say secondly that Gods ministers bind and loose sins by preaching his sacred word of which kind of binding and loosing Christ speaketh in Saint Matthew and in Saint Iohn For when the people of God beleeue in their hearts his word sincerely preached and in their conuersation shew the liuely fruits thereof then doubtlesse are their sinnes loosed on earth and then is that loosing also ratified in heauen then are the wordes of the Apostle verified who saith that the gospel of Christ is the power of God vnto saluation to euery one that beleeueth it then are Christs ministers as the Apostle saith become in them the sauour of life vnto life On the contrarie side when the people will not heare and beleeue Gods worde sincerely preached but contemne it and the ministers thereof then doubtlesse are their sinnes bound on earth and then is that binding also approued in heauen Then are the apostles words verified who saith that vengeance is readie against all disobedience Then are Christes ministers as y e apostle saith made vnto them the sauour of death vnto death What can be a more ioyfull loosing what can be a more terrible binding See the aunswere to the third obiection following and there marke S. Hieromes words I say thirdly that our people cōfesse their sins generally before the minister in the face of the whole congregation according to the holy scriptures Yea in the reformed churches abroad the people vse to confesse to the ministers such speciall sins as most greeue clog their consciences and for which they need graue aduise and godly councell Which christian libertie is graunted also in our churches of England For such as list may confesse their sinnes to the minister priuately and haue both his godly aduise and absolution if he deeme them penitent for their sinnes The replie Your confessions are nothing els but a meere mockery for ye confesse your selues generally to be sinners but ye name no sins at all Againe as in Germany they confesse some sinnes so do they leaue vnconfessed what pleaseth them And this is the scornful libertie which ye grant to your churches of England The answere I say first that we confesse our sinnes this day as the Israelites of olde confessed their sinnes before Ezra and the Leuites As the humble publican confessed his sins when he said O God be mercifull to me a sinner As the prophet Dauid confessed his sins when he said I know mine iniquities and my sin is euer before me Against thee against thee only haue I sinned and done euill in thy sight that thou maist be iust when thou speakest and pure when thou iudgest As the prodigal son confessed his sins when he said Father I haue sinned against heauen before thee am no more worthy to be called thy son And as your selues confesse your sins in the beginning of euery masse I say secondly that your selues graunt that Venials need no confession at al. And yet as I haue already proued the least sin of al deserueth eternall death For thus doth your own famous Canonist write Quibus consequens est posse quem si velit confesso vno peccato veniali alterum tacere Vpon which it followeth that one may if he list confesse one veniall sinne and conceale another Maior and other Schoole-doctors are of the same opinion I say thirdly that by the scriptures vpon which ye woulde gladly ground your confession we are no lesse bound to confesse one sin then another For your triuolous distinction of mortall and veniall sinnes can be found in no text of holy scripture And consequently since the scripture it selfe by your graunt freeth vs from confessing Venials it followeth directly that wee are bound to confesse none at all I say fourthly that your confession is ridiculous indeede as which vrgeth the penitent to confesse those sinnes to sinful men which God of his mercy hath forgiuen already I prooue it because your best approoued writers hold that contrition onely reconcileth sinners to God and taketh away both the fault and the paine But after that we are reconciled to God by only cōtrition and haue both our sinnes and the satisfaction remitted I weene it is a vain and a ridiculous thing to afflict our selues for popish absolution This that I say is witnessed by Martinus Nauarrus by your learned frier Ioan. Lud. Viualdus and diuers others I say fiftly that your confessions are neuer able to bring peace to any troubled conscience but to driue them headlong into desperation For first none liuing is able to make a true confession of all his sinnes which thing is so cleere by the Scriptures that your Cardinall Caietane cannot denie it Secondly thousandes are so turmoiled therewith that dayly they come to confesse the sinnes which they had forgotten condemning themselues of their former negligence Thirdly none of you all can prescribe howe much time or what diligence is inough y t ones confession may be perfit The consideratiō wherof bringeth many thousand souls to perplexitie For you beare thē in hand y t they must confesse all mortal sins and all specificall differences of the same And yet will I gage my life that ye haue ten thousand priestes in Europe yea perhaps in Italie that cannot perceiue the aforesaid differēce and much lesse can the lay people performe it See more hereof in my booke of Motiues The 2. obiection S. Iohn the baptist induced the people to the confession of their sinnes which doubtlesse was not to confesse themselues in generall to be sinners but to vtter euery man his sinnes So is it said in the actes of the apostles that many of them which beleeued came confessing and declaring their deeds And therfore saith S. Hierome that priestes binde and loose Auditâ peccatorum varietate hauing heard the varietie of sinnes The answere I say first that S. Iohn the baptist cannot meane of your sacramentall confession because it was not instituted before his decollatiō But you make smal accompt to wrest the holy scripture if by any meanes it could so serue your turne For as your graund doctor Pighius resembled it to a nose of waxe euen so in good sooth ye seeme to vse it The trueth is this S. Iohn exhorting the people to repentance and to amendment of their former liues euil spent found so good successe in his preaching that Hierusalem and all Iurie and all the countrey about Iordan were desirous to be baptized and in signe of their true repentance they publickly acknowledged their sinnes But that they this did in generall termes and not in popish maner I prooue it by two reasons First because popish auricular confession was not yet inuented but after Christes resurrection as all papistes graunt Againe because one man could not possibly heare seuerally the generall confessions of so manie multitudes speciallie in so short a time I say secondly that with
in synop Ionas liued in the daies of Elias who reprooued Achab the king of Samaria He was the sonne of the widow of Sarepta whom Elias restored to life for her hospitalitie towardes him So writeth Epiphanius but others thinke otherwise Let the Reader vse his owne iudgement herein Ionas did prophesie Christes death and resurrection more significantly by his passion then by his worde or preaching For to what end was he swallowed vp of the Whale and restored againe the third day but to signifie Christes rising from the dead the third day Aug. de ciuit lib. 18. cap. 30. Yea Christ himselfe interpreted the prophesie of Ionas euen as S. Austen doth For he obiected against the Iewes for their incredulitie Ionas his comming out of the Whales belly as a most vndoubted signe of his resurrection Mat. 12. ver 40. Luc. 11. verse 30. The Hebrewes say that Ionas was the sonne of the widow of Sarepta whom the prophet Elias restored from death They also write that Osee and Amos Esay and Ionas prophesied at the selfe same time Hier. hic in prooem The seuenth Section of the Prophet Micheas Micheas the Moralist which is by interpretation humble and fellow heire with Christ was a prophet of the tribe of Ephraim Epiphanius He was so charitably affectced towards the Israelites his brethren that he wished himselfe to haue bin destitute of the spirite of Prophesie to haue been reckoned amongst the false Prophets to haue preached an vntrueth and himselfe to haue perished alone so that such a multitude should beleeue in Christ and not be deliuered to captiuitie euerlasting Hier. in cap. 2. Mich. Albeit Micheas was of the same time with Osee Amos and Esay who prophesied in the time of Osias king of Iuda yet did not Micheas preach in the daies of Ozias but in the time of Ioatham his sonne after whom Achas reigned Ezechias succeeding in the empire of his father Achas in whose daies the ten tribes felt their captiuitie amongst the Assyrians Hier. hic in cap. 1. Aug. de ciu lib. 18. cap 27. Micheas prophesied against Ierusalem and Samaria and against Achab. Mich cap. 1.3 Reg. 22. Athanas in Synopsi The eight Section of Nahum Nahum euen as Ionas did directeth his prophesie to Niniuie the great citie of the Assyrians which is now called Ninus And because y e Niniuites after God had mercifully released the punishment foretold by Ionas committed greater offences then before this Prophet Nahum doth denounce vnto the said Niniuites to al y e persecuters of Israel Gods iudgment and euerlasting captiuitie And withall hee comforteth the faithfull shewing that the destruction of their enemies shall be for their consolation Nah. cap 1.2.3 Hier. in proaem Nahum was the sonne of Helkeseus who after the tradition of the Hebrewes was also himselfe a prophet He prophesied in the time of Ezechias Hier Gloss. After Iosephus he prophesied in the time of Ioatham king of Iuda Ioseph antiq lib 9 cap. 11. All thinges foretold of Niniuie were fulfilled in the hundred and fiteenth yeare Iosephus Ibidem The 9. Section of Abacuc Like as Nahum whome Abacuc followeth prophecieth against Niniue and the Assyrians who destroyed the ten tribes called Israel euen so Abacuc prophecieth against Babylon and king Nabuchedonosor by whom the two tribes called Iuda as also the temple were ouerthrowen Hier hic in proaemio Abacuc prophecied many things of the aduent of our Sauior 2. yeres before the Iews returned from Babylon he died and was honorably buried in his owne house Epiphanius The 10. Section of Sophonias Sophonie was of the tribe of Simeon borne in the mount Sarabatha Epiphanius Sophonias the prophet descended of noble progenitours Chusa was his father Godolias his grandfather Amarias his great grandfather Ezechias father to his great grandfather who all by the tradition of the Hebrewes were also prophets Hier. in 1. cap. Sophon Sophonias prophecied in Hierusalem and in all Iewrie he foretold the day in which all their idolles should be ouerthrowen and affliction come vpon them He also prophecied of our Sauiour and of his resurrection After that hee preached against Gaza Ascalon Azoto Accaron Moab Ammō Damascus Niniuie against the Aethiopians Athanas. in synopsi Sophonias prophecied in the dayes of Iosias the sonne of Amon the king of Iuda and so it is euident that he prophecied before the captiuitie of Babylon cap. 1. Sophon Lyranus ibidem The 11. Section of the prophet Aggaeus Aggeus directed his prophesie specially to Zorobabel and Iesus the sonne of Iosedech and then to all the people in Iuda and Hierusalem commaunding them to build vp againe the temple of the Lord. Lyranus in princ S. Austen saith that these three prophets Aggeus Zacharias and Malachias prophecied in the end of the captiuitie Aug. de ciuit lib. 18. cap. 35. which yet must be vnderstood after the returne from the captiuitie whereof saint Austen could not be ignorant since it is plainely said in the first of Haggai that in the sixt month of the second yeare of the raigne of king Darius he receiued the gift of prophecie This case shall appeare more clearely in the second booke in the discourse of the first monarchie In which place marke this point attentiuely Haggeus so soone as he saw the temple of Ierusalem builded with his corporall eies for he saw it before in vision so soone did hee sing praises to the Lorde and that doone ended his life in the same place where he was very honourably buried Epiphanius The 12. Section of the prophet Zacharias Zacharias sonne of Barachias the sonne of Addo the prophet beganne to prophesie two moneths after Aggeus that is in the eight moneth of the second yeere of Darius chap. 1. Zachar. There were sundry Zacharies one the sonne of Ioiada another the sonne of Barachias an other the father of saint Iohn the Baptist. Whereupon ariseth a great controuersie amongest the learned which of all these was that Zacharie whom the Iewes as Christ chargeth them in the 23. of Mathew murdered betweene the temple and the altar Hier. in Matt. lib. 4. cap. 23. prope finem Zacharias after hee had prophecied many things of Ierusalem and animated the people to builde the temple and had also reprooued the sluggishnesse of the prophets and priests hee died in his decrepite age and was buried with Aggeus Epiphanius The 13. Section of the prophet Malachie The prophet Malachie was of the tribe of Zabulon borne after the returne of the Iewes from Babylon in Sopha the land of Zabulon Epiphanius Malachias was the last of all the prophets who after the returne from the captiuitie and building againe of the temple foretold the desolation therof and the ceasing of their sacrifice Hier. apud Eder Malachie prophecied of the day of iudgement and of the incarnation of our Sauiour he foretold that Elias to wit Iohn the Baptist shoulde be sent before his aduent Athanas. in synopsi CHAP. XII Of the diuerse names
condition of the married For he saith indeede that the vnmarried doth better if he can so continue albeit in marrying he sinneth not yet this is not in respect of any holines that resulteth out of single life but because the vnmarried is more free from the cares of the world and so more apt forstudie the seruice of God I say secondly that S. Paul neuer meant to enforce any person either to be married or to leade a single life therfore did he say that he sought for the coÌ„modity of the Corinthians but not to entangle theÌ„ in the snare as if he had said if I shuld go about to bar you of mariage I shuld tangle you in a snare I say thirdly y t a man may be as holy in mariage as if he liued vnmarried to his liues end which S. Hierome though a great patron of single life both grauely considered and sincerely acknowledged for he saith that Abraham pleased God no lesse in wedlocke then virgins doe in their single life these are his expresse words as the popish canon law reciteth them Abraham placuit in coniugio sicut nunc virgines placent in castitate seruiuit ille legi tempori suo seruiamus nos legi tempori nostro in quos fines coelorum deuenerunt Abraham pleased God in marriage euen as virgins now please in chastity hee serued the law and his time let vs also vpon whom the ends of the world is come serue the law our time Yea S. Nazianzene saith that his father being a bishop was greatly holpen in pietie by his wife the same S. Gregory saith in another place that neither marriage nor single life doth either ioyne vs to God or to the world or withdraw vs from god or from the world This is confirmed by S. Chrysostome in these words Nuptiae licet difficultatis in se plurimum habeant ita tamen assumi possunt vt perfectiori vitae impedimento non sint Although marriage haue great trouble in it self yet may it so be vsed as it shalbe no hindrance to perâ—â—t life S. Austen after that he had auouched holy life to be nothing abated in holy Samuel and Zacharias by reason of their marriages by and by he addeth these words Qua ergo ratione accusatur quod minime obesse probatur quis neget bonum debere dici quod neminem laedit How therefore is that thing accused which is proued to do no hurt who denieth that that ought to be called good which bringeth harme to none S. Clemens Alexandrinus giueth a sufficient solution to this obiection in these expresse words Annon permittitur etiam ei qui vxorem duxit vna cum coÌ„iugio etiam esse solicitum de iis quae sunt domini sequitur ambae enim sunt sanctae in domino haec quidem vt vxor illa verò vt virgo cannot she also that is married together with hir marriage seeke the things that pertaine to the Lord for they both are holy in the lord this as a wife she as a virgin Nicephorus though he were caried away with sundry errors of his time yet doth he make S. Gregory who was a married bishop equal with S. Basill his brother who led a single life these are his words Et quamuis is coniugeÌ„ habuerit rebus tamen aliis fratri minimè cessit though he were married yet was he nothing inferior to his brother in other things In fine S Ambrose saith thus Quid ergo dicimus si virgines de deo cogitant iunctae viris demundo qu espes relinqutur nubentibus apud deum si enim ita est dubium est de salute eorum nam videmus virgines de seculo cogitare matrimonio iunctos dominicis studere operibus What therfore say we if virgins think of god and the married of the world what hope haue the married with God for if it be so their saluation is in doubt for we see that virgins do thinke of the world and that married men are careful for the works of the Lord. The third obiection Defraude not one another but for praier sake saith S. Paul ergo priests that must euer pray must euer abstaine The answere I say first that S. Paul doth here shew the necessity of marriage in that he disswadeth not from abstinence saue onely for praier sake I say secondly that priests must not euer be occupied in prayer no more then lay men their nature and condion requireth conuenient recreation I say thirdly that y e apostle speaketh not here of euery kind of praier but of extraordinary praier appointed for vrgent extraordinary causes which kinde of praiers must alwaies haue fasting ioyned with them as the apostle doth expressely say and so if the papistes will needes haue the apostle to speake of vsuall and daily praier then must their priestes vsually and daily fast which I weene their fatted headed moonkes will neuer agree vnto or at least neuer put in practise Yea they must continually absteine from wine for so the law required The fourth obiection When Dauid to satisfie his hunger being vrgent required of Abimelech the priest some cakes of bread or what els came to hand Abimelech answered that hee had no common bread but if he and his companie were not polluted with women hee would giue them hallowed bread Now it is cleere that Abimelech meant of their lawfull wiues because hee coulde not suspect holy Dauid to haue been polluted with naughtie women If therefore lawfull wedlocke did so pollute secular persons that for the vse therof they might not eate the Shew bread how much more shall the vse of wedlocke pollute priests of the new testament that they may not eate Christes body in the holy masse The answere I say first that how holy your Masse is shal by Gods grace appeare in conuenient place I say secondly that wedlocke is an honourable and vndefiled bed and therefore cannot pollute such persons as vse the same lawfully and in the feare of God Yea if the vse thereof had not been lawfull euen in Bishops and other ministers of the church holy Paphnutius durst not haue defended the same publikely in the presence of so many learned men at Nice who for all that did so and was therfore not onely highly commended but the whole councell alsagreed to his godly motion I say thirdly that there were many legall contamination aswel in men as in women whereof who list may see at large in Leniticus but neither was the lawfull matrimoniall act reputed any of them neither do those legall ceremonies concerne vs of the newe testament but the true puritie signified by the same that is Christian purification wrought in the bloud of Christ Iesus and apprehended by a true sincere and liuely faith I say fourthly that many legal contamâ—nations were no other sinnes then the manifold popish irregularities then nocturne pollutions done
rash impious and most execrable in Gods sight The perioch of the chapter Priestes were married in the olde lawe and in time of the new testament in the East church and in the West Many popes of Rome were the sonnes of priests neither were they bastardes but legitimate children Many holy and learned bishops were married men S. Gregory S. Spiridion S. Cheremon S. Philogonius S. Eupsichius S. Paphnutius defended the marriage of priestes publickly in the councell of Nice and auouched in the spirite of God that the vse of holy wedlocke was honourable in them euen in time of their priesthood S. Cheremon and his wife fled togither from persecution euen at that time when he was Bishop of Nicopolis Eupsichius was the bishop of Cesarea and forthwith after his marriage martyred for Christ Iesus The apostles themselues were married begate children and carried their wiues about with them while they preached the gospel abroad in the countrey Clergie men vsed the benefite of marriage aswell as secular persons vntill the vntimely birth of wicked pope Syritius Bishops priests and all religious persons so termed may most lawfully marry by the lawes of God and are onely debarred thereof by the odible lawes of man or rather to vse the apostles wordes by the detestable doctrine of Satan All this I haue proued effectually in this present chapter Yea the marriage of priestes was vsed without restraint in Germanie for the space of a thousand seuentie and foure yeares after Christes sacred incarnation That is vntill the daies of the vngratious pope Hildebrand who termed himselfe Gregorie the seuenth who crept into the popedome by naughty meanes in the yeare of Christ 1074. And because I wil charge the Papistes with nothing but that which they shall neuer be able to denie their own deare moonk Lambertus Schafnaburgensis a man whom their trusty friend Ar. Pontacus Burdegalensis affirmeth to haue handled the histories of his time very exactly shalbe my witnesse against the pope and popishly prohibited marriages This writer so authenticall as ye heare writeth in this maner Hildebrandus papa cum episcopis Italiae conueniens iam frequentibus synodis decreuerat vt secundum instituta antiquorum canonum presbyteri vxores non habeant habentes aut dimittant aut deponantur nec quispam omnino ad sacerdotium admittatur qui non in perpetuum continentiam vitamque caelibemprofiteatur Sequitur aduersus hoc decretum protinus vehementer infremuit tota factio clericorum hominem plane haereticum vesani dogmatis esse clamitans qui oblitus sermonis domini quo ait non omnes capiunt verbum hoc qui potest capere capiat Apostolus qui se non continet nubat melius est enim nubere quam vri violenta exactione homines viuere cogeret ritu angelorum dum consuetum cursum naturae negaret fornicationi immunditiei fraena laxaret Pope Hildebrand togither with the Bishoppes of Italie decreed in frequent Synodes that after the ordinaunces of olde canons priestes shoulde not haue wiues and that suche as had wiues shoulde either put them awaie or bee depriued of their liuinges and that none shoulde be admitted to the order of priesthoode but hee that woulde professe the perpetual vow of single life Against this decree the whole faction of the clergy stormed wonderfully exclaming that Hildebrand was mad a flat heretike as who had forgotten the words of the Lord who saith that all cannot liue continent and the Apostle saith hee that cannot abstaine let him marrie for it is better to marrie then to be burnt and would violently compel men to liue like angels and while hee denied the accustomed course of nature gaue libertie to fornication and vncleannesse Out of which wordes I note first that this Lambertus was a Monke and a great patron of poperie which I proue by two reasons first for that hee tearmed it a faction to withstand Pope Hildebrands wicked decree Again because he affirmeth the late prohibition of priests marriage to bee according to the old canons which canons for al that were not before the daies of the late Pope Syricius as I haue proued I note secondly that since this Lambert was a great and zealous papist all must needs be of good credit that he saith against the papists and popish doctrine I note thirdly that priests were married in Germanie aboue one thousand seuentie yeeres after Christ that is till the time of this wicked Hildebrand I note fourthly that it was so strange a thing in those dayes to speake against the mariage of priests in Germanie that they reputed Pope Hildebrand a madde man and an heretique for withstanding the same And yet such is the fondnesse and madnesse of the common sorte this daye that they deeme them mad men and heretikes who speake in defence thereof I note fiftly that all the learned in Germanie proued the Pope an heretike by the flatte testimonie of Christ and his Apostle I note sixtly that by the verdict of all the learned in Germanie that great and goodly country Pope Hildebrand did not only enforce them violently against their auncient custome but withall did open the window to al filthie liuing Priests were also married in our owne countrey of England till the late dayes of the saide Pope Hildebrand if wee will beleeue our owne English Chronicles Polidorus another deare friend of the papists shall tell them what he thinks of the Popes proceeding touching the marriage of priests thus doth he write Illud tamen dixerim tantum abfuisse vt ista coacta castitas illam coniugalem vicerit vt etiam nullius delicti crimen maius ordini dedecus plus malireligioni plus doloris omnib bonis impresserit inusserit attulerit quam sacerdotum libidinis labes proinde forsitan tam è republica christiana quam ex ordinis vsu esset vt tandem aliquando ius publici matrimoni◠sacerdotibus restitueretur quod illi sine infamia sanctè potius colerent quam se spurcissimè eiuscemodi naturae vitio turpificarent Yet this I wil say that this compelled chastitie of priests was so far frō excelling chastity in wedlock as no crime whatsoeuer hath brought greater shame to priesthood more harme to religion more griefe to all good men then the vnchast life of priests Therefore perhaps it were no lesse necessarie for the publike weale of christendome then for the order of priesthood that once againe priests might marrie publikely that so they might liue honestly without shame not pollute themselues so filthily This is the iudgemēt of their own popish Polidore who being an Italian knewe best the Romish fashion He confesseth plainly as you see that priests were maried in old time wishing for great causes that it were so againe Their great Cardinall Panormitanus giueth so worthie a testimony of this controuersie as which being well marked will confoūd al papists in the world these be his words Continentia nō est
holy angels And Lodouicus Viues vpon the same place of S. Austen hath these wordes Et istos quoque supplicijs liberabat Origenes sicut ex sanctis angelis praecedente tempore diabolos faciebat quae illius erant vicissitudines These also did Origen deliuer from punishment as in processe of time he made of angels diuelles such was his changeable course of dealing Roffensis our late popish bishoppe of Rochester confesseth a trueth in this matter to wit that the Greekes did neuer beleeue there was a purgatorie Againe that purgatorie was not receiued in all places at once neither yet generally for many hundred yeeres His wordes I haue alleadged in the first booke of my Motiues in the seuenth preamble The first obiection I haue loosed thy prisoners out of the pit wherein there is no water Ergo saith our Iesuite Bellarmine there is a purgatorie for out of hell none can be loosed The answer I answer that the prophet means nothing els but that God will deliuer his church out of all dangers howe great soeuer they seeme Againe this text may fitly be expounded of hell as Saint Hierome taketh it His wordes are these In sanguine passionis tuae eos qui vincti in carcere tenebantur inferni in quo non est vlla misericordia tua clementia liberasti Thou hast deliuered in the bloud of thy testament of thy free mercie those that were bound in the prison of hell where there is no mercy And indeed the merite of Christes bloud preserued vs from hell which otherwise was prepared for vs. This text may also be vnderstood of the captiuitie of Babylon from whence the church was deliuered The second obiection We went through fire and water and thou hast brought vs to a place of comfort or refreshing By this place it is cleere that there is a purgatorie The answere I say first that before hell had no water in it but now there is found both fire and water such is the constancie of popishe diuinitie I say secondly that by fire and water the prophet here vnderstandeth the victories which martyrs haue had in their manifold passions That is to say martyrs after all their crosses miseries and afflictions are brought to Christ their head and true comfort Thus doth S. Hierome expound this place whose expresse wordes are these Martyrum hic ostendit victorias quas in diuersis passionibus meruerunt ad vnum eos dicit refrigerium id est Christum Dominum per laqueos per cruces per verbera per ignes aestusq alia diuersa supplicia per quae holocaustum acceptum effecti sunt peruenisse Hee sheweth the victories of martyrs which they were worthie of in their manifold passions and hee saith they came to a place of refreshing that is to Christ our Lord through snares through crosses through beatinges through fire and heate and diuers other tortures through which they became an acceptable sacrifice S. Austen expoundeth it in the selfe same maner The third obiection They cried to the Lord in their trouble and hee deliuered them from their distresse Hee brought them out of darkenes and out of the shadowe of death and brake their bandes asunder Ergo there is a purgatory The answere I answere that the whole Psalme containeth in effect nothing els but thankes giuing to the Lord for his great mercie in that he hath deliuered them not onely from hell iustly deserued for their sinnes but also from the manifold dangers of this life So writeth S. Austen vpon this Psalme and S. Hierome is of the same opinion For these are his expresse wordes Vinctum enim erat genus humanum catenis criminum carceri diaboli mancipatum For mankinde was bound with the chaines of sinne and kept in prison as a slaue by the diuell The 4. obiection He shall fine the sonnes of Leui and purifie them as gold and siluer that they may bring offeringes vnto the Lord in righteousnesse Which fining say our papistes cannot be vnderstood but of purgatorie The answere I answere that the prophet Malachie speaketh flatly of the first aduent of our Sauiour Iesus Christ who by his bitter and sacred passion will purge his church from all her sinnes and then shall the faithfull offer vp the sacrifice of land and thankesgiuing Thus doth S. Hierome expound this text neither can any other glosse be consonant to the discourse of the prophet The 5. obiection S. Mathew saith that the sinne of the holy ghost shalbe forgiuen neither in this worlde neither in the worlde to come By which wordes he giueth vs to vnderstand that some sinnes are forgiuen in the world to come Ergo there is a purgatorie The answere I answere that Gods spirite knoweth best how to interpret the scripture and consequently that S. Mathew meaneth nothing els by these wordes neither in this world neither in the world to come but that the sinne against the holy ghost shall neuer be forgiuen For so doth S. Marke another Euangelist interprete this selfe same text These are the wordes hee that blasphemeth against the holy ghost shall neuer haue forgiuenesse but is culpable of eternal damnation Yea which is a confusion to the papists S. Mathew himself so expoundeth himselfe in the next verse aforegoing And so doth S. Chrysostome expound this place The 6. obiection Thou shalt not depart thence till thou hast paied the vttermost farthing Ergo after satisfaction made or the popes pardon graunted thou maiest come out of purgatory The answere I answere with S. Augustine that the prison whereof S. Mathew speaketh is hell from whence there is no departure in deed For hee that is once committed thither for non payment must tarry there world without end because hee can neuer answere this infinite debt The replie When he saith vntill thou hast paied hee giueth vs to vnderstand that after a certaine time we shall come out I aunswere that the word vntill doth not connotate the end of imprisonment but the continuation thereof because so is the vsual acception of that terme in the holy scriptures For when S. Mathew saith he knew her not vntil she had brought forth her first borne sonne it followeth not that he afterward knew the blessed virgine So when it is said that Michol had no child to the day of her death it followeth not y t she had children after her death Thirdly when our Sauiour promised to be with his disciples till the worldes end it doth not import that he wil after forsake them Fourthly when the prophet saith as the eyes of a maiden looke vnto y e hands of her mistres so our eyes wait vpon the Lord our God vntill hee haue mercy vpon vs he meaneth not that our eies shal not afterward wait vpon the Lord. No God forbid Fiftly when God saith sit thou at my right hand vntil I make thine enemies
thy footstoole he meaneth not that Christ shall sit no longer on his right hand No no God auert The 7. obiection If any man build on this foundation golde siluer pretious stones timber hay or stubble euery mans worke shalbe made manifest for the day shall declare it because it shalbe reuealed by the fire and the fire shall trie euery mans work of what sort it is This fire the holy fathers doe vnderstand of purgatorie Ergo it ought not to be denied The answere I say first that all the fathers as well old as latter writers confesse that S. Paules discourse is altogither metaphoricall consequently y t no doctrine of faith can be grounded thereupon I say secondly that the old writers dissent one from another in the exposition of his text For S. Chrysostome vnderstandeth it of hell fire S. Hierome of Gods examination in the day of general iudgment S. Gregorie of the fire of tribulation in this life S. Ambrose and S. Theodoret of the fire of Gods iudgemēt others otherwise Gregorius Magnus hath these expresse words Quamuis hoc de igne tribulationis in hac vita nobis adhibito possit intelligi albeit this place may be vnderstood of the fire of tribulation which we suffer in this life Out of which words I note that although this Gregory thought there was a purgatory of small sins after this life yet did he confesse y t this place could proue no such thing Hereunto I adde that if either this text or any other had been a sufficient warrantize for purgatory aswel the Greekes as the ancient fathers would haue receiued it both which their own Roffensis denieth as is already proued I say thirdly that it cānot possibly be vnderstood of purgatory and I proue it effectually First because al martyrs go straight to heauen as al papists confesse Secondly because al such as haue plenary pardons frō the pope escape purgatory go the ready way to heauē Thirdly because Ieremy Iob. Ioh. Baptist the blessed virgine sundry others in whose passions of supererogation they build the treasure of the church and popish pardons could neuer come in purgatory and yet doth the text say that all aswel good as bad must be tried by that fire whereof the apostle speaketh in this place I say fourthly y t the apostle here speaketh of y e fire of probation but not of purgation as y e papists would haue him to doe These are y e words vniuscuiusque opus quale sit ignis probabit the fire shal trie euery ones worke of what sorte it is Which S. Austen well obserued when he wrote in this maner Ignis de quo locutus est eo loco apostolus Paulus talis debet intelligi vt ambo per eum transeant id est qui aedificat supra hoc fundamentum aurum argentum lapides pretiosos qui aedificat ligna foenum stipulam The fire whereof the apostle Paul speaketh in that place must be vnderstood to be such an one that both sorts may passe through it that is aswel he that buildeth vpon this foundation gold siluer or pretious stones as he that buildeth wood hay or stubble I say fiftly that all thinges spoken of in this text are taken metaphorically gold siluer and pretious stones doe signifie sound doctrine timber hay and stubble signifie false doctrine the builders are such as teach that doctrine the day signifieth time the daughter of trueth and the fire signifieth Gods spirit which reuealeth all trueths maketh false doctrine knowen This exposition is gathered out of the circumstances of the text it selfe out of S. Ambrose and S. Austen and out of late popish writers For their owne Hofmeisterus if my memory faile me not and their Gagnaeius also haue this interpretation in flat and expresse termes It is long since I read them and I haue not now their bookes at hand otherwise I would haue alledged their wordes I say sixtly that al such as would ground popish purgatory vpon this text are enforced to confesse and admit manifold absurdities And for triall hereof togither with that which is already said these wordes of our Iesuite Bellarmine may suffice Respondeo nos cogi ab ipso textu ad aequiuocationem non vnam sed duas admittendas I answere that the very text doth compell vs to admit more then one equiuocation The 8. obiection What shall they do which are baptised for dead if the dead rise not at all Why are they then baptised for the dead out of this place as our Iesuite Bellarmine supposeth nay as hee braggingly boasteth is popish purgatorie prooued vndoubtedly The answer I say first that great is the impudencie of our Iesuit who glorieth so much in his late Romish exposition which neither any one of the ancient fathers approueth neither yet sundrie of his owne fellowes will admit For Epiphanius Theodoretus Chrysostomus Tertullianus Ambrose Sedulius Anselmus Oecumenius Haymo and Theophilactus do expound it flatly against our Romish Iesuite and so doe also his owne deare fellowes Aquinas and Caietanus I say secondly that S. Paul vnderstandeth by those that are baptised for dead such as are at the point of death and are reputed as dead or for dead this saith S. Epiphanius is the true meaning of the Apostle and that he saith truely I appeale to the true iudgement of the indifferent reader These are the words of Epiphanius Alii rectè hoc dictum interpretantes dicunt quod morti vicini si fuerint in pietatis doctrina instructi ob hanc spem ante obitum lavacro digni fiunt ostendentes quod qui mortuus est etiam resurget ob id indiget remissione peccatorū per lauacrū Others interpret this saying of the apostle truly say that such as are at the point of death if they be instructed christiāly are for this hope worthie of baptising before they die thereby signifying that he which is dead shall rise againe and for that ende hath need of remission of his sins by baptisme This then is the true meaning of S. Paul in this place what shall they do which are baptised for dead that is which are rather reputed for dead then for liuing Wherefore are they baptised if the dead rise not againe for since they cannot be baptised for anie commoditie of this life which presently they must forsake being so extreamely sicke their baptisme prooueth the resurrection of the dead And where our Iesuit listeth to wrangle vpon the words pro illis for them it shall suffice to tell him that their latin so magnified edition is false and that in the originall and Greeke copies it is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the dead and so his cauill is not worth a figge The ninth obiection S. Paul saith that in the name of Iesus euery knee voweth both of things in heauen and things in earth and things vnder the earth but the
the word soule must we vnderstād life for so the words following doe require of necessitie so saith Paul trouble not your selues anima enim ipsius in ipso est for his soule that is his life is in him And a litle after he saith thus neither is my soule deare to me so I may fulfil my course where by y e word soule life must needs be vnderstood So Ioseph was bidden to take the babe and his mother to go into the land of Israel because they were dead that sought the babes soule that is his life so Christ saith that a good shepheard giueth his soule for the sheepe that is his life These and other like places doe proue euidently that our soule in the scriptures is taken for our life so that when the scripture saith God wil not suffer Christs soule to tarrie in the graue it meaneth Christs life as if it shoulde say Christ shal not be long dead death shall not swallow him vp or preuaile against him The 12. obiection Saint Austen and other of the fathers haue taught flatly that there is a purgatorie and therefore whosoeuer denieth purgatory opposeth himselfe against the fathers The answere I say first that I haue said sufficiently for the authoritie of the fathers in my booke of Motiues in the ninth chap. of credit due vnto writers I say secondly that the fathers as they were men so had they their imperfections and errors are no lesse reiected of the papists when they make against them then of vs. Yea no man reiecteth the fathers with such temeritie as doth the Iesuite Bellar. when he dislikes them This is proued in my book of Motiues I say thirdly that thogh sundry of the fathers seeme to grant that there is a purgatorie yet do they it so doubtfully so vnconstantly so coldly as none of thē do or can make it an article of our belief And for proofe hereof one only S. Austin may suffice for the rest In one place he writes in this manner Tale aliquid etiam post hanc vitam fieri incredibile non est vtrum ita sit quaeri potest It is not incredible but that some such thing may be after this life and it is a question whether there be anie such thing or no. Again in another place after he hath discoursed largely of purgatory in y e end he cōcludeth doubtfully thus Non redarguo quia forsitan verum est I doe not reprooue it because perhaps it is true Again in another place he hath these expresse words Siue ergo in hac vita tantum homines ista patiuntur siue etiam post hanc vitam talia quaedam iudicia subsequūtur non abhorret quantum arbitror a ratione veritatis iste intellectus huius sententiae Whether therfore men suffer these things onely in this life or also after this life some such iudgementes follow this interpretation as I thinke is not repugnant to reason Thus we see cleerely howe vnconstant and how cold S. Austens doctrine is concerning popish purgatorie The 13. obiection The ancient fathers both praied and offered vp sacrifice for the dead which they would neuer haue done if there had not been a purgatorie The answere I say first that sundry of the fathers praied for the dead who neuer once dreamed of popish purgatory Which thing is so fully proued in my Motiues as may be sufficient for this obiection I say secondly that in the hote persecutions of the primitiue church when martyrs were daily put to death for confessing Christ Iesus then the church did offer the sacrifice of laud and thankesgiuing did celebrate anniuersaries or annuall memories of her faithful children in which memories were publickly named al such persons as died constantly for the christian faith Not by that meanes to procure any merite remission or satisfaction to those blessed martyrs for as y e papists graunt martyrs need no such thing but so to excite the liuing after their godly example boldly to confesse the name of Christ and therin to be ready to yeeld vp their liues when time and place should so require I say thirdly that they praied for y e dead to insinuate their hope in the resurrection to mitigate their own sorrow and to declare their affection towards the dead But neuer did anie of the approoued antiquitie pray in such sort for the dead as the papists this day doe I say fourthly that the praiers which the old fathers vsed ministred great occasiō to that superstitiō which is now an high point of Romish religion For the ignorant posteritie wrested euery thing to serue their turne I say fiftly that as the fathers were excited to pray for the dead of a certaine natural affection towards them so were they doubtful what effect their praiers shuld haue and whether they did profite the dead or no. Yea some of the fathers praied onely for the resurrection of the body as I haue prooued in my Motiues The vncertaintie doubts which the other fathers had shal appeare euidently by S. Austens testimony First therfore S. Austen praied for his mother that she might haue remission of her sins for I will conceale nothing y t seemeth to make for the papists yet did S. Austen thus pray only to shew his louing ardent affection towards his mother not to procure any remittall for her sins as whose sins he constantly beleeued were already pardoned For these are his expresse wordes Et credo iam feceris quod te rogo sed voluntaria oris mei approba Domine And I verily beleue y t thou hast already done as I desire yet Lord accept my inward affection vttered by my lippes Out of which words I note that Austen beleeued his mothers sins to be forgiuen before he praied for her and that the end and intent of his praier was only this to shew that he was naturally and dutifully affected to his mother Vpon which kinde of vndiscreet zeale great superstition and flat idolatry followed in his posteritie as I said before Secondly S. Austen hauing distinguished three sortes of dead to wit very good very euill and neither very good nor very euill affirmeth y t praiers made for the very bad damned soules do make their dānation more tollerable These are his expresse wordes Pro valde malis etsi nulla sunt adiumenta mortuorū qualescunque viuorū consolationes sunt Quibus autem prosunt aut ad hoc prosunt vt sit plena remissio aut certe vt tolerabilior fiat ipsa damnatio For the very bad although they be no helpes to the dead yet are they some solace to the liuing And whom they profite they profite for this that either they may haue full remission or that their dānation be more tolerable Out of which words I note that Saint Austen holdeth in this point of praying for the dead that which neither is sound neither yet allowed by
the Papists themselues and consequently that the papists ought not to make account of his iudgement herein For you doe see that he granteth the punishment of the damned to be mitigated in hell for the prayers of the liuing which thing no papist will or dare auouch And the like is to be saide of other of the Fathers when they folow opinions not grounded vpon the word of God Saint Austen therefore must be reiected by his owne rule as I haue prooued in my Motiues when he dissenteth from Gods word the true touchstone and triall of all trueth And saint Austens inconstancie is plainely vttered in an other place where he hath these wordes Quod quidem non ideo confirmo quoniam non resisâ—o Which verily I do not therefore approue because I do not impugne it Out of which wordes I note that though saint Austen could not approoue the opinion of the vulgar sort as which he knew to haue no ground but a meere naturall affection yet would hee not condemne it but leaue it as in suspense The foureteenth obiection Praier for the dead is proued by the scripture euen in y t new testament for when S. Iohn forbids to pray for them that die without repentance he doubtles exhorts to pray for them that die penitent The answer I say first that when cardinall Allen in his notes vpon this place auoucheth roundly that this text coÌ„uinceth praier for the dead he may tell that tale to wise men and repute himselfe a foole for his paines For first as S. Austen vpon whose authoritie he only buildeth affirmeth that the apostle speaketh of him that dieth impenitent so doth the same S. Austen auouch that he doth iniury to a martyr that praieth for a martyr which is a receiued axiome with the papists and consequently when he inferreth out of S. Austen that we must pray for them that die penitent he concludeth against S. Austen that wee must pray for most constant martyrs and so commit a manifest iniurie So then albeit S. Iohn dehorteth from praying for such as die without repentance yet doth he not exhort vs to pray for those that die penitent for otherwise doubtles wee must pray for martyrs which no papist wil allow I say secondly that S. Iohn exhorteth to pray for penitent sinners here on earth but not for the dead I prooue it because these are saint Iohns words If any shal see his brother sinning a sin not to death but he that sinneth is in this life for wee can not see a man sinning in the next life where no sinne is committed and therfore S. Iohn speaketh of prayer only in this life I say thirdly that saint Iohus purpose is this no other to exhort vs to repentance for our sins in this life because after this life there is neither repentance nor remission of sinnes to be had neither can any other sense be truely deduced out of S. Iohns words Yea their owne cardinall Caietane doth so expound this place to their vtter confusion CHAP. VII Of praying to Saints departed COncerning the inuocation of Saints great abuses and intollerable superstition haue crept into the church and dazeled the eies of the vulgar sort wherein I desire diligent attention and indifferent iudgement vntill the end of my discourse The first Conclusion Albeit a christian man neuer pray to the saints departed yet doth he not sinne therein I prooue it because euery sinne is a transgression of Gods law or commandement but God hath made no law nor giuen any commandement to pray to saints Ergo not to pray to them is no sin at all The proposition is a receiued maxime in the Romish church grounded on these wordes of saint Austen Peccatum est factum vel dictum vel concupitum aliquid contra legem aeternam Sinne is any deed word or thought against the eternall law which is the will of God Saint Ambrose confirmeth Saint Augustines description in these wordes Quid est peccatum nisi praeuaricatio legis diuinae caelestium inobedientia praeceptorum What is sinne but the transgression of Gods lawe and the disobedience of his holie precepts The assumption is secure vntil the papists can alleadge some precept out of the olde or new testament for the inuocation of saints which they will doe ad Calendas Graecas But the Papistes thinke they haue a mightie obiection against this Conclusion taken out of Genesis in these wordes Et innocetur super eos nomen meum nomina quaeque patrum meorum Abraham Isaac And let my name be called vpon them and the names of my fathers Abraham and Isaac To which I answere thus First this vocation or nomination was not any precept from God but the meere fact of Iacob or Israel who as hee was holy so was he a man and might haue erred herein as man Secondly the hebrew text is thus Let my name be named in them that is let them bee called my children by adoption or let them bee surnamed after me For it was the custome both of the Hebrewes and of the Greekes to expresse the surname of euery one by the name of the father as Aristoteles the sonne of Nicomachus Zenophon the sonne of Gryllus Cambyses the sonne of Cyrus Thirdly the whole course of holy scripture doth yeelde this interpretation of Iacobs wordes In the olde testament it was a great reproch for a woman to beare no children though nowe with the Papists they be reputed holy that will rashly vow neuer to marry for which respect the small remnant of men left after the execution of Gods iustice in the destruction of Ierusalem inforced women contrary to womanly shamefastnesse to seek vnto men and to offer themselues to very base conditions to the end they would be their husbands and so take away their reproch Which thing the prophet Ieremy vttereth in these wordes In that day seuen women shall take hold of one man saying We will eate our owne bread and weare our owne garments onely let vs be called by thy name and take away our reproch Thus writeth Gods holy prophet whose discourse with the due circumstances thereof if the christian Reader wil exactly ponder he shall behold as clearely as the glittering beames of the sunne the most impudent and sophisticall dealing of the papists For though the words aswell in the latine as in the Hebrew be all one and the very same yet are the papists ashamed I am well assured to inferre or proue inuocation of Saints by this latter place That which I say is euident because these women desired nothing else of the man but that he would be their husband and that they might be called his wiues and so put away their reproch This interpretation is plainely touched in the expresse wordes of the text when the women desired the man to take their reproch away by letting his name be called vppon them for which end they promised not only
intercession before God it shal not be a thing inconuenient Out of which sayinges of Origen I note first that he speaketh only of the praiers which saintes in heauen make for vs and not one word of our praying to them I note secondly that to holde that the saintes in heauen doe pray for vs is not a constant position in Origens doctrine but only an opinion and disputable question I proue it because he saith arbitror I think Again because he saith non erit inconueniens it shal not be incoÌ„uenient Thirdly because he saith audiuâ— ita dicentem I heard one say so The fiâ—st obiection Origen in his book de paenitentia saith y t he will fall prostrate on his knees and inuocate all the saintes in heauen that they will helpe him because he dare not pray to God for himselfe The answere I say first that this assertion fathered vpon Origen will confute it selfe for how could Origen or anie faithfull christian be in feare humbly to inuocate our most mercifull God who willeth all to come to him that are in distresse who promiseth to heare all those that in their trouble call vpon him Who graunteth to vs whatsoeuer we aske in his sonnes name who hath appointed his sonne to make intercession for vs. I say secondly that this booke alledged in the obiection is not Origens but a plaine counterfeit And I prooue it effectually because their owne pope Gelasius hath so resolued The 2. obiection Origen saith that the fathers of the churche appointed the feast day of the holy Innocentes and that by the will of God that so their intercession might profite their parentes The answere I say first that if all this were graunted it could but at the most proue that the saints pray for vs which in a good sense may be admitted For I willingly graunt that the saintes in heauen doe in generall maner and termes pray for vs that is that they wishe vs to perseuere in the true faith and feare of God and y t in the end we may be partakers with theÌ„ of eternal glory I say secondly that sundry learned men doe thinke these homilies from whence this obiection is taken not to be any part of Origens workes I say thirdly that if Origen doe make that a constant doctrine in one place which he graunteth to be a disputable question in another place what remaineth but to thinke his opinion therein to be of no force I say fourthly that the papistes as their Ruffinus recordeth will admit nothing in Origen which disliketh them but reiect all such stuffe as infarsed into his workes by the heretickes Let them therefore giue vs leaue also to reiect in Origen if in any place he seeme to approoue inuocation of saintes as that which is infarsed by the heretickes specially because in other places he teacheth the contrary doctrine The fift Canon About 20. yeares after that Origen had doubtfully disputed the praying of saintes for vs S. Cyprian and S. Cornelius set down that point resolutely as standing no longer in doubt therof to wit that the saintes in heauen doe pray for the liuing here on earth For they made this couenaut that whether of them soeuer should die the first should pray for his brethren and sisters yet liuing These are S. Cyprians owne wordes Et si quis istinc nostrum prior diuinae dignationis celeritate praecesserit perseueret apud dominum nostra dilectio pro fratribus sororib apud misericordiam patris noncesset oratio And if either of vs shall through Gods mercie die before the other let our loue continue still in Gods sight let vs not cease to desire the fauour of God for our brethren and sisters yet liuing Thus saith S. Cyprian Out of whose wordes I note first that to be established in his time which was but in opinion and doubtfull case in the daies of Origen To wit that the saintes in heauen pray for vs here on earth I note secondly that the inuocation of saintes in heauen was neither established in saint Cyprians time neither once called into question I note thirdly that popish inuocation of Saintes sprung vp by little and little from one degree to another The sixt Canon About an hundreth yeares after S. Cyprian which was about 350. yeares after Christ some of the fathers by rhetoricall apostrophees did applie their orations to the dead as if they had been liuing Of which sort were S. Basill and saint Gregory Nazianzene who though they did but inuocate the saints figuratiuely and of a certain excessiue zeale yet did such their inuocations minister occasion to the papistes of all their superstition in that behalfe These are the wordes of S. Gregory Nazianzene Audite populi tribus linguae homines omnes cuâ—usuis generis aetaetis quicunque nunc estis existetis Infra audiat quoque Constantini magni anima si quis mortuis sensus est omnesque eorum qui ante eum imperium tenuerunt piae Christique amantes animae Heare O people kinreds tongues nations ages whosoeuer are now liuing or shalbe borne hereafter Let also the soule of Constantine the Great heare all the christian godly soules of the Emperors before him if the dead perceiue any thing at all And againe in another place he thus writeth At ô pascha magnum inquam sacro sanctum pascha totiusque mundi piaculum te enim quasi vita praeditum alloquor But O Passeouer the great I say and sacred Passeouer and the purgation of the whole world For I call vpon thee as if thou hadst life Thus writeth Nazianzene by whose wordes we may measure both the rest of his sayings and of the other fathers First therefore I note that hee doth inuocate aswell senselesse thinges as reasonable soules Secondly hee calleth vpon the soules of all the people in the world whereof some were damned in the bottome of hell and so could not heare as euery learned papist will admit Thirdly he inuocateth those that are yet vnborne Vpon these sandie foundations are built all popish superstitious inuocations The 7. Canon Catholique doctrine is that as Vincentius Lyrinensis who liued aboue a thousand yeares agoe defineth it which hath been receiued constantly of al the faithful at al times and in all places Which Vincentius is and euer was of great reputation with and amongst al learned papists and consequently since popish inuocation of Saintes neither was constantly receiued of all the faithfull neither in all places neither at al times as which was not heard of for many hundreth yeares after Christ it cannot be deemed catholicke doctrine no not by popishe proceeding This Canon ought to be well remembred as which of it selfe ouerthroweth al Romish religion An obiection S Chrysostomes Masse which was generally vsed in the Greeke church maketh expresse mention of the inuocation of Saintes and the same doctrine is taught in sundry places of his workes The
answere I say first that in S. Chrysostomes time which was more then 400. yeres after Christ this superstitious inuocation had gotten deepe roote in the heartes of the vulgar sort For which cause S. Chrysostome did zealously in many sermons induce them wholly and solie to inuocate the liuing God One or two places I will alledge for the better satisfaction of the Reader thus therefore doth hee write Dic mihi mulier quemadinodum ausa es cum sis peccatrix iniqua accedere ad eum ego inquit noui quid agam Vide prudentiam mulieris non rogat Iacobum non obsecrat Ioannem neque pergit ad Petrum nec intendit Apostolorum chorum non quaesiuit mediatorem sed pro omnibus illis paenitentiam accepit comitem quae aduocati locum impleuit sic ad summum fontem perrexit Propterea inquit descendit propterea carnem assumpsit homo factus est vt ego ei audeâ—m loqui Tell mee O woman howe thou being a great sinner darest come vnto God I saieth she know what I haue to doe Behold the wisdome of the woman she desires not Iames she praies not Iohn shee goes not to Peter shee neither respected the companie of the Apostles nor sought for a mediatour but in steed of them all shee tooke true repentance for her fellowe which supplied the place of an aduocate and so she came to the chiefe fountaine For this end saith shee did Christ descend for this end did hee take our nature vpon him and was made man that I may boldly speak vnto him Againe in another place the same S. Chrysostome saith thus Sin vero sobrie agemus etiam per nosmetipsos istud valeamus efficere multo magis per nos quam per alios Nam Deus gratiam non tam aliis rogantibus pro nobis quam nobis vult donare quo fruamur libertate Deum compellandi emendemur dum ipsi studemus deum reconciliare sic Chananaeam illam aliquando miseratus est sic etiam meretrici donauit salutem sic latronem nullo patrono nullo mediatore intercedente But if we will deale soberly wee may dispatche that by our owne selues and a great deale better by our selues then by others For God will giue vs his grace not so muche for the praiers of others as for our owne sake that so wee may haue libertie to call vpon God and to amend our liues while wee seeke to bee reconciled to him So had hee mercie on the woman of Chanaan so gaue hee remission of sinnes to the adulteresse so did hee saue the theefe without any patrone without any mediatour Thus saith Saint Chrysostome Out of whose wordes I note first that hee greatly commendeth those who will immediately call vpon God and neither seeke to Peter nor to Paule nor to anie mediatour but Christ Iesus I note secondly that hee greatly reprooueth all such as are afraid to call vpon God by reason of their sins teâ—lâ—â—g theÌ„ that a penitent heart is the chief patron before God Thirdly that Christ Iesus tooke our nature vpon him for this end that sinners may boldly call vpon him I note fourthly that God wil sooner heare our selues theÌ„ other for vs. I note fiftly that wheÌ„ we cal vpon god immediatly we confirm our christian libertie I say secondly that the masse which goeth abroad vnder the name of S. Chrysostome is a meere counterfeit for first there be diuers copies and diuerse translations whereof neuer one agreeth with another Againe if S. Chrysostome had written any such masse he should be contrarie to himselfe in sundrie places of his works Thirdly because if S. Iames S. Basil S. Chrysostome shoulde euerie one of them haue made a masse as popish printed bookes tel vs it must needes follow which the papists will not wel like of that the bishop of Rome hadde in those dayes smal authoritie For now a dayes nothing may be done without the popes consent but then bishops made masses at their pleasure and the pope made none at all Fourthly because in this supposed S. Chrysost. masse there is often repeated this blasphemous prayer Saue vs by the prayers of thy saints Fiftly because prayer is there made for pope Nicholas and for the Empereur Alexius who both liued long after S. Chrysostomes death the one 500. yeares the other 800. yeares I say thirdly that the other places of S. Chrysostom are euen like to his masse and whosoeuer thinketh otherwise must say that he is contrarie to himselfe as is alreadie proued CHAP. VIII Of Popish Pilgrimage GOds people of late yeres haue beene wonderfully seduced and that by the sinister and false perswasion of the papists who taught them to merite their saluation by gadding on pilgrimage to visit stocks stones and dead mens bones The whole summe whereof for perspicuitie sake I shall reduce to certaine briefe conclusions The first conclusion The common people about the yeare of our Lord 420. were so addicted to sundry kinds of superstition partly by the instinct of Satan partly by the negligence of some Bishops and partly by the vndiscreet doctrine of othersome that S. Austen was at his wits end not knowing which way to turne him or what to do because he vtterly condemned many things in his heart which he durst not freely reprooue speake against This conclusion will seeme strange to many a one but S. Austen doth himselfe deliuer it to vs whose expresse words are these Quod autem instituitur praeter consuetudinem vt quasi obseruatto sacramenti sit approbare non possum etiamsi multa huiusmodi propter nonnullarum vel sanctarum vel turbulentarum personarum scandala vitanda liberius improbare non audeo Sed hoc nimis doleo quòd multa quae in diuinis libris saluberrima praecepta sunt minus curantur tam multis praesumptionibus sic plena sunt omnia vt grauius corripiatur qui per octauas suas terram nudo pede tetigerit quam qui mentem vinolentia sepelierit Omnia itaque talia quae neque sanctarum scripturarum authoritatibus contineÌ„tur nec in concilijs episcoporum statuta inueniuntur nec consuetudine vniuersae ecclesiae roborata sunt sed diuersorum locorum diuersis moribus innumerabiliter variantur ita vt vix aut omnino nunquam inueniri possint causae quas in eis instituendis homines secuti sunt vbi facultas tribuitur sine vlla dubitatione resecanda existimo Quamuis enim neque hoc inueniri possit quomodo contra fidem fint ipsam tamen religionem quam paucissimis manifestissimis celebrationum sacramentis misericordia dei esse liberam voluit seruilibus oneribus premunt vt tolerabilior sit conditio Iudaeorum qui etiamsi tempus libertatis non agnouerint legalibus tamen sarcinis non humanis praesumptionibus subijciuntur I can not approue that which beside custome is ordeyned to be obserued as an holy thing albeit
righteous or right His rectitude consisted in this that his reason was subiect to God his inferiour powers to his superiour his body to his soule There was no rebellion to be found in any part of the whole man For otherwise it would follow hereupon y t God were vniust which yet to auouch were y e greatest blasphemie in the world The reason is euident because if it had not been in Adams power to haue auoided al sin God should haue charged him with an impossibilitie and withall haue condemned him for not performing the same But our Lord is a iust iudge as witnesseth his apostle This whole processe S. Austen sheweth both pithily briefly in these right golden wordes Posteaquam praecepti facta est transgressio confestim gratia deserente diuina de corporum suorum nuditate confusi sunt Senserunt enim nouum motâ—m inobedientis carnis suae tanquam reciprocam poenam inobedientiae suae quia superiorem Dominum suo arbitrio deseruerat inferiorem famulum ad suum arbitrium non tenebat non omnino habebat subditam carnem sicut semper habere potuisset si Deo subdita ipsa mansisset After that Gods lawe was transgressed Gods grace did incontinently forsake them and they beholding their owne nakednesse were confounded For they felt a new motion in their disobedient flesh a punishment correspondent to their disobedient heartes And because he voluntarily disobeied his superiour Lord hee coulde not haue his inferiour seruaunt subiect to his word Neither was his flesh in subiection as he might haue had it for euer if it had remained obedient to Gods lawes The condition of mans free will from the creation of the protoplaste Adam vntil our regeneration Christ himselfe seemeth to set down most liuely in that parable which he propounded to the lawyer A certaine man saith Christ went downe from Hierusalem to Iericho and fell among theeues who robbed him of his raiment and wounded him and departed leauing him halfe dead Which is to say allegorically as y e fathers write that mankinde went out from the paradise of peace to the mutabilitie of misery fell among the powers of darknes who robbed him of his supernatural gifts of innocency and immortalitie wounded him in his naturall giftes of will and reason and departed leauing him halfe dead that is dead in respect of Gods fauour though liuing to the eyes of the world Semiuiuus inquit Augustinus habet vitalem motum id est liberum arbitrium vulneratuÌ„ quod ad aeternam quam perdiderat vitam non sufficiebat Et ideo iacebat quia vires ei propriae ad surgendum non sufficiebant vt ad sanandum medicum .i. deum requireret In that he was halfe aliue saith S. Austen he had vitall motion that is free will so wounded as it could not returne to eternall life which it had lost And therefore did he lie because he wanted proper strength to seeke God the phisition that could cure his maladie Ludolphus alluding to mans creation setteth downe this matter verie finely in these wordes Fecerat Deus hominem ad imaginem suam secundum rationem ad similitudinem secundum dilectioneÌ„ vt per vtrumque Deo adhaereret in haerendo beatus esset Sed diabolus humanae beatitudini inuidens contra duo bona praedicta duo homini in originali intulit praecipua mala In eo namque quod factus erat ad imaginem Dei secundum rationem vulnerauit eum per ignorantiam boni in eo verò quod factus est ad similitudinem Dei secundum dilectionem vulnerauit eum per concupiscentiam mali God made man after his own image according to reason after his owne similitude according to loue that by them both hee might adhere to God and by adhering to him attaine eternall beatitude But the deuill enuying mans felicitie bestowed on him in steede of these two blessings the double mischiefe of originall sinne For in that man was made after Gods image in reason he wounded him with the ignorance of good and in that he was made after his similitude in loue he wounded him with the concupiscence of euill Al this is liuely comprehended in the essence nature and definition of free will which after Saint Austen is this Liberum arbitrium est facultas rationis voluntatis qua bonum eligitur gratia assistente malum eâ desistente Free will is the facultie of reason and will by which good is chosen when grace is present and euill when grace is wanting For this cause saith the apostle that we are not able to think any good thought of our selues as of our selues neither yet to say that Iesus is the Lord but in the holy ghost For it is God saith he that worketh in vs both to do wel and to wil wel This verity was defined aboue a thousand and one hundred yeers ago by the ancient holy and learned councel of Aransica in these words Haeretico fallitur spiritu non intelligens vocem Dei dicentis in Euangelio Sine me nihil potestis facere whosoeuer saieth the holy synode thinketh he can do any act which pleaseth god or perteineth to eternal life by force of his free will that man is deceiued with an heretical spirit not vnderstanding the voice of god wheÌ„ he saith in his gospel Without me ye can do nothing that is good Out of this discourse two things are cleare euideÌ„t the one that our first parent Adam before his fal might by force of his free-wil holpen with supernaturall grace make free election aswel of good as of euil withal put that his free choise in execution thother that y e posterity of Adam hath free wil to nothing saue to sin only vntill the time of regeneration The first obiection There is no consultation as saith the Philosopher but of things which are in our owne power and yet doth euery one vse consultations in those things which he goeth about Againe there must be some immediate cause of euery act and that can not be God because God is not the cause of any euill Neither can the cause thereof be ascribed either to nature or to destinie or to fortune because humane actions are variable and with the intention of the doer Therefore the best course that can be taken with him that denieth mans freewill after the fall of Adam is this to wit to beate him like a stockfish vntill he confesse those that beate him to haue free will either still to beate him or to cease from beating For if one should deny the fire to be hote the best reason against him were to cast him into an hot ouen or burning furnace Thus reasoneth Veguerius The answere I say first that I willingly graunt both Papists and other reasonable creatures to haue free will in morall or ciuill acts neither do I thinke him vnworthy of strokes that will obstinately deny
Againe in an other place Without me can ye doe nothing By which testimonies it is clear y t man before he be regenerate hath not power force efficacy or faculty to do good or once to coÌ„sent to any spiritual act The third conclusion The meritorious cause as wel of saluation as of iustification is Christ Iesus and none els This conclusion wilbe manifest if we seriously reuolue in our minds the wonderful mystery of mans redemption In which kind of holy meditation whosoeuer shal deuoutly exercise himselfe that man doubtlesse wil espie with facilitie these foure most excellent attributes of our most sweete redeemer to wit his iustice his mercie his wisedome his loue For first as the worthines of the person increaseth so doth also the offence against the saide person committed Wherupon it commeth that a reprochful word spoken against a meane priuate person is in respect a small offence when it is spoken against a magistrate it is greatâ—r when against our soueraigne the greatest of all and consequently when we offend God whose person is of infinite worthienes our offence must needes be infinite howsoeuer our late papists flatter themselues in their venials and so man vncapable of euerie infinite action cannot possibly yeeld any condigne compensation and yet god of his iustice cannot pardon sin without condigne compensatioÌ„ for the same Behold here Gods iustice Secondly in rigor of iustice the partie that offendeth is bound to make satisfaction for the fault neither is the partie offended bound to accept the satisfaction of any other and conseqently God was not bound to accept his sonnes satisfaction for our sinnes though it were most sufficient and of infinite dignitie In this Gods mercie shewed it selfe Thirdly on the one side pure God could not satisfie though he were of infinit dignitie because pure God is impassible on the other side pure man was not able because euerie his action was insufficient as of which no one amongst al could be infinite God therefore appointed his onely sonne to be incarnate to ioyne humanitie with diuinity in hypostatical vnion and so to make attonement for our sinnes For as man hee was passible and as God he was able to giue infinite dignitie to his passion Wherein we may beholde Gods diuine wisedome Fourthly God seeing man in the chaines and bondage and thraldome of the deuill through sin and hauing tender compassion of him in such his distresse sent his owne deare sonne to set him at libertie again and this he did of meere loue without all merits and deserts of man For as Christ himselfe saith God so loued the world that he gaue his onely begotten sonne that whosoeuer beleeueth in him should not perish but haue life euerlasting All saith the apostle haue sinned and are depriued of the glorie of God and are iustified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Iesus Againe in another place As by the offence of one the fault came on al men to condemnation so by the iustifying of one the benefit abounded towarde all men to the iustification of life For as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one many shall be made righteous This is the stone saith Saint Peter which the builders refused which is become the head of the corner neither is there saluation in any other for among men there is giuen none other name vnder heauen whereby wee must be saued Wee haue an aduocate with the father saith Saint Iohn euen Iesus Christ the iust and he is the reconciliation for our sinnes Christ redeemed vs saith Saint Paul from the curse of the lawe while hee was made a curse for vs. Againe in another place In whome wee haue redemption through his bloud that is the forgiuenesse of our sinnes Againe Who did by himselfe purge our sinnes and sitteth on the right hand of maiestie on high Againe For he hath made him to be sinne for vs that knew no sinne that we should be made the righteousnes of God in him These saith S. Iohn are they which came from great tribulatioÌ„ washed their stoales and made them white in the bloud of the Lambe Again in another place The bloud of Iesus Christ doth purge vs from all sin I euen I am hee saith God by his Prophet that blotteth out thine infirmities not for thy deserts but for mine owne sake Againe in another place He was wounded for our iniquities hee was torne in peeces for our offences S. Austen shal conclude this point who writeth in this maner Dominus noster Iesus Christus mori venit peccare non venit communicando nobiscum sine culpa poenam culpam soluit poenam Our Lord came to die he came not to sin communicating paine with vs without sinne he loosed both sinne and the paine of sinne The fourth conclusion The mercie of God is the efficient cause of mans iustification and Gods glorie the finall cause of the same Of the former speaketh S. Paul when he saith Not by the works of righteousnesse which we haue done but according to his mercie hath he saued vs by the washing of the new birth and the renewing of the holy ghost Againe in another place the same Apostle saith that al haue sinned are freely iustified by his grace Againe he saith Which beleeue in him that raised vp Iesus our Lord from the dead And S. Iohn saith that God of his meere mercy and loue gaue his only son for the redemption of the world Of the latter speaketh the apostle when he saith that God hath made vs accepted in his beloued to the praise of his glory Again in another place whether therfore ye eate or drink or whatsoeuer ye do do all to the glory of God As if he had said ye must referre al your thoughts words and workes to Gods glorie because ye were created to that end The prophet also saith I euen I am he that putteth away thine iniquities for mine own sake wil not remember thy sins Againe in an other place Surely I wil not giue my glory to any other But doubtlesse if God shoulde iustifie man for any other end then for his owne glory it would follow thereupon that his glorie were giuen to another Yet as Salomon saith God hath made al things for his own sake yea euen y e wicked for y e day of euil The formall cause of mans iustification is not mans owne inherent iustice but the iustice righteousnes of Christ Iesus This conclusion containeth the maine point of a mighty controuersie betweene the papists vs for which respect I wish the reader to marke attentiuely my discourse The late councel holden at Trent setteth downe the opinion of the papists in these words DemuÌ„ vnica formalis causa est iustitiâ— dei noÌ„ qua ipse iustus est sed qua nos
in this chapter the fourth to the Romaines I note thirdly that faith is counted our righteousnesse Which the apostle expresseth more liuely in the fift verse But to him that worketh not saith hee but beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Loe not the worker but the beleeuer is iustified and that by imputation The same apostle after a long discourse to prooue that a man is iustified by faith onely in another place addeth these words We therfore think y t a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law Loe the holy apostle after a long disputation which is implied in the worde therefore concludeth that we are iustified by faith without works As if he had said sole faith only faith or faith without works doth iustifie albeit the papistes cannot or will not it see This whole processe is confirmed by the vniforme testimonies of the auncient fathers who all ascribe our iustification to sole faith S. Ambrose hath these wordes Iustificati sunt gratis quia nihil operantes neque vicena reddentes sola fide iustificati sunt dono Dei They are iustified freely because they neither doing any worke nor making any compensation are iustified by sole faith through the grace of God The like sayinges hee hath in sundry other places S. Chrysostome hath these wordes Vnum hoc tantummodo donum Deo obtulimus quod futura nobis promittenti credimus atque hac solum via seruati sumus This one only gift do we present to God that we beleeue him when he promiseth vs future giftes and by this only way are we saued Againe in another place he writeth thus Aut fidem dicit decretum illam vocans Ex sola quippe fide nos saluauit Or hee meaneth faith calling it the decree For by only faith hath he saued vs. S. Hilarie hath these wordes Mouet scribas remissum ab homine peccatum hominem enim tantum in Iesu Christo contuebantur remissum ab eo quod lex laxare non poterat Fides enim sola iustificat It vexeth the Scribes that man forgiueth sinnes for they onely considered Christ Iesus to be man and that he forgaue that which the law could not doe For sole faith doth iustifie S. Basill hath these words Nam ea demum perfecta omnimodae gloriatio est in Deo quando neque propter suam ipsius quis extollitur iustitiam sed agnoscit se quidem verae destitui iustitia verùm sola in Christum fide iustificatum esse For that is the perfite ioy al maner of comfort we haue in God when no man is puffed vp by reason of his owne righteousnesse but acknowledgeth himselfe to be destitute of true iustice in deed and seeketh to be iustified by sole faith in Christ. Origen writeth in this maner Dicit sufficere solius fidei iustificationem ita vt credens quis tantummodo iustificetur etiamsi nihil ab eo operis fuerit expletum He saith that the iustification of sole faith is sufficient so as a man may be iustified if he only beleeue although hee doe no workes at all And the same Origen prooueth in the same place by a long and learned discourse that wee are iustified by sole faith and not by workes S. Austen is plaine in this point who writeth in this maner Opus autem fidei ipsa dilectio est And charitie it selfe is the worke of faith What plainer testimonie can be had what papist can inuent any solution for the same who but mad men will not yeeld thereunto August in Epist. Ioann tract 10. in initio The 6. conclusion The good works of y e regenerate do neither merite grace in this life nor glory in the world to come This conclusion is against a graund and mightie article in popishe doctrine but I will prooue it by strong and irrefragable reasons S. Paul writeth to the Romaines in these wordes the afflictions of this present time are not worthy of the glory which shalbe shewed vnto vs. The workes of the regenerate saith S. Paul as ye see are not worthy of heauen They cannot therefore say I merite heauen because as the papists themselues doe graunt to merite heauen and to be worthy of heauen is all one the difference is onely in wordes not in sense The papists perceiuing the force of this argument vse this seely euasion although say they the actions of man be not worthie of heauen neither merite grace as they proceed from mans free-will yet are they worthie of heauen and meritorious as they proceede from the holy ghost But this is a friuolous childish and miserable shift onely inuented by the suggestion of Satan to seduce simple soules For first our workes are only ours as they proceed of and from our selues Secondly when the holy ghost and man worke both one and the same work that which the holy Ghost doth can no more be deemed mans act then that which man doth can be deemed Gods act yet so it is that y t which man doth cannot be deemed Gods Ergo neither that which God doth can be deemed mans The assumption wherein resteth the difficultie if there be any at all is manifest by mans sinfull actions For the most cruell act that can be imagined is not done without the concourse of the holy ghost as all learned papistes doe and must confesse Neuerthelesse mans sinfull actes are so farre from being Gods actes as the deformities and irregularities thereof be onely mans and neuer Gods and yet doth God concurre more effectually to those wicked acts in that he is the principall agent of the real and positiue entities thereof then man doth or can concurre to any act of Gods that is to any good act himselfe doth Note well for God is the creator of the diuell as he is an angel but not as hee is such an aungell and euen so is God the authour of mans acts as they be acts but not as such acts This place of the Apostle is handled more at large in my book of Motiues I my self saith the Apostle in my mind serue the law of god but in my flesh the law of sin Out of which words I note first that Saint Paul speaketh of the regenerate throughout this whole chapter because hee nameth himselfe who was Gods chosen and elect vessel For which respect and the like expressed in this seauenth chapter to the Romaines S. Austen changed his opinion and granted the apostle to speake here of the regenerate I note secondly that the elect regenerate do serue the law of sinne I note thirdly that the best liuers are so far from meriting grace of glorie that they deserue in rigour of iustice eternal death because death is the rewarde of sinne Which for that Saint Augustine coulde not well digest at the first he thoght that S. Pauls words in this chapter were to be vnderstoode of the
of works lest any man should boast himselfe And therfore the apostle meaneth nothing lesse then that we shoulde purchase and merite heauen by our good workes I say secondly with deuout Bernard that the ready way to attaine saluation is to beleeue the contrarie doctrine These are his expresse wordes Necesse est primò omnium credere quòd remissionem peccatorum habere non possis nisi per indulgentiam Dei deinde quòd nihil prorsus habere queas operis boni nisi hoc dederit ipse postremò quòd aeternam vitam nullis potes operibus promereri nisi gratis detur illa First of all thou must beleeue of necessitie that thou canst not haue remission of thy sinnes vnlesse God will giue thee a pardon for the same Againe thou must beleeue that thou canst not haue any good works at all vnlesse thou receiue it at Gods hand Last of all thou must beleeue that thou canst not merite eternall life by any works vnlesse it be freely giuen of mercie I say thirdly that the apostle meaneth nothing else but that as god hath called vs and offered saluation to vs and withal giuen vs power to will and to do well so we ought by faith to embrace his gratious gifts and to shew our selues thankfull by the obedience of his holy lawes For to this ende hath God chosen vs called vs and iustified vs not that we should liue idly and dissolutely but that we should exercise our selues in faith and good works and in obedience be answerable to his holy vocation For this respect doth the same apostle say in another place For we are his workemanship created in Christ Iesus vnto good works which God hath ordained that we should walke in them The eight obiection Redeeme thy sinnes with righteousnes saith the prophet and thine iniquities with mercie towards the poore Therefore with good workes we may satisfie for our sinnes and procure Gods fauour towards vs. The answere I say first with the apostle that no man is able to make satisfaction for his sinnes And I adde Bernards glosse vnto the same who writeth thus Iam verò de aeterna vita scimus quia non sunt condignae passiones huius temporis ad futuram gloriam nec si vnus omnes sustineat Neque enim talia sunt hominum merita vt propter ea vita aeterna debeatur ex iure aut Deus iniuriam aliquam faceret nisi eam donaret Nam vt taceaÌ„ quòd merita omnia Dei dona sunt ita homo magis propter ipsa Deo debitor est quà m Deus homini quid sunt merita omnia ad tantam gloriam denique quis melior est prophetâ cui dominus ipse tam insigne testimonium perhibet dicens virum inueni secundum cor meum veruntamen ipse necesse habuit dicere deo non intres in iudicium cum seruo tuo Domine Nowe touching eternall life wee knowe that the sufferings of this time are not worthy of y e glorie to come no not if one man abide al. For the merits of men are not such that for them eternal life is due by right or that god shuld do som iniury if he gaue it not For to let passe that all merits are the gifts of God and so man is rather debter to God for them then God to man what are al merits to so great glorie In fine who is better then the prophet to whom our Lorde giueth so worthie testimonie saying I haue found a man according to my heart for al that he had need to say to god Enter not into iudgement with thy seruant O Lord. In which words the papists are vtterly condemned by their owne approued doctour For first S. Bernard saith that nothing which man can doe or suffer in this life is worthy of the ioyes of heauen Secondly he saith that heauen is not due to anie man for his own deserts Thirdly he saith that god should doe no man wrong if hee should debarre him of heauen Fourthly he saith that man is more in debt to God then God to man and he yeeldeth this reason because it is the free gift of God what good soeuer be in man Fifitly hee alleageth holy scripture for the grounde of his assertion I say secondly that the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth properly signifie to breake or dissolue in which signification the prophet seemeth to vse it here although it also signifie to saue or deliuer as if the prophet had said O king thou hast liued wickedly and dealt cruelly with Gods people nowe therefore make an end of sinne and begin a new course of life change thy cruelty into clemencie and thy tyrannie into mercie and conpassion toward the poore Thus doth Theodoretus expound this text I say thirdly that albeit we cannot redeeme our sins in Gods sight or make satisfaction for the same in the court of his iustice as is proued exactly out of holy Bernard yet may wee redeeme them before men while we reconcile our selues to those whome we haue offended and make restitution where we haue done wrong And of this kind of redemption may the Prophet not vnfitly be vnderstoode The replie Not only S. Bernard in the words by you alleaged but the other fathers vsually and generally do acknowledge the merit of good works which you and your solifidians cannot abide The answere I say first that though the fathers doe often vse the worde Merit when they speake of good works yet do they neuer take it in your popish maner nor expect heauen for the worthinesse of their works Which I wish the reader to obserue diligeÌ„tly because the papists euer wrest the word Merite to the wrong sense This is cleare by the words of Bernard alreadie cited to which for better confirmatioÌ„ I adde these his words in another place Deest gratiae quicquid meritis deputas Nolo merituÌ„ quod gratiaÌ„ excludat horreâ— quicquid de meâ— est vt â—im meus nisi quòd illud magis forsitan meum est quod me meum facit Gratia reddit me mihi iustificatuÌ„ gratis sic liberatum à seruitute peccati It derogateth from grace whatsoeuer thou ascribest to merite I will no merite that excludeth grace I abhorre whatsoeuer is of mine owne that I may be mine owne vnlesse perchance that is more mine owne which maketh me mine owne Grace iustifieth me to my self freely and so deliuereth me from the bondage of sinne I say secondly that the fathers tearme workes meritorious not for the worthinèsse thereof but for Gods acceptation and promise sake That is to say they tearme good works meritorious because God hath promised to accept the works of the faithfull as worthie for the worthines of his sonne and for his merits to reward them with heauen as if they had merited the same For which respect either euer or almost euer they ioyne merite and grace together This veritie wil be
neuer cease to impeach accuse slaunder and condemne vs in this behalfe yet do we defend nothing heerein but that which their owne best Doctors and printed bookes doe teach vs yea euen such bookes as are dedicate to the Popes holinesse himselfe The conceites which this Bishop alledgeth to make good his intended purpose are childish and too too friuolous For first where hee sayth that the Fathers speake of good workes onely in respect of their naturall valure as hee tearmeth it I aâ—nswere that that glosse and exposition is onely inuented by him and his fellowes to salue their beggerly doctrine if it wold be For besides y t no father saith so they repute al works before grace meere sin as I haue prooued out of Austen And our Bishop vnwittingly confuteth himselfe of such force is the trueth when he graunteth that good works done in grace are vnworthy of heauen if Gods promise be set apart For if they merite ex condigno as he auoucheth then doubtlesse promise couenant and mercie is altogither needlesse Secondly where the bishop fleeth to distributiue iustice so to establishe the merite of workes I answere that both the fathers and his fellowes are against him yea euen Aquinas himselfe For they vnderstand iustice commutatiue and require arithmetical equalitie And if Geometricall proportion were to be admitted yet should greater equalitie be required then can be found between our workes and eternall life The 9 obiection Ye brag that the merite of good workes cannot be found in all the Scripture But therein you belie both vs and the holy scripture For in the booke of Ecclesiasticus I finde these expresse wordes Omnis misericordia faciet locum vnicuique secundum meritum operum suorum All mercie shall make place to euerie one according to the merite of his workes Loe here is made expresse mention of the merite of his good workes The answere I say first that the booke of Ecclesiasticus is not canonicall Scripture as which was not found written in the holy tongue I say secondly that it is not for nothing that your late councel of Trent hath so magnified your Latine vulgata editio For such stuffe as this it doth affoord you in time of neede I say thirdly that in the originall and Greeke text your worde merite may long seeke for lodging before it finde any For these are the expresse wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Make place to all almes for euerie one shall find according to his workes The 10. obiection One Scripture saith that if we giue almes all things are pure vnto vs. Another scripture saith that charitie couereth the multitude of sinnes And it is frequent with the holy fathers that good workes deliuer vs from hell The answere I say first that S. Luke reprooueth y e extortions of the Pharisies exhorteth them to works of charitie As if he had said not vnwashed handes make you eate vncleanly but your wicked extortions Vse therefore charitie and giue almes to the poore and then your soules shalbe cleane though the platter be vnwashed This sense is gathered out of the verses aforegoing I say secondly that almesdeedes and other good works proceeding of faith do neither merite nor iustifie as is prooued but yet they are testimonies before men that wee be iustified by faith through the merites of Christ Iesus For which respect iustification is often ascribed vnto them as to the effects therof I say thirdly that the fathers in many places doe speake of temporal remission which often is graunted for almes deeds and the like The replie If good workes can neither iustifie nor merite then is it but a vaine thing to exercise our selues therein The answere I say first that thus to say and thinke is a probable signe of the reprobate who hath no feeling of Gods holy spirite but is become senselesse in all spirituall contemplation I say secondly that albeit good workes doe neither iustifie nor merite in proper kinde of speech yet be there many good and necessary causes why we should doe good workes First because God is glorified therein Therefore saith Christ let your light so shine before men that they may see your good workes and glorifie your father which is in heauen Secondly because by good workes we shew our gratitude loue towards God Therfore saith Christ If ye loue me keep my coÌ„mandements Thirdly because it is the end for which we were created Therfore saith the apostle For we are his workmanship created in Christ Iesus vnto good works which God hath ordained that we should walke in them Fourthly because they are necessary effectes of our predestination and consequently yeeld and euident morall certitude both to our selues to our neighbours that we are y e childreÌ„ of God Therfore saith the apostle There is no coÌ„demnation to theÌ„ y t are in Christ Iesus which walk not after y e flesh but after the spirite as if hee had said Who soeuer are the childreÌ„ of God cannot but liue after Gods holy lawes Which is the selfe same doctrine that Christ himselfe taught vs saying If ye shall keepe my commaundementes yee shall abide in my loue as I haue kept my fathers commandement and abide in his loue And S. Iohn confirmeth the same in these wordes In this wee know that we loue the children of God when we loue God and keepe his commandementes For this is the loue of God that we keep his commandementes So then if we keep Gods commandementes it is an euident signe that we loue God and that by faith wee are of his free mercie made his children for the merites and righteousnesse of Christ Iesus See more hereof in the eleuenth preamble in my first booke of Motiues The 8 conclusion Although good workes doe neither merite grace in this life nor glorie in the life to come as which are imperfect polluted with sinne and in rigour of iustice worthy of condemnation as is alreadie prooued yet because God hath decreed in his eternal counsel to bring vs to heauen by them as by ordinary meanes and right fruites of a sound christian faith they may in a godly sense be termed The secundary instrumentall cause of eternall life but in no sense the cause of mans iustification Explico I say of mans iustification because the latter can neuer be the cause of the former and consequently good workes following our iustification as the immediate fruites thereof can by no meanes possible be the cause of the same In regard whereof S. Austen as in many other thinges so in this point saide very learnedly Quòd opera non praecedunt iustificandum sed sequuÌ„tur iustificatum That workes doe not go before iustification but followe him that is iustified I say of eternall life because when there be many gradual effectes of one and the same cause then the former may fitly be termed the materiall cause of the latter that is as the schooles terme it Causa sine qua non
The cause without which the latter shall not haue effect For as vocation iustification regeneration and glorification are the effectes of predestination euen so by Gods holy ordinance being predestinate wee are called by the hearing of his word vnto â—aith which faith is the cause of our iustification by apprehending the righteousnesse of Christ Iesus after wee be iustified of our iustification proceedes regeneration as who hauing remission of our sinnes and being ingraffed in Christ by faith are indued with more aboundant grace of his holy spirite thorough which we are dayly more and more regenerate and made new creatures after we be regenerate out of our regeneration spring good workes aswel internall as externall as who being made good trees begin to bring forth good fruits and so continuing are brought at the length of Gods free mercie to the possession of eternall life For as y e apostle saith we are created vnto good workes which God hath ordained that wee shoulde walke in them and continuing in them we shall at the dreadful day of doome heare this ioyfull sentence pronounced to our vnspeakable comfort Come yee blessed of my father take the inheritance of the kingdome prepared for you from the foundation of the world For I was an hungred and ye gaue me meate I was thirsty and ye gaue me drink I was a stranger and ye took me in vnto you I was naked and ye clothed me I I was sicke and ye visited me I was in prison and ye came to me And with this it is true yet y t the apostle saith Not by the workes of righteousnesse which we had done but according to his mercie he saued vs by the washing of the new birth and by renuing of the holy Ghost which hee shed on vs aboundantly through Iesus Christ our sauiour that wee being iustified by his grace should be made heires according to the hope of eternall life This is a true saying and these thinges I will thou shouldest affirme that they which haue beleeued God might be carefull to shew forth good workes These things are good and profitable vnto men Thus saith S. Paule and therefore I thinke this a profitable conclusion By it rightly vnderstood many places of holy Scripture may easily be answered which seeme to ascribe iustification or glorification to good workes The 10. conclusion This popish assertion that workes doe iustifie and merite eternall life de condigno was for the space of a thousand and eightie yeares vnknowne to the church of God About which time Petrus Lombardus and his fellowes began their scholasticall theologie and disputed such matters doubtfully About the yeare of our Lord 1545. the late councell of Trent defined the same for an article of christian beliefe solemnely accursing al such as hold the contrary opinion This is the originall and antiquitie of this impudently defended heresie It is sufficiently confuted throughout the whole chapter CHAP. X. Of the popish idololatricall masse The 1. conclusion TO withhold from the vulgar and laycall sort of people the one part of the holy communion is a diabolical hereticall and sacrilegious fact I prooue it sundry waies First because it is flatly against the expresse scripture and Christes holy institution For Christ himselfe instituted and ministred the Sacrament in both kindes saying drinke yee all of it as Saint Mathew recordeth and they all dranke of it as witnesseth Saint Marke Saint Paule also taught all the Corinthians to communicate in both kindes protesting that hee deliuered the forme and maner of the holy communion euen as he had in spirite receiued it from the Lord. Secondly because the auncient fathers shew euidently that in their time it was the generall practise of the church to deliuer the holy communion to the lay people vnder both kindes Neither was the cup taken from the vulgar sort by any setled law vntill the late councell of Constance which was in the yere of our Lord God 1414. Origen hath these words Quis est iste populus qui in vsu habet sanguinem bibere haec erant quae in euangelio audientes ij qui ex Iudaeis dominum sequebantur scandalizati sunt dixerunt Quis potest manducare carnem sanguinem bibere sed populus Christianus populus fidelis audit haec amplectitur sequitur eum qui dicit nisi manducaueritis carnem meam biberitis sanguinem meum non habebitis vitam in vobis ipsis quia caro mea verè est cibus sanguis meus verè potus est Who is that people that hath in custome to drinke bloud these were the thinges which the Iewes that followed Christ heard in the gospel and were scandalized and said Who can eate flesh and drinke bloud but the christian people the faithfull people heare these thinges and embrace them and follow him that sayth vnlesse ye shall eate my flesh drink my bloud ye shall haue no life in your selues because my fleshe is meate indeed and my bloud drinke indeed S. Hierome hath these words Sacerdotes quoque qui eucharistiae seruiunt sanguinem domini populis eius diuidunt impiè agunt in legem Christi The Priestes also that administer the eucharist and diuide the Lordes bloud to his people transgresse the law of Christ heynously Saint Cyprian with fourtie learned bishops in their ioynt Epistle to Cornelius write in this expresse maner Quo modo docemus aut prouocamus eos in confessione nominis sanguinem suum fundere si eis militaturis Christi sanguinem denegamus aut quo modo ad martyrij poculum idoâ—â—os facimus si non eis priùs ad bibendum in ecclesia poculum domini iure communicationis admittimus Howe doe we teache 〈◊〉 them to shed their bloud for the name of Christ if wee denie them the bloud of Christ when they go to warre or how doe we make them fit for the cuppe of martyrdome if wee doe not first admit them to drinke the Lordes cuppe in the Churche and that by the right of communion where I wishe the reader to note well that the lay people haue right to both kindes and consequently that the Romish church is become the whore of Babylon in that shee robbeth vs of our christian right which wee haue de iure diuino Saint Chrysostome hath these wordes Est vbi nihil differt sacerdos à subdito vt quando fruendum est honorandis mysteriis Similiter enim omnes vt illa percipiamus digni habemur Non sicut in veteri lege partem quidem sacerdos comedebat partem autem populus non licebat populo participem esse eorum quorum particeps erat sacerdos Sed nunc non sic verum omnibus vnum corpus proponitur poculum vnum There is a place where there is no difference betweene the priest the lay person as when we are to communicate in the holy mysteries for we are all in
like worthie for that communion not as it was in the olde lawe where the priest ate one part and the people another neither coulde the people be permitted to take part of that that the priest ate For nowe it is not so but to all is proposed one bodie and one cuppe Out of these golden words I note first that the difference in communion is a Iudaicall ceremonie from which Christs death deliuered vs. I note secondly that in the christian communion the common people ought to be as free as the minister I note thirdly that it was so in Saint Chrysostomes time when the people receiued vnder both kinds I note fourthly that the pope hath brought vs into greater bondage then euer were the Iewes S. Ignatius hath these wordes Vna est caro domini Iesu vnus eius sanguis qui pro nobis effusus est vnus etiam panis pro omnibus confractus vnus calix totius ecclesiae There is one flesh of our Lord Iesus one blood which was shed for vs one bread also broken for all and one cuppe of the whole church Saint Iustine hath these wordes Praesidens vero postquam gratiarum actionem perfecit populus vniuersus apprecatione laeta eum comprobauit qui apud nos vocantur diaconi atquo ministri distribuunt vnicuique praesentium vt participet eum in quo gratiae actae sunt panem vinum aquam After the chiefe pastour hath finished the giuing of thankes and all the people haue with ioyfull prayer approoued the same they that we cal Deacons and Ministers do distribute to euery one that is present the sanctified bread wine and water to be partaker thereof Yea the said Iustinus a little after addeth these important wordes Nam apostoli in commentarijs à se scriptis quae euangelia vocantur ita tradiderunt praecepisse sibi Iesum For the apostles in their commentaries that is in the gospelles haue taught vs that Iesus so commaunded them to minister the holie communion Where note by the way that Christ did not onelie ordaine both kindes but he also gaue commaundement to retaine the same in the church For which cause saint Paul teaching the Corinthians to communicate vnder both kinds said that he receiued that form maner from the Lord. S. Austen hath these words Cum Dom. dicat nisi manducaueritis carnem meam biberitis meum sanguinem non habebitis vitam in vobis quid sibi vult quod à sanguine sacrificiorum quae pro peccatis offerebantur tantopere populus prohibetur si illis sacrificijs vnum hoc sacrificium significabatur in quo vera sit remissio peccatorum à cuius tamen sacrificij sanguine in alimentum sumendo noÌ„ solum nemo prohibetur sed ad bibendum potius omnes exhortaÌ„tur qui volunt habere vitam When our Lord saith vnles ye shal eate my flesh and drinke my blood ye shal haue no life in you what meaneth it that the people is so greatly forbidden the blood of sacrifices which was offered for sins if in those sacrifices this onely sacrifice was signified in which there is true remission of sins From y e blood of which sacrifice for al that to be takeÌ„ for nourishment not only none is prohibited but al rather are exhorted to drinke it that desire to haue life S. Ambrose at such time as the emperour Theodosius after his great slaughter of men at Thessalonica desired to enter into the church at Millan and there to be partaker of the holie eucharist spoke these words vnto him Quî quaeso manus iniusta caede sanguine respersas extendere audes eisdem sacrosanctum corpus domini accipere aut quomodo venerandum eius sanguinem ori admouebis qui furore irae iubente tantum sanguinis tam iniquè effudisti How I pray thee darest thou stretch out thy hands sprinckled with vniust slaughter and blood and to take the holie bodie of our Lord in the same Or how wilt thou touch thy mouth with his venerable blood who to satisfy thy fury hast shed so much bloud so vnworthily Gregorius magnus their owne bishop of Rome confirmeth this veritie in these words Eius quippe ibi corpus sumitur eius caro in populi salutem partitur eius sanguis non iam in manus infidelium sed in ora fidelium funditur For his bodie is there receiued his flesh is diuided for the saluation of the people his bloud is now powred not into the handes of infidels but into the mouthes of the faithfull What need many words Their owne Gelasius in their owne canon law condemneth their fact as flat sacrilege These be his words Aut integra sacramenta percipiant aut ab integris arceaÌ„tur quia diuisio vnius eiusdeÌ„que mysterij sine grandi sacrilegio non potest peruenire Either let them participate the whole sacraments or els let them abstain from the whole bicause the diuision of one and the same sacrament cannot be done without great sacrilege The first obiection The commaundement to receiue in both kinds was onelie giuen to the twelue apostles and in them to all priestes for they onely were present when Christ spâ—ke these wordes Drinke ye all of this The answer I say first that if the commaundement pertained onelie to the apostles then are priests aswell as clarkes free from the same I say secondly that the commandement was giuen of both kindes in one and the selfe same maner and therefore the lay people are as free from the one as the from the other I say thirdly that by the common opinion of the papists they were lay people that receiued the communion at Christs handes in his supper For the apostles were vnpriested vntil after his resurrection when hee saide Receiue ye the holy ghost I say fourthly with S. Bernard that the participation of both kinds was commaunded by Christ in the first institution thereof for thus doth he write Nam de sacramento quidem corporis sanguinis sui nemo est qui nesciat hanc quoque tantam tam singularem alimoniam eâ primùm die exhibitam eâ die commendatam mandatam deinceps frequentari For concerning the sacrament of his body and bloud euery one knoweth that this such and so singular nourishment was exhibited that day the first that day commended and commaunded afterward to be frequented This commandement S. Cyprian and saint Iustine vrge for both kindes their words already are set downe I say fiftly that S. Paul who knew Christs minde aswell as any papist did communicate the vnpriested Corinthians vnder both kinds and told them that Christ had so appointed The replie S. Paul only recited Christs institution saith our Iesuite Bellarmine but gaue no commaundement for both kindes but left it as he found it indifferent and in the free choise of the Corinthians to communicate in both or in one only kind The answere I say
and then vttered the wordes of drinking the fruit of the vine For the papists would gladly haue Saint Luke to tell the storie out of order and that Christ spoke these wordes before the deliuerie of the sacrament that is before the consecration of the cuppe which Saint Crysostome and other fathers doe denie Saint Cyprian hath these words Dico vobis non bibam amodò ex ista creatura vitis vsque in diem illum quo vobiscum bibam nouum vinum in regno patris mei Qua in parte inuenimus calicem mixtum fuisse quem Dominus obtulit vinum fuisse quod sanguinem suum dixit I say to you I will not drinke henceforth of this creature of the vine vntill that day in which I wil drinke new wine with you in the kingdome of my father Wherein we find that the cup was mingled with our Lord offered and that it was wine which he called his body Out of these words I note first that Saint Luke spoke of the consecrate cup when hee tearmed it the fruit of the vine as is proued already out of Saint Clement and S. Chrysostome I note secondly that the consecrate cup contained naturall wine and not Christs corporall bloud indeed This testimonie doth conuince and so effectually confuteth transubstantiation and the popish reall presence as if S. Cyprian were this day liuing and knew the blasphemous doctrine of the papists yet coulde hee not decide more plainely the controuersie betweene them and vs. Yea this testimonie of saint Cyprian may bee a generall rule for vs as well to expounde himselfe in other places as also the rest of the holy fathers For when they tearme the holy communion or Eucharist Christs bodie and blood the bloud that issued out of his side the body that was nayled on the crosse the flesh that was borne of the virgin the price of our redemption all this is truely saide in their godly meaning that is to say all this is truely verified sacramentally mystically spiritually but not corporally as the Papistes teach For all the Fathers admitte this doctrine of Saint Cyprian that euen after consecration remayneth still the true nature of bread and wine Sixtly Tertullian being consonant to the other fathers hath these wordes Acceptum panem distributum discipulis corpus suum illum fecit hoc est corpus meum dicendo id est figura corporis mei Figura autem non fuisset nisi veritatis esset corpus Caeterum vacua res quod est phantasma figuram capere non potest Hee made that bread which hee tooke and gaue to his disciples to bee his bodie saying this is my body that is to say the figure of my bodie and there shoulde not haue beene a figure vnlesse there had been a true body indeed for a vain thing which is but a falâ—â— imagination cannot receiue a figure Out of these wordes I note first that y â— which Christ gaue to his disciples was bread I note secondly that it was the figure of his body I note thirdly that to be Christes body as Christ himselfe and the fathers speake is nothing els but to be the figure or signe of his body For so doth this learned father declare the very phrase I note fourthly that the thing figured is much different from the figure and consequently that Christes body cannot be the figure of it selfe Seuenthly S. Theodoret hath these words Neque enim signa mystica post sanctificationeÌ„ recedunt à sua natura Manent enim in priore substantia figura forma videri tangi possunt sicut prius The mysticall signes after the sanctification depart not froÌ„ their nature but they abide in their former substance and figure and forme and may be seen and touched euen as before Out of these most golden wordes of this auncient and learned father I note first that hee writeth against certaine heretickes who held that Christes body was chaunged into his deitie after his ascension And they prooued it because as the bread and wine after consecration were changed into the body and bloud of Christ euen so was his body changed into his deitie after his ascension This note is plainly set downe in the wordes aforegoing I note secondly that S. Theodoret confuteth the heretickes euen by their own reason For the mysticall signes saith hee remaine still in their former substance and nature euen after the sanctification therof As if he had said ye lay not a good foundation your supposall is false ye take that as graunted which is flatly denied For although the creatures of bread and wine be sanctified by Gods word and accidentally changed into the mysticall signes of his body and bloud yet doe they still retaine their former nature and substance yet doe they still remaine truely bread and truely wine I note thirdly that though the bread and wine haue gotten by sanctification a new diuine qualitie yet haue they lost nothing that they had before for they haue the same nature the same substance the same figure the same forme they may be seene tasted and touched euen as they might before All the papistes in Europe cannot answere this reason For Theodoret prooueth against the heretickes that as bread and wine are as truly bread and truely wine after consecration as they were before consecration euen so is Christes body as truely a body now after his ascension as it was afore heere on earth So as the papistes cannot now say that the bread and wine haue lost their true natures in y e eucharist vnlesse they wil also say y t Christ hath lost y e nature of a true body now in heaueÌ„ Eightly S. Austen a worthy pillar of Christes Church as the papistes themselues doe graunt hath these wordes Nisi manducaueritis inquit carnem filij hominis sanguinem biberitis non habebitis vitam in vobis Facinus vel flagitium videtur iubere Figura est ergo praecipiens passioni domini esse communicandum suauiter atque vtiliter recondendum in memoria quod pro nobis caro eius crucifixa vulnerata sit Vnlesse saith Christ ye shall eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud ye shall haue no life in you Hee seemeth by these wordes to commaund to doe an heinous offence It is therefore a figure commanding vs to be partakers of Christes passion and sweetly and profitably to lay vp in our mindes that his flesh was crucified and wounded for our sakes In another place hee hath these words Cum videritis filium hominis ascendentem vbi erat prius certe vel tunc videbitis quia non eo modo quo putatis erogat corpus suum certe vel tunc intelligetis quia gratia eius non consumitur morsibus When yee shall see the sonne of man ascending thither where hee was before then doubtlesse shall ye see that hee giueth not his body in such sorte as ye imagine then
that body in his handes such is the humilitie of our Lord Iesus Christ. Thus saith Saint Austen By whose words it is euident that that which Christ at his last supper gaue to his disciples was his true reall naturall body euen that which was borne of the virgin Mary For first he telleth vs that Christ did that which Dauid could not do to wit that he did beare himselfe in his own hands Secondly he saith that this was done literally euen as the words do sound Thirdly he coÌ„mendeth Christs great humility in that fact Now it is cleare y t if this could be vnderstood figuratiuely it might be well verified in Dauid for Dauid might haue born the picture figure or image of his owne body in his hands yea this he might haue done literally haue shewed no humilitie therin But Christ did so beare himselfe in his owne hands saith saint Austen as no man can do the like This reason is inuincible all protestants in the world cannot answere the same The answere I say first that this reason seemeth indeede to be inuincible and so my selfe haue sometime thought I say secondly that if S. Austen should so meane as you gather of these words he should contradict himself in many other places as is already proued and consequently his authoritie should be of no force in this behalfe I say thirdly that Saint Austen doth a little after expound his owne meaning in these expresse words Et ferebatur in manibus suis. Quomodo ferebatur in manibus suis quia cum commendaret ipsum corpus suum sanguinem suum accepit in manus suas quod 〈◊〉 fideles ipse se portabat quodammodo cùm diceret hoc est corpus meuÌ„ And he was borne in his hands How was he borne in his hands because when he commended his owne body and his blood hee tooke into his hands that the faithful know and he bare himselfe after a sort when he saide This is my body Where I wish the Reader to marke well the worde quadammodo after a sorte for Christ had his true reall and natural bodie in his handes after a sort that is sacramentally when he said This is my body He had his 〈◊〉 body in his hands but it was after a sort not simplie but sacramentally not naturally but mystically not carnally I say fourthly that neither Dauid nor any other creature coulde haue borne himselfe after this sort in his owne hands For as Aquinas Victoria Antoninus Couarruuias Bellarminus and all learned papists grant no mortall man can institute any sacrament and so no mortal man being pure man could sacramentally beare himselfe in his owne hands I say fiftly that greater humilitie coulde not be then that the Lord of glorie should offer himselfe on the crosse so to appease Gods wrath and to make attonement for our sins and withall shoulde giue vs the sacrament of his body bloud as a seale of our reconciliation and of his beneuolence towards vs. All this discourse S. Austen confirmeth in another place where he hath these words Non hoc corpus quod videtis manducaturi estis bibituri illum sanguinem quem effusuri sunt qui me â—rucifigent Sacramentum aliquod vobis commendaui spiritualiter intellectum viuificat vos Yee shall not eate this body that ye see and drinke that blood which they shal shed that will crucifie me I haue commended a sacrament to you which being vnderstood spiritually doth quicken you The second obiectâ—on S. Cyprian doth prooue this veritie in most plaine and manifest tearmes Thus doeth he write Panis iste quem Dominus discipulis porrigebat non effigie sed natura mutatus omnipotentia verbi factus est caro The bread which our Lord did reach to his disciples being chaÌ„ged not in shape but in nature became flesh by the omnipotencie of the word Lo bread was changed not in shape or figure which our sense telleth vs to be so but in nature or substance as the catholike church teacheth vs. And how is it changed euen into flesh and yet wil not you haue Christ to be present in flesh bloud and bone But if it were otherwise the omnipotent power of Gods word shoulde be needelesse which yet Saint Cyprian saieth is it that worketh this mightie change If yee yeeld not to this testimonie ye shew your selfe to be obstinate The answere I say first that the grosse and carnal sense of these words did wonderfully seduce my selfe when the time was I say secondly that if Saint Cyprian meant as you woulde haue him hee should bee contrarie to himselfe For hee affirmeth it to be true wine which Christ gaue to his Apostles I haue already alleaged his expresse words peruse them and marke them well I say thirdly that S. Cyprian can neuer bee more truely expounded then when his owne meaning in one place is gathered out of his owne words in another place That therefore all his words may be consonant one to another we must ioine antecedent to consequent former to latter and one place to another This done wee shal finde with facilitie that hee speaketh onely of sacramentall alteration and that by the word nature hee meaneth natural properties Yea euen so do the papists interprete the same word in their Gelasius concerning this question nowe in hand Thus doeth Saint Cyprian say immediately after the other wordes Et sicut in persona Christi humanitas videbatur latebat diuinitas ita sacramento visibili ineffabiliter diuina se infudit essentia Infrà Nostra vero ipsius coniunctio nec miscet personas nec vnit substantias sed affectus consociat confoederat voluntates Iterum sicut panis communis quem quotidie edimus vita est corporis ita panis iste supersubstantialis vita est animae sanitas mentis Panem Angelorum sub sacramento manducamus in tâ—rris eundem sine sacramento manifestiùs edemus in coelis non ministerio corporali And as the humanitie was seene in the person of Christ and the diuinitie hidden euen so hath the diuine essence powred out it selfe vnspeakeably in the visible sacrament For both ours and his coniunction neither mingleth persons nor yet vniteth substances but procureth fellowship in affection and agreement in willes And as the common bread which wee eate daily is the life of the body so is this supersubstantiall bread the life of the soule and the health of the minde We eate here on earth Angel-foode vnder the sacrament but wee shall eate the same more clearely without the sacrament in heauen and that without help of the body Out of these wordes I note first that Christs diuinitie is after an vnspeakeable manner in the sacrament but so is noâ— his bodie or humanitie and consequently that Christ is not there in inuisible carnall presence I note secondly that this sacramentall vnion doth not vnite substances but affections and willes and yet should our bodies be
haue it seene Pope Bonifacius the 8. made a constitution in which he called himself Lord spirituall and temporall of the whole world Whereupon he required Philip the French king to acknowledge that he held his kingdome of him which when the king refused to doe hee gaue his kingdome to another This was done Anno. 1302. This pope entred as a foxe reigned as a Wolfe and died as a dog so doe they write of him CHAP. XV. Of certaine popish sects which they terme the orders of religious men WHatsoeuer I shal set down of these sects or religious orders as the papistes must needs haue them termed shal be truely and sincerely collected out of these popishe historiographers to wit Martinus Polonus Philippus Bergomensis Polyd. Virgilius Palmerius Platina and Ar. Pontacus Burdegalensis Which I here for once admonish least the often repetition thereof should be tedious Benedictus an Italian the father of all monkes erected an Abbay in the mount Cassinum and instituted the sect of the Benedictines about the yeare 527. These monkes in a short time began to be dissolute and were deuided into many new sectes whereof same were called Cluniacenses some Camalduenses some Vallisumbrenses some Montoliuotenses some GrandimonteÌ„ses some Cistertienses some Syluestrenses Al which being most variable in life maners obseruations wil for al that be right Benedictines EueÌ„ forsooth as our late popes must needs be S. Peters successors thogh they be as like as York foul SuttoÌ„ This sect of the Benedictines far altered from the first institutioÌ„ was reformed in y e yere 1335. For as Polydore grauely reporteth monks do not loÌ„g obserue their monastical institutioÌ„ The sect of the Carthusians was ordained by one Bruno in y e yere 1084. How this sect had the first originall it is worthy of due attention This is the story While Bruno was the reader of philosophy at Paris in France it chanced that a friend of his being a man of good external life died who lying dead vpoÌ„ the coffin in the church soundeth out these words in the eares of the said Bruno I am damned by the iust iudgment of God By which miracle Bruno was so terrified y t hee knew no way how to be saued but by inuenting the sect of the Carthusians Behold here the subtletie of the deuil who wanteth no means how to set vp superstition idolatry For if the story be true as I think it was in deed then doubtlesse the voice came from the diuel as which brought forth y e spirit of pride not of humility I proue it because this Bruno could not be coÌ„tent to be a monk amongst the Benedictines but he must be Lord Abbot of a new sect For since the order of the Benedictines was the ready way to heaueÌ„ as popery taught him either he condemned his own religion consequently his own institutioÌ„ or my consecution must be admitted Let what papist as list reply my reason can not be coÌ„uinced And here I note by the way the formal deformitie of al the sects or orders in poperie to wit that the papistes ascribe merite and saluation to the same Let therefore this story of our holy father Bruno neuer be forgotten The order called â—raemonstratensis began the yeare 1119. The first authour thereof was one Norbertus by name Who doubtles either conâ—emned the former orders at the least of imperfection or els was puffed vp with the spirit of pride as were his predecessors his fraterculi before him The sect of the Carmelites began in y â— yere 1170. was instituted by one Almericus y e bishop of Antioch This sect though it had the original in the time mentioned yet was it not in full perfection for the space of 40. yeres to come The sect of Dominicans whereof Tho. Aquinas surnamed Angelicus was one began in the yere 1198. The authour of this sect was one Dominicus Calaguritanus a Spaniard borne The sect it selfe was termed Ordo fratrum praedicatorum The sect of the Franciscans began in y e yere 1206. Of which sect was Io. Scotus surnamed D. Subtilis The author of this sect was one Franciscuss Asisiates an Italian born The sect it self was termed Ordo fratrum minorum Thus we see y t these Romish sects were multiplied as if it were swarmes of Bees The sect of the Iesuates began in the yeare of our Lord 1371. the author of this sect was one Ioannes Columbinus Senensis the sect it selfe was termed ordo Iesuatorum The sect of the Iesuites began in the yeare of our Lord 1540. The author thereof was one Ignatius Loyola a souldier and a Spaniard borne The moonkes of this sect as they were hatched after al others so doe they in pontificall pride exceed al the rest This sect is termed ordo societatis Iesu the verie name expressing their proud and hauty mindes For no name of so many sectes before them nor any other appellation could content them vnlesse they be termed fellowes and companions with Iesus Christ. They are indeede so proud and stately that where euery other Romish sect hath some cardinall to be their protector they only to die for it wil haue none at al. And why because forsooth they will depend vpon none neither submit themselues to any saue to the pope alone to whom I weene they wil be subiect because they can no other doe They are not only proud but very factious people They are hated generally of all sortes of men they cherish themselues and seek to ouerrule all others They employ some of their sect to no other end but only to looke into matters of state that so by parasiticall informations made to the pope they may leade all the world in a string The Perioch First therfore since popish primacie began in the yere 607. Secondly since priests marriage was neuer prohibited til the yere 385. Thirdly since popes pardoÌ„s were neuer heard of til the yere 1300. Fourthly since popish purgatory tooke no root in the Romish church til the yere 250. Fiftly since inuocation of saints adoration was not known til the yere 370. Sixtly since popish pilgrimage began in the yeere 420. Seuenthly since the merite of works de condigno was disputable about the yere 1081. Eightly since the communion vnder both kindes was neuer thought vnlawful til the yere 1414. Ninthly since the popes buls were not authenticall til the yere 772. Tenthly since auricular confession was not established till the yeere 254. Eleuenthly since general councels were euer summoned by the emperours many like matters of importance as may appeare by this smal volume I may reasonably conclude that al men careful of their saluation wil detest from their hearts al popish faction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Table containing the texts of holy scripture which are handled in this Volume Necessary at the least for the simple Reader
ad contractum matrimonialem inhabile transgressiones voti simplicis solemnis eiusdem speciei sunt etiamsi qui solenniter vouet grauius peccet ratio est quia specifica differentia actuum est penes obiecta cum idem sit vtriusque voti obiectum nempe seruare continentiam erunt actus eiusdem speciei erit tamen voti solemnis transgressio grauior ratione perfectioris status The vow solemne and single differ accidentally in respect of the subiect because the subiect of the single vow is able to contract matrimonie albeit he sinne in so contracting but the subiect of a solemne vow is inabled to matrimoniall contract the transgressions of the vowe single and solemne are of the same nature or kind albeit hee that maketh the solemne vow sinneth more grieuously the reason is because the specificall difference of acts resteth in the obiects and since there is one obiect of both the vowes to wit to keepe chastitie the acts shall bee of the same nature or kinde neuerthelesse the transgression of the solemne vow shall be greater by reason of the perfecter state Thus reasoneth Frier Ioseph after the opinion of other popish doctours and his discourse is euident because euerie specificall difference morall ariseth of the obiects and consequently since the obiect of vow single is one and the same with the vowe solemne the difference betweene them can no way be essentiall The sixt building All secular Priests are so free from the solemne vow annexed by the church of Rome to ecclesiasticall orders as their marriage is perfect and of force notwithstanding the supposed dissoluing impediment thereof I proue it first because Scotus Nauarre Iosephus Angles and others doe grant that this vow is onely annexed by the ordinance of the church as shall appeare more at large in the ende of this chapter I prooue it secondly because if the secular priests â—â—e votaries their vowe must either be by the worde spoken or by the deede done not the first because no such word can be proued neither the second because if the art it selfe in taking orders shoulde be the vowe annexed it would follow thereupon necessarily that the Greekes likewise should become votaries as who doe the selfe same thing Who for all that were neuer votaries as Gratianus Syluester and other popish doctours do affirme I proue it thirdly because when two things are essentially and really distinguished the grant of the one doth necessarily include the graunt of the other and yet is the solemne vow of chastitie essentially and really distinct from sacred orders as I haue proued out of Iosephus in the fourth building and as is apparant by Nauarre in his Enchiridion Gratian their owne doctour maketh this case cleere see his assertion in the next chapter in the answere to the first obiection The seauenth building The solemne vowe of chastitie imposed onely by the power of man cannot alter the institution of God and take away the liberty by him granted vnto man For proofe hereof their own deare fryer Antoninus some time archbishoppe of Florence shall suffice who telleth our holy father the Pope that God is his superiour and that he therefore cannot alter any one iâ—te of his law these are his expresse words Quantum verò ad illa quae sunt de iure naturali vel diuino iurisdictio seu potestas papalis non se extendit sic verò quod ista possit mutare vel etiam dare eis vim obligandi ratio est quia inferior non potest mutare leges superioris Deus autem superior ad papam Concerning those things which are of the law of nature or law diuine iurisdiction or papall power doth not extend it self so to wit that the pope can change these things or giue power obligatiue vnto them and the reason is because an inferiour cannot change the laws of his superior and God is superiour to the Pope Franciscus a Victoria and other learned Papists hold the same opinion but Antoninus his testimonie is sufficient The proofe of the proposition This foundation and these seauen buildings onely considered my proposition afore rehearsed will be cleare and manifest for first if single life be only imposed by the law of man as the seauenth building proueth secondly if secular priests can no way be proued votaries as in the sixt building is shewed thirdly if the vow single be of one and the selfe same nature with the solemne differing only accidentally from it as the fift building affirmeth fourthly if the solemne vow hath not force of it selfe to dissolue marriage as the fourth building teacheth fiftly if the popes dispensation can make marriage of force after the solemn vow as the third building conuinceth sixtly if marriage made after the single vow be of force as the first building declareth euidently which single vow for all that is of the same essence and nature with the solemne vow as is already said I conclude with this ineuitable illacion that the marriage not only of secular priests but euen of Monks Fryers and all religious votaries is sound perfect and of force An important obiection against the sixt proposition Refuse the youger widowes for when they haue begun to waxe wanton against Christ they will marrie hauing damnation because they haue broken the first faith This place of S. Paule sundrie of the fathers expound of the vow of chastitie neither can it possibly admit any other sence The answere I say first that though sundrie of the fathers thinke it sinne to marrie after the vow of chastitie and that by reason of this place yet doth the same fathers repute such marriages to be true and perfect matrimonie for saint Epiphanius writeth in this manner Melius est itaque vnum peccatum habere non plura melius est lapsum à cursu palam sibi vxorem sumere secundum legem à virginitate multo tempore poenitentiam agere sic rursus ad ecclesiam induci velut qui mala operatus est velut lapsuâ— fractum obligatione opus habentem non quotidie occultis iaculis sauciari ab improbitaete quae à Diabolo ipsi infertur It is better therfore to haue one sin not many it is better for one that is fallen from his course openly to marrie a wife according to the law and to repent a long time from his virginitie and so to be restored againe into the church as one tha hath done wickedly as one that is fallen and broken and hath need of binding vp and not to be daily wounded with the secret darts of that wickednes which the diuell putteth in him Thus writeth Epiphâ—nius shewing plainely to the reader that he condemneth not the marriage in vowed persons monkes or nunnes but the falling from their gudly purpose S. Cyprian hauing sharply inueyed against the licenâ—ious life of certaine deacons and vowed virgins exhorteth them at the length to marry that cannot or wil not
liue continent chast these are his words Quod si ex fide se Christo dediâ—auerunt pudicè caste sine vlla fabula perseuerent ita fortes stabiles praemium virginitatis expectent si autem perseuerare nolunt vel non possunt melius est nubant quam inignem delictis suis cadant If they haue betrothed themselues to Christ by faith let them continue honestly and chastely without all mockerie so as they may in fortitude and stabilitie expect the reward of virginitie but if they wil not or cannot perseuere it is better that they marry then that they fall into the fire with their misbehauiour Thus saith saint Cyprian declaring very plainely that he approoueth the marriages of affianced and vowed virgines S. Austen although he vnderstand by the first faith the vow of chastitie yet doth he flatly allow marriage after the breach thereof these are his expresse wordes Hoc dico nubere licet antequam voueat superbire nunquam licet O tu virgo Dei nubere noluisti quod licet extollis te quod non licet Melior virgo humilis quam maritata humilis sed melior maritata humilis quam virgo superba Que autem respâ—xerit ad nuptias non quod voluit nubere damnatur sed quod iam ante recesserat fit vxor Loth respiciendo retrorsum This I say it is lawful to marry before she vow it is neuer lawful to be proud O thou virgin of God thou wouldst not marry which is lawful for thee to do but thou waxest prouâ— which thou maist not do An humble virgin is better then an humble maried woman but an humble maried woman is better then a proud virgin Yet she that hath lookeâ— backe to marriage is damned not because shee would marry but because she had alredy departed from her holy purpose and is become Lots wife in looking backe againe The same S. Augustine hath in another place of his works such a plaine declaration of his mind in this point as whosoeuer shall once reade or heare his words cannot but perceiue the same Thus therefore doth he write expressely I wil not alter or change one word Postremò damnantur tales non quia coniugalem fidem posterius inierunt sed quia coÌ„tinentiae primam fidem irritam fecerunt Quod vt breuiter insinuaret Apost noluit eas dicere habere damnaetionem quae postamplioris sanctitatis propositum nubunt non quiae non damnentur sed ne in eis ipsae nuptiae damnari putarentur Infra proinde qui dicunt talium nuptias non esse nuptias sed potius adulteria non mihi videntur satis acutè ac diligenter considerare quid dicant In fine such are damned not because they are afterward marriâ—d but because they haue made void the first promise of chastity which thing the Apostle intending briefly to insinuate would not say that they were damned who marie after the purpose of larger sanctimonie not bicause they are not damned but lest he shuld seeme to condemn their marriages in them therfore they that say the marriages of such are no marriages but rather adulteries seeme to mee not to consider exactly and aduisedly what they say By which words of S. Austen it is cleare that he is so far from coÌ„demning the matrimonies of those vâ—tiue widowes which cannot liue continently as hee reputeth them for perfect true and lawfull marriages I say secondly that marriage after a solemne vow ought to be deemed perfect of force euen with the Pope himselfe for thus is it written in his owne canon law votum simplex apud deum non minus ligat quam solemne the simple or single vow bindeth no lesse afore God then doth the solemne and yet as I haue already proued marriage is perfit after the single vow euen by the popes alowance therfore with no reasoÌ„ can he denie it to be perfit also after the double or solemne vow for vnlesse the pope wil impudently say y t his power is greter then gods he must perforce admit this to be so And it is a friuolous supposed euasion to say that there is a deliuery of the party in the vow solemne not so in the single for thus writeth their owne doctor Scotus Alia ratio est quod vouens solemniter mittit in possessionem illum cui vouit solemniter vouens autem priuaté non sed quasi promittit sed haec valet minus quam secunda quia omnia intrinseca voto vt respicit actum voluntatis per quem ob ligat se vouendo transfert dominium suum in alterum omnia inquam istae sunt aequalia hinc iude Igitur non magis datio hic quam ibi nec promissio ibi quam hic Another reason is this that he who makes a solemne vow puts him to whom he voweth in possession but so doth not he that maketh a single vow but only giueth his promise This reason is worse then the second for al things that be of the substance of the vow as a vow concerneth the act of the mind whereby the mind bindes it selfe by vowing transposeth the ownership of it selfe to another al these things I say are of like weight on either side therfore there is no more deliuerie in the vow solemne then in the single nor more promise in the one then in the other I say thirdly that the widows whose vowes Paul admitteth must be no lesse then 60. yeres of age but the pope bids al to take the mantle the ring at what age they list S. Paul would haue them then to promise when the heat of lust is past but the pope aduiseth them to come eueÌ„ when lust rageth most of all S. Paul would first haue them try their strength then to promise but the pope bids promise roundly thogh they performe neuer so slenderly S. Paul willed the promise of single life because they could not both serue the church and their husbands but the pope requireth the vow of single life thereby pharisaically to merit heauen S. Paul exhorts the yonger widows to vse marriage as a soueraine remedy against sin but y e pope inforceth the yongest of al to contemn marriage as a polluted vnlawful thing S. Pauls widowes were godly occupied in ministring to the sicke to the poorer sort yea to strangers in way of christian hospitality but the popes so supposed virgins are free from al honest exercise liue idely after their owne sensual pleasures so the popes counterfeit and hypocritical Nuns haue no affinitie with S. Pauls holy widowes I say fourthly that the first faith whereof S. Paul speakes may very fitly be vnderstood of the promise made in baptisme And I proue it because the first promise of these widows was this to wit that they would continue in christian religion in the puritie of honest life good maners The second faith or promise was that which these widowes made when they
damned in hell blaspheme Christ ergo there be some vnder the earth that is in purgatorie which worship and adore Christ. The answer I answere that the bowing of the knee whereof the apostle speaketh doth not signify worship or adoration but that subiection which shalbe shewed openlie in the last iudgement when and where the deuilles as well as men and the good angels shall yeeld homage and dominion vnto Christ. For so S. Paul expoundeth S. Paul in his epistle to the Romaines and S. Luke recordeth that the deuill falleth prostrate before Christ and acknowledgeth his power ouer him which is that bowing of the knee whereof S. Paul speaketh Other expositions whatsoeuer are repugnant to the text The replie S. Iohn saith that hee heard all the creatures which are in heauen and on earth and vnder the earth and in the sea and al that are in them saying in this maner praise and honor and glorie and power be vnto him that sitteth vpon the throne and vnto the Lambe for euermore Therefore they be vnder the earth which truely worship Christ and consequently since the deuils as yee grant do rather blaspheme then worship Christ they that worship Christ vnder the earth must needes bee the soules in purgatory The answere I answere that S. Iohn meaneth nothing els then that which S. Paul hath vttered he vseth the figure Prosopopeia after the vsuall course of the scriptures causeth things senselesse and voide of reason to sounde out the praise of God so saith the Psalmograph Dauid All thy workes praise thee O Lord and thy saints blesse thee and in another place thus The heauens declare the glorie of God and the firmament sheweth the worke of his hands yea as the prophet saith and as the three holy Hebrewes sang fire heate winter summer frost snow light darkenesse the starres the sunne the moone and creatures blesse the Lord. The tenth obiection S. Iohn saith that no vncleane thing shall enter into heauen but many depart out of this life which are not pure ergo such must be purged in purgatorie before they come in heauen The answere I say first that faith in Christ Iesus can as well purge a man in this life as the Popes pardons and yet as your selues teach vs a plenarie indulgence will salue this impuritie I say secondly that it is a needelesse thing to establish popish purgatorie because popish pardons supplie the want thereof This is proued copiously in my booke of Motiues I say thirdly that the faithfull and elect children of God haue their cleanenesse before him in Christ his sonne with which they may enter into heauen For as S. Iohn saith they haue washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lambe who as S. Paul saith when hee knew no sinne was yet made the sacrifice for sin that we might be the righteousnes of God in him And as S. Peter saith their hearts are purified by faith yea as Christ himself saith his sacred word hath made them cleane In fine holy Writ pronounceth them blessed that die in the Lord that they rest from their labors Which being so they neither haue any impurity nor suffer any purgatorie paine The replie You all confesse that your inherent iustice is vnperfect and impure and so your vncleanenes must be taken away after this life be fore yee come into heauen ergo there is a purgatorie The answere I answere that original concupiscence is an inseperable accidēt during this life aswel in you as in vs but as it is proper to this state so is it taken away in that very instant in which our state is altered The 11. obiection S. Peter saith that God raised vp Christ after he had loosed the sorrows of hel This place saith our Iesuite must needs be vnderstood of purgatory for first it cānot be meant of the damned because their paines shal neuer end Secondly it cannot be meant of the sorrowes of Christ because they were finished on the crosse Thirdly it cannot be meant of the fathers in Limbo because they had no paine at all it therefore remaineth that it be meant of the sorrowes which soules abide in purgatorie The answere I say first that if their Latin text were sound this obiection would solue it selfe for the originall and Greeke text is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hauing loosed the sorrowes of death Out of which words nothing can be gathered that fauoreth purgatory any thing at al. I say secondly that if it were as y e papists do reade the sorrowes of hel being loosed their soules should alwayes feele paine but neuer haue an end Which cannot be truely verified of their purgatorie fire I say thirdly that the fathers whō the papists hold to haue bin in Limbo at that time did according to their owne doctrine suffer poenam damni because they were not as yet partakers of the cleare vision beatificall which Bellarmine granteth in another place and so is repugnant to himselfe But let that be deemed a small fault in a Iesuite which is thought a great crime in another man Adde hereunto that poena damni is a greater pain then poena sensus by their best popish diuinitie I say fourthly that by the sorrows of death is meant nothing els but the bitter paines which Christ suffered vpon the crosse to accomplish mans redemption For then did he properly perfectly triumph ouer death when he rose againe from death who was deliuered to death for our sins saith Saint Paul and is risen againe for our iustification And the verie words of the text next following in the Actes doe confirme this exposition for there it is thus written whome God raised vp and loosed the sorrowes of death because it was vnpossible that he should be holden of it as if S. Peter had said although the passion of Christ was so bitter exceeding great as implying the curse and malediction due for our sinnes insomuch that the remembrance therof caused him to sweate out drops of blood yet could not death possiblie preuaile against him but that he should rise againe and conquer both hel and it The replie Although the greek word in the 24. verse signifieth death yet in the 27 verse it signifieth hel and so the sense is against you The answere I answer that the hebrew word in the psalme from whence this sentence is taken is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and signifieth a sepulchre or graue and so doth your owne great linguiste Arias Montanus interpret it as if the Prophet hadde saide thou wilt not leaue my soule or life in the graue For the course of holy scripture doth comprehende our life vnder the name of the Soule so saith the Prophet Ionas therefore now O Lord take I beseech thee my soule from me for it is better for me to die then to liue So is it in the Hebrew and original and yet by