they did eat the same spirituall meat and dranke the same spirituall drinke with the Corinthians otherwise his reasō prooues not the point which he hath in hand namely that the Israelites were nothing inferiour to the Corinthians Reason VI. And it is said the sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath so it may be saide that the sacrament of the Lordes supper was made for man not mā for it therefore man is more excellent thē the sacrament But if the signes of bread and wine be really turned into the body and blood of Christ then is the sacrament infinitely better then man who in his best estate is onely ioyned to Christ and made a member of his mysticall bodie whereas the bread and wine are made very Christ. But the sacrament or outward elements indeede are not better then man the ende beeing alwaies better then the thing ordained to the ende It remaines therefore that Christs presence is not corporall but spirituall Againe in the supper of the Lord euery beleeuer receiueth whole Christ God and man though not the godhead now by this carnall eating we receiue not whole Christ but onely a part of his manhoode and therefore in the sacrament there is no carnall eating and consequently no bodily presence Reason VII The iudgement of the ancient Church Theodoret saith The same Christ who called his naturall bodie foode and bread vvho also called him selfe a vine he vouch safed the visible signes the name of his owne bodie NOT CHANGING NATVRE but putting grace to nature whereby he meanes consecration And The mysticall signes after sanctification loose not their proper nature For they REMAINE IN THEIR FIRST NATVRE and keepe their first figure and forme and as before may be touched and seene and that which they are made is vnderstood beleeued adored Gelasius saith Bread and wine passe into the substance of the bodie and blood of Christ yet so as the SVBSTANCE OR NATVRE OF BREAD AND VVINE CEASETH NOT. And they are turned into the diuine substance yet the bread and wine REMAIN STIL IN THE PROPERTIE OF THEIR NATVRE Lumbard saith If it be asked what conuersion this is vvhether formall or substantiall or of an other kinde I am not able to define And that the Fathers held not transubstantiation I prooue it by sundrie reasons First they vsed in former times to burne with fire that which remained after the administration of the Lords supper Secondly by the sacramentall vnion of the bread and wine with the bodie and blood of Christ they vsed to confirme the personall vnion of the manhood of Christ with the godhead against hereticks which argument they would not haue vsed if they had beleeued a popish reall presence Thirdly it was a custome in Constantinople that if many parts of the sacrament remained after the administration thereof was ended that young children should be sent for from the schoole to eate them who neuertheles were barred the Lordes table And this argues plainely that the Church in those daies tooke the bread after the administration was ended for common bread Againe it was once an order in the Romane church that the wine should be consecrated by dipping into it bread which had bin consecrated But this order cannot stand with the reall presence in which the bread is turned both into the bodie and bloode Nicholaus Cabasilas saith After he hath vsed some speach to the people he erects their mindes and lifts their thoughts from earth saith Sursum corda Let vs lift vp our heartes let vs THINKE ON THINGS ABOVE and not on things that are vpon the earth They consent say that they lift vp their hearts thither where is their treasure and where Christ sits at the right hand of his father Obiections of Papists I. Their first reason is Ioh. 6. 55. My flesh is meat indeed and my blood is drinke indeed therefore say they Christs body must be eaten with the mouth and his blood drunke accordingly Ans. The chapter must be vnderstood of a spirituall eating of Christ his bodie is meate indeede but spirituall meate and his bloode spirituall drinke to be receiued not by the mouth but by faith This is the very point that Christ here intendes to prooue namely that to beleeue in him is to eate his flesh and to drinke his bloode are all one Againe this chapter must not be vnderstoood of that speciall eating of Christ in the sacrament for it is saide generally v. 53. Except ye eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his blood ye haue no life in you and if these very words which are the substance of the chapter must be vnderstood of a sacramentall eating no man before the comming of Christ was saued for none did bodily eate or drink his bodie or bloode considering it was not then existing in nature but onely was present to the beleeuing heart by faith II. Obiect An other argument is taken from the wordes of the institution This is my body Ans. These wordes must not be vnderstood properly but by a figure his bodie beeing put for the signe and seale of his bodie It is obiected that when any make their last wills and testaments they speake as plainely as they cā now in this supper Christ ratifies his last will and testament and therefore he spake plainely without any figure Ans. Christ here speaketh plainely and by a figure also for it hath bin alwaies the vsuall manner of the Lord in speaking of sacraments to giue the name of the thing signified to the signe as Gen. 17. 10. circumcision is called the couenant of God in the next v. in way of exposition the signe of the couenāt Exod. 12. 11. the paschal lambe is called the Angels passing by or ouer the houses of the Israelites whereas indeed it was but a signe thereof 1. Cor. 10. 4. The rock was Christ 1. Cor. 5. 7. The Passeouer was Christ. And the like phrase is to be found in the institution of this sacrament cōcerning the cup which the Papists themselues confesse to be figuratiue when it is said Luk. 22. This cuppe is the new testament in my blood that is a signe seale and pleadge thereof Againe the time when these wordes were spoken must be considered and it was before the passion of Christ whereas yet his body was not crucified nor his blood shed and cōsequently neither of thē could be receiued in bodily manner but by faith alone Againe Christ was not onely the author but the minister of this sacrament at the time of institution thereof and if the bread had beene truly turned into his bodie and the wine into his blood Christ with his owne hands should haue taken his owne bodie and blood and haue giuen it to his disciples nay which is more he should with his owne hands haue taken his owne flesh and drunken his owne bloode and haue eaten himself For Christ himselfe did
Pope saith to the Emperour I which AM SVBIECT TO YOVR COMMANDEMENT haue euery way discharged that which was due in that I haue performed mine allegiance to the Emperour and haue not concealed vvhat I thought on Gods behalfe And Pope Leo the fourth after Gregorre 200. yeares acknowledged the Emperour Lotharius for his soueraigne prince and professed obedience without gainsaying to his Imperial commandemeÌ„ts To conclude whereas they say that there is a double head of the Church one imperiall which is Christ alone the other ministerial which is the Pope gouerning the whole Church vnder Christ I answer this distinction robbeth Christ of his honour because in setting vp their ministeriall head they are faine to borrow of Christ things proper vnto him as the priuiledge to forgiue sinnes properly and the power to gouerne the whole earth by making of lawes that shall as truly binde conscience as the lawes of God c. The nineteenth point Of the efficacie of the sacraments Our consent Conclus I. We teach and beleeue that the sacraments are signes to represent Christ with his benefits vnto vs. Conclus II. We teach further that the sacraments are indeede instruments whereby God offereth and giueth the foresaid benefits vnto vs. Thus farre we consent with the Romane Church The difference The difference betweene vs standes in sundrie points First of all the best learned among them teach that sacraments are phisicall instruments that is true and proper instrumentall causes hauing force and efficacie in them to produce and giue grace They vse to expresse their meaning by these comparisons When the scriuener takes the pen into his hande and writes the action of writing comes from the penne mooued by the hand of the writer and in cutting of wood or stone the diuision comes from the sawe mooued by the hand of the workman euen so the grace say they that is giuen by God is conferred by the sacrament it selfe Nowe we for our parts holde that Sacraments are not physicall but meere voluntarie instruments Voluntarie because it is the will and appointment of God to vse them as certen outward meanes of grace Instruments because when we vse them aright according to the institution God then answerably conferres grace from himselfe In this respect only take we them for instruments and no otherwise The second difference is this They teach that the very action of the Minister dispensing the sacrament as it is a worke done giues grace immediatly if the partie be prepared as the very washing or spâ—inkling of water in baptisme and the giuing of bread in the Lords supper euen as the orderly moouing of the penne vpon the paper by the hand of the writer causeth writing We hold the contrarie namely that no action in the dispensation of a Sacrament conferreth grace as it is a worke done that is by the efficacie and force of the very sacramentall action it selfe though ordained of God but for two other waies First by the signification therof For God testifies vnto vs his will and good pleasure partly by the word of promise and partly by the sacrament the signes representing to the eyes that which the word doth to the eares beeing also types and certen images of the very same things that are promised in the worde and no other Yea the elements are not generall and confused but particular signes to the seuerall communicants and by the vertues of the Institution for when the faithfull receiue the signes from God by the handes of the Minister it is as much as if God himselfe with his owne mouth should speake vnto them seuerally and by name promise to them remission of sinnes And things said to men particularly doe more affect and more take away doubting then if they were generally spoken to an whole companie Therefore signes of graces are as it were an applying and binding of the promise of saluation to euery particular beleeuer and by this meanes the oftener they are receiued the more they help our infirmitie and confirme our assurance of mercie Againe the sacrament conferres grace in that the signe thereof confirmes faith as a pledge by reason it hath a promise annexed to it For when God commaundes vs to receiue the signes in faith and withall promiseth to the receiuers to giue the thing signified he bindes himselfe as it were in bonde vnto vs to stand to his owne word euen as men binde themselues in obligations putting to their handes and seales so as they cannot go backe And when the signes are thus vsed as pledges that often they greatly increase the grace of God as a token sent from one friend to another renews and confirmes the perswasion of loue These are the two principall waies wherby the sacraments are said to conferre grace namely in respect of their signification and as they are pledges of Gods fauour vnto vs. And the very point here to be considered is in what order and manner they confirme And the manner is this The signes and visible elements affect the senses outward and inward the senses conuay their obiect to the minde the minde directed by the holy Ghost reasoneth on this manner out of the promise annexed to the sacramenâ— He that vseth the elements aright shall receiue grace thereby but I vse the elements aright in faith and repentance saith the minde of the beleeuer therefore shall I receiue from God increase of grace Thus then faith is confirmed not by the worke done but by a kind of reasoning caused in the minde the argument or proofe whereof is borrowed from the elements beeing signes and pledges of Gods mercy The third difference The Papists teach that in the sacrament by the worke done the very grace of iustification is conferred We say no because a man of yeares must first beleeue and be iustified before he can be a meete partaker of any sacrament And the grace that is conferred is onely the increase of our faith hope sanctification c. Our reasons Reason I. The word preached and the sacrameÌ„ts differ in the maÌ„ner of giuing Christ and his benefits vnto vs because in the word the spirit of God teacheth vs by a voice convaied to the minde by the bodily cares but in the sacraments annexed to the word by certen sensible and bodily signed viewed by the eye Sacraments are nothing but visible words and promises Otherwise for the giuing it selfe they differ not Christ himselfe saith that in the very word is eaten his owne flesh which he vvas to giue for the life of the vvorld and what can be saide more of the Lords supper Augustine saith that beleeuers are partakers of the bodie blood of Christ in baptisme and Hierome to Edibia that in baptisme vve eate and drinke the bodie and blood of Christ. If thus much may be saide of baptisme why may it not also be saide of the word preached Againe Hierome vpon Ecclesiastes saith It is profitable to be filled with the bodie
Euphrates where was the confusion of languages and where the Iewes were in captiuitie which Babylon is in Scripture reproched for Idolatry and other iniquities The second Babylon is in Egypt standing on the riuer Nilus and it is now called Cayr of that mention is made 1. Pet. 5. v. 13. as some thinke though indeede it is as likely and more commonly thought that there is meant Babylon of Assyria The third Babylon is mysticall whereof Babylon of Assyria was a type and figure and that is Rome which is without question here to be vnderstood And the whore of Babylon as by all circumstances may be gathered is the state or regiment of a people that are the inhabitants of Rome and appertaine thereto This may be prooued by the interpretation of the holy Ghost for in the last verse of the 17. chapter the woman that is the whore of Babylon is said to be a citty which raigneth ouer the kings of the earth now in the daies when S. Iohn penned this booke of Reuelation there was no citie in the world that ruled ouer the kings of the earth but Rome it then beeing the seate where the Emperour put in execution his Imperiall authoritie Againe in the seuenth verse shee is saide to sit on a beast hauing seuen heades and ten hornes which seuen heads be seuen hills v. 9. whereon the woman sitteth and also they be seuen kings Therfore by the whore of Babylon is meant a citie standing on seuen hills Now it is well knowne not onely to learned men in the Church of God but euen to the heathen themselues that Rome alone is the citie built on seuen distinct hills called Caelius Aventinus Exquilinus Tarpeius or Capitolinus Viminalis Palatinus Quirinalis Papists to helpe themselues doe alledge that old Rome stood on seuen hills but nowe is remooued further to the plaine of Campus Martius I answer that howsoeuer the greatest part of the citie in regard of habitation be not nowe on seuen hills yet in regard of regiment and practise of religion it is for euen to this day vpon these hills are seated certaine Churches and Monasteries other like places where the Papal Authoritie is put in execution and thus Rome beeing put for a state and regiment euen at this day it standes vpon seuen hills And though it be come to passe that the harlot in regard of her later daies euen changed her seate yet in respect of her yonger times in which shee was bred and borne shee sate vpon the seuen hills Others because they feare the wounding of their own heads labour to frame these wordes to an other meaning and say that by the whore is meant the company of all wicked men in the world wheresoeuer the deuil being the head thereof But this exposition is flat against the text for in the second verse of the 18. chapter shee is opposed to the kings of the earth with whome shee is said to commit fornication and in the last verse shee is called a citie standing on seuen hills and raigning ouer the kings of the earth as I haue said therfore must needes be a state of men in some particular place And the Papists themselues perceiuing that this shift will not serue their turne make two Romes heathenish Rome and that whereof the Pope is head now say they the whore spoken of is heathenish Rome which was ruled by cruel tyrants as Nero Domitian and the rest and that Rome whereof nowe the Pope is head is not here meant Behold a vaine and foolish distinction for Ecclesiasticall Rome in respect of state princely dominion and crueltie in persequuting the Saints of God is all one with the heathenish Empire the See of the Bishop beeing turned into the Emperours court as all histories doe manifest But let the distinction be as they suppose yet by their leaues here by the whore must be vnderstood not onely heathenish Rome but euen the Papall or Ecclesiasticall Rome for v. 3. of this chapter the holy Ghost saith plainely that shee hath made all natious drunke with the wine of the wrath of her fornication yea it is added that shee hath committed fornication with the kings of the earth whereby is signified that she hath endeauoured to intangle al the nations of the earth in her spirituall idolatrie and to bring the kings of the earth to her religion Which thing cannot be vnderstoode of the heathenish Rome for that left all the kings of the earth to their owne religion and idolatrie neithet did they labour to bring forraine kings to worshippe their Gods Againe chapt 18. v. 16 it is said that the ten hornes which be ten kings shall hate the whore and make her desolate and naked which must not be vnderstoode of heathenish Rome but of popish Rome for whereas in former times all the kings of the earth did submit themselues to the whore nowe they haue begun to withdrawe themselues and make her desolate as the king of Bohemia Denmarke Germanie England Scotland and other parts therefore this distinction is also friuolous They further alledge that the whore of Babylon is drunke with the bloode of the Saints and Martyrs chap. 17. 6. shedde not in Rome but in Ierusalem where the Lord was crucified and the two prophets beeing slaine lie there in the streets Rev. 11. â—8 But this place is not meant of Hierusalem as Hierome hath fully taught but it may well be vnderstoode of Rome Christ was crucified there either because the authoritie whereby he was crucified was from the Romane Empire or els because Christ in his members was and is there dayly crucified though locally in his owne person he was crucified at Ierusalem And thus notwistanding all which hath bin said we must here by the whore vnderstand the State and Empire of Rome not so much vnder the heathen Emperours as vnder the head thereof the Pope which exposition besides the authority of the text hath the fauoure and defence of auncient and learned men Bernard saith They are the ministers of Christ but THEY SERVE ANTICHRIST Againe The beast spoken of in the Apocalyps to which a mouth is giuen to speake blasphemies and to make warre with the Saints of God is now gotten into Peters chaire as a lyon prepared to his praie It will be said that Bernard speakes these latter wordes of one that came to the Popedome by intrusion or vsurpation It is true indeede but wherefore was he an vsurper he rendreth a reason thereof in the same place because the Antipope called Innocentius was chosen by the kings of Almaine France England Scotland Spaine Hierusalem with consent of the whole Cleargie and people in these nations and the other was not And thus Bernard hath giuen his verdict that not onely this vsurper but all the Popes for this many yeres are the beast in the Apocalyps because now they are onely chosen by the colledge of Cardinalls To this agreeth the decree of Pope Nicolas the second
satisfaction and that is when any hauing giuē offence to the church of God or any part thereof do make an open publike testimonie of their repentance Mirian for murmuring aganst Moses was striken with leprosie and afterward by his prayer shee was clensed and yet for all that shee must go seuen dayes out of the tent and congregation that shee might make a kinde of satisfaction to the people for her trespasse And in the old testament sackcloth and ashes were signes of their satisfaction Conclus III. We hold that no man can be saued vnles he make a perfect satisfaction to the iustice of God for all his sinnes because God is infinite in iustice and therefore will either exact an euerlasting punishment or satisfaction for the same The dissent or difference The points of our difference and dissent are these The Church of Rome teacheth and beleeueth that Christ by his death hath made a satisfaction for all the sinnes of men and for the eternall punishment of them all yet so as they themselues must satisfie the iustice of God for the temporall punishment of their offences either on earth or in purgatorie We teach and beleeue that Christ by his death and passion hath made a perfect and all-sufficient satisfaction to the iustice of God for all the sinnes of men and for the whole punishment thereof both eternal and temporall Thus we differ and herein we for our parts must for euer stand at difference with thē so as if there were no more points of variance but this one it should be sufficient to keepe vs alwaies from vniting our religions and cause vs to obey the voice of Christ Come out of her my people For as in the former points so in this also the Papists erre not in circumstance but in the very foundation and life of religion Our reasons I. A satisfaction that is made imperfect either directly or by consequent is indeede no satisfaction at all But the Papists make Christs satisfaction imperfect in that they do adde a supply by humane satisfactions thus much a learned schoolman Biel in plain words confessed Although saith he the passion of Christ be the principall merit for which grace is conferred the opening of the kingdome and glorie yet IS IT NEVER THE ALONE AND TOTAL MERITORIOVS CAVSE it is manifest because alwaies vvith the merit of Christ there concurreth some vvorke as the merit of congruitie or condignitie of him that receiueth grace or glorie if he be of yeares and haue the vse of reason or of some other for him if he want reason For that which admitts a supply by an other is imperfect in it selfe Therefore humane satisfactions cannot stand Learned Papists make answere that Christs satisfaction and mans may stand well togither For say they Christs satisfactions is sufficient in it selfe to answer the iustice of God for all sinne and punishment but it is not sufficient to this or that man till it be applyed and it must be applied by our satisfaction made to God for the temporall punishment of our sinnes But I say againe that mans satisfaction can be no meanes to apply the satisfaction of Christ and I prooue it thus The meanes of applying Gods blessings and graces vnto man are twofold some respect God himselfe and some respect man Those which respect God are such whereby God on his part doth offer and convay his mercies in Christ vnto man of this sort are the preaching of the word baptisme and the Lords supper and these are as it were the hand of God whereby he reacheth downe and giueth vnto vs Christ with all his benefits The other meanes of applying on mans part are those whereby the saide benefites are receiued Of this sort there is onely one namely faith whereby we beleeue that Christ with all his benefits belong vnto vs. And this is the hand of man whereby he receiueth Christ as he is offered or exhibited by God in the word and sacraments As for other meanes beside these in Scripture we finde none Foolish therefore is the answere of the Papist that make mens satisfactions meanes to apply the satisfaction of Christ vnto vs for by humane satisfactions Christs is neither offered on Gods part nor yet receiued on mans part let them prooue it if they can Others not content with this their former answer say that our satisfactions doe nothing derogate from the satisfaction of Christ because our works haue their dignitie merit from Christs satisfaction he meriting that our workes should satisfie Gods iustice for temporall punishments But this is also absurd and false as the former was For if Christ did satisfie that man might satisfie then Christ doth make euery beleeuer to be a Christ a Iesus a Redeemer a Priest in the same order with his owne selfe But to make sinfull man his owne redeemer though it be but from temporall punishments is a doctrine of deuils For the holy Ghost teacheth that the priesthood of Christ is incommunicable cannot passe from him to any other Nowe to make satisfaction for sinne or any part of the punishment thereof is a dutie or a part of Christ his priesthood and therefore to make satisfaction is a worke that cannot passe frō his person to the person of any man Againe if Christ by his satisfaction giue power to man to satisfie then man doth satisfie by Christ and Christ beside his owne satisfaction vpon the crosse must daily satisfie in man to the ende of the world but this cannot be for Christ vpon the crosse when death was vpon him said It is finished that is I haue fully satisfied for all the sinnes of mankind both in respect of the fault and punishment As for Christs buriall and resurrection which followed his death they serued not to satisfie but to confirme and ratifie the same Againe Paul saith 2. Cor. 5. 12. He that knew no sinne was made sinne for vs that is the punishment of sinne for vs but if the Church of Rome say true that Christ doth daily satisfie then Paul spake too short and should haue saide further that Christ was made sinne for vs and in vs too and that God was not onely in Christ but also in vs reconciling the world to himselfe But Paul neuer knew this learning and therefore let them turne themselues which way they will by putting a supplement to Christs satisfaction they doe indeed annihillate the same Reason II. In sundrie places of Scripture especially in the Epistles of Paul we are are said to be redeemed iustified and saued Freely which word freely doth import that we are iustified and saued without any thing done on out part or by our selues in the matter of our saluation and if this be so then can we doe nothing at all that may satisfie the iustice of God for the least punishment of our sinnes If we satisfie in our own persons we are not saued freely and if we be saued freely we make no satisfaction
of the natiuitie of our Sauiour Christ is onely a custome and tradition of the Church and yet men are commonly more carefull to keepe it then the Lordes day the keeping whereof standes by the moral law Positiue lawes are not sufficient to restraine vs from buying selling on the sabbath yet within the twelue daies no man keepes market Againe see the truth of this in our affection to the ministerie of the word let the preacher alleadge Peter and Paul the people count it but common stuffe such as any man can bring but let men come and alleadge Ambrose Austine and the rest of the fathers oh he is the man he is alone for them Againe let any man be in danger any way and straight he sendeth to the wise man or wizzard Gods word is not sufficient to comfort and direct him All this argues that poperie denied with the mouth abides still in the heart and therefore we must learne to reuerence the written word by ascribing vnto it all manner of perfection The eight point Of vowes Our consent Touching vowes this must be knowne that we doe not condemne them altogeather but onely labour to restore the puritie of doctrine touching this point which by the Church of Rome from time to time hath bin corrupted and defaced We hold therefore that a vowe is a promise made to God touching some duties to be performed vnto him and it is two fold generall or speciall The generall vow is that which concernes all beleeuers and it is made in the couenant both of the lawe and of the Gospell I will here onely speake of the vowe which is made in the couenant of the Gospell in which there be two actions one of God the other of man God in mercy one his part promiseth to men the remission of sinnes and life euerlasting and man againe for his part promiseth to beleeue in Christ and to obey God in all his commandements All men euer made this vowe vnto God as the Iewes in circumcision which also they renued so often as they receiued the Passeouer and in the newe testament all that are baptised doe the like And in baptisme this vow is called the stipulation of a good consciēce wherby we purpose to renounce our selues to beleeue in Christ to bring forth the fruits of true repētance it ought to be renued so oft as we are partakers of the supper of the Lord. This vowe is necessarie and must be kept as a part of the true worship of God because it is a promise wherein we vowe to performe all duties commanded of God either in the lawe or in the Gospell It may be demanded considering we are boūd to obedience how we binde our selues in baptisme thereto Ans. Though we be alreadie bound partly by nature and partly by the written word yet may we renue the same bonde in a vowe and he that is bound may further binde himselfe so it be for this ende to helpe his dulnes for want of zeale and to make himselfe more forward in duties of loue to men and the worship of God to this ende Dauid sware to keepe the law of God psal 119. 116. though he were bound vnto it by nature and by the written law it selfe The speciall vowe is that which doth not reach to the person of all beleeuers but onely concernes some speciall men vpon some speciall occasions And this kind of vowe is twofold The first is the vowe of a ceremoniall dutie in the way of seruice to God and it was in practise in the Church of the Iewes vnder the olde Testament examples hereof are two especially the first was the vowe of the Nazarites whereto no kind of men were bound by Gods commaundement but they bound themselues God onely prescribing the manner and order of keeping the same with rites pertaining thereto as abstinence from wine the not cutting of their haire and such like The secōd example is of the Iewes when of their owne accords they vowed to giue God house or land sheepe or oxen or any like things for the maintenance of the legall worship and of this also God prescribeth certaine rules Levit. 27. Now these vowes were part of the Iewish pedagogue or ceremoniall law wherein God trained vp the Iewes in the old testament and being obserued of them they were parts of Gods worship but now vnder the gospell they are not beeing all abolished with the ceremoniall lawe to which Christ put an ende at his death vpon the crosse It is true Paul made a vowe and since kept the same in the time of the newe Testament Act. 18. yet not as a part of Gods worship but as a thing indifferent for the time wherein he onely condescended to the weaknes of the Iewes that by this meanes he might bring them the better vnto Christ. And whereas Christ is called a Nazarite Math. 2. 23. we may not thinke he was of that very order because he did not obstain from wine but he was so tearmed because he was the veritie and accomplishment of this order For by it was signified that Gods church was a peculiar people seuered or chosen out of the world that Christ in respect of holines was also seperated srō all sinners And the words in S. Matthew he shalbe called a Nazarite are borowed from the book of Iudges cap. 13. where they are properly spoken of Sampson and in type or figure of Christ. For as Sampson saued Israel by his death so did Christ saue his Church And as Sampson killed his enemies more by death then by life so did Christ. It is plaine therefore that this kinde of vowe bindeth not vs for there are no more ccremonies to be kept vnder the gospell for parts of Gods worship but the outward rites of Baptisme and the Lordes Supper Vowes concerning meates drinks attire touching tasting times places daies were proper to the Iewes The second kinde of speciall vowe is that wherby a man promiseth freely to performe some outward and bodely exercise for some good ende and this vowe also if it be made accordingly is lawefull and belongs both to the Church of the olde and newe testament In the olde we haue the example of the Rekabites Ier. 35. who by the appointment of Ionadab their father abstained from strong drinke and wine from planting vineyardes and orchardes whereby Ionadab intended onely to breake them before hand and to acquaint them with their future condition and state that they should be strangers in a forraine land that so they might prepare themselues to indure hardnes in the time to come And nowe in the newe testament we haue warrant in like manner to vowe as if a man by drinking of wine or strong drinke finde himselfe prone to drunkennes he may vow with himselfe to drinke no more wine nor strong drinke for so long time as he feeles the driuking thereof will stirre vp his infirmitie and minister occasion of sinning Of this kind also are the vowes in
God and of Saints in heauen glorified being absent from vs. Ans. To kneele to the chaire of estate is no more but a ciuill testimony or signe of ciuill reuerēce by which all good subiects when occasion is offered shewe their loyaltie and subiection to their lawfull princes And this kneeling being on this manner and to no other end hath sufficient warrant in the word of God But kneeling to the image of any Saint departed is religious and consequently more then ciuill worship as the Papists themselues confesse The argument then prooueth nothing vnlesse they will keepe themselues to one and the same kind of worship III. Differ The Papists also teach that God may be lawfully worshipped in images in which he hath appeared vnto mem as the Father in the image of an old man the Sonne in the image of a man crucified and the Holy Ghost in the likenes of a doue c. But we hold it vnlawfull to worship God in by or at any image for this is the thing which as I haue prooued before the second commandement forbiddeth And the fact of the Israelites Exod. 32. in worshipping the golden calfe is condemned as flat idolatrie albeit they worshipped not the calfe but God in the calfe for v. 5. Aaron saith To morrovve shall be the solemnitie of Iehovah whereby he doth giue vs to vnderstand that the calfe was but a signe of Iehouah whome they worshipped Obiect It seemes the Israelites worshipped the calfe For Aaron faith vers 4. These be thy Gods O Israel that brought thee out of Egypt Ansvv. Aarons meaning is nothing els but that the golden calfe was a signe of the presence of the true God And the name of the thing signified is giuen to the signe as vpon a stage he is called a King that representes the King And Augustine saith that images are wont to be called by the names of things whereofthey are images as the counterfeit of Samuel is called Samuel And we must not esteeme them all as madde men to thinke that a calfe made of their earings beeing but one or two daies olde should be the God that brought them out of Egypt with a mightie hand many daies before And these are the points of difference touching Images wherein we must stand at varience for euer with the Church of Rome For they erre in the foundation of religion making indeede an idol of the true God and worshipping an other Christ then we doe vnder new tearmes maintaining the Idolatry of the heathen And therefore haue we departed from them and so must we still doe because they are Idolaters as I haue prooued The X. point Of reall presence Our consent I. We holde and beleeue a presence of Christs bodie and bloode in the Sacrament of the Lords supper and that no fained but a true and reall presence which must be considered two waies first in respect of the signes secondly in respect of the communicants For the first we hold and teach that Christs bodie and bloode are truly present with the bread and wine being signes in the sacrament but how not in respect of place of coexistence but by sacramentall relation on this manner When a word is vttered the sound comes to the eare and at the same instant the thing signified comes to the minde and thus by relation the word and the thing spoken of are both present together Euen so at the Lords table bread and wine must not be considered barely as substances and creatures but as outward signes in relation to the bodie and blood of Christ and this relation arising from the very institution of the Sacrament standes in this that when the elements of bread wine are present to the hand and to the mouth of the receiuer at the very same time the bodie and bloode of Christ are presented to the minde thus and no otherwise is Christ truly present with the signes The second presence is in respect of the communicants to whose beleeuing hearts he is also really present It will be said what kinde of presence is this Ans. Such as the communion in the sacrament is such is the presence and by the communion must we iudge of the presence Nowe the communion is on this manner God the father according to the tenour of the Euangelicall couenant giues Christ in this sacrament as really and truly as any thing can be giuen to man not by part and peecemeale as we say but whole Christ God and man on this sort In Christ there be two natures the godhead and manhood The godhead is not giuen in regard of substance or essence but onely in regard of efficacie merits and operation conueied thence to the manhood And further in this sacrament Christs whole manhood is giuen both bodie and soule in this order First of all is giuen the verie manhoode in respect of substance and that really secondly the merits benefites thereof as namely the satisfaction performed by and in the manhoode to the iustice of God And thus the intire manhood with the benefits thereof are giuen wholly and ioyntly together For the two distinct signes of bread and wine signifie not two distinct giuings of the bodie apart and the blood apart but the full and perfect nourishment of our soules Againe the benefites of Christs manhoode are diuersly giuen some by imputation which is an action of God accepting that which is done by Christ as done by vs and thus it hath pleased God to giue the passion of Christ his obedience Some againe are giuen by a kind of propagation which I cannot fitly expresse in tearms but I resemble it thus As one candle is lighted by an other one torch or candle-light is conuaied to twentie candles euen so the inherent righteousnes of euery beleeuer is deriued from the storehouse of righteousnes which is in the manhood of Christ for the righteousnes of all the members is but the fruit thereof euen as the naturall corruption in all mankinde is but a fruit of that originall sinne which was in Adam Thus we see how God for his part giues Christ and that really To proceede when God giues Christ he giues withall at the same time the spirit of Christ which spirit creates in the heart of the receiuer the instrument of true faith by which the heart doth really receiue Christ giuen of God by resting vpon the promise which God hath made that he will giue Christ and his righteousnesse to euery true beleeuer Now then when God giues Christ with his benefits and man for his part by faith receiues the same as they are giuen there riseth that vnion which is betweene euery good receiuer and Christ himselfe Which vnion is not forged but a reall true and neare coniunction nearer then which none is or can be because it is made by a solemne giuing and receiuing that passeth betweene God and man as also by the bond of one and the same spirit To come then to the point considering
eate the bread and drinke the wine that he might with his own person consecrate his last supper as he had consecrated baptisme before And if these wordes should be properly vnderstood euery man must be a manslaier in his eating of Christ. Lastly by meanes of popish reall presence it comes to passe that our bodies should be nourished by naked qualities without any substance which in all philosophie is false and erronious To helpe this the like absurdities some Papists make nine wonders in the sacrament The first that Christs bodie is in the Eucharist in as large a quantitie as he was upon the crosse and is now in heauen and yet exceedes not the quantitie of the bread The second that there be accidents without a subiect The third that bread is turned into the bodie of Christ and yet is not the matter of the bodie nor resolued to nothing The fourth that the body increaseth not by consecration of many hosts and is not diminished by often receiuing The fifth that the bodie of Christ is vnder many consecrated hosts The sixt that when the host is diuided the bodie of Christ is not diuided but vnder euery part thereof is vvhole Christ. The seauenth that when the priest holds the host in his hand the bodie of Christ is not felt by it selfe nor seene but the formes of bread and vvine The eight that vvhen the formes of bread and wine cease the bodie and bloode of Christ ceaseth also to be there The ninth that the accidents of bread and wine haue the same effects vvith the bread and vvine it selfe vvhich are to nourish and fill On this manner it shall be easie for any man to defend the most absurd opinion that is or can be if he may haue libertie to answer the arguments alledged to the contrary by wonders To conclude seeing there is a reall communion in the sacrament betweene Christ and euery beleeuing heart our dutie therefore is to bestow our hearts on Christ endeauouring to loue him and to reioyce in him and to long after him aboue all things all our affiance must be in him with him wee beeing nowe on earth must haue our conuersation in heauen And this is the true reall presence which the auncient Church of God hath commended vnto vs for in all these liturgies these wordes were vsed and are yet extant in the popish masse Lift vp your hearts we lift them vp vnto the Lord. By which wordes the communicants were admonished to direct their mindes and their faith to Christ sitting at the right hand of God Thus saide Augustine If vve celebrate the ascension of the Lord vvith deuotion let vs ascend vvith him and lift vp our hearts Againe they vvhich are alreadie risen with Christ in faith and hope are inuited to the great table of heauen to the table of Angels VVHERE IS THE BREAD The eleuenth point Of the sacrifice in the Lords Supper which the Papists call the sacrifice of the Masse Touching this point first I will set downe what must be vnderstoode by the name Sacrifice A sacrifice is taken properly or improperly Properly it is a sacred or solemne action in which man offereth and consecrateth some outward bodily thing vnto God for this end to please and honour him thereby Thus al the sacrifices of the old testament and the oblation of Christ vpon the crosse in the new Testament are sacrifices Improperly that is onely by the way of resemblance the duties of the morall lawe are called sacrifices And in handling this question I vnderstande a sacrifice both properly and improperly by way of resemblance Our consent Our consent I propound in two conclusions Conclus I. That the supper of the Lord is a sacrifice and may truly be so called as it hath bin in former ages that in three respects I. Because it is a memoriall of the reall sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse and containes withall a thanksgiuing to God for the same which thanksgiuing is the sacrifice and calves of our lips Hebr. 13. 15. II. Because euery communicant doth there present himselfe bodie and soule a liuing holy and acceptable sacrifice vnto God For as in this sacrament God giues vnto vs Christ with his benefits so we answerable giue vp our selues vnto God as seruants to walk in the practise of all dutifull obedience III. It is called a sacrifice in respect of that which was ioyned with the sacrament namely the Almes giuen to the poore as a testimonie of our thankefulnes vnto God And in this regard also the ancient Fathers haue called the sacrament an vnbloodie sacrifice and the table an altar the ministers priests and the whole action an oblation not to God but to the congregation not by the priest alone but by the people A Canon of a certaine Council saith We decree that euery Lords day the oblation of the altar be offered of euery man and woman both for bread and wine And Augustine saith that vvomen offer a sacrifice at the altar of the Lord that it might be offered by the priest to God And vsually in ancient writers the communion of the whole bodie of the congregation is called the sacrifice or oblation Conclus II. That the very bodie of Christ is offered in the Lordes Supper For as we take the bread to be the bodie of Christ sacramentally by resemblance and no otherwise so the breaking of bread is sacramentally the sacrificing or offering of Christ vpon the crosse And thus the fathers haue tearmed the Eucharist an immolation of Christ because it is a cōmemoration of his sacrifice vpon the crosse Aug. Epist. 23. Neither doth he lie which saith Christ was offered For if sacraments had not the resemblāce of things whereof they are sacraments they should in no vvise be sacraments but from a resemblance they often take their names Againe Christ is sacrificed in the last supper in regard of the faith of the cōmmunicants which makes a thing past and done as present Augustine saith When we beleeue in Christ he is offered for vs daily And Christ is then slaine for euery one vvhen he beleeues that he is slaine for him Ambrose saith Christ is sacrificed daily in the mindes of beleeuers as vpon an altar Hierome saith He is alwaies offered to the beleeuers II. The difference They make the Eucharist to be a reall externall or bodily sacrifice offered vnto God holding and teaching that the minister is a priest properly and that in this sacrament he offers Christs bodie and blood to God the father really and properly vnder the formes of bread and wine We acknowledge no reall outward or bodily sacrifice for the remission of sinnes but onely Christs oblation on the crosse once offered Here is the maine difference betweene vs touching this point and it is of that waight and moment that they stiffely maintaining their opinion as they doe can be no Church of God For this point raseth the
foundation to the very bottom And that it may the better appeare that we auouch the truth first I will confirme our doctrine by scripture and secondly confute the reasōs which they bring for themselues III. Our reasons Reason I. Heb. 9. v. 15. and 26 and cap. 10. v. 10. The holy ghost saith Christ offered himselfe but once Therefore not often and thus there can be no reall or bodily offering of his bodie and blood in the sacrament of his supper the text is plaine The Papists answer thus The sacrifice of Christ say they is one for substāce yet in regard of the manner of offering it is either bloodie or vnbloodie and the holy ghost speakes onely of the bloodie sacrifice of Christ which was indeede offered but once Ans. But the author of this epistle takes it for graunted that the sacrifice of Christ is onely one and that bloodie sacrifice For he saith Heb. 9. v. 25. Christ did not offer himselfe often as the high priests did v. 26. For thē he must haue oftē suffered since the foundatiō of the world but now in the end he hath appeared once to put away sinne by the sacrifice of himselfe and v. 22. VVITHOVT SHEDDING OF BLOOD is NO remission of sinne By these wordes it is plaine that the scripture neuer knewe the two fold maner of sacrificing of Christ. And euery distinction in Diuinitie not founded in the written worde is but a forgerie of mans braine And if this distinction be good how shall the reason of the Apostle stand He did not offer himselfe but once because he suffered but once Reason II. The Romish Church holdes that the sacrifice in the Lordes Supper is all one for substance with the sacrifice which he offered on the crosse if that be so then the sacrifice in the Eucharist must either be a cōtinuance of that sacrifice which was begun on the crosse or els an iteration or repetition of it Now let them choose of these twaine which they wil if they say it is a continuance of the sacrifice on the crosse Christ being but the beginner and the Priest the finisher thereof they make it imperfect for to continue a thing till it be accomplished is to bring perfection vnto it but Christs sacrifice on the crosse was then fully perfected as by his owne testimony appeares when he said consummatum est it is finished Againe if they say it is a repetition of Christs sacrifice thus also they make it imperfect for that is the reason which the holy ghost vseth to prooue that the sacrifices of the old testamēt were imperfect because they were repeated Reason III. A reall and outward sacrifice in a sacrament is against the nature of a sacrament and especially the supper of the Lord for one end thereof is to keepe in memory the sacrifice of Christ. Nowe euery remembrance must be of a thing absent past and done and if Christ be daily and really sacrificed the sacrament is no fit memoriall of his sacrifice Againe the principall ende for which the sacrament was ordained is that God might giue we receiue Christ with his benefits and therfore to giue and take to eate drink are here the principal actiōs Now in a reall sacrifice God doth not giue Christ the priest receiue him of God but contrariwise he giues offers Christ vnto God and God receiues some thing of vs. To helpe the matter they say that this sacrifice serues not properly to make any satisfaction to God but rather to apply vnto vs the satisfaction of Christ beeing already made But this answere still maketh against the nature of a sacrament in which God giues Christ vnto vs whereas in a sacrifice God receiues from man and man giues something to god a sacrifice therefore is no fit meanes to apply any thing vnto vs that is giuen of God Reason IV. Heb. 7. 24. 25. The Holy Ghost makes a difference betweene Christ the high priest of the newe testament and all Leuiticall priests in this that they were many one succeeding another but he is onely one hauing an eternall priesthood which cannot passe from him to any other Nowe if this difference be good then Christ alone in his owne very person must be the priest of the new testament and no other with or vnder him otherwise in the new testament their should be more priests in number then in the old If they say that the whole action remaines in the person of Christ and that the priest is but an instrument vnder him as they say I say againe it is false because the whole oblatiō is acted or done by the priest himselfe and he which doth all is more then a bare instrument Reason V. If the priest doe offer to God Christs reall bodie and blood for the pardon of our sinnes then man is become a mediatour betweene God and Christ. Now the Church of Rome saith that the priest in his masse is a priest properly and his sacrifice a reall sacrifice differing onely in the manner of offering from the sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse and in the very Canon of the masse they insinuate thus much when they request God to accept their giftes and offerings namely Christ himselfe offered as he did the sacrifices of Abel and Noe. Now it is absurd to thinke that any creature should be a mediatour betweene Christ and God Therefore Christ cannot possibly be offered by any creature vnto God Reason VI. The iudgement of the auncient Church A certaine Counsell held at Toledo in Spaine reprooueth the Ministers that they offered sacrifice often the same day without the holy communion The wordes of the Canon are these Relation is made vnto vs that certaine priests doe not so many times receiue the grace of the holy communion as they offer sacrifices in one daie but in one day if they offer many sacrifices to God in ALL THE OBLATIONS THEY SVSPEND THEMSELVES FROM THE COMMVNION Here marke that the sacrifices in auncient Masses were nothing else but formes of diuine seruice because none did communicate no not the priest himselfe And in an other Counsell the name of the Masse is put onely for a forme of prayer It hath pleased vs that praiers supplications Masses which shall be alowed in the Councel be vsed And in this sense it is taken when speach is vsed of the making or compounding of Masses for the sacrifice propitiatorie of the bodie blood of Christ admits no composition Abbat Paschasius saith because we sinn daily Christ is sacrificed for vs MYSTICALLY and his Passion is giuen in mysterie These his words are against the reall sacrifice but yet he expounds himselfe more plainly cap. 10. The blood is drunke IN MYSTERIE SPIRITVALLY and it is all SPIRITVAL which we eate and c. 12. The priest distributes to euery one not as much as the outward sight giueth but as much as FAITH RECEIVETH c. 13. The FVL similitude is outwardly and the immaculate flesh
of Christ and drinke his bloode not onely in mysterie but in knovvledge of holy Scripture Now vpon this it followes that seeing the worke done in the word preached conferres not grace neither doth the work don in the sacramēt confer any grace Reason II. Math. 3. II. I baptize you with water to repentance but he that commeth after me is stronger then I he shall baptize you with the holy Ghost and with fire Hence it is manifest that grace in the sacrament proceedes not from any action in the sacrament for Iohn though he doe not disioyne himselfe and his action from Christ and the action of his spirit yet doth he distinguish them plainely in number persons and effect To this purpose Paul who had saide of the Galatians that he traueled of them beget them by the Gospel saith of himselfe that he is not any thing not onely as he was a man but as he was a faithfull Apostle thereby excluding the whole Euangelicall ministerie whereof the sacrament is a part from the least part of diuine operation or efficacie in conferring of grace Reason III. The blessed Angels nay the very flesh of the sonne of God hath not any quickning vertue from it selfe but all this efficacie or vertue is in and from the godhead of the sonne who by meanes of the flesh apprehended by faith deriueth heauenly and spirituall life from himselfe to the members Nowe if there be no efficacie in the flesh of Christ but by reason of the hypotasticall vnion howe shall bodily actions about bodily elements conferre grace immediatly Reason IV. Paul Rom. 4. standes much vpon this to proue that iustification by saith is not conferred by the sacraments And from the circumstance of time he gathereth that Abraham was first iustified and then afterward receiue circumcision the signe and seale of this righteousnes Now we knowe that the generall condition of all sacraments is one and the same and that baptisme succeeded circumcision And what can be more plaine then the example of Cornelius Act. 10. who before Peter came vnto him had the commendation of the feare of God and was indued with the spirite of prayer and afterward when Peter by preaching opened more fully the way of the Lord he the rest receiued the holy Ghost And after all this they were baptized Now if they receiued the holy Ghost before baptisme then they receiued remission of sinnes and were iustified before baptisme V. Reason The iudgement of the church Basil. If there be any grace in the water it is not from the nature of the vvater but from THE PRESENCE OF THE SRIRITE Hierome saith Man giues vvater but God giues the holy Ghost Augustine saide Water toucheth the bodie and washeth the heart but he shews his meaning elsewhere There is one vvater saith he of the Sacrament an other of the Spirit the water of the sacrament is visible the water of the Spirit invisible That vvasheth the body AND SIGNIFIETH what is done in the soule By this the soule is purged and sealed Obiect Remission of sinnes regeneration and saluation is ascribed to the sacrament of baptisme Act. 22. 21. Eph. 5. Gal. 3. 27. Tit. 2. Ans. Saluation and remission of sinnes is ascribed to baptisme and the Lords supper as to the word which is the power of God to saluation to all that beleeue and that as they are instruments of the holy Ghost to signifie seale and exhibit to the beleeuing minde the foresaid benefits but indeede the proper instrument whereby saluation is apprehēded is faith and sacraments are but proppes of faith furthering saluation two waies first because by their signification they helpe to nourish and preserue faith secondly because they seale grace and saluation to vs yea God giues grace and saluation when we vse them wel so be it we beleeue the word of promise made to the sacrament whereof also they are seales And thus we keepe the middle way neither giuing too much nor too little to the sacraments The XX. point Of sauing faith or the way to life Our consent Conclus I. They teach it to be the propertie of faith to beleeue the whole word of God and especially the redemption of mankind by Christ. Conclus II. They auouch that they beleeue and looke to be saued by Christ and by CHRIST ALONE and by the MEERE MERCY of God in Christ. Conclus III. Thirdly the most learned among thē hold and confesse that the obedience of Christ is imputed vnto them for the satisfaction of the lawe and for their reconciliation with God Conclus IV. They auouch that they put their whole trust and confidence in Christ and in the meere mercy of God for their saluation Conclus V. Lastly they hold that euery man must apply the promise of life euerlasting by Christ vnto himselfe and this they graunte we are bound to doe And in these fiue points doe they and we agree at least in shewe of wordes By the auouching of these 5. Conclusions Papists may easily escape the hands of many magistrats And vnles the mysterie of popish doctrine be well known any common man may easily be deceiued and take such for good protestants that are but popish priests To this ende therefore that we may the better discerne their guile I will shewe wherein they faile in each of their conclusions and wherein they differ from vs. The difference Touching the first conclusion they beleeue indeede all the written word of God and more then all for they also beleeue the bookes Apocriphal which antiquitie for many hundred yeares hath excluded from the canō yea they beleeue vnwrittē traditiōs receiued as they say from Councils the writings of the Fathers and the determinations of the Church making them also of equall credit with the written worde of God giuen by inspiration of the spirit Nowe we for our partes dispise not the Apocripha as namely the bookes of the Macchabees Ecclesiasticus and the rest but we reuerence them in all conuenient manner preferring them before any other bookes of men in that they haue bin approued by an vniuersall consent of the Church yet we thinke them not meete to be receiued into the Canon of holy scripture and therefore not to be beleeued but as they are consenting with the written word And for this our doing we haue direction from Athanasius Origen Hierome and the Councel of Laodicea As for vnwritten Traditions they come not within the compasse of our faith neither can they because they come vnto vs by the hāds of men that may deceiue and be deceiued And we hold and beleeue that the right Canon of the books of the old and new Testament containes in it sufficient direction for the Church of God to life euerlasting both for faith an manners Here then is the point of difference that they make the obiect of faith larger then it should be or can be and we keepe our selues to the written word beleeuing nothing to saluation out of
coniurations by holy water by the ringing of bels by lighting tapers by reliques and such like For these things haue not their supposed force either by creation or by any institution of God in his holy worde and therefore if any thing be done by them it is from the secret operation of the deuill himselfe The fift sinne is that in their doctrine they maintaine periurie because they teach with one consent that a Papist examined may answer doubtfully against the direct intention of the examiner framing an other meaning vnto himself in the ambiguitie of his words As for example when a man is asked whether he saide or heard Masse in such a place though he did they affirme he may say No and sweare vnto it because he was not there to reueale it to the examiner whereas in the very lawe of nature he that takes an oath should sweare according to the intention of him that hath power to minister an oath that in truth iustice iudgement Let them cleare their doctrine from all defence of periurie if they can The sixt sinne is that they reuerse many of Gods commaÌ„dements making that no sinne which Gods word makes a sinne Thus they teach that if any man steale some litle thing that is thought not to cause any notable hurt it is no mortall sinne that the officious lie and the lie made in sport are veniall sinnes that to pray for our enemies in particular is no precept but a counsell and that none is bound to salute his enemie in the way of friendship flat against the rule of Christ Matth. 5. 47. where the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth all manner of dutie and curtesie that rash iudgement though consent come thereto is regularly but a veniall sinne that it is lawfull other whiles to faine holines that the painting of the face is ordinarily but a veniall sinne that it is not lavvfull to forbid begging whereas the Lord forbad there should be any begger in Israel Againe they teach that men in their choller when they are chiding and sweare vvounds and blood are not indeede blasphemers Lastly their writers vse manifest lying to iustifie their doctrine They plead falsly that all antiquitie is on their side whereas it is as much against them as for them and as much for vs as them Againe their manner hath bin and is still to prooue their opinions by forged and counterfait writings of men some whereof I will name 1 Saint Iames Liturgie 2 The Canons of the Apostles 3 The bookes of Dionysius Ariopagita and namely De Hier archia Ecclesiastica 4 The Decret all Epistles of the Popes 5 Pope Clements workes 6 Some of the Epistles of Ignatius 7 Origens booke of repentance His homelies in diversos sanctos Commentaries on Iob and booke of Lamentation 8 Chrysostomes Liturgie 9 Basils liturgie and his Ascetica 10 Augustines booke de 8. quest Dulâ—itij A booke of true and false repentance Ser de festo commemorationis animarum booke de dogm Ecclesiast Sermon ad fratres in Heremo Sermon of Peters chaire Booke of visiting the sicke c. 11 Iustin Martyrs Questions and Answ. 12 Athanasius epistle to Pope Foelix 13 Bernards sermons of the Lords Supper 14 Hieromes epistle ad Demetriadem sauouring of Pelagius 15 Tertullian de Monogamia 16 Cyprian de Chrismate de ablutione peâ—um 17 In the Councel of Sardica the 3 4 and 5 canons are forged 18 In the Councel of Nice all saue 20. are forged 19 Certaine Romane Councels vnder Sylvester are forged For he vvas at this time dead and therefore could not confirme them Sozom. lib. 2. 20 To the sixt canon of the Councel of Nice are patched these words That the Romane Church hath alwaies had the supremacie 21 Lastly I will not omit that Pope Sozimus Bonifacius ana Coelestinus falsified the canons of the councell of Nice to prooue appeales from all places to Rome so as the Bishops of Africke were forced to send for the true copies of the saide Councell from Constantinople and the Churches of Greece I might here rehearse many other sinnes which with the former call for vengeance vpon the Romane Church but it shall suffice to haue named a few of the principall Now in this reason our Sauiour Christ prescribes another maine dutie to his owne people and that is to be carefull to eschewe all the sinnes of the Church of Rome that they may withall escape her deserued plagues and punishments And from this prescribed dutie I obserue two things The first is that euery good seruant of God must carefully auoide contracts of marriage with professed Papists that is with such as hold the Pope for their head and beleeue the doctrine of the Councel of Trent For in such matches men hardly keepe faith and good conscience and hardly auoide coÌ„munication with the sinnes of the Romane Church A further ground of this doctrine I thus propound In Gods worde there is mentioned a double league betweene man and man countrie and countrie The first is the league of concord when one kingdome bindes it selfe to liue in peace with an other for the maintenance of traficke without disturbance and this kinde of league may stand betweene Gods church and the enemies thereof The second is the league of amity which is when men people or countries binde themselues to defend each other in all causes and to make the warres of the one the warres of the other and this league may not be made with those that be enemies of God Iehosaphat otherwise a good king made this kinde of league with Ahab and is therfore reprooued by the prophet saying wouldest thou helpe the wicked and loue them that hate the Lord 2. Chron. 19. 2. Now the mariages of protestants with Papists are priuate leagues of amitie betweene person and person and therefore not to be allowed Againe Malac. cap. 2. vers 11. the Lord saith Iudah hath defiled the holines of the Lord which he loued and hath married the daughters of a straunge god where is flatly condemned marriages made with the people of a false god nowe the Papists by the consequents of their doctrine and religion turne the true Iehova into an idol of their owne braine as I haue shewed and the true Christ reuealed in the written word into a fained Christ made of breade Yet if such a marriage be once made and finished it may not be dissolued For such parties sinne not simply in that they marrie but because they marrie not in the Lord beeing of diuers religions The fault is not in the substance of marriage but in the manner of making it and for this cause the Apostle commaunds the beleeuing partie not to forsake or refuse the vnbeleeuing partie beeing a very infidel which no papist is if he or she will abide 1. Cor. 7. 13. The second thing is that euery seruant of God must take heede how he trauells into such countries where popish religion is stablished
least he partakes in the sinnes and punishments thereof Indeede to goe vpon ambassage to any place or to trauell for this ende that we may performe the necessarie duties for our speciall or generall callings is not vnlawfull but to trauell out of the precincts of the church onely for pleasures sake and to see strange fashions hath no warrant And hence it is that many men which goe forth in good order well minded come home with crased consciences The best traueler of all is he that liuing at home or abroad can goe out of himselfe and depart from his own sinnes corruptions by true repentance FINIS An advertisment to all fauourers of the Roman religion shewing that the said religion is against the Catholike principles and grounds of the Catechisme GReat is the number of them that embrace the religion of the present church of Rome being deceiued by the glorious titles of Vniuersalitie Antiquity Successiō And no doubt though sōe be wilfully blinded yet many deuoted this way neuer saw any other truth Nowe of them and the rest I desire this fauour that they will but way and ponder with themselues this one thing which I will nowe offer to their considerations and that is That the Romane religion nowe stablished by the councell of Trent is in the principall points thereof against the very grounds of the Catechisme that haue beene agreed vpon euer since the daies of the Apostles by all Churches These groundes are fowre the first is the Apostles Creede the second is the decalogue or ten cōmandements the third is the forme of praier called the Lords praier the fourth is the Institutiō of the two Sacramēts baptisme and the Lords supper 1. Cor. 11. 23. That I may in some order manifest this which I say I will beginne with the Symbole or Creed And first of all it must be considered that some of the principall doctrines beleeued in the Church of Rome are that the Pope or Bishop of Rome is the vicar of Christ the head of the Catholike church that there is a fire of purgatorie after this life that images of God and Saints are to be placed in Churches and worshipped that praier is to be made to Saints departed and their intercession to be required that there is a propitiatory sacrifice daily offered in the masse for the sinnes of the quicke and the dead These points are of that moment that without them the Roman religion cannot stand in the councel of Trent the curse Anathema is pronounced vpō all such as deny these or any of them And yet marke the Apostles creede which hath bin thought to containe all necessarie points in religion to be beleeued and hath therefore beene called the Kay and rule of faith this creed I say hath not any of these points nor the Expositions made thereof by the ancient fathers nor any other creed or confession of faith made by any councell or Church for the space of many hundred yeares This a plaine proofe to any indifferent man that these be new articles of faith neuer known in the Apostolike Church and that the fathers and Councells could not finde any such articles of faith in the bookes of the olde and new Testement Answere is made that all these points of doctrine are beleeued vnder the articles I beleeue the Catholike Church the meaning whereof they will haue to be this I beleeue all things which the catholike Church holdeth and teacheth to be beleeued If this be as they say we must needes beleeue in the Church that is put our confidence in the Church for the manifestation and the certentie of all doctrines necessarie to saluation and thus the eternall truth of God the Creator shall depend on the determination of the creature and the written word of God in this respect is made vnsufficient as though it had not plainely reuealed all points of doctrine pertaining to saluation And the ancient Churches haue bin farre ouerseene that did not propounde the former points to be beleeued as articles of faith but left them to these latter times 2. In this Creede to beleeue in God and to beleeue the church are distinguished To be leeue in is pertaining to the Creatour to beleeue to the creature as Ruffinus hath noted when he saith that by this proposition in the Creatour is distinguished from the creature and things pertaining to God from things pertaining to men And Augustine saith It must be knowne that we must beleeue the Church NOT BELEEVE IN THE CHVRCH because the church is not God but the house of God Hence it followes that we must not beleeue in the Saints nor put our confidence in our workes as the learned Papists teach Therefore Eusebius saith We ought of right to beleeue Peter and Paul but to beleeue in Peter Paul that is to giue to the seruants the houour of the Lord we ought not And Cyprian saith He doth not beleeue in God which doth not place in him alone the trust of his whole felicitie 3. The article conceiued by the holy ghost is ouerturned by the transubstantiation of bread and wine in the masse into the body and blood of Christ. For here we are taught to confesse the true and perpetuall incarnation of Christ beginning in his conception and neuer ending afterward and we acknowledge the truth of his manhoode and that his bodie hath the essentiall properties of a true bodie standing of flesh and bone hauing quantitie figure dimensions namely length breadth thicknes hauing part out of part as head out of feet and feet out of head beeing also circumscribed visible touchable in a word it hath all things in it which by order of creation belong to a bodie It will be said that the body of Christ may remaine a true bodie and yet be altered in respect of some qualities as namely circumscription But I say againe that locall circumscription can no way be seuered from a bodie it remaining a bodie For to be circumscribed in place is an essentiall propertie of euery quantitie and quantitie is the common essence of euerie bodie And therefore a bodie in respect of his quantitie must needes be circumscribed in one place This was the iudgement of Leo when he saide The bodie of Christ is by no meanes out of the truth of our bodie And Augustine when he saide ONELY God in Christ so comes that he doth not depart so returnes that he doth not leaue vs but man according to bodie is in place and goes out of the same place and when he shall come vnto an other place HE IS NOT IN THAT PLACE VVHENCE HE COMES To helpe the matter they vse to distinguish thus Christs bodie in respect of the whole essence thereof may be in many places but not in respect of the whole quantitie whereby it is onely in one place But as I haue saide they speake contraries for quantitie by all learning is the essence of a
veniall and not against the lawe but beside the lawe But this which they say is against the petition for a debt that comes by forfiture is against the bond or obligation Nowe euery sinne is a debt causing the forfiture of punishment and therefore is not beside but directly against the lawe 4. In this clause as we forgiue our debters it is taken for granted that we may certenly knowe that we are in loue and charitie with meâ— when wâ— make reconciliation why then may not we knowe certenly that we repent and beleeue and are reconciled to God which all Romane Catholikes denie 5. In the last wordes and lead vs not into temptation we pray not that God should free vs from temptation for it is other whiles good to be tempted Psal. 26. 1. But that we be not left to the malice of Sathan and held captiue of the temptation for here to be bed into temptation and to be deliuered are opposed Now heÌ„ce I gather that he which is the child of God truely iustified and sanctied shall neuer fal wholly and finally from the grace of God and I conclude on this manner That which we aske according to the will of God shall be graunted 1. Ioh. 5. but this the child of God asketh that he might neuer be wholly forsaken of his father and left captiue in temptation This therefore shal be graunted 6 This clause Amen signifies a speciall faith touching all the former petitions that they shall be graunted and therefore a special faith concerning remission of sinnes which the Romane Church denieth To come to the last place to the Institution of the sacrament of the Lords Supper 1. Cor. 11. v 23. In which first of all the Reall presence is by many circumstances ouerthrowne Out of the wordes he tooke and brake it is plain that that which Christ took was not his body because he cannot be said with his owne handes to haue taken held and broken himselfe but the very bread Againe Christ said not vnder the forme of bread or in bread but This that is bread is my body 3. Bread was not giuen for vs but onely the body Christ and in the first institution the body of Christ was not theÌ„ really giuen to death 4. The cup is the newe testament by a figure why may not the bread be the body of Christ by a figure also 5. Christ did eate the supper but not himselfe 6. We are bidden to doe it till he come Christ then is not bodily present 7. Christ bids the bread to be eaten in a remembrance of him but signes of remembrance are of things absent 8. If the Popish reall presence be granted then the body blood of Christ are either seuered or ioyned together If seuered then Christ is still crucified If ioyned together then the bread is both the body blood of Christ whereas the institution saith the bread is the body and the wine is the blood 2 Againe here is condemned the administration of the sacrament vnder one onely kind For the commandement of Christ is drinke ye all of this Math 26. 27. And this commandement is rehearsed to the Church of Corinth in these wordes do this as oft as ye drinke it in remembrance of me v. 25. And no power can rehearse this commandement because it was established by the soueraigne head of the Church These fewe lines as also the former treatise I offer to the vewe and reeding of them that fauour the Romane religion willing them with patience to consider this one thing that their religion if it were Catholike and Apostolike as they pretend it could not be contrarie so much as in one point to the groundes of all Catechismes that haue beene vsed in all Churches confessing the name of Christ euer since the Apostles daies And whereas it crosseth the said grounds in sundrie points of doctrine as I haue prooued it is a plaine argument that the present Romane religion is degenerate I write not this dispising or hating their persoÌ„s for their religion but wishing vnfainedly their conuersion in this world and their saluation in the world to come FINIS To the Reader Pag. 235. l. 20. I say that Christ obaied the law for him selfe not because he did by his obedience merit his own glorie but because he was to be a perfect and pure high priest not onely in nature but also in life and as he was a creature he was to be conformable to the law Faults to be amended thus Pag. 1. l. 1. for 3. read 4. p. 9. l. 2. read Apostolicke p. 19. l. 17. read formeth and l. 23. read indeauour p. 39. l. last read too p. 48. l. 18. read or p. 55. l. 2. read holy p. 126. l. 2. read be p. 138. l. 13. read pertaining p. 142. l. 23. read matters p. 161. l. 5. read containe and l. last read chastitie p. 168. l. 5. read persecution p. 187. l. 7. read men p. 192. l. last read cannot p. 222. l. 5. read right p. 260. l. 9. read particular p. 265. l. 14. read I thinke p. 284. l. 2. read deputies Faults escaped in the places of Scripture Pag. 1. v. 3. pro 4. p. 4. c. 18. pro 17. p. 6. c. 18. pro 17. p. 7. v. 18. pro 8. p. 19. v. 5. pro 7. p. 22. v 2. pro 1. p. 43. v. 20. pro 28 29. p. 50. v. 21. pro 22. p. 52. v. 36. pro 63. p 75. v. 13. pro 12. p. 127. v. 12. pro 21. p. 135. v. 20. pro 8. p. 139. c. 8. v. 1. pro c. 1. v. 8. p. 164. v. 38. pro 37. p. 227. v. 18. pro 29. o Epist. 17. Eâ—stâ— Paula ad Marcellam Serm. in CaÌ„t. 33. Epist. 125. C. in nomine dist 23. referente Iuello 2 Thess. 2. d ExameÌ„ pacâ—â—qâ—â— imprimè de nou vâ—â—u a Caen 1590. d Hypogn 3. Ser. 15. de verb. Apost de grat â— arbitr 1. c Posse velle actu velle recipere c August de correp grat c. 12. d Epist. 105. e Fulgent lib. Prad f Bernard l. de libâ—ro arbitrio e Aug. contra Iul. l. 5. cap. 3. c ad Valer. lib. 1. c. 24. d Lib. 2. contra Iul. e Tract 42. in Ioh. c quoadimputationem d quoad exâ—â—tiam b contra Iuâ— l. 6. c. 6. e Bellar. l. 3. pag. 1129. cl Gal. 3. 14. Mark 11. 24. 1. Ioh. 5. 14. Ioh. 6. â—6 c de verbis Dei serm 28. d Tract 5. epist. Ioh. Bellar. dâ— Iustif. lib. 2. cap. 7. d Iren. lib. 5. cap. 17. Chrysostom homil ad Neoph. e namely for himself f as any one starre partakes in the whole light of the Sunne with the rest of the starres so farforth as the said light makes it to shine e we haue posse velle he had no more but posse si vellet he wanted velle quod posset August de corrept grat cap. 11. b de verbis Dei serm 7. c