of Christ by the Euangelists and Apostles as by his Pen-men or Notaries How is the Scripture diuided in respect of that authority it hath in prouing So it is diuided into the bookes which are Canonicall and those which are not Canonicall but Apocryphall Which doe you call the Canonicall Books Syst Theol. pag. 169. item p. 173. Hi constituūt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost Those which are of vndoubted authority in prouing the Articles of Faith or which are the Square and Rule of our faith for Canonicall is deriued from Canon which signifieth as much as a Rule or Square Of what sort are the Canonicall books Of two sortes either of the Old or of the New Testament Which Books of the Old Testament are Canonicall The Canonicall Scripture of the old Testament is diuided into foure rancks Syst The. pag. 182. the first containeth the fiue Bookes of Moses the second those Bookes which are called Historicall as these Joshua Iudges Ruth the two Bookes of Samuel the two Bookes of Kings the two Bookes of the Chronicles the Bookes of Esdras Nehemiah Ester The third Bookes which are written in verse which are called Poeticall as these Job the Psalmes of Dauid the Prouerbs of Salomon Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs the fourth comprehendeth the Prophets which are either greater Prophets in number foure or lesser to wit twelue Which Bookes of the New Testament are Canonicall The Canonicall Scripture of the New Testament is diuided into the History of the Euangelists the Acts of the Apostles the Apostles Epistles and the Prophecy or Reuelation of John Which are called Apocriphall or not Canonicall Syst Theol. pag. 190. Which are not of infallible truth and authority in prouing the Articles of faith and consequently which are not the Rule and Square of our beliefe but containe precepts of life and historicall instructions Which are those Apocryphall Bookes Among the Bookes of the Old Testament as wee haue before said there are some found not to bee Canonicall such as the Booke of Tobias Iudith Wisedome which falsly is ascribed to Salomon Ecclesiasticus or Syracides the third and fourth bookes of Esdras all the Bookes of the Maccabees Baruch with Ieremy his Epistle the Prayer of Manasses the fragments of Ester the additions to Daniel as is the Song of the three Children the Historie of Susanna the Historie of Bell and the Dragon None of all these Bookes are to be found in the Hebrew tongue in which Language onely God would haue the Bookes of the Old Testament to bee written neither were they written by the Prophets or any person immediately called of God Neither doth Christ the Euangelists or the Apostles cite them at any time and to conclude there bee many vntruths in them Wherefore when the Papists vrge any thinge out of these Bookes against vs wee must answer that those Bookes containe not the infallible Word of God and consequently that they haue no firme force or validity in prouing How is the Scripture diuided in respect of the matter it handleth Into the Law and the Gospell for that part of Gods Word is called the Law wherein wee are taught what we ought to doe but the Gospell is that part of Gods Word wherein we are taught what we ought to beleeue and consequently wherein wee haue the remission of our sins promised vs by faith in Christ I haue heard sufficiently touching the diuision of the Word of God J pray you also instruct mee in the proprieties of it That will I willingly doe so I first admonish you that hereafter wee shall alwaies take the holy Scripture for the Canonicall Bookes onely and not at all for the Apocryphall VVhat is the first proprietie of the holy Scripture The first propriety is that it deriues all its authority from God alone Syst Theol. pag. 171. not from the assembly of godly men which is called the Church How proue you this I proue it by these reasons first the testimony of God hath not any authority from men The Scripture is the testimony of God alone Ergo. It hath none authority from men yea the most holy men that bee and consequently not from the Church which is nothing else but a company of godly and sanctified men The force and pith of the argument you shall finde 1 Ioh. 5.9 If wee receiue the witnes of men the testymonie of God certainely is greater Secondly that must needs be before the Scripture in naturall order of which the authority of the Scripture dependeth But the Church is not before the Word of God Ergo. The Maior proposition is euident because that which dependeth of another must needs come after that on which it dependeth The Minor is thus prooued That which is gathered gouerned regenerated by the Word or by the Scripture that is in order after the Scripture But the Church Ergo. The Maior is plaine the Minor is prooued by 1 Pet. 1.23 Wee are regenerated and borne anew by the word of God Iames 1.18 He hath begotten vs by the word of truth Ioh. 17.20 Which by their word shall beleeue in me Thirdly the foundation of any building depends not on the roofe or vpper roomes which are built vpon the foundation but contrarily those same vpper roomes and the roofe depend vpon the foundation but the Word of God is the foundation Ergo. The Maior is plaine in it selfe The Minor is confirmed by that Ephes 2.20 You are built vpon the foundation of the Profits and Apostles Obict The Papists obiect to vs that place 1 Tim. 3.15 Where the Church is said to be the pillar and ground of truth Whereto we answer Answ that this argument is sophisticall or a fallacie commonly called a Dicto secundum quid a dictum simpliciter For the Church is not called the piller and ground of truth in regard of it selfe but in regard of Christ the head who is that corner stone And further it is so called in regard it is the keeper of the Scripture Syst Theol pag. 181. forsomuch as God hath made the Church onely to haue to doe with the treasurie of his Word and in the Church as on the piller and doore of his house or pallace he hangeth those holy Tables which euery man must go thither to read No otherwise then the Magistrate hangeth vp on pillars and gates of his Court Tables containing in them his Lawes and Decrees to the end that his Subiects may there reade them as in a publike place Lastly the Church is called the Pillar of Truth in this respect because that God vseth the testimony of the Church as his instrument and meanes for the proposing teaching and expounding of the holy Scriptures vnto men for the Ministers of the Church are the conseruers of truth and the interpreters of the Scriptures yet not so as if the authority of the Scripture did depend on them but because God vseth them as his seruants and Ministers to propound and to beate into the memories of
men his holy Scripture euen as a Prince vseth a Cryer for the promulgation of his lawes vnto his Subiects And here take this similitude with you a man goeth to the Vniuersitie as vnto the very shop and store-house of Learning yet hereupon it followeth not that the truth of that learning we are taught there in the Vniuersitie doth depend on the authority of the Vniuersity Besides this must aâ—so be obserued that whatsoeuer the Papists say tovching the authority of her Church aboue the Scripture doth nothing at all profit them but that they manifestly beg the point in question whilest they thus argue The Church hath authority aboue the Scriptures The Pope of Rome is the Church Ergo. For suppose wee grant them their Maior which notwithstanding is false as wee haue manifestly proued yet they are neuer able to prooue their Minor as shall bee showne anone more distinctly VVhat is the second propriety of the word of God or the holy Scripture Syst Theol. pag. 176. That it bee intire perfect and sufficient to saluation which is prooued by that Ioâ— 20.30 Many other signâ— did Jesus which are not writteâ— in this Booke but these thinges are written that you may beleeue that Jesus is the Christ that Son of God that you beleeuing might haue life by his name Out of which place â— thus reason That which is sâ— written that by it wee may beleeue in Christ Iesus and sâ— obtaine eternall life that 〈◊〉 say is sufficient to life eternall But the Scripture is so written Ergo. Againe thence I thus argue The holy Scripture was written to this end that wee might beleeue in the Sonne of God and get eternall life Ergo. Whatsoeuer Word is not written profiteth or auaileth vs nothing to faith to eternall life which must diligently bee noted against the errour of the Papists which say there are two words of God Quod non legi vsurpare non debeo Amb. Non sum alioruÌ„ sermonum discipulus nisi coelestium Origen the one written the other vnwritten vpon which pretence they will needs obtrude vnto vs Traditions which they call Apostolicall the Decrees of the Popes and the custome of the Church Of which the Councell of Trent in the fourth Session thus speaketh Whosoeuer doth not with like affection of mind reuerence the Traditions of the Church as hee doth the holy Scriptures let him bee accursed But against those Traditions first note the sufficiency of the Scriptures Secondly this argument The Traditions of the Chuâ—ch either agree with the holy writ or they dissent from it If they be coâ—sonant to it then they say the selfe same thing thâ— Scripture saith and so theâ— are Scripture for that oughâ— not in all reason to be done bâ— mâ—â— which may bee performed by fewer Or they dissenâ— from the Scripture as all thâ— Traditions of the Popes as namely that Tradition wherby the Cup in the Lords Supper is prohibited to be administred vnto the lay people and such like And if they disagree with the Scripture they cannot fill vp the Scripture for that which is repugnant to any thing doth not fill vp but rather quite ouerthrow it Another testimony of the perfection of the holy Scripture is most manifest in the 2 Tim. 3.16 The whole Scripture is giuen by inspiration from God and is profitable to teach to reprooue to correct to instruct that the man of God may be perfect and perfectly instructed to euery good worke From whence wee may frame these arguments First the Scripture is a totum an intire thing Ergo it is perfect for a totum is that which wanteth no necessary parts Secondly that which sufficeth vs for doctrine Adoro plenitudinem ScripturaruÌ„ Tertul. for reproofe for correction and instruction that is full compleate for there is none that can shew any thing besides whereunto the Scripture should bee profitable But the Scripture is sufficient to those things Ergo. Thirdly that which maketh a man perfect and furnished to euery good worke that same must needs be perfect but thâ— Scripture doth so Ergo. The Maior is therefore true because there is no effect which is more perfect then its cause or because a perfect effect presupposeth the cause to be perfect and nothing can giue that to another which it hath not it selfe if the Scripture therefore make men perfect then it must also be perfect VVhat is the third propriety of the holy Scripture That in the Articles of faith Syst Theol. pag. 199. which are necessary to saluation it bee plaine easie and perspicuous easie I say and perspicuous first in respect of them to whom 〈◊〉 ought to bee a light for theâ— saluatioÌ„ according vnto thâ— 2 Cor. 4.3 If our Gospell be hid it is hid to them which perish whence it necessarily followes that the Gospell is not hid but cleare and open to those which doe not perish as Peter saith 2 Pet. 1.19 You doe well in that you attend to the word of the Prophets as vnto a light that shineth in a darke place Psal 19.7.8 The word of God is cleare Psal 119.105 The word of God is a light to our feete and steppes Secondly the Scripture is easie as it is an instrument which it hath deriued to it from the principall guide the holy Spirit who is that true teacher and interpreter of the Scripture Ioh. 14.26 The Aduocate which is the holy Ghost he shall teach you all things 1 Ioh. 2.27 That annointing that is the holy spirit teacheth vs of all things Also Ioh. 16.13 When that spirit of truth shall come he shall leade you in all truth Lastly it is easie if that in the handling of it wee vse conuenient meanes and expound one place by another according to the rules of good and lawfull exposition which you may reade in the 201. page of my Systeme of Diuinitie If then any shall demand Syst Theol. pag. 201. who hath the authority to interpret the Scripture if the Pope of Rome be he I answer that euery one is the best interpreter of his owne words whereas therefore the Scripture is the Word of God and of the holy Ghost and not of the Pope of Rome therefore the holy Spirit hath the authority to interpret as that true aduocate and teacher of verity But why then doth the Bishop of Rome chalenge to himselfe this authority to interpret the Scriptures I answer because he knowes well enough how bad his cause is and therefore dares not submit his Tenents to the Word of God or the Scripture if it be rightly vnderstood and therefore will he wrest and stretch the scriptures at his owne pleasure Touching which poynt I would haue you note the words of a certaine Apostate from the faith Casper Schoppius Papist who is now at Rome with the Pope hee in that Epistle he wrot touching his defection from vs vnto the Papists about sixe yeares agoe set out at Ingolstadium in the 24 page saith thus The
summe of all controuersies betwixt the Catholickes and the Lutherans consists in these two things that besides the holy Scripture the Traditions of the Apostles and of the Church are necessary to bee beleeued And that the holy Scriptures themselues neither can nor ought to be interpreted of any with authority saue of the Catholike Roman Church In which two doctrines if one be once perswaded and setled hee will easily yeeld aioyne himselfe to the Church of Rome in the rest of the chiefe points of faith For if I were to dispute with the Heretikes about any article of faith it must needs be that there be somewhat set downe in the Bible touching my opinion or that there bee nothing at all to be found for it If there be nothing in the Bible forme presently then I say that it was wont so to be obserued by tradition from the Apostles in the Church of Rome But if there be somewhat contained in the Bible touching mine opinion and the Heretique will interpret it another way then might serue my turne then presently I oppose to him the Church of Rome that it hath so interpreted it so that euery Dispute ought to bee reduced to these two heads Thus farre he And truly this is it that the Pope of Rome labors for that hee may wrest the Scripture as seemeth him good and then it is as if any offering to fight with another and the weapon should be a sword he would fight vpon this condition that hee may be suffered to weild his aduersaries Sword as hee will And so it is likewise as if any would haue a suite in Law tryed before the Iudge according to the lawes but vpon this condition that it may be lawfull for him to interpret the Law on his owne side iust so the Pope doth for hee saith I will dispute with you out of the Scripture but so that it may bee lawfull for mee to interpret the Scripture on mine owne behalfe I would haue this also noted that if the Papists demaund who is the Iudge in the controuersies of faith Wee answer Syst The. pag. 174. item p. 203. that the chiefe and highest Iudge of controuersies of faith is he who is the Author both of faith and of the scripture to wit the holy Ghost According to that of Ioh. 16.8 When the Comforter shall come he shall reprooue he will iudge the world of sinne And then only the Scripture to bee the Law and Sentence of this Iudge according where vnto iudgment must be giuen concerning cōtrouersies of faith as it doth manifestly appeare by Ioh. 5.45 There is one who accuseth you euen Moses i. e. the writings of Moses which giue iudgement against you and yet more manifestly Ioh. 12. vers 48. He that reiecteth and receiueth not my words hath one that iudgeth him This word c It is not true therefore which the Pope of Rome saith that hee is the chiefe Iudge and decider of controuersies for he is not fit to bee a iudge who is accused and found guilty of deprauing and falsifying the Word of God I haue heard you sufficiently about the former sort of knowledge of Christian Religion or touching the principles of Diuinitie to wit God and Gods word Now I desire to bee instructed in the second kinde of knowledge arising from the former that is touching tthe parts of this heauenly Doctrine which doth spring from the doctrine which is of God and of the holy Scripture You tell mee right and I perceiue you well vnderstand the method and progresse which ouhgt to be obserued in vnderstanding the doctrine of Religion and therefore now will I instruct you touching the parts of Diuinity or Christian Religion How many parts hath this secondarie or deriued knowledge Two whereof the forme is of the end it selfe the latter is of the meanes that leade vs to that end What is the end of Diuinitie Saluation or life euerlasting How many waies is the saluation of man considered Two manner of waies either as it is perfect and compleate or as it is but begunne and imperfect or either in respect of the life to come or of this present life What is perfect and eternall saluation It cōsisteth in three things Syst Theol. pag. 110. First In most absolute perfection of body and soule Secondly In that vnutterable ioy wherewith wee shall triumph before God the holy Angels and godly men Thirdly In that most euident Maiestie glory and honor wherein wee shall triumph ouer death Sathan sinne and sinfull men And this is that which Peter saith 2. Pet. 1. v. 4. We shall be made pertakers saith he of the diuine nature of diuine perfection ioy and glory And Phil. 3. vers 21. Christ shall transforme our base body that it may be like the glorious body of Christ Esay 64. vers 4. 1 Cor. 2. vers 9. The things which the eye hath not seene nor the eare heard nor euer entred into the heart of man to conceiue are those which God hath prepared for them that loue him What is imperfect saluation or that which is begonne onely It is a taste of eternall saluation Syst Theol. pag. 211. V pag. hic 115. seqq or that comfort and ioy of conscience which wee haue in this life arising from the forgiuenes of our sins and from that confidence we haue towards God whom we certainely know to bee reconciled vnto vs by Christ Iesus so that no calamity whatsoeuer can be able to seperate vs from his loue no not death it selfe or that anxity and horror which vsually wee feele a◠the houre of death Of this the Apostle speaketh Rom. 5. uers 1. Therefore being iustified by faith we haue peace e. i. a ioyfull and merry conscience in the very midst of callamity and death Rom. 8. vers 35. Who shall seperate vs from the loue of Christ shall oppression shall anguish c. I see now what the end is I may expect to reape from this heauenly doctrine which how much the more it is desirable so much the more J long to know the meanes by which I may be conducted to this end The meanes whereby thou maist com to this most desired end are two First Partes Theologiae duae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Naziaenzen Syst Theol. pag. 212. the knowledge of thy misery Secondly of thy redemption out of that misery The former part of this heauenly science touching the diseases of the Soule How may I come by the right knowledge of my misery or of the sores of my soule If thou shalt weigh well with thy selfe these foure things First that which went before thy misery Secondly the efficient cause of thy misery Thirdly the parts of thy misery Fourthly the exemplary cause or glasse wherein thou hast represented vnto thee thy misery What is that which went before the miserie of mankinde Quanto videmus maiora fuisse bona quae amisimus tanto grauiora cognoscemus
may be punished for that sinne man had committed the Iustice of God requiring that it should be so as it is said Ezech. 18. verse 4 That soule that hath sinned euen that shall die Secondly Homo debuit sed non potuit Deus potuit sed non debuit c. O sapientia potens attingens vbique fortiter O potentia sapiens disponens omnia suauiter Bern. Non satiabar dulcedine mirabilâ— considerare altitudinem consilii tui super salutem generis humani August Because no creature no not the Angels are able to escape and free themselues out of eternall punishment Whereupon it followeth that it was requisite that he who should satisfie the Iustice of God for our sinnes should bee truly God and truly man Man he was to bee because man had sinned and therefore Gods Iustice so requiring he that should pay and smart he must be man as it is said Heb 9.22 Without shedding of blood there is no remission of sinnes wherefore that Christ might shedde blood it was meete he should be man And he was to be God too First that by the power of his diuinitie hee might vndergoe the infinite anger of God against the sinn of mankinde with which anger Christ should certainely haue beene ouerwhelmed Opus siâ—e exemple gratia sine merito charitas sine modo Bern. O foelix culpa quae taleÌ„ tantum meruit redemptoreÌ„ if hee had beene but bare man Because God is a consuming fire Deut. 4. vers 24. and therefore as man hee desireth the cup of his Passion might bee taken away from him as being that which hee could not beare as he was man And as man hee cryeth out vpon the Crosse Oh God why hast thou forsaken me Secondly It was needefull that he should be truly God who would satisfie for our sinnes that his suffering and punishment might be of infinite worth and so equiualent to eternall damnation For because we by our sinnes had deserued not only Temporall but Eternall punishment it was necessary that hee whâ— would take in hand our deliuerance should vndergoe not the temporall punishment alone but the eternall too the Eternall not by reason of the extent and continuance of it but in value and equiualence that is his punishment was to bee equiualent to eternall punishment or to haue an equall proportion with eternall punishment But no mans punishment can equalize eternall punishment but only of him who is himselfe eternall who is truly God whereupon the Fathers said very rightly and deuoutly For God to suffer it is more then for all men to bee damned eternally Thirdly Because the satisfaction must needs haue been of infinite worth and value to the end it might sufficiently serue for the purging and ransoming of all mens sinnes But none there is that can worke such a satisfaction of infinite value vnlesse hee himselfe bee infinite that is God What is the second propriety of Christs Passion That it was truly expiatory and satisfactory that is our sinnes by vertue of Christs expiation were forgiuen vs. Which must bee noted 1 against the Samosatenians who blasphemously say that the Passion of Christ was only exemplary that is that Christ by his Passion would giue vs only an example to obey God in all things and to beare the Crosse which God shall lay vpon vs patiently as Christ before vs patiently did beare his Crosse This dangerous doctrine that throweth our consciences headlong into the pit of despaire arose from no other spring then the deniall of the God-head of the Sonne of God For because there was none could satisfie for our sinnes except he were God as we haue also a little before prooued and the Samosatenians deny Christ to be truly God therefore no far lie was it if they thought that the Passion of Christ was not satisfactory but only exemplary But to their blasphemies wee oppose First the Diuinity of the Son of God prooued and euicted already by euident testimonies to wit when we concluded this necessarily that Christ who suffered for vs was the Sonne of God and hence it will follow that his suffering was of infinite valour and consequently that it was satisfactorie Secondly most apparent testimonies of holy writ Esa 53. vers 4. Hee himselfe carried and bare our infirmities truly and vers 5. He was tormented for our sinnes and hee was broken for our iniquities Rom. 5 vers 9. Now then being iustified by his blood wee shall bee saued 2 Cor. 5. vers 18. All these things are of God who hath reconciled vs vnto himselfe by Jesus Christ and vers 21. He made him who knew no sinne to be sinne for vs. 1 Tim. 2. v. 5.6 There is one God one Mediatour of God and men euen the man Christ Iesus who gaue himselfe a price of our Redemption an example is one thing and a price or ransome is another thing Galat. 2. vers 20. The Sonne of God hath giuen himselfe for me for if righteousnesse be by the Law then Christ died without a cause as if hee had said Christ dyed to that end that by his death hee might bestow on vs righteousnesse in satisfying Gods Iustice thereby for our offences But there is a very plaine place Gal. 3. ver 13. Christ redeemed vs from the curse of the Law when hee was made a curse for vs for it is written cursed is hee that hangeth on the tree 1 Iohn 1. verse 7. The blood of Iesus Christ the Sonne of God purgeth vs from all our sinnes 1. Iohn 2. verse 2. Hee is the propitiation for our sinnes These are most pregnant places of Scripture for this point whereunto wee may adde this argument If the Passion of Christ was but exemplarie surely he would neuer haue cryed out with a loud voice My God my God why hast thou forsaken me for those words are not set downe as an example for vs to follow nay rather we ought to doe quite contrary to them euen to haue alwaies sure confidence in God and neuer to thinke or cry out that we are forsaken of him as it is said Rom. 8. vers 15. wee must cry Abba Father in thee doe I settle my soule Againe if the Passion of Christ was but exemplary how were then the Fathers saued which were before Christ and so had not his example and how was the thiefe saued that could not imitate Christ in his example whereas he was now hanged on the Crosse as wel as Christ and that before his conuersion Secondly this same propriety of Christs Passion must be noted against all such as attribute the purging of their sinnes and the merit of the forgiuenesse of them to almes-deeds or other works of their owne for if so be that there is no remission of sinnes but by shedding of blood as wee haue shown before and almes-deeds or other workes euen the best of theÌ„ shed no blood certainely then by no works of ours whatsoeuer can there bee wrought expiation or remission of
est Petrus dicens tu es Christus filius Dei viui Non enim dictum est ei Tu es Petra sed tu es Petrus Petra autem erat Christus quem confessus Simō dictus est Petrus Aug. which hee setteth out by a Paranomasie or allusion vnto the name of Peter as if he said I rightly set vpon thee the name of Peter see the first Chapter of Iohn where Christ gaue Peter his name because thou in the name of the other Apostles hast made such a confession and vttered such a doctrine as vpon which as it were on a Rock my Church shall bee builded First then Christ commendeth Peter in the person of Peter all the Apostles for that they beleeued Christ to be the Sonne of God Secondly hee sheweth the profit and fruit of that confession to wit for that this doctrine and confession was to bee the foundation whereupon Christs Church should bee built so that it should neuer bee ouerturned by Satan Otherwise that Peter neuer vnderstood these words of himselfe as if hee were that stone or Rocke vpon which the Church is reared he himselfe professeth openly 1 Pet. 2.4 where hee saith that Christ is that very stone vpon the which the Church was to bee built The fourth errour is that they take for certaintie than Peter was Bishop of Rome and so consequently that hee was at Rome which not withstanding is vncertaine neither can it be firmely proued that Peter was euer at Rome but the contrary for that place which before wee cited Gal. 2. is very remarkable namely in that Paul did so deuide the Apostleship and part it with Peter they shaking hands on the motion that Paul should goe to the Gentiles to conuert them and Peter should labour in the conuersion of the Iewes This promise the right hand being giuen vpon it Peter should haue broke if hee had gone to Rome to conuert the Gentiles neither doe we reade that two Apostles went into the same Citie especially it being so farre off to preach the Gospell Wherefore sithence by the confession of all it is apparent that Paul preached the Gospel at Rome what neede was there that Peter should come thither especially at the very same time As the Papists say that they were both at Rome in Nero his time II. Out of the last Chapter of the second to Timoth v. 16. In my first defence saith Paul when I appeared before Nero there was none that stood to mee but all forsooke me I pray God it be not laid to their charge But if Peter had then beene Bishop of Rome as the Papists will haue it what a disgracefull thing had it been and vnworthy a Bishop to forsake his brother and his owne companion Bellarm. saith that Peter was at that time gone abroad to visite the Churches But wee answer that it was not meete that he should goe away then when hee should haue assisted his brother but should rather haue put off the visitation vnto some other time which hee would haue done doubtlesse if hee had beene at Rome Againe I say that Bellarm. coines that answer of his because he neither backs it with any place of Scripture nor of any Historian but speaketh it out of his owne braine III. This may be concluded by the circumstance of time for they say that Peter was 25 yeares at Rome and 7 yeares at Antiocheia which make 32 yeares and yet they say that Peter was crucified at Rome vnder Nero and that hee came to Rome the 2 of Claudius the Emperour Now Claudius raigned but 13 yeares and Nero 13 so that both their Regiments lasted but 26 yeares Secundum Hieronym how then could Peter come the 2 of Claudius and continue 27 yeares Bishop of Rome and yet be crucified vnder Nero IV. We say that Eusebius and Hierome who are of that opinion doe not agree with themselues yea and Hierome especially manifestly contradicts himselfe For when as hee in one place had said that Peter was crucified vnder Nero afterward expounding those words of Ch. Mat. 23. Luk. 11.49 Behold I send unto you Prophets c. Flatly affirmes that Peter was crucified by the Iewes at Ierusalem When the Ancients therefore are opposite vnto themselues hereby it may appeare that they knew no certainetie in this point and consequently we see how much we are to detest the impudencie of the Popes which set downe for certainety that Peter was Bishop of Rome The fift errour is that they inferre the Pope of Rome to bee Peters successour for first there is no sure ground to euince that Peter was euer at Rome how then could the Pope of Rome succeed Peter Secondly if wee grant this to the Papists out of pitty Calu. Instit l. 4. c. 7. §. 23 that Peter was at Rome yet it doth not follow that the Pope of Rome was Peters successour for the Turke also hath his seate at Constantinople notwithstanding it doth not follow that the Turke is the lawfull Emperour of the East or of Greece the Emperours before hauing their lawfull residency and abode at Constantinople for the place makes not the succession lawfull but two things there bee which make lawfull succession first the power giuen of God secondly the imitation of the Predecessors in life and manners As Cyprian saith in a certaine place and after him Ambrose and Hierome Cathedram Petri non tenet qui fidem Petri non tenet True succession is succession in doctrine and hee cannot bee said lawfully to hold the Chaire of Peter who holdeth not the doctrine of Peter But neither of these the Pope of Rome hath first whence will hee proue that God hath giuen him that power to sit at Rome as the Monarch of the Church surely hee cannot bring so much as one letter out of the Scripture of God to proue this nay Christ inioyned the contrary to his Disciples to wit that one of them should not desire to bee aboue another 2. The true succession which is in doctrine the Pope of Rome hath not for if the Decrees of the Pope and the Epistles of Peter be compared together there will appeare as great difference betwixt them as betwixt light and darkenesse yea we are about to proue by and by that the Pope of Rome is the Ringleader of Idolaters so farre is he off from being Peters successor in Doctrine Which be the members of the Church They bee all the Faithfull which doe beleeue in Christ vnto eternall life for they all are vnited to Christ euen as the members of our body vnto their head They are vnited I say by the holy Spirit who produceth such like motions in them as are in the humane nature of Christ assumed that is hee maketh that the Faithfull become partakers of the Sacerdotall Propheticall and Regall power which is in Christ About which matter Peter Epist 1. c. 2. v. 9. speaketh most sweetly You are a chosen generation a royall Priesthood a holy Nation a people
say the Papists doe not worship Images and we know that it is said in the second Commandement Thou shalt not bow downe thy selfe vnto them c. To this what shall we answer but that they say one thing and doe another for wee haue already proued that they fall downe and worship the Crosse Behold the signe of the Crosse come and let vs worship it Againe it is impossible that ones whole affection should bee bent and setled on an Image and yet that he should not direct some deuotion vnto the Image as one of the Ancients hath well said Jt cannot possible bee Placuit picturas in ecclesia esse non debere ne quod colitur aut adoratur in parietib pingatur Concil Elibert that the affection should be withdrawne from that wheron our whole sense is fixed and fastned Therefore Lactantius saith that there can bee no true worship performed where it is done with respect vnto Images Thirdly wee say that both these are equally forbidden of God namely the worshipping of the Image it selfe and the worshipping of God at 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Atha Quis ergo iste honor Dei est per lapideas ligneas formas discurrere inanes atque examines figurastanquam numina venerari hominem in quo vereâ— imago Dei est spernere Clem. Rom. or before an Image For this you haue a plaine place Leu. 26.1 You shall make you none Idols nor grauen Image neither reare you vp any pillar neither shall you set vp any stone or image within your Land to worship before it for I am Jehouah the Lord your God But Images say they are Lay-mens Bibles and therefore they may be borne with as certaine historicall documeÌ„ts for the good of lay people whereto I answer first that it is no little blasphemy to affirme that Images are Bibles that is the Word of God for the authority of Gods word and of the Bible is the greatest that may bee and it is vnspeakeable But who dare say that the authoritie of Images is as diuine and eternall as that of God himselfe Secondly Images cannot be Lay-peoples Bibles because the Bible containes the true doctrine of God but Images are deceitfull lying Teachers Calu. Instit l. 1. c. 11. §. 5 teaching lyes as it is manifestly written by Ier. 10.8 and by Habb 2.18.19 Further wee ought not to bee wiser then God who hath instituted that his church should be taught not by dumbe Pictures and Images but by the liuely preaching of his Word and the lawfull vse of the Sacraments And these things be spoken also as touching the adoration of Reliques for the worshipping of them is confuted by those very same places of Scripture by which the worshipping of Images hath beene ouerthrowne You haue led mee by the hand through all Diuinitie and so haue holpen mee to some generall knowledge wherby I may in some sort bee prepared vnto the holy Supper of the Lord now it remaines that you furnish mee with some particular knowledge about the same Supper of the Lord wherunto I desire to prepare my selfe You say well indeed S. Th. p. 439 and I doe it very willingly so bee that before all you note that the word Sacrament is no where extant in holy Scripture but there are diuers words aequiualent vnto it as Romans 4. the word Signe or Seale where Paul calleth Circumcision the seale of the righteousnesse of Faith A Sacrament then Calu. Institut l. 4. c. 14 is a holy signe or seale annexed to the Word of God as vnto Tables and Letters wherein God promiseth vnto vs his fauour and the forgiuenesse of sins by the death and suffering of our mediatour Iesus Christ Now signes be of three sorts Some there bee which are onely Significatiue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and noting out somewhat as the Meare-stone signifieth the fields which it parts to be diuers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Some are Memoratiue representing vs the memory of somewhat and exciting our affection and will thankfully to thinke on it as whâ—n one friend giues vnto anothâ—r some excellent booke or a piece of gold to be a signe vnto him of his friendly remembrance Lastly some Signes are Confirmitiue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherby some benefit or other promised vnto vs by any man is made certaine vnto vs. As the seale hanging at the Kings Letters Patents doth not only signifie and put the partie in remembrance of some benefit but it doth especially certifie him as namely by which hee to whom the letters are granted is certainly assured to obtaine that benefit or good thing which is promised him in the Letters A Sacrament then is a Seale or Signe assuring vs the forgiuenesse of sinnes promised in the Letter Pattents of the Gospel In which short and plaine description the whole nature of Sacraments doth consist neither is it here any whit needfull that the godly heart should bee troubled or molested with any subtilties either of Papists 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or of Vbiquitaries 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 J conceiue what a Sacrament in generall is I would haue you to shew mee what the Supper of the Lord is It is a Sacrament of the new Testament or it is a holy signe ordained by Christ in the New Testament that by bread broken and eaten S Th. p. 454 Calu. Institut l. 4. c. 17 De coena Domini Zanch. Miscellan 1. part pag. 387. seq wee may bee admonished and certified that the body of Christ was broken vpon the Crosse and giuen for vs and by wine powred out and drunke wee may bee remembred and assured that the blood of Christ was shed for vs for the remission of sinnes How many things are wee to consider in the Lords Supper S. Th. p. 440 Three things as in euery other relation first the two termes of the relation the Relate and the Correlate Secondly the foundation and ground of this relation thirdly the end or finall cause of this relation What is the Relate in the Lords Supper and what is it called It is called the signe or the thing which puts vs in mind and giues vs assurance of some other matter How many kind of signes bee there in the Lords Supper The Relatum or signe in the Lords Supper is twofold Substantiall and Accidentall Which is the Substantiall It is true bread true wine Sub vtraque specie sumitur ipse totus Christus sed si in altera tantuÌ„ sumeretur ad alterius tantum id est animae vel corporis non vtriusque pariter tuitionem valere significaretur Ambros Aut integra Sacramenta percipiant aut ab integris arceantur quia diuisio vnius eiusdemque mysterii sine grandi sacrilegio fieri non potest Gelasius Which is the Accidentall It is the breaking of the bread and the taking of it likewise the powring out of the wine and the taking of it What is the
and therefore the Protestants opinion is true and the Papists false It was the saying of good S. Cyprian Jn nullo gloriandum est quia nostrum nihil est Wee must not glory in any case for wee haue nothing to glory of I will conclude the whole reason proofes with the speech of Bonauenture whom the Romanists account the Seraphicall Doctor Piarum mentium semper fuit vt totum attribuant gratiae diuinae nihil libero arbitrio This hath beene the practice of all godly and religious minded men in the world to ascribe the whole glory of our conuersion and saluation to the grace of God and nothing to Free-will And hee proceeds further and tels vs that looke what wee attribute to Free-will wee detract so much from grace and looke what wee attribute to grace so much wee detract from Free-will and that this later is the safest way whereas the former is not without danger By this shall yee know saies our Sauiour whether my Doctrine bee true or whether J speake of my selfe Hee that speaketh of himselfe seeketh his owne glory but he that seeketh his glory that sent him that man is true and there is no vnrighteousnesse in him Here is then that Lydius lapis the very touch-stone by which any indifferent man that is an intelligent Scholler withal able to iudge of things without partiality not fastâ—ning his opinion vpon any mans sleeue but submitting himselfe to the euidence of Gods Word may trie true and sound Doctrine from false erroneous and rotten hypocrisie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thus far haue I proceeded in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or confirmation of the truth a word or two as my leasure will serue of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or confutation of the aduerse proofes The Arguments which the Author of your Script hath well compacted together mostly strike vpon one string as the two last from the authority of Scripture the 2 first from the authority of the fathers the 3. 4. 5. and 6. from demonstratiue reason I will cast them all into one mould because I may not vnfitly apply one answer to them all The argument is this Ob. Similia olim cum obiectarentur Augustino libellum de corrept gratia scribere coactus fuit Galu Instit l. 2. c. 5. §. 4. seq Take away free-wil from a man then to what end serues all the reproofes complaints exhortations in the word of God why doth God promise vs any thing vpon condition of our obedience Why hath God left vnto vs his holy commandements if we can do no otherwise of our selues then euill If the Condition bee impossible or the performance of his Commandements why hee may seeme to mocke vs in bidding vs do that which is impossible for vs. I answere Resp 1. the precepts and commandements of God dispersed through the Volume of the Scriptures doe not import what we are able to doe but what is our duty to doe not what we can doe but what we should doe yea and what wee could haue done once in Adam that so seeing our duty what we ought to doe and our infirmity that we are not able to doe it wee might haue recourse vnto God by prayer that by the mighty power of his grace we might bee made able to do what he commands vs as Leo a good Bishop of Rome excellently speaketh Ideo datur praeceptum vt requiratur praecipientis auxilium S. Austin Synonymally yet more fully to the same purpose Iubet Deus quae non possumus vt nouerimus quid ab ipso petere debeamus God commands vs those things which are aboue our power to doe that we may run vnto him by prayer and petition for his ayde and helpe to doe them I assure you it wrought this good affection in holy Dauid as you shall finde Psal 119.4 Thou hast commanded saith the Prophet to God that we should diligently keepe thy commandements Whereunto hee answers not in all haste as a Pelagian or a Papist would O Lord I will I can keepe thy coÌ„mandements because thou dost command mee so to doe but what is Dauids answer O that my wayes were made so direct that I might keepe thy Statutes The Imperatiue in God as one wittily begets not a potentiall but an optatiue in Dauid Vpon Gods Precept there followes immediately Dauids Prayer Tu praecepisti Thou hast commanded that wee should diligently keepe thy commandements there 's Gods precept O that my waies were made so direct that I might keepe thy Statutes there 's Dauids Prayer And let vs learne this Lesson of the blessed Prophet to distrust our selues and flye vnto God for the assistance of his powerfully working grace with that short and pithy prayer of S. Austin Da domine quod iubes iube quid vis Lord giue vs grace to performe what thou commandest and then command what thou wilt And this is yet a thing more euident by the common practice of the Church and of all the godly in the Church For to them that demand to what end are precepts and exhortations if we cannot of our selues do that which is commanded we may in like manner interrogate why doth the Church pray continually for grace to doe those things that are commanded if it bee in our owne power to doe them But the Church of God doth pray thus daily as appeares plainly by the Seruice-Booke wherein you haue 3. Collects to be said euery morning and euening Prayer And whereas one of them is for the day the other for peace and defence against dangers the third is alwayes for grace And there is no Papist that can iustly take exception at those prayers For as touching these Collects for grace vsed in our Litturgie both at morning and euening Prayer wee find them expressly and verbatim in their owne Masse-bookes In officio B. Virginis in horis B. Virginis ad vsum Sarum printed at Paris 1510. Now I say the Church by praying to God continually for grace to doe his commandements doth acknowledge the true vse of hearing precepts and exhortations which is not to be proud of any power in vs or to presume of that which is not in vs but to pray and thereby to acknowledge that wee haue it from grace 2. God without mockery may require of vs obedience and the perfect obseruing of all his comandements though it bee impossible for vs to keepe any one of them Yet this I say God may exact of vs without all iniustice because it comes to bee impossible vnto vs onely through our owne default for God made man at the first righteous indued him with a power of doing whatsoeuer he should haue commanded him but wee haue fought out vnto our selues many inuentions as the wiseman speaketh Giue mee leaue to make this plaine vnto you by an easie and familiar comparison You are a Gentleman of good meanes yet giuen to retyrednesse and you are desirous to rent out or set to farme