Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
scripture_n able_a faith_n salvation_n 3,115 5 6.7195 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A06106 A retractiue from the Romish religion contayning thirteene forcible motiues, disswading from the communion with the Church of Rome: wherein is demonstratiuely proued, that the now Romish religion (so farre forth as it is Romish) is not the true Catholike religion of Christ, but the seduction of Antichrist: by Tho. Beard ... Beard, Thomas, d. 1632. 1616 (1616) STC 1658; ESTC S101599 473,468 560

There are 18 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

glory of God and the merits of Christ And therefore the conclusion must needs follow being built vpon an vnmooueable foundation that that Religion which maintaineth such doctrines is not the truth of Christ but the seduction of Antichrist MOTIVE V. That Religion deserueth to be suspected which refuseth to be tryed by the Scriptures as the perfect and alone rule of faith and will bee iudged and tryed by none but it selfe But such is the Religion of the Church of Rome Ergo. THe first proposition in this Argument though it be most true and cannot without any shew of reason be contradicted yet that it may be without all doubt and exception it shall not be amisse to strengthen the same by sound and euident proofes deriued both out of Gods word and consent of ancient Fathers The Proposition consists of two parts first that it cannot be the true Religion which will not abide the alone tryall of the Scriptures Secondly that it will bee iudged and tryed by none but it selfe let vs consider of both these seuerally 2. And concerning the first if the Scripture be the fountaine of all true religion the foundation and basis of our faith the Canon and rule of all the doctrines of faith and the touch-stone to trye truth from falshood then to refuse to be iudged and tryed by the Scriptures alone is plainely to discouer that there is something in it which issued not from that fountain which is not built vpon that foundation which is so oblique and crooked that it dares not to be applyed to that rule and which is counterfeit and dares not abide the touchstone Now that the Scripture is such as I haue said let the Holy Ghost speaking in the Scripture beare witnesse Search the Scripture saith our Sauiour for in them you thinke to haue eternall life and they be they which testifie of me therefore the Scripture is the fountaine of all true religion for what is the Religion of Christians but the right knowledge of Christ Iesus This caused Saint Paul to say I desire to know nothing but Christ Iesus and him crucified Againe the Scriptures are able to make vs wise vnto saluation through faith in Christ Iesus and are profitable to teach to improue to correct and to instruct in righteousnesse that the man of God may be absolute and perfect to euery good worke Therefore the Scripture is the onely fountaine of true Religion for what is true Religion but spirituall wisedome and holy perfection the one in contemplation the other in action the one in knowledge the other in practice for these two ioyned together do make a man truly religious but the Scriptures afford both as it is cleare in that saying of S. Paul and may be confirmed by another like speech of Salomon who affirmeth that the commandements of God will make a man to vnderstand righteousnesse and iudgement and equity and euery good path Righteousnesse and iudgement pertaine to knowledge equity and euery good path belong to practice And for this cause Origen compareth the Scriptures to Iacobs Well from whence not onely Iacob and his sonnes that is the learned and the skilfull but his sheepe and cattell that is the simple and ignorant doe drinke that is deriue vnto themselues the waters of life and saluation and therefore where the knowledge of the Scriptures flourished not as among all the Heathen both Romanes Grecians and Barbarians before their conuersion there no true Religion shewed it selfe but their Religion was all false and deuillish for in stead of the true God they worshipped dumb creatures and mortall men yea deuils themselues as Lactantius sheweth All which proceeded from hence that they had not the word of God for their guide which is the onely fountaine and well-spring of true Religion 3. Againe as it is the fountaine from whence so it is the foundation vpon which our faith relieth whether wee take faith for the act of beleeuing or for the matter and obiect of our beliefe Ye are built saith S. Paul vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Christ Iesus himselfe being the chiefe corner stone By the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles is meant the Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine as all Expositours that I haue read yea their owne Aquinas and Caietane with one consent auouch and to bee built vpon this foundation is to haue our faith to relye and depend vpon it onely as a house relyeth onely vpon the foundation and without a foundation cannot stand that therefore is no doctrine of faith that is vpholden by any other foundation neither hath that any good foundation which is not built vpon the Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine they build vpon sand that build vpon humane traditions euery stormy puffe of winde will shake the house of that faith but they which heare the word of Christ and keepe it build vpon a rocke against which neither the raine flouds nor windes no not the gates of hell are able to preuaile because they are grounded vpon the rocke which rocke indeede is Christ to speake properly as not onely S. Peter confesseth 1. Pet. 2. 7. but euen Christ himselfe that is this rocke Math. 16. 18. when hee saith Vpon this rocke will I build my Church that is vpon this truth that Christ is the Sonne of God yet the word of Christ may also be called the rocke because it is as firme and durable as Christ himselfe And that wee may know that Gods word onely is the foundation of faith S. Paul telleth vs plainely that faith is by hearing and hearing by the word of God If any of them say as they doe that the word of God is not onely that which is written in Scripture but that which is vnwritten deliuered by tradition let them shew as good reasons to proue their traditions to be the word of God as we doe to proue the Scripture and we will beleeue them but since they cannot let them beare with vs if we vnderstand the Apostles words as spoken onely touching the written word and the rather because we haue for the warrantize of our interpretation both S. Paul himselfe in the same Chapter verse 8. when he saith This is the word offaith which we preach Where hee sheweth what is that word which is the ground of our faith namely the word preached And S. Peter who hauing magnified the word of God with this commendation that it endureth for euer presently expoundeth himselfe of what word hee spake saying And this is that word which is preached amongst you That is the word of the Gospell which was not in part but wholy and fully as preached by mouth so committed to writing And thus S. Basil also interprets it for he saith Quicquid est vltra scripturas Whatsoeuer is out of the Scriptures diuinely inspired because it is not of faith is sinne for faith is by hearing and hearing by
confesse afterward that it is indeed a rule but not a total and entire rule but a partiall and imperfect one If it bee any waies a rule then it was giuen by God and written by the men of God to that end to be the rule And so Bellarmines goodly reasons hang together like a sicke mans dreame the one part wherof ouerthroweth the other 18. But to answere in particular to them seuerally To the first I say that it is not farre from blasphemy to affirme that there is any thing in holy Scripture that is vnnecessary for though all things are not of equall necessity and profit yet there is nothing in the whole Booke of God from the beginning of Gen. to the end of the Reuel but may haue most profitable and necessary vse in the Church of God if not for the essentiall forme of faith yet for the adorning and beautifying of it and this may truely bee verified euen of those things which he excepteth against to wit the Histories of the Olde and New Testament and the salutations in the Epistles of the Apostles out of all which how many excellent doctrines may be deriued both for the confirmation of faith and edification of manners And therefore as in mans body God by nature hath not disposed all parts to be alike necessary but some haue no other vse but ornament and comelinesse so hath Almighty God mingled the parts of holy Scripture in that manner that some are as it were bones and sinews to our faith some flesh and bloud and some againe but exteriour beautie and fashion yet as in nature nothing is made in vaine so much lesse in Scripture is there any thing to be accounted superfluous and redundant nay in this diuine body there are no excrements that may be cast out and separated as it fareth in our earthly carkases but all is entire sound and perfect as the Prophet Dauid teacheth Psal 19. 7. when hee saith that the Law of God is perfect conuerting the soule and our Sauiour Math. 5. 18. when he auoucheth that till heauen and earth perish one iote or title of the Law shall not c. 19. To his second reason I answere three things first that it is entirely false that the Scripture doth not contayne all things necessarily required to the Essence of faith for if the Scripture be perfect and giueth wisedome to the simple if nothing may bee added to it nor taken from it if to teach any thing besides the Scripture deserueth the fearefull Anathema if it be able to make the man of God perfect to euery good worke if in them onely wee may finde eternall life if the Church of God be built vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles and lastly if our faith and hope doe arise from the Scriptures then there is nothing necessary to saluation but is fully and plenarily contained in them but the first is true as appeareth by all those testimonies before alledged and therefore the latter must by necessary consequence be true also 20. Secondly I answere that Bellarmine by that assertion crosseth the whole streame of the Fathers for most of them affirme the flat contrary Tertullian saith that when we once beleeue the Gospell Hoc prius credimus non esse quod vltra credere debemus This we beleeue first that there is nothing besides which we ought to beleeue Iraeneus saith that the Apostles committed to writing the Gospell which they preached Fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futurum To be the foundation and pillar of our faith Basil saith Quicquid extra diuinam scripturam est cum ex fide non sit peccatum est Whatsoeuer is beside the holy Scripture because it is not of faith is sinne Cyrill saith that all those things were written in holy Scripture which the Writers thought sufficient Tam ad mores quàm ad dogmata As well touching conuersation as doctrine Augustine saith that those things were chosen out to be written Quae saluti credentium sufficere videbantur Which seemed sufficient for the saluation of them that beleeue And againe he saith in another place Whether concerning Christ or concerning the Church of Christ or concerning any thing that pertaineth to our faith or life we will not say if we but if an Angell from heauen shall preach vnto you but what ye haue receiued in the Scriptures of the Law and the Gospell let him be accursed Chrysostome saith Si quis eorum If any of them who are said to haue the holy Ghost doe speake any thing of him selfe and not out of the Gospell beleeue it not Ierome speaking of an opinion touching the death of Zacharias the father of Iohn Baptist saith Hoc quia ex Scripturis non habet authoritatem This because it hath not authority out of the Scriptures is as easily contemned as approued I supersede for breuity sake the residue of the Fathers who with full consent conspire in the same opinion yea not onely the Fathers but many also of their owne most learned Authors as Thomas Aquinas Antoninus Durandus Peresius Clingius and diuers others by all which we may see how little reckoning Bellarmine maketh of the ancient Fathers where they make for him hee magnifieth and exalteth them to the skies but when they are opposite to him he reiecteth them as drosse and the like account he maketh of his owne Doctors 21. Lastly I answere that of those things which he affirmeth not to be contayned in holy Scripture and yet to be of necessity of beliefe some of them are farre from either necessity or profit as that of the meanes whereby women vnder the Law were purged from originall sinne and how the Gentiles were partakers of the couenant hauing not the Sacrament and that Easter is to be celebrated vpon the Lords day If these things be of that necessity of beliefe which hee maketh them how many thousand then haue sinned greatly in being ignorant thereof for at this day not the hundreth part of Christians euer heard these things once named and yet by this ignorance they neither offended God nor hindered their owne saluation And what shall we thinke of Iraeneus and other godly Bishops in the East that held that Easter was not to bee celebrated euer vpon the Lords day Againe the other things nominated by him as that the books of the sacred Bible are the Canonicall Scripture and the word of the liuing God that the children of beleeuing parents are to be baptized that Christ descended into hell may easily be proued out of Scripture either by expresse testimonie or by necessarie consequence and deduction which is all one for Perinde sunt ●a quae ex Scripturis colliguntur atque●a quae scribuntur c. saith Nazianzene 22. Thirdly being driuen by the power of truth to acknowledge the Scripture to be a rule he commeth in with a leaden distinction to wit that is not a totall but
at large discoursed in the former Chapter touching the chiefe Iudge of controuersies for when as they disable the Scripture from that office and exalt the Church that is the Pope as I haue shewed into the highest throne of iudgement what doe they else but debase the Scripture in subiecting it to the Popes wil and making it a vassall to wayt vpon his pleasure and giuing a greater certainty and infallibility to the determinations of his mouth speaking out of his chayre then vnto the infallible and certaine light of truth shining in the Scriptures This is open wrong to the Scriptures and not onely to it but also to the Spirit of God the Author and Enditer thereof for they which set vp the Pope as an all-sufficient and most competent Iudge and pull downe the Scripture as non-sufficient and incompetent as the Romanists doe doe they not aduance the one and disgrace the other as on the contrary we which ascribe all con●petencie of right and sufficiencie of power to the Scripture and denie the same to the Pope doe we not disgrace him and aduance it This is the difference in this poynt betwixt them and vs and their Religion and ours and that men may see how little estimation they haue of the Scripture compared with their Pope though the Pope be a man vtterly vnlettered ignorant euen of the grounds of Grammar much more of the grounds of Diuinitie as some of them were though he be a childe of tenne yeeres of age as Bennet the ninth or a mad Lad not past eighteene yeeres old as Iohn the twelfth though he be an Atheist as was Leo the tenth or a Coniurer as Iulius the third Lastly though hee were a man destayned with all manner of filthy and lewd conuersation as a number of them were yet his iudgement must bee heard and preferred because forsooth quatenus Papa as he is Pope he cannot erre though quatenus homo as he is a man hee be an Heretike or an Atheist or a wicked wretch or because Papa est doctor vtriusque legis authoritate non scientia The Pope is Doctour of both lawes in authority and not in knowledge And thus by their Religion the holy and sacred Scripture must giue place and bow the knee to an vnholy sacrilegious and ignorant Pope oftentimes and acknowledge him as Iudge and submit it selfe to his sentence and censure 8. The second doctrine of theirs whereby they disgrace and wrong the Scripture is that touching the insufficiency and imperfection thereof for they are not ashamed to say that the Scripture is imperfect and vnsufficient of it selfe and that in it are not contained all things needfull to saluation but that a great part yea the greatest part of true Religion is grounded vpon tradition without the which the Church of GOD could not bee sufficiently instructed either in faith or manners this is their goodly doctrine whereas we on the other side hold and maintaine that the Canonicall Scripture containeth in it sufficiently plainely and abundantly all doctrines necessary to be knowne for the attainment of saluation whether they be positions of faith or directions for godlinesse and that thereis no neede of any vnwritten traditions for the suppliance of any want or defect which is found therein And herein we haue not onely all the ancient Fathers of the primitiue and purer times of the Church our Abbetters as Iraeneus Origen Athanasius Basil Chrysostome Cyril Tertullian Cyprian Augustine Hierome as you may see in the places quoted in the Margent but also the testimony of the Holy Ghost in the Scriptures plainely and directly affirming the same 9. That this imputation of imperfection and insufficiency is layd by them vpon the Scripture let vs heare themselues acting their owne parts and first Bellarmine the Ringleader He in his fourth Booke De verbo Dei and fourth Chapter sets downe this position that the Scriptures without traditions are not simply necessary nor sufficient and throughout that whole Chapter doth nothing else but labour to prooue the same by many arguments and reasons as if hee were not content barely to affirme so high a blasphemy but euen as the Poet sayth Cum ratione insanire To be madde with reason and so are all his reasons there vsed in very deed mad reasons which my purpose is not to spend time in confuting that being sufficiently performed by our great and learned Champions of the truth which as yet remaine vnanswered onely it is inough for my intent to discouer to all men his notable blasphemy against the holy Scriptures which not onely in that place but in many other euidently and impudently sheweth it selfe 10. Next vnto him comes in another great Iesuite Gregorie de Valentia and he playeth his part and sayth That the most fittest way of deliuering the doctrine of faith to the Church was this not that all should bee committed to writing but that some things should be deliuered viua voce that is by tradition But Cardinall Hosius more plainly and boldly affirmeth That the greatest part of the Gospell is come to vs by tradition and that very title of it is committed to writing Yea it is reported of him that he should say Melius actum fuisse cum Ecclesia si nullum extaret scriptum Euangelium That it had beene better for the Church if there were no written Gospell extant O blasphemy and yet wisely spoken if so be by the Church hee meaneth the Church of Rome as without doubt hee doth But let vs heare another of the same stampe Eckius I meane that peremptory Bragadochio he steps forth and shoots his bolt in a moment The Lutherans are dolts sayth hee which will haue nothing beleeued but that which is expresse Scripture or can be prooued out of Scripture for all things are not deliuered manifestly in the Scriptures but very many are left to the determination of the Church Coster another Stage-player of theirs comes in and diuides the word into three parts to wit That which God himselfe writ as the tables of the Law that which he commanded others to write as the Olde and the New Testament and that which he neither writ himselfe nor rehearsed to others but left it to themselues as traditions the decrees of Popes and Councils And then he concludeth blasphemously that many things of faith are wanting in the two former neither would Christ haue his Church depend vpon them but this latter is the best scripture the Iudge of controuersies the Expositor of the Bible and that whereupon we must wholly depend His words are these Omnia fidei mysteria ccaeeraque credita scitu necessaria ●n corde Ecclesiae sunt clarissimè exarata in membranis tamen tam noui quam veteris Testaments multa defiderantur that is All the mysteries of faith and other things necessary to bee beleeued and known are most clearely engrauen in the heart of the Church but in the leaues of the Olde and
when at any time they are conferred withall about their Religion presently not being able to answer their refuge is to referre vs ouer to their Priests of whose learning and iudgement they haue such a perswasion that though Scripture and reason be against them yet their opinions preuaile more with them then either of these So that hence it is most euident that as the Iewes are bound to beleeue all that their Cachamim teach and not to stand to examine what it is that they teach so the Romanists are bound by their Religion to entertaine into their Creed whatsoeuer is taught them by their ordinary Pastours without all enquirie and search into their doctrines whether they bee true or false And as this is one chiese cause of the Iewes obstinacie against Christian Religion so is it also of that miserable superstition which raigneth in the Church of Rome for if the people were but perswaded that their learned Doctours might erre and deceiue they would certainely suspect their doctrines and try them by the touchstone of the holy Scriptures and so at length might be reclaimed from their errours thus they march together in this point also 20. Againe the Romanists are like vnto the Iewes in their doctrine and practice of praying for the dead for they hold and teach that prayer sacrifice is to be offered for the dead grounding their opinion partly vpon the example of Iudas Maccabeus who as they affirme procured sacrifice to bee offered by the Priests for the dead that had trespassed by taking to themselues the idolatrous iewels of the Iamnites and partly vpon the Thalmudical traditions of diuers of their ancient Rabbines but they haue no ground nor warrant for the same in the word of God for as concerning the bookes of the Maccabees they themselues acknowledge that they are not Canonicall Scripture and for the Scripture we finde no such precept or example in the whole volume of the olde and new Testament neither is it likely that God would haue omitted in the law that kinde of sacrifice for the soules of men where he prescribeth sinne-offerings for bodily pollutions and euery light trespasse if he had thought it necessarie That this is the opinion and practice of the Iewes their practice at this day beareth witnesse for they vse to say ouer the dead bodies a certaine prayer called Kaddish by the vertue whereof as they thinke they are deliuered out of Purgatory especially if it bee said by the sonne for his father and if hee haue no sonne by the whole Congregation on their Sabboth dayes And that this also is the doctrine and vsage of the Church of Rome besides their Bookes their Masses for the quicke and the dead their Diriges and Trentals doe sufficiently testifie And that they fetch this custome from the Iewes may appeare by two reasons first because one mayne argument of theirs which they call a demonstration to proue the lawfulnesse hereof is deriued from the example of the Iewes as we may see both in Galatinus Coccius and our late English Apologists And secondly because as it is confessed by their owne Bredenbachius it is not found in all the writings of the Apostles and Euangelists in the new Testament and we may adde hereunto neither in the olde vnlesse by distorted and misalledged texts which are not worth the answering except onely that fore-named passage of the Maccabees which notwithstanding is corrupted both by the Translatour and also the Relatour Iason Cyreneus as is vnanswerably proued by our famous Country-man Doctour Reynolds the word Dead being cogged into the Text by some cunning Iuggler which is not in the Originall wherein lyeth the pith of the argument And therefore it must needes follow that the Romanists doe merely Iudaize herein And for the Fathers which they alledge for the proofe of this article let their owne Cassander giue satisfaction who affirmeth that the ancient Church vsed prayers for the dead either as thankfull congratulations for their present ioyes or esse as restimonies of their hope and desire of their future resurrection and consummate blessednes both in their bodies and soules and this hee proueth out of Cyprian Augustine Epiphanius Chrysostome and ancient Leiturgies 21. Againe they Iudaize in their doctrines of Limbus Patrum and Purgatorie for Purgatorie it hath beene alreadie touched in the former section and for Limbus Patrum it is co●sessed by our aduersaries themselues that it is the tenent of the Iewish Rabbines warranted as they say onely by a Text in Ecclefiasticus which being both corrupted in the translation as our worthy Champion Doctour Whitaker hath proued and being also no part of Canonicall Scripture doth plainely shew that it is a mere Rabbinish conceit hatched in their brainsick Thalmud and not bred in holy writ Yet our Romanists lay fast hold on the same opinion without any other certaine ground to build it vpon For as touching the places of Scripture collected by them to proue this assertion they are either so impertinent or distorted that the meanest iudgement may easily discry their weaknesse for either they are deriued from a word of an ambiguous signification as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the speach of Iacob Gen. 37. 35. which signifieth sometimes the graue and sometimes hell by the confession of their great Bellarmine or from a Parable as that place in Luke 16. concerning Abrahams bosome confessed by Maldonate to be parabolicall because bodies are not yet tormented in hell but here is mention of a finger and a tongue or from an allegorie as is that place of Zacharie 9. 11. where is mention made of loosing Prisoners out of the pit wherein is no water which both Salmeron and Bellarmine acknowledge to make more for Purgatory then for Limbus but in truth for neither it signifying literally nothing else but the deliuerance of the Israelites out of the Babylonish captiuity and tipically the redemption of the Elect from the bondage of Sathan and hell which they are liable vnto or lastly are merely impertinent as those places Heb. 11. 39. 4. 1. Reg. 28. 1. Pet. 3. 19 the first whereof intendeth the consummate and perfect blessednesse of body and soule which the Fathers had not attayned vnto The second meaneth not the true Samuel but the deuill in his shape and likenesse and the third is to bee referred not to Christs d●scension into hell but to the operation of his Diuinitie which he exercised from the beginning of the world preaching by the mouthes of iust men as both S. Augustine and Aquinas expound the place How can any sound conclusion now be drawne from Texts that are either equiuocall or allegoricall or parabolicall or impertinent and all by their owne confessions Therefore it must needes follow that seeing this doctrine hath no sure foundation in Gods word but is founded vpon the Iewes prophane Thalmud that it is no better then a mere Rabbinish
Now to proue that the Scripture cannot be the iudge of Controuersies nor the Interpreter of it selfe they vse three chiefe reasons first because it hath diuers senses secondly because it is not able to speake but is mute and dumbe and thirdly because in euery well ordered Common-wealth the Law and the Iudge are distinguished and therefore seeing the Scripture is the law therefore it cannot be the Iudge 9. I answere to the first that it is not onely false but impious to affirme that the Scripture is as it were A nose of wax flexible into many senses as Melchior Canus affirmeth or that it may be dinersly expounded according to the occasion of the time as Cardinall Cusanus auerreth or that it is like a Delphian Sword to be conuerted into many senses as Turrian the Iesuite maketh it for as of one body there is but one soule so of one place of Scripture there is but one true sound sense which is the soule and life of it the words being but the flesh and the skinne that couereth the same and that true sense is that which the Spirit of God intendeth and not that which euery priuate spirit collecteth and deduceth out of the same as for the Tropologicall Anagogicall and Allegoricall senses they are not distinct senses of the Scripture but diuers collections and applications issuing out of one and the same sense all which may bee intended by the Holy Ghost vnder that one literall sense For example when an Allegory is deduced out of a place of Scripture as Saint Paul Gal. 4. 24. doth allegorize that History of Abrahams two Wiues it is not a double interpretation of that History but it is onely an Allegoricall application of it to the illustrating of the matter which he had in hand and so when by a tropologie a morall doctrine is deriued out of a text of Scripture as our Sauiour doth Math. 12. 41. 42. applying to the Iewes the repentance of the Niniuites and the long iourney of the Queene of Saba to see and heare Salomon or when as by a type any thing in Scripture is mystically expounded otherwise then the literall sense doth beare this is not a new sense but an accommodation of the right sense to another purpose which notwithstanding is intended by the spirit of God and this is confessed by diuers of their owne side Cornelius Agrippa thus writeth The Scripture hath but one simple and constant sense in which alone the truth is found And Aquinas thus It is the literall sense which the author of the Scripture intendeth which is God yet it is not inconuenient if in one letter of the Scripture according to the literall sense there bee many senses 10. But grant that there are diuers distinct senses of some few places of Scripture to wit one literall and another spirituall for in the most there is not yet there can be but one literall sense as many of the Iesuites themselues confesse and from that onely a forcible argument may be drawne as Bellarmine acknowledgeth and Vega another Iesuite except the mysticall sense be explaned and authorized by some other expresse place of Scripture as Salmeron Azorius Sixtus Senensis and Polidore Virgil auouch and proue the same by the testimonie of Augustine and Ierome Now then why should the multiplicity of senses barre the Scripture from being the Iudge of controuersies seeing no controuersie can effectually be decided by any other sense but by the literall which is euer one and the same or by the mysticall so farre forth as it is approued and declared by another Scripture which then becomes the literall sense of that place wherein it is expounded though it was spiritually included in the barke of the former from whence it was deriued This therefore is a most vaine and friuolous obiection 11. To the second that the Scripture is dumb and therefore cannot bee the Iudge because the Iudge of controuersies must haue a deciding and determining voyce I answere that this is blasphemy against the sacred word of God for if the Scripture bee an Epistle of the omnipotent God to his creature as Gregory calleth it what doth it but speake to them to whom it is sent He that writes a letter to his friend doth hee not speake vnto him and hee that reades his friends letter doth hee not vnderstand his meaning and intendment because the letter doth not vtter a voyce and he heareth not his friend himselfe Doth not euery man know that there is a double word verbum dictum a word spoken and verbum scriptum a word written the one being Imago cordis the Image of the minde the other Imago oris the Image of the speech True it is the Scripture doth not speake as man speaketh but yet it speaketh as the Law vseth to speake and God himselfe speaketh in the Scripture to them that haue eares to heare him and therefore in the Epistles to the Churches which were all written not spoken it is said Let him that hath an eare heare what the Spirit saith vnto the Churches and is there any thing more common then these phrases what saith the Scripture doth not the Scripture say Yea and is not the Scripture called vi●us Dei sermo the liuely word of God Heb. 4. 12. how can it speake if it bee dumbe how can it giue life if it be dead 12. This manifest truth Stapleton striueth to elude by a witty as he thinkes but indeed a witlesse distinction God saith he speaketh indeed by the Scripture but hee speaketh not vnto vs by them the Scripture is indeed the word of God but the Church is the voyce of God Which fond obiection our famous Country-man the scourge of Poperie Doctor Whitaker thus wipeth away If God speake in the Scripture then hee doth it either with himselfe or vnto some other but not with himselfe therefore to some other and if to some other to whom but vnto man for hee neither speaketh to Angels nor Deuils nor dumb creatures therefore onely to man as when he saith Thou shalt not kill or Loue your enemies there is no man so simple but hee perceiueth that God speaketh vnto man And therefore the Apostle saith that whatsoeuer things are written aforetime are written for our learning that wee through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might haue hope And so it is cleare that God by the Scripture not onely speaketh but speaketh vnto vs and so the Scripture is not onely the word of God but the voyce of God in it selfe as it proceeded from God the voyce of God to vs as we haue it by writing the word of God and the Epistle of the great King to his poore subiects whereby they are enformed of his will and pleasure and directed in the wayes of saluation 13. I but when the question is about the sense of a Text as of that Math. 16. 19. To thee will I giue the keyes
for to restraine a common good to a particular vse is an open wrong to the good it selfe which the more common it is the better it is and the lesse common the lesse good for bonum est sui diffusiuum good inclineth naturally to spreade it selfe and therfore the restriction thereof is violence and force offered to the nature of it and truth cannot abide to bee imprisoned but loueth liberty This is true in all naturall good and true things but much more in this supernaturall good and truth which as Origen● well noteth was not written for a few as Platoes Bookes were but for the people and multitude yea for the veriest Ideots and women and children as the Fathers affirme 20. And yet these presumptuous Romanists forbid the reading of the Scripture among the people one of them affirming That it was the deuils inuention to permit the people to reade the Bible Another That he knew certaine men to be possessed of the deuill because being but Husband-men they were able to discourse of the Scriptures All teaching that it is the ground of Heresie and that Lay men are no better then Hogs and Dogs and therefore these precious pearles not to be committed vnto them and that the Scripture to a Lay man is as a sword in a mad mans or a knife in a Childes hand Thus they practise to imprison the Scriptures within the Priests cells or Monkes cloysters which were giuen by God to be the light of the world and yet which is to be noted in Queene Maries bloudy and blinde daies such as could dispend a certaine summe of mony by the yeare might reade the Bible without any speciall dispensation as if heresie builded her nest rather in the brest of the poore man then of the rich or as if the rich were lesse carnall then the poore and thus these saucy fellowes handle the sacred Scripture at their pleasure being rightly to be branded with the name of Heretikes whom Epiphanius generally calleth Lucifugae because they cannot abide the light of the Scriptures but fly from them as Owles and Bats from the light 21. Another practice of theirs is against the sense of the Scripture as the two former were against the letter that neither the body nor the soule thereof might be left vnuiolated and this is in respect of the learned to bar them vp from controuling their errours as the other were in respect of the simple to keepe them from once looking into them Their policy in this is to interdict all senses and expositions of the Scripture saue such as agree with the Church of Rome and are allowed by the Pope of Rome this is the interdiction of the Councill of ●rent and is grounded vpon a false interpretation of that article of our faith I beleeue the Catholike Church for as Stapleton saith The literall sense of that article is that thou beleeuest whatsoeuer the Catholike Church holdeth and teacheth And Cardinall Hosius If any man haue the interpretation of the Church of Rome though he know not whether and how it agreeth with the words of the scripture notwithstanding he hath Ipsissimum verbum Dei Now by the Catholike Church they meane the Romane Church or rather the Romane Bishop as I haue shewed for as Siluester sayth The power of the Catholike Church remaineth onely in him And as Stapleton The foundation of our Religion is of necessity placed vpon the authority of this mans teaching and therfore one ●aith that the Pope may change ●he Gospell and giue to it according to place and time another sense Yea a blasphemous Cardi●all is b●ld to say That if a man did not beleeue that Christ is very God and Man and the P●pe thought the same he should not be condemned This is a tricke p●ssing all other whereby they not onely make sure worke with the Scripture that it neuer doe them hurt but also fashion the sacred and diuine sense thereof vnto their fond and foolish fancies and make it speake not what the Holy Ghost intendeth but what they imagine Nay they are so impudent as to say That the Scripture is fitted to the time and variably vnderstood the sense thereof being one while this and another while that according as it pleaseth the Church to change her iudgement Can there be a greater disgrace to the Scripture then this is 22. Adde to these yet another deuice which is far worse then all the rest that is a grosse and palpable wringing and wresting out of the holy Scripture a sense contrary to the true intendment of the place fitting it strangely to their own purpose This is a practice of theirs so cōmon as that their Books swarme with nothing so much as such fond and foolish interpretations and so ridiculous withall that it would make euen Heraclitus himselfe to laugh if he were aliue I wil here report some few of these strange wrested Expositions that the Reader may haue a taste of them and so iudge of the whole caske 23. And to beginne at the beginning of the Bible Genes 1. 16. It is written God created two great Lights the greater to rule the day and the lesser to rule the night that is saith Innocentius the third one of their owne Popes And also Molina the Iesuite God ordained in the Firmament of the Catholike Church two dignities to wit the Pontificiall dignitie and the Regall But that to gouerne the day that is the Spiritualty and is the greater and this to rule the night that is the Carnalty and is the lesser so that how great difference is betwixt the Sunne and the Moone so great is there betwixt the Bishop of Rome and a King that is according to the Glosse vpon the same place seuen and fiftie times So in the 3. of Genesis whereas the words of the Text are plaine Hee shall breake thy head or tread vpon thy head which is the first and principall promise of the Messiah they contrary both to the Hebrew and Septuagint translate and expound it Ipsa She shall applying vnto the Virgin Mary that which properly belongeth vnto Christ euen the worke of our Redemption And this interpretation and translation of that place is approued by the Councill of Trent in approuing the vulgar Latine Bible for authenticall and by Bellarmine also who calleth it a great mysterie that in the Hebrew a verbe of the Masculine gender is ioyned with a Nowne of the foeminine to signifie that a woman should breake the serpents head but not by her selfe but by her sonne and is also so translated by our Doway Translatours in English 24. So againe that place in the Psalme Psal 91. 13. Thou shalt walke vpon the Aspe and the Cockatrice and shalt tread vpon the Lion and the Dragon Pope Alexander the third interpreted it of himselfe and the Emperour applying the promise made to Christ principally and in him to all the Elect vnto himselfe as Pope and
call the Scripture a dumbe Iudge some a dead Letter and without a Soule others dead Inke others a Nose of Waxe to be wreathed this way or that way others say that it is no better then Aesops Fables without the authority of the Church all of them ioyne in this that it is not simply necessary that it was written not to rule our faith but to be ruled by it and that Christ neuer commanded his Apostles to write any Scripture and that it is subiect and inferiour to the Church all these and many other bitter and blasphemous speeches they belch out against the Scripture whereby they plainely bewray their cankred hatred against the Scripture and all because they finde it contrary to their humour and an enemie to their Religion 33. Thus the Minor proposition in this demonstration is I hope sufficiently prooued to wit that the Religion of the Church of Rome doth professedly disgrace the holy Scripture as both by their doctrine their practice and their blasphemous speeches against it doth manifestly appeare and so the conclusion is of necessary and vndeniable consequence that therefore it deserueth to be suspected and reiected of all those that professe themselues to be friends to the Scripture and hope from it either consolation in this life or saluation in the life to come MOTIVE VII That Religion is to be abhorred which maintaineth commandeth and practiseth grosse and palpable Idolatry but so doth the Religion of the Church of Rome Ergo c. WHen I consider the fearefull Idolatry of the Church of Rome which for that cause is called The Whore of Babylon and The Mother of fornications Reuel 17. 1. 2. I cannot choose but wonder that any should be so bewitched with the sorceries of this Iezabel or made drunke with the wine of her fornication that they should take her marke vpon their forheads and right hands and ioyne with her in her abominations and not rather come out of her with all speed as they are admonished by the Angell lest they bee partakers in her sinnes and haue a share also with her in her plagues but then againe remembring that which S. Paul faith that the comming of Antichrist should be in all deceiueablenesse of vnrighteousnesse and that God should send vpon them strong delusion to beleeue lies I turne my wondering at their sottishnesse into the admiration at Gods Iustice and Truth the one in punishing their contempt of his Gospell with such a giddinesse of spirit and the other in making good his owne word after such an euident and manifest manner that there by it most clearely appeareth that the Pope of Rome is that Man of sinne and Sonne of perdition there spoken of euen that Antichrist which exalteth himselfe aboue all that is called God and sitteth in the Temple of God as if he were God As this appeareth in many grosse errors which they hold so in none more then in the horrible idolatry practised and preached defended in this Antichristian Church of which I may truely say as Plutarch said of the heathen that they mingle heauen with earth because they made Gods of men men of Gods So these whilst they giue diuine worship to earthly creatures as the crosse pictures of Christ and to the Saints in heauen or attribute earthly affections to heauenly creatures make a plaine mixture of heauen and earth spoyling the Creatour of his honour due vnto his Dietie and adorning the creature therewith and ascribing that vnto men which is onely proper vnto God That the Church of Rome is guilty of this impiety I hope by Gods grace so to proue in this Motiue that no Iesuite though neuer so subtill shall bee able with any shew of sound reason to hisse against 2. The first proposition in this Argument though it be of so euident a truth that it needeth no further demonstration yet because S. Paul saith that an Idoll is nothing in the world and thereupon some may peraduenture conclude that Idolatrie is a matter of nothing and a small and triuiall sinne I will therefore very briefly shew the greatnesse and haynousnesse of this sinne and how odious and abominable it is in the sight of God As touching therefore that phrase of Saint Paul An Idoll is nothing it is not to bee vnderstood either in respect of matter for euery Idoll hath a materiall being and subsisting as the matter of the Calfe which the Israelites made in the Wildernesse was gold and of the brazen serpent which was abused also as an Idoll was brasse and of those Idols which the Prophet Esay declameth so against were wood nor yet in respect of forme as Bellarmine and Caietane would haue it As though the Apostle should meane thus that an Idoll though it hath matter yet it hath no forme that is to say is the representation of such a thing as hath no being in nature for many of the Idols of the Gentiles were of such things as truly were but the Apostles meaning is as Tertullian obserues and many other both of ancient and late Writers that an Idoll is nothing in respect of that which it is intended to bee that is that it is no God nor hath any part of the Diuinitie in it which deserueth to bee worshipped or that it is nothing in regard of efficacie and power that is as the Psalmist speaketh is not able to doe either good or bad to hurt or to helpe to saue or to kill and this interpretation is authorized by S. Augustine and S. Chrysostome the one saying thus There are Idols indeede but they can doe nothing neither are they Gods the other thus Sunt Idola sed ad salutem nihil sunt There are Idols but they auaile nothing to the attaynement of saluation and it is also approued by many other Expositors both ancient and moderne Protestants and Papists and is most agreeable to the whole current of the Text. This then that S. Paul saith That an Idoll is nothing is both so farre from extenuating the sinne of Idolatrie that it aggrauateth the same and also so farre from clearing the Church of Rome from the guilt of that crime that it rather layeth a greater stayne thereof vpon it 3. As for the greatnesse of the sinne it may appeare by three considerations first of the precept for there is no one commandement of the Law so frequent in the whole Scripture and so strictly vrged and mounded and fenced about with so many reasons as that is against Idolatrie as we may see in the Decalogue Secondly in respect of the punishment denounced against and inflicted vpon the committers thereof to wit not onely eternall death from the iustice of God which is the wages of all sinne vnrepented of but also temporall death from the iustice of man as being vnworthy to breathe this common ayre or to tread vpon the earth that thus sinne against the Maiestie of God and that
liue sanctification and not be sanctified righteousnes and not be righteous redemption and not be redeemed for all these is Christ made vnto vs Life Righteousnes Sanctification and Redemption as the Scripture testifieth Bellarmine spendeth one whole Chapter in this argument to proue that the wicked receiue Christ in the Sacrament and therevpon expresly affirmeth that though they receiue him yet they receiue not his iustifying grace nor his merits nor the fruit and effect of his death and passion together with him Of the same mind is Aquinas the rest of their Diuines Now this position is contrary both to Scripture Fathers and to their owne diuinity To Scripture for our Sauiour saith in expresse words Whosoeuer eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath eternall life and I will raise him vp at the last day And againe He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him But say they The wicked yea the reprobate eate the very flesh and drinke the very bloud of Christ Therefore conclude that they haue eternall life and dwell in Christ and Christ in them neither can they escape by saying that the spirituall eating of Christ by faith and not the eating in the Sacrament is here vnderstood seeing they doe all for the most part interpret this place of the Sacramentall eating and drinking but more plaine if it be possible is that of S. Iohn Ioh. 5. 12. He that hath the Sonne hath life and hee that hath not the Sonne of God hath not life From which place thus a man may reason He that hath Christ hath eternall life but hee that receiueth Christ verily truely as all the wicked do in the Sacrament by their doctrine hath Christ therefore the very reprobate euen Iudas himself hath eternal life is saued for either they must deny that they receiue Christ in the Sacrament or else they must grant being conuicted by these Scriptures that together with him they receiue eternall life 25. They reply to this two things first that the wicked receiue Christ onely Sacramentally and not Spiritually and therefore they haue no benefite by him and secondly because they receiue him vnworthily therefore they receiue their owne iudgement and not saluation not discerning the body and bloud of Christ To which I answere that though they receiue Sacramentally and vnworthily yet by their doctrine they receiue v●ry Christ and so by these Scriptures it must needs follow that they also receiue the fruite and effect of his death which is life and saluation Adde hereunto that the termes here vsed are generall both in respect of the persons that receiue and also the manner of receiuing without any such exception or distinction as they deuise and therfore I conclude that it is as impossible to make a separation betwixt Christ and his sauing grace as to separate the Sunne from light fire from heate or the soule from naturall life 26. Thus this position is an opposition to Scripture so it is also to the opinions of the Fathers To giue a taste of some two or three Origen saith That Christ is that true meat which whosoeuer eateth shall liue for euer which no wicked man can eat Augustine more effectually saith Hee that is in the vnity of Christs body that is a member of Christ he is truely said to eate Christs body and drinke his bloud Note hee saith truely to signifie that all other eate him falsly that is in shew and not in substance And in another place yet more plainely Hee which disagreeth from Christ doth neither eate his flesh nor drinke his bloud though he take the Sacrament of so great a thing to his iudgement Theodoret as plainely saith That Christ is meate for his owne sheepe onely that is his elect And Cyrill that as many as eate his flesh haue life in them being ioyned to him who is life it selfe And Basill saith that they which are fed with the foode of life to wit the bread that came downe from heauen haue an inward mouth of the minde whereby they eate that spirituall food Many more such like sayings might be heaped together to this purpose which for breuity sake I passe ouer all which are contrary to that Romish position that the wicked eate and drinke the very body and bloud of Christ which they must needs doe if the bread and wine after the words of consecration be changed into the very body and bloud of Christ 27. Lastly it is contrary to their owne diuinity for they hold that the parts of this Sacrament as of all others are two to wit the matter and the forme the forme in this Sacrament is to the whole word of consecration together with the sense thereof the matter is the whole element with the signification thereof As for example in the Eucharist the matter is the species of Bread and wine containing vnder them the body and bloud of Christ and the forme is for this is my bodie this is my bloud Now hence I thus reason The wicked either receiue the whole Sacrament or they receiue it not if they do then there is no difference betwixt the faithfull and them for they receiue no more and why should not they be saued then as well as they if they do not then either they receiue not Christ at all because we are sure they receiue the outward Elements and therfore if any thing be wanting it must needs be the thing signified or there are more parts then these two of the Sacrament Againe thus if the wicked receiue Christ in the Sacrament and yet not the vertue of Christ then they receiue not the whole Sacrament because the vertue of the Sacrament is in the Sacrament as the vertue of euery thing is in the thing it selfe And so it followeth that the wicked in the Sacrament receiue Christ and yet not Christ the whole Sacrament and yet but a part of the Sacrament and that there are but two parts of it and yet more then two Obserue gentle Reader these contradictions and wonder 28. Againe Transubstantiation is contradicted both by the doctrine of adoration of Images and by the Canon of the Masse by the doctrine of adoration of Images thus they teach that diuine adoration is to be giuen to the pictures of Christ and God the Father because they represent their most excellent and diuine persons and yet they would haue the very body and bloud of Christ to be in the Sacrament transubstantiated because some of the Fathers pretend ●o say that it is to be adored with diuine worship Now if it bee true that they say that Images of God the Father and of Christ our Sauiour ought to be adored with diuine worship because they represent their persons then it must bee false that therfeore the bodie and bloud of Christ are really and carnally in the Sacrament because it is to be worshipped for why may not those mysteries of bread and
that the Spirit of God witnesseth vnto our spirits that wee are the sonnes of God Neither is this witnesse of the Spirit a doubtfull and vncertaine certificate for Saint Paul in the words going before calleth it the Spirit of adoption whereby we cry Abba Father and not the spirit of bondage to feare any more When therefore God doth shead abroad his Spirit into our hearts crying and making vs to cry Abba Father in faithfull not formall prayer that is a certaine testimony to our spirits that we are the sonnes of God For as Saint Ierome well noteth Wee neuer durst call God our Father but vpon conscience of the Spirit dwelling in vs. Neither doe we euer vpon this ground call God our Father but withall we are or ought to be perswaded that we are his children 15. Againe why doth hee say in another place that all they which beleeue the Gospell are sealed with the holy Spirit of promise Are Gods children sealed and can they not see nor know the Seale Is not this one vse of a seale to confirme a couenant assuring the certainty of the performance thereof to him to whom it is made Yea doth not Saint Iohn say Hereby we know that we dwell in him and he in vs because he hath giuen vs of his Spirit And againe doth not the holy Ghost so ascribe this knowledge of iustification and saluation on to a mans selfe that he denyeth it to all others To him that ouercommeth I will giue a white stone and in the stone a new name written which no man knoweth sa●● he that receiueth it What is this white stone but the absolution and remission of a sinner what is the new name written in it but the childe of God This no man knoweth but he that hath it therefore he that hath it knoweth it What can be more plaine And yet this is the exposition almost of all Diuines vpon that place To omit all other testimonies doth not the Scripture now teach this doctrine touching the certainty of saluation 16. I but saith Bellarmine all Gods promises for the most part are conditionall and no man can certainely know whether he hath performed the condition and therefore cannot assure himselfe of the promise To which I answere that albeit in regard of our infirmitie we are not able to fulfill the conditions required in Gods promises yet wee are assured that we shall fulfill them through him that strengthneth vs and so as the Apostle Paul said in one place Wee can doe nothing no not so much as thinke a good thought Yet in another place he saith I can doe all things through Christ that strengthneth me So may we say of our selues We cannot do anything of our selues yet in Christ Iesus wee can doe all things By his might wee can keepe his Commandements though not perfectly yet so as our defects are made vp by his perfection and our endeuours accepted in his mediation for his sake it is giuen vnto vs not onely to beleeue in him but also to suffer for him and by his neuer-fayling grace and euerlasting loue we are assured that we shall perseuere vnto the end And therefore Origen saith that it is impossible that that which God hath once quickned should either by himselfe or any other be killed Thus there is no condition required of the children of God but they are assured that they can performe it though not in full measure and by their owne strength yet in that measure which God will accept and by the strength of his Spirit which dwelleth in them and sanctifieth them to doe his will And thus this third Antithesis is nothing empeached by Bellarmines cauill 17. The Gospell telleth vs that there is but one onely propitiatory Sacrifice in the world which is Christ Iesus the Sauiour of the world who offered vp himselfe once and no more for to take away the sinnes of his people But the Church of Rome teacheth that euery Masse is a propitiatory Sacrifice for the quicke and the dead and that euery Priest as often as he saith Masse doth offer vp Christ vnto God the Father as a Sacrifice for sinne 18. Bellarmine here distinguisheth againe and saith that indeede there is but one onely propitiatory Sacrifice in the world to wit that which was once offered vpon the Crosse but yet that one Sacrifice may be reiterated in mysterie by the same high Priest Christ Iesus by the hands of a carnall Priest And againe he in another place distinguisheth this Sacrifice into bloudy vnbloudy saith that there was but one bloudie Sacrifice of Christ and that on the Altar of the Crosse but there are many vnbloudy sacrifices of the same Christ in their dayly Masses And lastly that the sacrifice of the Masse is but an application of the Sacrifice of the Crosse vnto mens soules for the actuall remission of sinnes purchased by Christ vpon the Crosse 19. Here is much adoe to little purpose three distinctions and all not worth a rush for all of them are mutually contrary to each others and vaine and friuolous in themselues first if the sacrifice of the Masse bee a repetition of the sacrifice of the crosse then it is not an application of it for it is one thing to reiterate and another to apply and therefore if the Priest doth reiterate it then hee doth not apply it and if hee doth apply it then hee doth not reiterate for to reiterate is to doe againe that which was done before and to apply is to make vse of that which was done but not to doe it againe Beside if the masse bee a repetition and application of the sacrifice of the crosse then how is it an vnbloudy sacrifice can that bloudy sacrifice bee repeated and applied after an vnbloudy manner that is asmuch as to say it is a sacrifice and yet not a sacrifice especially no propitiatory sacrifice seeing as the Apostle speaketh without the shedding of bloud there is no remissiō of sinnes Againe if the masse be a repetition of that bloudy sacrifice of Christ on the crosse then it is a repetition of Christs death and a crucifying of him againe for the sacrifice of Christ and the death of Christ is all one and if it bee so then it must needs be bloudy aswell as that for the repetition of a thing is the doing of the same thing againe And lastly if it bee an application of it then it cannot bee a repetition of it nor indeed the same in specie with it for the application of a thing is not the thing it selfe in any reason and thus these distinctions are at ciuill warre with each other and indeed like deadly enemies doe cut each others throats 20. But let one of their own learned masters Peter Lumbard conclude this point for vs who saith that Christ dying vpon the crosse offered himselfe is sacrificed dayly in the Sacrament because in
of nature then the Saints are no wayes our Mediatours for if they bee they must bee one of these two wayes vnlesse wee will say that they doe that which belongs not vnto them but like busy-bodies are pragmaticall in anothers charge which farre bee it from vs to thinke of those blessed creatures but both these wayes he sayth Christ is the onely Mediatour therefore the Saints by his owne conclusion are no Mediatours at all 58. His third distinction is that therefore Christ is called the onely Mediatour because hee prayeth for all and none for him but the Saints are such Mediatours that they themselues stand in need of a Mediatour I answere that therefore they are no Mediatours at all for if the Saints in Heauen stand in need of a Mediatour themselues then it must necessarily follow that they are not Mediatours at all for they that are parties cannot bee vmpiers And this is that which Saint Augustine plainely affirmeth though Bellarmine laboureth to distort his words to another sense when he sayth He for whom none intreateth but hee intreateth for all is the onely true Mediatour And thus it is cleare that the doctrine of the Church of Rome touching the mediation of Saints is directly contrary to the doctrine of the Gospell 59. The Gospell teacheth that Christ Iesus hath made a full and perfect satisfaction for all our debts and so is our full and perfect Redeemer But the Church of Rome teacheth that Christ hath satisfied but in part for our debts to wit neither for all our sinne nor for all the punishment due vnto all our sinne and so that he is not our full and perfect Redeemer 60. This doctrine of the Gospell is so euidently propounded in holy Scripture that our aduersaries themselues acknowledge it in generall to bee true for Aquinas where the Apostle sayth I suffer all things for the Elects sake that they may also obtaine the saluation which is in Christ Iesus asketh this question What was not the passion of Christ sufficient and answereth to the same Yes as touching the working of saluation And Bayus sayth that there is but one satisfaction onely vnto God and that of Christ yea Bellarmine himselfe acknowledgeth asmuch in generall for hee affirmeth that the merit of Christ is sufficient to take away all sinne and punishment neither dare any of the rest for shame in plaine words deny the same because if they did many manifest texts of Scripture would conuince them of impiety and heresie 61. And that the other is the doctrine of the Church of Rome the Councill of Trent will witnesse which thus defineth When God forgiueth a sinner hee forgiueth not all the punishment but leaneth the party by his owne workes to satisfie till it bee washed away Yea they affirme not onely that wee our selues must satisfie for the temporall punishment but also for the relikes of sinne and for the fault it selfe yea for that punishment that should bee suffered in hell excepting the eternity yea so impious and shamelesse are some of them whose bookes are notwithstanding authorized by the Church of Rome that they affirme that Christ dyed onely for originall sinne and that the satisfaction of Christ deserueth not the name of a satisfaction for our sinnes Let the world iudge now whether these positions of the Church of Rome bee not flat contrary of the Gospell of Iesus Christ for the Gospell attributeth to Christ all sufficiencie of meriting and satisfaction but these fellowes make him a Satisfier party parpale for the sinne but not the punishment yet not for all our sinnes neither but for a part of them as for originall not actuall or iffor actuall yet for mortall onely and not for veniall And this is the Romish Religion though palliated with the name of Catholicke and hidden from the sight of the common people vnder the vaile of an implicite faith which if they should but see they could not chuse but abhorre 62. For the healing of this wound Bellarmine applyeth his wonted playster of a distinction Christs satisfaction saith he is in vertue sufficient but not in act efficient except it bee applyed by our satisfaction and therefore that there is but one onely actuall satisfaction which is ours which by the grace and efficacy of Christs satisfaction taketh away the punishment of our sinne and maketh a iust recompence to God for the same 63. But this distinction first vndermineth it selfe for if Christs bee a satisfaction then it is an actuall satisfaction if it bee not an actuall one then it is none at all Did not he actually dye and rise againe Did not hee actually by that death of his satisfy Gods iustice for all the Elect Doth not the strength and efficacy ofhis death stretch it selfe backward to Adam and forward to the last beleeuing child of Adam vpon earth If all this bee true then it must needs bee intolerable blasphemy to say that actually there is no satisfaction but our owne and that Christs satisfaction which hee made for our sinnes is indeed no satisfaction except it bee by the meanes of ours which must apply it and as it were giue efficacy vnto it 64. Againe the ground of his distinction is absurd for where doth the Scripture make our satisfaction a meanes to apply Christs satisfaction vnto vs It telleth vs of other meanes of application to wit outward the Word and Sacraments inward faith in respect of vs and the Spirit in respect of God but no where of this new-deuised meanes which they talke of and besides how can our satisfactions apply Christs vnto vs whereas they are both satisfaction and that to God and that for our sinnes Nay when as hee sayth that our satisfaction doth include the satisfaction of Christ in it and so both together make but one compound satisfaction if they be of one natur●● how can one apply the other If they bee one in mixture and composition how is the one seuered from the other These bee absurd inconsequences and irreconciliable 65. Lastly if the strength power of satisfying which is in our sufferings is wholly from the grace of God the vertue of Christs satisfaction why doe some of them hold that a man by power of nature without grace may bee able to satify for Veniall sinnes and expell them nay why doth Bellarmine say that a righteous man hath right to Heauen by a twofold title one of the merits of Christ by grace communicated vnto him and another of his owne merits By which he plainely diuideth our merits from Christ and ascribeth a satisfactory power to them equall to the death of Christ it selfe and that without the helpe of grace Nay why do they not say plainly that Christ hath satisfied for vs without any intermixing of our owne but that their wisedome perceiued that then Purgatory Masses Penance Romish pardons yea and the Popes Kitchin it selfe and the very marrow of all their Pompe shall fall
vnto him And that wee may not thinke that this Master of theirs is without schollers the glosse of their decrees doth set down asmuch when it sayth Dimi●tantur id est dimissa ostendantur Let them bee forgiuen that is let them bee declared to bee forgiuen Which because it speakes too boldly therefore their iudicious Censurers haue caused it either to bee blotted out or compelled it to speake otherwise 92. Secondly I answere that this doctrine is crossed by it selfe For they do not professe any other absolution but such as may be hindered by the party to by absolued to wit if by want of faith or repentance he put an inuisible bar to stop the power thereof Now if the sinner may hinder his own absolutiō then the Priest hath no power to absolue him except he be fitly disposed for the receiuing of it this disposition is meerly from God and therefore in God is the onely power to absolue and in the Priest onely to declare who is absolued and that conditionally if h● be thus qualified and haue no barre to hinder For if the power of absoluing or not absoluing depend vpon the putting in or taking away the barre of impenitency then he onely can iudicially absolue a sinner that can giue him repentance but neyther the Pope nor any mortall man is able to doe this as the Scripture testifieth in many places and therefore neyther Pope nor Priest can absolue a sinner any further then by a declaratiue sentence 93. Lastly it crosseth their owne practice for they teach that dead m●n dying in excommunication may be absolued and they practise the same to wit as Bellarmine saith when it is discouered that the partie was erroniously excommunicate and as Tollet saith when he shewed manifest signes of contrition before his death in which case their absolution can bee no more then a declaration that hee did repent and that he is absolued before the tribunall ●● at of God 94. And thus this first distinction wi●l hold no water Let vs heare the second Touching the Popes power to pardon out of the Sacrament this it is They say that the Pope doth not by his pardon take vpon him eyther to remit the guilt of sinne or the eternall punishment due vnto it but onely the temporall punishment which it ought to sustaine eyther here in this life òr in Purgatory But I answere that h●e which can remit any part of the punishment due vnto sinne can also remit the guilt it s●l●e for guilt and punishment are vnseparable companions insomuch as in the Hebrew tongue Sinne and Punishment are notified by one and the same word to shew that where the one is there the other is also and therefore he that can pardon the ore may also release the other Adde hereunto that to pardon a sinne is nothing else as our common phrase of speech together with reason teacheth vs but to remit the punishment thereof as when the King in the Court of Iustice pardoneth a Malefactor he releaseth him from the punishment which by the law he should suffer so in the Court of Conscience he that doth remit any part of the punishment due by Gods Law vnto a sinner as the Pope doth vndertake to doe by the same labour doth remit so much of the guilt it selfe And so this distinction filleth to the ground being as feeble and brittle as the former 95. Lastly the Gospell teacheth that when we haue done all that we can yet we may say that we are vnprofitable seruants Luke 17. 10. But the Church of Rome teacheth that a man may doe more then he ought and then the law requireth and so may say and thinke himselfe to be not onely a profitable but more then a profitable seruant for hee m●y say they supererogate now hee doeth supererogate who layeth out more then he receiued as he that to the precepts of Christ adioyneth the commaundements of the Church and to the precepts of the law the counsels of the Gospell 96. Bellarmine answereth first out of Saint Ambrose that it is to bee vnderstood of vs whilst wee are in the state of nature and not of grace as if by nature we are vnprofitable but by grace profitable but our Sauiour speaketh this to his Disciples who were now in the state of grace and not of nature And Saint Ambrose his meaning is nothing else but this that our naturall imbecillity though it be sanctified yet it is not abolished by grace and therefore that we in regard thereof are still bound to remember that when we doe all we can yet we are vnprofitable 97. Secondly he answereth that we are vnprofitable indeede but to God not to our selues which hee saith is Beda's interpretation but hee leaueth out that which followeth in Beda for so farre is hee from building hereupon the merite of works that he saith plainely that by whose mercy we are preuented that we may humbly serue him by his gift wee are crowned to raigne with him By which it is euident that if wee b● profitable to our selues it is because God accepteth our seruice and in mercy rewardeth the same not because we deserue any thing at his hands To omit that the word Seruants hath relation to Masters and not to themselues and therfore in saying they are vnprofitable seruants it must needs be vnderstood in respect of God and not of themselues 98. Thirdly hee answereth out of Saint Augustine that we are said to bee vnprofitable in respect of the couenant of the law but in respct of the free couenant of grace we may be profitable and more then profitable But this is Bellarmines fraudulent collection and not Saint Augustines intention for he saith onely that we can require no reward for our labour though we haue kept all the commandements vnlesse God of his free grace had couenanted with vs to reward vs. He saith not that wee are made profitable by grace eyther to God our Master or to our selues And therefore in another place he disclaimeth vtterly all profite and merite in our selues when he saith Lord for thy Names sake quicken me in thy righteousnes not in mine not because I haue deserued it but because thou art mercifull Thus this generation is not ashamed to wrest and wring the godly Fathers to make them speake to their purpose 99. Lastly hee answereth out of Saint Chrysostome that our Sauiour saith not Yee are vnprofitable seruants but bids them say so of themselues to teach them humility and to auoyd pride But how doe this follow that because Christ biddeth vs to say so to auoyd pride therefore we are not so yea rather therefore we are so for would he bid vs to lye Chrysostome himselfe in another place cleereth this doubt when he saith that all that euer wee doe we doe vpon dutie for which cause Christ sayd When yee haue done all say yee are vnprofitable seruants So that Chrysostome did not onely
thinke it fit for vs to say so for humility sake but also that wee were so in truth and indeede Let Saint Bernard for an vpshot wipe away this distinction Wilt thou saith he say that Christ hath taught thee to say so for humility sake true indeed it was for humility but what against truth And thus none of these shifts and distinctions can deliuer this doctrine from opposition to the Gospell for it followeth ineuitably if the best be no better then vnprofitable seruants then none can worke such works whereby hee may not onely merite for himselfe eternall life but hauing a surplusage of redundant merits bestow some of them for the supplying of others wants 100. And thus wee haue a short view of the cleere and manifest oppositions that are betwixt the doctrines of the Gospell and the doctrines of the Church of Rome And we see with what subtill and intricate distinctions they labour to reconcile them together but truth is naked and needeth no such shiftings Both the one and the other therefore namely their direct opposition to the Gospell on the one side and their elaborate diflinctions to make good their cause on the other doth euidently euince the conclusion of this ninth demonstration that that Religion which is built vpon such desperate and dangerous principles cannot be the truth of Christ but the doctrine and Religion of Antichrist The X. MOTIVE That Religion which nourisheth most barbarous and grosse ignorance amongst the people and forbiddeth the knowledge and vnderstanding of the grounds of the Christian faith cannot be the truth but this doth the Romish Religion ergo c. 1. IN the first proposition of this Argument the Romanists hold the Wolfe by the eares not knowing whether it be better to graunt or to deny it for if they graunt it to bee true it will flye in their faces because they are guilty of the contents thereof and if they deny it it will bite them by the fingers for all men will condemne them of shamelesse impudency for denying so apparant a truth Therefore as the beast which Pliny calleth Amphisbaena so it stingeth both wayes But of two euils the lesser they must of necessitie deny it or else they must condemne their owne practice of impietie which sure they will not doe though for their labour they gaine to themselues that name which so frequently and imperiously they impute vnto vs Shamelesse Heretikes they speake it of vs in the spirit of malice but it shall be prooued of them by sound reason and that in this demonstration ensuing by Gods assistance 2. For the confirmation therefore of the first proposition a word or two though whatsoeuer can be spoken thereof is but to adde light vnto the Sunne First therefore the Scripture standeth foorth and condemneth ignorance so plainely that nothing can be more euident Salomon telleth vs That they which hate knowledge loue death And the Prophet Esay That the people were carryed into captiuitie because they had no knowledge And the Prophet Hosca That they were destroyed for lacke of knowledge Our Sauiour affirmeth that the cause of erring in the Sadduces was the ignorance of the Scripture And Saint Paul coupleth these two together in the Gentiles Darkned cogitations through ignorance and strangers from the life of God where he plainely sheweth that ignorance and destruction are inseparable companions as sanctified knowledge and saluation are And to omit infinite other passages of holy writ our Sauiour directly concludeth that he which knoweth his Masters will and doth it not shall bee beaten with many stripes and he which knoweth it not and therefore doth it not shall be beaten too but with fewer stripes By which he giueth vs to know that though some kinde of ignorance may extenuate and lessen the fault yet none especially if it bee of matters which we are bound to know and may be attayned vnto doth excuse from all fault but is blame-worthy and punishable by Gods iustice 3. Thus speakes the holy Ghost in the Scripture and doubtles in reason it must needs be so for wherin doth a man differ from a beast but in reason and vnderstanding and wherein doth one man differ from another but in the enlightning of reason by diuine knowledge which is the matter subiect of true Religion Religion being nothing else but the knowledge and profession of the diuine truth the want whereof must needs be a subuerter and destroyer thereof A Physicion that is ignorant of the grounds of his Arte we account a Mountebanke and Imposter And what I pray you can they be lesse that professe ignorance and that in the most difficult Art of all other the Art of Christianitie Besides all confesse that ignorance is a defect and blemish of the soule and that the more knowledge a man hath the neerer he is vnto perfection because hee is the more like vnto God but the chiefe end of Religion is to purge away the blemishes to make vp the breaches of the soule to renue Gods Image defaced therin that so we may be made like vnto him euen perfect as he is perfect How can then true Religion teach ignorance which is such an enemy vnto perfectiō or how can that be true religion which nourisheth ignorance inioyneth it vnto most of her professors followers 4. Let the fathers bee Iudges of this cause Saint Augustine sayth in one place that Ignorance as a naughty mother bringeth forth two wicked daughters falshood and doubting And in another that the knowledge of God is the engine by which the structure of charity is built vp Saint Bernard sayth that both the knowledge of God and of a mans selfe is necessary to saluation For as out of the knowledge of a mans selfe commeth the feare of God and out of the knowledge of God the loue of him so on the contrary from the ignorance of a mans selfe commeth pride and from the ignorance of God desperation Saint Chrysostome sayth that knowledge goeth before the imbracing of Vertue because no man can faithfully desire that which hee knoweth not and euill vnknowne is not feared The like song sing all the rest of the Fathers whose testimonies I thinke needlesse to accumulate being so wel knowne to all men 5. And that they may bee vtterly without excuse heare what their owne Doctours affirme Aquinas confesseth that omnis ignorantia vincibilis est peccatum si sit eorum quae aliquis seire tenetur All vincible ignorance that is which may bee auoided is sinne if it bee of those things which a man is bound to know But such is the ignorance maintained in the Church of Rome not onely vincible but affected wilfull and voluntary Bellarmine also acknowledgeth that ignorance is a disease and wound of the soule brought in as a punishment of originall sinne And confesseth out of Saint Augustine that it is the cause of errour For Two euils are
brought into the world sayth Saint Augustine by originall sinne ignorance and difficulty from which two other fountaines of euils doe arise to wit error griefe For ignorance bringeth forth error and difficulty griefe And our Countrey-man Stapleton telleth vs plainely that Zelus sine scientia est vehemens cursus in deui● in quo quantò curris velociùs tantò a via aberras longiùs peccas absurdiùs Zeale without knowledge is a violent course in a wrong way wherein the swifter wee runne the further woe wander and sinne the groslier Thus they themselues write and therefore I wonder how the same men should dare to allow that which in their own consciences they condemne or nourish that in the people which they confesse to bee a sinne a wound and disease of the soule and the way to perdition I know not how they will distinguish and shift off that saying of Saint Paul Blessed is he that condemneth not himselfe in that which hee alloweth vnlesse it bee either by saying that they condemne not ignorance in all but onely in the Lay people as if Lay people had not souls to saue aswel as Priests Or that they allow of it not simply in regard of it selfe but in respect to a further good to wit the increase of deuotion as if euill were to be done that good might come thereof which Saint Paul giueth a God forbid vnto and sayth that their damnation is iust that are of that minde I leaue therefore this first proposition confirmed by Scripture reason Fathers and their owne Doctours and come to the second wherein out of their owne grounds they shall bee conuinced of this grosse impiety 6. That the Romish Religion doth nourish and maintaine most grosse and barbarous ignorance amongst the people and take from them the key of knowledge First their owne confessions Secondly their doctrines And thirdly the fruits and effects of both in the whole rabble of their multitude Priests and people shall euince For their confession The Rhemists doe plainely confesse that knowledge in things wee pray for is not required of Christians but that ignorance is to bee preferred before it and that ability to professe the particulars of our faith is not necessary no when possibly we are to dye in the defence of the same faith How contrary is this to that which Saint Peter teacheth that eueryman be ready to giue an answere of the hope that is in him Hosius saith that to know nothing is to know all things and ignorance of most things is best of all How contrary to that which our Sauiour teacheth This is eternall life to know thee and whom thou hast sent Iesus Christ The same Hosius with Stephylus and others commends the Colliers faith to be the onely faith whereby euery vnlearned man may trye the spirits resist the Deuill iudge of the right sense of Scriptures and discerne true doctrine from false c. And what was the Colliers faith Mary being at the point of death and tempted of the Deuill answered I beleeue and dye in the faith of Christs Church Being againe demanded what the faith of Christs Church was answered that faith that I hold And thus hee beleeued as the Church beleeued and the Church as he and yet he neither knew what the Church nor himselfe beleeued This is a braue faith and worthy to bee canonized to all posterity for conquering the Deuill But what if the Deuill departed from the Collier not because hee was scarred with his bugbare faith but because he perceiued him safe enough intangled in his snare and so needed not to tempt him any more being already sure enough his owne Where was his faith then Sure I am it is farre vnlike to that faith which the Scripture speaketh of which is often called by the name of knowledge and not of ignorance as Esay 53. 11. Iohn 17. 3. 7. Againe another affirmeth plainely to wit Linwood their Lawyer that for simpler people it is sufficient to beleeue the articles of the faith implicuè that is confusedly and infoldedly and not distinctly and plainely as a bottome of yarne folded together which lieth in a small compasse and not raueled out at the length that it may bee seene and discerned in euery part And their Angelicall Doctour Aquinas compareth Gods children to asses and their teachers to oxen because it is said in the first Chapter of Iob that the oxen did plow and the asses fed by them that it is sufficient for them in matters of faith to adhere vnto their superiours And in the same place hee concludeth that a man is bound to know no more explicitely but the Aritcles of the faith As for all other doctrines of Religion conteined in Scripture it is enough to beleeue them implicitely And againe in another place hee sayth that knowledge doth occasionally hinder deuotion and therfore that simple men and women that are voyd of knowledge are for the most part most inclined to deuotion But I confesse he speaketh this of such knowledge as is not sanct fied but puffeth vp how be it hee should then haue ascribed the impediment of deuotion vnto the pride that accompanieth knowledge and not to knowledge Hence grew that notorious celebrated prouerbe of the Romish Synagogue that Ignorance is the mother of deuotion And it goeth for currant amongst them all as yet vncontrolled But how opposite is the very sound thereof to that which holy Scripture teacheth that ignorance is the mother of errour and of folly Prou. 7. 7. and of destruction Hos 2. 6. Thus wee haue their open confession and what should follow but their open condemnation 8. But peraduenture the Iury requireth fuller euidence let them list therefore to their doctrines diuers whereof either directly maintaine ignorance or at least by necessary consequence driue thereunto and they are such as are not the particular opinions of priuate men but the approoued doctrines of their Church so that a man cannot bee an entyre Romanist but he must needes subscribe vnto them and subscribing vnto them must also needs confesse that that monstrous ignorance which is in the Church of Rome doth issue out of their corrupt fountaine To come therefore vnto them 9. The first doctrine that breedeth and nourisheth ignorance amongst them is their locking vp the Scripture in an vnknowne tongue that the common people being ignorant of the learned tongues may not be able to read them much lesse to vnderstand them to their comfort which that is so hath beene partly declared already and may further bee demonstrated for Bellarmine affirmeth that it is not necessary for the Scripture to be translated into our Mother tongue And Azorius another Iesuite going a step further saith that it is not expedient for the sacred volumes to be translated into Mother tongues because thereby the vnitie of the faithfull should be detrimented and diuers causes of errors and heresies would spring vp
And Salmeron a third Iesuite descending yet a stayre lower saith that the translation of the Scripture should be onely tillinguis of three tongues that is Hebrew Greeke and Latine in honour of the Trinitie Or as another saith Because th●se three tongues were onely sanctified vpon the Crosse Herevpon the Councill of Trent decreeth the olde vulgar Latine Translation of the Bible to be onely authenticall and alone to bee vsed in all publike Lectures Disputations Preachings and expositions And though Pope Pius Quartus forbade onely as Bellarmine saith such to read the Scripture as had not licence thereunto giuen them by their Priest or Confessor to wit such as could receiue no damage but profit by their reading yet Pope Clement the eighth as another Iesuite confesseth tooke away all faculty of giuing licence to any to read the Scripture or to retaine with them the common Bibles or any parts of the Old and New Testament in the Mother tongues so that as wofull experience hath taught it was in times past in this Land and is now in those places where the bloudie Inquisition is exercised a sufficient marke of an Heretike and cause of fire and faggot to bee found with a translated Bible in their houses or hands 10. This is their doctrine which how it ingendreth and nourisheth ignorance who seeth not seeing first it locks vp the fountayne of knowledge that few or none of the common sort can drinke of the waters thereof cleane contrary to that famous saying of learned Origene who compareth the Scripture to Iacobs Well where not onely Iacob and his Sonnes that is the Learned but also the Cattell and the Sheepe that is the rude and the ignorant doe drinke and refresh themselues but these men barre out the poore sheepe and driue them away from the waters of life to no other end as it may be thought but that they should pine away with thirst and liue and dye in blindnesse and ignorance For if all sound and true knowledge is to be found in holy Scripture and therein is the whole counsell and will of God reuealed vnto vs so farre foorth as it concerneth our saluation it being the Epistle of the great Iehouah to his poore Subiects to enforme them of his will and pleasure how should they possibly clime to this true and sauing knowledge who are debarred from the place and meanes where it is to found and had and not permitted to reade this Letter or heare it read vnto them contrary to that doctrine of Nazianzene who saith that all Christians ought to come to Church and there read themselues or if they be not able heare others read vnto them the word of God 11. If they reply and say that it is enough for them to know the Traditions of the Church I answere that if there were as certaine ground for their Traditions to prooue them the word of God as there is of the Scripture then this allegation might carry some shew of reason but the vncertainty nouelty mutability and absurdity of many of them doe plainely shew that it is no safe course to repose the strength of our saluation vpon them but rather to flye to that foundation which is immooueable If they say that the people must be content for their knowledge to depend vpon their Priests and to draw it from their lippes and so by that meanes may attayne a sufficient measure of instruction I answere that the Priests are for the most part as ignorant as the people as shall be shewed afterward and if any be furnished with gifts yet they seldome teach the people and when they doe they preach in stead of Gods word their owne inuentions idle tales and meere tales and fables witnesse Cornelius Agrippa and Dante their Poet two no great enemies but fast friends to Popish Religion Now if a man should bee constrained to sup vp whatsoeuer euery sottish Priest or idle Fryer or craftie Iesuite doth belch foorth without examining doubtlesse hee should sucke downe much poyson in stead of wholsome iuyce If they say that there is multiplicity of good Bookes written to this end to instruct the people in the grounds of Religion and to stirre them vp vnto godlines and deuotion I answere there is indeede a great number of such Bookes which are so farre from gendring sound knowledge that they are no better then baits of Antichrist seruing to allure men vnder shew of deuotion vnto Idolatry and Apostacie from God for if they were sound and true why should Gods Booke which without all question is most sound bee prohibited and they admitted Why is it not lawfull to examine them by that rule and why should all Bookes else which any thing make against their Religion be suppressed and by great penalties forbidden Surely this sheweth that all their Bookes of deuotion are but rotten stuffe and meere hypocriticall deuices to deceiue the simple 12. Lastly if they say that all our translations are false and erronious and therefore that our Bibles are not the word of God I answere that indeede it is impossible to haue a Translation so exact perfect that no fault nor imperfection shuld be found therin neuertheles the chief faults in our translations are for the most part in respect of proprietie of words and phrases which are nothing repugnant to holy doctrine or good life and not in any materiall or substantiall poynt of faith and those also are not frequent but heere and there dispersed which can no waies hinder the profite to be gathered by the rest of the Scripture and if for some corruption in translations the Bible should not bee read then none but the originall Hebrew and Greeke should bee in vse for all translations are imperfect yea their so much extolled vulgar authorized by the Councill of Trent wherein the Diuines of Louane obserued many errors and Isidorus Clarius a Spanish Monke professed that hee found eight thousand fau'ts though for his plaine dealing hee was plagued by the Inquisitors and after that it was decreed authenticall by the Councill a thing worth the noting yet it was corrected and castigated by the authority and commaundement of sixe Popes successiuely Nay the Hebrew and Greeke copies themselues should not bee permitted for euen they if wee will beleeue the Romanists are full of corruptions but as Bellarmine saith of the corruptions in the Hebrew text so wee may truely of the imperfections in our translations Non sunt tanti momenti vt inijs qu● ad fidem bonos more 's pertinent sacrae Scripturae integritas desideretur that is they are not of such moment that they can hinder the integrity of the Scripture in those things which pertaine to faith good manners 13. Moreouer besides all this it is no maruell if they contend for their vulgar Latine Bible that it should be onely authenticall seeing many Romish errors are thereby maintained which in the truth of ye●●● originall
doe so yet they must iudge of them no otherwise then by referring them to their ordinary Pastour which is the Pope to whose definitiue sentence they must yeeld full consent without further examination Nay he most shamefully affirmeth that if their ordinary Pastour teach a falshood and another that is not their Pastour teach the contrary truth yet the people ought to follow their Pastour erring rather then the other telling the truth And thus the poore people must rely al their knowledge vpon their Pastours and may not in any case examine and try their Spirits whether they be of God or no cleane contrary to the Precept of our Sauior Ioh. 5. 39. Search the Scriptures And to the practice of the Bereans who examined Pauls doctrine by the Scriptures And to the counsell of Saint Iohn to all To try the Spirits Now who seeth not that this confirmeth and cherisheth the people in ignorance For if they may not dispute about any matter of faith themselues nor heare others that are learned so to doe nor examine the doctrine of their ordinary Pastours but beleeue whatsoeuer they teach bee it true or false what remaineth but that they should lye and tumble in ignorance and superstition seeing the ordinary meanes of getting knowledge and finding out the truth is taken from them For when they are bound to swallow downe all the doctrines on the one side and may not so much as heare or read the reasons of the other nor weigh them together in the Ballance of iudgement how is it possible that they should euer finde out the truth 22. Wee confesse with Saint Paul that the weake are not to bee admitted to controuersies of disputation But what disputations Mary about needlesse questions touching matters indifferent as meat and drinke and difference of dayes as the Apostle explaineth himselfe in the same Chapter Or foolish and vnlearned questions that ingender strife and are not profitable to edification But if the disputation bee concerning matters of saluation and disquisition of a necessary truth then are none to bee excluded either from reasoning or hearing For Saint Peter requireth of euery man that hee be able to giue an answere to euery one that asketh a reason of the hope that is in him And therefore to dispute for what is to dispute but to giue a reason And our Sauiour disputed with the Pharises and Sadduces in the audience of the people touching the resurrection and the greatest Commandement of the Law and his humane and diuine nature And so likewise did Saint Paul with the Grecians and with the Iewes conuincing them by arguments out of the Scripture That Iesus was the Christ and that there was no way to saluation but by saith in his Name From such disputations as these none was debarred but euery one was and is bound to seeke a firme resolution that hee bee not carried about with euery winde of doctrine True it is euery simple man and woman ought not presently to rush out into arguments of disputation nor too peremptorily to talke of deep mysteries in Religion for then it may bee said vnto them as Saint Basill is reported to haue answered the Emperors Cook Tuum est de pulmentis cogitare non diuina dogmata concoquere It is thy part to looke to thy sauces and dainty dishes and not to boyle in thy shallow wit heauenly mysteries And therefore they must as Saint Ierome speaketh not lacerare Scripturam teare in pieces the Scriptures by their ignorant interpretations and applications of it Nor docere antequam didicerunt Teach others before they haue learned themselues But like Pythagoras schollers keepe silence long till they be wel grounded in knowledge neuerthelesse all this while they must not be barred from hearing others discourse of these high matters nor from reading their arguments pro contra nor at length also when they are come to some perfection from arguing and reasoning with the aduersary For this is the high way to knowledge and vnderstanding the Lord hauing promised to all those that pray vnto him and doe his will whether they bee Priests or people the illumination of his Spirit and power to discerne of doctrines They that deny therefore this liberty vnto the people doe barre them out from all sound knowledge and imprison them in a gaole of ignorance blindnesse and superstition 23. Lastly their braue doctrine touching Implicite faith doth tend to the same end and bring forth the fame effect and that more effectually then any of the rest For thus they teach that it is not necessary for a Layman to know anymore by a distinct knowledge saue some few capitall heads of Religion as that there is one God and three persons That Christ is come in the flesh and redeemed vs from our sinnes and shall com againe to iudge the quicke and the dead c. As for the rest it is sufficient to giue assent vnto the Church and beleeue as it beleeueth though they know not what it beleeueth yea that they are not bound expresly to beleeue all the Articles of the Apostles Creed which is notwithstanding nothing els but a briefe summe and Epitome of Christian Religion and one of the principall grounds of the Catechisme And this is the Colliers faith spoken of before so much commended by many of their greatest Clarks Now how can this but nourish most groffe ignorance For when the people are perswaded that such a short scantling of knowledge is sufficient and that it is enough for their saluatiō if in a reuerence to the Church they beleeue as it beleeueth what reason haue they either to labour to get any further knowledge or to increase and grow vp in that which they haue attained vnto Surely in matters of Religion so great is the auersenesse of our nature that wee are all so farre from endeuouring to get more then is needfull that few seeke for so much And therefore they that bound our knowledge within so narrow limits cherish this corruption and by speaking pleasing things vnto it lull it asleepe in the bed of ignorance But in the meane time how contrary is this to the word of God let the world indge seeing the Apostle prayeth for the Colossians that they might bee fulfilled with the knowledge of Gods will in all wisedome and spirituall vnderstanding and that they might increase in the knowledge of God Whereas these fellowes would haue Gods people to bee empty of knowledge and in stead of growing to stand at a stay resting vpon the supposed knowledge of the Church And whereas the same Apostle saith vnto the Thessalonians I would not haue you ignorant brethren speaking in the same place of very high and deepe mysteries as the state of the dead the resurrection and ast iudgement they on the contrary say to their people W●e would haue you ignorant brethren These things are so grosse and shamefull that if the Church of
thereof then surely it cannot bee lesse then an article of their faith or if that terme mislike him a generall Romish opinion which is enough for our purpose 35. Againe it is another article of the Romish faith that diuine seruice should bee in the Latin tongue this to be contrary to all antiquity I haue already declared a little before and therefore I thinke it not needfull here to repeate it onely this is to bee marked that till the Pope of Rome began to shew himselfe to be Antichrist that man of sinne the mystery of whose name is the number 666. which according to Irenaeus coniecture is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Till then I say this Latine seruice was not publikely receiued but euer since as if the Pope would discouer himselfe to bee that enemy pointed at by that Prophecy hee will haue all the prayers of the Church to bee Latin and hath fixed an Anathema vpon euery one that shall dare to affirme the contrary 36. Againe it is another doctrine of the Romish Religion that the Lay people may not read the Scriptures nor keepe them in their mother tongue which to bee contrary to the ancient custome of the Church three reasons demonstrate First their own confession for Azorius the Iesuite confesseth that the Scriptures in the Primitiue Church were to be published throughout all nations and therefore were made common by the three most common and famous languages and againe Wee confesse sayth he that in Ierome and Chrysostomes times the Lay people were exercised in reading the Scriptures because they were written in those languages which they vnderstood And Ledesima another Iesuite that the Bible was translated into the Latine tongue presently after the Apostles times and that to this end that all might vnderstand the Scriptures And Espensaeus sayth that it is manifest by the Apostles doctrine Col. 3. 16. and by the practice of the Church that the publike vse of reading the Scriptures was then permitted to the people And further that the Iewes instructed their children at fiue yeeres of age in the Scriptures and therefore that Christians might bee ashamed to be carelesse therein and this hee sayth was not onely his complaint but the complaint of the ancient Fathers And lastly Cornelius Agrippa affirmeth that it was a decree in the Nicene Councill that no Christian should be without a Bible Thus we haue a quadron of their owne Doctors acknowledging this to bee a nouelty 37. Secondly the generall consent of the Fathers demonstrate the same for the Councill of Nice as it is alledged before out of Agrippa decreed that no Christian should be without a Bible and Saint Augustine alloweth the vse of the Scriptures to all when hee sayth that they are not so hard but that euery one by his study and diligence may attaine to so much knowledge in them as shall further him in his saluation and Chrysostome in many places exhorteth all both men and women learned and ignorant yea very tradesmen to get Bibles and to read them for though they vnderstand not what they read yet they gaine to themselues some sanctity by the reading of them And Ierome perswadeth not onely men but women to fly to the mountaines of the Scriptures saying that though there be none to teach them yet their indeuour shall bee accepted of God and in another place hee sayth that Plato wrote not to the people but to a few for scarse three vnderstand his workes but Christ our Lord wrote by his Apostles not to a few but to the whole people Origen compareth the Scripture to Iacobs Well wherein drinke not onely Iacob and his children that is the learned but the sheepe and oxen that is the rude and simple Nazianzene affirmeth that Christians ought to read the Scriptures or if through ignorance they cannot then they must giue eare to others Many other testimonies I could alledge but these are I thinke sufficient to shew that in the age when these holy men liued this doctrine was neuer hatcht nor heard of and therefore must needs bee an addle egge of a later layer 38. Thirdly lastly the manifold translations of the Bibles into sundry languages proueth the same for to what end were they translated if they might not bee read This Saint Augustine affirmeth when hee sayth that the holy Scripture proceeding from one tongue beeing through the diuers tongues of interpreters farre and wide dispersed abroad became knowne to the Gentiles to their saluation And Theodoret as plainely The Hebrew bookes were translated into all languages which are at this day vsed in the world Chrysostome is confessed to haue translated some parts of the Scriptures into the Armenian tongue and Vlphias into the Gothicke Charles the fift caused them to be translated into the French tongue and Charles the great into the Germane Alfred king of this Island the Psalter into the English tongue and at this day the Moscouites Armenians Egyptians Ethiopians haue their publike prayers and Scripture in their vulgar and knowne tongues Now these ancient translations doe euidently proue this Romish doctrine to bee an Innouation 39. Againe it is another doctrine in the Romish faith that Priests and Ministers of the Gospell ought not to marry and that marriage is an inseparable impediment to holy orders some of them most grosly affirming that the vow of single life is so essentiall to Priesthood euen by the Law of God as that it is no more lawfull for any person to permit the Clergy to marry then to license a man to steale But they which speake more remissely say that though it bee a positiue Law yet it is Apostolicall and therefore ought to bee obserued in the Church inuiolably and the reason is giuen by Bellarmine Because great purity and sanctity is required in the office of sacrificing but in the act of marriage there is mixed a certain impurity and pollution which though it be not sinne yet it proceedeth from sinne and maketh a man carnall and so vnfit for diuine offices 40. This is their doctrine which to haue no ground in true antiquity first their own confessions beare witnesse and secondly the light of history For their confessions one of them sayth that marriage of Priests is not prohibited either by Legall Euangelicall or yet Apostolicall authority but by Ecclesiasticall onely another that many hundreth yeeres after the Apostles by reason of want of others Priests were marryed another that if wee exclude the Church Lawes and stand onely to that which wee haue from Christ it cannot bee prooued by any reason or authority that speaking absolutely a Priest sinneth in marrying or that holy order is an hinderance to marriage either as it is an order or as it is holy others that in the most ancient times of the Church and after the Apostles deaths Priests had their wiues And lastly their owne glosse and marginall obseruation
iudgement because there must be by their doctrine aswell contrition in heart as confession in the mouth or else no pardon can follow but a Priest cannot discerne of the heart Nay further many if not most of their Romish shauelings are vnable to iudge of the nature and qualitie of sin much more of the quantitie and degrees thereof so consequently can neither impose a iust or proportionable satisfaction without which no releasement nor make the partie vnderstand the ease hee standeth in that hee may take vpon himselfe voluntarie penance or if need bee purchase indulgence from the Pope In all which respects it is danger to trust our soules vpon such a slipperie foundation but hee that confesseth to God his sinnes and expecteth pardon at his hand onely is sure that hee discerneth the secrets of the heart and that he shutteth and no man openeth and openeth and no man shutteth and therefore if hee absolue though all the World condemne hee is on a sure ground and if hee condemne though all the World acquite hee is in a miserable case In this doctrine there is no vncertainty but strong comfort to the penitent sinner and terrour of conscience to the obstinate and vnrepentant 30. If they say that the absolution of a Priest is certaine vnlesse there bee a barre in him that confesseth because our Sauiour saith Whosoeuers sinnes you remit they are remitted and whosoeuers sinnes yee retaine they are retained I answer that first de facto the Priest may erre but God cannot Secondly he cannot choose but erre in absoluing if the penitent doe erre in confessing which hee is verie likely to doe and thirdly that when God purposeth to absolute a sinner no barie can hinder the performance thereof yea hee infuseth grace into his soule to hate his sinne and power to forsake it Is it not better then to trust vnto God then to man and safer to confesse our sinnes to him that hath absolute power to pardon them then to a Priest whose pardon depends vpon the vncertaintie of a mans true confession These things be so cleare that no reasonable man can doubt of the truth of them 31. Lastly confession to God hath manifest and vndeniable grounds in holy Scripture but auricular Romish confession to a Priest is by the iudgement of their greatest Clarkes taken vp onely by a tradition of the Church and not by any authoritie of the olde and new Testament witnesse their Canon Law Panormitane Peresius Petrus Oxoniensis Bonauenture Medina Rhenanus Erasmus with many more and though the new Iesuites and Rhemists auouch the contrarie yet they but therein crosse their fellowes as learned and wise as themselues and yet are not able to alleadge any one direct proofe of their opinion Now is it not a safer practice to build vpon Scripture then tradition that is vpon God then man And to chuse that kind of confession which no man doubteth to be warranted from God rather then that which the Patrones thereof themselues are at variance from whom it commeth who that hath eyes seeth not which of these is rather to be chosen 32. Touching Purgatorie it breedeth diuers dangerous consequences as to their holy Pope first who taketh vpon him to haue plenarie power ouer all creatures especially ouer the soules in Purgatorie which the Canonists call peculium Papae the Popes peculiar for it proueth him eyther to bee a lying Prophet or a cruell Tyrant if hee haue full power ouer them why doth hee let so many thousand poore soules lye frying there without release His suffering them to continue in that cruell torment argueth him either to want power to relieue them or mercie to put that power in execution both which are vnbeseeming qualities for Christs Vicar If they reply against this as Antoninus doth and say that in respect of his absolute Iurisdiction he may absolue all that are in Purgatorie but if we regard the orderly execution thereof in that respect the Pope may not nor ought so to doe I say againe But why ought hee not if it bee in his power is it for feare to fill Heauen too soone with Saints but that would be a great blessing for then the consummation of all things would the sooner come or is it for feare lest the iustice of God should be fully satisfied by a proportionable punishment But the Popes indulgence can helpe that for hee hath in his Treasure-house such a surplussage of Saints merits that can serue to make good whatsoeuer is wanting in their behalfe and the Pope by their doctrine hath authoritie to dispence dispose of these merits at his discretion Or is it for feare lest purgatorie should bee emptied and so hee should lose one part of his Kingdome But our Sauiour contented himselfe with heauen and earth to be vnder him and his dominion and Saint Paul attributes to his regiment things vnder earth that is in hell and wil his Vicar needs haue a larger dominion then his Master But indeed this is the true reason For if hee should make a goale deliuerie out of this infernall prison then his chiefest sway were gone yea and his reuenue too It stands vpon him therefore not to bee pleased to deliuer any out of these paines vnlesse he bee well pleased for his paines and if hee bee so then the soules shall flye out of that place to heauen in whole troupes as they say they did at the Prayer of a certaine holy man c. In their leaden Legend this danger lighteth vpon the head of their head the Pope which according to their doctrine can by no meanes be auoided it were better then for him to forgoe his profit which ariseth by purgatorie then to vndergoe such foule discredit 33. Another dangerous consequence ariseth hencefrom to all the professors of Religion in generall that is a feareful presumption and securitie of sinning when they are perswaded that after this life they may be released from the paines of purgatorie by the prayers almesdeeds Masses and other meritorious workes of the liuing for who would bee afraid to sinne or carefull to make his saluation sure in this life with feare and trembling when hee beleeueth that by giuing a summe of monie at his death for Masses and dirges to be sung for his soule he shall be certainly deliuered out of purgatory This must needs cast men into manifest presumption if not of all sinnes yet of veniall sinnes and ordinarie offences which are to be purged by that fire as they teach Is not our doctrine more sound and safe that informeth vs that such as die in their sinnes sinke downe to the lowest Hell as hopelesse after death to bee relieued by anything that can bee done for their sakes by the liuing doth not this teach men betimes to bee wise and to finish vp the worke of their saluation before the night come and make their peace with God whilest they are here in the way of
the child before it bee baptized is in some sort partaker of the Sacrament of Baptisme euen by the faith of the Church which hath vowed him thereunto And Bonauenture as hee is reported by Cassander sayth that infants are disposed vnto Baptisme not according to any act of their owne but according to the act of other because the mercie of God imputeth to them as their owne will the will of another Insants therefore stand still in as good case in euery respect as men of yeares if not in better both being vnbaptized and the one dedicated to God by their owne desire the other by the purpose desire of the Church and therefore either these may bee saued aswell as they or else God is not so mercifull to them as to these which is no lesse then impietie to thinke and blasphemie to pronounce 38. Another wicked consequence that followeth vpon this doctrine is that it maketh God the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost euen that blessed Trinitie that is the fountaine of all truth and goodnesse to be lyars and teachers of vntruth For God the Father sayth to Abraham I will bee thy God and the God of thy seed And that this is not to bee vnderstood of the seed of Abraham according to the flesh onely to wit the Iewes but much more of his seed according to the Spirit which are faithfull Christians may appeare both by that which is in the verie same place where it is called an euerlasting couenant and by Saint Pauls testimonie who affirmeth that the blessing of Abraham was to come on the Gentiles through Christ Iesus aswell as on the Iewes God the Sonne sayth Suffer little children to come vnto me for of such is the Kingdome of Heauen plainly affirming that the Kingdome of Heauen is pertaining to little children and not barred vp against any as our Romanists teach it is against such little ones as dye without baptisme Our Sauiour saith without exception that the Kingdome of Heauen belongeth vnto them they as it were to make him a lyar bring in an exception and say that except they bee baptized not Heauen but Lymbus belongeth vnto them And the holy Ghost by the mouth of Saint Paul sayth That the children of beleeuing Parents are holy the reason is because the root is holy and therefore the branch must needs be holy and if children may be holy before they be baptized then by the same rule they may goe to Heauen before they be baptized for as no man without holinesse can see God so with holinesse none can be banished out of the sight of God And thus this doctrine giueth the lye to euery person of the blessed Trinitie 39. If they say that it is our Sauiours doctrine that except a man be borne againe of water and the holy Ghost hee cannot enter into the Kingdome of Heauen and therefore all those generall promises are to bee restrained by this exception if they bee baptized I answere out of Bellarmine that God is not tyed to his Sacraments but can saue them by his especiall grace as also witnesse diuers others of their learned Doctours And therefore whereas our Sauiour saith Except a man be borne againe c. it must needs be vnderstood by another exception to wit of cases of necessitie where Baptisme cannot be obtained and is not contemned for not the want but the contempt of Baptisme is damnable 40. The third and last inconuenience that ariseth from this doctrine is that it is the mother of diuers strange paradoxes and grosse absurdities as not onely of Lay mens Baptisme yea of Pagans and that in scorne but also of changing the true element into lee or broth or puddle water and that which is most strange of baptizing the childe in the mothers wombe before it bee borne or ripping vp the mothers belly in case the child be in danger of death c. some of all which absurdities are held by them all and all by some Is it not then more safe to hold that opinion which is more respectiue to Gods glorie agreeable to Christian charitie and free from all these dangerous consequences 41. To conclude omitting many other of their doctrines which might easily bee shewne to stand in the same case of dangerous tenure and hath in part alreadie beene manifested as their doctrine of set fasts implicite faith veniall sins dispensations with others more I propound for the last instance that doctrine of doctrines the verie groundcell of their ruinous Religion touching the veritie authoritie and singularitie of their Church which they vaunt and bragge to be the onely true Catholike Church of Christ and to haue a preeminence ouer the Scriptures and without the which to be no possibilitie of saluation that there is no safetie in these positions many reasons will euince as first if it should bee true that out of the bounds of that Church none could bee saued then those famous Churches of Asia which were in Pope Victors time that opposed themselues against the predominance of the Church of Rome were all damned wherein flourished many holy Martyrs that gaue vp their liues for the testimonie of Iesus Then Saint Cyprian and all the Bishops of Carthage to the number of fourescore that in a Councell at Carthage set themselues against Pope Stephen and his Councell were damned and Saint Cyprian must bee no longer a Martyr but a Schismaticke and then S. Augustine with the whole Church of Africa and troupes of Martyrs and Confessors should not bee crowned with blisse but tormented in hell for they reiected the yoke of the Bishop of Romes authoritie and would not admit that any should make appeales from them to Rome This horrible and vncharitable inconuenience doth arise from that dismall doctrine The Church of Rome is the onely Catholike Church and out of it there is no hope of saluation now that these holy and heauenly Martyrs and Confessors of Iesus Christ were out of it appeareth by their most receiued definitions of a Catholike and a Schismaticke A Catholike faith Bellarmine is he that is subiect to the one Pastor the Pope whereby hee mak●th the essentiall forme of a Catholike to be his vnion and coniunction with his head the Pope and a Schismatike sayth Tollet is hee that doth separate himselfe from the head of the Church and the Vicar of Christ I assume but Cyprian Augustine and those other famous Bishops did not acknowledge any subiection to the Pope but separated themselues from his dominion therefore they were by their doctrine no Catholickes but Schismatickes and consequently out of the Church and so out of saluation a damnable conclusion 42. Secondly they peremptorily auouch that none of vs being not members of their Church can bee saued we on the contrarie charitably beleeue that many of them that are ignorantly members of their Church if they hold the foundation of Iesus Christ and depend vpon his merits not their owne