or omission and permissiuely to suffer it for to enter and by a positiue decree resolued that auerting himself from the fountaine of all goodnesse and the rule of all righteousnesse hee should runne into innumerable dangerous euils and grieuous sinnes of commission But Bellarmine will say Calvine denieth that Gods determination decreeing what shall bee dependeth on this prescience and that his prescience presupposeth his purpose and decree For answere hereunto wee must remember that there is a double prescience simplicis intelligentiae and visionis The first is of all those things that are possible and which vpon any supposed condition may bee as was that prescience of God whereby hee foreknew that if in Tyrus and Sidon those things should be done which afterwards were done among the Iewes they would repent This doeth not presuppose the decree of God but extendeth to many things God doth not decree nor purpose to bee as it appeareth in the example proposed The other is of those things onely which hereafter shall bee and this presupposeth some acte of Gods will For seeing nothing can bee vnlesse some act of Gods will doe passe vpon it at least not to hinder the beeing of it nothing can bee thus foreseene as beeing hereafter for to bee vnlesse some decree of God doe passe vpon it Of this kinde of prescience Caluin speaketh and not of the other For that first kinde of prescience what the creature would doe if it were so created and left to it selfe as afterwards it was was before any decree of God or determination what hee would doe But that other to wit what hereafter shall be not so and therefore Caluin rightly affirmeth that Gods foresight of the entrance of sinne presupposed his decree that it should enter Thus I see not what can be disliked by our aduersaries in our doctrine thus deliuered nor what difference can be imagined betweene them and vs touching the entrance of sinne But sayth Bellarmine Caluine affirmeth that the end for which God purposed to make man was the manifestation of the seuerity of his justice and the riches of his mercie and that the consideration of this end was the first thing that was found in God when hee thought of creating man so that this purpose was before and without respect vnto the prescience of any thing that afterwards might or would be in man And that because there was not any thing wherein hee could shew either mercie or Iustice vnlesse sinne did enter therefore secondly hee purposed that sin should enter So that first hee purposed to punish before hee saw any cause and then purposed the entrance of sinne that there might be cause which is no lesse inexcusable from iniustice cruelty and tyranny than if he should purpose to punish and so doe without any cause at all Thus sayth hee it should seeme that the first originall and spring of sinne is from the will of God according to Calvines opinion For answere hereunto wee must note that Caluine doeth no where say that God did purpose the manifestation of his mercie and Iustice before all prescience but onely before that which is named praescientia visionis Secondly that Caluin doeth no where pronounce that simply absolutely the end wherfore God purposed to make man was the manifestatiō of the severity of his justice the riches of his mercie or that hee might saue some and condemne others But as I conceiue according to Caluines opinion foure things are implied in Gods purpose of creating man First what hee meant to bestow vpon him Secondly what he meant to deny vnto him Thirdly the foreknowledge what would fall out vpon the bestowing of such benefits onely and the denying of others namely Sin Apostasie Fourthly his purpose notwithstanding his foreknowledge to bestow vpon him onely such benefits of his rich and abundant goodnesse and no other So then the end of those benefits which God purposed in such sort and in such degree and measure to bestow vpon man in his creation was not the manifestation of his mercie and Iustice neither did he purpose the entrance of sinne originally out of his owne liking that he might haue matter of punishment as Bellarmine injuriously chargeth Calvine to affirme But the end of his purpose of bestowing such benefites onely and no other notwithstanding his fore-knowledge what would fall out if so hee did was that he might shew his mercie and Iustice in sauing and condemning whom he would And against this Bellarmine neither doeth nor can except Thus hauing cleared those doubts that occurre in the doctrine of the Divines of the reformed Churches touching the entrance of sinne Let vs come to the second part and see what it is that they attribute vnto God when sin is entred The actions they attribute to God when sinne is entred are three Limitation direction and condigne punishing of one sinne with another For the first that God setteth bounds to wicked men in their wickednesse not onely in respect of the effect and event but also of the very inward purpose affections and designes and at his pleasure stoppeth them when hee will I thinke none of our adversaries will make any question For the diuell himselfe was limited how farre he should proceede in afflicting Iob and could not enter into an herde of swine without leaue obtained For though the will to doe euill be not of God yet the power is for there is no power that is not of God Touching the second which is direction though God bee not the Authour and causer of euill nor may be thought without impiety to put it into men yet when he findeth it in them hee directeth it not onely in respect of the kind wherein the persons against whom and the time when it shall breake forth But also in respect of the end and effect in which sense it is that Bellarmine and Stapleton both say that though GOD incline not simply and absolutely vnto euill yet hee inclineth and bendeth the willes of them that bee wicked that they shall be wicked in this sort rather than that at this time than at some other against such men rather than against those they more maligne and desire to despite if they were left to themselues This God doth in that he openeth the passage and maketh way for wickednesse to come foorth and shew it selfe in what sort he pleaseth and stoppeth all other Euen as a man being in a high Tower and desiring to cast himselfe downe there being many passages thorough which he might cast himselfe out if a man should stoppe all but one though hee might not justly bee saide to bee the cause of the fall of him that should thus cast away himselfe yet might hee rightly bee said to bee the cause why he fell rather this way and out of this window or passage then any other So doth God order dispose and direct the wickednesse of men to breake out in what sort at
his owne folly But when a man is punished for another mans fault whereof hee hath beene no cause by example perswasion helpe or consent hee canne haue no remorse of conscience Now our Saviour Christ suffered the punishments of the sinnes of other men not his own and therefore hee was free from remorse of conscience though it be generally found in all men and be neither sinne nor inducement to sin Lastly the punishments that are punishments onely and not sin that are common to the whole nature of Man and suffered not for the faults of him that suffereth them but for the sins of other are of two sorts for either they are the punishments of sinne eternally remayning in staine and guilt or broken off ceasing and repented of The punishments of sinne eternally remaining must according to the rules of diuine justice be eternall and consequently joyned with desperation which alwayes is found where there is an impossibility of any better estate for euer But it is no way necessary neither doth the iustice of God require that the punishments of sinne repented of ceasing and forsaken should bee euerlasting or ioyned with despaire For as the Diuines doe note that there are three thinges to bee considered in sinne The auersion from an infinite and incommutable good the inordinate conuersion to a finite good and the continuing in the same or ceasing from it so to these seuerall thinges in sinne there are three seuerall thinges answearing in the punishment of it For to the auersion which is obiectiuely infinite there answereth poena damni the losse of God which is an infinite losse To the inordinate conuersion of the sinner to thinges transitory there answereth poena sensus a sensible smart and griefe intensiuely finite as the pleasure the sinner taketh in the transitory thinges hee inordinately loueth is finite To the eternity of sin remayning euerlastingly in staine guilt or the continuance of it but for a time answereth the eternity of punishment or the suffering of the same but for a time It is true that euery sinner sinneth in suo aeterno as Saint Gregorie speaketh in that hee would sinne euer if hee might liue euer and that euery sinner casteth himselfe by sinning into an impossibility of euer ceasing to sin of himselfe as a man that casteth himselfe into a deepe pit canne neuer of himselfe rise out of it againe And therefore naturally eternity of punishment is due to sinne but if by force of Diuine operation men be framed to cease from sinne and to turne from it vnto God the Iustice of God requireth not eternity of punishment but onely extrâ—…mitie answerable to the grieuousnesse of sinne Wherefore seeing our Sauiour Christ suffered onely for those sinnes which he meant to breake off by framing the sinners to repentance it was no way necessary for the satisfying of diuine Iustice that hee should endure eternall punishment If it be sayd that all doe not repent nor cease from doing ill wee easily graunt it but it is likewise to be knowne that the satisfaction of Christ is not appliable to all sinners not through any defect in it selfe but through the incapacity of them to whom it should be applyed Soe that as Christ dyed and satisfied Gods wrath sufficiently for all but effectually onely for the elect and chosen soe likewise hee giueth grace to cease from sinne if the fault were not in themselues sufficiently to all But to the elect and chosen whom he foreknew before the world was made hee giueth grace effectually that his passion may be applyed vnto them and they really and indeede made partakers of it They seeme therefore to be deceiued who thinke that the excellencie of the person of Christ dispensed with the eternity of punishment which otherwise to satisfie diuine justice hee was to haue suffered and thereupon inferre that it might also dispense with the grieuousnesse and extremity of punishment that otherwise hee was to haue endured For the worth and excellency of his person was neither to dispense with the time nor grieuousnesse of his punishments but to make the passion of one auaileable for many Otherwise if it might haue dispensed with one degree of extremitie of punishment due to sinne it might also haue dispensed with two and consequently with all as Scotus aptly noteth though to another purpose These things being thus distinguished it is easie to answer that question that hath troubled many Whether Christ suffered all the punishments of sinne or not For wee may safely pronounce as I thinke that Christ suffered the whole generall punishment of sinne that onely excepted which is sinne or consequent vpon the inherence and eternity of sinne that is punished as remorse of conscience and desperation If any man shall goe further and aske whether to satisfie Gods justice Christ suffered the paines of hell or not it will be answered that he suffered not the paines of hell in specie or loco that is either in kind or place but some thinke that he suffered paines and punishments conformable and answerable to them in extremity that onely excepted which is sinne or consequent vpon the inherence and eternity of the sinne of such as are punished in hell Concerning poena sensus that is sensible smart and griefe Cardinall Cusanus a famous learned man is claerely of opinion that Christ suffered extremity of such paine answerable to that sensible smart and griefe that is indured in hell but the doubt is principally of the other kind of punishment named Poena damni which is the losse of God For the clearing of which point Scotus aptly obserueth diuers things For first he sheweth that punishment is the discernable want of some fitting good in an intellectuall nature and the presence of some euill in the same Secondly that the good that is in an intellectuall nature is of two sorts the one of vertue the other of sweete joyfull and pleasing delight and that though both these concurre sometimes as in the fruition of God in heauen wherein the perfection of vertue the fullnesse of joy and delight do meete together yea that though every thing that is vertuous be delightfull yet it is not so much the height of vertue as of delight that is to be judged happinesse Thirdly he inferreth from hence that there are two kinds of punishment consisting in the losse of God whereof the one is the want of that vertue whereby the soule is to be joyned and knit vnto God the other the want of that delight and pleasure that is to be found in God That the former is an evill of vnrighteousnesse sin may be called an obstinacy in sinne and is nothing else but sinne not remitted nor remoued Poena derelicta non inflicta that is no new euill brought in vpon the sinner but that left in him that hee wrought in himselfe The other is more properly named Poena damni or Damnum that is the punishment of losse or a losse
must haue faith to beleeue the things revealed vnto vs of God The second that this faith maketh vs see what the estate of mans nature should bee what it was at first and how much we are fallen from that wee were The third that out of this faith must flow a dislike of those sinfull evils into which wee are fallen and a feare of wofull consequents if wee be not freed from them The fourth that hence must grow a desire of remission of that which is past of grace that we may cease to doe evill learne to doe well and of assistance of the same grace that wee may goe on continue and not be turned out of the good way when wee are entered into it The fift that no man obtayneth remission of sinnes without dislike of sin and desire and purpose to leaue off to doe euill The sixt that being thus converted vnto God in longing desires of reconciliation we must not doubt but assure ourselues of the obtayning of it The seaventh that being justified no man canne bee saued without the studie care of well doing and that workes are necessary vnto saluation The eight that when wee haue done all wee must confesse we are vnprofitable servants that in many things we sin all That if God doe marke and obserue our defects we cannot abide it That we must not trust in our workes but in Gods mercy That euen those things which seeme small to vs deserue great punishment if God enter into judgement with vs. And that it is not our well doing but his mercy that maketh vs escape condemnation So that they differ from the Romanists touching the perfection of inherent righteousnesse the merit of congruence and condignity and workes of supererogation 7ly The Romanists teach that sins committed after baptisme are not so remitted for Christs sake but that wee must suffer that extremity of punishment which they deserue and therefore either we must afflict our selues in such sort and degree of extremity as may answere the desert of our sinne or bee punished by God heere or in the world to come in such degree and sort that his justice may be satisfied But they that are Orthodox teach First that it is injustice to require the payment of one debt twice Secondly that Christ suffered the punishment due to all sinnes committed before and after baptisme and therefore so satisfied the justice of God that they that are partakers of the benefit of his satisfaction so farre forth as they are made partakers of it are freed from the guilt of punishment Thirdly that the satisfaction of Christ is applied and communicated vnto vs vpon the condition of our faith and repentance without suffering the punishment that sinne deserveth 4ly That it is no lesse absurd to say as the Papists doe that our satisfaction is required as a condition without which Christs satisfaction is not appliable to vs then to say Peter hath paid the debt of Iohn and hee to whom it was due accepteth of the same payment conditionally if he pay it himselfe also Fiftly that as one man payeth another mans debt and the paiment of it is accepted vpon condition of his dislike of former evill courses and promise of amendment and not otherwise so it may be truely sayd that neither Christ hath payd our debt or God the Father accepted the payment of it for vs but vpon condition of our sorrowfull conversion and repentance Sixtly That the penall and afflictiue courses which the sinner putteth himselfe into may be named satisfactions dispositiuè in that they put vs into an estate wherein wee are capable of the benefit of Christs satisfaction freeing vs from the punishment of sinne In this sort the Greekes vrge the necessitie of satisfactions and not as the Romanists doe which appeareth by the reasons and causes which they deliuer Whereof the first is that correcting our selues amending that which otherwise God by his chastisements must driue vs to doe we may escape punishment The second that wee may pull vp the roote of sinfull evils that is the inordinate desire and pleasure wee had in things which either we should not desire or not so as wee doe The third that this correction may serue vs as a bridle to restraine vs from running into the like or worse evils hereafter The fourth that wee may frame ourselues to labour and a strait course of life vertue being a laborious thing and requiring painefull endeavours The fift that wee may make it appeare to our selues and others that wee hate sinne truely and from the heart These are true reasons why men should put themselues into penitentiall courses and these only are assigned by the Grecians but they neuer giue any such reason thereof as the Romanists fancie And as they receiue not the Romish doctrine of satisfactions so they neuer admitted any vse of such indulgences as are granted in the Roman Church nor euer dreamed of any power in the Church of communicating the ouerplus of one mannes satisfactions sufferings to supply the wāt of another Eightly touching the estate of the departed First they thinke that neither the Saints are already entred into the kingdome prepared for them nor that the sinners are already cast into hell but that both are in an expectation of that lot that remayneth for them and shall so continue till the resurrection and judgement This opinion prevaileth generally amongst all the Easterne Christians and it was the opinion of many of the ancient Fathers Secondly they beeleeue that the soules of such men as excell in vertue are worthy of eternall life and such as meerely embrace this present world of eternall punishment But that they who were in a course of vertue yet not without sundry defects and die in the same are not to bee punished eternally nor yet to bee made partakers of Gods glorie till they haue obtayned remission of those sinfull defects in which they die without particular repentance So that they beleeue there is remission of some sinnes not remitted here obtayned after this life But whether they whose sinnes are so remitted be subject to any punishment after their departing hence or God doe freely without inflicting any punishment remit them out of his mercifull disposition at the entreaty of the Church they doe not so cleerely resolue Though they incline to thinke that this remission is free and amongst many other reasons for proofe of the same alleadge that as some few good things in them that are generally principally euill shall haue no reward in the world to come so some few evill things in them that principally embrace vertue shall not bee punished But if they be subject to any punishment they all agree that it is onely the wanting of the cleere light of Gods countenance that shineth vpon others or the being in a strait or restraint or the sorrowfull dislike of former evills and not any punishment inflicted from without to giue satisfaction to the justice of God
faithfully gathered the opinions of all the Fathers and that his iudgement is their iudgment but he opposeth himself against Augustine therefore against all the Fathers This assumption we deny For Calvin no way dissenteth from Augustine but saith onely it may seeme that there should be some little difference betweene Augustine and vs For that wee affirme concupiscence in the regenerate to be sinne but he is fearefull to call it sinne vnlesse it be consented vnto naming it rather an euill sickenesse infirmity or the like But else-where taking away this doubt he saith that Augustine feareth not sometimes to call it sinne whereby the consent and agreement betweene Augustine and Caluin appeareth It were easie to shew that not onely Augustine but the Fathers generally were of the same opinion that we are of and that the popish opinion is a most dangerous and damnable errour if this were a fit place to enter into the exacte handling of that question But let vs see the rest of his objections Caluin saith he in the matter of satisfaction chargeth all the Fathers with errour This is as true as the rest For Caluin doth not say they erred in this matter of satisfaction for he sheweth plainely they were far from the absurditie of the Popish conceipt but he saith disiunctiuely only that either they erred or at least vsed some phrases and formes of speech that may seeme hard and neede a good and fauourable construction rather than to be wrested to a worse sense then they were vttered in as the manner of the Popish Sophisters is to deale with the writings of the Fathers For the clearing of this matter we must obserue that in sinne there are two things the sinfulnesse the punishment which for it the iustice of God inflicteth Both these are taken away by Christ but in a different sort The sinfulnes by the operatiō working infusion of grace the punishmēt by the imputatiō of Christs sufferings who suffering that he deserued not freeth vs frō that wee were deservedly to haue suffered From one of these wee cannot bee freede vnlesse also wee bee freede from the other and in what degree wee are delivered from the one wee are discharged from the other if wee be freed onely from the dominion of sinne we are onely discharged from the condemnation of eternall death if from all sinnefullnesse wee are discharged from all touch of any puuishment But the Romanists do teach touching sinnes committed after Baptisme that God contenteth not himselfe with the most perfect abolishing and extinguishment of all sinnefullnesse by working of Diuine grace the satisfaction of Christs sufferings but that he doth require that we suffer the extremity of that wee haue deserued onely some little mitigation procured by the bloudshead of Christ and the eternity excepted from which our ceasing from sin doth free vs the punishment of sin being eternall because sinne is eternall Hence it commeth that they teach that if wee will not suffer and endure the extremity of punishment wee haue deserued wee must make some other recompence to Gods iustice for it This is a blasphemous assertion and contrary to the doctrine of all the Fathers who know and teach as wee do that the iustice of God and his wrath against sinne is satisfied in Christ that this satisfaction is imputed to vs not continuing in but ceasing from sinne that according to the degree of our ceasing from sinne this satisfaction is diversly imputed So that if wee cease from sinne onely so that it hath no more dominion over vs it is imputed in such sort as it dischargeth vs only from condemnation but if wee wholy cease from sinne it is so imputed vnto vs as that it freeth vs from all punishment whatsoeuer So that if there were found in any of vs a perfect leauing forsaking of sinne GODS iustice would lay no punishment vppon vs. But the Romanistes thinke it might and would for precedent sinne though now wholly forsaken and quite abolished It is true indeede that the Fathers sometimes vsed the name of satisfaction in their writings but to another purpose than the Romanists doe They knew that euils are cured by contraries and therefore in the curing of sinfull soules they prescribe that which Caluine also doth that men hauing offended in yeelding too much to their owne desires pleasures delights and profits should for the freeing of themselues from the euill of sinne deny something to them selues which otherwise they might lawfully enioy which if they do not they shall in the punishments which God will bring vpon them tast the bitternesse of that that seemed sweete vnto them in sinne This exercise of repentant mortification the Fathers called satisfaction not as if the iustice of God were not satisfied in Christ or wee were tied yea though wee should wholly forsake sinne yet to satisfie for that is past by suffering so much as our sinnes haue deserued or else to doe some painefull thing equiualent to such sufferings which is the popish errour But because wee must doe that in this kind of repentant mortification which may be sufficient for the finding out of the depth of that wound which sinne hath made in the soule for remouing the causes of it the extinguishment of that remaineth of it the taking away the occasions and the preuenting of the reentrance of it againe This if wee do wee shall preuent the hand of GOD which otherwise would smite vs not to be satisfied in the course of his Iustice which at our hands cannot bee looked for and which is aboundantly satisfied in Christ and would not touch vs for any thing past if by perfect forsaking of sinne wee were fully ioyned vnto him but to driue vs by bitter sorrow to purge out that sinfullnesse and those remainders which our precedent sinnes left behind them in respect whereof wee are not yet fully ioyned to Christ. These remainders of sinne if wee dislike cast off and forsake and iudge and condemne our selues as the Apostle speaketh wee shall not bee iudged of the Lord for them This happie course of preventing the hand of God turning away his punishments by bitter and afflictiue recounting of our sinnes the Fathers call Satisfaction Some sayings of the Fathers it may bee there are which are hard and must with a favourable constructiō be reduced to the sense we haue expressed and that is all that Calvin saith for which how justly he is blamed let the Reader judge CHAP. 17. Of Prayer for the dead and Merite THe next calumniation is concerning prayer for the dead Let the Reader obserue what it is that Bellarmine is to proue and he shall find that he doth nothing but trifle For he is to proue that Calvin confesseth that more then a thousand three hundred yeares since the Popish doctrine and custome of prayer for the dead did prevaile and was generally receiued in the whole Church of God throughout the world This if hee will
of sin the sinner is denominated euill partly by denomination passiue in that he wanteth that orderly disposition that should bee in himselfe partly by actiue in that he depriueth as much as in him is some other of that good which pertaines to him Some not rightly obseruing these things finding that some sinnes are positiue acts whereas the nature of euill is privatiue distinguish that which is materiall in the sins of commission that which is formall the substance of the act the difformity of it making the one positiue the other privatiue consisting in the want of that rectitude which should be in it But these men seeme not rightly to conceiue the things whereof they speake For the sin of omission is formally euill a want of rectitude in that the good act that should be done is omitted But the sin of commission if it be an euill act ex genere obiecto is denominatiuely euill not by passiue denomination as wanting that rectitude that should be in it but by actiue in that by way of contrariety it depriueth the sinner of that orderly disposition that should be found in him others of that good that pertaineth to them That that sin of commission that is an euill act ex genere obiecto is not denominated euill passiuely froÌ„ the want of rectitude due vnto it it is evident in that no rectitude is due to such an act For what rectitude is due to the specifical act of hating God or what rectitude is it capable of Greg. de Valentia finding this to be true yet willing to defend the distinctioÌ„ of that which is formall that which is material of some thing positiue some thing privatiue in the sin of commission saith that euill acts as particularly the act of injustice may be considered 2 wayes First in the proper specificall nature of iniustice so it is no subiect capable of the perfection of vertue neque huius perfectionis negatio est in illo priuatio sed pura negatio neither is the deniall of this perfection in respect of such an act so considered a priuation but a meere pure negation 2l l Secundum communem quandam rationeÌ„ illi actui iustitiae vt versantur circa materiam communem ipsi iusticiae scilicet rem alienam sic subiectum aptum est ad perfectionem iustitiae et huiâ—… perfectionis negatio est in illo priuatio In a generalitatie in respect of that which is common to it the contrary act of iustice as they are both conuersant in things pertaining to other men and in this sort it is a subiect capable of rectitude and the perfection of vertue his meaning is that a morall act conuersant in things pertaining to other men considered in a generality is indifferent either to bee an act of iustice giuing to euery one his own or of iniustice depriuing others of that which pertaineth to them that the omission of the act of iustice is a priuation of such rectitude as might be found in this kind So that wheÌ„soeuer any act of iniustice is don first there is a want of rectitude that is an omissioÌ„ of the good act of iustice which might ought to haue bin donne 2ly the producing of an evill act contrary to that good act that is omitted 2 kinds of sin do allwaies concurre the one of omission the other of commission the one is a meere priuation of rectitude the difformity of it is priuatiue in the other which is a sin of coÌ„missioÌ„ specifically coÌ„sidered there is no priuatiue waÌ„t of rectitude for it is capable of none in it there is nothing but meerly positiue the difformity that is fouÌ„d in it is precisely a positiue repugnance to the Law of God Aluarez saith the sin of commission is a breach of a negatiue law which is not broken but by a positiue act contrary to the prescript of right reason as Tho Aquinas teacheth 2ª 2ae q. 79. ar 2. 3. 4. And the same is further confirmed because the same Thomas elswhere saith that in the sin of omission there is nothing but priuation if we consider it as it is in it selfe but the sin of coÌ„mission is some positiue thing Because saith Caietan sin consisteth aswell of a coÌ„version to an obiect contrary to the obiect of vertue as of an aversion from the Law there is in sin a double nature of euill the one arising from the obiect the other froÌ„ the not obseruing of the law the first is positiue the 2d priuatiue the first inferreth the 2l. For it cannot bee that a man should hate God but that in so doing he must breake the Law For there are some acts simply intrinsecally euill so that to doe them is to sin of which sort is the act of hating God Besides one coÌ„trary depriueth the subiect wherein it is found maketh it vncapable of the other so long as it is in it as the hate of God maketh a man vncapable of the loue of God of the hate of such things as are contrary to God should be hated So that there is a double nature of evill the one positiue the other priuatiue the one of these is the cause of the other Greg. de Valentia saith it is consequent vpon the opinion of Caietan that sin formally as sin is a positiue thing which thing he also expressly affirmeth in 1am 2ae q. 71. ar 6. There are that hold saith Cvmel that the formal nature of sin he meaneth the sin of commission consisteth in some positiue thing to witt in the manner of working freely with positiue repugnance to the rule of reason the Law of God Difformitas in actu coÌ„missionis saith Ockam non est nisi ipsemet actus elicitus contra praeceptum diuinum nihil penitus aliud dicit Qâ—…ando elicit quis actum quem non debet si non teneatur ad oppositum actum difformitas non est careÌ„tia alicuius rectitudinis debitae inesse nec illi actui nec voluntati sed si teneatur tunc est duplex peceatuÌ„ coÌ„missionis omissionis et hoc est carentia alterius actus debiti inesse et it a rectitudinis debitae inesse voluntati that is The difformity in an act of commission is nothing but the very act which is done contrary to the Law of God neither doth it imply any thing else So that when a man produceth an action which he should not do if he be not bound to do the contrary the difformity that accompanieth such an actioÌ„ is not the want of any rectitude that should be either in that action or in the will but if he be bound to do the contrary then there are 2 sins found in him the one of coÌ„missioÌ„ the other of omissioÌ„ this latter is the want of another act that should bee donne consequently of a rectitude
which they are found and so leaue him in a state wherein hee hath nothing in himselfe that can or wil procure him pardon and other which though in themselues considered and neuer remitted they bee worthy of eternall punishment yet do not so farre preuaile as to banish grace the fountaine of remission of all misdoings All sinnes then in themselues considered are mortall a as Gerson doth excellently demonstrate First because euery offence against God may iustly bee punished by him in the strictnesse of his righteous iudgments with eternall death yea with annihilation which appeareth to be most true for that there is no punishment so euill and so much to be avoided as the least sin that may be imagined so that a man should rather choose eternall death yea vtter annihilation than committe the least offence in the world Secondly the least offence that can be imagined remaining eternally in respect of the staine and guilt of it though not in act as do all sinnes vnremitted must bee punished eternally for else there might some sinnefull disorder and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 remaine not ordered by diuine iustice But wheresoeuer is eternity of punishment men are repelled from eternall life and happinesse and consequently euery offence that eternally remaineth not remitted excludeth from eternall glorie and happinesse and is rightly iudged a mortall and deadly sinne All sinnes then are mortall in them that are strangers from the life of God because they haue dominion and full command in them or are ioyned withsuch as haue and so leaue no place for grace which might cry vnto God for the remission of them But the elect and chosen seruants of God called according to purpose doe carefully indevour that no sinnes may haue dominion ouer them therefore notwithstanding any degree of sinne they runne into they retaine that grace which can and will procure pardon for all their offences Thus all sinnes in themselues considered and neuer repented of forsaken nor remitted are mortall All sinnes that against the Holy Ghost excepted are veniall ex eventu that is such as may bee and oftentimes are forgiuen through the mercifull goodnes of God though there be nothing in the parties offending while they are in such state of sinne that either can or doth cry for remission The sinnes of the just not done with full consent and therefore not excluding grace the property whereof is to procure the remission of sinnes are said to be veniall because they are such and of such nature as leaue place in that soule wherein they are for grace that may and will procure pardon By that which hath beene said I hope it doth appeare that we teach nothing touching the difference of veniall and mortall sinnes that Bellarmine himselfe can except against and that wee differ very much from the Pelagians who thought that no sinfull defect can stand with grace or a state of acceptation and fauour with God For we reject this their conceit as impious and hereticall doe confesse that all sinnes not done with full consent may stand with grace and so be rightly named veniall CHAP. 33. Of the heresie of Nestorius falsely imputed to Beza and others THe next heresie it pleaseth this heretical Romanist to charge vs with is that of the Nestorians Let vs see how he indeauoureth to fasten this impiety vpon vs. First saith he the Nestorians contemned the Fathers and so doe the Protestants therefore they are Nestorians The consequence of this argument we will not now examine But the Minor proposition is most false For we reverence and honour the Fathers much more then the Romanists doe who pervert corrupt and adulterate their writings but dare not abide the tryall of their doctrines by the indubitate writings of antiquity Secondly saith he the Nestorians affirmed that there were two persons in Christ and so divided the vnity of his Person But the Protestants thinke so likewise Therefore they are Nestorians The assumption we deny and he doth not so much as indeavour to proue it but proceedeth particularly to proue Beza a Nestorian heretique in which hee hath as ill successe as he had in the rest of his slanderous imputations Beza saith he teacheth that there are two hypostaticall vnions in Christ Ergo two hypostases or persons which was the heresie of Nestorius The consequence of this argument is too weak to inforce the intended conclusion For when Beza saith There are two hypostaticall vnions in Christ the one of the body and soule the other of the nature of God and man hee doth not conceiue that the vnion of the body and soule doe in Christ make a distinct humane person or subsistence different from that of the Sonne of God for hee euery-where confesseth that the humane nature of Christ hath no subsistence but that of the Sonne of God communicated to it but hee therefore calleth it an hypostaticall vnion because naturally it doth cause a finite distinct humane person or subsistence and so would haue done here if the nature flowing out of this vnion had not beene assumed by the sonne of God and so prevented and stayed from subsisting in it selfe and personally sustained in the person of the sonne of God This doctrine is so farre from heresie that he may justly be suspected of more then ordinarie malice that will traduce it as hereticall Yet hath Beza to stop the mouthes of such clamorous aduersaries long since corrected and altered this forme of speech which hee had sometimes vsed CHAP. 34. Of the heresies of certaine touching the Sacrament and how our men denie that to bee the body of Christ that is carried about to bee gazed on THe sixteenth heresie imputed to vs is the heresie of certaine who what they were the Iesuite knoweth not nor what their heresie was as it should seeme by his doubtfull and vncertaine manner of speaking of it This vnknowen heresie defended by he knoweth not whom he sayth Caluine Bucer Melancthon and other worthy and renowned Diuines with whom he is no way matchable either in pietie or learning though hee weare a Cardinals hatte doe teach But what monster of heresie is it that these men haue broached Surely that Christs body is not in the Sacrament or sacramentall elements but in reference to the vse appointed by Almighty God nor longer than the Sacrament may serue for our instruction and the working of our spirituall vnion with Christ and that therefore it is not the body of Christ that dogs swine and mice doe eate as the Romanists are wont to blaspheme and that it is not fit to dispute as their impious Sophisters doe of the passage of it into the stomacke belly and draught of vomiting it vp againe and resuming it when it is vomited with infinite other like fooleries which euery modest man loatheth and shameth to heare mentioned Secondly that it is not the body of Christ which the Popish Idolaters carrie about in their pompous solemne and pontificall Processions to be
not of sense and that they are subiect to no dolour or greife inward or outward this he saith is the opinion of Thomas Aquinas and some other Schoolemen The third opinion is that they are in a sorte subiect to the punishment of sense that is to greife and dolour which floweth out of the consideration of their great and inestimable losse of eternall happines but because they cannot haue remorse not hauing lost that eternall good by their owne negligence and contempt therefore they are not subiectto that dolour that is properly named the worme that neuer dieth whereof wee reade in the ninth of Marke Their worme dieth not and their fire neuer goeth out There is a fourth opinion which is that of Augustine who sayth Wee must firmely beleeue and no way doubt that not onely men that haue had the vse of reason but infants also dying in the state of originall sinne shall bee punished with the punishment of eternall fire because though they had no sinne of their owne proper action yet they haue drawne to themselues the condemnation of originall sinne by their carnall conception To this opinion Gregorius Ariminensis inclined fearing exceedingly to depart from the doctrine of the Fathers and yet dareth not resolue any thing seeing the moderne doctours went another way And to the same opinion Driedo inclineth likewise Thus then wee see that Pelagianisme was taught in the midst of the Church wherein our Fathers liued and that not by a few but many For was not this the doctrine of many in the Church that there are foure mansions in the other world of men sequestred from God and excluded out of his presence The first ofthem that sustaine the punishment as well of sensible smart as of losse and that for euer which is the condition of them that are condemned to the lowest hell The second of those that are subiect to both these punishments not eternally but for a time onely as are they that are in purgatory The third of them that were subiect onely to the punishment of losse and that but for a time named by them Limbus patrum The fourth of such as are subiect onely to the punishment of losse but yet eternally and this named by them Limbus puerorum nay were there not that placed these in an earthly paradise and was not this Pelagianisme Surely August telleth vs that the Pelagians excluded such as were not made pertakers of Gods grace out of the kingdome of heaven and from the life of God which is the vision of God and yet supposed that they should be for euer in a kind of naturall felicity so that they imagined a third state and place betweene the kingdome of heauen and hell where they are that endure not onely the punishment of losse but of sensible smart also where they are whose worme neuer dieth and whose fire neuer goeth out and this is the opinion of Papists against which Saint Austine mightily opposeth himselfe The vnregenerate is excluded out of the kingdome of heauen where Christ remaineth that is the fountaine of the liuing Giue mee besides this another place where there may bee a perpetuall rest of life the first place the faith of Catholiques by diuine authoritie beleeueth to bee the kingdome of heauen the second Hell where euery apostata and such as are aliens from the faith of Christ shall suffer everlasting punishment but that there is any third place we are altogether ignorant neither shall wee finde in the holy Scripture that there is any such place There is the right hand of him that sitteth to iudge and the left the kingdome and hell life and death the righteous and the wicked On the right hand of the Iudge are the iust and the workers of iniquity on the left There is life to the ioy of glory and death to weeping and gnashing of teeth The just are in the Kingdome of the Father with Christ the vnrighteous in eternall fire prepared for the divell and his Angels By which words of Augustine it is euident that there is no such place to bee admitted as the Papistes imagine their Limbus puerorum to bee neither did the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died beleeue any such thing though many embraced this fancie And therefore Gregorius Ariminensis hauing proued out of Augustine and Gregory that infants that die in the state of originall sinne not remitted shall not onely suffer the punishment of losse but of sense also concludeth in this sort Because I haue not seene this question expressely determined either way by the Church and it seemeth to me a thing to be trembled at to deny the authorities of the Saints and on the contrary side it is not safe to goe against the common opinion and the consent of our great Masters therefore without peremptorie pronouncing for the one side or the other I leaue it free to the Reader to judge of this difference as it seemeth good vnto him CHAP. 8. Of the remission of originall sinne and of concupiscence remaining in the regenerate IN the remission of all sinne there are two things implyed the taking away of the staine or sinfulnesse and the remouing of the punishment that for such sinfulnesse justice would bring vpon the sinner In actuall sinne there are three things considerable First an act or omission of act Secondly an habituall aversion from God and conversion to the creature remaining after the act is past till we repent of such act or omission of act and this is the staine of sinne remaining denominating the doers sinners and making them worthie of punishment And thirdly a designing to punishment after the act is past In remission therefore of actuall sinne there must bee first a ceasing from the act or omission secondly a turning to God and from the creature and thirdly for Christs sake who suffered what we deserued a taking away of the punishment that sin past made vs subject to In originall sinne there are onely two things considerable the staine or sinfulnesse and the designing of them that haue it to punishment The staine of originall sinne consisteth of two parts the one privatiue which is the want of those divine graces that should cause the knowledge loue and feare of God the other positiue and that is an habituall inclination to loue our selues more then God and inordinately to desire whatsoeuer may be pleasing to vs though forbidden and disliked by God and is named concupiscence This sin first defileth the nature and then the person in that it so misinclineth nature as that it hath the person at commaund to be swayed whether it will The remission of this sinne implieth a donation of those graces that maycause the knowledge loue and feare of God a turning of vs from the loue of our selues to the loue of God and forChrists sake a remouing of the punishment we were justly subiect to in that we had such want and inordinate inclination The donation of grace maketh
or take vpon them to prescribe inward actions of the soule or spirit or the performance of outward actions with inward affections whereas none but God that searcheth the heart canne either take knowledge of things of this kind or conuent the offenders and judge and trye them Thus then wee see what it is to binde and that none can binde men to the performance of any thing but by the feare of such punishments as they haue power to inflict CHAP. 33. Of the nature of Conscience and how the Conscience is bound IN the next place wee are to see what the nature of Conscience is and how the Conscience is bound Conscience is the priuity the soule hath to things known to none but to God her selfe Hence it is that conscience hath a fearefull apprehension of punishments for euills done though neither knowne nor possible to be knowne to any but God and the offendour alone The punishments that men can inflict wee neuer feare vnlesse our euill doings be known to them For though we haue conscience of them be priuy to them yet if they bee hidden from them vve knovv they neither vvill nor can punish vs. To binde the conscience then is to bind the soule and spirit of man with the feare of such punishments to bee inflicted by him that so bindeth as the conscience feareth that is as men feare though none but God themselues be privie to their doings Now these are onely such as God alone inflicteth therefore seeing none haue power to binde but by feare of such punishments as they haue power to inflict none can binde the conscience but God alone Neither should the question be proposed whether humane lawes binde the conscience but whether binding the outward man to the performance of outward things by force feare of outward punishments to be inflicted by men the not performance of such things or the not performance of them with such affections as were fit be not a sinne against God of which the conscience will accuse vs hee hauing commaunded vs to obey the Magistrates and Rulers hee hath set ouer vs. For answere whereunto wee say there are three sorts of things commaunded by Magistrates First euill and against God Secondly injurious in respect of them to whom they are prescribed or at least vnprofitable to the Common-wealth in which they are prescribed Thirdly such as are profitable and beneficiall to the societie of men to whom they are prescribed Touching the first sort of things God hath not commaunded vs to obey neither must we obey but rather say to them that cōmand vs such things with the Apostles whether it be fit to obey God or men judge you Yet wee must so refuse to obey that we shew no contempt of their office and authoritie which is of God though they abuse it Touching the second sort of things all that God requireth of vs is that we shew no contempt of sacred authoritie though not rightly vsed that we scandalize not others and that wee be subject to such penalties and punishments as they that commaund such things doe lay vpon vs so that God requireth our willing and ready obedience onely in things of the third sort The breach violation of this kinde of lawes is sin not for that humane lawes haue power to binde the conscience or that it is simply and absolutely sinfull to breake them but because the things they commaund are of that nature that not to performe them is contrary to justice charitie and the desire wee should haue to procure the common good of them with whom wee liue Wee are bound then sometimes to the performance of things prescribed by humane lawes in such sort that the not performance of them is sinne not ex sola legislatoris voluntate sed ex ipsa legum vtilitate as Stapleton rightly obserued But some man will say What doe the lawes then effect seeing it is the Law of Iustice and charitie that doth binde vs and not the particularitie of Lawes newly made To this wee answere that many things are good and profitable if they be generally obserued vvhich vvithout such generall obseruation vvill doe no good as for one man to pay tribute or for one man to stay his goods from transportation is no vvay beneficiall to the Common-vvealth vvhich vvould bee very profitable if all did so Novv the Lavv procureth a generall obseruation vvhence it commeth that a man is bound by the Lavv of charity and justice to that after the making of a Lavv vvhich before he vvas not bound vnto And this is it that Stapleton meaneth vvhen hee sayth that humane Lavves doe binde the conscience not ex voluntate legislatoris sed ex ipsa legum vtilitate ratione Not because they prescribe such things but because the things so prescribed if they bee generally obserued are profitable to the Common-vvealth By this vvhich hath been said it appeareth that they doe impiously vsurpe and assume to themselues that vvhich is proper to God vvho vvill haue all their Lavves taken for diuine Lavves and such as binde the conscience no lesse then the Lavves of GOD vvho publish all their Canons and constitutions in such sorte that they threaten damnation to all offenders Whereas no creature hath power to prescribe commaund or prohibite any thing vnder paine of sinne and eternall punishment vnlesse the partie so commaunded were formerly either expressely or by implication either formally or by force and vertue of some generall dutie bounde vnto it by Gods lawe before because God onely hath power of eternall life or death The soule of man as it receiueth from GOD onely the life of grace so it loseth the same when hee for the transgression of his lawes and precepts forsaketh it For as none but hee can giue this life so none but hee canne take it away hee onely hath the keyes of DAVID hee openeth and no man shutteth hee shutteth and no man openeth Hence it followeth that no law-giver may commaund any thing vnder paine of eternall punishment but God onely because he onely hath power to inflict this kinde of punishment And that no man incurreth the guilt of eternall condemnation but by violating the lawes of God Wherevpon Augustine defineth sinnes to be thoughts words and deedes against the law of God That men doe sinne in not keeping and obseruing the lawes of men it is because being generally bound by Gods lawe to doe those things which set forward the common good many things being commaunded and so generally obserued grow to bee beneficiall which without such generall observation flowing from the prescript of law were not so and so though not formally yet by vertue of generall duety men are tyed to the doing of them vnder paine of sinne and the punishments that deseruedly follow it CHAP. 34 Of their reasons who thinke that humane Law es doe binde the Conscience THe reasons which Bellarmine and other of that faction bring
Whosoeuer is angry with his brother vnaduisedly shall be guilty of judgment but whosoeuer sayth Racha shall be guiltie of a Councell and he that saith Thou foole shall be worthy to be punished with Gehenna of fire or the fierie Gehenna Thereby shewing vs that one of these offences and faults is more grieuous and worthy of greater punishment then the other for the Councell or Sanedrim did handle weightier causes and might inflict more grieuous punishments theÌ„ the set Courts of Iustice in the gates of euery city So that this is it he meant to say He that is angry with his brother vnaduisedly shall be guilty of judgment that is of some lighter punishment and he that sayth Racha shall be subject to the councell that is punished more grieuously but he that sayth Thou foole shall be punished with all extremity answering in proportion to the cruell and mercilesse burning of of men in the valley of Hinnon or the fiery Gehenna S. Augustine in his first booke De Sermone Domini in monte doth somewhat otherwise but very excellently expresse the meaning of Christs words in this sort There are sayth he degrees of sinne in this kind mentioned by Christ itaque in primo vnum est id est ira sola in secundo duo ira vox quae iram significat in tertio tria ira vox quae iram significat in voce ipsa certae vituperationis expressio Vide nunc etiam tres reatus Iudicij Concilij Gehennae ignis Nam in Iudicio adhuc defensioni datur locus ad Concilium pertinet sententiae prolatio quando non jam cum reo agitur vtrum damnandus sit sed inter se qui iudicant conferunt quo supplicio damnari oporteat quem constat esse damnandum Gehenna vero ignis nec damnationem habet dubiaÌ„ sicut Iudicium nec damnati poenam sicut ConciliuÌ„ in Gehenná quippe ignis certa est daÌ„natio poena damnati That is In the first degree there is but one thing that is anger only In the 2d two anger a voyce expressing anger In the third three anger the voyce that giueth signification of it and in the voyce it selfe an expressing of some certaine reproach See now also three guilts of judgment of Councell and the Gehenna of fire For in Iudgment there is yet place left for defence to Councell pertaineth the pronouncing of the sentence when there is no more to bee done with the partie guilty nor no further doubt whether he be to be condemned or not but they that iudge take counsell and conferre amongst themselues to what punishment they shall condemne him of whose condemnation they are already resolued but in the Gehenna of fire there is neither doubtfulnesse of condemnation as in Iudgement nor of the punishment of the condemned as in Councell For there both the condemnation is certaine and the punishment also The Papists alledge the words of Christ for proofe of veniall sinnes because onely the last degree of vnaduised and causelesse anger is pronounced worthy to be punished with Gehenna of fire or hell fire Whence they thinke it may be concluded that other degrees of causelesse anger though sinfull yet do not subiect men to any punishment in hell and consequently are by nature veniall But if we vnderstand that Christ alluded to the different courts of justice amongst the Iewes their proceedings in the same and the diuersity of punishments which they inflicted more or lesse grieuous as Sigonius in his booke Derepub Hebraeorum and other excellently learned doe then by Gehenna of fire is not simply meant hell fire which is the generall punishment of damned sinners but the greatest extremity of punishment in hell expressed by comparison with the cruell torments which they indured that were consumed in fire in Gehenna or the valley of Hinnon farre more intollerable then were the punishments inflicted by the Iudgement or Councell to which the lighter and lesser punishments in hell due to lesser and lighter sinnes may be resembled And though wee vnderstand the words as Augustine doth yet is not their errour confirmed by this place for as he fitly noteth whereas to kill is more greeuous then to wrong by contumelious and railing speeches amongst the Pharisees onely killing was thought to make a man guilty of judgement But heere anger the least of all the sinnes mentioned by Christ is by him pronounced guilty of judgement and whereas amongst them the question of murther was brought before the iudgement seate of men here all things are left to the judgement of God where the end of the condemned and guilty is hell fire And for farther cleering of this point he addeth that if any man shall say that murther as more greiuous is to be punished more grieuously according to the rule of iustice then with hell fire if rayling speeches be punishable with hell fire hee will force vs to acknowledge diuerse hells or kindes and degrees of punishments in hell So farre was Augustine from imagining any such difference of sinnes whereof some should be worthy to be punished in hell and some not to be proued out of this place as our aduersaries would enforce and vrge CHAP. 10. Of the sâ—…t Courts amongst the Iewes their authority and continuance TOuching the Tribunals and iudgements that were in euery city God sayd vnto Moses Thou shalt appoint thee Iudges and Magistrates in all thy cityes and againe They shall goe vp to the Iudges that sit in the gates of the city But the Sanedrim or great Councell of State consisted of the King the twelue Princes of the people the seaventy Elders the high Priest the chiefe Priests and the Scribes And this Councell was first in Siloh afterwards at Hierusalem first in the tribe of Ephraim and after in the tribe of Iudah and after the rent of the tenne tribes none but the elders of Iudah and Beniamin and the Priests and Leuites entred into this Councell This Councell either the King or high Priest called according as the matter to bee heard touched Religion or the common-wealth But after the returne from Babylon the high Priest was alwayes chiefe and gouerned with the Elders and chiefe Priests For there were no more kings of Iudah after that time but the kings of Persia Aegypt and Syria had the command ouer Iudaea and made the Iewes pay tribute vnto them Of this Councell almighty God did speake when he said If there arise a matter too hard for thee in iudgement between bloud and bloud between plea plea betweene plague and plague in matters of controversie within thy gates then shalt thou arise goe vp to the place which the Lord thy God shall chuse and thou shalt come vnto the Priests of the Leuites vnto the Iudge that shall be in those dayes aske they shall shew thee the sentence of iudgment thou shalt doe according vnto that thing which they of
state But when Herod swaied the Scepter flue all those that he found to be of the bloud royall of Iudah and tooke away all power and authority that the Sanedrim formerly had then the Scepter departed from Iudah and the Law-giuer from betweene his feete so that then was the time for the Shiloh to come CHAP. 11. Of the manifestation of God in the flesh the causes thereof and the reason why the second Person in the Trinitie rather tooke flesh then either of the other GOd therefore in that fulnesse of time sent his Sonne in our flesh to sit vpon the throne of Dauid and to bee both a King and Priest ouer his house for euer concerning whom three things are to bee considered First his humiliation abasing himselfe to take our nature and become man Secondly the gifts and graces he bestowed on the nature of man when he assumed it into the vnitie of his Person Thirdly the things hee did and suffered in it for our good In the Incarnation of the Sonne of God we consider first the necessity that God should become man secondly the fitnesse and conuenience that the second Person rather then any other Thirdly the manner how this strange thing was wrought brought to passe Touching the necessity that God should become man there are two opinions in the Romane schooles For some thinke that though Adam had neuer sinned yet it had beene necessary for the exaltation of humane nature that God should haue sent his Sonne to become man but others are of opinion that had it not beene for the deliuering of man out of sinne and misery the Sonne of God had neuer appeared in our flesh Both these opinions sayth Bonauentura are Catholique and defended by Catholiques whereof the former seemeth more consonant to reason but the later to the piety of faith because neither Scripture nor Fathers doe euer mention the Incarnation but when they speake of the redemption of mankind soe that seeing nothing is to be beleeued but what is proued out of these it sorteth better with the nature of right beliefe to thinke the Sonne of God had neuer become the Sonne of man if man had not sinned then to thinke the contrary Venit filius hominis sayth Augustine saluum facere quod perierat Si homo non perijsset filius hominis non venisset nulla causa fuit Christo veniendi nisi peccatores saluos facere Tolle morbos tolle vuluera nulla est medicinae causa that is The Sonne of man came to saue that which was lost If man had not perished the sonne of man had not come there was no other cause of Christs comming but the saluation of sinners Take away diseases wounds and hurts and what neede is there of the Phisition or Surgeon Wherefore resoluing with the Scriptures and Fathers that there was no other cause of the incarnation of the Sonne of God but mans redemption let vs see whether so great an abasing of the sonne of God were necessary for the effecting hereof Surely there is no doubt but that Almighty God whose wisdome is incomprehensible and power infinite could haue effected this worke by other meanes but not soe well beseeming his truth and justice whereupon the Diuines doe shew that in many respects it was fit and necessary for this purpose that God should become man First ad fidem firmandam to settle men in a certaine and vndoubted perswasion of the truth of such things as are necessary to be beleeued vt homo fidentiùs ambularet ad veritatem sayth Augustine ipsa veritas Dei filius homine assumpto constituit fundauit fidem that is That man might more assuredly and without danger of erring approach vnto the presence of sacred truth it selfe the sonne of God assuming the nature of man setled and founded the faith and shewed what things are to be beleeued Secondly ad rectam operationem to direct mens actions for whereas man that might be seene might not safely be followed and God that was to bee imitated and followed could not be seene it was necessary that God should become man that hee whom man was to follow might shew himselfe vnto man and be seene of him Thirdly ad ostendendam dignitatem humanae Naturae to shew the dignitie and excellencie of humane nature that no man should any more soe much forget himselfe as to defile the same with finfull impurities Demonstrauit nobis Deus sayth Augustine quà m excelsum locum inter creaturas habeat humana natura in hoc quòd hominibus in vero homine apparuit that is God shewed vs how high a place the nature of man hath amongst his creatures in that he appeared vnto men in the nature and true being of a man Agnosce sayth Leo O Christiane dignitatem tuam diuinae consors factus naturae noli in veterem vilitatem degeneri conuersatione redire that is Take knowledge ô Christian man of thine owne worth and dignity and being made partaker of the diuine nature returne not to thy former basenesse by an vnfitting kind of life conuersation Lastly it was necessary the Sonne of God should become man ad liberandum hominem à seruitute peccati to deliuer man from the slauery and bondage of sinne For the performance whereof two things were to be done For first the justice of God displeased with sinne committed against him was to bee satisfied and secondly the breach was to be made vp that was made vpon the whole nature of man by the same neither of which things could possibly be perforned by man or Angell or by any creature For touching the first the wrath of God displeased with sinne and the punishments which in iustice he was to inflict vpon sinners for the same were both infinite because the offence was infinite and therefore none but a person of infinite worth value and vertue was able to endure the one and satisfie the other If any man shall say it was possible for a meere man stayed by diuine power and assistance to feele smart and paine in proportion answering to the pleasure of sin which is but finite and to indure for a time the losse of all that infinite comfort solace that is to be found in God answering to that aversion from God that is in sinne which is infinite and so to satisfie his justice he considereth not that though such a man might satisfie for his owne sinne yet not for the sinnes of all other who are in number infinite vnlesse his owne person were eminently as good as all theirs and vertually infinite Secondly that though he might satisfie for his owne actuall sin yet he could not for his originall sin which being the sin of nature cannot be satisfied for but by him in whom the whole nature of man in some principall sort is found Thirdly he considereth not that it is impossible that any sinner should of himselfe euer cease from sinning and that therefore seeing
so long as sinne remaineth the guilt of punishment remaineth he must be euerlastingly punished if he suffer the punishment due to his euerlasting sinne and consequently that he cannot so suffer the punishments due to his actuall sinnes as hauing satisfied the vvrath and justice of God to free himselfe from the same If it be said that by grace he may cease from sinning and so suffer the punishment due to sin so ceasing and not eternall it vvill be replyed that God giueth not his grace to any till his justice be first satisfied and a reconciliation procured for hee giueth it to his friends not to his enemies Touching the second thing that vvas to be done for mans deliuerance vvhich vvas the making vp of the breach made vpon the nature of man the freeing him from the impuritie of inherent sinne that so the punishment due to sinne past being felt and suffered he might be reconciled to God it could not bee performed by any meere creature vvhatsoeuer For as all fell in Adam the roote and beginning of naturall being vvho receiued the treasures of righteousnesse and holinesse for himselfe and those that by propagation vvere to come of him so their restauration could not bee vvrought but by him that should be the roote fountaine and beginning of supernaturall and spirituall being in whom the whole nature of mankind should be found in a more eminent sort then it was in Adam as indeed it was in the second Adam of whose fulnesse we all receiue grace for grace And this surely was the reason why it was no injustice in God to lay vpon him the punishments due to our sinnes and why his sufferings doe free vs from the same It is no way just that one man hauing no speciall communion with another should suffer punishment for another mans fault but the whole nature of man being found in him in a more eminent sort then either in Adam or any one of them that came of him he hauing vndertaken to free deliuer it it was just right he should feele the miseries it was subiect vnto that being felt and sustained by him in such sort as was sufficient to satisfie diuine justice they should not be imposed or laid on vs. Hereupon some haue said that Christ was made sin not by acting or cōtracting sin for so to say were horrible blasphemy but by taking on him the guilt of all mens sinnes which yet is wisely to be vnderstood lest we run into errour For whereas the guilt of sin implieth two things a worthines to be punished a destination vnto punishment the former implieth demerite naturall or personall in him that is so worthy to bee punished this could not be in Christ the other which is obligatio ad poenam a being subject vnto punishment may grow from some cōmunion with him or them that are worthy to be punished And in this sense some say Christ took the guilt of our sins not by acting or contracting sin but by communion with sinners though not in sin yet in that nature which in them is sinfull guilty as those good men that are parts of a sinfull City are justly subject to the punishments due to that City not in that they haue fellowship with it in euill but in that they are parts of it being euill as the son of a traitor is justly subject to the grievous punishment of forfeiting the inheritance that should haue descended vpon him from his father though hee no way concurred with him in his treason in respect of his nearenesse cōmunion with him of whom he is as it were a part Wherupon all Divines resolue that men altogether innocent yet liuing as parts of the societies of wicked men are justly subiect to those temporal punishments those societies are worthy of that the reason why one man cannot bee subject to those spirituall punishments which others deserue is for that in respect of the spirit inward man they haue no such derivation frō dependance on or cōmuniō with others as in respect of the outward man they haue Wherefore to conclude this point we may safely resolue that no other could satisfie diuine justice and suffer the punishments due to sinne in such sort as to free vs from the same but Christ the Sonne of God in whom our nature by personall vnion was found in an excellent sort and that it was right and just that hauing taken our nature vpon him vndertaken to free and deliuer the same hee should suffer endure whatsoeuer punishments it was subject vnto For the illustration of this point the learned obserue that when God created Adam he gaue him all excellent precious vertues as Truth to instruct him Iustice to direct him Mercy to preserue him and Peace to delight him with all pleasing correspondence but that when he fell away forgate all the good which God had done for him these vertues left their lower dwellings and speedily returned backe to him that gaue them making report what was fallen out on earth and earnestly mouing the Almighty concerning this his wretched and forlorne creature yet in very different sort and maner For Iustice pleaded for the condemnation of sinfull man and called for the punishment hee had worthily deserued and Truth required the performance of that which God had threatned but Mercy intreated for miserable man made out of the dust of the earth seduced by Satan and beguiled with the shewes of seeming good Peace no lesse carefully sought to pacifie the wrath of the displeased God and to reconcile the Creature to the Creator When God had heard the contrary pleas and desires of these most excellent Orators and there was no other meanes to giue them all satisfaction it was resolued on in the high Councell of the blessed Trinity that one of those sacred Persons should become man that by taking to him the nature of man he might partake in his miseries and be subject to his punishments and by conjoyning his diuine nature and perfection with the same might fill it with all grace and heavenly excellencie Thus were the desires of these so contrary Petitioners satisfied for man was punished as Gods Iustice vrged that was performed which God had threatned as Truth required the offender was pittied as Mercy intreated and God man reconciled as Peace desired and so was fulfilled that of the Psalmist Mercy and Truth are met together Righteousnesse and Peace haue kissed each other Wherefore now let vs proceede to see which of the Persons of the blessed Trinity was thought fittest to be sent into the world to performe this worke Not the Father for being of none he could not be sent Not the holy Ghost for though he proceede yet he is not the first proceeding Person and therefore whereas a double mission was necessary the one to reconcile the other to giue gifts to reconciled friends the first proceeding Person was fittest for the first
will not conceiue that they may haue something to say against vs are all easily cleared and answered by this explication of the same By that which hath beene sayd touching Christs being a Mediatour according to both natures wee may easily vnderstand how and according to what nature hee is Head of the Church In a naturall Head Bonauentura obserueth three things the first that it is Conforme caeteris membris the second that it is Principium membrorum and the third that it is Influxiuum sensus motus that is first that it hath conformitie of nature with the rest of the members of the body Secondly that it is the first chiefest and in a sort the beginning of all the members and thirdly that from it influence of sense and motion doth proceede and hee sheweth the same to bee found in Christ the mysticall head of the Church For first hee hath conformitie of nature with them that are members of his body the Church in that he is Man Whereupon S. Augustine sayth Vnius naturae sunt vitis palmites the vine and the branches are of the same nature And secondly as the naturall head is the chiefest and most principall of all the members so is Christ more excellent then they that are Christs Omnia membra faciunt vnum corpus sayth S. Augustine multum tamen interest inter caput caetera membra Etenim in caeteris membris non sentis nisi tactu tangendo sentis in caeteris membris in capite autem vides audis olfacis gustas tangis All the members make one body yet is there great difference between the head and the rest of the members for in the rest a man hath no sense but that of feeling in the rest he discerneth by feeling but in the Head heseeth and heareth and smelleth and tasteth and feeleth So in the members of Christs mysticall body which is the Church there are found diuersities of gifts operations administrations and to one is giuen the word of wisdoâ—… to another the word of knowledge to another faith to another the gift of healing to another the operation of great workes and to another prophesie but to the man Christ the spirit was giuen without stint or measure and in him was found the fulnesse of all grace The third property of a naturall Head which is the iufluence of Senâ—…e and Motion agreeth vnto Christ in respect of his humanity and diuinity both For hee giueth influence of diuine sense and motion two waies per modum praeparantis and per modum impertientis that is by preparing and making men fitte to receiue grace by imparting it to them that are fitted prepared He prepareth and fitteth men to the receipt of Grace by the acts of his humanity in which hee suffered death dying satisfied Gods wrath remoued all matter of dislike meritted the fauour and acceptation of God and soe made men fitte to receiue the grace of God and to enioy his fauour Hee imparteth and conferreth grace by the operation and working of his diuine nature it being the proper worke of God to inlighten the vnderstandings of men and to soften their hearts So that to conclude this point we may resolue that the grace in respect whereof Christ is Head of the Church is of two sorts the one created and habituall the other increate and of Vnion In respect of the one hee giueth grace effectiuè by way of efficiencie in respect of the other dispositiuè by way of disposition fitting vs that an impression of grace may be made in vs. CHAP. 17. Of the things which Christ suffered for vs to procure our reconciliation with God HAuing shewed how Christ as a Mediator interposed himselfe between God and vs when we were his enemies and how he is the Head of that blessed company of them that beleeuing in him looke for saluation let vs see consider first what he suffered for vs to reconcile vs vnto God secondly what he did for vs thirdly what the benefits are that hee bestoweth on vs and fourthly to whom he committed the dispensation of the rich treasures of his graces the word of reconciliation and the guiding and gouerning of the people which hee purchased as a peculiar inheritance to himselfe Touching the first to wit the sufferings of Christ he was by them to satisfie the justice of God his Father displeased with vs for sinne that so wee might bee reconciled vnto him Wherefore that wee may the better conceiue what was necessary to be done or suffered to satisfie the justice of God wee must consider sinne in the nature of a wrong and in the nature of sin In the nature of a wrong and so two things were required for the pacifying of Gods wrath for first he that hath done wrong must restore that he vnjustly tooke away from him whom he wronged and secondly hee must do something in recompence of the wrong he did as if hee tooke away another mans good name by false and lying reports hee must not only restore it to him againe by acknowledging that the things were vntrue which in defamation of him hee had spoken but he must also take all occasions to raise continue and increase a good opinion of him If sinne be considered in the nature of sinne it implyeth in it two things debitum poenae and debitum neglectae obedientiae that is a debt of punishment and a debt of obedience then neglected when it should haue been performed and therefore in the satisfaction that is to reconcile us to God displeased with vs for sinne as sinne two things must be implyed for first the punishment must be sustained that sinne deserued and secondly that obedience must be performed that should haue been yeelded whilest sinne was committed but was neglected For if only the punishment be sustained we may escape the condemnation of death but we cannot inherit eternall life vnlesse the righteousnesse and obedience which Gods law requireth be found in vs also Now the law of God requireth obedience not only in the present time and time to come but from the beginning of our life to the end of the same if wee desire to inherit the promised blessednesse And though the performance of that obedience that was neglected may seeme to be in the nature of merit rather then satisfaction yet in that it is not simply the meriting and procuring of fauour and acceptation but the recouering of lost friendship and the regaining of renewed loue it is rightly esteemed to pertaine vnto satisfaction Touching sinne considered in the nature of an offence wrong and the things required to pacifie Gods wrath in that respect there is no question but that the sinner himselfe that wronged God in sinning must by sorrow of heart disliking and detesting and by confession of mouth condemning former euils restore that glory to God hee tooke from him and seeke and take all occasions the weaknes of his meanes wil affoord
to glorifie God as much as he dishonoured him before and God accepteth weake indeauours as sufficient in this kind CHRIST hauing perfectly satisfied for us as a publicke person may accept of a meane and weake satisfaction for the wrong done to him but must inflict punishment answerable to the fault to satisfie publique justice offended by that wrong Wherefore passing from this kinde of satisfaction let vs speake of that other that God requireth standing in the suffering of punishments due to sinne Some define this kind of satisfaction to be the suffering of the punishments that God inflicteth or wherewith a man voluntarily punisheth himselfe but this is not a good definition For as a thiefe or murtherer may not lay violent hands on himself be his owne executioner when he hath offended to satisfie publique Iustice but must submit himself to that which authority will lay on him so it is so farre frō being any satisfaction to Gods Iustice for a man when he hath sinned to become his own executioner to punish himselfe for his sin to satisfie the Iustice of God that it highly displeaseth God It is true indeede that we may lawfully afflict our selues not to satisfie Gods Iustice but to purge out the drosse of that sinfull impuritie that cleaueth to vs and to cure the wounds of our soules as wee may afflict our selues by fasting watching and abstaining from many things otherwise lawfull for the freeing of our selues from the remaines of our former excessiue and immoderate delight in eating drinking surfeiting and riot other abuses of the good creatures of God So that we must not define satisfaction to bee the suffering of those punishments that God inflicteth or wherewith the sinner punisheth himself for it is only the sustaining of those that God in Iustice doth inflict And in this sort Christ satisfied his Fathers wrath not by punishing himself but by being obedient to his Father euen vnto the death Wherefore let vs proceed more particularly to consider the satisfactory sufferings of Christ see first what punishments Christ suffered to pacifie his Fathers wrath and secondly what the manner of his passion was Touching the punishments that Christ suffered they were not ordinary but beyond measure grievous bitter insupportable yea such as would haue made any meere creature to sinke down vnder the burthen of thē to the bottome of Hell For he suffered grieuous things from all the things in Heauen Earth Hell in all that any way pertained to him He suffered at the hands of God his Father and of Men of Iewes of Gentiles of enemies insulting of friends forsaking of the Prince of darknes all his cruell mercilesse instruments of the elements of the world the Sun denying to giue him light the aire breath the earth supportance Hee suffered in all that pertained to him In his name being condemned as a blasphemer as an enemy to Moses the Law the Temple worship of God to his own Nation to Caesar the Romans a glutton a cōpanion with Publicans sinners a Samaritan one that had a Diuell did all his miracles by the power of Beelzebub In the things he possessed when they stripped him out of his garments cast lots on his seamelesse coate In his friends greatly distressed discomforted with the sight of those things that fell out vnto him according to that which was prophesied before The Shepheard shall be smitten the sheep shall be scattered In his body when his hands feete were nailed his sides goared his head pierced with the crown of thorns his cheeks swollen with buffering his face defiled with spitting vpon his eyes offended with beholding the scornefull behauiour of his proud insulting enemies his eares with hearing the wordes of their execrable blasphemy his taste with the myrrhe gall that they gaue him in his drinke his smell with the stinch and horrour of the place wherein he was crucified being a place of dead mens skuls Lastly in his soule distressed with feares compassed about with sorrowes besetting him on euery side that euen vnto death In so wofull sort did he take on him our defects and suffer our punishments But because we may as well enlarge and amplifie Christs passions and sufferings too much as extenuate them too much let vs see if it bee possible the vttermost extent of that he suffered For the clearing hereof some say that he suffered all those punishments that were beseeming him or behoofefull for vs that hee suffered all those punishments that neither prejudice the plenitude of sanctitie nor science But that wee may the better informe our selues touching this point wee must obserue that the punishments of sinne are of three sorts First Culpa Secondly ex culpa ad culpam Thirdly ex culpa sed nec culpa nec ad culpam that is First sinne Secondly something proceeding from sinne and inducing to sin Thirdly things proceeding from sin that neither are sins nor incline and induce to sinne Examples of the first are Enuie afflicting the mind of the proud man grieuous disorders accompanying the drunkard and a reprobate sense following the contempt of Gods worshippe and seruice Of the second naturall concupiscence pronenesse to euill difficulty to doe good contrariety in the faculties of the soule and repugnance and resistance of the meaner against the better Examples of the third which are things proceeding from sin but neither sinnes nor inclinations to sinne are hunger thirst weakenesse nakednesse and death it selfe The punishments of this last sort onely Christ suffered and neither of the former two for neither was there sin in him nor any thing inclining him to euill or discouraging him from good The punishments of this kinde are of two sorts Naturall and Personall Naturall are such as follow the whole nature of man as hunger thirst labour wearinesse and death it selfe Personall are such as grow out of some imperfection and defect in the vertue and faculty forming the body disorder in diet or some violence offered and these are found but in some particular men and not in all men generally as Leprosies Agues Gowts the like All those punishments that are punishments only that are from without and that are common to the whole nature of Men Christ suffered that came to bee a Redeemer of all without respect of persons but such as flow from sin dwelling within or proceed from particular causes or are proper to some and not common to all hee suffered not The punishments that are punishments onely and not sinne and are common to the whole nature of man are likewise of two sorts for either they are suffered for sinne imputed or sinne inherent For one may bee punished either for his owne fault or the fault of another in some sort imputed to him When a man is punished for his owne fault hee hath remorse of conscience blaming and condemning him as hauing brought such euils vpon himselfe by
minde the distance and disproportion that we know to be betweene them and vs together with our dependance of them or subiection to them This kinde of feare causeth and produceth all acts of Reuerence Adoration It is found in the Angels and spirits of iust perfect men is more excellent then any other vertue The greatnesse that is found in thinges that are euill causeth a feare declining them as euill which is of diuerse sorts For first there is an Humane feare which maketh men more decline the losse of their liues good estates then the losse of the fauour of God Secondly there is a Mundane feare that causeth them to decline the disfauour of the world more then the displeasure of Almighty God and these two kindes of feare driue men from God but there are other kindes which driue them vnto God The first whereof is a Seruile feare that maketh men leaue the act of sinne both inward outward to auoid punishment though they retaine the loue liking of it The second is an Initiall feare that maketh them cast from them the very desire of sinning not out of the loue of God which they haue not yet attained vnto but out of the consideration of the wofull consequence of it and thirdly there is a Filiall feare proceeding from the loue of God causing vs to decline the offending of him whom we so dearely loue and of whom wee are so dearely loued more then any euill whatsoeuer The former kindes of feare that driue men from God could not bee found in Christ who was not onely nearely ioyned vnto God but God himselfe blessed for evermore for neither did hee prize life nor the fauour of the world that knew him not at any higher rate then was fit Of the later sorts of feare neither Seruile nor Initiall were in him that was free from all sinne and touching Filiall feare being well assured of his owne power in respect whereof it was impossible for him to be drawn to the committing of any euill though he had that part of it which standeth in declining the offence of GOD more then any euill in the world yet not that other that proceedeth from the consideration of the danger of being drawen therevnto so that hee could not feare lest hee should fall into sinne Besides all these kindes of feare whereof some driue men from God and some bring them to God there is another which is the ground of them all named Naturall feare which is the declining of any thing that is hurtfull or contrary to the desired good of him that feareth This Naturall feare as also the feare of Reuerence that part of Filiall feare that is the declining of sinne and the displeasing of God was found in Christ as all other sinlesse and harmelesse affections were For in the nature of man he reuerenced and adored the Maiesty of God his Father and with a Naturall feare declined death and the bitternesse of that cuppe he was to drinke of and with a Filiall feare declined the offending of God his Father more then hell it selfe But passing by the feare of Reuerence and that part of Filiall feare that was found in Christ concerning which there is no question among the Diuines that wee may the better discerne both what his Naturall feare was and in respect whereof wee must note that feare is first in respect of things which cannot bee auoided neither by resistance and encounter nor by flying from them which things though they may seeme rather to make an impression of sorrow then feare because in respect of their certainty they are rather apprehended as present then future yet for that wee know not experimentally how we shall bee afflicted with them and in what sort wee shall sustaine and beare them we may rightly be said to feare them Secondly in respect of such things as may be escaped or ouercome with a kinde of vncertainty of euent and danger of the issue Thirdly in respect of such as may be escaped or ouercome without any vncertainty of the euent or issue though not without great conflict and labour These kindes of Naturall feare thus distinguished it is easie to see what Christ feared and in what sort For first hee feared death and the stroke of the iustice of God his Father sitting on the Tribunall or Iudgement seate to punish the sinnes of men for whom hee stood forth to answere that day and secondly hee feared euerlasting destruction The former of these hee feared as things impossible to be escaped in respect of the resolution and purpose of God his Father that by his satisfactory death and suffering and no other way man should be deliuered The later hee feared that is declined as a thing he knew he should escape without all doubt or vncertainty of euent though not without conflicting with the temptations of Sathan and the enduring of many bitter and grieuous things for it was no otherwise possible for him hauing put himselfe into the communion of our nature to escape the swallowing vp of that gulfe into which wicked sinners sinke downe but by resisting the temptations of sinne that it might not enter into him by breaking off the same in others and by suffering whatsoeuer it had deserued But some man will say Beza teacheth that Christus veritus est succumbere absorberi à morte that is that Christ feared to sinke downe and to bee swallowed vp of death and consequently that he feared euerlasting destruction with an vncertainty of his escape from the same It is true that Beza saith that Christ feared to sinke downe and to bee swallowed vp of death yet doth not that follow whâ—…ch is alledged as a consequent of his saying nor any thing contrary to that hath beene said of vs. For whereas there is a double apprehension of reason in Christ the one named Superior that looketh into things with all circumstances the other Inferiour that presenteth to the minde of man some circumstances and not all Beza teacheth that Christ feared to sinke downe and to be swallowed vp of death that is that he so declined the swallowing gulfe of death out of which he saw no escape within the view of Inferiour reason presenting vnto him this hideous destroying euill in it owne nature endlesse without shewing the issue out of the same that yet notwithstanding simply he feared it not Superiour reason clearely shewing him the issue out of it This wil not seem strange vnto vs if we consider that in Christ euery faculty power part was suffered notwithstaÌ„ding the perfectioÌ„ found in some other to do that which properly pertained to it from hence it is easie to discerne how it came to passe that Christ should desire and pray for that which he knew should neuer be granted as namely that the cup of death might passe from him For the sense of nature Inferiour reason presented death the ignominie of the Crosse vnto him
gratiâ infinita increata That is Christ merited for all sufficiently on his part in that grace was found in him not as in a particular man but as in the Head of the whole Church for which cause the fruit of his passion might redound to all the members of the same Church and because as Damascene sayth by reason of the vnion of the natures of God and Man in his Person he doth the workes of a man in a more excellent sort then any meere man can do the benefite and force of his working and operation extended to the whole nature of Man which the action of a meere man cannot do The reason of which difference is not to be attributed to any habituall created grace but to that which is increate for that the finite grace that is in Christ that is his vertue and worke of vertue is availeable for the good of many it is from his infinite and increate Grace CHAP. 21. Of the benefits which wee receiue from Christ. HAuing spoken of the Satisfaction and Merit of Christ it remaineth that we speake of the benefites which we receiue from him which are all most fully expressed by the name of redemption which is the freeing of vs from that miserable bondage and captiuity wherein we were formerly holden by reason of Adams sin This bondage was twofold first in respect of sin and secondly in respect of punishment In respect of sinne we were bondmen to Sathan whose will we did according to that of the Apostle His seruants ye are to whom ye obey In respect of punishment we were become bondmen to Almighty God the righteous Iudge of the world who vseth Sathan as an instrument of his wrath and an Executioner of his dreadfull Iudgments against such as do offend him and prouoke him to wrath These being the kinds of captivity and bondage wherein we were holden it will not be hard to see how we are freed and redeemed from the same There is no redemption as the Diuines do note but either by exchange of prisoners by force and strong hand or by paying of a price Redemption by exchange of prisoners is then when wee set free those whom we hold as captiues taken from our Enemies that they may make free such as they hold of ours and this kind of redemption hath no place in the deliuerance of sinnefull men from sinne and misery but their deliuerance is onely wrought by strong hand and paying of a price For Christ redeemed vs from the bondage of sinne in that by the force and working of his grace making vs dislike it hate it repent of it and leaue it he violently tooke vs out of Sathans hands who tyrannically and vnjustly had taken possession of vs but from the bondage of punishment in respect whereof we were become Bondmen to Almighty God hee redeemed vs not by force and strong hand but by paying a price satisfying his justice and suffering what our sinnes had deserued that so being pacified towards vs he migh cease to punishvs and discharge Sathan who was but the Executioner of his wrath from afflicting vs any longer In this sort do wee conceiue of the worke of our redemption wrought for vs by Christ and therefore it is absurdly and vntruely sayd by Matthew Kellison in his late published Suruey of the supposed new religion that we make Christ an absurd Redeemer for we speake no otherwise of Christ the Redeemer then we haue learned in the Church and House of God But for the satisfaction of the Reader let vs see how he goeth about to conuince vs of such absurdity as hee chargeth vs with The Protestants sayth he do teach thē which nothing can be more absurd that Christs passion was our Iustice Merit Satisfactiō that there is no Iustice but Christs no good workes but his workes no merit but his merite no satisfaction but his satisfaction that there is noe justice or sanctitie inherent in man nor none necessary that no Lawes can bind vs because Christs death was the ransome that freed us from all Lawes Diuine Humane that no sinnes nor euil workes can hurt vs because Christs Iustice being ours no sinnes can make vs sinners that no Hell or Iudgment remaineth for vs whatsoeuer wee doe because Christs Iustice being ours sins can neither be imputed to vs in this life nor punished in the next and that herein consisteth Christian liberty A more shamelesse slanderer and trifling smatterer I thinke was neuer heard of For some of these assertions are vndoubted truths against which no man may oppose himselfe vnlesse he will be branded with the marke of impiety and blasphemy as that Christs passion is our justice merite and satisfaction that there is no merite properly soe named but Christs merite no propitiatory and expiatory satisfaction but Christs satisfaction and the other are nothing else but shamelesse and hellish slaunders and meere deuices and fancies of his idle braine without all ground of truth as that there is no justice nor sanctity inherent in Man nor none necessary that good workes are not necessary that noe lawes canne binde vs that noe sinnes nor euill workes canne hurt vs and that no hell nor judgment remaineth for vs whatsoeuer wee doe For we most constantly affirme and teach that there is both justice and sanctity inherent in Man though not so perfect as that hee may safely trust vnto it desire to bee judged according to the perfection of it in the day of Tryall Likewise wee teach that good workes are in such sort necessary to saluation that without Holinesse a desire at the least to performe the workes of sanctification no man shall euer see God Neither doe we say that no Lawes can binde vs as he slaunderously misreporteth vs but wee constantly teach that not to doe the things contained prescribed in the Law of God is damnable damning sinne if God vpon our repentance forgiue it not And therefore Bellarmine though hee wrongeth vs in like sort as Kellison doth yet in the end like an honest man he confesseth ingenuously that he doth wrong vs and sheweth at large that Luther in his booke de votis Monasticis defineth the liberty of a Christian to consist not in being freed from the duty of doing the things prescribed in the Law of God as if at his pleasure he might doe them or leaue them vndone but in that there are no works forbidden in the Law that may stand with Faith so euill that they can condemne vs nor none there prescribed performed by vs so good as to cleare defend justifie vs So making vs free non ab operibus faciendis sed defendentibus accusantibus that is not from the necessitie of doing the things that are commaunded as good but from seeking justification in workes or fearing condemnation for such euil workes as wee consent not fully vnto but dislike resist against and seeke remission of Whereunto Caluin agreeth teaching that Christian
excommunication they may restraine from vse of Sacraments societie of Beleeuers and benefite of the Churches praiers so by Absolution they may free from all these bonds againe Neither is this kinde of binding and loosing lightly to bee esteemed of or little regarded for he that for his contempt and disobedience is debarred from the vfe of the Sacraments from enjoying the societie of the beleeuers and partaking in the benefite of the Churches prayers is vndoubtedly excluded from all accesse to the Throne of grace in Heauen all acceptation there so consequently no lesse bound in Heauen then in Earth and he that is vnloosed from these bonds on Earth is vnloosed and set free in Heauen that without all restraint he may goe boldly to the Throne of Grace to seeke helpe in the time of neede Thus wee see the diuerse kindes of binding and loosing that the Guides of Gods Church haue power and authority by Lawes and precepts censures and punishments to binde those that are committed to their care and trust and when they see cause by reuersing such Lawes and precepts wholly or in part and by diminishing releasing taking away such censures and punishments to vnty them and set them free againe The bond of Diuine Lawes they may no otherwise meddle with then by letting them know who are so bound how straightly they are tyed The bonds of sinne and punishments by Diuine Iustice to be inflicted they haue no power and authoritie to vnloose but they concurre as helpers to the vnloosing of them by the Ministery of the Word vvinning and persvvading men to convert vnto God to cast their sinnes from them and by the Sacraments instrumentally communicating vnto them the grace of repentant conversion and the assurance of remission and pardon In all these kindes of binding and loosing the Apostles were equall seeing our Aduersaries themselues confessing they had the same power of Order and jurisdiction in like extent within the compasse whereof all these kinds of binding and loosing are confined Wherefore let vs proceede to speake of the power of remitting and retaining sinnes giuen to the Apostles by Christ our Sauiour To remit sinne properly is nothing else but to resolue not to punish sinne and therefore hee onely may properly be sayd to remit sinne that hath power to punish it Now as sinne is committed against the prescript of God our Conscience and Men in authority soe GOD the conscience of the Sinner and the Magistrate and Minister haue power to punish sinne GOD with punishments temporall and eternall of this life and that which is to come the Conscience with remorse the Magistrate with death banishment Confiscation of goods imprisonment and the like and the guides of the Church with suspension excommunication degradation and such other censures Hence it followeth that GOD onely is sayd properly to remitte the punishments that his justice doth inflict that the conscience onely vpon repentance canne take away that bitter and aflictiue punishment of remorse wherewith shee is wont to torment and disquiet the minde of the offendour and that the Magistrate and Minister onely haue power to take away those punishments that in their seuerall courses they may and doe inflict Notwithstanding the Minister by the Word perswading men to repentance procuring remission and out of his prudent obseruation of the parties conuersion vnto GOD assuring him that it will goe well vvith him as also by the Sacrament instrumentally communicating to him as well the grace of repentant conuersion as of free remission that soe hee may heare the very sound and voyce of GOD in mercy saying to the heart and spirit of the repentant Sinner I am thy Saluation may bee sayd in a sort to remitte sinne euen in that it is an offence against GOD not by way of authority and power but by winning and perswading the sinner to that conuersion which obtaineth remission from GOD and by the Sacrament instrumentally making him partaker as well of the grace of remission of sinne from GOD as of conuersion from sinne to GOD. There are but foure things in the hand of the Minister the Word Prayer Sacraments and Discipline By the word of Doctrine hee frameth winneth and perswadeth the sinner to repentant conuersion seeking and procuring remission from God By Prayer he seeketh and obtaineth it for the sinner By Sacraments he instrumentally maketh him partaker as well of the grace of remission as conuersion And by the power of Discipline he doth by way of authority punish euill doings and remit or diminish the punishments he inflicteth according as the condition of the party may seeme to require By that which hath beene sayd it appeareth that to bind and loose to remit to retaine sins are equiualent the same saue that to bind and loose is of more ample large extent in that it implyeth in it the binding by precepts lawes the loosing which is by reversing or dispensing with the same And therefore hauing shewed that the Apostles were equall in the power ofbinding and loosing we need ad no farther proofe that they were equall in power of remitting retaining sins Wherefore let vs proceede to the promise of Christ made to Peter that vpon the Rocke mentioned by him he would build his Church and let vs see whether any peculiar thing were promised vnto Peter in that behalfe The Church of God we know is compared in Scripture to a City an House and a Temple and therefore the beginning proceeding and increasing of the same is rightly compared to building Now in building there must be a foundation vpon which all may rest and stay that is put into the same building and the foundation must be sure firme immoueable for otherwise it wall faile and so alll other parts of the building wanting their stay will fall to the ground Now nothing is so firme sure and immoueable as a Rocke and consequently no building so strōg as that which is raised vpon a rockie foundation wherevpon our Sauiour sheweth that a House builded on the sand is easily ruinated soone shaken to pieces but that an House builded vpon a rocke standeth firme notwithstanding the furie and violence of the flouds winds and tempests and compareth a Man rightly grounded and established in his perswasion and resolution to an house so built By a Rocke therefore in this place is meant a sure foundation that will not faile nor be moued or shaken how great a weight soeuer be laid vpon it In a foundation there are three things required The first is that it bee the first thing in the building the second that it beare vp all the other parts of the building the third that it be firme and immoueable For as Christ saith If the eye that is the light of the bodie be darknesse how great is that Darknesse So if that which is to support and beare vp all doe faile shrinke all must needs be shaken and fall a
the bond of marriage remaineth inviolable and is not nor may not be dissolued and therefore if this comparison hold a Christian King falling into heresie apostasie or atheisme and seeking to draw his people to the same doth not lose the right of dominion he hath ouer them Thirdly in Bellarmines opinion it is not refusall to dwell together nor sollicitation to idolatrie that could make a separation if the band of matrimony contracted betweene Infidels were simply firme and indissoluble as that of Christians is But heathen Princes haue as good interest in their Kingdomes which are not founded vpon grace or faith but vpon the light of reason the freedome of will and the Law of Nature and Nations as beleeuers therefore their solliciting to infidelity and idolatrie cannot make their titles to their kingdome voide Lastly malitious desertion or refusall to dwell with the beleeuer vnlesse he some way at lest by silence consent to the blasphemies of the Infidell is directly contrary to the nature essence end and intendment of marriage and therefore dissolueth marriage but the abvse of sacred authority to the promoting of impiety and suppressing of true Religion is not contrary to the nature and essence of authority but to the right vse of it and therefore it doth not make voide the title of magistrates seeing it is certaine that lawfull authority may stand with most horrible abuse of the same Wherefore let vs proceede to their seuenth proofe When Princes say they come to the Church and are admitted to the Communion of the faithfull people of God they are not admitted but vpon promise and agreement that if they forsake the faith or hinder the good of GODS people they will bee content and it shall bee lawfull for the Gouernours of the Church to take their authoritie from them therefore when Princes become heretiques or Apostataes it is lawfull by their owne agreement and consent for the Gouernours of the Church to depose them The antecedent of this Argument I thinke will neuer bee made good For what Prince in his admission to bee a Christian did euer thus condition with the Church either expressely or by necessary implication examples of any such stipulation I am perswaded they canne bring vs none It is true indeede that the very vow of a Christian made in Baptisme implieth in it a resolution and promise rather to depart with any thing and lose all then to forfeit the inheritance he is entitled vnto to dishonour God or any way to hinder the good of his church but this vow and promise is made to God and not to the church and therefore God may take from Christian kings their kingdomes when they become heretiques and seeke to misleade the people as forfeited vpon their own agreements but the Church hath nothing to doe with them more then the great Turke vpon any such forfeiture made vnto Almighty God It is true that all infidels and wicked ones haue forfeited their kingdomes to God but yet in the title of mundane iustice they haue right to them still and may not bee dispossessed of them by mortall men vnlesse they bee specially authorised by almighty God as the Israelites were to cast out the Canaanites And this was the meaning of Wickliffe when he affirmed that a Prince being in state of mortall sinne ceaseth to bee a Prince any longer namely in respect of any title he canne plead to God if hee be pleased to take the advantage of the forfeiture but in respect of men he hath a good title still in the course of mundane iustice So that whosoeuer shall lift vp his hand against him offereth him wrong The Church therefore may proceede no further then to admonish Princes when they offend and for grieuous and scandalous faults to deny vnto them the benefit of her Communion The last proofe they bring for deposing Princes when they become heretickes is taken from the office of a Pastor to whom it pertaineth to driue away wolues to restraine and keepe the Rammes and great leaders of the flockes from hurting those sheepe that are more weake This reason as it is the last so it is the worst of all For each Pastour must doe these things according to the nature and quality of his Pastorall office and therefore a spirituall Pastour must performe them by spirituall and ecclesiasticall censures driuing away the wolues from his flockes by suspension excommunication and anathema and restraining the Rammes from hurting the rest by the same meanes so binding them with bands that exceed all the bands of restraint vsed by the secular powers CHAP. 46. Of examples of Church-men deposing Princes brought by the Romanistes HAuing examined the reasons brought to proue that the chiefe gouernours of the Church may depose Princes erring from the faith and hindering the course of religion let vs see what examples our Aduersaries produce of the practise of deposing them The first is the example of Samuel appointing Saul to be a king and afterwards deposing him for his disobedience But in this example they are grossely deceiued For first Samuel was neither high Priest nor Priest at all not being of the posterity of Aaron Secondly Samuel did not appoint Saul to be king as being of higher authority but as obeying and executing the mandate of God as the meanest man in Israel might haue done as we reade in the second of the Kings of one of the sonnes of the Prophets who at the commandement of Elizeus annointed Iehu king ouer Israel yet was neither Elizeus nor he greater in dignity then Kings Thirdly we doe not reade in the sacred History that Samuel deposed Saul but that God deposed him and that Samuel was the messenger sent from God to let him know it Because saith Samuel thou hast cast away the word of the Lord the Lord hath cast thee away that thou shalt not reigne And againe the Lord hath cut away the kingdome of Israel from thee this day Yea so farre was Samuel from deposing Saul that he mourned for him till God blamed him saying How long dost thou mourne for Saul whereas I haue cast him away that hee should not reigne ouer Israel The next example is that of Hieremy the Prophet to whom the Lord said I haue set thee ouer nations and people to plucke vp and to roote out and to destroy and throw downe to build and to plant Whence they inferre that the chiefe Priest is ouer the kingdomes of the world and may giue them to whom hee will But first wee must obserue that Hieremy was not the high Priest but one of an inferiour ranke that therefore if we will conclude any thing from hence touching the power of disposing kingdomes by Priests every Priest must haue this power Secondly we must know that Hieremie was set ouer the kingdome of Iudah and other kingdomes not to rule them but prophetically to denounce vnto them and foreshew the things that afterwards should fall out Whereupon Lyra
the true Catholicke Church as admit not all the things before specified so that I lay no foundation of Babell as this Babylonian is pleased to say I doe but pitying the breaches of Sion endeauour as much as in me lieth to make them vp that Hierusalem may be as a citie at vnity wit hin it selfe But the Romanistes indeede build Babell and their tongues are confounded euery one almost dissenting from other and that in most materiall and essentiall points Pighius and Catharinuâ—… haue a strange fancie touching originall sinne contrary to the Doctrine of other Papists Pighius is of Caluins opinion touching iustification Catharinus defendeth against the common tenent that men in ordinary course without speciall reuelation may be certaine by the certainty of Faith that they are in the state of grace yea M Higgons himself saith Our faith in Christ must be trustfull liuely and actiue by a speciall application of his merites vnto our selues as he was wont to preach in Saint Dunstans Church So vrging a necessity of special Faith which the Romanists condemne as hereticall in the Doctrine of our Church and innumerable like differences they haue yet all these are of one Church Faith Communion nothing it seemeth being necessary to the vnity of their Church but the acknowledging of the Supremacie of the Pope And yet which is most strange they that thinke he may erre they that thinke he cannot erre they that make him to be but Prime Bishop they that make him vniversall Bishop they that attribute to him power to depose Princes dispose of their states they that deny that hee bath any such power are of one the same Church But it is a Babylonicall Church §. 2. FRom the perpetual visibilitie vndoubted assurance the Church hath of holding the true Faith he proceedeth to shew our zeale in impugning condemning the opinion of Purgatory that yet notwithstanding the whole vniversal Church receiued it And thervpoÌ„ saith â—…he was misinformed by me others that the Greeks neuer intertained this doctrine that now he findeth that we erre not knowing or 〈◊〉 the truth assuring himselfe that howsoeuer some Greeks did not or do not admit the doctrine of Purgatory precisely vnder this name with some other circuÌ„stances yet the church of Greece generally doth retaine the thâ—…ig it selfe But whatsoeuer this goodfellow say to the coÌ„trary we know the Greek 〈◊〉 neuer 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 thing There is extant a most excelleÌ„t learned Apollogy of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…o the couÌ„cel of Florence or Basil as it is thought In this apology first 〈◊〉 clearly 〈◊〉 that there is no purging after this life by â—…e especially materiall c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Papists imagine Secondly they insâ—…te that some a longst 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that such as are of a middle condition and so depart hence are after death in a certaine obscurity without enioying the light of Gods countenance or holden as it were in a prison or in a state of sorrow till by the goodnesse of God and the prayers of the Church they be deliuered and thus much some professed in the Councell of Florence for there was a diuision amongst them Thirdly they incline to an opinion that the lesser sinnes of men dying in the state of grace are remitted after death without any punishment at all either by fire or in any other kind by the meere mercy goodnesse of God And whereas some bring proofes of remission of sinnes after this life thereby to confirme their conceit of Purgatory they say there is no agreement betweene remission and purging by fire and punishment for that eyther punishment or remission is needfull and not both and againe they confidently pronounce that neither Scripture nor the fifth Generall Councell deliuered vnto vs a double punishment or a double fire after this life This iudgment resolution they confirme proue by very excellent reasons authorities for first thus they argue It more beseemeth the goodnes of God to suffer no good though neuer so litle to passe away vnrespected vnrewarded theÌ„ to punish small sins offences but some litle good in them that haue great sins hath no reward because of the preuayling of the euil that is fouÌ„d in theÌ„ therefore smal euils in them that haue great works of vertue are not to be punished the better things ouercomming Secondly as is a little good in those that are mainely euill so is a little euill in those that are otherwise mainely good But a little good in those that are otherwise euill can procure no reward but onely causeth a difference in the degree of punishment making it the lesse therefore a little euill causeth no punishment but a difference in the degree of glory and happinesse which it maketh to bee lesse then otherwise it would bee whence it followeth that there is no Purgatory Thirdly either the wils of men departed hence are mutable or immutable if they be mutable then they that are good may become euill and they that are euill may become good whence it will follow according to Origens opinion that neyther the good are vnchangeably happy nor the the euill vnchangeably miserable but that men may fall from happinesse to misery and rise from misery to the heighth of all happinesse And soe wee shall make the punishments of all cast-awaies euen of the diuels themselues to be temporary as endeed supposing the mutability of the Will to continue after death iustly they may for the reason why in Iustice the punishment of sinne in the damned is to be eternall is because they are immutably vnchangeably and etâ—…nally euill if they bee immutable then are they not capable of any correction for he who is corrected is sette right by being brought to iust dislike and forsaking of that he formerly affected ill which chaunge from loue to hate froÌ„ liking to disliking from pursuing and following to forsaking and flying from cannot be found in a Will that is immutable Bonauentura disputeth the matter how afflicting fire purgeth the soule and answereth that some thinke that this fire besides the punishing vertue and power it hath hath also a spirttuall purging vertue such as sacraments haue which hee thinketh to be absurd especially seeing Gregory out of visions and apparitions of the dead sheweth that soules are purged in diuerse places and by diuerse other meanes as well as by fire and therefore there are other who thinke that what this purging fire worketh it worketh by punishing and afflicting which helpeth and strengtheneth grace that it may be able to purge out sinne Now punishment and affliction canne noe way helpe grace or strengthen it to the expulsion of sinne but in that by the bitternesse of it it maketh vs know how much it offendeth GOD and hurteth vs and thereby causeth a dislike of it or at least an increase of the dislike of it which dislike the Will cannot newly
the very same more peremptorily namely that Gregory by this saying and some other found in him doth vtterly ouerthow that Purgatory which hee is thought to teach And if hee will bee pleased to peruse the Schoole-men hee shall finde in Alexander of Ales that the best of them thought Gregorie to bee of opinion as they also were that all sinne in respect of the staine or fault is purged out in death some interpreting his wordes where hee speaketh of remission of sinnes after this life of that remission which is in the last instant of this life and the first of the next and â—…her â—…herwise And therefore Master Higgons might well haue spared his taxation of me and omitted his marginall note that many such tricks were found by the Bishoppe of Eureux in the writings of the Lord Plessis Mornay For in all that which I haue written touching this point there is not so much as the least shadow of any ill dealing and for that worthy Gentleman against whom that Bishoppe soâ—…ght aduantage by cauilling against some parts of his allegations it will bee found that hee hath more sincerely handled the controuersies of religion then euer any Romanist did That if any mistaking be found in him there are many moe and more materiall in farre lesse compasse in the writings of Cardinall Bellarmine himselfe and that in his anatomy of the Masse the booke excepted against by the Bishoppe of Eureux hee hath in such sort cutte in sunder the sinewes not onely of the Masse but of the whole masse of Romish religion that all the rabble of Romanists will neuer bee able orderly to answere that whole booke howsoeuer it is easie to cavill against some parts of any thing neuer so well written But to returne to the matter in hand whatsoeuer wee thinke of Gregory of whom I say onely that hee seemeth to agree vnto the opinion of those Diuines who thinke all sinnefulnesse to be purged out of the soules of men dying in the state of grace in the moment of dissolution it is certaine that exceeding many of best esteeme in the Romane Church informer times were of that opinion and the same is proued by vnanswerable reasons Whence it will follow ineuitably that there remaineth no punishment to bee suffered after death by men dying in the state of grace For they are propositions of Saint Bernard that all the world cannot except against that when all sinne shall bee wholly taken out of the way no effect of it shall remaine that the cause beeing altogether remoued the effect shall bee no more and that all punishment shall hee as farre from the outward man as all fault shall bee from the inward Now that all sinfulnesse is purged out in the very dissolution of soule and body is confirmed as I said by vnaunswerable reasons for seeing the remaines of naturall concupiscence the pronenesse to euill difficultie to doe good and contrarietie betweene the better and meaner faculties of the soule are wholly taken out of the soules of all them that die in the state of grace in the moment of dissolution euen in the iudgement of our aduersaries themselues there being nothing in the fault or staine of sinne but the acte desire purpose which cannot remaine where concupiscence the fountaine thereof is dried vp or the habituall liking and affecting of such things as were formerly desired purposed or done ill which cannot be found in a soule out of which all naturall concupiscence inclining to the desiring of things inordinately is wholly taken away and it selfe turned to the entire desiring of God alone and nothing but in and for him as is euery soule out of which concupiscence inclining to affect finite things inordinately is wholly taken away It is more then euident that all sinnefulnesse is wholly taken out of the soule of each good man in the very moment of his death dissolution and departure hence See then the absurditie of Romish Religion the soule of a good man in the moment of death is wholly freed from all sinnefulnesse there is nothing found in it that displeaseth God charitie and grace making those in whom it is acceptable to GOD is perfect in it and yet it must bee punished to satisfie the iustice of GOD because it was sometimes sinnefull Truely Ieuer thought whereas there are two things in sinne the fault deformity or staine and the punishment that Christ who is the Lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world by the working of his sanctifying grace purgeth out the one and by vertue of his satisfactory sufferings freeth such as he purgeth from the impuritie of sinne from the punishment due vnto it and that in proportionable sort he purgeth out the one and by vertue of his satisfactory sufferings freeth vs from the other So that when sinne is onely so purged out that it is no more predominant there remaineth no condemnation but yet some punishment as in the case of Dauid and when it is wholly taken away there remaineth no punishment at all which whosoeuer contradicteth is iniurious to the sufferings of Christ the Iustice of God who will not require one debt to be twise paid For it is most certain that Christ suffered the punishments not only of those sins that men commit in the time of ignorance 〈◊〉 and the state of Nature before Baptisme and Regeneration but of all sinnes and that the reason why notwithstanding godlesse men are subiect to all kindes of punishments as before is because they doe not become one with CHRIST nor are made partakers of his sanctifying Spirit purging out the sinfulnesse that is in them that they might enjoy the benefite of his satisfaction as likewise the reason why good men such as Daâ—…id turning to God by repentance are still subject to some punishments in this life notwithstanding their vnion with CHRIST is because they are not so fully conjoyned to CHRIST and made partakers of his Spirit as to be purged from all sinne For if they were they should be freed from all punishment by his sufferings he hauing suffered for all them that become one with him all that the Iustice of God requireth This is that heresie of the Papists which I speake of namely that to satisfie Gods Iustice the soules of men dying in the state of grace must suffer punishments answereable to the sinnes they some-times committed though now pure from all sinne This conceipt neuer any of the Auncient had howsoeuer some of them supposed that sinfull men in hell may be eased or deliuered thence and some other as Augustine such as followed him in the Latine Church were doubtfull whether some impuritie might not remaine to be purged out of the soules of men dying in the state of grace by afflictions and chastisements after this life And therefore it is vntrue that M Higgons saith This imputation of heresie cleaueth as fast to the Fathers whom we pretend to honour and reuerence as to
Lions found out an vnknowne worke in a certaine ruinated Abbey and put it out vnder the name of Ruffinus though as himselfe confesseth it seemed strange to many that such a worke had lyen hid so long and more strange that so often the same sentences and periods should bee found in Augustine that are in this supposed Ruffinus seeing hee could not take them from Augustine Augustine in all likelyhood would not borrow them from him neuer vsing to bee beholding to any man in this kind so that it may bee thought this worke had a latter Author then either of these surely the words Mr Higgons citeth are the words of Augustine and therefore ill alledged to shew that others before him thought as hee did touching the purging of men dying in an imperfit state of grace Wherefore let vs come to Ambrose out of whom he citeth two places the first is vpon the hundred and eighteene Psalme the second vpon the thirty sixe Psalme Touching the first of these places Cardinall Bellarmine will tell him that it is not to bee vnderstood of the fire of Purgatory but of the fire of Gods Iudgement which is not a purging or an afflicting fire but a trying and examining fire I will set down the words at large that the Reader may iudge of them All must be proued by fire that desire to returne to Paradise for it is not idlely written that when Adam Eue were cast out of Paradise God set in the entrance into it a fiery two-edged or turning-sword for all must passe by slaming fire whether it bee Iohn the Evangelist whom the LORD so loued that he said of him to Peter if I will haue him to abide what is that to thee follow thou me Of his death some haue doubted of his passage through the fire we may not doubt because he is in Paradise is not separated from CHRIST or Peter that receiued the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen walked vpon the Sea he must be forced to say we haue passed by fire water and thou hast brought vs into a place of refreshing but when Iohn commeth the fiery sword shall soon be turned away because iniquity is not found in him whō equity loued If there were any fault found in him as a man the loue of God wasted it away For the wings thereof are as the wings of fire he that heere hath the fire of charitie shall not there feare the fire of the sword Christ shal say vnto Peter that so oftē offred to dy for him passe be at rest but he shal say he hath tried vs in the fire as siluer is tried c Hee shall be tried as siluer but I shal be tried as lead I shall burne till the lead melt away if no siluer be found in me woe is me I shal be cast into the lowest hell or wholly burnt vp as stubble if any gold or siluer be found in me not by mine own works but by the mercy and grace of CHRIST and by the ministery of my Priest-hood happily I saye They that trust in thee shall not bee confounded Therefore iniquitie shall bee burned out by the fiery sword that fitteth vpon the talent of Lead Hee alone could not feele that fire who is the iustice of God euen Christ who did no finne for the fire found nothing in him that it could burne but concerning others euen he that thinketh himselfe Gold hath lead and hee that thinketh himselfe to be a graine of corne hath chaffe that may be burned Many here seeme to themselues to be gold I do not enuie them but euen the gold shall be tried it shall burne in fire that it may be proued for so it is written I will proue them as gold in the fire therefore seeing we are to be tried let vs so behaue our selues that we may deserue to be approued by the iudgment of God let vs while wee are here hold humility that when euery of vs shall come to the iudgment of God he may say See my humility and deliuer mee And vpon the thirty sixt Psalme he hath these words We shall all be tried by fire and Ezechiel sayth Behold the Lord Almighty commeth and who shall abide the day of his comming or who shall indure it when he shall appeare vnto vs for he shall come as purging fire as Fullers soape he shall sitte downe to trie and fine the gold and the siluer he shall fine the sonnes of Leuie and powre them out like gold and siluer and they shall offer sacrifice to the Lord in righteousnesse Therefore the sonnes of Leuie shall bee fined by fire Ezechiel shall bee fined by the fire and Daniel shall bee fined by the fire but these though they shall bee tried by the sire yet they shall say we haue passed by fire and water others shall abide in the fire to them the fire shall be as a moyst dewe as it was to the Hebrew children that were cast into the hotte burning furnace but the reuenging fire shall burne vp the Ministers of iniquity Woe is mee if my worke shall burne and I suffer losse of my labour and if the Lord do saue his sernants we shal be saued by faith yet as by fire though we be not burned vp yet wee shall bee burned but how some remaine in the fire and other passe thorough it let the Scripture in another place teach vs. The people of Aegypt were drowned in the Red sea the people of the Hebrewes passed through it Moses passed Pharaoh was ouer-whelmed because his grieuous sins did drowne him in like sort sacrilegious persons shall be cast headlong into the lake of burning fire c. Here we see Ambrose speaketh of the tryall of Gods seuere and righteous judgment expressing the same by the name of fire because euen our God is a consuming fire And a fire shall go before him when he commeth to judge the world but of the Papists Purgatory-fire he hath no word The fire he speaketh of is the fiery tryall of Gods iudgement through which he thinketh all must passe though neuer so holy and bee burned in it though not burned vp as the wicked shall Of the same fire not of Purgatory but of the iudgement of God doth Hillary speake vpon the same wordes of the 118. Psal. and vpon the second of Mathew where expounding these words Hee shall Baptize you with the holy Ghost and with fire he sayth it remaineth that they that haue bin Baptized with the Holy Ghost should be comsummate and made perfit in the fire of iudgment And before these Lactantius his words are these therefore the Diuine fire by one and the same vertue and power shall burne the wicked c. And also when the Lord shal iudge the righteous hee shall try them by fire Then they whose sins shall preuaile either in waight or number shall bee burned vp in the fire but they whom full and perfect righteousnesse and the
or to driue them to dislike that they formerly liked well and so to purge them from the impurity of sinne as they of the Church of Rome imagine Thirdly they pray for the dead not as the Papists to deliuer thē out of purgatorie but for their resurrection the remission of their sinnes and publicke acquitall in the day of judgement the perfecting of whatsoeuer is yet wanting vnto them the possessing of them of heavenly happines and in the meane while the placing of them where in best sort they may expect till they bee perfected Lastly touching the Saints departed they lay downe these propositions First that truely and properly God onely is to bee invocated Secondly that Saints are invocated improperly and by accident onely Thirdly that Peter and Paul heare none of those that invocate them but the grace and gift that they haue according to the promise I am with thee till the end of the world Meaning as it may bee conceiued that the Saints heare not them that invocate them but Christ the Sonne of God who was given vnto them and promised to bee with them and the holy Ghost which is likewise given vnto them and abideth and dwelleth in them for ever So that whatsoeuer their words seeme to import when they speake to the Saints their meaning is to direct their petitions to that God that promised to bee with them and to heare the petitions and grant the requests of all such as by them should bee converted and should seeke to him in hope to obtaine such things as by them hee made them promise of The question is proposed sayth Hugo de Sancto Victore whether the Saints when wee intreat them to intercede for vs doe pray for vs and how The answere herevnto is that the Saints are no otherwise sayd to pray for vs but in that the favour and acceptation they haue with God induceth him to doe good to such as he findeth well affected towardes them for his sake So that it is nothing whether they heare vs or not for it sufficeth that God heareth vs to whom wee principally direct our selues Ninthly touching Images First they differ from the Church of Rome in that they allow no Image of God Who can make an Image saith Damascen of God who is invisible incorporeall incircumscriptible it is great folly and impiety to seeke to haue any representation of him that is an infinite and incomprehensible Spirit Secondly they admit no grauen carved or molten Images of gold siluer wood or stone but thinke they savour of Heathenish superstition Thirdly they haue the Pictures of the Saints not only for history and ornament which might be allowed but so as in reference to Christ and his Saints to bow and incline themselues before them this they doe following the 2d Nicene Councell which though it condemne all religious adoration of the Saints and their pictures seemeth to permit no other acts of outward reuerence and respect to be done to pictures of Saints then they yeeld to all sacred and holy things as bookes vessels vestiments and places dedicated to the service of God nor the expressing of any other affections towards them or remembrances of them then holy men heere in this World beare one towardes another and so come farre short of the conceipt of the Romanists yet the Westerne Church in the time of Charles the Great a long time after condemned that Councell and the Image-worship which they that met in that Councell sought to bring in neither can the Greekes bee excused from superstition in this point Tenthly they permit such as are to be Priests if they like not to liue single to marry wiues before they be ordained and made Priests to liue with them after they are entred into that degree order knowing that God hath ordained marriage that it is honourable amongst all men that they that condemne Priests marriage are the occasion of much sinfull impurity The Romanists saith Photius doe so presse the law of single life that many grievous scandals follow the same For with them many Virgins become mothers that neuer were wiues many mothers are found to nurse the Children of such Fathers as may not be known And yet these indeavour to make the true Priests of God that liue in lawfull marriage to be odious and hatefull So then the Graecians leaue it free to them that are to be ordained Priests to take vnto them wiues before their ordination and to liue with them afterwards but if they then refuse so to doe they permit them not to marry afterwards Yet if any doe they dissolue not the marriage but put them from the execution of their office and ministerie Lastly touching abstinence they differ not a little from the Church of Rome for they fast Wednesday because on that day Iudas agreed with the Iewes to betray Christ and Friday because on that day Christ was crucified But they fast no Saturday in the whole yeare but onely Easter Eue. In the Lent they abstaine on Saturday from flesh but all the yeare besides they freely eate flesh that day They keepe foure Lents in the yeare The first that which the Westerne Christians obserue The 2º from the Octaues of Whitsuntide vntill the holydayes of Peter and Paul which they call the fast of S. Peter The 3d from the first of August vntill the assumption of the blessed Virgin The 4th 6 weekes in the Advent beginning presently vpon the feast of S. Philip according to the Kalendar of the Russions and therefore call it the Fast of S. Philip. Their Monkes and Bishops as hauing beene Monkes doe neuer eate flesh Lastly they all abstaine from things strangled and blood obseruing as they suppose the Canon of the Apostles Thus wee see the extent of the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Religion of them that are vnder the same This jurisdiction hath beene greatly straightned within these few yeares for both the Russiaes both that vnder the Moscovites and the other subject to the King of Polonia are fallen from the same But the number of them that professe the Greeke Religion is not diminished For all those Christians still retaine their former religion rites and ceremonies The metropolitan of Mosco saith Possevine was wont to be confirmed by the Patriarch of Constantinople but now he is chosen by the Prince and consecrated by two or three of his owne Bish. without seeking any confirmation from the Patriarch of Constantinople to whom yet the Emperour of Russia sendeth yearely a certaine somme of money by way of almes The occasion of this breach and falling off Possevine saith was the comming of a certaine Priest from Constantinople vnto Russia in the time of Basilius For this Priest finding the Muscovites to differ in some things pertaining to religion not only from the Latines but the Greekes also freely reprehended them and shewed his mislike this his reproofe so enraged the Emperour that though hee had sent