to be seene in their decretall Epistles haue euer chalenged this right of Supremacy ouer the whole Church as the successours of S. Peter and that the very Patriarkes and principall Prelates euen of the East Church who were likelyest to haue resisted if they had seene any cause vvhy haue from the very beginning of the free practise of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction acknowledged and confessed the same and that finally the greatest vvisest and best Emperours of both the Latin and Greeke Church haue as you haue heard before declared the same right to appertayne vnto the said Roman Sea the matter cannot be but cleare enough to all that list not to remayne vvranglers vvhere the right of the Supremacy resteth OF THE EFFICACY OF THE SACRAMENTS OVR CONSENT M. PERKINS Page 295. THe first conclusion We teach and beleeue that the Sacraments are signes to represent Christ with his benefits to vs. The second conclusion We teach further that the Sacraments are indeede instruments whereby God offereth and giueth the fore-said benefits to vs. THE DIFFERENCE THe Catholikes teach that the Sacraments are true and proper instrumentall causes which being moued by God thereunto doe produce and giue grace to the worthy receiuer Euen as the penne doth make the letter or as the axe doth cut the wood being thereto applyed by the workeman so for example doth the Sacrament of baptisme wash away the sinnes of the baptised being by God therevnto ordayned and rightly vsed by the Minister But M. PERKINS holdeth that the Sacraments haue no operation to that effect of forgiuenesse of sinnes but are only outward meanes which being applyed vnto the party God of himselfe doth immediately purge him from sinne and not by meanes of the Sacraments Againe Whereas we require a fit disposition in the receiuer to make him capable of the grace presented and exhibited vnto him by the Sacrament He holdeth that all the vertue of the Sacrament consisteth in the receiuer Who beholding those signes from God in the handes of the Minister must conceite and imagine First that God himselfe by his owne mouth doth promise him seuerally and by name remission of his sinnes the signe and pledge whereof is that Sacrament which the minde considering reasoneth thus he that vseth the elements aright in faith and repentance shall receiue grace thereby but I vse the elements aright therefore shall I receiue from God increase of grace Thus then faith is confirmed not by the worke done but by a kinde of reasoning the proofe whereof is borrowed from the elements being signes and pledges of Gods mercy Contrarylie vve hold that the Sacrament it selfe conferreth and doth giue great grace so that there be no impediment or let of it by reason of the receiuers euill disposition Now if the receiuer come throughly vvell prepared with great humility charity and attention he then ouer and besides the ordinary grace of the Sacrament shall receiue more grace according vnto the measure of his owne preparation Lastly whereas we teach the very grace of justification to be giuen in some Sacraments as in Baptisme and Penance M. PER. saith no because A man of yeares must first beleeue and be justified before he can be a meete pertaker of any Sacrament But vvhat vvill he then say vnto Infants must not they receiue the grace of justification by Baptisme before they haue wit to beleeue and to reason in such sort as he prescribeth Before I come vnto the arguments of either party I thought fit to giue the reader to vnderstand that whether the Sacraments be true physicall instruments of grace or no Lib. 2. de Sacram. in gener cap. 11. is not a matter of faith as Cardinall Bellarmine declareth so we hold them to be true morall causes of the same grace to which M. PER. yeelded his consent wherefore I will not be long in this question Secondly to perceiue well the state of the question you must obserue what difference there is betweene a physical and moral instrument That then may be called a morall instrument vvhich moueth the principall agent to doe any thing albeit he vse not that thing it selfe as a meanes to doe it vvithall so that if God be effectually moued to bestowe grace vpon him that receiueth a Sacrament by the sight of the Sacrament though he giue not the grace by the vvorke of the Sacrament but immediatly from him felfe the Sacrament is the morall meanes of the same grace but it cannot be called the physicall or naturall instrument of that grace vnlesse God doe vse and apply the Sacrament it selfe as the meane and instrument to conuey the same grace into the soule of the receiuer Nowe vve hold it more agreable with the word of God and sentences of the holy Fathers and more for the dignity of the Sacraments themselues to say that God by them as by true naturall instruments doth conuay his graces into our soule M. PERKINS goeth about to proue the contrary thus The word preached and the Sacraments doe differ in the manner of giuing Christ vnto vs because the word worketh by the eare and the Sacraments by the eye otherwise for the giuing it selfe they differ not Christ saying that in the very word is eaten his owne flesh and what can be said more of the Lordes supper Augustine saith that beleeuers are pertakers of the body and bloud in baptisme Serm. ad Infant so saith Hierome to Eâ—â—bia Nowe vpon this it followeth that seing the worke done in the word preached conferreth not grace neyther doth the worke done in the Sacrament conferre grace I answere that his owne first word must stand wherein he said that the word preached and the Sacraments doe differ in the manner of giuing vs Christes grace for preaching doth by perswasion drawe vs vnto grace and goodnesse but the Sacraments as conduite-pipes doe take and deriue grace from Christes passion and conuay it into the soules of all them who doe not stoppe vp those diuine conduits by their owne default and want of due preparation To his idle and ill shapen commation I answere that Christes body may be eaten two vvayes either really as in the blessed Sacrament or else spiritually by beleeuing in Christ and being incorporate into his mysticall body and in this second sort Infants in baptisme and all true beleeuers doe eate the body of Christ But howe this proueth that the vvord and the Sacraments doe giue grace after the same manner is there any man that can tell His second reason I baptise you with water to repentance Math. 3. vers 11. but he that commeth after me shall baptise you with the holy Ghost and with fire Hence saith M PER. it is manifest that grace proceedeth not from any act of the Sacrament for Iohn though he doe not disjoyne himselfe and his action from Christ and the action of the spirit yet doth he distinguish them plainely in number persons and effect Answere He that can let him pike some English out
a Sacrament that euen in Christes owne dayes and by himselfe it was instituted a Sacrament M. PERKINS objecteth for vs It will be said that remissions of sinnes and life euerlasting are promised to repentance and answereth That it is not to the worke of repentance but to the person which repenteth and that not for his works of repentance but for the merits of Christ applyed vnto him by faith Reply When there is no mention made of faith but only of repentance to attribute all to faith and nothing to repentance is a very extrauagant glosse specially he doing it of his owne authority without warrant eyther of reason or of any authour and thus much of the abuses forsooth of repentance in generall Nowe to the particular about Contrition Confession and Satisfaction The first abuse concerning contrition is that the Catholikes teach that it must be sufficient and perfect they vse to helpe the matter by a distinction c. O remarkeable abuse that Catholikes vvould haue contrition to be sufficient and perfect If vve vvould haue had it imperfect and not fit to serue the turne then loe we had hitte the nayle on the head what dotage is this vve say briefly concerning sorrowe for our sinnes past first that it ought to be the greatest that we can haue for nothing is vvorthy to be so vehemently lamented as that vve haue deadly offended our creatour and redeemer and are fallen from his grace into the slauery of our most deadly enemy the Deuill so that for this as for the greatest euill that could be fall vs we are to be most sorrowfull And this highest degree of sorrowe is requisite in contritio◠vvhen thereby alone vve doe recouer the grace of God but vvhen Contrition is joyned vvith Confession and is made a part of the Sacrament then loe though it vvere not so great before as is otherwise requisite it receiueth by vertue of participating with Christes grace in that Sacrament the full measure of sorrowe and so is made vp sufficient and perfect vvhich M. PER calleth the first abuse of Contrition but goeth not about to disproue it The second as he saith is that we ascribe to Contrition the merit of congruity Before he sticked not to say that vve made repentance the meritorious cause of remission of sinnes vvhich vvas a loude lie because vve teach that no man can merit remission of his sinnes for no man can merit ought at Gods handes vnlesse he first be in his grace and fauour vvhich no sinner is vvherefore we hold only that repentance as faith hope and a purpose of amendment be only good dispositions making the man fit and apt to receiue the grace of justification vvhich God freely of his infinite mercy without any desert of ours bestoweth vpon vs only for Christes sake That apt disposition some men call merit of congruity vvherein is no desert of the grace giuen but only a man is made thereby more meete and better prepared to receiue such grace Nowe mans merits doe so vvell agree and stand vvith Christes merits that Christes order is that none comming to the age of discretion shall be partaker of his merits vnlesse he by his owne merits doe make himselfe capable of them as hath beene sufficiently proued before in the question of Merits The third abuse That they make imperfect contrition or attrition arising of the feare of hell to be good and profitable and to it they apply the saying of the Prophet The feare of God is the beginning of wisdome But saith he seruile feare of it selfe is the way to eternall destruction c. Reply He vnderstandeth not what we say we teach that feare of being punished in hell fire maketh euill men abstaine from sinning and beginneth to put them in minde of Gods justice towardes impenitent sinners vvherewith many being strooken vvith the horrour of that euerlasting torment are moued to flie vnto God for mercy and so that seruile feare becommeth profitable vnto them first in that it causeth them to abstaine from that vvickednesse vvhich they vvould otherwise haue committed and then being helped with Gods grace they beginne to turne vnto his mercy and so feare of Gods punishments becōmeth vnto them the beginning of wisdome Thus much in effect doth M. PER. himselfe allowe of and yet vvould seeme to confute it his judgement is so slender Nowe to the abuses concerning Confession The first abuse That we confesse our sinnes to God in an vnknowne language What is there any language vnknowne to God or doth he meane that the vnlearned make their confession in Latin which is impossible for a man that vnderstandeth not one Latin vvord He vvould say I gheste that some of them begin their generall confession in Latin but we speake here of euery mans confession in particular that general of the Churches ordinance is commanded only to be vsed of them that are skilfull in the Latin tongue all others may vse the English Withall saith he we require the ayde and intercession of dead men We beleeue the Saints to be liuing which if he doth not he blasphemeth Touching the intercession of Saints I haue treated before Nowe as we request the helpe of their prayers so doe we acknoweledge vnto them howe grieuously vve haue offended that they seing our humility and sorrowe for our sinnes may the more earnestly entreate for the remission of them But let vs come vnto the principall point in controuersie about this matter viz. That we haue corrupted Canonicall confession by turning it into a priuate auricular confession binding all men to confesse all their mortall sinnes with the circumstances that change the kinde of the sinne as farre as they can remember once euery yeare at the least and that to a Priest vnlesse it be in the case of extreame necessity but in the word of God there is no warrant for this confession nor in the writinges of orthodoxe antiquity for the space of many hundreth yeares after Christ as one of their owne side auoucheth and he quoteth in the margent a man of small credit among vs Beatus Rhenanus for his authour Well let vs see a little vvhat warrant we haue in holy Scriptures and in the auncient Doctors for confession of our faultes vnto a Priest First it is euidently collected out of these wordes of our Sauiour Receiue the holy Ghost Ioh. 20. vers 23. whose sinnes yee doe forgiue in earth they shall be forgiuen in heauen and whose sinnes yee doe retayne they shall be retayned For giuing his Apostles power to remit and forgiue men their sinnes his meaning vvas not that they should pardon them whether they would or would not or that they should absolue any other then such as vvere contrite and did humbly craue absolution neyther should they absolue them from they knewe not of what but that they should knowe vvhat howe many and howe grieuous their offences were that they might be put to worthy penance and receiue particular comfort and counsell
the chiefest Bishops and Doctors aswell for their Godlynesse of life as for their knowledge in holy Scriptures who were also chosen by the holy Ghost to gouerne instruct and teach the principal Churches in both Europe Africke and Asia and that in or about the most flourishing state thereof for all of them sauing S. Gregory the great and venerable Bede liued within 400. and some within 200. yeares of Christ Whither I say these most sound testimonies of so many sacred and worthy personages be not sufficient to perswade any reasonableman that praying to the Saints in heauen is both agreable to Gods vvord which no man in these dayes vnderstandeth halfe so well as the worst of any of them did and also very profitable for vs. Yet for the further assurance of this important matter I wil adde one miracle which I touched before wrought in confirmation of it so that he that will not beleeue this shall be conuinced not to beleeue God himselfe witnessing of it In the coasts of Thelousae in France Ex lib. 3. vitae S. Bernardi cap. 5. about 400. yeares past one Henry an Apostata and wicked fellowe beganne to cry out against praying for the dead and praying to Saints and pilgrimages and some other points of the Catholike doctrine the fame of S. Bernards holynesse and learning being then very great he was sent for by the Popes Legate to come thither to stay the people from following that lewde companion who on a day after he had preached at a towne called Sarlate blessed some loaues of bread and said This shall be a certayne proofe that our doctrine is true and theirs false if those that be sicke by tasting of this holy bread be cured of their diseases There stood by among others the Bishop of Charters who fearing what might followe added if they taste of it with faith Nay said the holy Father Barnard nothing doubting of Gods power I say not so but he that shall taste of it shall be truly cured that they may knowe vs to be true men and the true messengers of God then a great multitude tasting of it were according to his word perfectly healed of what disease soeuer they had What can be more euident or better assured then that praying to Saints is the truth of God seing that it pleased God to confirme it in such sort by the miraculous curing of so many people M. PERKINS for an vpshot saith that he finally dissenteth from the Catholikes because they are not content to pray to Saints but say further that God through their merits in heauen doth bestowe many benefits vpon vs on earth I would he agreed with vs in the two former points we should quickly be at accord in this for the good-man is fouly mistaken if he thinke that vve affirme the Saints after they be come to heauen to merit a newe there for we hold that none after their death can merit any more but doe then receiue according vnto their former merits either saluation or damnation but we neuerthelesse say that God in respect of their former merits gotten in this life doth for their sakes bestowe many benefits vpon vs and this doth M. PER. himselfe confirme in plaine wordes In this question when he graunteth pressed thereto by the euidence of Gods word that men vpon earth haue helpe and benefit by the faith and piety which the Saints departed shewed when they were in this life for saith he further God shewed mercy on them that keepe his commandements to a thousand generations True it is that this their faith and piety he would not haue to be called merits but vve with that most honourable Father S. Ambrose doe say Apud Deum Lib. 5. super LucaÌ„ seruus interueniendi meritum jus habet impetrandi with God a seruant of his hath both the merit to be an intercessour and the right to obtayne his suite see more of merits in that question Here M. PER. addeth against himselfe That the Saints in heauen haue receiued the full reward of all their merits and therefore there is nothing further that they can merit Here we haue first that the Saints had merits which he was wont to deny flatly againe how doth God hauing fully rewarded their former faith and piety at their entrance into heauen afterward for their sakes shew mercy to thousands which he confesseth himselfe wherefore he is aswell bound to answere this as we are it bearing as strongly against his owne doctrine as it doth against ours To saue him a labour I answere in a word that it is one part of the reward of a faithful seruant to be alwayes after not deseruing the contrary in his Masters fauour and so gratious with him that he may intreate any reasonable matâ—â—r at his handes so are the Saints vvith God vvho can neuer be wearyed with their suites so long as they all doe but tend vnto his owne honour and the saluation of his poore creatures and as we both agreed vpon before Their faith piety and charity whiles they liued did and doth still moue and cause God to shewe mercy vnto thousands vpon earth for their sakes though their merits were before most abundantly rewarded let this suffice for this question OF IMPLICITE OR INFOLDED FAITH M. PERKINS Page 266. THis question is handled for two causes as he saith pag. 274. first to rectifie the conscience of the weaker sort of his disciples secondly to rectifie their Catechismes which doe as he censureth require too full an assurance of saluation in all men It being then for the instruction of his ovvne deceiued flocke and not much appertayning to vs I will post it ouer lightly He teacheth a twofold implicity of faith first that faithfull men may be ignorant at the beginning of many articles of faith and learne them afterwardes It was so in deede in Christes time because he taught them not all a once but since the establishment of the Gospell it is necessary that euery one beleeue all the articles of the Apostles Creede the true doctrine of the Sacraments and such other necessary heades of the Christian religion other points of faith may be learned in time according vnto the capacity of the persons The second fold of his faith is that many of his deceiued disciples haue not at their conuersion and in time of temptation a full assurance of their saluation which notwithstanding will serue the turne then if they desire to haue a full assurance and labour afterward to attayne vnto it which he speaketh to the comfort of their consciences that cannot perswade themselues so assuredly that their sinnes are pardoned them This presumptious doctrine of full assurance of saluation I haue in a seueral question before confuted therefore I say only here that no Christian is bound to haue any such absolute assurance of his owne saluation but that he must according to the Apostles rule worke his saluation with trembling and feare Ad Philip. 2.