eternall life and that the terrifying threats vsed by the Holy Ghost in the Scriptures are to this end to stirre vp the elect to watchfulnesse and diligence motiues they are to and meanes of perseuerance not arguments at all to proue the Saints Apostasie u To the place of Matth. 12. 44. we answer First we ought not to ground any doctrine of faith vpon a meere parable or allegory because as Saint Augustine in his booke de Doctrinâ Christianâ deliuereth it All those points which belong to faith and manners are plainly deliuered in the Scriptures Secondly we cannot aâ—gue strongly from corporall possession or dispossession to spirituall as a Lunaticke man so a man possessed with the Deuill in body may be yet in the state of grace in his soule and in like manner as a man that is cured of his frensie or lunacie may be yet an vnsanctified man so a man out of whom the Deuill is cast from tormenting or possessing the body may be yet an vnregenerate man although I grant our Sauiour seldome or neuer cured any mans body but first he healed the soule as some Interpreters haue obserued yet no necessary consequence can be drawn from the health or sicknesse of the body to the health or sicknesse of the soule Neither is it said here that the vncleane spirit was cast out by Christ nor by any other but that he went out of himselfe and returned againe and therefore this possessed person can be no fit embleme of a truly regenerated and iustified man out of whom the Deuil is powerfully cast out and the party is no way vnder him or in his power but led by the spirit of God Rom. 8. and wholly deliuered from the power of Satan Thirdly the meaning of the Parable is as appeareth by our Sauiours application that as the latter state of that man out of whom the Deuill first departed and afterward returned with seuen worse than himselfe was worse than the former so it should be with the wicked Iewes out of whom the vncleane spirit had gone out for feare of the Law but now was returned againe vnto them through their refusall of the Gospell and despiting the Spirit of Grace Thus Saint Hilary Ierome and Bede expound the Parable and their Exposition is euidently grounded vpon our Sauiours words vers 45. Euen so shall it be also vnto this wicked generation As it is particularly applied by our Sauiour to the Iewes so it may be to any Nation out of which the vncleane spirit departeth for a while or is driuen away by the preaching of the Gospell if it be empty of good workes and giuen to the pleasures of this world like the lodging of the vncleane spirit which he found empty swept and garnished The vncleane spirit will enter with seuen worse that is the Gospell shall be taken away from them and the Kingdome of Grace for the abuse of it and they shall be brought into worse bondage of the Deuill then before according to Saint Peter 2 Epist. 2. 20. If after they haue escaped the pollution of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ they are againe intangled therein and ouercome the latter end shall be worse with them than the beginning for it had beene better for them not to haue knowne the way of righteousnesse than after they haue knowne it to turne away from the holy commandement deliuered vnto them This was the case of the Kingdome of Congo which for a time embraced the Gospell but afterwards perceiuing that it restrained their carnall libertie and no way permitted pluralitie of wiues they cast off the yoke of Christ and enthralled themselues againe to Satan But it is not so with those that are truly regenerate for to them his yoke is easie and his burthen light Lastly this obiection may be retorted against the Aduersaries thus This Parable is meant of a wicked generation Matth. 12. 45. an euill and adulterous generation vers 39. a generation of vipers vers 34. such as the Scribes and Pharises were who in this Parable are reproued by our Sauiour But the regenerate children of God are not a wicked adulterous or viperous generation but a chosen generation a royall Priest-hood an holy nation a peculiar people 1 Pet. 2. 9. Therefore this Parable is not meant of the regenerate children of God * To the place of Saint Luke 8. 13. and Mat. 13. 20. we answer First the heart of a man truly regenerated is not compared to a stony ground for God by regenerating grace takes away our stony heart and giues vs an heart of flesh Ezek. 36. 26. Secondly a temporary faith is not of the same nature with a iustifying faith a temporary faith hath no root Matth. 13. 22. and Luke 8. 13. a iustifying faith hath a temporary faith beareth no fruit but a iustifying faith beareth fruit Matth. 13. 23. and Luke 8. 15. Those who beleeue the Gospell meerely out of temporary hopes because godlinesse hath the promise of this life they receiue the word with ioy while they thriue and gaine by it but when there ariseth trouble and persecution for the Word they are offended and fall away but those who ground their faith vpon the promises of a better life their faith like gold 1 Pet. 1. 7. being tried in the fire is made much more precious and found vnto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Iesus Christ beleeuing with ioy vnspeakable and full of glory receiuing the end of their faith the saluation of their soules vers 8. Their faith differeth from the faith of Hypocrites and Temporizers in the cause and kinde their ioy in the degree and both in the continuance Lastly this obiection may be retorted against the Aduersarie First thus They who are compared vnto the good ground are not meant here by stony ground But truely regenerate Christians and beleeuers Luke 8. 15. and Matth. 13. 23. are compared to good ground Therefore they are not here meant by stony ground Secondly thus That faith which is distinguished from a iustifying faith in this Parable cannot be taken for the faith of a true regenerate Christian But the temporary faith is distinguished in this Parable from a iustifying faith Therefore the temporary faith cannot be taken for the faith of a true regenerate Christian and consequently the Appealer and Arminians are in this their allegation mistaken Of Falling away from Grace ARMINIANS BERTIVS of the Apostasie of Saints pag. 26. Apostasie is described by the phrase to wax cold Mat. 24. 12. And because iniquitie shall abound the loue of many shall x wax cold Bertius pag. 34. The Apostle fore-seeing that the conuerted Gentiles might be bewitched with that opinion That they could not be cut off from the Church warneth them that they wax not proud against the Iewes but that they learne by their example that it may come to passe that they also may bee cast away Rom. 11. 19. They were broken off
the children of God 1 Ioh. 3. 9. This seed because it is immortall 1 Pet. 1. 23. preserueth euery childe of God in whom it remaineth from eternall death Lastly this Argument may be retorted against the Aduersary thus If God withdrew not his louing kindnesse vtterly from Salomon Salomon fell not from grace totally nor finally God withdrew not his louing kindnesse vtterly from Salomon Therefore Salomon fell not from Grace totally nor finally The first proposition is manifest for vtterly totally are termes equiualent and it is certain that whosoeuer falleth not totally caÌ„not fall finally The second proposition may be deduced out of Psa. 89. 31 32 33 34 35. ARMINIANS BERTIVS pag. 96. citeth Tertullian Praescrip c. 3. Estne hoc mirum vt k probatus aliquis retro postea excidat Saul bonus prae caeteris liuore postea euertitur Salomon omni gratiâ sapientiâ donatus à domino ad idololatriam à mulieribus inducitur c. Bert. pag. 98. alledgeth l Cyprian Epist. 7. Adhuc in saeculo sumus c. As yet we are in the world c. Parum est adipisci aliquid potuisse plus est quod adeptus es posse seruare sicut fides ipsa natiuitas salutaris non accepta sed custodita viâ—ificat Nec statim consecutio sed consummatio homineÌ„ Deo seruat c. Salomon denique Saul caeteri multi quamdiu in vijs domini ambulauerunt datam sibi gratiam tenere potuerunt recedente ab ijs disciplinâ Dominicâ recessit gratia c. Bert. pag. 99. 100. produceth Nazianzen m Deus his quideÌ„ lumen est illis autem ignis c. God is a light to some but to others a fire c. Quid vero deprehendimus in Saul Vnctus erat spiritum receperaâ— â—ratque tune spiritalis c. Postea verò non totum se praebuit spiritui neque purè sed in alium conuersus est virum c. What finde wee in Saul Hee was anointed and made partaker of the holy Spirit yet for all that afterward he suffered not himselfe to bee wholly and entirely directed by the Spirit nor became perfectly and sincerely another man Ber. pag. 101. citeth Augustine lib. 11. de Ciuitat Dei â— 12. n The Saints though they are certaine of the reward of their perseuerance yet are found to be vncertaine of their perseuerance Bert. pag. 102. August de Correp Grat. cap. 5. o Si iam regeneratus iustificatus in malam vitam suâ voluntate relabitur certè non potest dicere Non accepi quia acceptam gratiam Dei suo in malum libero amisit arbitrio If a regenerate and iustified man doth willingly relapse into an euill life he cannot say I haue not receiued because he hath lost the grace of God which he receiued by his owne will free to euill Bert. pag. 102. Prosper Respons 7. ad capit Gallorum p It is proued by many lameÌ„table examples That some of the regenerate in Christ Iesus forsaking faith and good manners did fall away from God and ended their wicked life in this their Auersion from him APPEALER ANswer to Gag p. 166. citeth Tertullian Praescript c. 3. Et hoc mirum opinor c. As if it were a thing so strange that any man k approued by God should afterward relapse from grace Saul a man better than the rest was ouer-taken vndone at length through enuy Dauid was a good man according vnto the Lords heart yet afterward guiltie of murther and adultery Salomon endued with all grace and wisdome from the Lord was by women brought ouer vnto idolatry For why It was reserued vnto the Sonne of God alone to be without sinne Answer to Gag pag. 167. saith l Cyprian is through for this point Epist. 7. Parum est adipisci potuisse aliquid c. It is a small matter to obtaine any thing it is a greater to keepe that which thou hast obtained euen as faith it selfe and that healthfull birth not receiued but retained doth quicken Neither doth attaining but consummation keepe a man for God c. Salomon and Saul and many other so long as they walked in the wayes of the Lord could retaine the grace giuen them but when the discipline or feare of the Lord departed from them grace also departed Answer to Gag pag. 168. saith thus And in Nazianzen too Apolog. ad Patrem p. 37. who writeth thus of Saul c. m Anointed he was made partaker of the holy Spirit and then at that time was spirituall c. yet for all that because he suffered not himselfe to bee wholly and entirely directed by the Spirit nor became perfectly and sincerely another man what need I relate the Tragicall end which he vnder-went Appeale pag. 27. Augustine of the City of God booke the eleuenth chap. 12. n Licet sancti de suae perseuerantiae praemio certi funt de ipsâ tamen perseuerantiâ suâ reperiuntur incerti c. Appeale pag. 27. For the Tenet of Antiquitie I cannot be challenged Saint Augustine and after him Saint Prosper affirme more than M. Montague hitherto hath done Saint August lib. 1. de Bon. Perseuer cap. 6. Si autem regeneratus iustificatus in malam vitam suâ voluntate relabitur non potest dicere non accepi quia acceptam Gratiam Dei suo in malum libero amisit arbitrio Appeale p. 27. Prosper Resp. 7. ad ca. Gallorum p Ex Regeneratis in Christo Iesu quosdam Relictâ Fide pijs moribus APOSTATARE A DEO impiam vitam in suâ AVERSIONE â—inire multis quod dolendum est probatur exemplis k To the place alledged out of Tertullian wee answer First The Appealer falsly translates the words of Tertullian whose words are not probatus à Deo a man approued by God but simply probatus that is a man approued or well thought of as probatus Author an approued Author or generally well esteemed And that by probatus he meant not approued by God his words following in the same Chapter seeme to me to make euident his words are about seuen lines after Tu vt homo extrinsecus vnumquemque nosti putas quod vides vides autem quousque oculos habes sed oculi sunt Domini alti Homo in faciem Deus in praecordia contemplatur ideo cognoscit Dominus qui sint eius Thou as man knowest euery man by the outside thou thinkest that to be which thou seest thou seest as farre as thou hast eyes but the Lords eyes are high man looketh on the face God beholdeth the heart therefore the Lord knoweth who are his Secondly the instances of Tertullian are of a different kinde Saul and Salomon were not alike Salomon a glorious type of Christ Saul rather of Antichrist Salomon is called by the holy Ghost Iedidiah beloued of God Saul neuer was so called Saul therefore might fall totally and finally but for Salomon wee resolue with the Reuerend and excellently
bitter scoffe at the practice of our Ecclesiasticall Courts Howsoeuer if the Appealer had onely trod a little awry either in the high path of popery or by-path of puritanisme I for mine owne part would haue borne with it and that in respect of his otherwise commendable parts and profitable paines in the Church but when he halteth downe right betweene two religions none that desireth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to walke with a right foot can endure him And doth he not limpe nay doth he not halt downe-right doth he not weare a Linsie-woolsy garment Answer to Gagg page 13. and 14 Truth is of two sorts amongst men manifest and confessed truth or more obscure and involved truth In his quae apertè posita sunt in Scripturis inveniuntur illa omnia quae continent fidem morés que vivendi spem scilicet charitatem Plainly deliuered in Scripture are all those points which belong vnto Faith and Manners Hope and Charity to wit And accordingly I doe know no obscurity vpon these I know none of these controuerted inter partes The Articles of our Creed are confessed on both sides and held plaine enough The controuerted points are of a larger and inferiour alloy of them a man may bee ignorant without any danger of his soule at all A man may resolue or oppose this way or that way without perill of perishing for euer c. It is most euident in this place that the parties he speaketh of are the Papists and we for there are no other haue any triall in this Chapter or matter of debate By partes in many other places of his booke he vnderstandeth Papists and Protestants and here he cannot meane any other but the Gagger and his complices on the one side and the Protestant Church on the other side as the antecedents and consequents doe manifest Now if the differences betweene the papists and vs are of such an inferiour alloye that little reckoning is to be made of them because they adde nothing to or take nothing from the summe of sauing knowledge how much haue all the reformed Churches in Christendome to answer at the dreadful Tribunall of Christ for making so great a rent in Christs seamlesse coat vpon so small occasion If the controuerted points be like herbe Iohn in the pot that may be in or out without perill at all why haue all our Prophets sithence Luther at least cryed Mors in ollâ mors in ollâ Death in the pot O blessed Martyrs who sithence the beginning of Reformation haue watred the seed of the Gospell with your blood put off your long white robes and garlands and put on sackcloth and ashes for you dyed vpon no good ground you shed not your blood in zeale but spilt it in folly Martyrs you may be of schisme or obstinacy or indiscretion but not of faith if those points you suffered for belonged not at all to faith Diffido oculis meis identidem interrogo an legerim an viderim I suspect mine eyes I question my Copy I demand of my selfe againe and againe Is it possible a Diuine of no inferiour alloy should vtter such an incredible paradoxe wee dissent from the Church of Rome about Christ and his offices the foundation of faith the Scriptures the rule of faith the Church the subiect of faith the Sacraments the seales of faith iustification the proper effect of faith and good workes the fruit of faith nay wee contest about the very nature and essence of faith And are none of these matters of faith doe none of these belong to faith or manners If our debates are de tribus capellis about the fringe not the Spouse coat about the barke and not the body of Religion then hath not the Church of Rome erred in matter of faith and if she hath not then the Church of England hath erred in charging her with error not onely in matter of ceremony and discipline but also in matter of faith Art 19. If the Church of England hath erred in this Article the Appealers false oathes must needs be answerable to his degrees and preferments for so oft hath he sworne to that Article among the rest But he yeeldeth vs a reason The Articles of our Creed are confessed on both sides and held plaine enough on both sides hee might say on all sides and hands For the Arrians in Polonia the Antitimitarians in Transiluania the Nestorians in Greece the Anabaptists and Socinians in the Netherlands doe all rehearse the Articles of the Creed and hold them plaine enough Let him peruse al the bedrol of heretikes condemned by the Church of God in all ages drawne by Irenaeus Epiphanius S. Augustine Philastrius Alfonsus a Castro and others and he shall hardly pitch vpon any sort of Heretickes that directly either denyed or articled against the Articles of the Apostles Creed And will he say none of these erred in matter of faith but all were and are in regiâ viâ the high way to heauen If hee answer that the heretickes though they professed the Articles of the Apostles Creed totidem verbis in the very words yet they denyed or depraued the sense and brought in damnable errours by consequence ouerthrowing those foundations of our faith Our reply is at hand As the greater part of ancient heretickes so at this day the Papists confesse the Articles of the Creed and hold them plaine truth but they misinterpret them and by consequence shake if not quite ouerthrow diuers of them Either they or we misinterpret those three articles especially concerning the Catholike Church the Communion of Saints the forgiuenesse of sinnes to which their great Champion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reduceth all the controuersies betweene our Church and theirs And for vndermining the articles of our Creed by consequences and maintaining repugnances to them thâ— Romish Pioners are not farre behind the ancient enemies of our faith Manes and Vorstius doe not directly impugne the article touching God the Almighty Creator nor Marâ—ion Arrius Apollinaris Eutiches Nestorius and Socinus the article concerning Christ the Redeemer nor Macedonius and the Pneumatomachi the article concerning the holy Ghost but they held such doctrine which was not comportable with those articles And how the Romish doctrine of Invocation of Saints and Angels may stand with the first article rightly expounded I beleeue in God and their doctrine of Iustification by inherent righteousnesse with the second and in Iesus Christ and of transubstantiation with the article of Christ his Incarnation and Ascension and of a Catholick visible Romish Church vnder one visible Head with that I beleeue the holy Catholicke Church and of vncertainty of saluation with those I beleeue the remission of sins and life euerlasting I desire to bee enformed by the Appealer which I could neuer yet bee by any Romanist Vpon this most false and deceiueable ground that the differences inter partes are not in matters de fide hee buildeth two most dangerous assertions that a man may be ignorant
in the Heauens for it implieth a contradiction that his body should be contained in and yet be without the Heauens at the same time If his body may bee in more places then one at once then he might haue been at the instant of his passion in the Sun and Moon vpon the Crosse which S. Augustine concludes to bee absolutely impossible And if Christ in his flesh may be both in heauen and earth at the same instant Vigilius his reason hath no strength at all to wit because he is in heauen therefore he is not vpon earth To conclude if it be impossible that Christ his body should bee at the same instant in heauen and vpon earth as the testimonies of the Angel S. Peter S. Augustine and Vigilius aboue alleadged declare and if all Papists teach that Christs body after words of Consecration is truely really and substantially vpon earth handled with the hands and eaten with the mouthes of Communicants they must needes consequently deny his bodily presence and being at the right hand of his Father in Heauen Fiftly the article of the Catholike Church rightly expounded signifieth the whole company of Gods elect which is the onely Catholike inuisible Church wee beleeue for the visible Church is an obiect of sense and therefore not properly an article of faith This true interpretation of the article the Romanists are so farre from admitting that in the Councell of Constance they condemned Iohn Husse of heresie for maintaining it Whence I thus argue They who make the visible Church to be the catholike Church which wee beleeue misbeleeue the article touching the Catholike Church But the Romanists make the visible Church to be the Catholike Church which wee beleeue Therefore the Romanists misbeleeue the article touching the catholike Church The first proposition or major is proued by the words of the Apostle 2 Cor. 5. 7. We walke by faith and not by sight and Heb. 11. 1. Faith is the euidence of things not seene The Church therefore which we beleeue cannot be the visible Church The assumption is the assertion of all Papists who are so farre from beleeuing that they scoffe and laugh at an inuisible Church as a meere phantasme or Platonicall Idaea Sixtly the foure last articles of the Apostles creed the communion of Saints the forgiuenesse of sins the resurrection of the dead and life euerlasting rightly expounded import not only that there is a communion of Saints and remission of sinnes in the Church and a resurrection of the faithfull to eternall life which the Deuills themselues doe and cannot but beleeue but that euery true beleeuer who rehearseth these articles doth and ought to beleeue that hee hath a part in the communion of Saints hath obtained remission of his sinnes and shall at the last day rise to life eternall This interpretation of these articles is condemned by the Papists as hereticall Whence we thus argue against them They who deny that a man is bound to beleeue that he is of the number of the elect or that his sinnes are vndoubtedly forgiuen him c. ouerthrow the foure articles aboue mentioned according to their true meaning But the Romanists deny that a man is bound to beleeue that he is of the number of the Elect or that his sinnes are vndoubtedly forgiuen him c. Therefore the Romanists ouerthrow the foure articles aboue mentioned according to their true meaning Secondly it is a dangerous errour to affirme that the present Church of Rome holdeth the same foundation of Sacraments with the Ancient Church Which I proue first They who maintain seuen Sacraments properly so called hold not the same foundation of Sacraments with that church which held but two onely But the present church of Rome maintaines seauen Sacraments properly so called the Ancient church of Rome held but two onely Therefore the present church of Rome holdeth not the same foundation of Sacraments with that church The first proposition or major if it bee not euident in it selfe may be thus confirmed The fiue Sacraments which the Romanists adde cannot be built vpon that foundation which beareth but two onely therefore those fiue Sacraments are built vpon another different foundation or vpon no foundation at all The second proposition or assumption is generally proued by all Protestant writers that handle this question with whom the Appealer professeth euery where to hold faire quarter Secondly I proue it thus Whosoeuer maintaineth an error ouerthrowing the nature of a Sacrament holdeth not the same foundation of Sacraments with the Ancient church But the present church of Rome maintaineth an error ouerthrowing the nature of a Sacrament Therfore the present church of Rome holdeth not the same foundation of Sacraments with the Ancient church The first proposition is euident in it selfe for nothing can be more fundamentall to a Sacrament then that which concernes the nature and essence of a Sacrament nothing more destructiue or euersiue then that which ouerthroweth the very essence and substance of it The second proposition is contained totidem verbis in expresse words in the articles of religion of the Church of England Artic. 28. Transubstantiation or the change of the substance of bread and wine a doctrine de fide in the Church of Rome defined both by the Councell of Lateran and the Councell of Trent in the supper of the Lord cannot be proued by holy Writ but it is repugnant to the plain words of Scripture ouerthroweth the nature of a Sacrament and hath giuen occasion to many superstitions Thirdly it is proued thus Whosoeuer holdeth an errour concerning Christs ordinance and institution of the Sacraments erreth in the foundation of Sacraments and therein differeth from the ancient Church But the present Church of Rome holdeth an errour concerning Christs ordinance and institution of the Sacraments Therefore the present Church of Rome erreth in the foundation of Sacraments and therein differeth from the ancient Church The first proposition is cleare for Christs order and institution is the foundation of the Sacraments and therefore an error concerning it must needs be fundamentall in point of Sacrament The second proposition or assumption is set downe in Article 30. Both parts of the Sacrament by Christs ordinance and commandement ought to be ministred to all christian men alike which assertion touching Christs ordinance the present Church of Rome erroneously denieth and defineth the contrary in the Councell of Constance and Trent Thirdly it is a dangerous errour to affirme that the present church of Rome is not diuerse from the ancient vndoubted church of Christ. Which I proue First thus Whatsoeuer Church hath most shamefully gone from the Apostles from Christ himselfe from the Primitiue and catholike church of God and hath vtterly forsaken the Catholike faith is vndoubtedly diuerse from the ancient true church of Christ The present church of Rome hath most shamefully gone from the Apostles from Christ himselfe from the primitiue and catholike church of God and hath