sacrifice neither is the worde sacrifice in the Hebrew text of Daniell And therefore it is an vnlikelie place to prooue a sacrifice propitiatorie of the bodie of Christ in the Masse The prophecie of Malachie by general consent almost of all auncient fathers is expounded as I haue saide of the sacrifice of praise and thankesgiuing which is offered at al times by the faith full and especiallie in the celebration of the Lords supper But most cleerelie Instinus Martyr in his Dialogue against the Iewes speaking of the verie same text of Malachie and the sacrifices that are offered in al places by the gentiles that is the bread of thankesgiuing and the cuppe of thankesgiuing hath these wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For I my selfe doe affirme that praiers and thanksgiuing made by worthie persons are the onelie perfect and acceptable sacrifices to God For these are the onelie sacrifices that Christians haue receiued to make to be put in minde by theire drie and moist nourishment of the passion which God the sonne of God is recorded to haue suffered for them If praiers and thankesgiuing be the onely sacrifices which Christians haue receiued to offer and are the onelie perfect and acceptable sacrifices to god as Iustinus in plaine wordes affirmeth where is the vnbloodie sacrifice of the naturall bodie and blood of Christ yea of Christ him-selfe vnto god his father If praiers and thankesgiuing be the onelie pure sacrifice prophecied by Malachie then is not the naturall bodie of Christ offered in the Masse neither hath the Church anie such sacrifice And although the auncient fathers often times doe call the celebration of the Lordes supper a sacrifice yet you see by the iudgement of Iustinus how they are to be vnderstood of a spirituall sacrifice of praier and thankesgiuing for the death of Christ on the crosse and our perfecte redemption therebie which also they called an vnbloodie sacrifice sometimes as Cyrill and Nazianzen in the place by the answerer quoted but either in the same places or some other of their workes they doe euidentlie declare that they meant no sacrifice propitiatorie of the naturall bodie of Christ but of praise and thankesgiuing for tbe onelie insacrificable sacrifice of Christes passion as Gregorie Nazianzen doth call it Saint Augustine also in the place by the answerer quoted sheweth plainlie that this sacrifice of praise is celebrated by the sacrament of rememberaunce of the slesh and blood of Christ which in truth it selfe was offered in the passion of Christ. Sed quid agam c. But what shall I do and when shall I make demonstration to so great blindenes of these heretikes what force that hath which is song in the Psalmes The sacrifice of praise shall glorifie me and there is the waie where I will shew my sauing health The flesh blood of this sacrifice before the comming of Christ was promised by oblations of similitudes in the passion of Christ by the trueth it selfe it was yealded after the ascension of Christ by the sacrament of rememberance it is celebtated Whoe seeth not here a manifest opposition betweene yealding by the truth it selfe and celebrating by a sacrament of rememberance But that the sacrifice of the Masse is the same that was offered on the crosse differing but in the vnbloodie manner of oblation Saint Chrisostome saith out answerer doth prooue at large vpon the epistle to the Hebrewes Hom. 17. whome if Master Charke and his fellowes would not disdaine to reade and beleeue they would be ashamed to cauill and blaspheme gods mysteries as they do The place of Chrisostome hath bene often alledged on both partes by the Papists for a shew and a colour of the matter by the other side for a manifest demonstration that Chrisostome as he doth interpret him-selfe maketh nothing for the Popish sacrifice of the Masse but altogether against it His wordes are these after he hath shewed the imperfection of the legall sacrifices by the often repeating of them Then what do we euerie daie do we not offer yes we offer but we make the remembrance of his death and this is one sacrifice and not manie How is it one and not manie Seeing it was once offered it was caried into the holie of holies This thing is a figure or type of that sacrifice this sacrifice of that For we offer the same alwaies not now an other but alwaies the same Therefore it is one sacrifice by this reason otherwise because it is offered in manie places are there manie Christes Not so but one Chrisi euery where both here full and perfect there full and perfect one bodie Therfore as being offered in manie places it is one bodie and not manie bodies so is it one sacrifice He is our high priest which offered that sacrifice which maketh vs cleane the same do we offer now also which then was offered which can not be consumed This is now done in the remembrance of that which was then done For do ye this saith he in remembrance of me we do not offer an other sacrifice as the high Priest but the same alwaies but rather we worke the remembrance of a sacrifice These words of Chrisostome declare that the name of sacrifice is vn properly giuen to the celebration of the Lords supper which is rather a remembrance of a sacrifice then a sacrifice indeede Secondlie that reteining the name of a sacrifice there is great difference betweene it and the sacrifice of Christ for the thing here offered is a type of that which was offered there and this sacrifice is a figure of that sacrifice Thirdlie Christ offered the onelie sacrifice propitiatorie that purgeth awaie sinnes this oblation is but a remembrance of that to stur vs vp to thankfullnes for that and to confirme our faith in our spirituall nourishment by that bodie and blood which was once offered for all neuer to be repeated So that Master Charke and his fellowes haue not Chrisostome their aduersarie in this place but receaue great light by this exposition of the name sacrifice which is not properlie so to be called but rather a remembrance of a sacrifice And it is not to be doubted but that other auncient fathers vsed the name of sacrifice in the same sense that Chrisostome did The answerer referreth his reader further to Theodoret and Saint Augustine who handleth this question whie Christians do now vse to sacrifice seeing the old law with all sacrifices were abolished by the one sacrifice of Christ. You maie see by this that our answerer hath more care to point his margent with quotation of the Doctors which the ignorant can not reade then he hath iudgement to consider what the Doctors write For this place of Theodoret is cleane contrarie to the sacrifice propitiatorie of the Masse The wordes are these of the translation of Gentianus Heruetus a man not to be suspected of Papists Siergo Sacerdotium quod est ex lege finem 〈◊〉
flatlie against you for he that doth not that which god commaundeth sinneth although in the meane time he doe some other thing that is good or not euill yea although he sleepe and doe nothing Where Master Charke doth distinguish the creatures and ordinances of God which are good from the corruption and preuarication that is in them which is euill you picke a fond quarrell to him and make him to saie that deuills and euill men doe not repugne against the law of God and that they doe not sinne properlie Which is false for he saith no such thing but that euill men as they are the creatures of God are not against the law but the euill in men and so of the rest yet euil men doe sinne properlie and repugne against the law of God by the euill that is in them as in your owne example the Phisitian cureth his patient not as he is a man but as he is a Phisitian and by knowledge of Phisicke which is in him And as for the repugnance of contrarietie whereof the question is in the definition of sin it is not in the creature of god but the corruption of that good crearure A blacke horsse is not contrarie to the colour of white but the colour of blacke so not an euil man but sin of an euil man is contrary to the iustice of Gods law So a Phitisian driueth away an ague yet aPhisitian is not contrary to an ague but thevertue of the medicine which he ministreth When euerie childe may vnderstand your cauilling it is no meruaile though you charge M. Chark with such absurditie and ignorance yea with heresie and that out of Augustine Tom. 8. fol. 665. not telling vs of what edition you speake so that it were harde to finde if it were worth the search that which you talke of but you are to be pardoned for your note was vnperfect did not expresse in what homelie vpon what Psalme The second fault of the Iesuites definition is that they call it an humane or reasonable action Master Charke would rather saie a beastly or vnreasonable action of a man indued with reason Here you take on and aske whether Master Charke be so vnlearned in all foundation of Philosophie And Aristotle and Saint Augustine are called to witnes that sin proceedeth from the minde indued with reason and what other thing I beseech you doth Master Charke saie his wordes are plaine as I haue set them downe and the same that you cite out of Augustine Now if you will defend that sinne is an action agreeable to right reason because it proceedeth frō a reasonable man he giueth you a weapon to play with al against your next encounter otherwise he hath better reformed the wordes of your definition thé you haue either wit or grace to vnderstand It hath a better colour that you obiect of the morall workes of iustice temperance other vertues in the gentils which M. Chark wil acknowledge to be sin and yet they seeme to be agreeable to right reason so they are in part so far forth as they be directed by that light which is left in men proceeding fró the eternal word of god but in so much as that light shineth in darkenes and the darkenes comprehendeth it not no acceptable worke to God can be brought forth therebie Yea for so much as all the morall workes of the gentiles respected not the right ende of obedience and glorie of God whome they knew not their wholl actions were therebie vitiated and corrupted so that they may iustlie be called sinne Euen as praier is turned into sin and the sacrifice of the vngodlie is abhomination to the Lord. And M. Charke faith truelie whatsoeuer is not of faith is sin be it reasonable as you speake or against reason And in deede against right reason it is that the gentiles in their morall workes sought not to obey God according to his lawe and therefore euen their best workes of iustice and temperance were sinne But this is so iumpe you saie that an horse might be a sinner for that his actions proceed not of faith In deed if Saint Paul had spoken of the actions of brute beastes as your Saint Francis witnes your Legend did preach to brute beastes you had iumped neere the matter but when none but an asse would vnderstand Saint Paul to speake of any other actions then such as proceede from men you iumpe as neere as Germans lippes that were nine mile a sunder But you will answere to Saint Paul with S. Ambrose that he meaneth whoesoeuer doth a thing against that which faith prescribeth that is against a mans own conscience and iudgement he sinneth The words of S. Ambrose are these Rectè peccatum appellat quod aliter fit quà m probatum est He doth rightlie call that sinne which is done otherwise then is allowed Now this allowance or approbation is not referred to euerie mans corrupt conscience or ignorant iudgement as you expound it but is measured by faith which is a certaine knowledge and perswasion grounded vpon the worde of God as Saint Paul sheweth in the 14. verse of the 14. Chap. I know am perswaded by our Lord Iesus that nothing is vncleane of it selfe which faith when the Gentiles had not in their workes their works were sinne And therfore you abuse S. Ambrose by your glose to restreine the prescription of faith onelie to that which a man doth against his conscience and iudgement But Saint Augustine you say prooueth at large against Master Charke that the morall good workes of infidels were not sinne lib. de spiritu litera cap. 26. 27. 28. In truth S. Augustine though he call such workes iustice liberalitie wrought by infidels as we doe commonlie good workes yet his iudgement is none other then I haue before expressed and that he declareth in the latter ende of the 27. Chapter for in the 26. he hath nothing sounding that wase Speaking of infidels Quaedam tamen fact a vel legimus vel nouimus vel audimus quae secundùm iusticiae regulam non solùm vituper are non possumus verumetiam meritò recteque laudamus quanquam si discutiatur quo fine fiant vix iuueniuntur quae insticiae debitam laudem defensionemue mereantur Yet some deedes we either reade or know or heare of which according to the rule of righteousnes we cannot not only dispraise but also we do worthily rightly praise them although if it be discussed with what end they are done they are scarslie found which deserue the praise or defense dew to righteousnes But most cleerelie his iudgement is for Master Charke against you sir defender as well for the allegation of the text Rom. 14. where you scornfullie iumped in your sinfull horse as for the matter in question that the morall workes of Gentiles are sin before God Contra Iulianum Pelagianum lib. 4. cap. 3. towarde the ende in these wordes Si Gentilis inquis nudum
dare abide by your censure to renew your defence or els to pas on to the rest of the confutation of the rest of Master Charkes replie and so to take his answer altogether LAVS DEO A CONFVTATION OF A TREATISE MADE BY WILLIAM ALLEN IN DEFENCE OF the vsurped power of Popish Priesthood to remit sinnes of the necessity of Shrift and of the Popes Pardons BY WILLIAM FVLKE Imprinted by THOMAS THOMAS Printer to the Vniuersitie of Cambridge A CONFVTATION OF A TREATISE MADE BY WILLIAM ALLEN IN DEFENCE OF THE VSVRped power of Popish priesthood to remit sinnes c. ALLEN BEcause the vniust clyame and chalenge of anie power not giuen doth highlie displease God from whome onely all preheminence of man proceedeth no doubt all Priestes Bishops who haue so long practised pardoning and punishing of sinne if they hold not the right of the excellent function of Gods owne graunt they haue built this manie hundreth yeares towardes hell and can neither auoid the heauie indignation of god in wose office and prerogatiue they haue vniustlie intermedled nor yet maruell at their disdaine amongest men seeing it is said that the vsurper of power is worthielie hated Qui potestatem sibi sumit iniustè odietur FVLKE IF the rest of your arguments were as good as this we should not neede to write anie confutation of your treatise for true it is that they which vsurpe so great a power without Gods owne graunt deserue condemnation of him and hatred of men neither of which except they repent they can be able to auoid Neither are they in better case which though they pre tend to haue some colour of graunt yet abuse the same peruerting the right meaning of the graunter to a farre other end and exersize the same after a farre other sort then their commission by which they claime authoritie in anie wise doth import And such is the case of popish priesthoode which vnder pretence of power of remitting or retaining of sinnes committed against the Church of Christ and the true pastoures thereof arrogate vnto them selues which are but Idolles and therfore not the persons authorized an absolute autoritie of pardoning according to their owne iudgement not a ministerie of reconciliation according to the will of God by a certaine deuised forme of wordes or writing and not by preaching of the Gospell For which causes and manie other although the graunt of Christ be neuer so ample vnto his Church yet it includeth not them which be his aduersaries which for their owne glorie and luker vnder shadow of Christian authoritie of binding and loosing doe practise antichristian tyrannie to be Lordes of mens conscience and to make marchaundise of their soules ALLEN But if that most holie order doe by good right reason and by the sonne of God Christ Iesus his owne warrant and speciall commission occupie the seat of iudgement erected in the Church for the gouernment of our soules and needfull search of our secret sins then it standeth lamentablie with the disobedient captains of this contempt through whose continuall call to sedition so manie haue beene caried awaie from that cbaisance that is due to the soueraing power geuen to Gods annonited FVLKE But when neither the popish order of priesthood hath any institution of God neither hath the sonne of God erected anie such seate in the Church for gouernment of our soules and needefull search of our secret sins as is pretended practised they which cal men not one lie to the contempt but also to the detestation of such vsurped tiranny are vniustly charged with sedition and disobedience against Gods annointed seeing they purpose and practise nothing but the honour of Christ the Lords anoninted with the oile of gladnes aboue all other the due estimation of those his seruantes whome he hath appointed to be the true dispensers of the graces and heauenlie treasures of his word and Sacraments vpon earth ALLEN They remember well such is their exercise in the worde how that disdaine of Moses Aarons 〈◊〉 ouer the people that then God chose to be his peculiar mooued his Maiestie to so great indignation that he droue downe Core and all his confederacie to the depth of hell both body soule themselues aliue all the people looking on their fall so fearefull The example had bin of lesse respect if his heauie hand had staid vpon the principal of that prowd sort but it did not For there perished by strange fire of the accessaries to that Schisme two hundreth fiftie moe And the grudge alas of the people not ceasing so God sent fire from heauen and wasted 14. thousand and 700. of them at once And all this saith Moses Vtsciatis quia blasphemauerint Dominum that you maie be well assured that they blaspemed our Lord God So neere doth the contempt of Gods ministers touch his owne person that in disdaine of the one there is account made of horrible blasphemie of the other This Cores as Iosephus writeth was a man that had a cast in talke to please the people as the seditious often haue and this was a great flowre of his perswasion of the people to sedition disobedience as holie write reporteth Cur eleuamini super populum Domini It is sufficient for our purpose that the whole multitude is sanctified and the Lord is in them whie doe you exalt your selues aboue the people of God Thus said the seditious against Gods Priests then and now truelie both the people and the preacher doe pipe Cores note of cur eleuamini in euerie plaie and pulpit neuer hauing in minde their lamentable fall whose steppes they like so well to follow FVLKE The example of Cores rebellion if we had forgotten by so manie treasonable deuises of the papists against the Prince and Religion breaking forth into sundrie actuall rebellions both in Ingland and Ireland we might easelie be put in remembrance whose often disapointed purposes and sometime punished practises if at length they mooue nothing to surcease from their wickednes let them remember that the Lordes long suffering so much contemned will adde infinite tormentes to their endles damnation which sleepeth not although the execution be deferred As for the application of Cores example which Allen maketh is verie ridiculous while the papists dauncing after the Popes seditious pipe charge vs for piping and that in euerie plaie pulpit Cur eleuamini as though either they had prooued themselues to be Gods Priests which be rather the deuills paragons or we refused to yeald any honour which to anie of Gods ministers either Ecclesiasticall or Ciuill by his appointment appertaineth ALLEN Mary I cannot tel wel whether the cases be comparable though I nothing doubt but ours is much worse For. S. Chrysostome saith that the disobedience of Dathon and the rest of that consederacie rose rather vpon the affectation of so high a function with admiration of their dignitie then vpon anie contempt of that power in which the
sttetch forth the Doctors meaning when you will be so impudent with their wordes The Apostles said In hoc credimus quia a Deo exîsti Quae rogo haec verbi huius admiratio est quod se exisse à Deo professus sit Tanta tam deo propria vos O Sancti beati viri ob fidei vestrae meritum claues regni caelorum sortitt ligandi atque soluendi in caelo in terraius adepti gestacsse per Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum Dei filium 〈◊〉 ad id quod à Deo exisse dixit nunc primùm vos veri intelligentiam assecutos protestamini In this we beleeue that thou art come out from God What admiration I praie you is this of this word that he professeth that he came out from God so great thinges and so proper to God O ye holie and blessed men which had obteined the keies of the kingdome of heauen for the worthinesse of your faith and haue obtained right of binding and loosing in heauen and earth had you seene done by our Lord Iesus Christ the sonne of God And doe you now first protest that you haue obtained the vnderstanding of the trueth as concerning that he said he came forth from God In these wordes it is apparant that all the Apostles haue the keies as well as Peter and right or authoritie of binding and loosing but that the whole right thereof is in them as though God had resigned his right to them or giuen them equall right with him-selfe S. Hilarie neuer said nor thought The latter sentence toucheth not the cōtrouersy between vs. For we graunt the power of binding and loosing forgiuing and retaining to be ratified in heauen but that the wordes of Christ be of an absolute power properlie to doe that which is the office of God alone we cannot learne by this or anie other saying of Saint Hilarie ALLEN But I will adde S. Chrysostomes testimonie thereunto the rather because our aduersaries doe abuse his wordes sometimes against confession which necessarilie hangeth on the authority of Priesthood in remission and retaining sinnes as anon I shal declare That I be not ouer tediuose I will report his saying in English onelie Those saith he that dwelleth in earth and are conuersant amongst men haue receiued power and commission to dispose and dispense such thinges as be in heauen yea these men haue receieud power such as neither God either gaue to Angelles for it was neuer said to them whatsoeuer you bind in earth it shall be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer you loose in earth it shall be loosed in heauen Earthlie Princes in deed haue power to binde but that pertaineth to the bodies of their subiectes onelie but that which I now talke of that is proper to the Priests touching the verie soule it selfe and is so ample that it reacheth to the heauens aboue yea that so largelie that whatsoeuer the Priestes doe beneath the verie selfe same God wil allow and ratifie in heauen aboue and so the Lord will confirme the iudgement and sentence of the seruants Thus farre speaketh Chrysostome His words be so plaine that to stand long on them for farther proofe of my matter then the verrie face of the sentence doth importe it were vaine For man maie here rather maruell to see such strange power vpon Christes wordes giuen to the holie order and yet that to be so litle esteemed of wicked men and so litle regarded euen of the honester sort of simple folkes that few either seeke after their iudgement in cause of their soules or duelie honour that power in them which passeth all other prelacie that euer either man or Angell receiued in this great contempt I saie of most holie things wickednes is rather to be wondered at and lamented then by long reasoning to be confuted The sequele of true thinges is so plaine in it selfe the diuerse places of scripture so answere iustlie ech to other the fathers so consonantlie confirme the knowne meaning of the same and the verie tearmes of so many scriptures writen at diuerse times by sundrie of the Euangelists so fall vpon one vndoubted sense that we may rightly conclude the power to be in all cases giuen to the Apostles of remission of sinne FVLKE The wordes of Chrysostome are large enough of themselues although you had not augmented them with your additions and explications beside that you haue altered the number in the text of Mat 16. where in lieth a mysteric For Chrysostome by these wordes spoken in the singular number to Peter prooueth the authoritie that is common to all Priests What soeuer thou shalt binde whatsoeuer thou shalt loose The summe is that the power and dignitie of Priests is exceeding great which maketh a mortall man to come neere to the blessed and incorrupted nature of God as he saieth before But if an absolute and proper power of remitting sins were graūted to them they come not one ly neere but are translated in deede into the diuine na ture which is intollerable blasphemy That the Lord ratifieth in heauen confirmeth the sentence of his seruants giuen vpon earth it is to be vnderstoode that God approoueth the sentence which he before hath appointed them to pronounce As if the Queene in England should protest that shee is content to ratifie and confirme whatsoeuer her embassadour doth in France acding to his commission and the instructions receiued from her thee neither resigneth her authoritie to her embassadour neither giueth him equall power with her selfe but onelie maketh him the interpreter and declarer of her will and pleasure which shee is content to ratifie and not otherwise ALLEN And vpon such knowne termes I make this argument against the aduersaries They truelie and properlie doe remit sinnes vpon whose sentence in earth the pardon of God immediatelie ensueth in heauen but Gods pardon vndoubtedlie followeth the priests pardon in remission in earth Claue non errante Ergo they assuredlie remit sins The Maior is manifest the Minor hangeth vpon plaine scripture thrise tolde which first appointed man to loose in earth and then that God shall in the same instant forgiue in heauen God shall confirme the sentence of his seruants saith S. Chrysostome Mans iudgement saith Hilarie shall be as a sentence preiudiciall to God in heauen And thus farre for the wordes of Christ at this present and farther strength shal more and more be gathered vnto them by diuerse partes of all the processe following FVLKE You make such argumentes for your friendes and not against your aduersaries For what aduersarie would you choose vnto your selfe so simple that could not espie these grosse faults of your syllogisme For first your Maior is false which you saie is manifest But you haue not yet prooued that they doe properlie remit sinnes vpon whose sentence in earth the pardon of God immediately ensueth in heauen that is whose sentence on earth is ratified confirmed in heauen That they doe
notis corporaliter siue ignotis Omnes enim mali spiritualiter à bonis seiuncti sunt Ecce hic dicit peccata dimitti vel teneri à sanctis viris tamen spiritum sanctum ea dimittere dicit quod maiori consideratione dignum est idem etiam dicit quod Deus per se vel per sanctos suos tantùm dimittit peccata ait enim sic sacramentum gratiae dat Deus etiam per malos ipsam vero gratiam non nisi per seipsum vel pcr sanctos suos ideo remissionem peccatorum vel per seipsum facit velper ipsius columbae membra quibus ait si quibus dimiseritis aimittentur Ecce quà m varia à doctoribus traduntur super his in hactanta varietate quid tenendum Hoc sane discere sentire possumus quod solus Deus dimittit peccata retinet tamen Ecclesiae contulit potestatem ligands soluendi Sed aliter ipse soluit vel ligat aliter Ecclesia Ipse enim per se tantùm dimittit pecca tum quia enim animam mundat ab interiore macula à debito aeternae mortis soluit Non autem hoc sacerdotibus concessit quibus tamen tribuit potestatem soluendi ligandi id est ostendendi homines ligatos vel solutos vnde Dominus leprosū sanitati priùs per se restituit deinde ad sacerdotes misit quorum iudicio ostenderetur mundatus When sinnes are forgiuen to him that is truelie turned to God they are forgiuen by them to whome he him selfe by true conuersion is ioyned The holie ghost forgiueth them which is giuen to all the Saints which are knit together in charitie whether they know one another corporallie or not Likewise when any mans sinnes are reteined they are reteined by them from whome he is disioyned by prauitie of heart whether they be corporally knowne or vnknowne For all euill men are spirituallie separated from good men Beholde here he saieth that sinnes are forgiuen or reteined by the Saints or holiemen Ana'yet he saieth that the holy ghost doth forgiue them and that which is worthie of greater consideration the same Doctor also saith that God by himselfe or by his Saints onelie remittesh sinnes For thus he saieth The sacrament of grace god giueth euen by euilmen but grace it selfe not but by himselfe he causeth or by the members of that doue to whome he saith if to any ye shal forgiue they shal be forgiuen Beholde how diuerse thinges are deliuered by the Doctors concerning these matters and in this so great variety what is to be holden This truelie we may saie and thinke that onely God forgiueth sinnes and reteineth and yet he hath giuen power to the Church of binding and loosing but otherwise doth he him selfe bind and loose otherwise the Church For he him selfe by him selfe onelie forgiueth sinne because both he clensith the soul from the inward spot and looseeh from the debt of eternall death But this he hath not graunted to the priests to whome notwihstanding he hath giuen power of binding and loosing that is to saie of declaring men to be bound or loosed whereupon our Lord did first by him seifere store the Leper to health asterwards sent him to the priests by whose iudgement he might be declared to be clensed Thus writeth the Master of the sentences with more to this effect In your second argument brought to prooue that penance is a sacrament I denie the Antecedent that there is any wordes of institution to prooue your sacrament of penance Where you feare vainlie least we will shortly seeke to baptize by preaching as we wil absolue you onelie by the same you declare nothing but your harde conceit of vs. For we are olde enough to know the difference of the ministerie of the worde and the sacrament a sunder To compare vs with Nouatus either in the one point or in the other you haue no cause in the world but your owne malicious and slaunderous humor For we doe not admit the power of remission where we list but wheresoeuer God hath graunted it and in what manner soeuer he hath appointed it to be exercised We are readie to receiue the publike penitents that with plentie of teares and other outward signes doe testifie the inward sorowe of their hearts conceiued for their greeuous and notorious sinnes Yea we receiue them whose offences being not openlie knowne doe neuertheles secretlie bewaile their sinnes And therefore that you saie of pampering mans will and pleasure where Gods worde and writing should be onely followed seeke among your owne sect where it may take place For sinnes openlie committed or knowne to be committed we holde that they ought with open confession to be chastised for satisfying the Church that is offended by them As for sinnes committed in secret whereby our neighbour is neither hurt nor offended it is sufficient that they be acknowledged with hartie repentance before god if the offendours conscience be not troubled with further doubtfulnes about them In which case we holde that it is conuenient that he should consult with the learned minister for his further comfort and satisfaction out of the worde of God concerning the remission of his sinnes ALLEN And therefore the manner and order of Penance hath bin diuerse in sundry ages and countries sometimes solemne which could be but once taken in al a mans life somtimes not solemne but yet open and publike which might be iterated as ofien as mans mortal sinnes so required other times priuat onelie betwixt the priest and the penitent which is now vsed and long hath beene in a manner gencrallie thorough the wholl worlde Of all which diuersities we will not now intreat nor for our matter the consideration of them is virie needfull seing that in all sortes and in euerie of the sundry formes of doing penance this is a most firme principle that the penitent had remission of sinnes for which he did penance no otherwise but by the ministerie of the Priestes Therefore the substance of the matter being one of the diuersitie of vse and circumstances which maie be according to the time and manners of men altered we need not much to care Baptisme was once vsed with solemnitie at two or three principall feastes of the yeare for the time so required then and the condition of the people yet the same sacrament of Baptisme ministerea'now priuatlie as occasion serueth by the birth of euerie childe is of the same force and grace now that it was then Wherein to reprehend the wisdome of Gods Church that is assuredlie ruled by the spirit of God is ouermuch wantonnes of will and sedition not tolerable FVLKE There hath beene diuerse manners and orders appointed for the punishment of sins and for triall of the offenders true repentance conuersion vnto god but all these prooue not any sacrament of penance The manner which the Popish Church doth vse in the exercise of this pretensed sacrament is partly
the leprous persons that is to say should onely discerne which were by God remitted or not remitted they could not that doo excepte they sawe the varietie of the saide sinnes by mans confession But now seeing they haue further interest in our matters and must properly both pardon and giue iust penaunce for sinne how is it possible they should doo this without exacte knowlege of entry of oure greeuous offences In deed a general confession such as is often made in diuine seruice to God or his priestes such as be Catholik doth some times take away the common infirmities of our sinfull life that our light trespasses be not imputed to vs or such as we haue so forgotten that we cannot by anie conuenient search call againe to our remembrance But other greater crimes and deadly sinnes for which the sacrament of discipline was instituted and the priestes iudgement seat erected in the Church are not discharged before God without seuerall contrition and distinct confession with readie in tent of the penitent to accomplish such fruites of penance as by the priest shall be appointed for the satisfying for his sinnes And what a marucilous disorder is brought into Christes Church by plaine flatterie of our selues herein whiles we holde that this generall confession is sufficient we see by experience of these our euill daies where there is now put no difference betwixt small offenders and most greeuous sinners no diuersitie of penance no more sorrow in one then in other no confession of the most wicked no more then of the smallest sinner or most honest liuer A common murtherer a filthie whoremunger a dailie drunkerd a false robber a greedie extorcioner confes as litle do as litle penance lament as litle yea a great deale lesse then the honest sort of people do for much more small and fewer faultes All men repose them-selues now of daies so much in Christes passion and there onelie no faith that they will neither confesse to God nor man neither sigh nor sorrow nor do satisfaction for their sinnes Well let all men be assured that God in the next world will not go by general Chapters but will haue an accompt of all our proper works and misdeedes till it come to our idle words and vaine thoughtes The which iudgement because Gods Church and ministers sentence to whome Christ gaue all iudgement of our sinnes in earth doth most cleerelie resemble we maie be out of doubt that the like particular discussing and examination of our owne selues here before his ministers must needes be had that we be not iudged of our Lord in the life to come FVLKE By seeing the varietie of sinnes though the Priest could see them as clearlie as he that committed them yea though he were present at the doing of them and did see all the circumstances of them he could neuer discerne which were by God remitted or not remitted except he could see the repentance of the sins according to which God doth either remitte or retain sinnes Therefore confession to this purpose is neither necessarie nor profitable For the further interest you claime you must bring better euidence then he therto you haue shewed forth or els we maie neuer yeelde it vnto you And greatlie I maruaile how you can affirme that the Priest can properlie pardon sinne when he can not to anie man pronounce pardon of his sinne except he be true lie contrite and penitent before god God onelie and the partie penitent are priuy to the con trition of his heart which in an Hipocrit with a thousand confessions maie be dissembled And I trow you will not saie that without vnfained contrition of the heart the priest maie pardon a sinner The doctrine of your masters is but with condition if the partie be contrite without counterfayting therefore he that can not pardon absolutely can much les pardon properlie Where you make generall confession auailable either for small and light offences or else for greater sinnes forgotten you speake without proofe and therefore your authoritite may be denied without doubt The disorder you speake of for lacke of shrift was greater when most mé went to shrift and not fearing the iugdement seat of God and thought they were sufficientlie discharged of their sinnes if they had powred them out into a priests lape or friers coule God be praised they that repose them selues moste in Christs passion and by the merites thereof beleeue to receiue forgiuenes of sinnes by faith in his bloode are more ready to confesse their vnworthines both before God man then any popish hypocrite that trusteth in the merit of his workes and his owne satisfaction for his sinnes and doe more sigh and sorrow for their sinnes although they be such as mans lawe cannot punish although they were knowne then they that whisper halfe an hower in a priestes eare for the sinnes of one whole yeare whereas one howers offences if they were particularie called to minde and repeated would aske longer time to confesse them We know that in the next world God will haue an account of al our misdeeds euen to our idle words thoughts therfore our wholl life ought to be a continuall meditation and profession of repentance yet we know by his word and assurance ofhis spirit that the same infinit multitude heape of our sinnes shal not be laid to our charge because out sauiour Christ is the lambe of God that hath taken them awaie and satisfied the iustice of God for them That Christ hath giuen al iudgement of our sinnes in earth to his Church and the ministers thereof you often affirme thereupon build vp your court of confession but by what wordes this may be prooued you are neuer able to shew For that text whose sinnes you forgiue c. imporeth no such manner of iudgement but an authoritie to pronunce a sentence declaratorie of Gods mercie in pardoning all them that trulie repent and of his iustice in punishing all them that obstinatly refuse the grace of God offered in the preaching of the Ghospel The examining iudgeing of our selues whch the Apostle requireth that we be not iudged of the Lord vrgeth vs not to commit our selues to the examination iudgement of othermen but to a diligent discussing of our owne conscience before god that we come not with hypocrisie or without dew regard of his presence and benefites to the participation of his sacraments ALLEN And this particular discussing Saint Paull meant when he commended vnto the Corinthians and by them commaunded all Christian men to prooue trie and iudge themselues especiallie afore the receipt of the blessed sacrament of Christes bodie and blood which requireth moste puritie of life in the receiuer that can be For to attempt to receiue the holie bodie of Christ before we haue in contrite manner confessed our selues and purged our consciences by the iudgement of Christes Church of the guilt of deadlie sinne is exceeding damnable to vs and much dishonour to
the least they disdaine to submit themselues to the Priests whom God hath giuen power vnto to discearne the cleane from the vncleane But I would thou shouldest not beguile thy selfe by false perswasion or some respect of shame that thou hast to confesse vnto the priest who is Gods Vicare For I tell thee thou must vnder his iudgement whome God doth not disdaine to constitute his Vicegerent But this Doctour made a wholl worke of penance and the waies of recouerie of Christian mans fall after Baptisme by the Priests iudgement and sacrament of Confession Of the which bookes if any man list doubt yet let him be assured that they be both auncient Catholike learned and agreeable to the doctrine of Saint Augustines daies whosoeuer made them And our cause is so much more holpen because not onelie Saint Austine who is plaine in these matters vpon Saint Matthwes Gospel and els where as it is declared alreadie but also other of great antiquitie confirme the same and plainly confound the pride of our daies in which men are not somuch ashamed of their sinnes as they be disdainefull to confesse their sinnes vnto a poore priest though he iustlie accupie the verie iudgement seat of God FVLKE You doe wiselie to deuorce vpon his meaning when you haue not his wordes to warrant you For so you maie blinde the eyes of the ignorant to beleeue that you haue som farther intelligence of meaning then can appeare euen by the words that you haue cited out of him For the 〈◊〉 of condemnation is not by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against them which are ashamed to confes their faults to men if they amend them before god but against them that flie the knowledge and iudgement of men and yet doe not repent before God And therefore he saith si ea confiteri aut emendare noluerirt if they will not confesse them or amende them and againe si in maio suo permanserint if they shall continue in their euill But if they will amend their faultes and not continue in sinne he dare promise them forgiuenes and life euerlasting as is declared in the last section But now you charge vs with Saint Agustines authoritie and yet you will not abide by it that it is Saint Augastines authoritie wherein you deale more sincerely then Papists are commonlie wont to doe to acknowledge that these bookes you vouch are not admitted for Saint Augustines authoritie Among so many great and large volumes as are certeinlie knowne and generally receiued to be of Saint Augustines writing where you can finde nothing but these bookes of vncerteine credit to mainteine the necessitie of auricular confession the indifferent reader may well gather how litle ground your purpose cā finde in that age of S. Austins For that you haue declared alreadie out of S. Austine vpon S. Matthewes Gospel ells where how plaine it is for these matters let the reader iudge by that I haue answered in those seuerall places But as touching the bookes de visitatione 〈◊〉 being one of the two treatises that you cite as it is certaine that it was not of S. Austines writing so hath it no similitude with the doctrine of his time or with the stile of anie learned or auncient father The Censure of Erasmus vpon these bookes is this Sermo locutulei nec docti nec diserti Quid habuerunt vel frontis vel mentis qui talia scripta nobis obtruserunt nomine Augustini c. These bookes are the speach of a pratler neither learned nor eloquent What shame or wit had they which haue thrust vpon vs such writings vnder the name of S. Augustine Yet you dare assure vs that they be auncient Catholike learned and agreeable to the doctrine of Saint Augustines daies But the reasons of your assurance you spare to shewe giuing vs nothing but your bare word which is sufficient among vnlearned and sottish Papists whose ignorance you knewe would accept whatsoeuer you brought and therefore were carles what all the learned of the contrarie parte might iudge of your impudent and shameles assertions Concerning the other whole worke of penance which you affirme that this doctour made although it were graunted that Saint Augustine was author of that worke of repentance as it shall be easilie graunted that if not Saint Augustine yet some other auncient and learned father was the writer of them neuertheles there is nothing in them by which you are able to prooue the matter in controuersie namelie the necessitie of confession of all mortall sinnes to a Priest And therefore albeit you set a good face vpon the matter you haue neuer a sentence to set downe out of those bookes that is able to giue but onely a glosse or colour to your Popish confession For if you had you woulde not haue beene silent in setting forth the sentence of another beside Saint Augustine as you saie and as I thinke of great antiquitie who against them that be impenitent and neither acknowledge their sinnes vnfainedlie before God nor studie to amend and reforme their wicked life writeth vehementlie shewing three kindes of repentance one before baptisme in them that are of yeares another after baptisme which is dailie sorowing for our infirmities in saying the Lordes prayer the third of heinous and notorious sinnes offensiue to the Church of them that are excommunicated and are not to be receiued without open confession and signes of humilitie But the necessitie of confessing all thinges to a poore priest iustlie occupying the verie iudgement seate of God there is no word in either of those two bookes De medicina poenitentiae de vtilitate poenitentiae ALLEN And Saint Ambrose these mens auncient somewhat did knowe this practise so well and allow it that he did sit in his owne person on confession as Paulinus doth recorde whose behauiour in that diuine office that all Priestes maie perceiue and all the people note I will report Quotie scunque illi aliquis ob percipiendam poenitentiam lapsus suos confessus esset it a flebat vt ilium flere compellerat Causas autem criminum quas illi confitebaniur nulli nisi Domino soli apud quens intercedebat loquebatur bonum relinquens exemplum posteris sacerdotibus vt intercessores apud Deum sin magis quà m accusatores apud homines That is to saie So often as anie man came vnto him to confesse his faultes and receiue penance he so wept that he made the Penitent to weepe also But the faults themselues which they confessed he vttered to no man but to God alone to whome for their sinnes he made sute leauing a blessed example to all Priestes of the posteritie to account themselues rather as intercessours to God for sinnes then accusers of men before the worlde for their sinne This saieth Paulinus of Saint Ambrose whereby at once we see the iudgement of them both for our matter FVLKE The iudgement of Saint Ambrose concerning the necessitie of popish thrift or auricular confession we haue
Ierusalem he thus mooueth himselfe to mercie Circuite vias Ierusalem a spicite considerate quaerite in plateis eius an inuenias virum facientem iudicium quaerentem fidem propitius ero ei Looke round about the citie and veiw the streets thereof and haue good consideration whether anie one maie be found there that doth instice and studeth after faithfullnes and I will haue mercie on the Citie In the fift of Ieremie Where you maie perceiue that God wil forgiue all for ones desertes and that the good workes of one maie by Gods iustice supplie the lacke of manie other not yet to deliuer anie man from euerlasting damnation that is impenitent and therefore in case and state of eternall death For the worke of the faithfull can not extend to do good to such as be for euer separated from their fellowship and therfore can be no members of the common bodie in the firme knot whereof onelie their is mutuall health and healpe among such as partlie lacke and partly do abound for release of the rodde of temporall correction that is often laied vpon the children and not of anie eternall punishment that onelie happeth to such as be separated and cut of effectuallie from Christes bodie which is the Church for euer FVLKE You continue still in Chrysostomes argument but you follow neither his wordes nor his meaning for he speaketh neither of meriting nor satisfying For his wordes are these immediatlie following that which I haue last rehearsed Haec nos Saepe facimus famulos qui peccauerunt dignos suppliciis nolentes punire neque à supplicij metu liberari anico iubemus vt illos è nostris eripiant manibiatque vt ita timor illorum in eis crescat nostra effugiant verbera Hoc Deus fecit Et quòd hoc sit verīs ex ipsis verb is manifestum est Dimitte me inquit irascar Etenim nullus remittit qui punire vult tuncenim irascimur Ipse autem dicit dimitte me irascar vt scias quodirain Deo non sit affectio sed pana in nos eo vocabulo nominetur Quando igitur audis Mosem dicentem siquidem dimittis pecceatum dimitte prae seruo Dominum obstupesee quod ipse fibi ipsi miserecordiae occasionem quaerit Non hîc autem solum hoc fecit sed ad Ieremiam ad Ezechielem idem hoc dicit circuite videte in viis Hierusalem num sit qui faciat iudicium insticiam miserieors ero cis Vidisti misericordiam Multietiam impij vnius virture simul fruuntur Multorum autem malitia quamuis vnus sit qui rectè agat in medio magni populi non 〈◊〉 Sed vnes quidem homo rectè viuens populum integrumeri pere potest ab ira Dei. Ciuitas autem integra per nersaque in suam poenam supplicium attrahere bene viuentem dietecre non potest Et hoc de Noe manifestum Pereuntibus enim omnibus solus seruatus est Et de Mose clarum est Solus enim potuit tanto populo impetrare veniam This doe we also oftentimes and being nether willing to punish our seruants worthie of punishment which haue offended nor to deliuer them from the feare of punishmēt we bid our friends that they should deliuer them out of our handes and that so their feare maie increafe in them and they maie auoide our stripes This did god also that this is true it is manifest out of the verie wordes Let me alone saith he and I will be angrie for no man relenteth that will punish for then we are angrie But he saith let me alone and I will be angrie that thou maiest know that anger in God is no affection but punishment toward vs is named by that terme Therefore when thou hearest Moses saying If thou doest forgiue this sin forgiue it wonder at the Lord in comparison of the seruant that he him selfe seeketh vnto him selfe occasions of mercie Neither did he this thing here onelie but also vnto Ieremie and Ezechtel he saith the same thing go round about and see in the waies of Ierusalem whether there be anie that doth iudgement and iustice and I will be mercifull vnto them Hast thou seene his mercie manie also vngodlie persons enioy the vertue of one man together And by the malice of manie although there be but one that doth well in the middest of a great people he doth not fall But one man truelie liuing well maie deliuer a whole people from the wrath of God but a wholl communaltie that is peruerse cannot draw into their paine and punishment him that liueth well nor cast him downe And this is manifest of Noe for when all perished he alone was preserued And of Moses it is cleere For he alone was able to obteine pardon for so great a people In all these wordes here is no mention or meaning of merit or satisfaction but onelie of mercie as appeereth in the example of men requiring their friendes to deliuer their seruants from punishment where not the worthines of the friendes can be the cause but the mercie of the Master Againe he speaketh of the auoiding of temporall plagues in this life whereof euen the vngodlie and they that perteine not to the communion of Saints often times are partakers which proceedeth of the loue of God towards his children and not of their merite which you confesse can not extend to them that be for euer separated from their fellowship ALLEN Neither doe the desertes onelie of the liuing helpe the necessitie of their fellow members being yet aliue but such as bedead also doe communicate in their workes with their brethren yet abiding in this world And God of his singular mercy is often contented to be answered by them for their poore fellow seruants that be indebted so far in the Church that they be not hable in their owne persons to dscharge their owne debt nor come out of the same whereof the said Saint Chrysostome doth excellentlie well consider in these wordes of his sermon de poenitentia mihi autem saieth he aliud maius est diuinae misericordiae iudicium quod dicam Cum enim non inuenis homines viuos fiducia praeditos qui possint intercedendo veniam obtinere confugit ad defunctos per illos inquit se remissurum peccata Ezechiae enim dicit protegam ciuitatem hanc propter me propter Dauid puerum meum Olim enim mortuus erat Dauid That is to saie I haue yet a plainer and greater token of Gods mercie which I will shew you For when he findeth none aliue that be of confidence which might by intercession procure pardon he turneth to the departed and saieth he will remit sins for their sakes For he spake to Ezechias thus I will defend this citie for my owne sake and my child Dauids sake and yet Dauid was dead long afore FVLKE This place of Chrysostome followeth immediately
besides his shamefull ignoraunce in the learned tongues which he sought most rediculoussie to couer and hide there appeared in him to all indifferent mens iudgements no more then is writen of Catiline the Romane whome he followed as well in practize as he resembled him in qualities Loquentiae multum sapientiae parum many words little wisdome impudent loquacity smale learning lesse iudgement But when it came to the hearing of the worlde sayth the setter forth how courteouslie you had vsed this learned man with torments The world here signifieth the secretrable of trayterous papists which giue themselues to no thing more then either to heare or inuent most impudent lies against religion al mainteyners professors of the same For to omitte the common phrase of this epistle wherewith all thinges that are done against the papists are imputed to M. Charke whom al reasonable men knowe to be one of the moste that may doe lest in these cases who is so farre from all sense or vnderstanding if he know what racking meaneth to beleeue that Campian endured such torments of racking whereof no signe could appeare in any part of his body either before the conference or after whereby he should be lesse hable to dispute as may be prooued by many hundred witnesses yet the glorious foole partly to boast of his sufferings partly to excuse his impatience and pusillanimity which for feare rather then feeling of the racke had discouered many of his friendes complices with his owne hand writting immediately after his racking was not ashamed on the day of the first conference to complayne of his grieuous torments vntil by testimony of Master Lieuetenant of the Tower and others that were present his impudencie was so restrained for that time that he thought it not best to bragge any more of his intollerable racking But in the conference say you he was handled without all indifferencie or law of reasoning How so I praie you The questiones were taken out of his owne booke in which he could not bevnprouided he had as great warning of them as any of his aduersaries he required no booke to furnish his memorie but it was prouided for him the opponents for the moste part dealt with him in lawfull syllogismes except when his owne lauish tongue discoursing against the lawe of reasoning enforced other manner of communication he was neither threatned nor reuiled though he gaue great occasion by his insolent speach gesture He was pressed with no authority but the booke was shewed him what other indifferencie or lawe of reasoning would you require But it is no maruell though you dare be bolde to quarrell at his handling in the conference when you are not ashamed to speake so impudently of his open trial and condemnation saying Finally you made him away by cruel death without any shew or shadow of particu lar crime committed by him against Prince or countrey This were more then barbarous immanitie if it were true but being false what is it but a most heynous and sedi tious slaunder whether you consider the matter or the persons against whome it is vttered Let vs begin with the persons Who made Campian away not M. Charke I am sure for all men would laugh at you if you so should say for immediatlie after you distinguish him from that action saying and that your selfe Master Charke followed him in person Then whoe can be vnderstoode to haue made him away by cruell death but they by whose authoritie in whose highe Courte by whose order he was brought to triall by whome euidence verdite and sentence was giuen and execution commaunded Now let vs waigh the matter was he not in dighted arraigned found guiltie atteinted iudg ed according to the ordinarie accustomable manner alwaies vsed in the case of hie rreason according to the lawes of the realme had he not leaue to answere for him selfe to challenge the Iurie or to vse any other plea that is permitted and allowed in such cases was there noe shewe or shadowe of particuler crime conteined in the inditement or in the euidence The worlde knoweth it must needes be the recordes are yet to be seene But there was nothing prooued perhaps you will say though much was alledged against him he was slaundered by them that gaue euidence against him he neuer did beare a trayterous or vndutifull minde against the Prince or the state Well admit for Campians sake that the credit of sworne witnesses and the wholl processe of so honourable a state as is of this lande must stand in suspense and not prooue so much as any shew or shadow of treason committed by him yet what shall his owne confession subscribed with his hande testifie concerning his treasonable affection against her Maiestie shall it not confirme the testimonie of such as gaue euidence against him prooue him moste manifestly to be guiltie of high treason his owne confession taken the first of August 1581. subscribed with his hand remaineth to be seene in which after certaine moste trayterous sentences were shewed him out of the bookes of Saunders and Bristow concerning the Bull of Pope Pius by which he tooke vpon him by his Antichristian sentence to depriue her Maiestie of her regalitie and to discharge her subiects of all obedience and dutie towardes her highnes it followeth in these wordes Edmund Campian being demaunded whether he woulde acknowledge the publishing of these things before recited by Saunders Bristow Allen to be wicked in the wholl or in any parte and whether he doth at this present acknowledge her Maiestie to be a true and lawful Queene or a pretensed Queene and depriued and in possession of her Crowne onelie de facto he answereth To the first that he medleth neither to nor fro and will not further answere but requireth that they may answere To the second he saith that this question dependeth vpon the fact of Pius Quintus whereof he is not to iudge and therefore refuseth further to answere Edmund Campian Answered and subscribed in the presence of Owin Hopton Iohn Hammonde Robert Beale Thomas Norton Here except you will say that it is no treason in a naturall borne subiect of this lande though he refuse to acknowledge the Queenes Maiestie to be a true and lawfull Queene and in possession of her Crowne de Iure and though he will not in one worde disalow them that speake write practize against her right her Crowne and dignitie and seeke by all meanes they can to depose and disposesse her of the same there was neuer traytor more clearlie discouered by the testimonie of others then Campian is displayed by his owne confession I neede not here note the faculties graunted by the present Pope Gregorie the 13. to Campian and his fellowe traytor Parsons which were taken about one of their complices immediatelie after Campians death in which they desire of the Pope the explication or meaning of the Bull of Pius Quintus giuen
that immediately follow in Luther declare that now he would doe worsse then before for now he would compell the poore husbandes to graunt their wiues that libertie or els would he tugge them by the lockes of the heade And can there be anie more shameles dealings c. If Luther declare his opinion in the words following to be as you say I must needes confes that this was a great ouersight in Master Charke at lest if it were not shameles dealing But if Luthers meaning by the whole scope of that place be plaine not to giue the wife licence to lie with an other man the band of wedlocke continuing but to compell such an insufficient husband to be deuorced from his wife because she cannot haue the lawfull remedie of incontinency by his companie do you not plaie the papist in graine thus to exclame against Master Charks false dealing As for the phrase of tugging by the Locks being a Dutch prouerb signifying no more but inforcement to vse your owne words hath that man anie conscience trow you that will vrge it to colour such vnhonest and false accusations Verily you had bene better to haue held your peace for now you are and shal be more hereafter discouered while you slaunder him vntruely to vse deceit and do vse false plaie your selfe and that most impudentlie Another example of his false dealing you bring in the controuersie Whether concupiscense in the regenerate without consent be sinne Where Master Chark being sore oppressed by many places of Saint Augustines auctoritie brought by the Censurer findeth no other reliefe of his credit with the reader but to forge a place of Saint Augustine to the contrarie in which to deceaue the reader he foisteth in this word sinne reciting his words thus Concupiscense is not so forgiuen in Baptisme that it is not sinne By which addition of the word sinne the matter seemeth to stand cleere on his side And this cannot be excused by ignorance but sheweth open and wilfull malice in the man Hasty iudgement Peraduenture he may excuse the addition by the Printers fault and so it was neither ignorance nor malice in him But take it moste hardly that Master Chark did purposely adde the word sinne vnto S. Augustines text which yet in a strict translation where there is no neede is not alowable if it be manifest that it is Saint Augustines meaning the addition of a word for explication of the sense is neither forging nor foisting But it is most impudentlying in you sir setter forth to say he findeth none other reliefe of his credit with the reader but to adde this word sinne to S. Augustines text when immediatly after this pretended forgerie he bringeth a most cleere place of Saint Augustine in which he doth expressly affirme that concupiseense euen in them that haue the spirit of God is sinne which argueth that he needed not at al to forge and foist hauing Saint Augustines words so euident on his side and that he findeth not onely another but a farr better reliefe of his credit with trueth then he could looke to gaine if he had bene disposed to vse false dealing Master Charkes wordes are these Saint Augustines place making it no sinne in the regenerate without consent is expounded by him-selfe afterward saying Concupis cense is not so forgiuen in Baptisme that it is not sinne but that it is not imputed as sinne For a cleere proofe hereof in another booke he saieth plainly it is sinne and so shewing the occasion of his saying citeth the place at large Cont. Iul. lib. 5. cap. 3. in which are these wordes Concupiscense of the flesh against which the good spirit lusteth is sinne because there is in it a disobedience against the regiment of the minde Where he saith for a cleerer proofe it is probable that the word sinne in the formet text was not added by him at lest wise not to deceaue for with the addition you will confesse it is as cleare as can be for his parte But if he added that word as being of the plaine meaning of Saint Augustine yet subiect to cauilling because it is not in him expressed to take awaie al colour of wrangling about the terme he ioyneth a moste cleere proofe of Saint Augustines iudgement plaine that concupiscense in the regenerate is sinne in his owne nature although because it is forgiuen it is not imputed to them as sinne So that the sense is manifest that concupiscense in the regenerate is sinne but sinne forgiuen or sinne not imputed And therefore although in some sense a man may truely say that sinne forgiuen as adulterie is no sinne or sinne not imputed is no sinne because the guiltines there of is remoued from the 〈◊〉 remission couering or not imputing through Gods mercy or satisfaction of Christ yet it followeth not there of that sinne of his owne nature is not damnable because mercy hath made it remissible or that sin forgiuen as adultety or such like cannot be properly called sinne because it is pardoned but the cleane contrary doth follow of necessity euen so is cōcupiscens which is forgiuen in the regenerate yet remaineth in them not as a vertue or an indifferent thing but as an euil thing as Augustine els where confesseth yet no sinne able to condemne them because it is not imputed to them or because it is pardoned in them Therefore except you wil say that sinne forgiuen or not imputed ceaseth to be sinne in his owne nature concupiscense in the regenerate is sin although forgiuen not imputed to them But of this matter inough at this time seing it is to be handled more at large hereafter and to be plainly shewed that Saint Augustine although in some sense he say that concupiscense is no sinne yet in another sense he doth as plainly affirme that it is sinne and such as would condemne vnto death if it were not satisfied by Christ and remitted vnto the regenerate Your third example of his purpose to deceaue is that not hauing at hand the Censure of Collen it selfe he reporteth diuerse vntruthes against the Iesuites out of Gotuisus concealing his name quoting onely Censura Coloniensis which he is sure cannot be seene as not to be had in England andomitting Canisius whom his author Gotuisus doth likewise cite which may be had and red of euery man This is but a bare surmise without any sufficient reason to vphold it of two he citeth one Ergo he seeketh to deceaue And as for the Censure of Collen it is now as common to be had in England as Canisius his Catechisme although when Master Chark did set forth his first booke it was not to be sold in the shops yet many had it in their studies And it seemeth he did chuse to cite that which was like to be of greater authoritie among the Papists as done by consent of a wholl Vniuersity But it toucheth him more neerely that where Gotuisus did not beelie the Iesuites sufficiently Master
argue that although there weere no costlienesse or delicacie yet there was decencie and comehenesse in the apparell of Iohn Baptist. Now commeth our answerer to his diet with these wordes And lastlie touching his diet of locusts and wild honie it was no hard fare saie they for the locusts were creuises cast awaie by the fishers of Iordane as vncleane by the law but eaten of Iohn by the libertie of the Gospell First we will speake of the locusts and afterwarde of the wilde honie For the locusts he quoteth Magd. Cent. I. lib. I. Cap. 4. 6. where he reporteth the Protestantes to saie it was noe hard fare he vseth his accustomable boldnesse of impudent lying for the Magdeburgianes whome he citeth saie not so but cleane contrarie For when they haue spoken of his apparell and diet of locusts and wilde honie Cent. I. lib. I. Cap. 10. p. 357 they conclude in these wordes Tendebant autem ea omnia huc denique vt constaret Iohannem non captare imperia huius mundi neque Christum vt haec vitae simplicitas austeritas testaretur non ob corporaliahuius vitae commoda Christum accipiendum qui spirirualia 〈◊〉 bona largiretur All these thinges tende to this ende that it might be manifest that neither Iohn nor Christ did seeke the Empires of this world and that this simplicitie and austerine of life might testifie that Christ is not to be receiued for corporall commodities of this life which giueth freclie spirituall and eternall good thinges The Magdeburgians doe here acknowledge a simplicitie and austeritie of life they doe not saie it was no hard fare But if they interpret those locusts to be creuises which are a delicate fishe with vs it could not be hard fare whatsoeuer they saie as our answerer thinketh Let vs then heare their owne wordes but where shall we finde them Cap. 4. which he quoteth conteineth 50 great leaues or more which he that hath leysure maie reade ouer and tell what he findeth to the purposeithe sixt Chapter hath euen as much sauing that in it they saie that Albeit Iohn Baptist lined in the wildernesse by Iordane yet was he no Monke neither did he institute anie Monkish or solitarie kinde of liuing For he tooke his iournie freelie about those places whether he would and did preach the doctrine of Messias to the people that flocked to him dailie That which perteineh to this purpose of locusts is in the tenth Chapter where their wordes are these Cibus erat mel siluestre c. His meat was wilde honie which the woodes neare hand did bring forth aboundantlie as Samuel 14. and locusts But what manner of liuing thing this was it is doubted among learned men Some thinke it was a kinde of Crabbe somewhat like the locusts in shape which the Iewish fishers at Iordan did cast on the bankes as meat forbidden by God Leuit II. Such also are certaine Crabbes that are bred in the Sea of meane bignes hauing a shell armed with manie sharpe prickes wanting armes and hauing somewhat longer legges If that be so Iohn also did exercise an example of the libertie of the Gospell in that meat which vsed fishes that were forbidden that all men might know that this Lawe of Moses was now abrogated Other vnderstand it of the land locuste the eating whereof is expresselie permitted Leuit. II. Dioscorides lib. 2. cap. 44. writeth that there is a certaine kind of locust which is called Asiracos or Onos which the people called Aphei dwelling about Leptis doe eate plentifullie Plinius li. II. cap. 29. saith that locusts are a pleasant meat vnto the Parthians and that they are found in some places three foote long It is manifest the Centuriaters do not affime that these locusts were creuises but onelie they report the iudgement of some men that so thought them-selues rather allowing the common opinion that they were land locusts and in the end concluding that whethersoeuer you take it these matters declared a simplicitie and austeritie of his life For admit they were fishes yet to eate nothing but such fishes and wilde honie though it were neuer so sweete honie would be compted but hard fare of my Lord fatte Abbot and his couent of Popish Monkes And it appeareth by the testimonie of Plinie that the land locusts are as pleasant in tast as the shrimps or creuises Saint Ierome vpon his diet noteth no more but this Habitatori solitudinis c. For an inhabitant of the wildernes it is meete not to followe the daintines of meates but to satisfie the necessitie of the humane flesh A small repast to sustaine nature though it be of pleasant meate and alwaies the same will prooue no delicacie in any man The elder writets were not all agreed what these locusts were Euthimius reporteth that some affirmed that they were the stalkes of hearbs some that they were a certaine herbe called locusts and other that they were the insect or flying vermine Yet he him-selfe holdeth the first It is I weene no wrong interpretation sometimes to declare the diuers opinions of learned men vpon matters whereof question may be wherefore neither the Magdeburgians nor Chytreus who reporteth the like opinion of the creuises are to be charged with absurd interpretations when either they leaue the matter to the readers iudgement or els they declare their owne without preiudice of other Now touching the honie our answerers words are these And the wilde honie was noe vnpleasant thing as the fathers doe imagine but it was saie Cossius and Strigelius that pleasant Manna which Apothecaries vse to keepe in their shoppes so that according to these men all that austeritie of life which the scriptures so particulerlie doe recount and all antiquitie doth wonder at in Saint Ihon Baptist commeth but to this that he was brought vp priuatelie in his fathers house cladde in Chamlet and fed with creuises and sweet Manna what great hardnes was this First where he saith the fathers do imagine that the wilde honie was an vnpleasant thing he bringeth none for proofe neither doe I think he can bring in any more then Euthimius noe verie auncient father who saith in deede that this wilde honie was made in the clefts of rocks by wild Bees and was bitter and vnpleasant But it is against all experience that honie though of wilde Bees should be bitter or vnpleasant Of honie that is poisonous we haue read in them that haue obserued the diuersities thereof but not of bitter hony And the moste auncient fathers rooke this wilde honie to be sweet and pleasant in tast and thereof gather allegories analogies anagogies As Hilarius which saith that the locusts are we the gentiles before flitting vnprofitable c. But now are the food of the saints and the filling of the Prophets being chosen together with wild 〈◊〉 to giue most sweet meate of our selues not out of the hyues of the law but out of the stockes of wilde
abstinencie from wine and strong drink his dailie excercise of praier and contemplation when he was alone his diligent and zealous preaching and baptifing when the multitudes came to him his free and earnest rebuking of all mens sinnes euen those that were greatest in credit the Pharises the Saduces the high Priests and the King him-selfe All these ioyned together are such arguments of austeritie and seueritie of life as not onelie all antiquitie but all ages past present and to come may worthelie wonder at as for the place the garment the dyet be not matters of so great admiration of themselues neither so wondred at of all antiquitie as he bableth not yet followed of his Mocke-monkes and false Eremites that either the wildernes is their dwelling or the Camels heare their weede or the locusts and bitter honie their diet or anie thing answering to these in hardnes Their Monkes dwell in palaces their Eremites in fine houses neere to cities and great townes their apparell though in fashion disguised yet neither rough nor hearie nor of smalest price their dyet like Princes and noble men the life of the greatest parte of them idle and lasciuious Therefore to their owne shame they may account Ihon Baptist the Prince or first author of their Monkish order whome they follow as neare in austeritie of life as they much come behind him in course of time I trust all reasonable men may now vnderstand what these vnlearned quarrels come vnto when they be discussed and examined howsoeuer they seeme to be bolstred out with impudent asseuerations multitud of quotations false cauillations and vnnecessarie collections In the rest therefore I wil be more briefe because my purpose is not to handle common places of controuersies at large but shortlie to discouer the vanitie and pride of this answerer and leaue such matters to other treatises where they be fullie answered A third example he taketh of our impertinent interpretation about the controuersie of the reall presence in the sacrament which is nothing els but a beggerlie crauing of a matter still in question which can beare no shew of of anie lawfull example except it were cleere against vs that our exposition were beside the text or contrarie to it But peraduenture this fellow will bring some new matter that hath not beene heard of in this cause to conuince vs of absurd interpretations First he saith they haue these wordes of scripture repeated in foure seuerall places This is my bodie If we did vtrerlie denic the sacrament to be the bodie of Christ in anie sense it were somewhat that he saith against vs But we graunt it to be the bodie of Christ in such sorte as Christ did meane by those wordes Contrariewise we shew the one part of the sacrament to be six times called bread after the consecration in the scripture the other part twise or thrise to be called the fruite of the vine yet your gare interpreters the Papists do vtterlie denie the one to be bread the other to be wine in anie sense but monstrous and imperceptible and that against the iudgement of all antiquitie and the plaine wordes of diuerse auncient doctours But all antiquitie to our answerer a great antiquarie as you shall sec by and by are so cleere for the Popish reall presence as no man might without great offence doubt thereof as the wordes of Saint Ambrose and Saint Cyrill are These bookes that he quoteth of lib. 4. de sacram C. 5. for Ambrose and Catech. 4. for Cyrill are not so without controuersie acknowledged to be so auncient as those fathers whose names they beare and yet they saie nothing in this cause of not doubting but we are readie to saie the same Namelia that Christ hauing said this is my bodie no man ought to doubt but that it is his bodie They haue also other wordes to declare that their meaning was not of the popish manner of presence but the spirituall manner of eating of Christs flesh where of the externall sacrament is a figure and similitude as Ambrose de sacr lib. 4. cap. 4. 5. de iis qui my ster init cap. 9. The same Cyrill also though much to be suspected for his antiquitie as verie latelie come into light yet saith in the same place that the bodie of Christ is to be receiued by fatih not as the Capernaites imagined which thought they had been prouoked to the cating of a mans flesh But that same Cyrill saith our answerer in another place prooueth at large that to aske onelie quomodo how it may be is the parte of an vnbelecuing Iewe quoteth lib. 4. in 10. cap. 13. In deed Cyrillus Alexandrinus affirmeth and we subscribe vnto him that to aske how God can doe that he said he wil doe commeth of Iewish incredulitie He saith not that it is a part of an vnbeleeuing Iewe to ask how Christs words are to be vnderstood figuratiuely or properlie carnallic or spirituallie Neither doth he speake in the place alledged of Christes reall presence in the sacrament but of the question of the Iewes how Christ could giue his flesh to be eaten which we beleeue verilie he doth not one lie in the sacrament but euen to infants which neuer receiued that sacrament or els we must exclude them from eternall life according to his words except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood you shall haue no life in you But now you shall plainlie see how skilfull this answerer is in all antiquitie whereof he talketh so often and so confidentlie as bayard is alwaies the boldest horsse The same Cyrill saith he speaking of him vnder whose name are caried those my stagogical catechesis is he that wrote vpon Iohns gospell c. whereas the one was Bishop of Ierusalem in Palestine the other of Alexandria in Egypt the one not much nearer in time to the other then the prouinces where they were Bishops are in place For Cyrill of Ierusalem was a verie olde man in the time of the second generall Constantinopolitane councell Cyrillus of Alexandria was president of the third generall councell of Ephesus the first betweene which two Councels there was aboue fortie yeares distance in tyme. By which note of grosse ignorance it is manifest that this scorneful proude answerer hath neuer seene the workes of the one Cyrill nor of the other but one lie the quotations and collections of other men which he vseth as vauntinglie as they were all of his owne reading yea if they be not pregnant inough for his purpose he will make no bones to falsefie their sayings cleane contrarie to their meaning as he dealeth with Epiphanius whome he affirmeth to saie That albeit the hoste seemeth to vs of arounde forme and insensible yet whosoeuer beleeueth it not to be the true bodie of Christ is fallen from grace and saluation whereas Epiphanius saieth expresselie it is of a round shape and insensible as concerning power and yet it is the
their aduetsaries it is well knowne that Master Charke and the ministers of the Church are none such neither haue they anie such authoritie It remaineth then that he accounteth the Prince her councell magistrates and ministers of Iustice his aduersaries who indeede haue good cause so to be not onelie in respect of their heresyes but also in regard of their manifolde and almoste infinite practises of treason against the Prince and realme for which some of them haue suffered moste iustlie and not for offering of disputation as this traiterous heretike euerie where moste slaunderouslie doth avowe But nowe for their partes he saith they offere the best surest and easiest meanes that can be deuised or that haue bene vsed in Gods Churches for triall and they are manie in number The first is the bookes of Scripture receiued vpon the credit of the auncient Church of which we are content saith he to accept for canonicall and allowe all those and none other which antiquitie in Christendome hath agreed vpon But this is false for to omit that they receiue for canonicall such as the Church of God before Christ neuer receiued they receiue also such as the greatest and best antiquitie in Christendome receiued not as the Church in Origens time witnesse Eusebius more then the Church of Rome receiued in Saint Ieromes witnesse Ierome himselfe prologo Galeato and Ruffinus in Expossymb more then the Councell of Laodicea did receiue for canonicall as is manifest by the 59. canon The second way of trial is the expresse plaine words of Scripture wherein they must needs be farre superior for what one expresse plaine text haue they saith he in anie one point or article against vs which we doe not acknowledge liberallie as they doe and as the wordes doe lie yes we haue manie but a fewe shal serue for example God saith Exod. 20. Thou shalt not make to thy selse anie grauen image c. thou shalt not fall down to thē nor worship them Againe Matt. 4. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onelie shalt thou serue Which are moste plaine expresse and manifest against worshipping of Images and other creatures in anie vse of Religion Christ saith drinke ye all of this they be expresse and manifest wordes against the popish sacriledge of the cuppe The 14. to the Corinthians the first Epistle is expresse and plaine against publike praiers homilies lessons in a straunge vnknowne tongue 1. Tim. 4. in expresse and plaine wordes the spirite pronunceth the forbidding of marriage and meates to be the doctrine of deuilles And Heb. 13. Mariage is honourable in all men And 1. Tim. 3. Tit. 1. a Bishop Elder or Deacon must be the husband of one wife beside a great number more But the papists saith our answerer haue infinit texts against vs which we cannot admit without glosses and fond interpretations of our owne A bolde speach as alwaies he vseth but it shall alwaies be founde that if we doe in anie text departe from the grammaticall sense there is necessarie cause why as if it be a figuratiue spcach which is tried either by circumstances of the same place or by other texts of scriptures for the most parte hath the iudgement of the most auncient writers agreing with our interpretation But the most of these examples he bringeth haue nothing in shewe that the expresle wordes of scripture are with them or against vs but by their fonde false vnreasonable collections and such as they can neuer conclude in lawful true syllogismes as for example We haue it saith he for the supremacie expresselie saide to Peter that signifieth arocke vpon this rock will I builde my Church We answere that we might followe the interpretation of the most auncient and approoued fathers that the rocke here spoken of is Christ whom Peter confessed but graunting them that they could neuer euict we confesse that the Church is builded vpon the foundation of Peter the Apostle but not vpon him alone or more principallie then vpon all the Apostles who are all rockes or stones vpon whose foundation as also vpon the foundation of the Prophets the Church of Christ is builded Neither is it possible to prooue the supremacie of the Pope out of those wordes of scripture or anie other But they haue further expresselie touching the Apostles he that is great among you let him be as the younger Luk. 22. We haue no where there is none greater then other among you Neither do we holde that none ought to be greater then other among vs but that the greatest among the ministers ought to be seruant of all the rest and that none ought to exercise Dominion ouer the Lordes inheritaunce yet the primacie of order we graunt euen among the Apostles according to which Iames was president of the Councell at Ierusalem Peter the cheife Aposlle of the circumcision Paull of the gentiles all which will not serue one whit to maintaine the popish tiranny For Paul was nothing inferiour to the highest Apostles But for the reall presence they haue expreslie This is my bodie we haue no where this is the signe of my bodie Neither doe we denie the sacrament to be the bodie of Christ neither doe we affirme that it is a bare signe But that this is a figuratiue speach we haue expreslie This cuppe is the newe Testament in my blood and as expreslie the Apostle speaking of the same sacrament the rocke was Christ which prooueth that it must be vnderstoode in a sigue and after a spirituall manner and so doe al the olde Doctors interpretit as hath beene often shewed We haue expreslie saith he The bread that I will giue you is my flesh Iohn 6. they haue nowhere It is but the signe of my flesh And we confesse as much for we neuer saide that the signe of Christs flesh was crucified for vs but his verie naturall bodie which he promiseth in that text to giue for the life of the world which by faith and the spirit of God is made the spirituall foode of all the elect children of God and without eating of which none can be saued Ioh. 6. 53. But they haue expresly A man is iustified by works and not by faith onelie Iames. 2. we haue no where a man is iustified by faith alone no nor that he is iustified by faith without workes talking of workes that followe faith First we confesse the text that a man is iustified by workes As Abraham was when he offered his sonne and as Rahab was when she receiued the spies that is a man is declared to be iust in the sight of men For Abraham was iustified before God by faith before he offered his sonne whome God did not trie to enforme himselfe but to declare vnto men by the fruites of obedience that Abraham was a iust man euen so by faith the harlot Rahab perished not with the vnbeleeuers when the receiued the spies in peace but by receiuing
you both to wil and to be hable to do for his owne good pleasure whereupon we conclude that though a man is willed to worke his owne saluation by walking in that waie which god hath appointed for them that shal be saued yet he can doe nothing by his owne strength but all that he doth is of the grace of god for by grace you are saued through faith that not of your selues it is the gift of God To be short we make not the grace of God an helper onelie but a wholl doer and bringer to passe in vs of our saluation and of all thinges tending thereto For we are not apt of our selues as of our selues to thinke anie thing belonging thereto but our aptnes is of God Nor I saith Saint Paul but the grace of God which is with me Againe we haue infinit places of scripture to prooue that a man ought not to dout of his saluatiō in respect of the truth of Gods promises although we ought to feare trem ble at Gods iudgements and although we cannot be alwaies voide of feare in respect of our own weakenes Furthermore they haue expresselie doe ye the worthie fruites of penance Luc. 3. we haue no where that faith onelie is sufficient without all satisfaction and all other workes of penance on our partes The fruites worthie of repentance we acknowledge to be necessaire to declare vnfained repentance but not for satisfaction of Gods iustice which is blasphemous against the satisfaction of Christes death But that a faith which is fruitles or voide of the workes of repentance should be sufficient to saluation or Iustification we doe vtterlie deny as a thing contrary to the scriptures Yet againe they haue expresselie that euerie man shal be saued according to his workes Apo. 20. we haue no where that men shal be iudged onelie according to their faith We confesse as the text is that euerie man shal be iudged according to his workes and so perhaps he would haue saide if the corrector had done his part neither doe we affirme that men shal be iudged onelie according to their faith for triall of their faith shal be made by their workes Once againe they haue expresselie that there remaineth aretribution stipend and paie to euery good worke in heauen Marc. 9. 1. Cor. 3. Apoc. 22. Ps. 118. we haue as he saith no where that good workes done in Christ do merite nothing In the 3. text quoted out of the new testament is all one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a rewarde whether it be freelie giuen or deserued by laboure To him that worketh saith Saint Paule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rewarde is not accompted according to grace but according to debt But God is debter to no man Neither is there anie merit of good workes once named in the scriptures but against the merit of good workes Christ saith epxresselie when you haue done all thinges that are commaunded vnto you saie we are vnprofitable seruants and the paie wages stipend merite or desert of an vnprofitable seruant is shewed Matt. 25. 30. Cast out the vnprofitable seruant into vtter darkenesse there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth It is therfore the grace mercie and trueth of Gods promise whereby we claime rewarde and not the merites desert or debt of our good workes To that he saieth they haue expresselie praier and sacrifice for the dead in the second of the Maccaebees We answer that booke of Macabes to be no holie Scripture out of which he might haue expresselie a man commended for killing himselfe Whether Angels present good workes and almesdeedes before God and whether Saintes departed do praie for them that are aliue which he gathereth out of the Apocriphal bookes of Tobie and the Maccabes we make no question as of matters not reuealed in the canonicall scriptures But if they were graunted to be so yet it followeth not that men aliue must or may praie to Angels or Saintes departed Last of all out of the canonicall scripture he saieth they haue expresselie that the affliction which Daniell vsed vpon his bodie was acceptable in the sight of God Dan. 10. and we haue no where that such voluntarie corporall afflictions are in vaine But which of vs saith that such voluntarie corporall affliction as Daniell vsed and to such end as he did vse them are in vaine No man verilie You see therefore that while he boasteth of expresse words of scripture against vs he is driuen either to glose vpon the text or to faine some opinion vnto vs which we holde not at all and that all his bragges are but winde and wordes without matter as of one that-fcareth no shame because his heade is hidden The third waie of triall is necessarie collections made and inferred vpon the scriptures which we are willing to acknowledge and admitte to be of as great authoritie as the expresse words of the scripture But to discerne what is necessarie collection and what is not necessarie collection when there is no expresse wordes of scripture there is no certaine waie but the iudgement of Logicke for that onelie is necessarie collection which out of expresse words of scripture or articles of faith or other groundes confessed to be necessarilie gathered out of the holie scripture may be rightly concluded in a true and lawfull syllogisme whatsoeuer cannot be so concluded is no necessarie collection But our answerer saith we must referre our selues to the auncient primitiue Church for this meaning and his reason is For it is like they knew it best for that they liued nearer to the writers thereof then we doe who could well declare vnto them what was the meaning of the same we doe willinglie yeald to consult with the auncient primitiue Church to be holpen with their collections but to admit all their collections without examining them were to admit many errors that euen the Papists doe condemne for errors and which are reprooued by the scriptures them-selues Let one example serue in stead of manie S. Ierome collecteth out of this scripture It is good not to touch a woman that therefore it is euill to touch a woman Euerie man doth see that this is an vnnecessary collection and so are many other in the auncient fathers writings Wherefore we must vse the gift of knowledge of right gathering and concluding which God hath giuen not to be vnprofitable vnto his Church but to be both beneficiall and necessarie Againe marke the feeble reason vpon which our answerer groundeth his saying It is like they knew it best he cannot say it is necessarie that they knew it best then how prooueth he that it is like because they liued neerer to the writers then we doe who could well declare the meaning vnto them In deede if we had the writings of them that liued so neere vnto the Apostles that they might heare their meaning of their owne mouthes it were some likeliehood and yet no necessarie proofe
of necessarie collection For Logicke would stil iudge whether such meaning could be necessarilie gathered out of such wordes Seeing we are not bound to creditte any writings since the diuine inspired scriptures but so farre as they agree with the scriptures and receiue the light of trueth from them But those auncient writers to whome he would haue vs to referre our selues liued so many hun dred yeares after the Apostles and Euangelists the writers of the new testament as they could no more declare to them then to vs their meaning in their writings and therefore those auncient fathers which ground purgatorie prayer to saintes sacrifice of the altar vse of the crosse c. beside tradition vpon the scriptures as the answerer saith must shew the necessarie collection of them by the iudgement of demonstration seeing they neuer sawe the writers neuer heard them speake nor possiblie could liuing so long after them or els they can carie no credit of necessarie collection outof the expresse wordes of holy scripture As for tradition without scripture since God hath giuen the holie scripture is as good as the credit of men may be without a warrant from God A fourth waie of triall of spirites with him is Councells by which olde heretikes haue beene tried and they are content to referre themselues to all the Christian Councells that euer haue beene since Christ died We acknowledge Christian councells to be a godlie meane to exa mine and trie the spirites but according to the scriptures onelie for matters of faith as in the example of the first Councell of Christendome Act. 15. where the question was determined by authoritie of the scriptures But that the Papists dare abide the triall by al Councells it is false for they admit none but by the Popes consent they admitte nothing in them but that the present Pope doth allow Many Councells in Aphrica forbad appellations to Rome the general Councell of Chalcedon made the Bishop of Constantinople of equal dignitie with the Bishop of Rome the Bishop of Constantinople condemned and accursed a Pope sor an heretike the Pope of that time confirmed it yet now it is not holden for Catholike But I will spare examples vntill this lustie gallant dare aduenture the triall whereof he maketh the challenge But seeing there are many points of controuersies betweene vs and the Papists which in no auncient councell came in question he bobs vs with the last most learned Godlie and generall Councell of Trent which was gathered of purpose for triall of hercticall spirites whereunto all safe conduct being offered we refused to come for triall As though the Catholikes would haue come to the Councell of Nice if nothing might haue beene therein determined but that which pleased Arius or to the Councell of Constantinople if nothing might haue beene concluded but that Macedonius would allow Or to the Councells of Ephesus and Chalcedon if when all had beene saide that which liked Nestorius and Eutiches must haue bene holden for Catholike Such is our case we accuse the Pope to be an heritike yea and to be Antichrist the Pope will admit no councell but where he him selfe is iudge nor any to haue any voice determinatiue but onely such as are sworne to maintaine his heresies and ambition It is great pitie but the Protestants must come to such a councell Such were many councells holden of olde time by heretikes but for the most part not frequented by the Catholikes Some of our profession were at Trent but what entertainement had they euen such as their aduersaries could afforde them they were not permitted to haue any speach but as pleased their enemies wherefore when they saw noe equitie vsed as they could looke for no better before they came they left the heretikes to consult among them-selues by example of auncient fathers in like Chapters of heretikes The sift waie of triall is to referre the matter to the olde Doctors which liued before the controuersies began of which we haue spoken latelie and this we haue often vsed and still vse against the Papists in most controuersies although the authoritie of man is no certaine rule to trie which is the truth of God Augustine against Iulian vsed this waie rightlie first confuting the Pelagians by the authoritie of the holie scripture and then by the testimonie of the auncient fathers also Theodosius also in a case determined by the holie scripture did politikelie circumuent the heretikes after the aduise of Sisinius the Nouatian by the suggestion of Nectarius the Catholike to put them to a foile which had good successe because the others cause was naught But Epiphanius hath a hard saying against vs as our answerer thinketh It is enough to say against all heresies the catholike church hath not taught this the holy fathers haue not admitted this But I wene Epiphanius doth not meane that it is enough to saie so except men can prooue it to be so For els it is aseasy for heretikes to saie so against Catholikes as for Catholikes against heretikes And here out answerer voucheth Epiphanius quoting onelie lib. 2. contra haere but no Chapter of so long a booke wherebie knowing him to be a common foyster we maie well suspect his honestie in this voucher vntill he shew vs in what Chapter we shall finde it The sixtwaie of triall with him is to consider which is the Catholike or vniuersall Church or great multitude of Christians out of which the other part first departed But to consider which is the Catholike or vniuersal Church is no waie of triall but the matter to be tried And the description that he maketh of the Church is as vncerten the great multitud of Christians out of which the other part first departed For the Catholike Church is not alwaies the greatest multitude When the East Church was deuided from the West the one was as great a multitude as the other yea considering the number of prouinces of the East and the largenesse of them it was the greater And one heresie some times departeth out of another as the Rogatians from the Donatists the Eunomians from the Arrians the Iacobites from the Eutichians c. Neither doth Saint Augustine against the Manichecs make the consent of people and the name of Catholike of them-selues to be a sufficient waie of trial but among many thinges which altogether held him beside the authoritie of the holie scriptures he accounteth these which with the truth are a good confirmation but can be no preiudice against the manifest truth as he confesseth in the same place To the iudgement of Vincentius we will subscribe to holde that which euerie where which alwaies which of all hath beene beleeued so hath no point of Poperie Hoc est etenim verè proprièque Catholicum quòd ipsa vis nominis ratioque declarat quod omnia verè vniuersaliter comprehendit For that is truelie and properlie Catholike saith Vincentius which thing the verie force and reason of the name declareth
the primitiue Church any other communitie of goodes then ought to be among all Christians alwaies namelie that no man should account any thing to be his owne otherwise then the necessitie of the Church requiring he should be contented to sell euen his landes and possessions to releeue the poore Neither was Ananias and Saphira punished for breaking of their vow of pouertie but for lying against the holie ghost as the text is plaine whatsoeuer any man say to the contrarie And yet Ierome ad Demetriadem whome you cite saith not that they were punished for breaking their vow of pouertie or that they vowed pouertie but that after they had vowed the wholl price of that land they did reteine part as if it had beene their owne In Basill I finde nothing to such intent But that Ananias and Saphira were punished so seuerelie because they sinned with an high hand proudly contemned the Lord in their hypocrisie Neither doth Master Charke affirme that the Apostles forsaking of their goodes is Anabaptisticall condemning of proprietie as you slaunder him but that the example of Christs voluntary pouertie if it be to be followed bindeth al men alike and speciallie the Pope who claimeth to be Christs owne vicar generall and therefore ought most to follow Christ. It is to no purpose therefore that you will him to reade the places of the doctours to chaunge his opinion For first Hierome in the 19 of Matthew is not content that he which seeketh to be perfect sell all his goodes but he must giue them to the poore and then not liue idlelie of other mens goodes but of his owne labour as the auncient Monkes did with many other conditions that are wanting in Popish votaties Basill inter 9. in reg fus expl hath nothing to this purpose but that men which forsake their goodes to professe monasticall life must not leaue them negligentlie but dispose them to the glorie of God What Saint Chrysostome saith vppon the saluting of Prilca it were good you read ouer your selfe and then tell vs wherefore you would haue Master Charke read it for I finde nothing to alter his iudgement therein Last of al Saint Augst de ciu lib. 17. cap. 4. saieth not that the Apostles votum paupertatis vouerunt For these are his wordes Dixerunt enim potentes illi Ecce nos dimisimus omnia secuti sumus te hoc votum potentissimi vouerunt Sed vnde hoc eis nisi abillo de quo continuò dictum est Dans votum vouenti For these mightie had said behold we haue left all and followed thee this vowe those most mightie had vowed but whence came thie to them but from him of whome it is saide immediately geuing the vow to him that 〈◊〉 Now I haue prooued before that the Apostles leauing all things to follow Christ was not a renouncing of any propertie in their goods except in such case as they could not reteine them and doe the seruice of Christ wherein if you will not beleeue me you are an obstinate heretike by the sentence of Pope Iohn 23. which declared al them to be obstinat heretikes that affirmed Christ and his disciples to haue had nothing priuate or proper He condemned also a glosse of Friar Peter a minorite which had incouraged a certaine couent of a third order to follow the pouerty of Christ of which number many were condemned and burned Platin. in Ioan. 23. How your doctrine and his doth agree looke you vnto it for one of you is greatly deceiued That you conclude the vse of al wordlie blessings to be lawfull it is well That you charge Master Charke or our ministers to allure dandle or smooth men in them to serue their owne bellie c. it is a slaunder that needeth no confutation seeing their open and zealous preaching of repentance and mortification is a sufficient discharge for them before God and all that heare them The forth section which he intituleth of Loialas and Luther IN this section you saie litle defence needeth because the replier hath nothing beside a railing sentence or two against the Iesuites saying that they eate the sinnes of the people Whereas these men neither taking anie charge of soules vpon them nor receiuing anie tithes or other commodities for the same both which things M. Charke doth the reader may iudge whether he or they stand in daunger of the sentence But that which M. Charke saith of eating the sinnes of the people he meaneth not of the Iesuits only or chiefly but of them that giue pardons for money of which the Iesuits are sometimes marchants wherein they may with the Pope eate the sinnes of the people although they haue no benefices which you meane by charge of soules and tithe taking And sure it is they liue not all of Angells food neither are they maintained altogether by pure almes but by an artificiall kinde of cousonage vnder pretence of restitution as their predeceslours the Pharisies vnder pretext of long praiers deuoured the houses of poore widowes and if no man eat the sinnes of the people but they that haue benefices Master Charke is out of daunger of the sentence for he neither hath charge of soules nor tithe or commoditie for the same as you vnderstand the matter Whether Paull the third or Paull the fourth did first allow the sect of Iesuites it is a trifling matter not worth the strife about it It is sufficient for Master Charkes reporte that Paull the fourth did confirme it and there is no more reason that we should beleeue Andradius then that you should credit Kemnitius you haue litle to do that prosequute such fruitles contentions The fift section entituled Of Luther and his doctrine MAster Charke first chargeth you with plainevntrueth in that you saie he doth contemptuouslie or contumeliouslie cal Loialas a souldier where as he doth neither with honour nor with disdaine nor anie waies in all his answer call him a souldier to this charge you are mumme And whereas he doth vnioint your two arguments and manifestlie discouer the insufficiencie of them you denie that you made such argumentes whereby you acknowledge that you brought in these matters of the life of Laiolas and Luther vainlie The slaunders of Papistes against Luthers life you think must be credited because they be matters of fact As though the testimonie of enimies must needes be taken in a matter of fact And that they which are obstinate enemies to the Gospell will care for feare either of damnation or open shame in the world to inuent or brute abroade moste impudent slaunders against the professours of the trueth Concerning Sleidans eleuen thousand lies there is no wise man but laugheth to heare of the number of them And if one Sleydan a Protestant hauing publike recordes and writings to iustifie his storie could yet write eleuen thousand lies against the Papistes as you affirme is it not possible trow you that Coclaeus Hosius Lindanus Xanctes Staphilus Bolsec and
called the Epistle of Saint Iames Stramineam And I pray you good sir where doth Luther so call it For admitting your reporte of his wordes Iacobi autem epistola pre illis straminea est the epistle of Iames in comparison of those of Peter and Paul is like strawe or but strawie we finde not yet that he doth so call it absolutelie but in comparison which may be done without contempt or reproch As when the Apostle saith the law hath but a shadow of good thinges to come he meaneth not that the law to alintents purposes is nothing but a shadow for then it should be a vaine thing but in comparison of the truth exhibited in the Gospell The intollerable impudency therefore is yours and your fellows and the laughter and admiration of all nations if all nations may heare of your shameles follie may be against you rather then Master Whitaker that blush not to say absolutelie Luther called the epistle strawy when he spake onelie in respect and comparison of greater plentie of more waightie matter in the Epistles of Peter and Paul then in that of Iames. But the matter presseth Master Whittaker verie heauily for that he being a reader in diuinitie could not choose but haue read those wordes alledged by learned men aboue a hunddred times against Luther As though he is bound to beleeue whatsoeuer he readeth by papistes alledged against him In deede this siaunder of Luthers reiecting that Epistle and calling it strawie is often thrust in by Popish writers yet without alledgeing the place where or the wordes in which it is written Prateolus out of Lindane of late hath sette it forth in these wordes eam non modò reiecit epistolam ceu canone indignam sed contumeliosissimè quoque appellauit Praealiis verè stramineam quòd nihilipsius iudicio haberet Euangelicae indolis He did not onelie reiect that episile as vnworthie to be in the Canon but also moste contumeliouslie hath called it in comparison of other verilie of strawe because in his iudgement it had nothing of Gospellike nature in it In the preface in Dutch whereof you speake we neither finde this word verilie or truelie nor anie reiection of this epistle or anie such iudgement of Luther expressed that should containe in it nothing that sauoreth of the Gospell You see therefore what credit is to be giuen to Popish writers in their reports against Luther Now whether Saint Iohn did speake lesse of good workes in his Gospell then the other three Euangelistes you handle a vaine question when you confesse that Iohn writing by the same spirit could not but haue manie thinges to the same effect Neither are you hable to sette downe those wordes of Luther our of which it maie be prooued either that Luther affirmed that the Gospell of Iohn was the onelie true Gospell or that the other three were to be reiected or mishked because they spake too much of good workes so that you remaine stil forany defense you haue brought a famous liet animpudent slaunderer The fourth doctrine of Luther you reported to be this If anie woman can not or will not proue by order of the lawe the insufficiency of hir husband let her request at his handes a diuorse or els by his consent let her priuelie lie with his brother or some other man Master Charke answered that this was Luthers counsel while he was a Papist which he reuoked after his conuersion For this you charge him with such wilfull and shamefull dishonestie as can not be excused and aske how he will looke his owne friendes in the face hereafter with such fonde insultation against him as was vsed in the preface whereunto hath sufficientlie beene answered to discouer your impudencie For Luther would not reuoke his former counsell saie you but do farre worsse namelie take the man by she lockes and touze him except he did it Wheras in plaine trueth Luther meaneth nothing els but to compell such a man to an open diuorse as I shewed in answer to the preface and as the woll discours of Luthers wordes shall make plaine euen to a partiall reader Serm. de matr speaking of the causes of diuorse Priores autem quos Christus ex matris vtero c. The former sort whome Christ saith to be borne eunuches from their mothers wombe are those which are called impotent which by nature are vnable for procreation and multiplying In whome coldnes and infirmities do exceede or els are so affected in bodie that they are not meete for the life that is in matrimonie such as a man maie finde both men and women These as exempted by God and so created as they are not partakers of the blessing of generation and multiplying are to be put awaie For in them there is left no place for that word of God increase and multiplie euen as if God had made some lame or blinde which are free from walking or seeing Concerning such a great while a goe I committed to writing a counsell for confessours which they should vse if the husband or wife came to them to aske counsel what they should do for as much as their yoke fellow is not able to render the due beneuolence and yet the other partie can not be without it when he feeleth sufficientlie that the creature of God in him-selfe to be of habilitie Then they slaundered me that I taught thus that if the husband can not satisfie his wiues wantonnes she ought to flie from him to another But I suffered those froward triflers to lie The sayinges of Christ and his Apostles were peruerted and made worse what maruaile if the same thing happen to me But who shal be hurt thereby they them-selues shall see at the length Therefore after this manner I gaue counsell If to a woman meete for the matter there do happen a husband that is impotent and she can not openlie be married to another man and she vnwillinglie went against the common vsage and would not haue her credit and fame to be obscured whereas in this case the Pope requireth without cause manie witnesses that she should speake to her husband after this manner Beholde my husband you cannot render vnto me the due beneuolence and you haue deceiued me and my youthfull bodie beside this you haue brought me into perill of my good name and health or saluation neither is there before God anie matrimonie betweene vs. Fauour me I praie you that I maie contract a secret matrimonie with your brother or your next of kinne so that you may haue the name that your goodes maie not passe to strange heires and suffer your selfe willinglie to be deceiued by me as you haue deceiued me against my will I proceeded also further that the husband in this case ought to assent vnto his wife and by that meanes to yeelde vnto her the due beneuolence and hope of issue And if that he refused that she by secret flight should prouide for hir owne safegarde and
many women together vnder the cloake of mariage by his authority or what carnall liberty of mariage Luther graunteh otherwise then the Apostle alloweth in the case of the infidels departure Albert he put the case of the second third fourth tenth or more beinginfidelis or false Christians which is altogether vnlikely and almoste vnpossible to come to passe For he that is once ridde of an vnfaithfull match being himselfe a good Christian will not 〈◊〉 take a wife but of Christian Religion and if he be deceuid twise it were mōstrous that he should be deceiued in his third choise But if he should wilfullie and wittinglie match with so manie knowne heathen women it would breed another case then Luther speaketh of and he were worthie to be cut of from the congregation of Christians as one that sheweth him-selfe to be a dissembling hypocrite rather then a faithful Christian. The fift doctrine that you reported of Luther is that if the wife will not come les the maide come Which M. Chark hath answered sufficientlie to be spoken of a third cause of diuorce when the woman shall obstinatelle refuse hir husbandes companie But this you saie cannot be excused either by M. Hanmers shameles denial or by M. Charks impertinent interpretation For you saie that this was practised in Germanie to all kind of lasciuiousnes yea among the Ministers them selues as Sebastian Flaske sometime a Lutheran Preacher doth testifie Here is vpon the testimonie of a lewd baudie knaues confession of his owne filthines for which it is like that he was banished frō the Church and so becam a papist a slaunder raised vpon the wholl ministery yea vpon the wholl nation of Germanes that professe Luthers Doctrine that by authoritie of Luthers writting they vse to call their maides to bed when their wiues will not come c. But to iustifie Master Charkes interpretation and to let the reader see the intolerable impudencie of this wretched defender I will set downe as I haue done in the rest Luthers wordes concerning the matter in question more at large by which it may appeare that Master Hanmer might iustlie denie the wordes to be Luthers where they were drawne so farre from his meaning After he hath shewed three causes of diuorce in his iudgement the first being impotencie the second adulterie the third desertion or forsaking he speaketh ofit in these words Tertia ratio est vbi alter alteri sese subduxerit vt debitam beneuolentiam persoluere nolit au habitare cum 〈◊〉 Reperiuntur enim interdum adeò pertinaces vxores quae etiamsidecies in libidinem prolaberetur maritus pro sua duritia non curarent Hic 〈◊〉 est vt maritus dicat Si tunolueris alia voler si domina nolit adueniat ancilla it a tamen vt antea iterum tertiò vxorem admoneat maritus coram aliis eius esiam pertinaciam detegat vt publicè ante conspectum Ecclesiae duritia eius agnoscatur reprehendasur Situm renuat repudiae eam in vicem Vasthi Esther surroga Assueriregis exemplo Porro hîc tu Diui Pauli 1. Cor. 7. imitaris verbis maritus proprij corporis potestatem non habet sed vxor Et vxer sui corporis ius non habet sed maritus Ne fraudetis vos mutuò niss vterque consenserit Ecce 〈◊〉 hîc fraudem 〈◊〉 Apostolus Nam in desponsione alter alteri corpus 〈◊〉 tradit ad matrimonij obsequium vbi ergo alter debitum obsequium negat tum alteri corpus 〈◊〉 deditum spoliat vi aufert quod propriè coniugij repugnat iuri immo coniugium dissipat Igitur hanc vxorem cohihere magistratus est atque interimere Hoc si 〈◊〉 magistratus imaginandum est marito suam 〈◊〉 vxorem à Latronibus raptam interfectam esse confiderandumque vt aliam ducat Ferendum est aliquando vt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tollatur spolieturque corpus tollerandum non est si vxor sese marito ipsademat praedetur aut ab aliis adimatur The third way is when the one withdraweth himselfe from the other so that he will not pay the due beneuolence or refuseth to dwel with the other For there are found women sometimes so obstinat that although their husbands should ten times fall into filthie lust such is their hardnes that they would not care Here now it is good time for the husband to saie if thou 〈◊〉 not another will if the mistres will not let the maide come but yet so that the husband before do admonish his wife the second and third time and discouer her 〈◊〉 also before other men that openlie and before the sight of the Church her hardnes may be knowne reprehended If then she refuse be thou deuorced from hir and in steed of Vasthi take Ester by the example of King Asuerus and in this case thou maiest leane vnto the wordes of Saim Paule 1. Cor. 7. the husband hath not the power of his owne bodie but his wife and the wife hath none authoritie of hir owne bodie but hir husband Doe not defraud one another except it be by consent of both Beholde the Apostle here forbiddeth fraud one both partes For in their betrothing they deliuer their bodies one to the other to the seruice of matrimonie Therefore where the one denieth the due seruice then he robbeth taketh away by force his body which he hath giuen to another which is properly repugnant to the right of mariage yea and dissolueth the mariage Therefore it is the Magistrates dutie to bridle his wife yea and to put hir to death This if the magistrat omit the husband must imagine that his wife is stollen awaie and slaine by theeues and consider how to marie another Is it to be borne at any time that a man should be spoiled and robbed of his owne bodie and is it to be tollerated if the wife doe take awaie and steale hir selfe from hir husband or be taken awaie by other Now reader it is thy part to iudge whether Master Charke haue made an im pertinent interpretation of Luthers wordes and whether any practize of such lascuiuiousnes as was touched can be defended by this doctrine of Luther Last of all whether there be anie honestie in the defender that faseth out the matter still as though Luther spake not of a cause of diuorce but of licentious lecherie to be committed with the maid so often as her mistres should chaunce to refuse her husbandes companie vppon anie occasion yea he rubbeth his forehead hardlie and saith to Master Charke when you are not ashamed to defend the doctrine ye are more bolde then the Lutheranes them-selues who for verie shame do suppresse the Germaine booke wherein it was written as Cromerus a Germane testifieth If the Lutheranes had beene so ashamed of the doctrine as you saie they were whie suffer they the latine booke to be so often printed As for suppressing of the Germane booke for verie shame
haue beene hither to frustrate and the strength of the Turke is increased by our warres The second is that vnder pretext of making warre against the Turke the Popehath vsed to rake mony to gether for their pardons And he concludeth that without repentance and the ouerthrow of the Popes tyrannie there is no hope to preuaile in warre against the Turkes because God is not on our side butiustlie incensed against vs. Quantòrectius saith he faceremus c. How much better should we do if first with our praiers yea rather by changeing the wholl course of our life we reconcile God vnto vs And then that the Emperours the princes would restraine that Idole of Roome from tyrannie deceit and destroying of souies For that I also maie once prophecie although I know I shall not be heard Except the Pope of Rome be brought vnder all Christendome is vndonne Let him flie as Christ hath taught into the mountaines he that can or with confidence let him offer his life to death vnto the Romish murtherers The Popedome can worke nothing but sinne and destruction what will you more But who shall subdue the Pope Christ by the brightnes of his comming and none other Lord who hath beleeued our preaching he that hath eares to heare let him heare and let him absteine from the Turgish warre while the name of the Pope preuaileth vnder heauen I haue said By this you maie see that Luther fauored not the empire of infidelitie but sheweth by what meanes it maie be resisted Againe he forbiddeth not defense against the Turke but inuasion of the Turke when we maie be at peace with him For that it is lawfull to fight against the Turke in our owne defense he sheweth his opinion in consut Rat. Latomianae where he derideth the follie of Latomus and the diuines of Louane which racked the decree of Pope Leo to this sense that it was needles to answer the aduersaties of religion which is as great wisedome of the schoole of Louane in proceeding against Luther as if when the Turke doth set vpon vs which is no waies lawfull for him and yet he will not be staid we should send the diuines of Louane embassadors vnto him which should saie vnto him It is not lawfull for thee to fight and if thou do we will condemne thee and so suffer him to raunge at his pleasure and yet boast that we haue gotten the victorie Nay saith he let vs laie aside praiers and all spirituall armour and cease to resist the deuill denouncing vnto him and saying It is not lauful for thee to trouble the Church of God So that Luther by these wordes declareth his iudgement that it is as lawfull for vs and as necessarie with bodelie armour to defend our selues against the Turke assailing vs as it is to fight against the deuill with spirituall armour and to confute enemies of the trueth by the word of God For a fourth example of impietie you adde when he reprehended the Pope for defining beside scripture that the soule is immortall and calleth it a monster of the dunghill of Rome what ground of impietie doth he not laie In deed if Luther should denie the immortalitie of the soule as Pope Iohn the 23. did and was therefore conuicted and condemned in the Counsell of Constance wee would accurse Luthers memorie as much as the Popes But if Luther reprehended the Pope for deliuering that vpon the creditte of his owne definition and authoritie which is manifestlie grounded vpon the authoritie of holie scriptures what a slaunderous penne haue you He was charged by the Collectors art 37. to haue saide thus Certum est in manu Ecclesiae c. It is certaine that it is not in the hand of the Church or of the Pope at all to decree articles of the faith nay nor yet lawes of manners and good workes To this article Luther answereth thus Probo hunc sic c. This article I prooue thus 1. Cor. 3. No man can lay any other foundation beside that which is alreadie laide which is Iesus Christ. Here thou hast the foundation laid by the Apostles but euerie article of faith is part of this foundation therefore none other article can be laid then is alreadie laid There may be builded vpon as the same Apostle saith And therefore the Pope ought to be laide and builded vpon the same foundation but not to lay any foundation for all things to be beleeued are fully set forth in the scriptures Yet I permit that the Pope may make articles of faith to them that beleeue in him such as these are That the bread and wine are transsubstantiated in the sacrament That the essence of god doth neither beget nor is begotton That the soul is the substantiall forme of the bodie That he him seife is the Emperour of the world King of heauen and an earthly God That the soull is immortall And all those infinite monsters in the Romish dunghill of decrees that such as his faith is such may be his Gospell such his beeleeuers such his Church and that like lippes may haue like lettice and the cup a couer meete for it But we which are Christians and not Papanes doe know that there is nothing pertaining either to faith or good manners which is not abundantlie set forth in the holie scriptures that there is neither authoritie nor place for men to decree any other thing These wordes declare that what doctrine is true and needefull to be knowne must be receiued from God by the holie scriptures not from the Popes decrees or from any mortall mans authoritie It is maruaile you doe not charge Luther with holding the pluralitie of Gods because here prehendeth the Pope for defining that the essence of god can neither beget nor be begotton as wel as with denying the immortality of the soul. both which articles are to be taken out of the holie scriptures not from the authoritie of the Popes definition For though the Pope define any thing which is true yet it must not be receiued vpon his creditte but vpon the authoritie of Gods worde And seeing the Popes decrees doe containe such a number of vntruethes the articles of faith from the Popes decrees may receiue discredit rather then authoritie But all thinges must be examined according to the worde of God writen which is the truth yea euen the scripture comming from the mouth of the deuill Againe I wish the reader to consider how truelie you saie that Luther calleth that opinion of the immortalitie of the soule a monster of the dunghill of Rome when he speaketh of the infinite monsters of falsehoode that are found in the dunghill of the Popes decrees where of he maketh no expresse mention in answere to this article The last example of impiety is when Luther affirmeth and mantaineth that neither man nor Angell on earth can laie any one lawe vpon any one Christian further then he will him-selfe What foundation say you
tali agone diuino caelesti auxilio vt vel srater adsit qui te consoletur promissionibus gratiae foris velintus in corde spiritus sanctus verbum fratris erigat ac animet ac sustentet cor tuum vt possis sic apud 〈◊〉 statuere Confessus quidem sum Lege dei conuictus coram diabolo me peccasse me damnatum esse vt Iudam Sed verto me ad Christum cum Petro respicio eius immensum beneficium meritum c. ille omnem horrendam damnationem damnauit Here those most holie fathers will answere me here they will laugh and say art thou a famous doctour and knowest not how to answere the deuill Dost thou not know that the deuill is a lyer how say you by that I giue you great thankes as you are worthie for so sweete comforse in so weightie a matter These three wordes the deuill is a lyar I should not haue knowne vntil now except you most notable diuines had taught me If I were a Papist vnexpert of all temptations whome Satan would not neglect beeing carles and snorting as he neglecteth them that follow their lusts c. I should be such a Giant also stout and valiant against the enemie that is absent If you should beare the stripes of the deuill and heare his disputations you should not longsing the song of the Church after the accustomed manner I verilie doe see sufficientlie in Dauid and the rest of the Prophets how greeuouslie they wrestle and groone in those combates and such like against the deuill and his horrible violence And Christ him-selfe although without sinne in what aboundance of teares and anguish did he siriue for vs in those conflictes against Satan For he vrgeth mans heart exceedinglie ceaseth not except he be driuen backe with the word of God And I am plainlie perswaded that Emser and Oecolampadius and such like were sodendlie slaine wieh these horrible stripes and shakings For the harte of man cannot abide this horrible and vnspeakeable violence except God be with him For Satan in the twinckling of an eie sodendlie ouerwhelmeth the wholl minde with terrors and darkenes and if he finde nothing but a man vnarmed and not instructed in the word as it were with a litle finger he ouerwhelmeth him all at once It is true in deed that he is a lyar but his lies are not of a simple craftes man but much more craftie and prepared to deceiue then mans capacitis can comprehend He doth in such sort set vpon a man take holde of him and that sound truth which can not be denied and that he vrgeth and sharpeneth so craftelie and subtillie and couereth it so cunninglie that he may deceiue them that take the best heede of him c. As that cogitation which strake the heart of Iudas was true I haue betraied innocent blood this could not Iudas denie But this was a lie therefore I must despaire of the grace of God And yet the deuill vrged this lie this cogitation so violentlie that Iudas was not able to ouercome it but despaired Therefore good brother Sir Papist the deuill doth not lie when he accuseth or vrgeth the greatenes of sinne For thereby he hath two graue witnesses that are vnreproouable the law of God and our owne conscience I can not denie but I haue sinned I cannot denie my sinne to be greate I cannot denie that I am guiltie of death and damnation c. but there Satan lyeth when he vrgeth further that I should dispaire of grace As Cain said my sinne is greater c. And in this conflicte thou hast neede of the helpe of God from heauen that either some brother be present which may comforte thee outwardlie with the promises of God or that the holie ghost inwardlie in thy heart through thy brothers word do lift vp and encourage the and comfort thy heart that thou maist determine thus with thy selfe I haue in deede confessed before the deuill beeing conuicted by the law of God that I sinned that I am condemned as Iudas but I turne my selfe vnto Christ with Peter and looke backe to his infinite benefite and merit c. he hath condemned all horrible condemnation c. Now I reporte me to euerie indifferent reader whether Luther doe not speake here of a spirituall conflicte or tentation vnto desperation for his saying of priuate masse after he knew that it was idolatrie not of any bodelie conference about the abolishing of the masse Secondlie that Luther doth not yeald to the perswasions of the deuill wherewith the defender confesseth that both good and euill men are assaulted but according to the difference by him obserued resisteth the assault and obtaineth victorie thorough Christ. But now let vs heare what arguments our defender bringeth to prooue this bodelie conference First the confession of the Tigurine Caluenists but that is false The Tigurines did onelie reprooue Luther for his intemperat inuectiues and naming of deuilles so often our wise defender concludeth ergo Luther had deuilles Secondly he saith it is euident that this conference was more then spirituall by the deuilles preface wherein he calleth the frier right learned Doctor according to the vaine of pride wherewith he saw him puffed vp c. But what reasonable man seeth not that this presace of his title was but a bitter scorne of the deuill no flattering speach to make him readie to receiue his impressions as the defender saith As for the sound of Satans voice described in the place alledged in the Censure there is none such For the booke demissa angulari so often alledged by the papists is none other but this de missa priuata vnctione sacerdotum as appeareth by the verie wordes noted by the Papists in lib. de missa angulari which are found here in this boke de missa priuata c. Therefore the sound of Satans voice is but some papists dreame vpon the matter which our defender would now hide vnder the title of de missa angulari The third reason is for that Luther confesseth some of his fellowes to haue beene slaine by this conference What he saith in his rash iudgement of Emser and Oecolampadius where of the one was a Papist the other a Protestant you heaue hard in his own words which prooueth no bodely conference For those terrible blowes and shakinges where of he speaketh are no more bodelie then the busfeting of Satan where of Saint Paul speaketh And who doubteth but that by such spirituall buffeting of Satan a man that is ouercome with exceeding sorrow may suddenlie die except he be assisted and comforted by the grace of Christ as Saint Paul was Finally the bushell of sault saith our defender which Luther confesseth himselfe to haue eaten together with the deuill prooueth that he had bodelie conference with him First the booke is not extant and if any such were yet it prooueth no bodelie conference For no man is so madde to thinke that
operuerit numquid quia non est ex fide peccatum est prorsus in quantum non ex fide peccatum est non quia per se ipsum factū quod est nudum operire peccatum est sed de tali opere non in domino gloriari solus impius negat esse peccatum If an heathen man saiest thou doe cloath the naked is it sinne because it is not of faith yea out of doubt in as much as it is not of faith it is sinne Not because the deede it selfe which is to cloath the naked is sinne but not to reioyce in the Lord of such a worke none but an vngodlie man will denie to be sinne This and much more to this effect hath Saint Augustine in that place against the Pelagians which with the papists denied that such workes of the infidels were sinne But albeit Saint Augustine be directlie against you yet Saint Ierome you thinke may helpe you in Ezechiell cap. 29. whoe saith thus Caeterùm ex eo quòd Nabuchodonoser mercedem accepit boni operis intelligimus etiam ethnicos si quid boni fecerint non absque mercede Dei iudicio praeteriri But of this that Nabuchodonvser receuied arewarde of good workes we vnderstand that euen the gentiles if they haue done any goood thing are not passed ouer without rewarde by the iudgement of God To this I answere that God rewardeth vertue in the gentiles it prooueth not their morall workes are not sinne in as much as they are not done of faith as S. Augustine at large teacheth in both the bookes and places last cited For those good facts are of the reliques of Gods image not altogether blotted out which God doth reward as his owne worke in them but in as much as they doe not those good deedes well they are sinne in the doers as Saint Augustine saieth and therefore neither Saint Augustine nor Saint Ierome are against Master Charke in this cause The third fault of your definition Master Chark saith is that you restraine sinne onelie to voluntarie action Against which you oppose Saint Augustine in manie quotations where he repeateth these words so often Sinne is an euill so voluntarie as it can be by no meanes sinne except it be voluntarie But what his iudgement was of those wordes appeareth best in his retractations which you quote lib. 1. cap. 13. 15. In the former he saith patest videri falsa haec definitio sed si diligenter discutiaiur inuenieiur esse verissima Peccatum quippe illud intelligendum est quod tantummodo peccatum est non quod est etiam paena peccati c. This difinition maie seeme to be false but if it be diligently discussed it shall be found to be most true For that sinne is to be vnderstood therein which is onelie sinne and not also the punishment of sinne as I haue shewed before when I rehearsed certaine thinges out of my third booke of free will Although euen those sinnes which not vnworthelie are called sinnes not voluntarie because they are committed either by them which know not or which are compelled can not be committed altogether without the will because euen he which sinneth of ignorance sinneth willinglie when he thinketh that to be donne which ought not to be donne And he which doth not those thinges which he will the flesh lusting against the spirit lusteth truelie vnwillinglie and there in doth not what he will but if he be ouercome he consenteth to concupiscence willinglie and therein doth not what he will being free from Iustice and a seruant of sinne And that which in children is called originall sinne when as yet they vse not the free choise of will is not absurdlie called also voluntarie because being drawne from the euill will of the first man it is made as it were comming by inheritance The same in effect he saith C. 15. answering that he had set downe de duabus animabus c. 14. Propterea vera est c. That definition is true for this cause for that that sinne is defined which is onelie sinne and not that sinne which is a punishment of sinne Againe he saith sine voluntate nullum esse petcatum siue in opere siue in origine that there is no sinne without will either in the worke or in the beginning By which sayings Saint Augustines iudgement is plaine that in the particular worke there are sinnes that are not voluntarie as those that come of ignorance or compulsion or as concupiscence original infection yet al these may be called voluntarie in respect of the first mans offence in whome was freedome of will which Master Chark graunteth and therefore that childish insultation needed not but to shew your pride in contempt of others as though al learning had beene bred with you and were like to die if you did not plant it in vs. Saint Augustine therefore is cleere that that sinne which is a punishment of sinne is not voluntarie and that his definition as he calleth it was onelie of sinne which hath none other consideration but as sinne his disputation being against the Manichees which deriued sinne from an euill God and not from the free will of man or deuill first created good by the onelie good God But you haue scripture to prooue euerie act or omission which is sin to be voluntarie because Christ him selfe saith that those things which do defile a man do come from the heart as though nothing might come frō that corruptroote the heart of man which is not voluntarie You your selfe affirm that euil thoughts are not voluntary which he saith come from the heart Mat. 15. 19. Now concerning the obiection of originall sinne there hath beene inough said out of Saint Augustine concer ning the other obiection of manslaughter donne without consent of will which you affirme to be innocencie God defend euerie good Christian from such innocencie At least wise you might haue made such a fact committed by error a voluntarie sinne by the first mans sinne that was of free will which if it had not beene no man should haue erred in that case or anie other But the text you tel vs calleth him an innocent man liberabitur innocens c the innocent shall be deliuered from the hand of the reuenger So great a Rabbin as you would seeme to be by your quotations out of Rabbi Isaac Rabbi Mose and Rabbi Leui should not be ignorant that in the hebrew text the word is harotzeach that is the killer not the innocent which yet is adiudged to escape punishment of death by the politike law because in respect of mans iudgement he hath not offended for which cause also Deut. 19. his blood is called innocent Yet his flying to the citie of refuge and imprisonment there vntill the death of the high priest argueth as Master Charke saith that there is somthing in his fact or the error by which he committed the fact that hath neede of forgiuenes by Christ
worde can Master Chark now peepe against all this O you papists that with sinceritie of Religion haue not caste of all humane honestie doe you not blush at the impudent ignorance of this your defender And yet he is not ashamed to gather Master Charks absurd positions not one according to his meaning and but one onelie agreeable to his wordes First that sinne is no action where he holdeth that all sinne as the sinne of omission is no action Secondlie that no euill men doe sinne but the euill in men which he saith not but that man as he is the creature of God is not against the lawe but the euill in man Thirdlie that sinne is not voluntarie which he saieth not generally but of some sin speakeing properlie Forthlie that sinne is no humane or reasonable action which he saieth rather to be a beastlie and vnreasonable action of a man endued with reason Fiftlie that it requireth neither will nor knowledge in the doer where he saith that the transgression of Gods law is sin in some case and sort which is without the will and knowledge of the doer Last of all that fooles and madde men may as properlie commit sinne as others but this he saith not at al but that the infirmites of follie and madnes shal not excuse sin and that if a madde man or a foole kil a man in the Censurcrs iudgement it is properly no sinne Whereof you may inferr that it is sinne properlie but not that it is as properlie sinne as in others But if madde men and fooles coulde not commit sinne properlie whie are they punished for sinne To conclude where you saie that Master Charke reiecteth Saint Augustine about the definition of sinne it is false For these are his wordes Howsoeuer you alledge Austen to approoue your definition it is no waie so large as sinne and iherefore a most vnlearned definition These words of his declare that he reiecteth not Augustine in this matter but your false and fraudulent allegation of him which is manifestly shewed before by Augustines sound iudgement in his retractions The eight section Of sinne MAster Chark hauing said out of the definition of Saint Iohn which also Saint Ambrose doth vse as I haue shewed before that all transgression of the lawe is sinne was charged by the Censurer with transposition because the Apostles wordes lie thus in the text Sinne is transgression of the law Master Charke defendeth him-selfe alledging that these wordes sinne and the transgression of the law are as the definition and the thing defined which are mutuallie verified the one of the other The defender bringeth nothing to prooue that this is no definition but that which he hath saide in the section before which is ouerthrowne Onelie he quarrelleth that Master Charke said the Gospell is as generall as the power of God to saluation whereas Christ also is called the power of God to saluation As though the Gospell did not include Christ. For when it is said the Gospell is the power of God to saluation you must vnderstand the generall matter namelie the doctrine or the preaching That transposition of wordes is sometimes lawfull M. Charke sheweth by an example God is a spirite where the wordes lie in the text a spirite is God The defender wrangleth that it is not alwaies lawfull which shall be graunted vnto him without controuersie That in this question it is not lawful he hath nothing to prooue but a beggerlie demaund of that in question that transgression of Gods lawe is larger then sinne Where Master Chark alledgeth out of 1. Iohn 5. 17. that euerie iniquitie is sin he maketh no small adoe because the greeke word in that text is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which if they be not all one in sense let him enter an action against the vulgar interpreter which in both places translateth iniquitas Yea let him quarrell with Saint Augustine which vpon the place in question writeth thus Nemo enim dicat aliud est peccatum atque aliud iniquitas nemo dicat ego peccator homo sum sed iniquus non sum omnis qui facit peccatum iniquitatem facit Peccatum iniquitas est quid ergo faciemus de peccatis nostris iniquitatibus Let no man saie sin is one thing iniquitie is an other thing let no man say I am a sinful man but I am not vniust euery one that committeth sin doth commit iniquity for sin is iniquity what then shall we do with our sinnes and iniquities c You see here that S. Augustine accounteth sin iniquitie or vniustice to be all one So doth he in 1. Iohn Tr. 5. And where the Apostle vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is vnrighteuosnes what say you meaneth he generall iniustice or speciall If he meane generall as you must needes say for shame then it is as large as sinne and it is manifest that the Apostle vseth the worde Iustice as contrarie to sinne therefore iustice must needes be the same that sinne If you can make a diuersitie between general iniquity general iniustice you are wiser then the vulgar interpreter speciallie if he speake in this latter place of great sinnes onelie as you say whereas iniquitie in the former place may signifie such small transgression as is no sinne at all Verelie Oecumenius is against you and saith Simpliciter tanquam à genere peccati facit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 omnis iniquitas peccatum est hoc est siue sit ad mortem siue non He maketh a plaine diuision of sinne as it were from the generall and saith all inquitie is sinne that is whether it be vnto death or not And vpon 1. 〈◊〉 3. he saith Sciendum autem quòd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. We must know that sin is a falling from that which is good 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 is an offence against the law and both of them hath this beginning namelie sinne the 〈◊〉 from that which is good iniquitie to doe against the law that 〈◊〉 And they agree the one with the other and are about the same thing For he which sinneth erreth from the marke which is according to nature and in nature is selfe For the scope or marke 〈◊〉 nature is to liue according to reason farre from vnreasonablenes Likewise he that doth 〈◊〉 offendeth about the lawe giuen in nature beeing affected intemperatelie Rectè ergo discipulus domini 〈◊〉 inidem 〈◊〉 Therefore the disciple of our Lorde hath rightlie vsed the one for the other Here iniquitie is as large as sinne Against this what haue you to saie Aristotell in praedicam qual For which I send you to Aristotell Eth. lib. 5. c. 1. But 〈◊〉 euery iniquitie is not sinne you haue Saint Augustine lib. 2. cont Iulian cap. 5. When you can set downe his wordes you shall receiue an answere in the meane time as you saie Master Charke reserued a sure carde for the ende I may
third question you haue what difference is betweene these speaches namelie of proceeding and begotten which question you saie with the rest though Master Charke seeme ignorant in them all and not to vnderstand so much as the verie 〈◊〉 themselues yet Catholike diuines know what the Church hath determined herein But concerning this question Saint Augustine shall answere for our ignorance Cont. Maximin lib. 3. cap. 14. Quid autem inter nasci procedere incersit de illa excellentissima natura loquens explicare quis potest Non omne quod procedit nascitur quamuis omne procedar quod nascitur 〈◊〉 omne quod bipes est homo est quam nis bipes sit omnis qui homo est haec scio Distinguere autem inter illam generationem hanc processionem nescio non valeo non sufficio Ac per hoc quia illa ista est ineffabilis stcut Propheta de filio loquens alt Generationem eius quis enarrabit ita de spiritu sancto verissimè dicitur processionem eius quis enarrabit c. What difference is betweene begotten proceeding speaking of that moste excellent nature whoe is able to expresse Not all that proceedeth is begotten although al proceedeth that is begotten As not euerie two legged thing is a man although euerie one is two legged that is a man Those thinges I know But to distinguish betweene that generation and this procession I know not I am not able I am not sufficient And for this reason because both that and this is vnspeakeable as the Prophet speaking of the sonne saith whoe shall declare his generation so of the holie ghost it is saide moste trulie whoe shall declare his procession This is Saint Augustines iudgement of this question Yea this is the Master of the sentences iudgement also as well of this question as of the proceeding of the sonne from the father against you Yet you saie of these as wel of as the other they are no lesse to be beleeued then other mysteries of the trinitie wherewith your conclusion is that you would not haue troubled Master Charke if you had supposed him so grosse therein as by examination you finde him Alacke poore Sir William A lacke for pitie what high points of learning you haue shewed which in the Master of the sentences whome soeuer he wil of an hundred schoolemen that wrote vpon him euerie sophister may finde mooued debated and defined in lesse then one daies studie no meruaill then if Master Charke be so grosse in them as you by examination finde him But while you in your owne imagination are so subtile in them that you thinke your crest perceth the clowdes you haue bewraied more shamefull proude ignorance then any of vs would haue suspected that it might be found in such a great Champion of the Papistes such a Lorde he censuter such a doughtie defender When in some of the questions propounded by your selfe you neither know the doctrine of the scripture the iudgement of the auncient fathers the determination of your Church nor the conclusion of your owne schoole doctors in whole mysteries neuertheles you would seeme to be an other Mercurie For the rest of the handes that you draw against Doctor Fulke you are answered in this consutation of popish quarrelles from pag. 48. vntill pag. 55. And where you saie that euerie litle gesse at our pleasure is sufficient to prooue what we will whereas no testimonies of your part will serue except they be so plaine and euident as by no waits they maie be auoyded and thereupon charge vs to be Lordes of the scriptures it is as manie other of yours a detestable slaunder For as I haue shewed before in matters necessarie to saluation we admit no gesses but either manifest wordes of scripture or els that which is necessarilie concluded out of manifest wordes and principles confessed and such if you haue anie bring them forth and we will hearken vnto them Ouer against the article of punishing heretiks by death which you saie was a long time denied by our selues to be allowable by scripture you note in the margent Luther against Latomus de incendiariis of burners For what purpose I maruell seeing in that booke he complaineth of the Louanistes not for burning heretikes but for burning of his bookes For the mention which Saint Paull is thought of some to make of an Epistle written to the Laodicenses you are not a litle netled that Master Chark condemneth both you and Saint Ieromes translation of ignorance You saie he should not obiect ignorance so peremptorilie to you you ought not so rigorously to haue beene reprehended and you name a great manie auncient writers which may be sufficient to wipe awaie Master Charkes bitter reproch against you But let vs see howrigorously and bitterly he hath delt with you yea how peremtorilie he obiecteth ignorance to you by his own wordes The Episile to the Laodiceans although manie make mention of it Paull maketh none so that either you ignorantlie passed ouer the greeke or willfullie addicted your selfe to the olde translation being in this place plainlie corrupted For by the originall Paull speaketh of an Epistle from Laodicea and not writen to the Laodicenses as you vntrulie assirme Here is all that he saieth you are a daintie Parnell that count your selfe so rigorouflie reprehended and so bitterlie reproched in those wordes where ignorance is not peremptorilie obiected as you saie but either that or willful addiction to the olde translation which I know not vpon what ground you doe so peremtorilie call S. Ieromes translation Master Charke hath more cause to complaine of you for that you affirme that he saith the greeke text hath of an Epistle written by S. Paull from Laodicea For he saith not an Epistle written by Saint Paull but from Laodicea by whome soeuer it was written Where you cite manie that thought mention to be made of one written by Saint Paull to the Laodiceans he confesseth as much But it is more against Master Charke that you haue two Greeke editions the one of Pagnine the other of Plantine which make for you as you affirme But what if you be deceiued in them as great a clarke as you would seeme to be that maie not be touched with the least suspicion of ignorance The most of the copies both printed and written haue 〈◊〉 the Epistle from Laodicea Your two editions leaue out the preposition and then it must be translated that Epistle of Laodicea which it seemeth your vulgar interpreter followed in sense though not in wordes which saith eam quae Laodicensiumest that which is of the Laodiceans Where is there now in anie of these that which maketh for you that Saint Paull speaketh of an Epstle written by him to the Laodicenses For the Epistle of Laodicea which your two greeke editions haue and the Epistle of the Laodicenses which your vulgar translation hath cannot signifie an Epistle written to the Laodicenses but from
peece of Gods worde and traditions are an other peece and this peece must be added to that or els it is not a perfect or sufficient instruction of itselfe for Gods Church The comparison you make of ioyning S. Lukes Gospell to that of Saint Matthew or Saint Paules epistles to them both to resemble your patching of traditions to the written word of God is both odious and vnlike and without begging the wholl matter in question gaineth nothing For the adding of the writings of one Euangelist to another or of an Apostle to the Euangelistes is but the heaping of heauenlie treasure to the further inriching of the Church in all light of spirituall knowledge so the accession of the bookes of the new testament is as it were the vnfolding or laying open of the same diuine riches that was perfectlie contayned in the olde testament for the saluation of all Gods elect that liued vnder that discipline But your traditions as you maintaine them argue an insufficiencie of the holie scriptures which allso you confesse your selfe and are not a more plaine or plentifull application of the mysteries comprehended in them Therefore though you can for manners sake otherwhile forbeare odious speeches aginst the dignitie of holie scriptures yet euen that odious conclusion gathered by Gotuisus must needes follow of your doctrine concerning the insufficiencie of scriptures and the necessitie of traditions That your traditions are Gods word and of equall authoritie with the scriptures you promise to shew more largelie in the twelft article together with certaine meanes how to know and discerne the same Sed haec in dicm minitave Parmeno You haue taken a pretie pause of three yeares long since you were interrupted as you 〈◊〉 in the end by a writte de remouendo But the daie will come that shall paie for all Whether anie cause or matter hath beene ministred by you of odious speeches against the dignitie of holie scriptures Mastet Charke declareth by one example out of Hosius which with all the rest that he saith you omit to answer as trifling speech to litle purpose So whatsoeuer by anie colour of reason you can not auoid by your censorious authoritie you maie contemne and passe ouer But his conclusion seemeth worthie the answer which he maketh in these wordes To conclude it is a great iniquitie to adde traditions or your vnwritten verities to the written word of God whereunto no man maie adde because nothing is wanting from which no man maie take because nothing is superfluous But to him that addeth shall the curses written in the booke be added for euer Against this conclusiō you note in the margent great iniquitie to adde one veritie to another or to beleeue two verities together A fine ieste but a grosse begging of the wholl cause For who shal graunt that your vnwritten vereties be truth and not falsehood falselie by you termed verities vnwritten There is no veritie of matters necessarie to be knowne vnto saluation which is not written in the holie scriptures that are hable to make vs wise vnto saluation But good Lord what a sturre you keepe because M. Chatk noteth in the margent Apoc. 22. ask how this place is alledged against you c. As though that which is true of one booke yea of euery booke of the scripture maie not iustlie be verefied of the wholl bodie and boke of the the Bible Because adding to the word of god argueth imperfection in the word of god Your stale obiection of Saint Iohns Gospell written after the Reuelation is alreadie answered For al bookes of scripture that haue beene written since the fiue bookes of Moses are no addition to the word of God but a more cleere explication of the 〈◊〉 first com mitted to writing by inspiration of God Neither do they teach an other waie of saluation then Moses did but set forth the same more plainlie by demonstration by examples of Gods iustice and his mercie by threatenings by exhortations by explication of his promises by shewing the accomplishment and the manner of perfourmance of them in Christ and his Church And this they do moste absolutelie sufficiently and plentifully to the saluation of Gods people These things saith S. Iohn are written that you should beleeue that Iesus is Christ the sonne of God and that beleeuing you maie haue euerlasting life in his name Here you maie as well cauill that not onelie the Gospell of Saint Iohn or the miracles written in the same is necessarie to be beleeued vnto saluation but all the rest of the scripture also foolishlie opposing thinges that are no waie repugnant but the one including the other For the beleeuing of Saint Iohns Gospell doth not exclude but include all other bookes and partes of holie scripture which teach the same meane of saluation or any thing thereto pertaining But how holdeth this argument saie you no man maie adde to the booke of Apocalips ergo no man maie beleeue a tradition of Christ or his Apostles Maie we not as well saie ergo we maie not beleeue the actes of the Apostles No sir for we make our argument in this man ner No man maie adde to the booke of the Apocalips much lesse may anie man adde to the wholl Bible of the olde and new testament And consequentlie there are no traditions of Christ and his Apostles to be credited as needefull to saluation which are not contained in the holy scriptures Thus we alledge scriptures and thus we argue vppon them not as it pleaseth you to deseant vpon our allegations and to dissigure our arguments But it is lamentable you saie to see the 〈◊〉 dealings of these men in matters of such importance It is verie true vnderstanding you and your complices to be the men that vse such fleightes in 〈◊〉 waightie causes As for our doctrine is plaine without any seame that the scriptures are sufficient to saluation therfore al tradition besides them are 〈◊〉 to that purpose But let vs see who 〈◊〉 sleightes by your iudgement First you aske Master Charke what he 〈◊〉 by adding Who doth adde Or in what sense as though his meaning and sense of adding were not manifest as also his accusation that the I suites the Papistes do adde to the word of God their traditions a necessarie to saluation yet not expressed or contained in the word of God But if God saie you left anie doctrine by tradition vnto the Church and our ancetours haue deliuered the same vuto vs especiallie those of the 〈◊〉 Church what shall we do in this case Shall we refuse it It seemeth dangerous and I see no reason The question is not whether we should refuse anie thing that God hath left but whether God hath left anie such tradition to be beleeued vnto salua tion which is not contained in the holie scriptures But if our ancetours of the primitiue Church haue deliuered anie such tradition vnwritten as left by Christ what shall we doe you
the next matter that you saie he prnoueth by tradition it is a question not so needefull to be decided although it may be prooued out of scripture that some of them which were Iohns disciples were baptized by him and so it is like were all the rest seeing Ierusalem and all Iurie and all the coast neere vnto Iordan were baptized by Iohn euen to the Pharisees and Saduces Publicans and souldiers it is not probable that the Apostles whoe before their calling by Christ were of honest and deuout conuersation did neglect that diuine institution which all men that would seeme to be religious made hast to receiue Furthermore you saie he prooueth by tradition the ceremonies of baptisme as deliuered by the Apostles lib. de fide Oper. cap. 9. The question is whether the Eunuch whome Philip baptized made such profession of his faith c. renouncing of the deuill as is required of them that are baptized when the scripture maketh mention onelie of a short confession that Iesus Christ is the sonne of God Where Saint Augustine sheweth that the holie ghost would haue vs to vnderstand that althinges were fulfilled in his baptisme which though they be not expressed in that scripture for breuities sake yet by order of the tradition we know that they are to be fulfilled Where tradition is not taken for that which is altogether beside the scripture but that which according to the scripture deliuereth what is to be obserued concerning the celebration of that sacrament which is the seale of mortification and regeneration That the Lordes supper should be receiued before other meates he thinketh of it as of other ceremontall matters that it came either from Apostolike tradition or from decrees of generall councell yet is it a thing not necessarie alwaies to be obserued for your selues doe housell sicke folkes at all times of the daie or night without respect whether they haue tasted any thing or no otherwise as a matter of order and decencie it is obserued of vs also to minister that sacrament before dinner and to them that be fasting if the case of necessity require not the contrarie Yet againe you saie he prooueth by tradition the exorcisme of such as should be baptized l. de nupt concu cap. 20. l. 6. cont Iulian. c. 2. But the truth is that by the ceremonie of exorcisme exsufflation and renunciation that is vsed in baptisme he goeth about to prooue that infantes before baptisme be in originall sinne and in the power of the deuill as is euident by both the places which prooue not exorcisme to haue beene receiued by tradition but by the end of that ceremonie vpon what beginning soeuer vsed in the Church at that time that infants are borne in originall sinne and subject to the power of Sathan before they be baptized The wordes of the former place are these In veritate itaque non in falsitate c. In truth therefore not in falsehoode the deuils power is exorcised in infants and they renounce him by the heartes and mouthes of their bearers because they cannot by their owne that beeing deliuered from the power of darke nes they may be translated into the kingdome of their Lorde Here is neuer a word of traditiō The second place hath these words Sedetsi nullaratione indagetur nullo sermone explicetur verum est tamen quòd antiquitas c. But although it originall sinne may be sought out by noe reason by no speach it may be expressed yet is it true that by true Catholike faith from auncient time is preached and beleeued thoroughout the wholl Church which would neither exorcise nor exsufflate the children of the faithfull if shee did not deliuer them from the power of darkenes and from the prince of death Here the auncient doctrine of original sinne is confirmed by the olde ceremonies of exorcisme and exsufflation which were vsed in baptisme to signifie that infants were by that sacrament deliuered from the guilt of originall sinne by which they were vnder the power of darkenes and death But that these ceremonies were Apostolike traditions he saith not or that they are of necessitie to 〈◊〉 vsed in baptisme when the one of them namelie 〈◊〉 is not vsed at this day for ought I know in the Popish forme of baptisme The Moscouites in place of it as it seemeth vse excreation For when the Godfathers and Godmothers answere that they renounce the deuil they spit out one the earth as it were in signe of detestation In Saint Augustines time they vsed to blow out In the last place you saie he prooueth by the same tradition that we must offer vp the sacrifice of the masse for the dead lib. de cura pro mort agenda cap. 1. 4. serm 32. de verbis Apostoli Of the sacrifice of the Masse Saint Augustine speaketh nothing but that praiers were offered for the dead at the celebration of the Lordes supper which he calleth sacrifice he saith it was by authoritie of the whol Church which was notable in that custome and that the wholl Church obserued it as deliuered from their fathers But seeing the elder Church for more then an hundred yeares after Christ had no such custome nor doctrine and especiallie seeing the same custome is against faith taught in the holie scriptures that the dead in the Lord are blessed that iudgement followeth immediatelie after death c. The authoritie of faith and trueth is to be preferred before the tradition and custome of men Neither is it to be thought to haue proceeded from the Apostles which is disprooued by the writings of the Apostles the onelie certaine witnes of the doctrine deliuered by them which is necessarie for vs to beeleeue and follow And therefore this new sir Censurer doth greatlie abuse the olde saints whome he would haue patrones of his vnwritten verities partely in charging them to referre vnto tradition many things that they doe not partlie in drawing to doctrine necessarie that which they speake of ceremonies mutable not the least in picking out one or two ouersightes to be pardoned vnder colour of them to maintaine all the grosse heresies of Poperie that are intollerable The fourteenth section Whether the Iesuites speake euil of scripture Art 6. intituled Nose of waxe IF you had ser downe Master Charkes replie betweene your Censure and your defense as reason would you should haue done for men to iudge indifferentlie betweene both you might haue spared more then two pages which you haue spent in charging him with a slaunder of the Iesuites where he reporteth that they saie the scripture is a nose of waxe when they saie it is as a nose of waxe For no reasonable man can make any other sense of those wordes the scripture is a nose of waxe but euen the same that you confesse to be the saying of the Iesuites the scripture is as a nose of waxe as Master Charke telleth you And moreouer that Paiua saith the fathers
a nose of wax is easie to be turned and shaped on euerie side or sort which if it were so must needes be a great fault in the scripture it selfe A hundred positiue lawes and statutes in England are so well penned as all the sophistical heads in christendome cannot finde a starting hole in them by anie peruerse interpretations but thatall they which haue but a meane skill in the lawes will laugh them to scorne And tha I we think so vnreuerently of the holy scriptures giuen by inspiration of god that euerie foolish heretike maie turne them about like a nose of wax but rather that in his said attempt of turning his folly shal be made manifest to al men Pighius saith expressely the scriptures are dumbe iudges as though Godspake not in them and by them vnto vs whose prophane comparison of the holie scriptures with prophane lawes which require Magistrates and iudges to punish the offenders of them euerie Christian man may perceiue to tende to the derogation of the maiesty of them As also euerie childe that hath studied logike but halfe a yeare maie vnderstand his beggerlie petition of the principle when appealing from the iudgement of the scriptures he will be iudged by none but by papists in controuersies and questions that we haue against the papists As for the blacke Gospell and Inkie diuinitie babled by Eccius against the written Gospell If Iesuits can maintaine as Catholike surelie Christians can not heare it without horror of blasphemie If there be no fault or imperfection in the scriptures how saith Pighius that euery man may euidently know without the scriptures in what order the Church is appointed by her author Againe of what moment is the holy scripture if it be not necessarie to decide all doubtes and controuersies in the Church for thus saith Pighius If we receaue the authoritie of the Churches tradition quam si recipimus omnis facilè etiam sine scriptur is inter nos componetur concertatio controuersia cùm de singulis nonfuerit admodum operosum inuenire quid Catholica ab initio Ecclesia senserit Which if we receiue all strife and controuersie betweene vs may easilie be compounded euen without the scriptures Seeing it is no very hard worke to finde out what the Ca tholike Church from the beginning hath thought of euerie question Thus the Ecclesiasticall tradition is set a loft and the holie scriptures excluded as superfluous and vnnecessarie seeing all questions may easilie be decided without them But to giue a better colour to your nose of waxe you saie Saint Ierome doth call the scriptures alledged corruptlie by Marcion and Basilides the diuells Gospell because the Gospell consisteth not in the words of scripture but in the sense But so doth not Christ call the scripture when it was alledged by the deuill neither doth Saint Ierome so call the scripture but the false sense feined by heretikes His wordes are these Grande periculum est in Ecclesia loqui ne fortè interpretatione peruersa de Euangelio Christi hominis fiat Euangelium aut quod peius est Diaboli It is great perill to speake in the Church least perhappes by peruerse interpretation of the Gospell of Christ be made the Gospell of man or that which is worse of the deuill And it is true which he saith The Gospell is not in the wordes but in the sense of the scriptures Yet it is also true that the sense of the scriptures is expressed in those wordes of the scriptures and not included in the Popes breast as the Papists would haue vs thinke that al labour bestowed in seeking the sense of the scriptures is in vaine except we take the interpretation of the Popish Church which sthe iudgement of the Pope as the sure rule to guide vs by But Saint Augustine you saie calleth the scripture the bowe of heretikes Which is not so for he compareth their wresting of the scriptures to the bending of a bowe Ecce inquiunt peccatores tetenderunt arcum credo scriptur as quas illi carnaliter interpretando venenatas inde sententias emittunt Beholde say they the sinners haue bent the bowe the scriptures I beleeue which while they interpret carnallie they send forth poysoned meaninges from them Further you saie Irenaeus compareth it abused by heretikes to a Iewel stamped with the forme of a Dogge or Fox Irenaeus speaketh not of the bodie of the scriptures but of wordes sentences and parables of scripture rent not onelie from their sense but also from their place and patched together with olde wiues fables to make a shew for heresie which is all one as he saith as if a man should breake an excellent Image of a king and when he hath fashioned the peeces beeing pearles or precious stones into the shape of a Fox or Dogge he would yet be so impudent to saie this is that excellent Image of the king which was made by a not able workman This soundeth nothing like the nose of waxe Likewise you saie Gregorie Nazianzen compareth the scripture to a siluer scabberd with a leaden sworde in it The comparison you speake of is in his poemes which I verelie am perswaded that you neuer read but were mocked by your notebooke as many times before For Gregorie compareth not the scriptures as you slaunder him but an hipocrite a man that hath nothing but an externall shew of religion to a leaden sworde in a siluer scabberde his verses are these if you could haue construed them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To these that you might seeme bountifull though you be a verie begger of your owne reading you adde Tertullian and Vincentius Lirinensis of which the former you saie compareth the scripture to the deceitfull ornaments of harlottes the other to poysoned hearbs couered in the Apothecaries shops with faire titles Wherein you slaun der them both for they compare not the wholl scripture as you doe in your nose of waxe but the hereticall bragges of scripture which as they may abuse a peece for a shew so are they confounded by the wholl when the same is rightlie weighed Therefore the comparisons of these auncient Doctors are no more like to your nose of waxe then your nose of waxe is like to the holie scriptures Neither doth the example of Luther calling the scriptures the booke of heretikes expounding him selfe why he so calleth it namely because it is depraued by heretikes defend the Iesuites which to the deprauation of the scriptures vse that similitude as Luther did not in his albeit he might as well haue forborne that title as his rash iudgement against those whome you call sacramentaries for as the one was vnprofitable so the other was vniust But if the Iesuites saie you had reiected any one booke of the scripture as the Protestantes doe many we might iustlie accuse them It is as great a fault to adde to the worde of God as to take from it The Protestantes reiect no booke
creature can haue except he be also creator and God himselfe therefore Christ truelie as man receiueth that which is giuen but in respect and right of his godheade he is able to receiue and exercise that power which none can haue but God onelie These thinges indeede maie seeme vnto the simple to be farre fetched and farre from the question of priests power to remit sinnes but they are much farther from the truth of our Catholike faith and Religion that our sauiour Christ in respect of his Diuine nature should be spoiled of his authority or els should thereby worke nothing in a manner in the cheife most necessarie partes of our redemption that Popish priests might be made equall or not farre vnlike him in the power of pardoning sinnes ALLEN For as the due consideration of Christes authoritie and excellent office touching his manhood will helpe vp the decaied honour and iurisdiction that the guides of Gods Church by the right of his high calling do iustlie challenge so it shall expresse the boldnesse of certaine miscreants of this age who to further their sundrie euil in tents and detestable doctrines haue dishonoured Christes dignitie touching his incarnation and office of his redemption exceeding much both in himselfe and in persons of his Pristes and substitutes some of them fearing as I take it lest the honour and office of Christes Priesthood might by participation descend to the Apostles and Priestes of the Church letted not to hold that Christ was his fathers Priest according to his diuine nature of which blasphemie Iohn Caluine was iustlie noted wherein the wicked man whiles he went about to disgrace the dignitie of mortall men became exceeding iniurious to the second person in Trinitie One other of that schoole and of his owne neast denied that Christ in his manhoode should iudge the world lest there might seeme to be some force of punishment and correction of wickednes practized by mans ministerie in this life for the resemblance of Christes iudgement to come And so taught one Richerius of a Carmelite a Caluinist Other deny Christ being now in heauen to make praier for vs according to his manhoode because it tendeth towardes the intercession as Saint Paulin expresse wordes recordeth of him Quòd saluare in perpetuum potest accedens ad Deum per semetipsum semper viuens ad interpellandum pro nobis That for euer he is of power to giue saluation hauing accesse to God by him-selfe and alwaies Iiuing to make intercession for vs. Yea most of the Sacramentaries for the aduantage of their vngodlie assertion that Christ in his owne person as he is God and man should not be present in the sacrament doe couertlie blaspheme the blessed and highlie sanctified fleshof our sauiour auouching it to be vnprofitable whereby they vnaduisedlie dishonour the dreadfull incarnation of Christ and all the workes wrought by the meane of his flesh and blood and ministerie of his manhoode for the remission of our sinnes and purchasing saluation to his Church FVLKE The due consideration of Christes authoritie and excellent office touching his manhoode will nothing helpe to restore the decaied honour and iurisdiction of Popish priesthoode except you can both prooue your Popish priests capable of such honour and power as the sonne of God is and also bring forth the recordes out of the holy scriptures for that high calling whereof you boast That any faithful Christian whome you to maintaine an Antichristian authoritie call Miscreantes haue dishonoured Christs dignitie touching his incarnation and office of his redemption it is a slaunder stronglie aduouched but slenderlie prooued For first Caluine affirming Christ to be a priest in his wholl person God and man derogateth nothing from that dignitie neither is he iniurious against the second person in trinitie for Christ is an high priest after the order of Melchesidech and our redeemer not as a minister and seruant onelie but as the sonne as the King os peace and righteousnes without father without mother without genealogy hauing neither beginning of his daies nor end of his life al which things can not be restrained to the humanitie of Christ but are proper to him as he is equall and eternall with his father That Richerius should denie that Christ in his manhoode should iudge the world it might well be a slaunder of that grosse potheaded Cyclops Villegagnon which when he durst not abide the inuasions of the barbarous people in Gallia antarctica where he had enterprised a conquest he quarelled with Richerius and other godlie persons to haue a colour of returne and a wellcome of the Papists And as touching his slaunderous libell that you send the reader vnto I referre you them to the answere confutation of Richerius Thirdlie that Christ doth make praiers for vs according to his manhoode it is not sufficiently prooued by the text of the Apostle to the Heb. 7. because he may and doth make continuall intercession for vs by the vertue and worthines of the sacrifice of his death although he conceiue no prayers for vs in forme of wordes as men vse vpon earth And if it be graunted that Christ so praieth for vs yet it tendeth nothing towardes the intercession of Saints but rather against it because the interceffion of Christ is sufficient without them yea if the intercession of Saints were prooued it draweth not of necessity praier vnto Saints after it and therefore there were smal purpose in them that denie Christ in such forme to praie for vs to controul the inuocatiō of Saints which thing being either graunted or denied prooueth neither too nor fro that Saints are to be praied vnto or 〈◊〉 That any one of those whome you cal Sacramentaries doth either ouertly or couertly blaspheme the blessed flesh of our Sauiour auouching it to be vnprofitable otherwise then our sauiour Christ himselfe auouched if it were separated from his diuine and quickening spirite doth profitte nothing you are not able to iustifie and therefore you send vs in the margent to Cyrill vpon Iohn lib. 4. Cap 14. whoe sheweth in deede that the flesh of Christ as it is the flesh of the sonne of God hath quickening vertue and power in it to our eternall redemption but otherwise affirmeth nothing thereof that we all are not readie to subscribe vnto ALLEN Let vs therefore Christianlie confes with the scripture and with the Church of Christ that our sauiour not onelie by power equall to his father concerning his diuine nature but also by the sending and graunt of his father and vnction of the holie spirit beeing farre vnder them both in his humane nature doth remit sinnes Whereupon it orderlie followeth that whosoeuer denyeth man to haue authoritie or that he maie haue power graunted him by God to forgiue sinnes he is highlie iniuriouse to our sauiours owne person dispensation of his flesh and mysterie of his holie incarnation For though there be great diuersitie betwixt his state and others because
in one person both God and man be perfectlie vnited in him and therefore much more prerogatiue might be and doubtles was giuen to his humanitie as to him that was both God and man in respect of his baser nature then to anie other of his brethren beeing but meere men yet this is assuredlie to be beleeued that he which could without derogation to his Godheade communicate with the sonne of man and graunt him in consideration of his assumpted nature the rule and redemption of his people the assoyling of our sinnes and to worke all wonders in the power finger and force of the holie ghost the same God without all doubt through his sonne and our sauiour may at his pleasure without all vnseemelines or derogation to his eternall honour andso it shall be prooued that he doth giue power to the gouernours of his Church and houshodle to pardone and giue penaunce to iudge and rule the people in the right of our said Sauiour to the edefying of his bodie and making perfect of his saints FVLKE We doe Christianly confesse according to the scripture and with the Church of Christ that our sauiour Christ not onelie by power equall to his father concerning his diuine nature but also by graunt of God his father in his humane nature which is farre inferiour to his father doth remit sinnes absolutelie and of soueraigne authoritie in respect of his diuinitie as the mediatour God and man and that he did the same vpon earth also as a minister and preacher of repentance and reconciliation according to his humanitie But hereupon it followeth not by any order or necessitie of consequence that whoesoeuer denyeth meere man to haue authoritie or power to forgiue sinnes is iniurious to Christs person and the dispensation of his flesh or mysterie of his holie incarnation For although that man haue this authoritie which is God yet it followeth not that such mē as are onely men are capable of the same authoritie The diuersitie betwixt the state of our sauiour Christ and others is so great that nothing can be communicated to others which is proper to him in respect of his diuine nature And such a thing is the absolute power to forgiue sinnes for which he hath made satisfaction to the iustice of God which whensoeuer we speake of the remission of sins may not be forgotten For the mercie of god forgiueth no sinne but that for which his iustice is thorouglie satisfied in the obedience and iustice of our Lord and redeemer Iesus Christ. Therefore as no other man hath the dispensation of his satisfaction but himselfe so no other man can giue absolute forgiuenes of sins but him-selfe But as all his ministers haue power to pronounce forgiuenes of sins to the penitent which is noe more but to expresse his will and pleasure concerning the remission of sinnes and in what sort and condition he bestoweth the same so haue they power to teteine sinnes not of them whome he will pardon but of such as doe not repent and therefore by his worde are denied of forgiuenes so that man in this case followeth the iudgement and authoritie of God not God the iudgement and authoritie of man For if a trew priest elder or minister of the gospell lawfullie authorized would forgiue the sins of an hypocrite that faigneth repentance they are not forgiuen before God and if man would reteine the sinnes of a true penitent yet are they forgiuen before God For to man is giuen no absolute power to forgiue sins any more then there is giuen to man an vndouted iudgement to discerne betweene hypocrites and true faithfull persons But where you saie that God could without derogation to his godheade communicat with the sonne of man and graunt him in consideration of his assumpted nature the rule redemption of his people the gouernment of our soules the assoyling of our sinnes c. I must know how farre you extend your consideration For if you meane therebie that God in respect of or according to this assumpted humane nature did communicate to our sauiout Christ none other but such power as he might without derogation to his deitie haue communicated vnto Moses Samuel or any other which was a meere mortall man for the redemption of our soules and forgiuenes of our sins I doe vtterlie abhorre your Nestorian and worsse then Nestorian blasphemie but if you meane that such pow er as might without the derogation of his godhead be communicated to the sonne of man is by him deliuered to the ministers of his Church which execute the office of shepheardes and teachers in his place I doe gladlie confesse that without all vnseemelinesse and derogation to his eternal honour the ministers of the Church haue power by his graunt to reteine and forgiue sinnes that is to declare the iudgement of God in forgiuing or reteining of sinnes according to such conditions as he hath expressed in his holie worde which iudgement according to those conditions is so ratifyed by God him-selfe that it is as certaine as if it were pronounced and vttered by his owne voice out of heauen But where you speake of pardoning and geuing of penance I must once againe distinguish of your meaning For if you meane by your Popish terme of penance repentance so that you saie man hath power to giue repentance which is a conuersion of the heart vnto God and a chaunge of the minde from sinne to obedience of God I spit at your blaspemous saying For it is proper onelie to God to giue repentance to Israell and to all true Israelites of the gentiles his elected children as the holie ghost teacheth Acts. 5. and 11. in which places your pupills the Rhemists durst not for gal of conscience and shame of the world translate the latine worde paenitentia as they doe commonly els where except it be taken in the euil part penance but repentance Yet if by the word penance you meane a time or exercise of trial of true repentance which the aunciēt writers do sometimes metonimically cal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and paenitentia which was graunted by the elders of the Church to such as had greeuouslie fallen that they might haue some experience of their true conuersion before they were admitted into the communion of the faithful I may yeald to your terme And further I will not denie but that God hath geuen power vnto the gouernours of his Church and household to pardon such penance thatis to remit vpon due and good consideration some part or the wholl of that time and exercise which to such penitents by them is enioyned but that any mortall creature hath power to pardon penance in such sorte that the partie which is to receiue the pardon neede not to be penitent for his sinnes I stand still to the flat deniall Neither must we here make any great account of such as shal obiect to the priests of gods Church as the Scribes did vnto Christ him-selfe when they saw him
in expresse wordes absolue many of their sinnes conceiuing in their heartes as it is recorded by Saint Matthew in the historie of the healing of the man that had the palsie that Christ did iniurie to God and committed blaspemie in taking vpon him to remit mans offences whose malitious mindes and cogitations Christ did so reprehend that they might well perceiue by his sight of their inwarde secrets that he was verie God whoe onelie by nature looketh into mans heart and therefore did therebie well insinuate that they could not iustlie reprehend his doings seeing he was God in deede and might as God pardon mans offences Yet that notwithstanding he stoode not with them then vpon the right of his Godhead for the doing of this excellent function which in deede by nature and propertie is onelie perteining to him but he gaue this reason of his doeing that the Sonne of man had power to remit sinnes in earth wherebie me seemeth wherein yet I submit my iudgement to the more learned that he plainlie professed that by power receiued he might in respect of his manhoode and calling forgiue sinners and that in earth as meaning therebie to institute an order and waie how to remit sinnes here in the worlde either by him-selfe or by his ministers at whose sentence past in earth the penitent should be frree by iudgement of God in heauen For so our sauiour two or three times talking of mans ministerie in the remission of 〈◊〉 termeth it loosing in earth and the contrarie binding in earth as also he calleth Gods high sentence in the same cause loosing and binding in heauen Neither doth the interpretation of Saint Hilarie anie whit hinder my meaning whoe vpon that place affirmeth Christ to haue remitted this mans sinnes by the might of his Godheade for it standeth well that one worke should be wrought by the principall cause and yet by the office and ministerie of some secondarie cause appointed by the ordinance of God for the same vse as we see in baptisme to the remission of the childes sinne both the might of God and the ministery of man to concurre at once whereof we shall haue I trust better occasion to speake anon FVLKE It is well that you can make such light account of such as shal obiect against you that it is not lawfull for mā to vsurpe any thing which is proper to god as is the absolute power to forgiue sinnes which none can properlie and absolutelie forgiue but he against whome they be committed Therefore there is a broad difference betweene the power of God and the 〈◊〉 of man in forgiuing of sinnes God doth absolutelie and properlie forgiue sinnes committed against his law and maiestie Man by his appointment doth assure the penitent sinners of his sinnes forgiuen by God and therefore in some phrase of 〈◊〉 is said to forgiue sins as he is said to saue mens soules to whom he preached the saluation by Iesus Christ. The Scribes did rightlie affirme that none could forgiue sinnes but God onelie but they erred in that they did not acknowledge Christ to be God whoe in the person of the mediator euen in that state of humilitie in which he was conuersant vpon earth was no whit abridged of his diuine authoritie but that he might by the same power forgiue sins that he did heale diseases And whereas he saith that the sonne of man had power to forgiue sinnes vpon earth he meaneth not that he had it as meere man but as God and man in one person and that his manhoode was no let vnto him to exercise that power of his Godheade Iohn 3. he saith the sonne of man came downe from heauen and that the sonne of man is in heauen But this is not to be vnderstood of the sonne of man according to his manhood but according to his Godhead as many other such speaches are in the scripture which in respect of the vnitie of the person ascribe to the one nature that which is proper to the other as Act. 20. to feede the Church of God which he hath redeemed with his owne bloode where redemption by his bloode is affirmed of God which is proper and true in respect of Christs humanity Your modestie is commendable that you doe submit your selfe to the iudgement of other in that your conceite of Christes meaning thereby to institute an order c. for the order that he hath instituted and the power that he hath giuen of binding and loosing in earth is els where plainly and purposedlie set forth that we neede not such vnnecessary vnlikelie coniectures to ground it vpon And whereas you affirme that the interpretation of Saint Hilarie doth not any whit hinder your meaning because one worke may be wrought by the principall cause and yet by the office and ministerie of some secundarie I answere the questions is not what may be but what was done in that case whereof Saint Hilaries iudgement is flat against you His words are in Mat. com Canon 8. Mouet Scribas remissum ab homine peccatum Hominem enim tantùm in Iesu Christo confitebantur remissum ab eo quod lex laxare non poteratifides enim 〈◊〉 iustificat deinde murmurationem eorum dominus introspicit dicitque facilè esse filio hominis in terra peccata dimittere Verùm enim nemo potest dimittere pecoata nisi solus Deus ergo quiremittit Deus est quia nemo remittie nisi Deus deus in homine manens curationem homini praestabat nulla ei agendi aut loquendi erat difficultas cui subest totum posse quod loquitur Porro autem vt ipse in corpore positus intelligi possit esse qui animis peccata dimitteret resurrectionem corporibus prestaret ait vt siatis quoniam silius hominis habet potectatem in terra dimittendi peccata c. It mooueth the Scribes that sinne is remitted by a man for they did beholde a man onelie in Iesus Christ and that to be remitted by him which the law could not release For faith alone doth iustifie afterward our Lord looketh into their murmuring and saith that it is easie for the sonne of man on earth to forgiue sinnes But none truelie can forgiue sinnes but God alone therefore he which forgiueth is God be ause no man remitteth but God God abiding in man performed healing to the man and there was no difficultie to him of doing or speaking who hath power so be able to doe all that he speaketh But that he beeing placed in the bodie might be vnderstood to be the same which forgiueth sinnes to mens soules and performeth resurrection to their bodies he saith that you may know that the sonne of man hath power on earth to forgiue sinnes c. Let the reader iudge whether Saint Hilarie doe any whit in these wordes hinder your meaning And yet more plainlie Saint Chrysostome controlleth your meaning and speaketh expresselie and directlie against it in Mat. Hom.
warrant of Christ his power receiued by the holy ghost maie as ministers seruants remit or retaine sins we do most willinglie consent and confesse But then they practise this power as seruants when they beinterpreters and declarers of the Lordes will and pleasure and require not that God should followe their sentence or attend how they be affected to forgiue or retaine and so to subscribe vnto their doing for that is an Antichristian vsurpation farre from the meaning of that power which Christ did graunt to his A postles ALLEN Some holie writers vpon this text of S. Iohn in which the order of Christes authorizing his Apostles for the remission of sinnes is described doe dispute of the difference of giuing the holie Ghost then to his Disciples and afterward on Whitsondaie some note the eternall ceremonie that our Master vsed when he gaue them the holie spirit which was by breathing on them that such outward actions might both be an euidence to them of that excellent gift which they inwardlie then receiued and should further be an euerlasting instruction to the Church that Gods grace and giftes be often ioyned to externall elements for the solace of our nature that delighteth to haue our outward man schooled as wel as the inward man nourished These and manie things moe be of profitable remembrance and consideration but not so much to our purpose Therefore let vs see whether the iudgement of the holie Fathers doe not wholie helpe our present cause prouing the Priests ministerie through the holie Ghostes authoritie that our declaration standing on the plaine wordes of scripture with their vndoubted sense maie obtaine inuincible force against the aduersaries worthie credit of the true beleeuers FVLKE If you had expressed what the writers are that thus dispute or discourse vpon this text we might better haue considred how pertinent or impertinent their opinions are to our matter in controuersie S. Chrysost. seemeth to allowe the opinion of some and Euthymius plainely affirmeth the same that the Apostles at this time did not presentlie receiue the holie ghost but onelie were prepared or made capable thereof which if it were true is contrarie to the title of your Chapter I like better of Cyrillus iudgement which thinketh they presentlie receiued the holie Ghost in some measure but not so plentifullie nor with such diuersitie of giftes as on the daie of Pentecost That the grace of God is testified assured and sealed vp vnto vs for the help of our infirmitie by outward signes and externall elementes ioined thereto we know confesse but as for the solace of our nature or delight to haue our outward man schooled I knowe not what they meane It is great mercie of God to beare with our weakenes but it agreeth not with the discipline of the Gospell that we should delight in outward thinges but rather to exercise our faith in spirituall and heauenlie meditations ALLEN We will make our entrance first with Saint Cyrill whoe debating with himselfe vppon the incomparable authoritie and power giuen to the Apostles for remission of sinnes standeth first as in contention with him selfe and with Christs words how it maie be that they being but men should forgiue the sinnes of our soules being sure of this that it is the propertie onelie of the true liuing god to assoile vs of our sinnes against whom onlie all sins be properlie committed And therfore being not of stomake as men be now a daies to denie that which Christes words so plainelie do import he made answere that the Apostles were in deed deified and made as you would saie partakers of Gods nature to worke Gods owne office in the world Qua igitur ratione saieth he diuinae naturae dignitatem ac potestatem discipulis suis saluator largitus est Quia certè absurdum non est peccata remitti posse ab illis qui Spiritum sanctum in seipsis habeant Nam cùm ipsi remmittunt aut detinent spiritus qui habitat in eis remittit detines By what meanes did our Sauiour giue vnto the Apostles the preheminence and power of Gods owne nature Surelie because it agreeth verie well that they should rimit mans sins that haue in themselues the holie Ghost For when they assoile or retaine sins it is the holie spirit that dwelleth in them which by their ministery doth remit or retaine sins Thus he I maruell not now whie this same father termeth the Apostles sometimes protectores curatores animarum corporum the protectors curers both of bodies soules it is not strange whie S. Ambrose should call the order of priestood Ordinem 〈◊〉 Neither that he should terme Officium Sacerdotis munus S. S. The Priests office to be the function of the holie Ghost No I doe not wonder at some of our forefathers that in the admiration of Gods Maiestic which they same to be so present in the execution of so high in office they did simplie and plainely terme the principall Pastours of the Church halfe Gods and not meere men not hauing respect to their persons which be compassed with infirmities as other the sinfull sort of people in the world be but casting eie vpward to the holie and excellent function which they practised by the spirit of God which dwelleth in them and deifieth their persons to make them of habilitie to exercise the workes of God FVLKE Saint Cyrill is farre from that blasphemie to saie that the Apostles were in deede deified and made partakers of Gods nature to worke Gods owne office in the world For ascribing to God that which is proper to him incommunicable to anie meere creature he maketh this obiection how our sauiour did graunt to his disciples the dignitie power of his diuine nature answereth that they were only made ministers instruments of the holy ghost to expresse his power in remitting sinnes by baptisme and repentance whereof S. Chrysostome also saieth vpon the same text that the Priest giueth onelie his tongue and his hand but the Father the sonne and the holie Ghost doth all things in this case I will rehearse the whole saying of Cyrillus that his iudgement maie more fullie appeare vpon this text Et certè solius veri Dei est c. And suerlie it pertaineth to the onelie true God that he is able to loose men from their sinnes For to what other person is it lawfull to deliuer the transgressors of the law from sinne but to the author of the law him-selfe for so in mennes affaires we see it to be done For no man without punishment doth reprooue the lawes of Kings but the Kinges them-selues in whome the crime of transgression hath no place For it is wiselie said that he is implous which shall saie to a King thou doest vniustlie By what meanes then did our Sauiour graunt to his disciples the dignitie and power of the diuine nature because trulie it is not absurde that sinnes may be remitted
holie ghost was God by whose authoritie and proper power they did alwaies since Christs word was spoken remitte the same The which beeing true as it cannot be false that is so agreeable both to scriptures and to all our fathers faith the heresy of our time must needes directly impugne the vertue and power of Gods owne spirit For as the proofe of mans ministerie in this foresaid function induceth the true and euerlasting Godhead of the holy ghost by whome they practize that power so the denial thereof and robberie of priesthoode of this their moste iust claime doth directlie spoile God of his honour and of the euerlasting right that he hath in remission of sinnes So whiles these goodmen seeke to abase man vniustlie they blaspheme God highlie and together with mans ministerie they bring vnto vtter contempt Gods owne authoritie FVLKE Your deifying of popish priests doth altogether weaken the force of that argument which our fathers vsed against the auncient heretikes to prooue the diuinitie of the holie Ghost For it were an easie matter for Eunomius Macedonius or anie other heretike that was against his godhead to replie that by ministerie of God the holie Ghost might as properlie forgiue sinnes as Priestes do by the ministerie of Christ and of the holie ghost yea so farre forth as thereby they are made halfe Gods yea deified and made Gods in deede But you vtter repugnancie when you saie that by Gods authoritie and proper power Priestes do forgiue sinnes Where you make it not proper to God which is common to others with him Therefore you should speake more properlie to saie that God the holy ghost by his owne authoritie and power proper to the deitie doth forgiue sinnes in their ministery men thereto authorized do no more in proper speach and sense but testifie and declare what God doth for which declaration and testification seeing they are the embassadours and messengers of God vnto the world to declare his pleasure of reconciliation or condemnation they are said to forgiue sinnes or to retaine them which they do not properlie but pronounce the sentence of God concerning the remission or retention of mens sinnes And that this was the meaning of the Auncient fathers concerning the authoritie and power of Gods ministers it is moste manifest by this argument whereby they choke the enuier of the holie ghostes diuinitie from which you cutte of all the sinnewes and force it hath to prooue it when you communicate to men that which is proper to God and aduance men aboue the nature of meere men when you deifie their persons by meanes of the giftes of the holie Ghost giuen to them and make them of abilitie to exercise the proper workes of God As for the deniall and robberie that you ascribe I can not tell to what heretikes of this time we detest as much as ye not seeking to abase man beneath the nature and condition of man norseeking to extoll him by robbing God of his glorie and proper effects to magnifie menne to deifie the persoas of men as you do in plaine termes Whereby it is manifest we are as far from blaspheming god or making mans ministerie contemptible which he exerciseth in the name of God as you are from sobrietie thus to iudge if your meaning be of vs or thus to reason if you would defend the argument of the auncient fathers against the auncient heretikes ALLEN But for the readersease and more light of our cause I ioyne thus in argument with them againe vpon the second part of Christes owne wordes and action had in the authorizing of his Apostles Whatsoeuer the holie Ghost maie doe in this case by the proper power of his Godhead that may the Apostles and Priestcs do by seruice and ministerie through the power of the holie Ghost But the holie Ghost properlie and rightlie doth remit sinnes Therefore the Apostles doe rightlie remit sinnes by their ministerie in the said holie Ghost All partes of this conclusion stand vpright and feare no falsehood they be guarded on euerie side by Christes action by wordes of scripture by the Doctors plain warrant and by all reason With all which whosoeuer is not contented but will needes extinguere spiritum extinguish Gods spirit and violentlie take from the Church the greatest comfort of all mans life that in this infirmitie of our flesh standeth in moste hope by his gift in remission of sinnes for which especiall cause the said spirit was mercifullie breathed vpon the Apostles peculiarly before the mare common sending of the same from heauen aboue If all this reason and iust demonstration of trueth will not serue them I will charge them with this graue conclusion of S. Augustine vttered partlie against the Nouatians especallie against the desperate that would not seeke for Gods mercie by the Churches ministerie in the sacrament of penance To be briefe I will speake it in English Whosoeuer he be that beleeueth no mans sinnes to be remitted in Gods Church and therefore despiseth the bountifulnes of God inso mightie a worke if he in that obstinate minde continue til his liues end he is guiltie of sinne against the holie Ghost in which holy ghost Christ remitteth sinnes FVLKE I doe greatlie commend you that you haue such regard of the readers ease and it seemeth you haue good confidence of your cause that you flie not the light of Logicall iudgement by which the trueth shall more plainelie appeere to all sortes of men then by anie discourses at large vnder which many great errors may be often couered vnder sophistical cloudes ambiguity of words which in a briefe syllogisme is soone and easilie espied To answere your argument therefore First I distinguish of your Maior for if you meane by seruice and ministerie the expressing and declaring of the will and pleasure of the holy ghost wherunto they are authorized I acknowledge your Maior proposition to be true whatsoeuer the holie Ghost maie doe in this case by the proper power of his godhead that maie the Apostles and Priestes doe by seruice ministerie through the power of the holie Ghost But if you meane by seruice and ministerie that the proper power of God is communicated to men I denie your Maior as false and absurde For the Apostles and Priests maie not by seruice and ministerie through the power of the holie Ghost forgiue sinnes properlie which the holie ghost by proper power of his godhead may doe for this is a proper power not com municable vnto any creature but a declaration of the will of him that hath such power is the ministeriall authoritie by which men forgiue sinnes Secondlie I answere that your conclusion is deceitfull For your Minor Extreame or Assumption is not perfectlie ioyned with your Maior or Proposition in the conclusion For your Minor is that the holie ghost properly rightlie doth remit sinnes So your conclusion should be therefore the Apostles properlie and rightlie doe remit sinnes by their ministerie
of Christ and his spouse the Church which you saie in no sauce we can abide as though wheresoeuer any mysterie is confessed to be there muste needes follow a Sacrament of the new testament ALLEN These fellowes therefore that dare be so bolde to disturbe all the orders and sacramentes of Gods Church and to mainteine their phantasies dare brust the sacred bandes of expresse scriptures in such pointes as doe directlie touch the wholl policie of our Christian common wealth and ordered waics of our saluation euen in those which Christ moste carefullie left to be practized for the vse of his louing slocke by the warrant of wordes moste plaine what shall we saie to such bold and impudent faces that thus dare doe and yet which I more mernaile at in this their vncurtesie and most vnhonest dealing will not sticke to crie and call vpon Gods worde as though they did that by scripture the contrarie whereof they expresslie finde in scripture And truelie where they be not holpen by the verte wordes vaine it shall be for them to stand with vs and with all our Fathers and with the practize of all nations and with the very expresse iudgement of the Church of God it shal not boote them I saie in their darke ignorance infinite pride to stand with vs hauing so many helpes for the true meaning and the expresse text of the worde for our selues and side FVLKE He must needes haue an impudent face and a wicked conscience that so shamefullie slaundereth vs to bereake the sacred bandes of the expresse scriptures wherunto we seeme to attribute al credit as though we denie any one word of expresse scripture do not affirme whatsoeuer the scripture doth affirme in expresse words or denie whatsoeuer the holy scripture in expresse words doth deny according to such sense and meaning as the scripture must haue as it is agreable to it selfe in all places The expresse wordes of scripture touching the Lords supper are these that it is the body blood of Christ we confesse and beleeue as much The expresse wordes of scripture concerning the Apostles authoritie in pardoning or reteining sinnes are as they haue beene often alledged we beleeue they and their successours of whome there is no expresse word haue power to remit or reteine sins The expresse words of scripture concerning the Lords supper are also The rocke was Christ we beleeue that the rocke was Christ. The cup is the new testament we beleeue that the cup is the new testament Also by expresse words to the Apostles there is graunted power to binde and to loose We confesse and beleeue that they haue power to binde and to loose And yet I trust we may be bolde to saie without breaking the sacred bondes of expresse scriptures The rocke was not Christ in nature of his humanitie and diuinitie but a sacrament of Christ. The cup is not the new couenant it selfe but that which is in the cup is an holie signe or seale thereof The Apostles had no power giuen them to binde men with chaines or coardes nor to loose the chaines coards of them that be bound by other but a spirituall authoritie to binde and loose spirituallie In like manner we doe not breake the sacred bandes of expresse scripture when we affirme that the Sacramentall bread and wine are not by transsbustantiation turned into the naturall bodie and bloode of Christ or the bodie and blood of Christ in the sacrament are not corporallie receiued but spirituallie For the contrarie of these we finde not expresselie in the scripture So when we saie the Apostles had not power to remit sinnes properlie which is peculiar onelie to God but to aslure men in Christes name whose embassadours they were of the forgiuenes of their sinnes by Christ we breake no bandes of expresse scriptures For we confesle the wordes according to their true meaning agreeable with other places of scripture that teach it to be peculiar to God to remit sinnes properlie An embassadour is said to make peace or warre when he declareth according to his commission his Princes determination of peace or warre The Kinges Liuetenant hauing such commission offereth or graun teth pardon to rebells or other offenders where he doth onelie declare the kinges pleasure in pardoning or releasing their offences As for the Popish bragge of all our fathers with the practize of all nations and the verie expresse iudgement of the Church of God to be for your assertion how vaine it is will easilie appeare when you come to cite fathers shew forth the practize of all nations declare the iudgement of Gods Church and when the contradictorie shall be manifestlie prooued and brough forth against you ALLEN Sometimes where it may appeare that the wordes and outwarde face of scripture serue not our assertions so plainlie as the holie traditions of Christes Church doe there they call vpon vs with infinite clamours to abide the iudgement of the word which they would be thought to esteeme aboue all mans meaning But whether would they now runne thinke you where all our sacraments stand vpon euident words more then words vpon the verie expresse notorious action of Christ him selfe al instituted sincerelie to be practized of the Church after his de parture hence all commended in knowne termes of greatest moste efficacie that could be not by way of preaching in which he vsed sometimes figures not at such time as he vsed other then common knowne speach but after his resurrection when he now vttered no more parables as he did before that such as faw should not see and such as were of vnderstanding might not vnderstand but did open vnto his dearest their senses that they might vnderstand scriptures and more carefullie expressed his meaning for the instruction of his holie Disciples to the better bearing of that charge which he meant to leaue them in after his departure whither will these men I saie where they see all thinges so enuironed with trueth whither will they flie The scriptures be plainlie ours the Doctors they dare not claime reason is against them there is then no waie to beare it out but with boldnes and exercised audacitie Yet here we wil assay by the notorious euidence of this one cause that we now haue in hand to breake their stonie heartes to the obedience of Christs Church word for whose faith if they haue seene great light force of argument allready shal yet see much more I trust they wil not stil with stand the knowen truth FVLKE We will runne no further for the vnderstanding of Christes wordes concerning the institution and practize of his holie sacramentes although we haue the consent of the moste auncient and approoued doctors of the primitiue Church as witnesses of the same That the sacraments are commended in knowne terms of greatest and most efficacie that could be we cofesse but therof it followeth not that they were not in some part commended by figuratiue speeches
that they are the twelue rocks or stones the foundation of the walles of the new Ierusalem Apoc. 21. 14. and the Church is builded vpon the foundation of all the Apostles Eph. 2. 20. Secondlie you saie the promis made to him Ioan. 1. Math. 16. was perfourmed no doubt after his resurrection when he committed to him the feeding of all his sheepe yong and olde Ioh. 21. 2. We graunt as much but that it doth exceedinglie import a wonderful incomparable soueraigntie and iurisdiction ouer mens soules greater or other then was equally graunted to the rest of the Apostles we see not how it can be inferred of anie scripture Euerie one of the Apostles being sent into all the world to teach all nations and to preach the Gospell to euerie creature hath as generall authority to feede the shepe of Christ both olde and yong as Peter Thirdlie you saie for a mortall man to receiue the keies of the kingdome of heauen and by them to binde and loose to lock out and let in before our Master Christ who had full iurisdiction therein it was neuer heard of But we read that the samekeies were committed to the scribes and Pharisees and teachers of the law which they did shamefullie abuse and therfore are threatned by our sauiour Christ woe be to you teachers of the law for you haue taken awaie the key of knowledge and neither you your selues do enter and you forbid them that would Woe be vnto you Scribes and Pharisees ye hypocrites for you shut vp the kingdome of heauen before men For neither you your selues do enter nor suffer those to enter that would enter Luk. 11. Mat. 23. here you note inthese places the key of knowledge by which the kingdome of heauen should haue beene opened taken awaie and the kingdome of heauen shut vp from them that gladlie would enter if they knew which way The keies in deede do signifie power and authoritie but that onelie Peter hath those keies and not the Church and euerie true Pastour of the same or that Peter by them had greater power and authoritie then the rest of the Apostles which had them also you shall neuer be hable to make demonstration Your remembrance serueth you well that all the olde writers do make no difference betweene the authoritie of Peter and the rest of the Apostles concerning the remitting of sins But you do forget that the power of bynding and loosing was by our sauiour Christ graunted equallie to all the Apostles and to their successours though it were once singularlie vttered to one The subtiltie of Origen to make a difference betweene binding and loosing in all the heauens and in one heauen onelie beside that it is vaine in it selfe yet is it not brought of Origen to dignifie Peter aboue all the Apostles whome both vpon the place of Mat. 16. and this also he confesseth to haue receiued equall power with Peter but to prefer Peter and such as Peter was before them that haue thrise reprehended offenders and beeing not heard haue bound the sinner vpon earth iudgeing him as an heathen or publicane whereof he inferreth Quanto melior fuerit qui ligat c how much better he is that bindeth by somuch he that is bound is bound more then in one heauen and how much better he is that looseth by so much he shall be more happie that is loosed for he is loosed in all the heauens The greater preheminence of rule and iurisdiction the fullnes of power and prerogatiue deriued from Peter as from a fountaine be matters of bolde assertion but void of all manner of proofe or demonstration ALLEN But we will not stand hereon now nor yet to put difference betwixt these wordes and tearmes loosing or remitting binding or retaining nor to dispute whether these two textes more properlie signifie the authoritie and iurisdiction giuen to the spiritual Magistrates for punishing by temporal pain enioyned and releasing by mercie as they see occasion the same appointed penance againe or els it properlie concerneth the verie release of sinne it selfe or retaining the sinne which they vpon iust causes will not forgiue These thinges would grow to ouer tedious a tale and ouercurious for the simple whome I would moste helpe in these matters and I shall briefllie touch so much hereof as is necessarie hereafter when I shall dispute of pardons For in deede these two textes of binding and loosing as well spoken to Peter as to the residue afterward shall be the ground of our wholl discourse there and therefore till then we must touch these textes no further but as in common pertaineth to remitting or retaining sinnes For they are brought indifferentlie of the holie fathers with the foresaid wordes of Saint Iohn in which as I haue declared the verie institution of penance and Priestes iudgement of our soules and sinnes be moste properlie grounded Theresore that by all these wordes so often vttered by our sauiour you maie well perceiue the verie literall and vudoubted meaning to be that Priestes haue authoritie by Christes warrant to remit and retaine sinnes I will recite one or two places of most auncient fathers that they ioyning with such plaine wordes of sundrie places of scripture maie make all most sure to such as can by anie reason be satisfied First Ialledge the saying of S. Maximus an olde author a blessed saint He doth by conference couple together these textes whereon we now stand thus hespeaketh verie pithely therefore you shal heare his owne words Ne qua vos fiatres de creditis Petro clauibus regni more nostrarum clauium cogitatio terrena promoueat Clauis caeli lingua est Petri quam singulorum meritae censendo Aposiolus vnicuique regnum coelorum aut claudit aut aperit Non est ergo clauis ista mortalis artificis aptata manu sed data à Christo potestas est iudicandi Denique ait eis quorum remiseritis peccata remissa erunt quorum detinueritis detenta erunt Thus he saith in our tongue Least anie earthlie cogitation mooue you to think of anie such materiall keies as we occupy in earth when you heare of committing the keies of the kingdome to Peter you must thus vnderstand that the key of heauen is Peters word or tongue because the Apostle weighing well euerie of our deserts openeth or shutteth to euery man the kingdome of Christ. This key therfore is not made by mortal mans hand but it is the power of iudgement giuen by Christ. To be briefe he saith to them al whose sins you shal forgiue they shal be forgiuē c. Thus saith Maximus ioyning together fitly two textes for one purpose out of both maketh a moste forcible argument that the iudgement of our soules which is a passing authoritie and the verie letting in and keeping out of heauen is addicted by the keies to Peters and the Apostles ministerie For which cause also S. Gregorie calleth all Christes Apostles and the iust occupiers
of their roomes the dores by which we must enter into heauē or euerlastingly byde out which is a feareful saying to al such as contemne their authority His wordes be these Quid cuncti Apostoli nisi sanctae Ecclesiae ostia existunt cùm eis dicitur Accipite spiritum sanctum quorum remiseritis peccata c. ac si illis apertè diceretur per vos ingrediuntur ad me hi quibus vos ipsi panditis repellentur quibus obseratis What are all the Apostles else but the dores of holie Church Seeing it is said of them take you the holie Ghost whose sinnes you doe forgiue they be forgiuen euen as though in plainer termes it had beene spoken thus by you all must enter that will come vnto me those I saie to whom you open the dore by loosing of thir sins and those that be put backe that you locke out Hitherto Saint Gregorie This wonderfull authoritie caused Saint Hilarie thus to make exclamatiō O holie most happie men for the desert of your faith you haue obtained the keies of heauen now the whole right both of binding loosing in heauen earth is assuredlie in you But that you maie fullie beholde their right herein consider his notable words vpon the alledged place of S. Matthew Ad terrororē metus maximi quo in praesens omnes continerentur immobile seueritatis Apostolicum iudicium praemisit vt quos in terrae ligauerint i. peccatorum nodis innexos reliquerint quos soluerint concessione scilicet veniae receperint in salutem in Apostolicae conditione sententiae in caelis quoque aut soulti sint aut ligati That is to saie To she terror and feare of all men and necessarie keeping of them in awe and disctplne Christ promised the immooueable iudgement of the Apostles seueritie that whomesoeuer they hound in earth that is to saie left fast tied in the bandes of sinnes and whome they loosed that is to witte by mercie receiued to the benefit of pardon that the same persons so bound or so released in the same case that the Apostles left them should be in the heauens either loose or fast Thus farre S. Hilarie by whome we euidentlie maie learne in what carefull case all men be that passe this life not loosed by them whose sentence in earth is so surely ratified in heauen aboue and no leesse how the wordes of Christ vttered sometimes in termes of binding loosing other times in remitting and retaining doe literallie signifie FVLKE If these two textes of binding and loosing shal be the ground of your whole discourse when you come to the popes pardons we maie see before hand vpon how feeble a ground you build For they beeing brought as you confesse indifferentlie of the holie Fathers with the other wordes vttered by Saint Iohn in which you saie the verie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of penance and Priests iudgement of our soules and sinnes be most properlie grounded do prooue that all Priestes haue equall power in giuing of pardons as they haue in remitting of sinnes When you conclude that by all these wordes so often vttered by our sa uiour we maie perceiue the verie litterall and vndoubted meaning to be that Priestes haue authoritie by Christes warrant effectuallie to remit and 〈◊〉 sinnes you ioyne together things that are of no necessary consequence and in this case are to be disioyned For we acknowledge that it is the vndoubted meaning of Christ that his ministers should haue authoritie effectuallie to remit or retaine sinnes But the verie literall meaning so you call the grammaticall sense is otherwise then you take it For in those two textes binding and loosing are plaine Metaphors as all men wil confesse that can put a difference betweene proper and figuratiue speaches And in the third of remitting or retaining either we must acknowledge a Metonymie or els the Proper office authoritie of God is made common to men The places of the auncient fathers that you cite make nothing at al to cleare the controuersie on your side namelie whether Priestes forgiue sins as properlie as God him selfe First the saying of Maximus or whosoeuer was author of that Homelie interpreting the keie of the kingdome of heauen to be Peters word or tongue doth signifie that by preaching he exreciseth that power of iudgement by which he openeth or shutteth the kingdome of heaué according as euery one receiueth or refuseth his Doctrine Againe comparing this power of iudgeing with the text of S. Iohn he declareth that Peters keie is common to him with all the Apostles and their successours S. Gregorie also comparing them to dores meaneth not to take anie thing from our sauiour Christ the onelie dore Also in the same place he sheweth in plaine words that they are dores to let in and keepe out by preaching Et quia Doctores sancti praedicatione quidem sequentibus 〈◊〉 sunt authoritate autem suaresistentibus clausi non immeritò ostia vocantur id est aperta conuersationi humilium clausa terroribus superborum Non immeritò ostia vocantur quia ingressum fidelibus aperiunt rursum sese perfidis ne ingrediantur opponunt Pensemus quale Ecclesie ostium extitit Petrus qui inuestigantem fidem Cornelium recepit pertio quaerentem miracula Simonem reppulit illi dicens In veritate comperi quoniam non est personarum acceptor Deus secreta regni benignè aperuit huic inquiens Pecunia tua tecum sit in perditionem per districtae damnationis sententiam celestis aulae aditum claudit And because holy teachers by preaching truelie are open to them that followe them and by their authoritie shut to them that resist they are not vnworthelie called dores that is open to the conuersation of the humble and shut to the terrours of the proude They are not vnworthely called dores because they do both open an entry vnto the faithsull and againe oppose them selues against the vnfaithfull that they should not enter Let vs consider what manner a dore of the Church Peter was which receiued Cornelius searching out the faith and kept out Simon seeking miracles for monie saying to the one Of a trueth I preceiue that God is not an acceptor of persons he gentlie opened the secretes of the kingdome saying to the other Thy monit with thee be vnto destruction by sentence of straight damnation he shut vp the entrie of the heauenlie court Then followe immediatlie the wordes by you cited Quid cuncti Apostolie c. whereby it is euident that Saint Gregories iudgement is that by preaching they remit or retaine sinnes as by the same they are dores of the Church The former place of Saint Hilarie is vnfaithfullie translated by you In neither is their anie admiration or exclamationi in his wordes in respect of their authoritie neither saith he that the whole right of binding and loosing is assuredlie in you I will recite his words whereby all men may see how bolde you are to
desirue so much S. Peter him-selfe was reprehensible in his gouernement therefore let vs not maruell that other which be not of so full spirit as he was either maie commit thinges worthie of reprehension amongst the good or subiect to the malitious slaunder of the euill These things are not such high pointes of learning that your aduersaries need not to be ignorant in thē Your distinction as common as it is in the schooles yea hath a good entēdement yet it is vttered in such termes as be coincident For gratia gratum faciens is also gratîs data Although euerie grace or gift of God doth not make a man acceptable or beloued of God yet is euerie grace or gift of God freely giuen and not in respect of merites or desertes and least of all that grace by which we are made acceptable and beloued of God And touching your other point we do not holde that the sacraments or anie other part of the administration of the Gospell dependeth vpon the vertue or vices of men that exercise the same And yet the first reason you vse to strengthen that point is verie feeble For you saie S. Paul did not disalowe the authority nor power of preaching in such as were euill men and taught for emulation and not of sincere zeale of the Gospell Phil. 1. Whereas it doth no waie appeare that he did allowe the authoritie of those men who perhappes were not lawfullie called and so it is most like but reioysed that Christ was preached by what meanes soeuer because God both can and doth conuert the vnlawfulintentes and actes of wicked men to serue to his glorie Some other arguments you vse that are not verie strong but forasmuch as I agree with you in the summe of the matter I will spend no time about them ALLEN And suerlie for our matter beeing of such importance Priests had need moste carefullie to studie how to practize so high a function which is proper to Gods owne iudgement and heauenlie courte For though by Christ they haue vndoubtedly receiued commission aud power in the vertue of the holy ghost when they toke holie orders to forgiue and remit sinnes yet cursed be they by Gods owne mouth if they doe it either negligently because it is the worke of our Lord or with affection of pride and Pharisaical dominion as though they were Lords of the sacraments and Christian Religion and not ministers or seruitours of Christ in his Church Whereof it seemed that S. Ierome in his daies had some cause to complaine nothing reproouing their authoritie but correcting the abuse of their authoritie Penance in those daies was so hardlie obtained that it seemed to S. Icreme that their austeritie grew to some spice of Pharisaicall regiment that would lay importable burdens on other mens neckes and not touch any at all them selues Whereupon he taketh occasion to aduertise them that eucrie power of remission and the office of absolution was properlie Gods and theirs but by ministerie And therefore that their mercie and iudgement ought to be tried and measured by his sentence and not his by theirs These thinges were to be admonished and reprehended then but now the disease lieth on the other side and they offende rather in ouer much lenitie For as both be contemned of the wicked so there is almoste amongst the good none left but loosing now a daies when men had rather be bound in sinne then bound in penance for sinne Therefore the office os binding and loosing requireth truelie good knowledge much discretion zeale and stowtnes in Gods quarell For as it is moste high so surelie it is moste hard and burdenous It pitieth my heart to see it so litle esteemed but much more that it should be lesse esteemed through their ignorance or euill life to whom the keies of remission be committed The keie of remission and retaining sinnes they had of God in their orders but discretion knowledge vertue with other qualities meete for the exercise of that office they must by praier and industrie obtaine lest whilest they profit other men to saluation they become reprobate them selues as Saint Paul said of him selfe in case of preaching But in deede it is not so cömendable for vs as the case standeth now nor so needefull to prie into the Priests bosomes or to vewe their lackes in ministring of this sacrament of penance which if anie be doe lightlie redound to their owne harmes not so mech to mine or to anie other which vse their office to our saluation For though for counsell and comforte and such other respectes a descrete and learned man were rather to be wished for then a worsse yet being assured that the partie is called by Gods Church to the function and hath iurisdiction ordinarie or graunted extraordinarilie by the appointintment of lawfull superiours and if by schisme and excommunication or otherwise he be not suspended from the practize of the said functions I need nothing to doubt for his other lackes but much more for mine owne sufficience or lacke of contrition or some other like want in my selfe why the fruit of the Priests absolution cannot be deriued vnto me as else if it were not my owne default it should by force of the sacrament vndoubtedlie be FVLKE Except you haue no regarde of the propertie of speach I maruell you can saie this function is so proper to gods owne iudgement and heauenly court and yet allowe the iudgement of Saint Ierome that all power of remission and absolution is properlie Gods and mans but by ministerie In which sentence if you would continue we should haue small controuersie with you touching the argument of this first booke of your treatise The wordes of Ierome vpon the 16. of Saint Mathewe are these Et dabo tibi claues regni caelorum Istum locum Episcopi presbyteri non intelligentes aliquid sibi de Pharisaeorum assumuns supercilio vt vel damnens innocentes vel soluere se noxios arbitrentur cùm apud Deum non sententia sacerdotum sed reorum vita quaeratur Legimusin Leuitico de leprosis vbi iubentur vt ostendant se sacerdotibus si lepram habuerint tunc a sacerdote immundifierent non quòd sacerdotes leprosos faciunt immundos sed quòd habeant notitiam leprosi non leprosi possint discernere qui mundus quiuè immundus sit Quomodo ergo ibi le prosum sacerdos mundum vel immundum facit sic hîc alligat vel soluit Episcopus pres biter non eos qui insontes sunt vel noxij sed pro officio suo cùm peccatorum audierit varietates rietates scit qui ligandus sit quiue soluendus And to the I will giue the keies of the kingedome of heauen This place Bishopes and priests not vnderstanding doe take vpon them somewhat of the pride of the Pharises that either they condemne innocentes or thinke that they due loose guilty persons whereas before God not the
name and authoritie shall sufficientlie beate downe these mens boldnes Saint Ambrose in this case is moste plaine and standeth with the Nouatians as I doe now with the Zuinglians euen in the verie same argument in these wordes Sed aiunt se Domino deferre reuerentiam cui soli remittend orum oriminum potestatem reseruent imò nulli maiorem iniuriam faciunt quà m qui eius volunt mandata res indere commissum munus refindere nam cùm ipse in Euangelis suo dixerit Dominus Iesus accipite Spiritum sanctum quorum remiseritis peccata c. quis est ergo qui magis honorat Vtrum qui mandat is attemperat an qui resistit Ecclesia in vtroque seruat obedientiam vt peccatism alliget laxat That is to saie These Nouatians saie that they denie penance or power to remit sinnes in earth in respect of the maintenance of such honour as is due to God to whome onely they will reserue the pardoning of mans sinnes But in deede none doe so much iniury to Gods glory as those which breake his commaundements and make a diuision of that charge and commission which he giueth For seeing our Lord Iesus by his owne mouth spake these words Receiue ye the holy ghost whose sinnes you doe forgiue they be forgiuen and whose sinnes you holde they beholden who in this case more honoureth God He that obeieth his commaundement or he that resisteth the same The Church obeieth in both as well in binding as in loosing Thus there And a litle after Looke to whome this charge was giuen and that person may lawfullie and with Gods good leaue vse the same Au l therefore the Church may lawfullie both binde and loose heresie and her attendants can rightlie doe neither This right is onelie committed to priests and therefore the Church rightlie challengeth that authoritie because shee hath lawfull priests and so heresie cannot doe because shee hath not the priests of God in her cursed congregation Thus said Saint Ambrose for the answere of the Nouatians in his daies and so say I now in the Churches behalfe against the like affected enemies of Christs honour which whiles they in face of scripture and Gods word would seeme to defend they are become sworne aduersaries of his honour and open contemners of his commaundements and holy ordinance Saint Ambrose here taketh it for a ground that it is Gods ordinance that Priests should remit sinnes he is bolde to call the contrarie doctrine heresie he maketh a principle of this that it neuer dishonoureth God that man should doe that which God giueth him either commaundement or commission to doe in his behalfe he taketh it for a knowne trueth that as the Church of God hath true and lawfull priests so shee may by them vpon Christes warrant bath loose and binde and contrariwise that heresie may well enough giue ouer that right of remission of sinnes because shee hath lightlie no lawfull priests by whome shee may practize the same FVLKE First you make a vaine exclamation or outcrie as though heresie hath spoiled the Church of her treasures vnder pretence of Gods glorie but such rhetoricall vamties all wise men will deride The Church is not spoiled of her treasures when neither Christ nor his grace is conteined in the sacraments but when Christ her onelie treasure is spoiled of his glorie of sole redemption and fatisfaction for our sinnes or of any other parte of the office that belongeth to the mediator Therefore it is her greatest honour that Christ may haue his true honour in whome with whome she hath al things not to the glory of flesh bloode but to the glorie of God to whome all glorie of right belongeth what Saint Ambrose did write against the Nouatians pertaineth not to vs who denie neither the power of remitting nor of reteining of sinnes but graunt both But that Saint Ambrose did not meane of such a power as the Papists doe claime I haue shewed before out of his owne wordes in the same place where he saieth that our Lord hath chosen such Disciples as should be interpreters of their Lordes will This power is graunted to all true ministers of the Church that they are the Legates or embassadors of god to declare his wil pleasure vnto men aswel for remitting as for reteining of sins And therefore Nouatus or Nouatianus did very absurdlie by Saint Ambrose his iudgement that did arrogate vnto himselfe power to reteine sinnes while he pronounced that they which fell into Idolatrie after Baptisme might not be receiued into the Church vpon any trial of their repentance and would not yeald that the ministers of the Church by the same authoritie might pronounce that they which were truelie penitent of their former wicked behauiour were forgiuen in the iudgement of God which was to remit their sins vpon earth with faith in Gods promise that they shall be forgiuen in heauen Thus the answere of Saint Ambrose vnto the Nouatians doth nothing in the world make against vs which denie no power that Christ hath graunted to his Church vnder collour of maintenance of Gods honour ALLEN And surelie it is a maruclous force of trueth or rather the might of Gods prouidence that driueth Heretikes to disdaine destroie and dissanull the graces and manifold giftes of Christes Church that impugning them where the verie right of such holie actes doe lie they may plainlte confesse and to their shame acknowledge that they haue none such themselues nor cannot by Gods warrant challenge any such giftes which with all their might they would wholie if they could together with Gods spirit and Church extinguish Alas into what miserie hath this forfaken flocke willfullie cast them selues and their adherentes which can forsake Gods house vbi mandauit Dominus benedictionem vpon which God hath bestowed his blessing abide there where by their owne confession there is no Priesthood no penance no host no sacrifice no remission where they can let of sinnes no grace in sacramentes nor no gift of the holie Ghost All other herisies lightlie by force of the Fathers Doctrine and iudgement lost either their Priesthood because they had no waie out of the Church to make Priestes as Saint Hierome writeth of Hilarie the Deacon or els the vse and function of Priesthood by reason the workes of God cannot be orderly nor benefi iallie vsed out of the house of God and yet they euer claimed to themselues not onlie the order but for moste parte all other functions that by Christ and his Church were annexed to that order but ours wherein they passe all their forefathers in a manner willinglie giue ouer the wholl profession freelie and without compulsion denie them selues with Nouatus to be priestes denie to sacrifice denie to enioyne penance denie to giue the holie ghost either by imposition of handes or by Chrisme or by any other solemne right of Gods Church To be short take nothing from these fellowes that belongeth
some to be obstinate or dissemblers he may know who is to be bound and who to be loosed which he cānot do by hearing the diuersity of their sins For if their sins be as red as scarlet if they be truelie penitent they are to be loosed and if they seeme neuer so small if they be not repentant nor humblie contrite in heart for them they are to be bound While you seeke to make a difference betweene the authoritie of the minister in the Ghospell of pardoning sinnes more properlie then the priest clensed the Leper you declare that you are not content with the sentence of Saint Ierome nor of so many of the auncient fathers as made the case all alike And where you saie it was not said vnto them as vnto ours whomsoeuer you punish with Leprosie or make vncleane he shal haue a Leprosie you speake beside the booke For this authoritie was giuen to them that they should make cleane or vncleane and whomesoeuer they made cleane he was admitted into the congregation and whomesoeuer they made vncleane he was so accounted of all men Yet properlie they made neither cleane nor vncleane but declared them so to be according to the institution which they had of Gods law in exercise whereof although they erred and so the partie might be receiued or refused according to their error yet was he neither cleane nor vncleane in deede by their sentence but by the work of God and so be sinners The blasphemie that you ascribe to Saint Hilarie I haue confuted before Your distinction of prius natura and quoad nos is foolish sophistrie in this case For except God first worke in our hearts by his holie spirit faith of forgiuenes we can haue but small comfort in the priests absolution That God doth alwaies wörke at the instant in which Baptisme is ministred it is false if Saint Augustines doctrine be true who reacheth that Baptisme may be receiued out of the Church but cannot haue effect but in the Church that is if the partie came from heresie and submit him selfe to the Catholike Church ALLEN And so it is in penance where God the principall and the priest the secondarie or seruisable cause ioyntlie forgiue together For so the words of institution of this sacrament doe moste plainlie conuince whose sinnes you shall forgiue they beforgiuen he speaketh in the present tence as though he would saie as you forgiue them or reteine them ipso facto I forgiue them or reteine them And therefore sauing the honour of the Master of the sentences he had not good consideration when he did holde as some other did after him that first mans sinnes be remitted by God in his contrition and purpose to come to the sacrament and afterwarde the same remission to be declared by the priests and as it were confirmed by his approbation in confession being therein partlie deceiued by the saying of Saint Hierome before alledged whome he tooke perchaunce to haue compared in all respects the office of the olde Priest for the viewe of the vncleane and ours of the new law in the iudgement vsed vpon mans sinnes and partlie as I take it by a sentence of Saint Augustine which compared together the receiuing of Lazarus by Christ and the Disciples loosing his bandes to Christes pardoning of sinnes first and then the priests loosing the same afterward in the face of the Church This to be shorte is a peece of Saint Augustines sentence Quid ergo facit Ecclesia cui dictum est Quae solueritis in terra erunt soluta nisi quod ait Dominus soluite illum sinite abire What doth the Church then to whome it was said vhatsoeuer you loose it shall be loosed Marie she doth that which our Lorde saied loose him and let him goe Wherein Saint Augustine meaneth nothing els but that Christ is the principall agent and that he properlie doth giue life to the soull the Priest for all that beeing his seruant and minister therein and therefore by nature is a latter agent in the same worke which els as I haue prooued ioynilie perteineth to them both for that the effect of a Sacrament commeth not to any man till it be receiued except it be in certaine cases of necessitie where the parties can not obteine the externall rse of the appointed element though they earnestlie desire the same But how the olde Priests office touching the Lepers of the law representeth our sacrament of the priests ministerie in the new Testament and how farre ours which is the truth excelleth that which was but a shadow of ours Saint Chrysostome doth excellentlic declare and therewith fullie may put out of doubt all men that our Priests properlie worke remission of sinnes as ministers in the same diuine action and not as declarers or approouers of that effect which before was wrought by God himselfe Thus he saith Corporis lepram purgare seu veriùs dicam haud purgare quidem sed purgatos probare Iudaeorum sacerdotibus solis liccbat at verò nostris sacerdotibus non corporis lepram verùm animae sordes non dico purgatas probare sed purgare prorsus concessum cst Quamobrem mco iudicio qui istos despiciunt contemnuntque multò sceleratiores ac maiori supplicio digni fuerint quà m fuerit Dathan vnà cum suis omnibus That is to saie To purge the Leprosie of the bodie or ells to saie as it was in deede not to purge but to discerne who were cleane was graunted onelie to the Priests of the olde law but it is fullie graunted to our Priests not to purge the bodilie lcprosie nor to snew who are cleaner purged but vtterlie to purge the verie filth of mans soull Therefore by my iudgement whosoeuer doe contemne or despise them they are much more worthie punishment then the disobedient Dathan with all his companie Thus saith this holie Father with many wordes moe which were worthie all consideration and rememberance in this case if the matter were not so abundant that it may not suffer ouer long abode in one place lest iniurie be done to other braunches of the cause no lesse necessarie to be knowne for full vpholding the truth thereof FVLKE Your argument taken of Christs speaking in the present tense is vaine and of no force to prooue that the forgiuenes or reteining of God and man concurre in one instant For in the latter sentence of reteining the verbe is of the preterperfect tense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but in the same sense that the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the former sentence which is of the present tence proouing Gods forgiuenes to goe before mans declaration thereof The Master of the sentences is litle beholding to you that doc so flatlie condemne him of error whereas he did write nothing in this point which was not commonly receiued in the Church of Rome in his time and long after For among the articles in quibus Magister non tenetur there is
no fault found with his sentence of the Priestes power in binding and loosing Gratian also declareth that learned and religious men in his time were in diuerse opinions about that point and other concerning this popish sacrament of penance whereby it appeareth that the sentence which you holde was not accounted Catholike nor vniuersallie receiued in their times If Peter Lumbard the Master of the sentences was deceiued by the sayings of Saint Ierome and S. Augustine they were first deceiued themselues for other sense out of their sayings then the master of the sentences gathereth no reasonable man can conclude And it is but one onelie saying of S. Augustine that he citeth not diuers and not onely out of Augustine and Hierome but out of other writers also as Ambrose and Cassiodorus and Gratian citeth maniemore all which you must answere if you wil take part against the two principall posts of poperie Gratiane and Lumbard with all them that take their part But you thinke one saying of Chrysostome inough to wipe awaie all their authorities and reasons and to prooue that the priestes of the new lawe doe purge the fitlh of the soull and not onely declare it to be purged as the Priestes of the olde lawe did of the leprosie of the body The meaning of Chrysostome is that the Ministers of the Gospell haue power not onelie to pronounce declare the penitent sinner to be deliuered from the vncleanes of his soule vnto other men that he may be accepted into the congregation if he haue bene excluded but to assure the penitents conscience in Gods name of the remission of their sinnes wherein he doth much more for the benefit of his soule then the priest of the olde law who onelie declared vnto other men how the partie was to be taken who knew in himselfe whether he were sicke or healed before he came to the priest Therefore where Chrysostome saith It is graunted vnto the priests of the new testament not onelie to trie approoue the soule to be deliuered of the filihines thereof but altogether to deliuer it he meaneth of deliuering by assuring the conscience of the penitent sinner of Gods mercie and forgiuenes whereby he is throughly or altogether deliuered therfrom whereas otherwise it were blasphemous conrrarie to Chrysostomes iudgement in many other places if the wholl act of purging or deliuering the soull from filthines were ascribed to man as the words seeme to sounde ALLEN Now vpon all this foresaid declaration it maie be well vnderstood that our aduersaries haue small reason in reprehending the ordinance of God who is prooued in all ages and diusities of lawes to haue giuen grace and remission of sinnes not onelie by externall elementes and actions of diuerse ceremonies sacraments and sacrifices but also euer to haue dispensed the said benefites by mans seruice and ministerie without all dishonour of his personage or diminishing his owne proper interest and right therein And so much more hath he vsed in the new law of the Gospell the ministerie of the priests and externall sacraments to the procuring of the saied benefites by how much more our law our sacraments our sacrifices and our priests be glorified and preferred in respect of the olde and haue the more abundant blessing of the spirit and Christs blood which by these conduites most largelie flowe to all mens fouls that despise not the blessed benefit thereof Yet if they will not be satisfied herewith because they surmise our new law to be so spirituall that man may looke for nothing at mans handes but all immediatelie of God and his spirit for by him they will be taught the meaning of the scripture by him they will be baptized by him they must haue remission and absolution and at length they are become Anabaptistes and refuse to obey Prelates of the Church and Princes of the world because by God they wil onelie be ruled and punished for their offences Against such proud cogitations as Saint Augustine tearmeth them God hath purposelie to teach humilitie and obedience one to another both in temporal causes and especiallie in spirituall matters perteining to mens sinnes and soules he hath I saie for the nonst not onelie instituted these waies of baser creatures vsed in the sacraments to atteine his grace by but also hath made man the master almost and executor of his meaning in the same whose seruice he vseth so much for our saluation that he sticked not to send his most chosen and dearest euen of those daies of grace and plentifulnes of the spirit to be instructed by man and made readie for his ministerie no otherwise but by man A strange thing surelie and to be well noted for this purpose not onelie of our aduersaries for their confusion but of the good studious readers for their instruction how that Paul beeing prostrate and miraculouslie called by Iesus Christes owne voice was yet sent by Christ himselfe to confirme the authority of his priests to Ananias of him to receiue as well instructions as the sacraments of the Church for his incorporation to the faithfull and remission of his sinnes paste And againe that Cornelius though his praiers were heard and his almes acceptable to god an Angel sent vnto him to declare the same which was a signe of high reputatiō was yet charged to goe to Peter of him not onelie to receiue the sacraments but a so by his instruction to learne what to beleeue what to hope what to loue saith S. Austine The Eunuch might by god himselfe in his owne coun try haue bene schooledor sanctified yet it pleased his maiesty so to vse the matter that by Philip both the sense of scripture the sacrament of Baptisme should be vnderstanded receiued at once So hath God in all ages confirmed the authoritie of his holie priests and ministers so hath he euer checked by his owne holie examples the presumptuous temptation of man who euer hath disdained mans office and ministerie for his owne saluation Therefore let no man maruell why Christ hath giuen authoritie to man to forgiue sinnes seeing he hath from the beginning not remitted ordinarilie otherwise then by mans seruice nor any way ells for the moste parte but by externall acts of ceremonies sacraments and sacrifices that we may learne thereby humility obedience to Gods ordinance by the warrant whereof they all as I haue prooued challenge all manner of interest in the gouernment of our soules FVLKE That God by externall sacraments and by the ministerie and seruice of man hath dispensed his spiritual benefits it is prooued but so that his grace was neuer bound either to the one or to the other but that he maie and hath bestowed the same most freelie according to the good pleasure of his will The fansie of the Anabaptistes that would seeme to looke for all thinges immediatlie from God despising the sacráments and ministerie of man we abhor and detest no lesse then
you We maruaile not why Christ hath giuen authoritie to man to forgiue sinnes whose ministerie he hath vsed in all times both by preaching his worde and by administring his sacraments to dispense his misteries vnto the rest of his Church vpon earth But that God doth not ordinarilie remit sinnes but by the ministerie of the priest nor any way ells for the moste parte but by externall acts we maruel how you are able to prooue it seeing God often times vseth many other occasions then the priests ministerie to bring men to repentance and without all waies of externall acts or sacrifices to assure men of the remission of their sinnes by faith But this admiration altogether passeth the reach of our capacitie to vnderstand how it may be conuinced That all priestes by warrant hereof may challenge all manner of interest in the gouernement of our soules It were much to challenge any interest in gouernment of our soules which is proper to our Sauiour Christ but to challenge all manner of interest in gouernment it sauoureth to stronglie of Antichristian presumption that any Christian should abide it The Apostles in exercise of their calling acknowledged them selues not onelie to be the seruants of God but also of the Church for we preach not our selues saith the Apostle but Iesus Christ and our selues to be your seruants for Iesus Christ. It is a ministerie and not a Lordeship that we must exercise not as temporall Princes who although they may be saide after a sorte to serue the common wealth yet they are so seruants as they are also Lordes But the ministers of the Church in their spirituall gouernement are seruants and not Lordes as Saint Peter testifieth therefore they cannot iustlie challenge all manner of interest in the gouernement of our soules For if they might we should haue many Lordes of our soules and denie God our onelie lorde our Lorde Iesus Christ our onelie sauiour ALLEN Much more might be said out of diuerse holie fathers much out of the decrees as well of Bishopes as Councells the authoritie wherof no Christian Catholike did euer reiect In Lateran in Florence and in Trent Councells Penance is decreed to be a sacrament and of necessitie to all such as fall into deadelie sinne after Baptisme The minister thereof by their holie determination is a Priest lawfullie ordered the remission of sins is in them all challenged to be his right not onelie by declaration that God hath or will pardon them nor by the preaching of the Gospell nor any other waies newlie deuised by the Deuill to delude Christes ordinance and misconstrue his plaine wordes But properlie is the priest prooued to be the minister vnder God of reconciliation and therefore may by his wordes absolue men in the saide sacrament of their sinnes as in Christs owne steade whose honourable iudgement seat byhis commission and the holie ghosts assistance he doth lawfullie possesse And so surelie doe Gods ministers holde this power and preheminence that no power or dignitie of man could euer be so well warranted and approoued by Gods owne worde and practize of all ages and nations christened as this is All the Princes in earth though they reigne full righteouslie can not yet shew the tenth part of the euidence that Gods priests can doe for their title of remission of sinnes and it booteth not mee in this my base state to admonish them though I hartelie wish they would consider it that the contempt of spirituall iurisdiction and the dignitie of priesthoode salleth at length to the difobedience of all temporal power and wicked contempt of ciuil gouernement also as in these disordered daies we may to our great griefe beholde when vnder pretence of religion and Gods worde whereof they haue no more respect surelie then the Deuil him selfe hath they haue disobeied not onelie Peters keies but also Cesars sworde Neither let any man thinke that where the bands of conscience the awe of gods maiestie the feare of hell and damnation the hope of heauen and saluation is remooued that there can be any ciuil obedience long Feare of man is much flatterie of man is more but bond of conscience passeth them both Thiu therefore haue Gods priests made account of their calling and long practised power of remitting and reteining the peoples offences FVLKE Whatsoeuer you can saie out of any auncient fathers will not prooue your intent of shrift and pardons your sacrament of penance is but a young beginner that can shew no auncienter councells for her authoritie then Lateran Florence and Trent the eldest of which is not much aboue 300 yeares olde and yet in the place you send vs vnto Confession is straightlie commaunded but penance is not decreed to be a sacrament Declaration of the pastour by preaching that God wil pardon al penitent sinners you count to be awaie newlie deuised by the diuil to delude Christes ordinance and misconstrue his plaine wordes as though your deuelishand blasphemous witte and tongue were hable to prooue out of Christes wordes your popish shrifts penance and satisfaction to be of Christes ordinance whereas it hath beene the doctrine and practize of all the Prophetes and Apostles to preach remission of sinnes to all that truelie repented and were turned vnto God and by authoritie of their commission receiued from God to assure all such of perfect forgiuenes of all their sinnes To compare the euidence wherby they holde this authoritie with the right of princes wherby they holde their croune so farre to preferre it is a point of antichristian and anabaptisticall presumption For ciuill Princes haue as cleere euidence in the scripture to auouch al their lawful authority as priestes haue to exercise that whereunto they be called Otherwise the particuler calling of euerie priest must leane vpon aiust title as well as the aduancement of princes into their throne and much more or els they haue not so great euidence as you talke of For a Prince being in the throne by what right soeuer he possesseth it is to be obeied But a minister of the Church except he be lawfullie called is not to be regarded You haue great cause to complaine of these daies that vnder pretense of Gods word and religion temporall and ciuill power is disobeied and contemned where there is no such manifest examples of such disobedience contempt as in your popish Northern rebellion and in an hundreth other vile attemptes to wring the scepter out of the hands of Gods anointed and your most lawful Prince vnder pretense in the Deuils name of religion and the Catholike Church But such religion and such a Church as aloweth in Italian Priest to depose anie Christian Prince from his throne God of his infinite mercie deliuer this Ileland and graunt all true subiectes of the same to yealde their faithfull obebience to their Godlie Prince not onely for feare but alfo for conscience Here it is prooued that b mitting sinnes the duety the right of the Priest
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euerie man that hath but small knowledge in the tongue doth know to signifie and require a mutual confession aswell as a mutuall praier of one man for another But yet let vs examine what your authorities doe containe First Origen in the place by you cited speaketh not a word of this text confesse your offences one to another but only of the two verses going before For making seauen meanes of remitting of sinnes after his corrupt vnpure manner of teaching By baptisme by martyrdome by almes by forgiueing one another by conuerting of sinners by aboundance of charitie he addeth the seauenth in these wordes Est adhuc septima licet dura laboriosa perpaenitentiam remissio peccatorum cum lauat peccator in lachrimis stratum suum fiunt ei lachrima suae pánes die nocte Et cùm non erubescit sacerdoti Domini indicare peccatum suum quaerere medicinam secundùm eum qui ait Dixi pronunciabo aduersum me iniustitiam meam Domino tu remisisti impietatem cordis mei in quo impletur illud quod Apostolus dicit si quis autem insirmatur vocet Presbyteror Ecclesiae imponant ei manus vngentes eum oleo in nomine Domini oratio fidei saluabit 〈◊〉 si in peccatis fuerit remittentur ei There remaineth yet the seauenth kinde of remission of sins although it be verie harde and painfull by repentance When the sinner washeth his bed in teares and his teares are made vnto him breade daie and night and when he is not ashamed to declare his sinne to the Priest of the Lorde and to seeke medicine acording to him which saith I haue said I will pronounce against my selfe my owne vnrighteousnes vnto the Lord and thou hast forgiuen me the vngodlines of my heart In which also that is fullfilled which the Apostle saith if anie man be diseasedl et him call the Elders of the Church let them lay hands vpon him anoynting him with oile in the name of the Lord and the praier of faith shall saue the diseased and if he shal be in sinnes they shal be forgiuen vnto him Thus much writeth Origen Now it is to be vnderstood that after his manner he alligorizeth vpon the sacrifices of the lawe comparing these meanes of remission to them And lest you should thinke that by declaring of sinne to the Priest of the Lord he doth meane confession to a popish priest he himselfe expoundeth before whom he meaneth by this Priest In morali loco potest pontisex isse esse sensus pietatis religionis videri qui in nobis per orationem obsecrationes quas Deo fundimus velut quodam sacerdotio fungitur In morall place this high Priest may seeme to be the sense of godlines religion which within vs by praiers and supplications which we powre forth to God exerciseth as it were a certaine priesthood And so likewise he taketh the place of Saint Iames alligoricallie as his application of the seauenth waie of remission vnto the Iudaicall sacrifice doth declare Si autem in amaritudine fletus fueris luctu lachrimis lamentatione confect us si carnem tuam maceraueris 〈◊〉 ac multa abstinentia aridam feceris dixeris quia sicut frixorium confrixa sunt ossa mea tunc sacrificium similam à sartagine vel à craticula obiulisse te 〈◊〉 But if thou hast bene in the bitternes of weeping consumed with sorowe teares and lamentation if thou hast afflicted thy slesh and made it drie with fasting and much abstinence and said my bones are fried as a frying pane or a fire thing then knowe that thou hast offered in sacrifice flower of the frying panne or of the gredeyorn Origen therefore giueth a colour in words but no substance in matter vnto this popish confession Concerning the opinion and authoritie of Bede touching this matter I haue spoken before but by the circumstance of the letter you saie it may well appeere that the Apostle speaketh of sacramentall confession to be made to gods priests How so I praie you forsooth Because he had there willed them to send for the Priestes of the Church to anoynt them and streight after addeth this text of confession and praying ouer the sicke A simple reason god wot because priests were spoken of in an other matter therefore none but priests may be vnderstoode in that which followeth nay rather the circumstances make against auricular confession and popish anointing also For what needes more priests then one to be sent for to other of those popish purposes or what papist sendeth for more although there be neuer so manie priests in the Church But the companie of elders in the primitiue Church being chosen of the moste replenished with heauenly graces that were in the congregatiō both for the gift of healing for praier to be made ouer the sick man were most conuenient to be sent for But it is in vaine by couller of anie circumstances to restraine the confession to priestes when the verie wordes of the letter as you call the text doe make it generall and mutual and therefore here was no cause for Luther to denie the authoritie of the epistle or for anie other to corrupt the text But where you count it a corruption to writ in stead of send for the priestes of the Church this call for the Elders of the congregation you doe either abuse the ignorant of willfull malice to make them thinke the sounde of words being changed the sense is anie thing altered or else you ignorantlie quarell about the translation which is word for word out of the originall greeke into English as no man meanelie learned in that tongue can doubt It is not the sounde of the wordes you rehearse that troubleth vs for we both like and vse them in their right sense our selues but it sufficeth you to haue an accidentall sounde when you cannot sinde a substantiall reason of your popish ceremonies and sacraments in the holie scriptures ALLEN But that thou maiest see good Christian reader the necessity of confession the better and that it is not growne to such a generall practize and opinion of necessitie vpon anie charge giuen by man or positiue lawes marke well with me that it dependeth directlie vpon Christes owne wordes whose sinnes you doe forgiue they be forgiuen and whose sinnes you doe retaine they be retained And therefore sacramentall confession to be of Christes institution For if Christ gaue power to Priestes to forgiue or retaine mens sinnes then there must needes be some subiect to their power iudgement else in vaine were so long a confession of binding and lossing mens sinnes if the right of the power did not necessarilie charge all men that haue such sinnes to be subiect to their binding and loosing Therefore this is a cleare case that in the verie 〈◊〉 wordes that the power was deliuered vnto them the bond of obedience was also perscribed
to vs. So that after that daie no sinnes mortal could ordinariely be loosed but by theÌ„ that sacrament which in their ministery he then did institute FVLKE Now you come towarde the point when you promis to let vs see how your popish confession is of Christes institution It dependeth you saie directly vpon Christes owne wordes whose sinnes you doe forgiue c. That would we faine see how For you your selfe though you make a very disorderly syliogisme cannot tel which way to infer it vpon your premises But thus you reason If Christ gaue power to Priestes to forgiue or retaine sinnes then there must needes be some subiect to their power and iudgement I answere you that euery power draweth not a iudgement with it and therefore you foist in the word iudgement vnreasonablie although I graunt also a kinde of iudgement vnto them and that men are subiect to this power and iudegment of the ministers by whome is declared the infallible sentence of God Then saie you it is a cleare case that in the verie same words that power was deliuered to them the bond of obedience was also prescribed to vs. Of what obedience I pray you that we should obay them in any thing they shal speake or only when they speake in the word of the Lord If the latter only for no man wil graunt the former shew vs if you be able the Lords word and commaundement for sacramental confessoÌ„ as you terme it to be necessary Your conclusion hangeth as wel by your premises as confession dependeh vpon Christs words That after that date no sins mortall could ordinarilie be loosed 〈◊〉 by them and in that sacrament which in their ministery he then did institute All sin is mortall and deseruing death The wages of sinne saith the Apostle is death But your conclusion is confuted by your selfe afterward graunting sinnes to be remitted by baptisme and as for other sacraments I dare saie you will not exempt them but that sinnes are forgiuen by them And that which is the chiefe matter in controuersie namelie that a sacrament was there and then instituted you alwaies affirme but neuer are able to prooue And whereas you affirme that the necessitie of auricular confession standeth not vpon positiue lawes but by Christes institution it is maruell that this institution should so manie hundreth yeares be vnknowne in the Church The Master of the sentences can saie nothing for it but alledgeth diuers authorities to and froe and in the end hath no certaine argument to perswade vs that it is of Christes institution Gratian likewise in his decrees after diuers testimonies producted on both sides whether it be necessarie or no concludeth in these words Quib authoritatibus vel quibuslibetrationum firmamentis vtroque sententia satisfactionis confessionis innitatur in medium breuiter exposuimus cui autem harum 〈◊〉 adhaerendum sit 〈◊〉 is iudicio referatur viraque enim 〈◊〉 habet sarientes religi osor viros Vpon what authorites and what fundations of reasons both the iudgement of satisfaction and confession doth leane we haue briefely brought forth and declared But to whether of these we ought chieflie to sticke it is reserued to the iudgement of the reader for either of both opinions hath wise and religious men fauorers of it If the Romish Church in Gratianstime had receiued the opinion of the necessitie of shrift to a Priest to be grounded vpon the institution of Christ neither he nor the Master of the sentences would haue bin in such a mamering about it wherfore it appeereth to be but young ware the institution whereof was so vncertaine to those principal pillers of popery In so much that the glosse vpoÌ„ the 5. aistinct In penitentia was bolde to vtter these wordes which should haue prooued him an heretike if the popish Churh in his time had held that confession was of Christs institution and not vpon any positiue laws In hac distinctione in aliis duabus sequentibus agitur 〈◊〉 de illa parte poenitentiae que dicitur oris confessio operis satisfactio quà m de aliis ider videndum est 〈◊〉 oris confessio fuerit instituta virum necessaria sit vel 〈◊〉 voluntaria qualiter sit facienda cui et quando dicunt quidam institutam fuisse in Paradiso 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 peccatum dicente Donino ad Adam Adam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ideo enim 〈◊〉 vt ipso conficente peccatum 〈◊〉 sorma aliis in posterum confitendi Sed quoniam in ille interrogatione dominus minùs expressè videbatur adconfirendum 〈◊〉 idro post exquisiuit á Cain fratricida expressiâ—s vbi est Abel frater tuus Alij dicunt quód sub lege primò instituta quando Iosua percepit Aâ—hor â—rimen sâ—um confiteri â—â— lapidatus est 45. dist secundum illud Alij dicunt quód in Novo testamento á Iacobo dicente consitemini alterâ—â—â—um peccata vestra c. Sed melius dicitur eam institutam fuisse a quâ—dâ—m vniuersale Ecclesiae traditione potius quám ex nouo vel veteri testamento authoritâ—s traditio Ecclesiae obligatoria est vt preceptum ait 1.1 di in his rebus Ergo necessaria est confessio in mortalib apud nos apud graecos non quoniam non emanauit apud illos traditio talis 〈◊〉 nec confisiunt in 〈◊〉 sed in firmentatis 5. di cap. 1. si illud ergo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alteruâ—rum peccata vestra 〈◊〉 consilium primó aliâ—â—uin liâ—oret et Grecos non obstanto eorâ—â— consuetudine In this distinction and the other two that follow it is intreated as well of that part of penance that is called confession of the mouth and satisfaction of the worke as of other partes And therefore it is to be seene when confession of the mouth was instituted whether it be necessarie or onelie voluntarie How it is to be made and to whome when Some say it was instituted in paradise immediately after sin committed when the Lord saide vnto Adam Adam where are thou for therefore he enquired that he confessing his sinne a forme of confessing should be giuen to others afterwarde But because in that confession the Lord secmed not so expresselie to haue warned him to confession therefore he enquired afterward of Cain the murtherer of his brother more expresselie where is Abel thy brother Other say it was first instituted vnder the law where Iosua commaunded Achar to confesse his fault and he was stoned 45. di sed illud Other saie that it was instituted in the new Testament by Saint Iames saying confesse your sinnes c. But it is better to saie that it was institutad by a certaine vniuersal tradition of the Church rather then by authoritie out of the new or olde testament And the tradition of the Church is of authoritie to binde as it is commaunded ar 11. di in these things Therefore confession in mortal sinnes is necessarie with vs but not with the Greekes because such tradition hath
not flowed vnto them Like as they make not the sacrament in vnleauened bread but in leauened 5. di 1. cap. si Therefore that saying of Iames confesse your sinnes one to an other was at the first but of counsel or els is should binde the Greekes notwithstanding the custome That which followeth in the glosse that confession in some case may be made to a laie man which also both Gratian Lumbard doe holde that which Bede writeth of confession of sins to euery man doth prooue that confessio to a priest is not of Christs institution by their iudgement For if it were it ought to be of all euery sin as wel as of those you cal mortall to a priest onelie For if Christ instituted a sacrament in these words whose sins you forgiue c. and ordeined a priest minister thereof by no other meanes but by hearing a sin ners particular confession as you seeme to holde what reason is there that a laie man should be a hearer of confession or an absoluer or that any sin be it neuer so small should not be confessed ALLEN And that is yet more euident by the second parte of Christes sentence where he saith whose sins you do reteine they be reteined The which worde retinere by Saint Hilarie signifieth non soluere or non remittere to reteinis as much as not to loose or not to forgiue Whercupon by Christes expresse wordes it ensueth that whose sinnes the priest doth not forgiue they be not forgiuen and therfore that euerie man beeing guiltie of deadelie sinne in his conscience is subiect to the priests iudgement by the plaine tearmes of Christs owne wordes Mary we must well note that the priest hath in other sacraments and namelie in Baptisme a right in remitting sinnes both originall and actuall but there in the graund pardon of all that is past he is not made a iudge or a corrector because the Church can not practize iudgement or exercise discipline vpon the penitents for any things done before they came iinto the householde and therfore can appoint the party no penance nor punishment nor binde him according to the diuersitie and number of his faultes nor can make search exactlie of all his secres sinnes by him committed that the sentence may proceede according to the parties desertes but onelie vpon his seeking that sacrament to minister it vnto him according to Christs institution whereupon without any sentence of remission giuen by the priest as I absolue thee or such like a pardon generall of all his sinnes committed if he come thether qualified most assuredlie ensueth But now in the other sacrament of penance not onelie pardon of sinnes but punishment for sinnes is put in the Apopostles and priests handes which can not be done without iudiciarie power and exact examination of the penitent because Christ would that if any did greeuouslie sinne after Baptisme he shold as it were be conuented before his iudgement seate in earth in which as in his roome he hath placed the Apostles priests as is alreadie prooued And therefore mens sinnes must in this case be knowne with diuersitie of their kindes and encrease by diuersitie of place time person number and intent For withoout this particular intelligence can neither the appointed iudges of our soules doe iustice nor the penitent receiue iustice for his offences Therefore it is euident that seeing this holie order is authorized not onelie to remit sinnes generallie as in Baptisme but also placed with all power ouer vs as the iudges of our sinnes we must needes by force of Christs institution be driuen to acknowledge and confesse all our sinnes to the Priest so sitting in iudgement vpon the examination of our conscience For no man euer tooke vpon him not in any ciuil causes to determine and giue sentēce in the matter whereof he hath not by some meanes or other persit and particular instruction and in causes criminall much lesse because the importance of the matter is much more Then in Gods causes and cases of our conscience and in things belonging directlie to mans euerlasting wealth or woe which is the life or death perpctuall of our soules there if either negligence in the iudge in searching out of our sins or consempt in vs in declaration opening confessing or cleare vtterance of them doe hinder the righteousnes of Gods iudgement executed by the Priests office or driuing them to giue wrong sentence of deliuerie and remission there the perill is exceeding great and the daunger wel neare damnation perpetual FVLKE Although to reteine is somewhat more then not to loose or not to forgiue yet the conclusion is true that whose sinnes the minister of the Gospell doth not forgiue of them that heare the Gospell they are not forgiuen But herofit doth not follow that euerie man is bound to shriue himselfe to the priest If you meane that by being subiect to the priests iudgement the minister of the gospell denounceth damnation to all impenitent and obstinate sinners vnto this sentence he is subiect by the plain tearmes of Christs owne wordes that is such a one But if he be truelie penitent in the sight of God he is absolued by the sentence of the minister which pronounceth in the name of God forgiuenes to all them that be truelie conuerted vnto God Wherefore here is no place for the necessitie of auricular confession except you can draw it in by the wordes of demonstratiue syllogismes which I suppose to be impossible and you your selfe shall in conscience confesse no lesse whensoeuer you dare goe about it As touching the difference you shew betwixt the priests office in remitting sins by Baptisme and penance it standeth altogether vpon your owne surmise without any authoritie of the holie scriptures For the minister of the ghospelis made as much a iudge whome to admit and whome to refuse from the sacraments as he is to pronounce whose sins be forgiuen and whose reteined Other iudgement or correction he hath not in the one nor in the other neither is there any punishments put into the Apostles or priests handes for those sinnes that are to be pardoned nor pardon to those that are to be punished The punishment is no lesse then the sentence of eternall damnation vnder which all obstinate and vnrepentant sinners doe remaine so iong as they continue in their obstinacie and impenirencie And therefore the power iudiciarie and exact examination of the penitent and the conuention before Gods iudgement feare in earth which should be the priest is nothing but imaginary vanitie without all ground of authoritie out of Christs institution wherefore except you can prooue that Christ by giuing his Apostles authoritie to sorgiue or reteine sinnes did giue this inordinarie power that you speake of and set vp this iudgement on earth like to the courts in ciuill iudgement in canonicall causes whatsoeuer you saie without warrant of Gods worde is as easily by vs denied as by you it
is affirmed Where you quote Damascene I finde in him nothing for nor any thing sounding that waie in the place by you noted But in the tenth Chapter where he speaketh of eight kindes of baptisme the fifte he maketh Baptisme by the holie ghost and fire Which may be saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a punishing Baptisme because of the fire to come immediatelie followeth the sixth kinde of baptisme which is verie painfall by repentance and teares So that the one beeing distinct by the author from the other I know not by what learning you doe confound to make it seeme as both were one ALLEN Neither may we thinke that this authoritie and approoued power of priests concerneth onelie the open offences which by witnesse and proofe may be conuinced and deferred to the publike Magistrates of the Church as some Protestantes confounding all places of like wordes and tearmes in scripture doe Wherein they consider not that the perfectnesse of the Gospell teacheth man willinglie to accuse condemne and iudge himselfe that he be not iudged of our Lorde Neither doe they weigh that this iudgement of our sinnes though it be ministred by man is yet the seate and court of Christ to whome it no lesse perteineth to binde and loose our secret sinnes then our open offences And he without exception committed remission of all manner of sinnes vnto the Apostles and priestes saying Like as my father sent me so doe I send you But Christ was sent to heale the contrite and sorowfull of al sinnes priuate and publike therefore al manner of offences be they neuer so secret belong to the priests not onelie pardon but also correction and punishment whereof because they be men they cannot iustlie discerne or determine to remit or reteine giue pardon or giue penance except they be confessed by the parties penitent Christ him selfe perfectlie seeing all diseases both of bodie and soule the inwarde sorow and sute of euerie mans heart yet saied to the sicke man blinde Quid vis faciam 〈◊〉 what wouldest thou haue at my hands And shal the priest being a mortall man take vpon him to giue sentence of the diseases of our soules before he knowe them or pardō him that wil not shew vnto him wherein for what sin he asketh a pardō Furthermore the sins of mans cogitation that cannot be discerned by the priest with out the confession of the partie be often no lesse greeuous dānable before God then the open offences therefore there may be no doubt but Christ hath ordeined mercie as well for them as other that be actuallie committed and subiect to the sight of the world but yet no otherwise but by the sacramēt of penance in which without exception the priests haue power to remit or reteine sinnes as well priuate as publike Therefore the same secret sinnes beeing subiect to the Churches iudgement no lesse then the open they must needes be vttered and confessed or els they cannot be realesed much lesse haue any enioyned penance for them But it is mecre wrangling of our aduersaries in so plaine a case follie in all other to doubt whether secret offences euen committed in thought onelie against the last two commaundements forbiding vnlawfull coueting and desires of the minde be properly subiect to the Priests iudgement seeing they can by no otherwise be released but in the sacrament of penance sincere confession of them For here is practized a iudgement not of ciuile Magistrates which onelie punish by laws of all nations actually committed faultes against the weale publike but of soule and conscience which properly pertaine to the cure of Priestes as they properly occupie Christes owne roome to whose pardon and punishment not onelie open sinnes but also priuate offences either in deede or thought committed doe in like perteine For external penance or publike is rather vsed to satisfie the Church of her right in which sinnes can not openlie be committed but to the great offence of her children and therefore must in her by publike penance be corrected for the example of discipline and prouiso of the like sinnes to come FVLKE I knowe no Protestantes neither I suppose you can name anie writer of them that doth think that the authoritie of sorgiuing and retaining sinnes concerneth onelie open offences and not secret But it maie be that some protestantes haue written as all I think do holde and you your selfe in the end of this section do acknowledge that open confession is most conuenient fot the satisfaction of the Church which is offended where and by whome open and notorious sinnes haue beene committed But that secret confession made to a priest is necessarie for the discharge of secret sinnes all Protestants denie neither can anie Papistes prooue it For such reasons as you bring are verie weake and friuolous The perfectnes of the Gospell teacheth man willinglie to accuse condemne and iudge himselfe that he be not iudged of our Lord Ergo he is bound to shriue him-selfe to a Priest Nay contrariewise if he be made accuser condemner and iudge of himselfe he neede not seeke anie other externall iudge but in his owne conscience accuse examine condemne and iudge him-selfe before God And this court of conscience we acknowledge to be the seat and court of Christ where no priest or other mortal man hath authoritie to sit and iudge Neither doth anie correction punishment of our sins belong to priestes by reason that Christ sent the Apostles and their successours to Preach as he was sent by his father but they may remit or retaine sinnes without hearing the particuler confession of euerie sinner by declaring the mercie of God to all that repent and his iustice to all that continue in sinne without repentance But it is a maruetlous strong argument Iweene to prooue the necessitie of confession because our sauiour Christ caused the blinde man by vttering his request in particuler to declare his faith Nay if he had caused all them whose sinnes he pronounced to be forgiuen first to make particuler confession vnto him it had beene more coloure and yet no sufficient argument to prooue the necessity of confession to be made vnto other men much lesse that he would haue the blind mā acknowledge that he beleeued that he was able to giue him sight wherfore vpon a Principle shamefully begged that confession to a priest is necessary you go about to proue that confessiō of secret faults and cogitations of mans heart is also to be made to a priest you accuse your aduersaries of wrangling in so plaine a case and all men of follie that doubt whether such secret offences be subiect to the Priestes iudgement seeing they can not otherwise be released but in the sacrament of penance and sincere confession of them but which of your aduersaries will graunt that they can not otherwise be released or how will you satisfie them that doubt out of the holie scriptures of the institution of
such a sacrament and of auriculer confession as necessarie ALLEN Moreouer the sacrifices of the olde law were in manie cases done by the Priestes as well for priuate sinnes as open which could not be without the confession of the penitent ergo much more the secrets of our soules be subiect to our Priestes to whom Christ hath giuen all iudgement Yet all this notwithstanding there be some that keepe them-selues by vaine excuse of sinne from the verie principall point and pith of this sacrament which is the particuler examination of a mans sinnes committed by thought word or worke and will yet draw back and holde that a generall confession is enough with tearmes vniuersall acknowledgeing a mans selfe to haue sinnes by minde word and deede though he expresse not the seuerall pointes thereof But this opinion is confuted both by all the fore said reasons and other as a moste absord and wilfull maintenance of sinne For by this rule he that killed and murdered thousandes should confesse no more after his wicked actes then before nor no more then the innocentest man that liueth Dauids weeping and confession should haue beene one after his double deadlie sinne committed as before in his innocencie Peter should not haue more bitterlie went after his for saking of his master then before Neither should our confession then pertaine more to our selues then to other who by like generall clauses maie truelie make the like and the same confession as it is now in the Church of England But the holie King Dauid confessed not sinnes common to him selfe and other men but my sinne my wickednes my impietie saith he and this in confessing to God that know alreadie his sinnes How much more now where Gods iudgement is exercised by man that can not discerne our faultes him selfe must we confesse our sinnes that he maie rightlie iudge thereof FVLKE The sacrifices of the olde law did in deede containe a confession of sinne but no particuler declaration vnto the priest of anie sin committed in secret therfore your conclusion is naught as also it is blasphemous that you saie therein that Christ hath giuen to your priestes all iudgement But confession by a generall clause you do not allow to be sufficient to saluation not answerable to Christes meaning I praie you sit at the length bring forth those words of Christ by which you know his meaning so well that you dare deny saluation to them that make not a particuler confession to a priest By this rule you saie the murtherer of thousands should confesse no more then the innocentest man aliue verily to a priest he is no more bound to confesse his murthers then an innocent man his lester trespasses But as anie mans sinnes are more heinous and greeuous so ought he to bewaile and lament the same more earnestlie before God So did Dauid and Peter after their seuerall and greeuous falles not to enforme God which knew their sinnes more exactlie then they could make confession of them but to stirre vp themselues to more earnest hartie sorrow and repentance for them That Gods iudgement is so exercised by priests as you meane you must first prooue after vse for an argument or els you begge and gette nothing ALLEN Penance must be donne for euery of our sinnes So Peter prescribed Simon the sorcerer when he attempted to haue bought the gift of Goddes Spirit that he should doo penance for that especiall greeuous crime Poenitentiam age saith he ab hac nequitia tua Doe penance for this thy wicked attempte if perchaunce God will forgiue thee this abhominable intent The man was baptised not long before and then no such Penance was prescribed for his most greeuous and blasphemous practises of Nicromancie and witchcrafte long exercised before Wherein this naughty pack Simon Magus is a thousand partes more religious then our newe maisters For he desired the Apostles to pray to God for him that this sinne might be forgiuen him where these care no more for the priest or Apostle concerning their sinnes then they doo for dogges Againe Saint Paule did not onely confesse his sinnes by a generall clause but acknowledged his owne sinnes wherein he in his owne person had offended he confessed he was of al sinners the greatest that he had obteined commission to attache them that beleeued in Christes name and so forth Such as were faithfull also at Ephesus as we reade in the 19. of the Actes came to the Apostles Et confitebantur actus suos and confessed their actes and misdees In so much that certaine which had followed vnlaufull artes as Magike Nicromancie and such like curiositie confessed their faultes and burned their bookes before all the people FVLKE We must be poenitent for al and euerie of oursinnes that we know or can call to minde but that penance must be enioyned by a Priest as you meane for euerie sinne let vs see how you can prooue it S. Peter prescribed Simon Magus that he should do penance for that greeuous crime Therfore penance must be done for eucrie of our sinnes Although the antecedent were true yet the consequence is naught penance must be done for one open and hainous sinne ergo for all secret sinnes But I denie that anie such penance as you meane was enioyned vnto him by Peter But that he exhorted Simon to repentance if he looked to haue any forgiuenes of his sinnes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repent saith he or change thy minde from this thy wickednes and not as you translate for this thy wickednes as though repentance were a satisfaction for his sin Moreouer I answere you vse not to enioyne penance before men haue confessed their sinne But when Peter exhorted Simon to repent he had not yet confessed his sinne but was a couetous hipocrite 〈◊〉 you dissent from your pupills of Rhemis which denie that doing of pennance was prescribed to men before they were baptized For they translate agite panitentiam as well before baptisme as after to do penance satisfaction for sinne Where you saie that your new maislers care no more for the Priest or Apostle concerning their sinnes then they do for degges it is a saucic Censure of a dogged Papist For they whome you scorne do reuerence all the ministers of God as well in the power they haue to remitte sinnes as also in al other partes of their office An other argument on haue of Saint Pauls example who confessed his owne sinnes and namelie the greatest of persecuting the Church of Christ. Yea but not his secret sinnes to a priest but his open faultes before his conuersion and Baptisme And so likewise they that beleeued Act. 19 made open confession of some of their deuilish practizes committed before they were Christians and in detestation of their former wickednes and signe of true repentance burned their bookes to a great value ALLEN If the priestes had nothing elles to doe with oursins but as they had in the olde lawe to doo with
Christes owne person Which prouing and iudging of mans selfe to be meant by the diligent dif cussing of our consciences sinnes and misdeedes by contrition and confession of them to our ghostlie Father the practise of the Church doth most plainlie prooue which neuer suffered any greeuous sinner to communicat before he had called him selfe to a reckning of his sinnes before the minister of God and so iudged him selfe that he receiue not to his damnation that which to euery worthy person is his life and saluation Whereof S. Augustine or the authour of the booke de Ecclesiasticis dogmatibus set forth with his name giueth vs good notice for his time Quem mortalia crimina post Baptismum commissa premunt hortor priùs publica poenitentia satisfacere ita sacerdotis iudicio reconciliatum communioni sociari si vult non ad iudicium condemnationem sui Eucharistiam percipere sed secreta satisfactione solui mortalia crimina non negamus I exhorte euerie man saith this holie doctour that is burdened after his baptisme with mortall sinne to satisfie for the same by publique penance and to be reconciled by the priests iudgement to be restored to the communion of saints if he meane to receiue the holy Sacrament not to his iudgement and condemnation And I denie not in this case but deadly sinnes may be remitted by secret satisfaction Thus he By whose wordes you see in what a damnahle state men now of daies stand seeing that whosoeuer receiueth the sacrament of Christes bodie and blood before he be reconciled by a priestes sentence and assoiled of his sinnes he doth receiue it to his euerlasting damnation Vnto whose iudgement I ioyne Saint Cyprian in this same matter complainig verie earnestly vpon certaine Conuersies in his daies that would aduenture vpon Christes bodie and blood ante exomologesim factam criminis ante purgatam conscientiam sacrificio manu sacerdotis Before their sinnes be confessed and their consciences purged by sacrifice and the Priests hand Al these thinges might be at large declared and confirmed farther by the iudgement of mostauncient Fathers but because I haue bene verie long and enough alreadie maie seeme to be said for such as by reason will be satisfied a great deale more then anie Protestant will answere vnto and also the scriptures them selues giuing the Priest so plaine power of binding and retaining as wel as of remitting and loosing will do more with these that haue charged themselues with the beleefe of nothing that is not in expresse writing of Gods word then the vniforme consent of all ages and the moste notable persons in the same In respect of their humor therefore I will not saie much more for this point then I haue said onely my meaning now is for the Catholikes comfort to repeat a few such euident sentences out of moste authentique authors by whom we take a 〈◊〉 not onely of their meaninges which is much for the matter but especiallie of the Churches practise in all ages and moste countries christened since the Apostles time which I account the moste surest waie to touch trie truth by that by the example of al our forefathers euery man may willingly learne to submit him selfe to the sentence of such as God hath made the iudges of his soule and sinnes FVLKE Yf Saint Poul had meant Popish shrift he could and would haue said Submit your selues to the examination iudgement of the Priest and not as he hath said Let a man trie him selfe Iudge your selues brèthren Yf auricular confession be necessarie vnder paine of damnation for euerie one that receiueth the sacrament of Christes bodie and bloode immediately before it many thousandes of your priests which saie masse euerie daie without shriuing themselues are in a damnable case I or there passeth no day of mans life without some deadelie sinne if not in deede not word yet at the least in thought but that you popish hypocrites by your distinction of veniall sinnes flatter your selues to be cleare when you are moste foull and filthie but the perpetuall practize of the Church you saie prooueth the necessitie of auricular confession whereof you take witnes the author of the booke de Ecclesiasticis dogmatibus for his time which you doe honestly not to father vpon Saint Augustine being a man of much later time lesse learning and more corruption of doctrine but you do fraudulentlie cut of his saying in the waste because that which followeth declareth plainlie that either he meaneth not of mortall sinnes as the Popish Church now doth holde or else his opinion for secret satisfaction is farre differing from that you would haue men weene that he meaneth namely such as you vse to inioine in your confession fiue Ladies Psalters fiue fridaies fast fiue pence groates or shillings to so many poore men in remembrance of the 5. wounds and such like stuffe but these authors wordes require another manner of satisfaction Sed secreta satisfactione solui mortalia crimina non negamus sed mutato prius secularihabitu confesso religionis studio per vitae correctionem iugi immò perpetuo luctu miserante Deo it a duntaxat vt contraria pro his quae poenitet 〈◊〉 eucharistiam omnibus dominic is diebus supplex submissus vsque ad mortem percipiat Poenitentia vera est penitenda non admittere admissa deflere Satisfactio paenitentiae est causas peccatorum excidere nec eorum suggestionibus aditum indulgere But also that by secret satisfaction mortall crimes may be loosed we doe not denie but so that the secular habite be first changed and the studie of religion confessed by amendment of life and by continuall yea perpetuall sorow God being mercifull so onelie that he doe the contrarie things to those for which he doth penance and humblie and lowlie receiue the Euchariste euerie sondaie to his dying day It is true repentance not to committe things to be repented and to bewaile such as are committed The satisfaction of repentance is to cut of the causes of sinnes and to yeald no entrie vnto their suggestions Wherefore it is plaine that in this writers time there was no auricular confession but an open confession and publike penance for open and hainous offences and that none was admitted to secret satisfaction except he changed his habite became a Monke performed other conditions by him required by which it is manifest that the iudgement of this writer though corrupt yet is contrarie to the practize of the popish Church at this daie But Saint Cyprian is a better witnes I trow for the necessitie of auricular cōfession of secret sins sauing that he speaketh of them that had openlie fallen to Idolatrie and without open confession of their fault and publike satisfaction of the Church by some vndiscreete pastours were admitted to the Lordes table describing them he saith Mortiferos Idolorum cibos adhuc pene ructantes exhalantibus etiamnum
to any other creature vnder God but also maketh the priestes to be as well the iudges as surgeons of our soules as to whome the searching the cutting the burning the hard griping the opening or the closing of our woundes and sores of conscience doth apperteine In all which cases he saith Quî igitur phramacum ei morbo adhibere quis possit cuius genus nequaquam intelligat How should a man salue that sore the nature and kinde whereof he knoweth not and to know it without confession of the partie is not possible For the things within a man none knoweth but the spirit which is in man And truelie said the Countie Bonifacius to Saint Augustine Ipse sibi denegat curam qui suam medico non publicat causam He hindereth his owne health that will not vtter his disease and the cause thereof to his Phisitian And further if you will be assured of the said Chrysostomes minde touching confession read his exposition vpon the wordes of the institution of this sacrament and of Christes breathing the holie Ghost vpon his Disciples for their power to remit sinnes Where he declareth that these holie things committed to the priests charge doe properlie apperteine to God by whose speciall grace we obteine remission euen then when the priest doth absolue vs where he also expresseth the verie manner of the Church in giuing absolution till this daie saying that the priest doth but as you would saie lende his voice and his hande Signifiyng that the manner was then as it is yet to speake the wordes of absolution and laie the hande vpon the penitents heade in the sacrament of penance So in sense saith Saint Chrysostome FVLKE Whosoeuer list to read that booke shall finde nothing in the worlde to prooue his iudgement for the necessitie of auricular confession but rather who so list to see Chrysostomes iudgement of the necessitie of shrift let him consider what we haue cited out of his writings in the last section For in this place by you cited he speaketh not of confession but of the difficulty of a Priests office as I haue shewed before to exact more knowledge and diligence of them because it is harder to be a shepheard of men then of beastes For the diseases of beastes maie moste commonlie be seene and they compelled to take the remedie the diseases of men are harde and sometimes impossible to be knowne and no waie either to compell men to discouer them or to receiue medicine for them Whereas if confession were a necessarie institu tion of God he might haue aptlie brought it forth in this place to shew what waie the spirituall shephearde hath to vnderstand the diseases of his sheepe His wordes are these after he hath spoken of the bodelie shephearde and his sheepe But the diseases of man first it is not easie for a man to see For no man knoweth those things that perteine to man but the spirit of man which is within him How wherefore should a man vse a medicine for that disease the manner whereof he knoweth not yea manie times he cannot know whether a man be sicke But when that is made manifest he hath more dissicultie about him For he can not heale all men with so great power as the shephearde doth his sheepe For there he may binde him restraine him of meate burne him cut him But here the power to receiue health lieth not in him that offereth the medicine but in the sicke person For this that wonderfull man saw when he saide to the Corinthians not that we are Lordes of your faith but we are helpers of your ioye And moste of all it is not required in Christians by force to reforme the transgressions of them that sinne But the forreine iudges when they take malefactors vnder the lawes doe shew great power ouer them and restreine them against their will to vse the same manners But here not by compulsion but by perswasion we must make such a one better for there is no such power giuen vs by the laws to restreine sinnes neither if the lawes gaue such power haue we where to vse it seeing God crowneth not them which of necessitie abstaine from wickednes but them that voluntaryly refraine from it Therfore there is neede of great cunning that they which are sicke may be perswaded willingly to submit themselues vnto the healing of the Priestes Thus much Chrysostome nothing fauouring the necessitie of auricular confession but rather denying any means wherby the inward disease of a man may be knowne except it be by voluntarie not extorted cōfession The countie Boniface speaketh of a publike fact which he cōmitted in taking a mā by force out of the Church for which he was suspended by S. Augustine vntil he did acknowledge his fault and shew him selfe penitent Therefore his saying can not be drawne to the necessitie of auricular shrift Neither doth Chrisostome vpon the 20. of Iohn declare anie iudgement or opinion that he thought it necessarie for a man to shriue himselfe to a Priest And where you vrge his wordes that the Priest doth lend his voice and his hands it is to farre of to prooue that it is necessarie for euery man to confesse al his secret faults to a Priest But I will set downe all that he saith in that place least anie man which hath not or can not vnderstand the booke may suspect there is further matter contained thererein toward this purpose then in deed there is Magna enim dignit as sacerdotum Quorumounque c. For great is the dignitie of Priestes Whose sinnes you shall remit saith he they are remitted Wherefore Paule saide Obey your gouernours and be subiect to them that you maie doe them the greatest honour For thou lookest to thine owne matter which if thou hast well ordered there is none other charge laide vpon the. The priest if he doe dispose his owne life and haue not diligentlie cared for thine he shall be thrust with the vngodlie into 〈◊〉 and sometime he is not damned for his owne deedes but for ours except he doe all things that perteine vnto him Therefore seing you see the greatnes of the daunger embrace them with much beneuocence which Paule also signified saying They doe watch as those which shall giue an account of your soules and therefore they are much to be looued But if you shal insult against them you shal not dispose your own things wel For so long as the master of the ship is of good cheereful minde the Mariners also are in quiet But if he begin to be hated of thē to be greeued he cannot likwise watch nor exercise his cunning being greeued against his will he shall trouble them with manie euills Euen so the priest if he shall see that the reuerence due to him is performed by vs he shall be able to gouerne vs well But if you shall kill him weakning his handes although he be of neuer so great
of the Primitiue Church or to disprooue Beatus Rhenanus which denieth the same accusing both the noueltie and and the tyranie thereof and the danger that mens consciences haue beene in through it beside manie other knowne inconueniences ALLEN But now if you conferre with the Fathers of all ages and of euerie notable Church touching this confession to Gods Priests you may beginne if you list euen at this daie and driue vp both the trueth of the doctrine and the perpetuall practise thereof euen to the Apostles time In the late holie Council holden at Trent both the doctrine is confirmed and declared with all grauitie and also the aduersaries of that sacrament and the misconstructers of Christes wordes of remission to pertaine to preaching of the Gospell not to the verie act of absolution be by the consent of all Catholike states of the Christian world accursed excommunicated It was at Furence also decreed in a most generall assemblie of both the Latine and Greek Church that as wel the whol sacrament of penance as that especiall part which is called confession was of Christes institution In the great councell holden at Lateran there is so plaine charge giuen to euerie Christian to confesse his sinnes either to his owne ordinarie Parochian or to some other Priest that hath by him or otherwise authoritie and iurisdiction ouer the penitent that Protestantes affirme albeit verie false'y that confession was first instituted in the said Councel and this was more then three hundred yeares since And foure hundred yeares before that in a Prouinciall Councell that was kept at Vormacia there is a Canon made concerning the qualities of the priests that are constituted to be confessours and Penitentiaries where it is commaunded that they be such Qui possunt singulorum causas originem quoque modum culparum sigillatim considerare examinare That can particularlie trie out and examine the causes of euerie offender the manner and ground of their faultes FVLKE We are so well accquainted with your often bragges of Fathers and Councells that we neuer start for them seeing we knowe you haue nothing but the drosse of the latter times to cast at vs. For the Councell of Trentes decree we esteeme it as it is worthie being made by a few buckeram Bishoppes of Italie and some other Epicurian prelates of other countries to patch vp rather then to repaire the ruines and decaies of the kingdome of Antichrist In the late Councel of Florence I remember nothing decreed of this matter neither doe you note where we should finde it In the Lateran Councell that was kept litle more then 300. yeares since the Protestantes doe trulie affirme that the necessitie of auricular confession was first imposed vpon men of the Romish Church For in the councell of Wormes which you saie was 400 yeares elder there is neuer a word of confession or confessor but of wife consideration to be had of them that did penance by which are ment open offenders that did open pennance neither are you able to prooue the contrarie Paenitentibue saith the Canon serundum differentiam peccatorum c. To the penitents or such as doe penance let penance be decreed by the iudgement of the Priest according to the difference of their sinnes Therefore in giuing penance the Priest ought seuerallie to consider the causer of euerie one the beginning also manner of the faulies and diligentlie to examine and manifestlie to know the affection and sighings of the offenders also to consider the qualities of the times persons of the places ages that according to the consideration of the places ages or times or according to the qualitie of the offences the groning of euery offendor he turne not his eies from the holie rules Thus sarre the Canon after which follow the rules of penance to be apointed for diuers kindes of offences as for him that hath killed a Priest a pagane his parents or brother or for him that hath slain a man in his madnes or against his will and such like whereby it appeereth that the Canon was made for penance to be enioyned to publike offenders and not to compell men to confesse their secret sinnes ALLEN Which decree is borowed word for word almoste out of the last Canon of Constantinople Councell called the sixth generall which was long before all the forsaid Synodes Their discourse is long vpon the Priestes dutie which shoulde sitte on confessions whome they instruct by these wordes Oportebit qui facultatem absoluendi ligandi à Deo receperunt peccati qualitatem speculentur peccatoris promptitudinem ad reuersionem vt sic medicamentum admoueant aegritudini aptum ne si de peccato sine discrimine statuant aberrent à salute aegrotantis Those that haue receiued of our Lorde power to loose and binde must trie out the qualitie of euerie fault and the readines of the offender to returne vnto vertue that they maie prouide a medicine meet to the maladie lest if they should without distinct knowledge of their sinne giue iudgement they should erre in poruiding health for the sicke person By which Councell kept in Constantinople you maie easelie gather that neither confession was euer omitted by the lawe nor the common Penitentiarie long abrogated out of Constaninople Church And when I name these decrees of so manie generall Councels in diu rfe ages I do not onelie call them generallie to witnesse for my cause which were inough seeing euerie determination there passeth as by the sentence of the holie Ghoste and Christes owne iudgement of whose presence such hotie assemblance is assured but I appeale to eueric holy Bishop Priest and Prince of the world that agreed to the same and were there assembled euerie of which was of more experience learning and vertue or at the least of more humilitie then all our aduersaries aliue But now if you go to trie other the learned writers of all times for the practize of this point then our labour shall be infinite but our cause more strong and 〈◊〉 aduersaries sooner confounded I need not for that practize name the learned schoolemem of excellent capacitie in deepe mysteries because they were so late and because Heretikes can not denie but they are all vndoubtedlie against them and euerie one for vs Thomas Aquinas is ours Dionysius is ours I meane the Carthusian If anie man doubt of Saint Bernard let him reade the life of Malachie whome he praiseth sor bringing into vre the most profitable vse of confession in the rude partes of Ireland Saint Bede is prooued before not onelie to haue allowed confession to the Priest but to haue expounded Saint Iames wordes of confession for the sacrament of pennance and vttering our sinnes to Gods Ministers And he recordeth that in our Countrie of England before his daies confession was vsed to a Priest Whereof as also os pennance and satisfaction there is an example or two in the
but the promise of truth which indeed if it be shewed so manifest that it cannot come in doubt it is to be preferred before all those things by which I am holden in the Catholike Church But if it be onelie promised and not exhibited no man shall mooue me from that faith which bindeth my minde with so manie and great knottes vnto Christian religion Let vs see therfore what Maniche doth teach me c. These wordes declare that setting aside the wisdom of the Church grounded vpō the scriptures which the heretikes would not acknowledge there were manie other things that might iustlie holde him in the Catholike Church among which the name of Catholikes was but one and serued onelie at that time when the Catholike religion was moste commonlie imbraced therefore he denied not that the name of Catholike onelie was sufficient to teach a man to knowe the Church and the trueth by it but acknowledgeth that all these motiues of vniuersalitie consent miracles succession name of Catholike must giue place to the trueth when it is plainlie shewed out of the canonicall scriptures as in the chapter following he vrgeth them to shew out of the gospells of Christ wher it is writen that Manicheus was an Apostle of Christ as his sect affirmed and his epistle pretended As for the reason you alledge that vnlearned men are not able to stand with heretikes in disputation which wil challenge the Church to themselues is of no force for the vnlearned man ought to know the Church by the true notes thereof conteined in the scriptures which is sufficient for to satisfie his conscience although he can not cunninglie auoide all the Sophisticall arguments that the aduersarie bringeth whereas theonelie name of Catholikes can breede no true faith or quietnes of minde which is not obteined by the peoples iudgement but by authoritie of the worde of God And seing the people are commonlie deceiued in many matters of difficultie and moste of all in misnaming of things what assurance shall the vnlearned haue that they be not deceiued in this so weightie a matter and wherein their speach may so easilie be abused But howsoeuer it was the common calling of the people brought you to know Catholikes Catholikes to know the Church and the creede taught you to beleeue the Church rules in Popes pardons then in other articles Thus is your faith builded altogether vpon humane presumptions the ladder whereof is this you beleeue Popes pardons because the Church of Rome alloweth them you beleeue the Church of Rome because it is the Catholike Church you beleeue that it is the Catholike Church because the people commonlie call it so But of Christian faith Saint Paull describeth another ladder faith commeth by hearing hearing by the worde of God preached by ministers sent of God so that against the authoritie of god who giueth both his worde and preachers and by them true faith you haue the generall and common calling of men which giue authority to that companie to be the Church which is surnamed Catholike which company so called may cause you to beleeue what they list and this indeed is the ground of al your heresies if you had gone one step lower that the Deuill inspireth ignorant and wicked men to call his fowle blouse the Romish synagogue by the name of the beautifull spouse of Christ his Catholike Church ALLEN The second cause that mooued me to reuerence the power of pardoning in the high Bishup and to like his Indulgences was the verie persons of them which first reprooued the same In whome because I saw the worlde to note and wonder at other manie moste blasphemous and inexcusable heresies I verilie deemed though I was then for my age almoste ignorant of all thinges that this opinion and impugnation of Pardons could neither be of God nor of good motion that first began in them begate such a number of most wicked cōtentio is opinions as streight vpon the controlling of the Churches power herein did ensue not onelie against Christs officers in earth but against his Saints in heauen against himselfe in the blessed Sacrament This extreame intollerable issue mee thought verilie could haue no holie entraunce and therfore with the other named cause stayed me in the Churches faith euen then when I had no feeling nor sense in the meaning of these matters FVLKE You were a wise young man in those daies when being almost ignorant of all things as you confesse you would follow the iudgement of the worlde in condemning the persons of them that reprooued pardons and were not able to iudge whether they were iustlie condemned of other blasphemous inexcusable heresies Nay at this presēt time as great a cleark as you are taken to be among your friends you are not able to conuince thē of such blasphemous inexcusable heresies as you prate of And yet if you had bin thō as able iustly to haue reproued thē by the scriptures of such monsters as the world did wonder at in them yet you staied vpō a weake staffe except this be a good atgumēt with you heretiks hold manifest false opinions therefore they holde no true opinions Much more wiselie and soundlie you should haue sought the true Church as Saint Augustine teacheth out of the scriptures and thereby iudged of the worldes noting and wondring which because it consisteth moste of wicked men doth commonlie condemne Christ and his Gospell Out of the same scripture you should haue learned who were Christes officers and whoe the limmes of Antichrist what honour is due vnto the saints in heauen and what manner presense there is of Christ vpon earth But as your faith was thē grounded vpō simple sophistrie in supposing that which no wise man will graunt so is it not now much differing from the same although you haue learned with more craft to peruert a few scriptures and to wrest the sayinges of some dctors for a florish hauing no more substance of true faith which is builded vpon the word of God then you had before For if your shameles principle be denyed that you are the Church of Christ then you come back to these beggerlie motyues as in your articles and Bristowes motyues is manifest being not able either to finde the notes of the true Church in the synagogue of Rome nor to iustify the doctrine of the Church of Rome to be builded vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles when triall is to be made by their writings ALLEN But afterwad reading the historie of the pitifull fal of our time and there considering the sinister intent and occasion of the first improofe of Pardons and all the strange endeuours of Luther whose name is cursed to all good men who first in all mans memorie sauing one Wicleffe who was condemned in Constance Councell for the same was so bolde onelie vpon contention and couetousnes to condemne that which himselfe in Conscience knew to be true and lawfull I could not
in the sacrament of penance there is a power iudiciarie and therefore can not be practized lawfullie but vpon subiect persons and causes not exempted from their iudgement and excepted from their audience In which cases the persons of higher iurisdiction to whome by right and law the cognition of those reserued sinnes belong do sometimes vpon occasion giuen communicate their power to the said simple priestes and do license them to exercise their iurisdiction vpon persons and causes not properly pertaining vnto them as when the Popes Indulgence giueth the sinner leaue to choose his ghostlie father and by him that he maie be assoiled euen from such sinnes as be reserued to the supreame power of the Church In this matter also the Indulgence ioyneth with the ordinarie sacrament of penance and the minister receiueth iurisdiction by the Indulgence to heare and assoile the Penitent of such sinnes as before were not subiect to his peculiar regiment and therefore this is also called a pardon from sinne and the paine for sinne and a full remission FVLKE You haue hitherto held hard that neither the Pope nor anie Bishop can giue pardon of anie mortal sinne but by reseruation of cases it appeareth that the Pope challengeth this prerogatiue that he onelie may giue absolution and pardon in these greeuous crimes that be called cases papall and the Bishop in cases episcopall Now let vs see how this geare hangeth together The Pope hath this prerogatiue in respect of his high iurisdiction for in the sacramēt of penance euery priest by order as we heard before hath as much authority as he Then if these cases be reserued to the Popes iurisdiction this reseruation doth prooue that the Pope taketh vpon him to pardon the most greeuous sinnes by his iurisdiction onelie or els he deceaueth them that seeke for absolution of them at his hands And whereas you would cloake the matter by saying the Popes indulgence doth graunt that the priest in confession maie assoile a man from such sinnes as be reserued to the supreame power of the Church it is to no purpose For the Priest in this case is but the popes deputie to exercise the Popes iurisdiction as you saie as well vpon persons as causes not properlie pertaining to him but by the Popes license whereupon it followeth that the Pope may do in his owne person that which he doth by his deputie but by his deputie he taketh vpon him to remit most deadlie sinnes therefore the Pope taketh vpon him to remit deadlie sinnes by his iurisdiction onelie If you saie the absolution commeth from the sacrament and not from his iurisdiction then shew vs out of the scriptures how the Pope hath authoritie to restraine the grace of sacraments in respect of the person that ministreth them or els your reseruation of cases and exemption of persons will prooue no better then an Antichristian tyrannie For if Christ haue giuen power to euerie Priest to remitte all sinnes as you haue often affirmed vpon the text Ioh. 20. whose sinnes you remit c. what is he but Antichrist exalting himselfe aboue all that is called God which controlleth the liberall graunt of Christ exempting both persons and sinnes from their power without al ground or war rant of Gods word ALLEN That thou be not deceiued herein vnderstand good Reader that euerie Priest in his taking Orders and by Christes graunt hath full power to remit all sinnes and all men of their sinnes that be penitent and yet that this power can not be practized by the law of nature indifferentlie vpon all because this sacrament and none other is iudiciall and therfore profitablie can be extended no further but to them that be of their subiection and regiment Wheresoeuer the Priest consecrateth it is effectuall whomesoeuer he baptizeth he is lawfullie Christianed whomesoeuer the Bishop ordereth he standeth trulie ordered and so forth though they should not herein meddle in other mens cures without speciall licence sufferance or necessitie But no man can assoile anie person at all that is not subiect vnto him either ordinarilie or otherwise because it is an act of iurisdiction and therefore though his power of orders be in it selfe sufficient yet by that onelie he can not absolue anie man but in necessitie except he haue withall authoritie ouer the person and in that case wherein the penitent requireth his sentence which iurisdiction he maie haue either ordinarilie as vpon all those that be of his charge or els extraordinarilie by some special graunt of the superiour as Bishop or Pope as we maie see in the formes and course of Indulgencies diuers times And thus considering of the matter you see that the Popes pardons as they be onelie proper to the act of iurisdiction separated from the power of priesthood and sacramentall confession can not remit the sinnes them-selues neither damnation due for their reward though because licence commeth and proceedeth by them to the inferiour Priestes to remitte sinnes in all cases they maie be called as I said plenarie and most liberal graces and graunts to assoile man both from sinne and the punishment that is due therefore FVLKE You pretend as though you would render a reason why all Priestes haue not equall power ouer all men and to remit all sinnes and for the former you saie somewhat though not sufficient but for the later you saie nothing at all First you confesse that euerie Priest rightly ordered hath by Christes graunt power to remit all sinnes and all men of their sinnes that be penitent But this power can not be practized you say by the law of nature indifferentlie vpon all Then belike Christ hath graunted and they receiued an vnprofitable power for why haue they power to remitte all sinnes and al mens sinnes and yet maie practize the same but vpon some sinnes and some mens sinnes onelie In truth Christ hath giuen ful power to al his ministers according to the measure of euerie one of their charges the Apostles ouer al the world their successors the bishops pastors teachers within the compasse of their seuerall cures and therefore you saie well that God hath so ordered the case that no man maie intermedle in an others cure without licence sufferance or necessitie the Pope then doth wickedlie to exempt anie man from his laufull pastor to whome the charge of his soule is by Christ committed The reason you giue wherfore this power can not be practized vpon all is friuolous because this sacrament and none other is iudiciall For who will graunt you that the power of remitting sinnes in repentance is more iudiciall then in baptisme or in the Lordes supper For the minister ought to haue a iudgement whome he baptizeth and whome he admitteth vnto the Lords table If the children of Turks or Iews be offered to baptisme without the conuersion or consent of their parentes by what warrant shall he receiue them If Turkes Iewes or Gentiles that be of yeares of discretion offer them selues to baptisme
before they be instructed in Christian beliefe shal they be baptized If children naturall fooles and such as can not examine themselues notorious offenders that haue giuen no signes of repentance men knowen to be in malice c. shal present thēselues to the Lords table must they without al iudgement or discretiō be accepted or repulsed By this therefore it appeereth that there is nothing more iudiciall in receiuing of sinners to repentance if that were a sacrament then in the only true sacraments of baptisme and the Lords supper Wherefore there is no reason that the Pope should restraine anie man of that power which you confesse he hath by Christes graunt ouer all persons of his charge by exempting anie of them or giuing them libertie to chuse their gostlie Father according to their owne appetite and much lesse that he should reserue vnto him selfe the absolution from the greatest sinnes the power whereof was graunted by Christ to euerie Priest as you confesse ouer his owne parishioners for which reseruation you bring not so much as the shadow of anie reason to shroud him from the the note of Antichristian tiranie ALLEN The Popes Pardons also maie wellreach so farre as to take awaie veniall and dailie infirmites which be of their nature punishable but by some temporall paine and correction because they be remissible manie waies out of the sacrament both here in this life and in the next For the merites of Christ maie be applied sufficientlie to the offenders in such light manner of trespaces without the especiall grace of a sacrament as by saying our Lordes praier saieth Saint Augustine and by almese and by the holie Sacrament of the aultar either receiued or deuoutlie adored by sacrifice now of the holie Masse much more then in olde time in the sacrifices of the lawe and by the holie peace or blessinges of Christ and his Apostles and Bishoppes after them and by their Pardons Therefore to him that is free from greeuous sinnes or pardoned of the same all these thinges shal be commodious towards the remission of his lesser infirmities but if he be in state of damnation and out of Gods fauour which grace must be procured onelie by the Sacraments of Baptisme or penance he can not obtaine anie Pardon at the popes hands neither aliue nor dead nor none was euer meant vnto him FVLKE Seeing veniall sinnes maie so easilie be pardoned as you doe shewe and by so manie meanes you make great fooles of all them that trauell to Rome for a plenarie Pardon of Iubelie or that will paie one halfepenie for anie at home when without trauell without expences without daunger he maie so lightlie obtaine forgiuenes of them But howsoeuer you plaie and blear mens eies with veniall sinnes the worde of trueth saieth that euerlasting death is the reward of sinne if it be not pardoned through the merites of Christes death applied to vs by faith The grace of God is all one whether it be testified by his 〈◊〉 or by a sacrament But you would haue it seene that Saint Augustine is an author of this distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes and sheweth these meanes by which veniall sinnes maie be wiped awaie without the grace of a Sacrament but you peruert his wordes farre from his meaning For his purpose is to shewe that a man cannot be purged from his greeuose sinnes by almes except he be heartelie penitent and carefull neuer to commit them againe but of smaller sinnes without the which a man can not lead his life he cannot determine that he will forsake them but must continuallie craue Pardon for them and auoide them as much as he can His wordes are these Sanè cauendum ne quisquam existimet infanda illa crimina qualia qui agunt regnum Dei non possidebunt quotidiè perpetranda eleemosynis quotidiè redimenda In melius quippe est vita mutanda per eleemosinas de peccatis praeteritis est propitiandus Deus non ad hoc emendus quodam modo vt ea semper liceat impunè committere Nemini enim dedit laxamentum peccandi quamuis miserando deleatiam facta peccata si non satisfactio congrua negligatur De quotidianis autem breuibus leuibusque peccatis sine quibus haec vita non ducitur quotidiana oratio fidelium satis facit Eorum est enim dicere Pater noster qui es in coelis Quiiam patri tali regenerati sunt ex aqua Spiritu Sancto Delet omninò haec oratio minima quotidiana peccata Delet illa à quibus vita fidelium sceleratè etiam gesta sed poenitendo in melius mutata discedit Si quemadmodum veraciter dicitur Demitte nobis debita nostra quoniam non desunt quae dimittantur ita veraciter dicatur sicut nos dimittimus debitorib nostris id est fiat quod dicitur quia ipsa eleemosyna est veniam petenti homini ignoscere Suerlie we must take heede lest anie man thinke those wicked crimer which they that committe them shall not possesse the kingdome of God are dailie to be committed and dailie to be redeemed by almes For the life must be changed into better and God is to be intreated through almese for sinnes past he is not to be bought after asort for this end that it maie be lawfull to commit them alwais without punishment For he hath giuen to no man licence of sinning although by his mercie he doe wipe awaie sinnes alreadie committed if meet satisfaction be not neglected But for daily short and light sins without which this life is not ledde the daily praier of the faithfull doth make satisfaction For it pertaineth to them to saie Our Father which art in heauen which are alreadie regenerat to such a father by water and the holie Ghost For this praier doth altogether wipe awaie these least and dailie sinnes It wipeth awaie also those from which the life of the faithfull hauing beene wickedlie passed but by repentance being changed into better doth depart if as it is trulie saied forgiue vs our debtes because there want not dets to be forgiuē euen so it may be truly said as we also do forgiue our debters that is to saie if that be done which is spoken For that is also almes to giue pardon to a man which desireth it First of receiuing the Sacrament of the altar or adoring the same of the sacrifice of the Masse of the Bishops blessing of their pardons here is no mention Secondly he sheweth that great crimes are pardoned also by saying the Lordes praier if changeing of life do followe by which it is manifest that by satisfaction he meaneth the fruites of repentance which as the offences are greater or lesser so it is meete they be shewed accordinglie in small offences contrition of heart and humble acknowledging of them before God is sufficient in great offences the change of life into better must be manifest euen to the Church and the sinnes repented
that they haue any such power of healing bodelie diseases It is a better reason that you alledge out of Saint Augustine that remission of sinnes in the Church respecteth the iudgement to come but that he speaketh there of any temporal iudgement after this life you are not able to prooue Neither doth the citing of the text of Saint Paull I. Cor. II. helpe you which he citeth to prooue that temporall paines are laide vpon men in this life to them whose sinnes are done awaie that they should not be reserued to the ende as his wordes are plaine in that wholl Chapter Magis enim propter futurum iudicium fit remissio peccatorum In hac autem vita c. For remission of sins ie made rather for the iudgement to come For in this life it preuaileth so much which is written a heauie yoke vpon the sons of Adam from the daie of their comming forth of their mothers wombe vnto the day of their buriall into the mother of all thus we see euen litle children after the lauer of regeneration to be tormented with the affliction of diuerse euills that we may vnderstand that all which is doue by the healthfull sacraments doth pertaine rather to the hope of good thinges to come then to reteining or obteining things present Manie euills also seeme to forgiuen heere and to be reuenged with no punishments but the paines of them are reseruea vntill afterwarde For not in vaine is that called properlie the daie of iudgement when the iudge of the quicke and the deade shall come As on the contrarie side some things are reuenged heere and yet if they be remitted verilie in the worlde to come they shall not hurt Wherfore of certaine temporall paines which are laid vppon sinners in this life in them whose sinnes are done awaie that they should not be reserued vnto the ende the Apostle saieth for if we iudged our selues we should not be iudged of the Lord but when we are iudged of the Lord we are chastened that we should not be damned with this worlde Thus it is plaine by Saint Augustines iudgement that Saint Paull speaketh of temporall paines laied vppon sinners in this life to bring them to repentance not of temporal iudgement to be exercised after this life But you meane not that Popes or Bishops pardons should alwaies take away bodelie sicknes because Christ did not so vnto ai Nay rather because they are not able to heale a sore finger in any one man For Christ healed as many as he would if the Pope haue Christs power why should he not as well heale whome he will Your similitude that as Christ tooke away temporall paines so may Popes and priests holdeth not for there is great odds betweene Christ and his seruants he did what he would they may doe no more then he hath giuen chem power and charge And for releasing of times of repentance appointed to satisfie the Church they may by power giuen from him but for the releasing of debt to be paied in the world to come he gaue them neither authority nor cōmaundement That the priest doth dailie heale in your sacrament of aneling it is an impudent lie For first they anoint none in their dailie practize but such as are in dispaire of life of whom if any recouer by the wilof God it is sacriledge to impure it to the power of the priests anointing who hauenot the gift of healing as the elders of the Apostles Church had whome S. Iames willeth to be sent for to heale the diseased ALLEN But in Saint Paull we haue inuincible proofe of the authoritie and iurisdiction of Bishops and princivali pastcurs touching as well the power of enioyned pename and satisfaction for sinnes committed as the lawfull power of pardoning the same which before was enioyned and so in one fact of the Apostle a cleare practize of binding and loosing He first bound him by excommunication that had so greeuouslie offended and to shew what a terrible torment this kinde of panishment is and how much it is to be dred he maketh it euident by a slraunge corporall vexation that all Chrillian men might conceiue the miserie of those persons which be excommunicated hereafter when the externall signe and miraculous torment should ceasse in the Church I wili reporte the matter fullie There was amongst the Corinthians one of reputation that kept vnlawfullie his fathers wife the which being knowne to their Apostle Saint Paul who then was absent srom them and being accounted of him as in deede it was an exceeding grieuous fact and notorious he gaue in charge to the Church of Corinth to take the person that had so offended as excommunicated that is to saie to be separated from the sacraments the seruice and common fellowship of Saints But see with what a maiestie and might of operation with what force of wordes and authoritie of his calling with what a kinde of punishment Christes officer here correcteth the offender Thus runneth his determinate sentence on the offender that all the worlde may take heede and wonder at the Churches authoritie and condemne the vaine voices of them that doe restraine the power of Gods ministers onelie to the preaching of the Gospell I beeing absent in bodie but present in spirit haue alreadie giuen iudgement as well as if I were present that the person that hath thus wickedlie wrought should be deliuered vpto Sathan in the vertue of our Lorde Christ Iesus you there being gathered with my spirit in the name of our said Lord Christ Iesus and all for the vexation of his flesh that his soull may be safe in the daie of our Lord Iesus Christ. This in effect is the Apostles sentence on that incestuous person wherby he was temporallie tormented by the force of Saint Pauls power of binding sinners giuen by Christ and exercised no otherwise as you may see but in Christs vertue holie name Where it may be noted for a strange 〈◊〉 of mans word that the deuill himse fe should be therby appointed to torment a sinners bodie not as he would but as far as the diuine Magistrate shall limit him Diabolus enim quia ad hoc paratus est vt auerses à Deo 〈◊〉 in potestatem audita sententia corripit eos The 〈◊〉 saith Saint Ambrose who is alwaies readie to take them to his power that are turned from God sireight as soone as he heareth the sentence pronounced vpon sinners he doth afflict and correct them As it may also appeere by our Sauiours wordes in the Gospell of a woman that had spiritum infirmitatis the spirit of infirmitie whome the deuill had eighteene yeares together fast bound in sickenes for her sinnes to whome also Christ gaue a pardon by imposition of his holie handes Where we may haue an other example of his mercie in loosing the temporall band and punishment appointed for sinne But let vs turne to Saint Pauls patient whome we left by the key of the
to robbe and spoile all he prooueth by the wordes of Gabuston Master of the watch at Paris whoriding into the high alter of Saint Medardes Church cried to his mates in Barbarous french Pilla tout pilla tout What words he spake I know not but all men know it is a foolish argument to prooue the purpose of all the Protestants by the wordes of one captaine vttered in heate in time of shamefull sedition mooued by the Papists for while the congregation of the faithfull was hearing the sermon in the suburbs of S. Marcell in the place appointed by the King for that purpose the priests of S. Medardes Church thereby kept such a tangling with their bells that the preacher could not be heard whereupon two of the companie went and gentlie desired the Priests to staie their bells but they being garded with a number of men fel vpon those two and the one they slewe in the Church the other escaped by flight The priests then went vp into the steeple and rang the bells backward which they call Tocksaine whereupon the people of the suburbs flocked rogither and disturoed the audience with stones I he seruant of the Magistrate was sent in his masters name to commaund them to cease their tumult and keepe peace But with stones and arrowes he was compelied to returne whereupon the sermon being broke of the multitude of the Protestants hasting to the Church brake open the dores where finding the dead bodie of him that was slaine maruell not if they were mooued with indignation and therefore some of the armed Priests with their complices they apprehended the rest fled into the stecple from whence with staues logges arrowes and such like matter which they had prouided for the purpose not sparing to throw downe their Idolls which they had caried vp least they should haue beene destroied by the Protestants they defended themselues a great space stil ringing the Tocksaine till at the last being threatned that the steeple should be fired they ceased about fourtie of them being wounded and 15. taken and committed to the officer And that their coulde be no great spoyle made in the Church the priests had before prouided for they had caried out all their massing stuffe and other trumperie as chalices basens vestiments that were of anie value before they attempted this sedition The next daie the furious people hauing other priests to their captaines came into the house appointed for the assemblie of the faithfull brake downe the pulpit and the stooles and fired the house in manie places vntil by the saide captaine of the watch they were put to flight This is of trueth the some of that sedition The cause whereof was yet so handled by the Popish iudges that the Papists were acquitted and certaine of the Protestantes committed to prison for it The moste hainous fact of al except one perhaps is yet behinde and that is the prophaning of the precious bodie of Christ him selfe which with furious and outragious impietie was cast on the ground trodden vnder feete hurled into the fire and into the water and so despert elie all to be pricked with their swordes and carried vpon the toppes of their speares This he meaneth of their Idol of the altar called of the french men Jean blanke which of old time if we beleeue the fables of the Papistes still auouched by great plentie of miraculous hostes and blood to be shewed in diuers places was so moodie that if he had bene prickt but with kniues of Iewes and Miscreantes he yelded forth not onely great streames of blood but also was auenged by fire or other meanes of those that so abused him But where are now those miracles where is one droppe of blood where be the examples of his vengeance aginst so manifest and spitefull contemners I suppose it was no more but a thing forgotten For otherwise he might haue fained miracles blood and vengeance as wel as all the rest wherein he hath impudentlie lied and counterfaited The greatest matter of all thinke is reserued to the last place that is the Traiterous murthering of the Duke of Guise by conspiracie of that vilecaytife Beza inuentor of all these mischiefes bondslaue of all bawdie lust and all detestable sinne and vice You know Frarines eloquence in handling such matters The crime obiected to omit his ruffinlike railing and whorish scoulding he prooueth by Poltrotei confession but Beza euen by the same confession prooueth that it is false forged For therin Poltrote is made to confesse that Beza shoulde counsaile him to commit that fact as a worke verie meritorious whereas the wiser sorte of Papists know full well that Beza woulde neuer vse anie such persuasion And Poltrote himselfe at his death howsoeuer that pretended confession was either forged or by torture enforced did cleare both Beza and the Admirall of beeing a counsaile with the enterprice affirming that it was his owne onelie deuise And yet I see not how that fact of his should be counted treason in the Admirall if he had bin of counsaile thereof seing Guise was an open enemie and slaine in time of war by one also who ought him no seruice or alledgeance howsoeuer it was it was a iust plague of god vpon him a great benefite to the whol Realme of Fraunce For his end made an end of the lamentable warres for thattime The rest that foloweth in two or three leaues to the end conteining nothing but either tedious repetitions of matters handled before or els odious amplifications of generall accusations without proofe or likelihood of truth I will spare to trouble the Reader withall trusting that euerie man which with indifferent iudgement shall consider these matters will confesse that Frarine hauing taken in hande to prooue three points in his oration is able to iustifie none of them all bringing nothing but accusations without proofe Reports without witnes lies without truth and words without matter God be praised Apoc. 18. In his request and protestation before his retentiue against Bristowes motiues Sesquipedalia verba See afterward in the answere to the defense more at large I. Iohn 4. Saunders treason in Ireland Bull. Pij 5. Ioh. 5. 39. Pighius 2. Tim. 3. Euseb. li. 5. c. 26. De cap. Bab. Ioh 5. Iho. 17. Gal. 1. Greg. ep lib. 7. ep 109. Se reno lib 9. ep 9. Sereno Theod. dial 2 Gelasius cont Eutych Can. 6. Can. 8. Can. 77. 〈◊〉 Ioan. Tract 7. Mat. 23. 8. Ihon. 4. 25. Psa. 110. Heb. 7. 2. 24. Ioh. 18. 37. 1. Tim. 6. 5. Apoc. 17. 14. 19. 16. Tom. 7. Wittemb Fol. 414. Luther spea keth against the rebellious rustical bou res principallie and the Anabaptistes Ioh. 20. 31. Apoc. 15. 4. Ioh. 20. 31. Luk. 1. 3. 2 Tim. 3. 15. Act. 24. 14. Act. 26. 22. Heb. 7. 24. Heb. 10. 11. Heb. 9. 22. Heb. 9. 25. 26. Heb. 〈◊〉 25 Heb. 9. 12. Heb. 10. 14. Dan. 9. Heb. 13. 15. Dan. 12. Indeclar Anath 11. Orat In