of eating and drinking Iob. 6. are not to be vnderstood properly but by a figure sect 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 30. That the Doctours of the Romish church by the defence of Transubstantiation haue bene driuen to most impious and damnable questions and assertions sect 29. That the place of the Gospell Luc. 22. 20. which they so much cauil vpon out of the Greeke maketh nothing at all for Transubstantiation as by diuerse other reasons so by the confession Bellarmine himselfe sect 31. That the assumption of the virgin Mary is a meere fable sect 33. That the Church hath no authoritie after the Apostles to authorize any scriptures and that we seclude no other bookes from the canon of the bible then the old church did sect 34. How wickedly the Papists deale in mangling and martyring the writings of the Fathers sect 35. That our doctrine of iustification before God by faith onely is the verie trueth which both the scriptures and out of them the Fathers haue manifestly taught that it maketh nothing against good workes that the place of S. Iames cap. 2. maketh nothing against it sect 36. May it please thee gentle Reader first of all to take notice of these two places of Chrysostome Gelasius which haue bene the occasion of all this controuersie for thy better satisfaction I haue noted them both in English and Latin though otherwise to auoyd both tediousnesse of writing and vnnecessarie charges of printing I haue thought good to set downe the places alleaged onely translated into English The place of Chrysostome against the vse of water in the cup of the Lords table CVius rei gratia non aquam sed vinum post resurrectionem bibit Chrysost in Math. hom 83. Perniciosam quandam haeresin radicitùs euellere voluit eorum qui aqua in mysterijs vtuntur Ita vt ostenderet quia quando hoc mysteriuÌ„ tradidit vnum tradidit etiam post resurrectionem in nuda mysterij mensae vino vsus est Exgenimine ait vitis quae certè vinum non aquam producit In English thus But why did Christ after his resurrection drinke not Water but Wine He would plucke vp by the rootes a certaine pernicious heresie of them which vse water in the Sacrament So that to shew that when he deliuered this Sacrament he deliuered wine euen after his resurrection also he vsed wine at the bare table of the Sacrament Of the fruite of the vine saith he which surely bringeth foorth wine and not water The place of Gelasius against Transubstantiation CErtè sacramenta quae sumimus corporis sanguinis Christi diuina Gelasius cont Eutych Nestor res est propter quod per eadem diuinae efficimur consortes naturae tamen esse non desiuit substantia vel natura panis vini Et certe imago similitudo corporis sanguinis Christi in actione mysteriorum celebrantur Satis ergò nobis euidenter ostenditur hoc nohis in ipso Christo domino sentiendum quod in eius imagine profitemur celebramus et sumimus vt sicut in haenc scilicet in diuinam transeunt sancto spiritu perficiente substantiam permanent tamen in suae proprietate naturae sic illud ipsum mysterium principale cuius nobis efficientiam virtutemque veracitèr repraesentant ex quibus constat propriè permanentibus vnum Christum quia integrum verumque permaenere demon strant In English thus Verily the Sacraments which we receiue of the bodie and blood of Christ are a diuine thing by reason whereof we also by them are made partakers of the diuine nature and yet there ceaseth not to be the substance or nature of bread and wine And surely an image or esemblance of the bodie and blood of Christ is celebrated in the action of the mysteries It is therefore euidently inough shewed vnto vs that we must thinke the same in our Lord Iesus Christ which we professe celebrate and receiue in his image that as these namely the bread and wine do by the working of the holie Ghost passe ouer into a diuine substance and yet continue in the proprietie of their owne nature so they shew that that principall mysterie the efficiencie vertue wherof these do represent vnto vs doth abide one Christ because whole and true those natures properly remaining whereof he doth consist M. Spence hauing had my bookes to peruse these places sent me in writing this answere to them SIr I right hartily thanke you for the willing minde you hauâ— towards me Truly I should be verie vnkinde if I knew mâ— selfe vnaffectioned to so much good will I am in prison and pouertie otherwise I should be some way answerable to your friendlinesse In the meane season good will shall be readie for good will Touching the words of S. Chrysostome He would plucke vp by the rootes a certaine pernicious heresie of them which vse water in the Sacrament c. Read the 32. Canon of the sixth Councell holden at Constantinople and there you shall find vpon what occasion this golden mouth did vtter these words and not only that but also mention of S. Iames and S. Basils masse or sacrifice left to the church in writing The words of the Canon begin thus Because we know that in the country of the Armenians wine onely is offered at the holie table c. The heresie therefore against which he wrote was of the a Vntruth For neither doth Chrysostome intimate any thing against the Armenians or such as vse wine only neither was it heresie in theÌ„ that did so Armenians and the Aquarians the first whereof would vse onely wine the other onely water in the holie mysteries Against which vse being so directly against both the scriptures and custome of the primitiue church he wrote the same which he saith of pernicious heresie as before I cannot doubt of your hauing the Councels or some of them Your other booke conteining the words of Gelasius I wil not yet answere being printed at Basil where we suspect many good works to be corrupted abused But if it proue so to be yet the whole faith of Christs church in that point may not be reproued against so many witnesses of scriptures and fathers b Neither scripture not Father auoucheth the contrarie auouching the contrarie Nay what words should Christ haue vsed if he had meant to make his bodie blood of the bread and wine as we say he did other then these This is my bodie which shall be giuen c. And gaine for this is my blood of the new Testament which shal be shead for many for remission of sinnes Marke well the speeches and they be most wonderfull as most true All the world and writings therein c The Gospell it selfe is sufficient to perswade him that will be perswaded â—nforming vs of a true and naturall bodie of Christ and not of a fantasticall bodie in the fashion quantitie of a wafer cake cannot
A Mirrour of Popish SVBTILTIES Discouering sundry wretched and miserable euasions and shifts which a secret cauilling Papist in the behalfe of one Paul Spence Priest yet liuing and lately prisoner in the Castle of Worcester hath gathered out of Sanders Bellarmine and others for the auoyding and discrediting of sundrie allegations of scriptures and Fathers against the doctrine of the Church of Rome concerning Sacraments the sacrifice of the Masse Transubstantiation Iustification c. Written by Rob. Abbot Minister of the word of God in the Citie of Worcester The contents see in the next Page after the Preface to the Reader Perused and allowed TC VIRESSIT VVLNERE VERITAS LONDON Printed by Thomas Creede for Thomas Woodcocke dwelling in Paules Church-yard 1594. TO THE MOST REVEREND FATHER IN GOD THE L. Archbishop of Canterbury his Grace Primate and Metrapolitane of all England and to the right reuerend Father in God the L. Bishop of Worcester R. A. wisheth all abundance of grace and peace with euerlasting life REuerend Fathers it may seeme perhaps some presumptiō in me to be thus bold to vse your LL. names for the countenancing of this Pamphlet which neither for the matter of it nor for the occasion may seeme worthy of the notice or sight of so graue and learned Fathers Notwithstanding being drawne to the publication hereof partly by the importunity of aduersaries partly by the desire and expectation of friends I thought it very requisite both in respect of the cause it selfe and in respect of mine owne priuate dutie to offer these my simple labours to the protection of your LL. The matter hereof in the beginning was only priuate betwixt my selfe and a Romish Priest one Paul Spence deteined as then in the Castle of Worcester now I know not vpon what occasion liuing at his libertie abroad But when by speech and report it was drawne to occasion of publicke scandall the aduersary bragging in secret of a victory and others doubting what to thinke thereof because they saw not to the contrary I iudged it necessary after long debating deliberating with my selfe to let all men see how litle reason there was of any such insolent tryumph supposing that it might be turned vppon mee for a matter of iust reproofe and blame if my concealing hereof should cause any disaduantage to the truth or any discredite of that Ministery seruice which vnder your LL. I execute in the place where I am Now I must professe that my thus doing is only for the Citie of Worcester and others thereabout for their satisfaction in this cause wherein I know many of them haue desired to be satisfied Your LL. are both by speciall occasion affectioned to the place I know my paines shal be the better accepted with them if it shall be vouchsafed your LL. gracious and fauourable acceptation Moreouer the fauour which I haue receiued of both your LL of the one in commending mee to the place where I am of the other in yeelding me speciall patronage eountenance therein hath bound me to yeeld vnto you these my first frutes though but as a handful of water yet a testimony of my dutifull and thankfull minde And if it shall finde no other cause to be liked of yet in this I doubt not but it shall be approued that it is a iust defense of truth against the vaine cauillations of error The speciall drift of my writing is to approue concerning the matters that are heere in hand our faithful vpright dealing in alleaging the Fathers against the doctrine of the church of Rome Whose proctors for a time vsed the name of the catholick church as a fray-bug to terrifie al mē from speaking against them But when they were perforce vrged to the scriptures they cryed out that wee expounde the scriptures amisse and otherwise then the auncient Fathers did vnderstand them Being further pressed with the testimonies and authorities of the auncient Fathers they stil notwithstanding exclaime that wee abuse them also and alleage them to other purpose then euer they entended A strange matter that the plaine words both of the scriptures and of the Fathers being so expresly for vs yet their meaning and purpose as these men pretend should be altogither against vs. But whilest they endeuour to iustifie this either open exclamation or priuie whispering it is strange to see how strangely and madly they deale a Eccl. 19. 24. There is saith the wise man a subtiltie that is fine but it is vnrighteous and there is that wresteth the open and manifest lawe Verily there is nothing so euident nothing so manifest but these men haue a speciall facultie to turne it out of the way that it would goe and by a distinction of this maner and that maner to set a meaning vppon it which neuer came into the meaning of him that wrote it In which practise and occupation it falleth out with them which Ireneus sayd of the heretickes of his time b Iren lib. ◠cap. 1◠There is none perfect amongst them but such a one as doth not ably cogge and lye Indeed lyes cannot be defended but by lying and false gloses must serue to maintaine false and erroneous assertions Which is not a litle to be seen in this libell or pamphlet which I haue here to refute the Authour whereof taketh vpon him lyke a cunnyng Alcumist to turne euery thing into what he list as if he supposed vs to be men bewitched and transformed into beastes sticketh not to make such constructions of the scriptures and Fathers sayings as no man that hath but the common reason and vnderstanding of a man can but see to bee leaudly and vnreasonably deuised Wherat I should the lesse maruell if they were only this mans deuise I would impute this folly to him onely But now hee hath taken the most of them out of their learned Treatises forsooth to which he oft referreth me as if they were the Oracle of all truth So that the spirit of this phrensie and madnesse goeth through the heades of them all whereby it commeth to passe that they take delight in those things which they cannot but know to be absurd That their maisters know so much it seemeth to vs apparant for that they forbid their scholers and followers to be acquainted with any of our writings wherein theyr absurdities and falshoods are layd open and wheras we in answearing them propose both theirs and ours indifferently to all men to be iudged of they giue their pupils some libertie to read their bookes but it is damnation for them to touch any of ours Such schollers would be suspicious of such maisters but that they are maruellously blinded with preiudice and selfe will Now as many other by other occasions so I the least of all by occasion offered to me haue taken vpon me for this present matter to shew I will not say how vainly fondly but wickedly and vnshamefastly they deale in peruerting they call it answering
not that because Christ taking y◠bread said thereof This is my bodie therefore the bread was turned into his bodie And this is so good Logicke that diuerse great maisters of his side haue plainly confessed that the wordes of the Gospell notwithstanding the aforesaid consent do not enforce Transubstantiation as I told him before and he answereth nothing to it Yea Bellarmine himselfe who hath taken vpon him to be the Atlas of Popery at this time after that he hath sweat and trauailed to proue it by the scripture when he hath all done is content to confesse so much For being vrged that Scotus and Cameracensis do say that there is no so expresse place of scripture that it can enforce to admit of Transubstantiation he answereth a Bellar. tom 2. contr 3. li 3. cap. 23. This indeed is not altogither vnlikely For although the scripture which I haue alleaged before seeme to vs so cleare that it is able to force a man that is not ouerthwart yet whether it be so or not it may worthily bee doubted for that most learned sharpe witted men such as Scotus especially was do thinke the contrary It is sufficient for our discharge that the Iesuit confesseth that it may iustly be doubted whether Transubstantiation may be proued by the scripture or not and that it is likely that indeed it cannot The matter then is come to this passe that Transubstantiation must be beléeued because of the authoritie of the Church of Rome but otherwise that it cannot be prooued by the authoritie of the scripture But we dare not trust the Church of Rome so farre as to receiue any doctrine of her without the warrant of the scripture For we are of Chrysostomes minde b Chrisost in Psal 95. If any thing saith he be spoken without scripture the minde of the hearer halteth or hangeth in suspense But when there commeth out of the scripture the testimony of the voyce of God it confirmeth both the minde of the hearer and the words of the speaker They must prooue it vnto vs by the scripture or else wee cannot bee assured of it But they cannot agrée how to expounde the wordes of scripture for it and the scripture it selfe is manifestly against it Christ saith This is my bodie The word This doth demonstrate and point to somewhat And what may that be One of them saith one thing and another saith another thing in fine they cannot tell So that we must suppose that Christ said This I know not what is my bodie Bellarmine commeth after all the rest to resolue the matter and he telleth vs that we must vnderstand it thus c Bellar. tom 2 cont 3 lib. 1. ca. 10. 11. This that is conteined vnder the formes is my bodie But the question is the same againe what is that conteined vnder the formes To say it is the bodie before all the words of consecration be spoken they themselues will not allow But except the bodie it can be nothing else but bread It is bread therefore to which the word This is referred perforce must the words be thus taken This bread is my body which again must néeds haue this meaning This bread is the signe and Sacrament of my bodie and consequently ouerthrow Transubstantiation Moreouer what Christ brake bid his Disciples take and eate that they did take and eate It was bread which he brake and bid them take and eate for the words of consecration were not yet spoken Therfore it was bread which they did take and eate But that which they did eate Christ called his bodie Therefore Christ called bread his bodie and meant This bread is my bodie So likewise as touching the other part of the Sacrament we say that what Christ willed them to drinke that they did drinke But Christ willed them to drinke wine saying Drinke ye all of this and this was wine because there was yet no consecration Therfore they did drinke wine That which they did drinke Christ called his blood The words therefore of Christ must be thus meant This wine is my blood And so he expoundeth himselfe immediatly when he calleth it This frute of the vine shewing hereby to what we must referre the word This when he saith This is my blood namely to the frute of the vine that is to say wine To auoyd these things thus plainly gathered from the circumstances of the text many blind shifts haue bene deuised but one especially most worthy to be noted d Tho. Aquin. pag. 3. q. 78. art 1. that the Euangelists doe not report these matters of the institution of the Sacrament in that order as they were spoken and done by our Sauiour Christ Thus to serue their turne the Euangelists must be controlled and vpon their word we must beléeue that these things are not so orderly set downe as the matter required I might adde hereunto how the scripture vsually calleth the Sacrament c Act. 20. 7. 1. Cor. 10. 16. 11. 26. 27. 28 bread euen after consecration in the breaking distributing and eating thereof then which what should we require more to assure vs that in substance it is bread indéede And of this spéech they can giue no certaine reason neither but are carried vp and downe from fancie to another as appeareth by Lanfrancus saying f Lanfran lib. de sacram Euchar◠It is called bread either because it was made of bread and retaineth some qualities therof or because it feedeth the soule or because it is the bodie of the sonne of God who is the bread of Angels or in some other maner which may be conceiued of them that are better learned but cannot of me They care not what they say it is so that they grant it not to be that that it is in truth But thus do they deserue to be led vp and down from errour to errour and follie to follie as it were after a dauncing fire who refuse to be guided and directed by the cleare and shining light of the euident word of God By this that hath bene said it may appeare sufficiently how litle hold the Answ hath in the consent of the Euange lists for the proofe of his Transubstantiation euen by the confession of his owne fellowes to whose wisedome and learning he doth greatly trust But yet once againe to proue it by the Gospell we haue another argument wherein the Answ as a sawcie fellow taketh vpon him to censure controll M. Beza and M. Fulke in a matter of Gréeke construction as he did M. Caluin and B. Iewell in other matters before But what may it be that he presumeth so much on Forsooth the Gréeke in Luc. 22. is so plaine against our doctrine and for proofe of Transubstantiation that Beza was greatly troubled there with and was faine to say that either S. Luke spake false Gréeke or else that somewhat was foisted into the text This argument Gregory Martin and others haue runne out of breath
enough against a naked and bare collection from a point of doubtfull construction Which séeing they haue diuers of them béen alleaged by maister Fulke and others directly against the Answrers demaund and yet haue not receiued any tollerable answere it was but a scape of his wit to say that maister Fulke doth steale away from the state of the question and medleth not with it His other cauill out of the wordes of S. Luke that Christ before the sacrament said l Luc. 22. 17. he woulde drinke no more of the fruite of the vine till in his kindome and yet dranke after in the Sacrament whereby he would prooue the sacrament to be no wine was long agoe preuented by S. Austen who affirmeth that S. Luke m August de consen Euangeli lib. 3. ca. 1. according to his maner setteth downe the former mention of the cup by way of anticipation putting that before which is to be referred to somewhat following after and therfore vnderstandeth it of the cup of the new testament by and by after instituted and so reconcileth him to the other two Euangelistes Mathew and Marke But to helpe this argument the Answ is faine to varie from his good maisters of Rhemes For he expoundeth the kingdome of God to be after the resurrection but they vnderstand it n Rhem Annot Luc. 22. 17 of the celebration of the Sacrament of Christes bloud Whereof it followeth that Christ in the Sacrament dranke of the fruite of the vine as both Mathew and Marke set it downe and the auncient fathers doe expound it Let him go and be agréed with his fellowes before he vrge this argument againe P. Spence Sect. 32. IN the end you giue me councell how to behaue my selfe in these controuersies In all Christian charitie I thanke you and loue you for the same for you aduise me no worse then your selfe followe and in good faith I accept of it as proceeding from your great good will towards me and therefore againe and againe I thanke you And I will follow you in genere that is to haue care of my poore soule to feede it with the trueth of Gods word but expounded by his Catholique Church I must tell you plainly and therefore in specie in the particulars of the points of our beliefe I will not followe you You and I endeuour both to come to one resting place at night but in our daies iourney wee goe two sundrie waies I pray God send vs merily to meet in heauen Amen R. Abbot 32. MY councell M. Spence must stand for a witnesse against you at that day if you go on forward still to walke in the counsel of the vngodly In the meane time I againe aduise and counsell both you and your maister to cease to rebell fight against God or to say when he offereth himselfe vnto you we will none of thy waies I councell you indéede as you say to no other thing but that which I follow my selfe and I most humbly thank almightie God who hath giuen me his grace to follow the same and hath preserued me from that daunger wherein I haue béen oft falling away from him You will followe me you say in generall to haue a care to féed your soule with the trueth of Gods word Do so M. Spence doe so that is the foode of life that is the riuer of the water of life the heauenly Manna he that féedeth there shal surely finde life b August de pastor Feede there saith S. Austen that yee may feede safely and securely But you marre and poison this good foode with that which you adde You will feede your soule you say with the word of God but expounded by his Catholicke Church you meane the Church of Roome Which is as much as if you should say you wil not follow the word of God it selfe but that which it pleaseth the Church of Roome to make of the word of God Take héede of M. Spence Assure your selfe that though the Church of Roome doe maintaine c 2. Pet 2. ◠damnable heresies and d 1. Tim. 4. 1. doctrines of deuils contrarie to Gods word yet being wise as she is according to this worlde she will neuer expound the word of God against her selfe if it be in her to make the meaning of it When she expoundeth the Scriptures to make her selfe the Catholike Church and no such thing is to be found in the words of the scripture will you beléeue her in her owne cause It shal then be verified of you which Salomon saith e Prou. 1◠15. The foole will beleeue euerie thing Take the simplicitie of the word of God it self and be directed thereby f Prou. 8 9. The waies of God are plaine to him that will vnderstand God g Hiere in psal 8◠hath not written as Plato did that few should vnderstand but for the vnderstanding of all saith S. Hierome So that although there be depth enough in the word of God for the best learned to bestow his studie and labour in yet as Chrysostome and Austen teach vs h Chrysost in 2. Thess 2. August ep 3. Whatsoeuer things are necessarie they are manifest and i Aug. de doct Christ li. 2. c. 9. in those things which are manifestly set downe in the Scriptures are contained all things that pertaine to faith and conuersation of life Lay before you therefore those things which néed not the exposition of the Church of Roome When the scripture saith There is now no offering for sinne wil you take her exposition to say that there is When the scripture saith no man liuing shal be found iust in the sight of God shal she by her exposition make you beléeue that it is not so When the scripture saith Thou shalt not bow downe to or worship a carued or grauen image will you be perswaded by her expositions that you may I passe ouer the rest Iustly doe they deserue to be giuen ouer to errour and to be deluded with lies and lewd expositions which will not yéeld vnto God when he speaketh vnto them so plainly as néedeth no exposition It were worth the while to set downe héere a Catalogue of Romish expositions but that the conscience of you all that way appeareth sufficiently in this whole discourse You pray that we both going sundry wayes may méete in heauen But maister Spence it will not be in that way wherein you go Either you must say that there is no heauen or els that your way is not the way to heauen because the God of heauen hath gainsaid it God open your eyes that you may sée the right way that so we may ioyfully méete in heauen P. Spence Sect. 33. AS touching the escape of our Rhemistes in the account of our Ladies assumption The matter is verie sleight not tending any way to our saluation I meane to erre in that computation especially when they haue a The more impudēt they that hauing no certaine
iustly and well perswade a Christian to beléeue the contrary in my opinion S. Mathew Mark Luke and Paul all writing This is my bodie whereas writing otherwise of one thing one saith If I in the finger of God cast out diuels c. Another If I in the spirit of God c. So that in d Vntrue as appeareth by the coÌ„ference of these places Mat. 5. 29. with Mar. 9. 3. Mar. 5. 39. with Luc. 6. 29. Mat. 20. 23. Mar. 10. 39. Mat. 21. 21. Mar. 11. 23. which are not taken literally and yet difler not in phrase of speech any matter where moe then one speak of the same thing euerie one hath more of the same thing to giue more light then another But in the matter of the Sacrament no whit so but in the verie substantiall point e Vntrue for they varie as touching the cup there is the same reason of the one part of the Sacrament as of the other See the reply Concil constanti 6. can 32 all deliuer the selfe same effectuall words Sir once againe thankes for your good Chrysostome and so I beséech to recall them that erre into the way of truth and euerlasting saluation A reply against the former answere to the places of Chrysostome and Gelasius THe willingnesse I haue to doe you good M. Spence I wish might take such effect with you as that God might be glorified by reuealing vnto you the knowledge of his truth I doubt not but it shall be so if you séeke it as you ought and where you ought Concerning the place of Chrysostome of vsing water in the Sacrament I finde it expounded as you answere me in Concil Constantinopol 6. ca. 32. of them that vsed water onely and no wine Albeit the wordes séeme to me plainly to enforce vpon the Reader another vnderstanding neither find I any reason why the Bishops of Armenia being a thousand vnder one Metropolitane may not be thought as méete iudges of Chrysostomes meaning as the Bishops of this Councell especially séeing it is not certaine either what time or by whom those Canons were made and appeare to be falsly fathered vpon the sixth generall Councell as Surius in his admonition Surius in admoniâ— ad Lector de can 6. synodi concil to 2. concerning those Canons giueth to vnderstand Yea and they are in diuers points reiected by your selues as is plaine also by Surius both in the same Preface and by some notes added to some of the Canons But I contend not of that point and as I condemne not in that respect the Churches which either haue vsed or doe vse that mixture only without opinion of superstition and necessitie so neither do I find reason why those Churches are to be condemned that rather follow as most assured the simplicitie of the institution of Iesus Christ where we finde mention of the fruite of the vine but nothing as touching water If you say as the Canon saith that this is to innouate those things which haue bene deliuered by tradition Cypri epist ad Pompeium I must answer you with Cyprians words Whence is this tradition Whether descending from the authoritie of the Lord and of the Gospell or comming from the Commandements and Epistles of the Apostles for that those things which are written must be done God testifieth c. If therefore either it be commanded in the Gospell or conteined in the Epistles and Acts of the Apostles let this tradition be kept as holie Now séeing there is no testimony of the holie scripture to approue the necessitie of water I take your wordes directly contrary to the scriptures to be vnderstood rather of those which vse water only contrarie to the text then wine only according to the expresse mention of the text Your glose of the Canon De consecra dist 2. cap. sicut in glossa law doth tell that Doctors haue said that water is to be mingled in the cup only for honestie or decencie and therefore not of necessitie to the Sacrament And that amoÌ„gst others Thomas Aquinas granteth Polydore Virgil referreth the fist institution thereof to Alexander Plati in Alexander 1. Durand Rati diuin lib. 4. rubri de officio sacerdotis c. Thom. Aquin. pa 3. q. 7â— art 3 the first Bishop of Rome Pâ—atina séemeth to agrée with him So Durand saith Water is mingled in the cup with the wine by the institution of Pope Alexander the first And as touching Christes vsing of water Thomas Aquinas maketh it but a probabilitie and no certaine truth It is probably beleeued that our Lord instituted this Sacrament in wine mingled with water according to the manner of that country Your Councell of Trent saith no more It is supposed that our Lord did so And in a conference betwixt Anselmus a Bishop of Saxome and Nechâ—tes Patriarch of Nicomedia Anno domini Centur. Magdebur cap. 12. 1138. Neâ—hites obiecting that Christ our Sauiour did not vse water in the consecration Anselmus answereth by likelihood that he did so because in Palestina the maner is to mingle water with their wine Now if it were done according to the maner of that country then it was done to abate the strength of the wine and not for any such mysterie as some haue imagined In manie Countries where their wines are verie strong temperate sober men vse to qualifie and delaie the heate thereof by mingling water least it should cause any distemperature to the bodie And this the Gréeke Churches may séeme to haue respected who consecrated with méere wine as appeareth by Nâ—chites his spéech in the conference aboue-named as also by some editions of Chrysostomes Liturgie and afterwardes put in water when it was to be administred to the receiuers The reason which they vsed for not adding water before was this because Christ is not read to haue added water which accordeth with the words of Chrysostome alleaged by me But as I said before I stand not vpon this point Only I pray you to consider an argument of Bertram in his booke de corpo sangui domini ad Carol imperat taking Bertram de corpo sang domini his ground from this mixture Water saith he in the Sacrament beareth the image of the people Therefore if the wine sanctified by the seruice of the Ministers be bodily turned into the blood of Christ then the water also which is mingled withall must needs be bodily or substantially turned into the blood of the beleeuing people For where there is one sanctification there is consequently one working or effect and where there is the like reason there followeth also the like mysterie But we see in the water there is nothing turned bodily Consequently therefore in the wine there is nothing bodily shewed It is taken spiritually whatsoeuer is signified in the water as touching the bodie of the people It must needes therefore be taken spiritually whatsoeuer is signified in the wine concerning the blood of Christ
not that we should daily purge with daily sacrifices as they did in the old law Did they sée none of these expositions yes without doubt they saw them and shut their eyes against them The Lord will require it in his due time But hereby we vnderstand the meaning of their words in their Preface to the Epistles that if in the scriptures there sound any thing to vs coÌ„trary to their doctrine we must assure our selues that we faile of the right sense So that be the words neuer so plain yet if they sound either to the auncient Fathers or to vs contrarie to the Romish doctrine we must thinke that neither the auncient Fathers nor we attaine to the right vnderstanding of the wordes But we are not so madde vpon the warrant of any Philosopher to say that snow is blacke so long as our eyes assure vs that snow is white I know here what you are readie to obiect namely that the Fathers in speaking of the Eucharist vse verie commonly a mention of sacrifice and cal the same by the name of sacrifice and all this you referre to the sacriledge of the Masse But you should not conceiue so of the Fathers as to thinke that they meant any thing contrarie to so expresse and manifest scripture so long as they do so plainly tel you what they meant in vsing the name of sacrifice You should remember the corrections which Chrysostome Ambrose do vse when Chrysost Ambros in Hebr. 10. naming their offering of sacrifice they adde Or rather wee worke the remembrance of a sacrifice You should take notice of the exposition of Theophylact Wee offer him the same alwaies or rather wee Theophy ibid. make a remembrance of the offering of him as if he were offered or sacrificed at this time and of the words of Eusebius After all hauing Euseb de demonstrat Euang lib. 1. cap. 10. Theodor. in Hebr. 8. wrought a wonderfull and excellent sacrifice vnto his father he offered for the saluation of vs all and ordained that wee should offer the remembrance therof vnto God in steed of a sacrifice and of Theodoret Why do the priests of the new Testament vse a mysticall Liturgie or sacrifice It is cleare to them that are instructed in diuine matters that we do not offer another sacrifice but do performe a remembrance of that one and sauing sacrifice For this commandement the Lord himselfe gaue Do this saith hee in the remembrance of me that by beholding the figures we might call to minde the sufferings which he vndertooke in our behalfe And of S. Austen The flesh August con faust Manich. lib. 20. ca. 2â— blood of this sacrifice was promised before the comming of Christ by sacrifices of resemblance in the passion of Christ it was giuen in verie truth after the ascension of Christ it is celebrated by a Sacrament of remembrance Learne by this place to put difference betwixt in verie truth and by a Sacrament of remembrance and learne by all these places that the Eucharist is not a sacrifice properly so called wherein Christ is really and properly and in verie truth sacrificed but a Sacrament a commomoration and remembrance of a sacrifice Adde hereunto if you will the words of saint Austen Was not Christ once offered in himselfe and yet in a mysterie or Sacrament August ep 23. he is euerie day offered for the people For if Sacraments had not a kinde of resemblance of those thinges whereof they are Sacraments they should not be Sacraments at all Now by reason of this resemblance they doe most commonly take the names of the things themselues Note in these words the difference betwixt being offered in himselfe and being offered in a Sacrament or mysterie learn that this spéech of being offered or sacrificed when it respecteth the Sacrament hath his vse and meaning not of the things themselues but of the resemblance of the things and therefore is not indéed to be offered in himselfe And therfore your owne glose of the Canon law expoundeth it Christ is sacrificed that is the sacrificing of him is represented De consec dist 2. cap. semel and there is a remembrance made of his passion The sacrifice of the death and passion of Jesus Christ is the whole matter and substance of this mysterie it is there proposed the remembrance thereof renued as if it were now done the thing resembled by outward signes of breaking the bread and powring the wine the hearts of men stirred vp as if they saw Christ nailed to yâ— crosse the sacrifice of this passion is presented by the faith praiers of the church vnto God thereby to haue forgiuenesse of sinnes nothing here remembred but Christes sacrificing himselfe vpon the crosse What maruell then though the Fathers called this mysterie a sacrifice though neuer imagining your sacrifice of the Masse What maruell though they will vs to behold in this Sacrament the sacrifice of our price the sacrifice of sacrifices the vnbloudie seruice of the sacrifice the sacrifice of our mediator and such like which spéeches your men foolishly and vnlearnedly or rather impudently and vnconscionably alleage for their supposed sacrifice of the Masse They haue expounded their owne meaning as you haue heard and pitifully do your Rhemists labour and striue to winde themselues out of those expositions and cannot preuaile And as for the same spéeches of the Fathers as touching sacrifice we would not doubt â—â— speake in this case as they did but that your hereticall doctrine hath caused Gods people to conceiue of sacrifice otherwise then the Fathers intended Albeit vpon like occasions we are not far from that vehemencie of wordes which we finde to haue bene vsed by them nay we are no whit behinde them But thinke with your selfe M. Spence is not the death and passion of Christ the onely sacrifice for the foâ—giuenesse of sins Shame be on his face that will deny it What sacrifice then is there in the Eucharist Verily Cyprian saith The passion of Christ is the sacrifice Cypr. lib 2. epist 3. Pâ—oâ—p in psal 129. which we offer And Prosper What propitiation is there but sacrifice and what sacrifice but the killing of that lambe which hath taken away the sinne of the world and your owne counterfeit decretall of Alexander the first The passion of Christ is to be remembred Alexan. epist 1. to 1. concil in these sacrifices and the same to be offered to the Lord. But doth Christ really suffer die in the Sacrament Is he there sweating water and blood is he buffeted with fists spit in the face crowned with thornes derided accused condemned nailed to the crosse Indéed the auncient fathers say as touching the Sacrament Chrysostome thus While that death is performed and dreadfull sacrifice Chrysost in Acta hâ—m 21. De conâ—e diâ—t 2. cap. Quidâ—â—t sanâ—uâ— Cyp de caena domini Chrâ—â—ost in Encaenâ—jâ— Hâ—â—ron â—â— psa 95. and Gregorie Christ dâ—eth
yeares But because the Roomish harlot hath approued this fable and the Rhemists do but sooth her in that which she hath affirmed you will rather then yâ—eld say that the supposed reporter of this storie being a Counsellor of Athens and this being done in Iudea was there for that purpose thrée or foure yeares before he was conuerted to Christianitie I shewed you the sophisâ—ry of the same honest men in peruerting the place before alleaged out of the tenth to the Hebruâ—s but because they haue set it down in fauour of the Romish Masse you will not goe from it though it be without shewe of reason and contrary to common sense To shewe the plaine euidence of scripture as touching our doctrine of iustification I cited those words That a man is iustified by faith without Rom. 3. 2â— Iam. 2. 21. 24. the workes of the law You crosse it with S. Iames his words That Abraham was iuâ—â—ified by workes and not by faith only I answere directly out of S. Paul If Abraham were iustified by workes he had Rom 4. 2. to reioyce but not with God by which place Oecumenius accordeth Oecumen in Rom. 4. the former two and by which conference it appeareth that whosoeuer is iustified by faith before God doth also approue his true faith by workes of righteousnesse before men but yet that no mans righteousnesse of workes is such as wherby he may stand holy blamelesse and without fault in the sight of God but that all are in this respect to cry out Enter not into iudgement with thy seruant for in thy sight no man liuing shal be iustified Wherupon S. Austen saith August in Pâ—al 142. saith Let the Apostles say forgiue vs our trespasses c. And when it shall be saide vnto them Why say you so what are your trespasses Let them answere because no man liuing shall be iustified in thy sight but you beléeue because your loue hath told you so that men are by the righteousnesse and merits of workes to be iustified in the sight of God Take héede M. Spence deceiue not your selfe There is but one heauen and one faith that bringeth thither God only hath reuealed that faith Séeke it there where he hath reuealed it Your ground is now only vppon men yet neither will Popery stand vppon that ground if you tie not your selfe to your new builders Bishop Iewel amongst others hath detected the vanitie of their building in many points But you say that one Steuens beyond the sea declared his bad dealing in his writing to that purpose But were you so simple to credit what Steuens said Doe you not know that many when they come to your Seminaries will haue some what to say whereby to commend themselues and to discredit vs and therefore when they want truth must néeds coyne lies One alleaged to me when I was in Oxford how Iewell had falsified a place out of Thomas Aquinas He spake it by heare-say as you do I went into a Library of verie auncient copâ—es and found it word for word as it was cited It was maruell that M. Harding could not finde that kinde of dealing It would haue giuen him good matter for a far more substantiall answere But I might as well vpon report tell you that Harding perplexed in mind néere his death wished that his soule might haue place with Bishop Iewels soule I haue heard that Hart the Iesuite being demanded thereof in the Tower could not make any great deniall of it But the truth lieth not in these matters As for Bishops Iewels writings I will lend you the booke if it please you It were maruell that no sillable or sentence should be mistaken in that multitude of allegations the sight whereof troubled M. Hardings minde as I conceiue by the Preface of his fond detection but for the substance of the cause and iustifying the points defended I will vndertake to make good vnto you the allegations for so many of the auncient Fathers as I haue and some of the principall you know I haue and can quickly get more And what I haue here written I will be readie to approue vnto you and to make plaine whatsoeuer is here for want of conuenient leisure briefly and therfore perhaps obscurely collected The God of peace guide vs in the way of peace and graunt vs to know his truth and to perseuere in the knowledge thereof vnto the ende A DEFENSE OF THE AVTHORITIES ALLEAGED IN THE REplie against the answere of P. Spence P. Spence Section first IN respect you wish me good and well M. Abbot I thanke you for it knowing it cannot proceed of an ill ground but at least of good nature which I do accept with desire of no lesse good to you then you to me but I hope rather much more Although there be choice oddes in our seuerall iudgements what is truly and indeede good which the one wisheth to the other For as from God who is essentially good all goodnesse proceedeth whatsoeuer so what faithfull seruant of God soeuer hee be that in God wisheth or willeth my good any way that may be called good indeed to him I thinke my selfe more beholding then for treasures of kingdomes of this world if he had them to beâ—â—ow vpon me If such good could be found in you as touching this cause betweene vs I would most thankfully accept it with no lesse estimatioÌ„ of your zeale and your person then pure affection to your charitie and care c. R. Abbot 1. SVch is the frowardnesse of mans nature that as S. Austen well noteth we are most commonly a Aug de nat grat cont Pelag. cap. 2â— more readie to seeke what we may answere to those things that are obiected against our errour then to consider how wholesome and good they are that thereby we may be freed from errour Which as it is generally true wheresoeuer the selfewill and pride of nature is not subdued ouerruled by good conscience and the feare of God so it is more particularly approued in you M. Spence by your vntowardly answere to that which I wrote vnto you which it séemeth you would néedes returne vnto me not as being perswaded that you could answere that that was alleaged vnto you but b August contra Gandentium lib 3. only for this cause least if you had holden your peace you should haue bene said to be conuicted as Austen told Gandentius the hereticke vpon the like occasion For to write somewhat or to say somewhat is not alwaies to answere and you though you haue taken paines to write much yet in your whole pamphlet haue answered nothing Which I call your pamphlet not because I take either the collections of the matter or the forme of enditing to be yours but because it came to me in your name and vnder your hand When I perused it I straightwaies perceiued that it was none of yours but that you had gotten the helpe of a secret friend who
to you Bishops Priests and Deacons concerning the mysticall seruice Now if this were in this solemne manner agreed vppon shall we thinke that the same saint Iames would of his priuate authoritie without cause publsh another Liturgy to the Church And would not the Church vniuersally accordyng to the sanction and designement of the Apostles haue practised that forme of seruice which it cannot be proued to haue done Or if either of those Liturgies had bene of authority from such an Authour would Basill Chrysostome and others haue giuen forth other formes of Church-seruice not haue cleaued to the receiued and enioyned Apostolicke forme It were wel that these doubts were sufficiently cleared But the testimony of Gregory Bishop of Rome is inough to cracke the credit of these Liturgies who assureth vs t Gregor Mag. in Regist li. 7. cap. 63. that it was the maner of the Apostles to consecrate the sacrifice with saying onely the Lordes praier This giueth vs sufficiently to vnderstand that those pretended Liturgies vnder the name of saint Iames the Apostle where much is sayd beside the Lords prayer either were not at all or at least were not déemed authenticall at that time and therefore are of the same stampe with an 〈◊〉 number of â—ther forgeries and counterfeit writings which haue bene put foâ—th in the name of the Apostles and other famous meâ— Of that Liturgy also which the sixth Councell mentioneth vnder the name of S. Iames Theodorus Balsamon testifieth yâ— in his time so long ago it was u Theodor. Balsa in concil Constant 6. can 32. not founde nor knowne but quite worne out amongst them Whereby we haue iust cause to thinke that these that now are are other counterfeits set forth since that time Basils Liturgy w Chemnie in exam Trident concil de canone missae by the old translation is one by the new translation another and yet it is sayd also that the Syrians haue a third differing from both the former This is iust cause to make a man suspicious of them all Of Chrysostomes Liturgy how often haue they bene told that although it be likely inough that he left some forme of seruice in his Church yet that there is now no certaintie what it was the differenâ—e of copies being such as it is one published by Leo Tuscus another by Erasmus another by Pelargus and yet Pelargus affirmeth that he hath séene another copie at Rome differing from all these In one of these Chrysostome himselfe is prayed vnto and these togither with yâ— other Liturgies are alleaged for inuocation of saints But x Epiphani haeresi 7 5. contra Aeriâ—nos Epiphanius testifieth that the Church in his time did pray for Saints Martyrs Apostles c. To pray for them and to pray to them stand not togither Epiphanius his testimony is true Therefore these Liturgies are certainly false Againe Chrysostome himselfe is prayed for yea Pope Nicholas and the Emperour Alexius are prayed for also who neither of them were borne some hundreds of yeares after S. Chrysostomes time If they will say that these names were put in as the maner is to put in the names of Princes and Bishops to be prayed for while they liue then how commeth it to passe that those names continue there still vnto this day and that the names of those that succéeded were not put in place of them It appeareth vndoubtedly that there was patching and adding not only of names but of prayers and ceremonies also according to the â—ustome of times and places and the will of those hucksters that had these things in handling Now séeing that although Proclus and others do mention such Liturgies of Basill and Chrysostome yet by meanes of such alterations patcheries and forgeries it cannot be certaine vnto vs what Basill and Chrysostome left in their Liturgies what folly is it in the Answ and his fellowes to face vs out with the names of Basill and Chrysostome in such sort as they do That many steps of antiquitie are yet remainyng in them it is not denyed but those are directly contrary to the practise of the Roomish faction in these dayes and therefore yéeld not any allowance to their proceedings And whereas there are diuers particles translated from those auncient Liturgies into their Masse by occasion wherof they vaunt themselues as followers of antiquity surely they deale no otherwise herein then y Irenae lib. â— cap. 1. Irenaeus reproteth the Valentinian heretickes to haue dealt with the holy scriptures Who gathered here and there wordes names out of the scriptures with the which they painted their horrible and accursed heresies yâ— men might beléeue that the scripture spake of those things which they wickedly taught against the scripture As if a man should take a precious and â—ostly image of a prince facioned by a cunnyng workeman and breakyng it in péeces should of the péeces of it make an il-fauoured image of a Foxe say that the same is the goodly image which such a cunnyng workeman made to resemble such a Prince For so haue they taken diuers péeces of the auncient Liturgies and turned them to other vse and meaning then euer was dreamed of by their Authors and as Irenee speaketh From that which is according to nature to that which is against nature and yet forsooth tell vs that their Liturgie hath example and warrant from all those that were vsed in former times The prayers which then were made to God for the accepting of the peoples gifts and offerings for the celebration of the Sacrament these men absurdly apply to the body and blood of Christ and appoint the Priest to entreate God that he will looke downe mercifully thereupon and accept them The old Liturgies vsed an open commemoration of the death passion and resurrection of our Lorde Iesus Christ that the people might be put in minde therof according to his commandement The Popish priest vttereth the words but is enioyned to vtter them in silence so that the people neuer haue the hearing of them The old Liturgies craued of God grace and heauenly benediction in behalfe of the people who togither were partakers of the communion the Masse kéepeth the words but excludeth the people from the communion The like dealing I noted before concerning the mixture of water and the like follâ—weth in the next place concerning the name of the Masse By these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such spéeches and doings borrowe â—or 〈◊〉 rather from the old Church-seruice they go about to daâ—le the eyes of â—en thâ—t they may not sâ—e their fraude and falshood But an ape will be an ape still though he be â—clothed in purple the Masse though it firmeth thus to be decked with â—â—oures of antiquitie shall remaine nothing else but â—â—ish this and abhominable idoll It is but apish 〈…〉 tation truly to keepe the words of the Fathers and so absurdly to vary from the 〈…〉 tise and meaning of the Fathers P. Spence Sect. 6. VVHether
reply And as for the praier for the dead which p Epiphan haere 75. Epiphanius defendeth against Aerius it was no such as Papists now teach not only for that it was vsed as a testimony of their beliefe that the dead were not vtterly perished but liued with the Lord whereas Papists defend it only in behalfe of them that are in Purgatory but also that it was vsed q Ibid. for the Patriarches Prophets Apostles c. to put difference betwixt Christ and all other men by the honor which is done to him whilest he only is acknowledged to be perfectly iust is worshipped praied vnto al others acknowledged to be such yâ— they were to be praied for Wheras the church of Rome now praieth not for Saints but praieth vnto them so yéeldeth vnto them that honor which the ancient Church reserued as a special prerogatiue to Christ alone Now as touching this maner of praying for Apostles Prophets Martyres c. which I mentioned the Answ saith nothing at all Only to no purpose he bringeth a spéech of Chrysostom to proue that there was in his time praier for the forgiuenesse of the sinnes of the dead But doe those wordes serue for exposition of that which I alleaged out of Chrysostomes Liturgie If they do then he must say that that reasonable seruice was offered for the sinnes of the blessed virgin If not then were they idlely brought in For I alleaged that spéech as taken from the auncient vse of the Church long before Chrysostoms time which because it importeth only thankesgiuing therefore giueth sufficieâ—t cause to thinke that in the beginning they vsed only commemoration thankesgiuing for the faithfull dead in Christ howsoeuer by litle and litle through the subtiltie of Montanus his heresie there was added to 〈…〉 ither in Chrysostoms time or before such praiers as he speaketh of and offeringâ— for the be 〈…〉 site of the dead That Chrysostom hath somwhat tending heretal iâ—â—as not denied r Mat. 19. 8. but it is sufficient for our defence that I froÌ„ the beginning it was not so And yet that praying for the forgiuenesse of the siâ—â— of the dead if there be nothing more said by Chrysostome maketh nothing for Popish praier for the dead For this resteth only vpon Purgatory torments and is not intended for any other purpose but for deliuerance from thence whereas it plainly appeareth by the supposed Dionysius that the auncienter Church praied in that sort for them of whom notwithstanding they were assured Å¿ Dionys Areo â—ccles hierarch cap. vltimo that they were come to rest that they were blessed and happie that they were not chaunged to worse but to better state then they had here that they were now compartners with the Saintes which had bene before from the beginning of the world and therefore in so praying thought of nothing losse then Purgatory paines The saying of S. Austen which the Answ vrge this thus t August Enchâ—r ca. 110. The sacrifices of the altar or of whatsoeuer almes when they are offered for all the dead that haue bene baptised are thankesgiuings for such as are verie good for such as are noâ— verie bad they are propitiations or attonements for those that are verie bad they are though no benefit to the dead yet some kinde of comfort to the liuing The first part of which wordes confirmeth that which I said before of the auncient custome not of praying but of thankesgiuing for he faithfull departed in Christ In the other two he yéelded too much to those superstitions which tradition and later custome had brought in without the word of God whilest being busied in matters of greater waight and importance he omitted throughly to examine and trie his opinion in this point with the true and euen wâ—ights of the same word Whereas the Answ telleth me that by this meanes we make no bodie of S. Austen I answere him concerning Austen as Austen himselfe answered the Donatists concerning Cyprian u August cont cresco lib. 2. ca. 31. 32. We do no iniury to him when we distinguish any writings of his from the authoritie of the holy scriptures Whatsoeuer therein agreeth to the authoritie of the scriptures we receiue it with his commendation but what agreeth not therto by his leaue we refuse it and as the s 〈…〉 e Austen answered also to the Pelagians concerning Ambrose w Idem de grat christi cont pel Cele li. 1. c. 23 He was a learned and godlie man but not to be compared to the authority of the Canonical scriptures Shall we be said to make no 〈◊〉 of Dauid because we refuse to follow him in coÌ„mitting adultery and murthers or of Peter because we will not deny Christ or cause the Gentiles to play the Iewes or of Iohn because we will not fall downe and worship an Angell or of Cyprian because we will not yéeld to his errour of rebaptising x August cont Cresco lib. 1. cap. 32 li. 2. cap 32. de vnico bapt cont Petil. ca 13 cont Gandent li. 2. cap. 23. surely as we account our selues incomparably inferiour to these renowmed and famous seruants of God and yet refuse to follow them in that which they thought and did amisse so we attribute excéeding much to Austen we admire his learning we honour his labours we estéeme of his iudgement and yet with that libertie whereunto the Lord hath called vs we deny to follow him in this whereof we cannot haue our consciences assured by the vndoubted warrant of the word of God And as lawfull we hold it for our selues so to do in this point as for the Papists to reiect his y August de bono viduitatis ca. â— â—0 11 sound iudgement of the vnlawfulnesse of dissoluing breaking such marriages as are contracted after vow and protestation of single life But as touching the matter in hand of propitiation attonement for sinne we holde fast that which S. Iohn teacheth vs and gâ—e no farther z 1. Ioh. 2. 2. We haue an aduocate with the father Iesus Christ the iust and he is the propitiation for our sinnes We beléeue no other merit of the forgiuenesse thereof but only his passion and death in the participation whereof whosoeuer dieth we assure rur selues he is immediatly receiued into Paradise with Iesus Christ euen as was a Luc. 23. 43. Cypr. de caena domini ad finem the théefe who vpon the Crosse began to beleeue in Iesus Christ And to this purpose I oppose against that thrée-membred diuision of Austen another of his consisting only of two parts b â—ugust in Ioâ— â—ract 49. All soules when they goe out of this worlde haue their diuers places of receipt The good haue ioy the euill haue torment But when the resurrection shall come both the ioy of the good shall be greater and the torments of the euill shall be more grieuous when as they shall be tormented
them without answere There i Orig. in Leuit hom ◠is saith he in the new testament a letter which killeth him that doth not listen to it spiritually For if thou follow according to the letter that which is written Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud that letter killeth Where he teacheth vs that to vnderstand spiritually is to vnderstand not according to the letter not as the wordes sound not simply as things are vttered as k Chrysostome Chrysost in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 46. speaketh but to gather another meaning imported by the wordes For example he alleageth that those wordes of eating the flesh of Christ and drinking his bloud must not be vnderstood according to the letter and as the wordes import but another spirituall construction must be made of them Which S. Austen verie effectually and to the purpose sheweth in the next place that followeth now to be handled Pet. Spence Sect. 24. YEa but S. August lib. 30. de doctr Christiana striketh vs dead He seemeth saith he to commaund a hainous matter Therefore it is a figure commanding c. This is your great Achilles so much magnified of your side But I beseech you sir did saint Augustine bring in this speech vpon the place This is my body onels vpon the place of saint Iohn Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man c. You know it was vpon the latter place For when Christ told them they should eate his flesh they might imagine as indeede they did that they should a A butcherly answere fit for the shambles S. Austen taught not the Capernaites but vs to vnderstand eating and drinking not properly but by a figure eat it in gobbets cut slashed and hewed and chopped as flesh to the pot or the broach yea monstrous and like the Cannibals man-hunting and man-eating beastly maner Heere therefore they must needes by saint Augustines rule flee to some other more milder sense and to a more humane meaning which was that he would exhibite himselfe to them in a sacrament in a mysticall sweet spirituall maner But what then ergo not verily Nego argumentum Did saint Augustine say so any where no verily But at his supper when he raught his Apostles the formes of bread and wine and tolde them not beguiling them nor lying to them that it was his body and bloud that he gaue them to eate and drinke where was now that flagitium and facinus What feare was heere of any such Capharnaticall bloudie imagination Nay here he let them see how he before meant to giue them his body when at Caphernaum he said Nisi manducaueritis c. And therfore heare the maner of exhibiting his body verie truely though in a sacrament to be verily eaten but not mangled our worried and torn in peeces giueth neither feare or need or occasion to S. Augustines rule proue that S. August meant it in this place that at his supper he gaue only a figure or els you prooue nothing R. Abbot 24. HEere S. Austens drist is to shewe what spéeches of the holy scripture are to be vnderstood properly and what figuratiuely and to another meaning then the wordes sound Of the latter sort he setteth downe this rule a Aug 〈…〉 6 If it be a speech that seemeth to command any haynous or wicked thing or to forbid the doing of good it is a figuratiue speech Whereof he had giuen this rule before b We must take heede that we take not a figuratiue speech according to the letter For to this belongeth that of the Apostle The letter killeth for when a man taketh a thing spoken by figure as if it were properly spoken hee doth carnally vnderstand it Héereof he giueth for example those wordes Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud c. Of this he saith It seemeth to commaund a hainous and wicked thing Therefore it is a figure that is to say a figuratiue spéech and therefore must not bee vnderstood as the wordes doe import The meaning of this figure he declareth It willeth vs to cōmunicate with the passion of Christ and sweetly and profitably to lay vp in our memorie that his fleshe was crucified and wounded for vs. Then by S. Austens iudgement the meaning of this figuratiue spéech of eating and drinking the flesh and bloud of Christ is to apply vnto our selues the benefite of his passion and comfortably to record that his flesh was wounded and his bloud shed for the forgiuenesse of our sinnes Whereby it is euident that he neuer dreamed of that monstrous and lothsome eating and drinking which the church of Roome teacheth flesh bloud and bone as he was born of the virgin Mary as some of them Canniball and Capernait-like haue vttered This place the Answ saith is our great Achilles much magnified of our side The greater this Achilles is the more strongly it behooued him to haue fought against it But he saith nothing to it but that that is ridiculous and childish First he commeth in with a bald and impertinent question Did S Austen bring in this spéech vppon the place This is my body He did not so and what then Surely this is but to talke idlely and not to care what he saith so be say some what He bringeth it in for that purpose for which I alleaged it to expoūd the words of Christ in the sixth of Iohn of eating and drinking the flesh and bloud of Christ and telleth vs that it is a figuratiue spéech and therefore must not be vnderstoode according to the proper signification of eating and drinking What saith this good man to it Forsooth the Capernaites when they heard Christ speake of this matter might imagine as indéed they did saith he that they should eat it in gobbets cut slashed and hewed c. Therfore they must néeds by S. Austens rule flee to a milder sense and to a more humane meaning Then belike S. Austen taught the Capernaites howe they should haue vnderstoode the wordes of Christ but hee teacheth not vs. For we are farre from imagining the eating of Christes fleshe in gobbets slashed hewed chopt in péeces as the Answ speaketh with his butcherly and barbarous termes Alas children sée the folly of these answeres S. Austen in that place giueth vs a rule of vnderstanding the scriptures He giueth this place for an example of his rule He teacheth vs that to eat and drink the flesh and bloud of Christ importeth a horrible and hainous thing if we vnderstand eating and drinking properly He talketh not of slashing or hewing but of eating and drinking and therefore telleth vs that wée must vnderstand eating and drinking not properly but by a figure He telleth vs what the meaning of it is as I haue shewed before Not a word to intimate any such Popish construction nay he condemneth it as a hainous and wicked imagination The matter is cléere Euery eye may discerne it
As for that which he asketh whether Christ doe not giue himselfe verily vnto vs wee say he doth and that wholly with all that is his yet not to be eaten with the mouth as being héere on earth but to be receiued by faith sitting in heauen as I said before out of S. Austen And this is enough for vs to prooue and in proouing wherof we confound that c Supr sect 22. grosse imagination as Cyrill calleth it of eating the fleshe of Christ with the mouth into the belly For that Christ at his supper giueth onely a figure and nothing else we néede not prooue it because it is not our assertion but the Answ cauill and a Popish slaunder As for the meaning of Christes wordes This is my body it is shewed before Christ did not lie to his Disciples nor beguile theÌ„ in so saying His Disciples were no Capernaites they were no Papistes They knew that Christ instituted deliuered a sacrament They knew that sacrameÌ„ts are called by the names of those things which they signifie whereof they had example in the name of the passeouer which they celebrated at the same time calling it the Passeouer which was indéede but a remembronce and signe thereof Therefore they vnderstood the meaning of Christ to be as the ancient Fathers expound it This is a Figure a signe a Sacrament of my bodie They saw the true bodie of Christ before theyr eyes They knewe that Christ had not a bodie at one and the same instant visible and inuisible with forme and without forme sitting at the table and yet inclosed in a little fragment or crust of bread These leaud and vntowardly fancies were not yet bredde They deliuered no such vnto vs and therefore we beléeue no such Let me thus conclude out of these two places this of Austen and that before of Origen He that vnderstandeth a figuratiue spéech according to the letter doth misunderstand it But he that vnderstandeth the eating and drinking of Christs flesh blood concerning the very eating of his flesh and drinking his blood with the mouth vnderstandeth a figuratiue spéech according to the letter Therefore he that so vnderstandeth the eating and drinking of Christs flesh and blood doth misunderstand it But the church of Rome doth so vnderstand it Therefore the Church of Rome doth vnderstand it amisse P. Spence Sect. 25. TO conclude we eate drinke in the blessed Sacrament Christs flesh and blood really truly and indeed but not bodily for so much I will graunt you taking bodily for after a grosse bodily maner but sacramentally figuratiuely and in a diuine mysterie in a figure not a figure of Rhetoricke or of Grammer but in a diuine figure but yet verie truly R. Abbot 25. HEre is now the Answ conclusion set downe without any premisses vpon his bare word namely that in the Sacrament they verily and truly eate and drinke the flesh and blood of Christ But against this presumed conclusion of his I oppose the auncient praier of the Church mentioned by a De corp san do Bertram b De sacr Euch. Lanfrancus and c De conse dist 2. ca. â—pecies Gratian Let thy Sacraments ô Lord worke in vs that which they containe that what we now celebrate in signe or resemblance we may in the truth of the things receiue the same They praied to receiue the truth of the things Of what things Namely of those the signe or resemblance whereof they celebrated in the Sacrament that is of the bodie and blood of Christ Then the Sacrament it selfe is not the truth of the bodie and blood but only the signe the image and resemblance therof For with what reason should they pray to receiue the truth of that which verily and truly they did receiue alreadie But their praier was that whereas they did now receiue but the image and signe of the bodie and blood of Christ they might in the kingdome of heauen enioy the thing it selfe the very bodie and very blood of Christ And hereof d Bertr de corp san dom Bertram in his booke very soundly concludeth that the bodie of Christ is not verily really in the Sacrament whose whole collection to that purpose being very strong the e Index Expuâ—â—n coâ—r Bertr Spanish censurers in their Index aboue named haue treacherously appointed to be left vnprinted as before I shewed of another place Lanfrancus to auoyd the euidence of this auncient praier so plainly contradicting the reall presence betaketh himselfe to an absurd shift whose words to that purpose being Gratian hath taken and put into the decrées in the chapter last before cited That Truth he saith is to be vnderstood of the manifestation and open reuealing of the bodie of Christ and affirmeth that the name of truth is diuerse times vsed in scripture to that meaning but yet alleageth not any one place to prooue it so Further he addeth that the word species doth sometime import the very Truth it selfe and so in that maier he will haue it vnderstood Then the meaning of the praier must be thus that they might receiue in truth that which they did now receiue in truth or that they might receiue in truth that is visibly and manifestly that which they now receiued in truth but inuisibly and vnder another shape But the Church as it is alwaies conuenient vsed their praier plainly and without these sophistications If they had meant so they had words inough to expresse their meaning neither néeded they to vse such doubtfull words to séeme to say one thing and yet to meane another They plainly oppose species and veritas the signe and the truth one against the other They would not put veritas in an vnproper signification as opposit to species and vnderstand it in proper signification included in the word species This were a very straunge and vnwonted kinde of speaking And therfore referring the signe or resemblance to the time present and the truth to the time to come they plainly shewe that there is not now in the Sacrament the very truth but only the resemblance of the bodie of Christ and therfore that we do not in the sacrament really and verily with our mouthes eate the bodie of Christ And this is most plainely affirmed by Hierome as Gratian citeth him in the decrées f â—e conse di 2 cap. de hac Surely saith he Of this sacrifice which is wonderfully made in remembrance of Christ a man may eate but of that which Christ offered vpon the altar of the crosse as touching it selfe no man may eate The hoste or sacrifice which Christ offered vppon the Crosse was his verie body and bloud The sacrament thereof he saith we doe receiue and eate but as touching it selfe no man may eat thereof Therefore no man may eate the very body and drinke the very bloud of Christ but these spéeches must be figuratiuely vnderstood as hath béen noted out of Austen And whereas the Answ saith for
himselfe to be chaunged by the water and not by faith Héereby it is plaine that Baptisme hath his force not of the verie worke done but of true and vnfayned faith working in the heart good conscience towards God So as touching the other Sacrament S. Austen referreth the vertue and effect thereof h August in Ioh. tr 26. de ciuit dei li. 21. cap. 25. to our eating inwardly and in the heart and this eating inwardly hée expoundeth to be our beleeuing in Christ and resolueth that hée that by this beleeuing in Christ abideth not in Christ and Christ in him he doth not spiritually eate and drinke the flesh and bloud of Christ though he receiue the sacrament thereof Therefore neither doth this Sacrament auaile by the worke wroughâ— but onely by faith whereby we abide in Christ and Christ in vs. A miserable doctrine it is whereby men are borne in hand that comming without faith voyd of knowledge without repentance or any good motion yet they may receiue the effect of the sacraments whereas the Scripture so plainly affirmeth that i Rom 14. 23. whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne and that k Heb. 11. 6. without faith it is vnpossible to please God and therfore precisely chargeth euery man before he come to the Lords table l 1. cor 11. 28. to examine himselfe m 2 Cor. 13. 5. in that behalf But for disproofe of this assertion it is reason enough that there can be no reason nor probable shew of reason giuen whereby to prooue it Of the difference of the Iewes sacraments and ours I haue spoken before We abase neither but lift both verie high The consent of the Euangelists auaileth with me to make me yéeld to that which can be soundly prooued thereby not to euerie thing that froward and peruerse men will péeuishly fancie thereof P. Spence Sect. 31. YOu tell me a matter out of S. Luke 22. but in good sooth to what purpose I cannot imagine Who euer denied but it was Metonymia when he said this cup is the new testament or rather two tropes in one sentence For the cup is taken for Christes bloud in the cup and to be the new testament is to be the seale establishment promulgation and consecration of the newe testament Who euer denied it but because we say that the true body and bloud of Christ is contained in the sacramentall formes and that Christ saying This is my body spake plainly a Be like wheÌ„ you list there is a figure and when you list there is none You might vnderstand the one by a Figure as well as the other without a figure therefore must we meane so grosly that no where the scripture speaking of this matter vseth a figure Oâ— would you conclude thus in these wordes This cup is the new testament there is a figure ergo in these words This is my body Logick will be good cheape if this may go for currant But good sir let me be bold a little with you to put you in minde of this place of S. Luke that b A popish peeâ—ish brag See the aunswere Qui calix so troubled Beza that he wist not what to say to it but he imagined that either some sorie fellow had foysted it into the text or els that S. Luke spake false greeke so sure he was that the text was awry it made so sore against him For setting it downe by the participle as it is in greeke thus it soundeth hic calix nouum testamentum in sanguine meo pro vobis effusus Which must needes respect Calix for his substantiue and then the cup that is the liquor in the cup was shed for them and vs all which if it were wine let euerie good christian man iudge I hope he shed for our saluation a farre more pretious liquor then wine And doctor Fulke to salue this sore telleth vs that in many places of the greeke text of other Scriptures there is incongruitie Very true I confesse but it is smally to the purpose For where no sense will helpe the syntaxis there we must needs graunt incongrâ—itie But how c There are reasons enough to proue it See the answere prooued doctor Fulke that the sense wherein this place is congrue and according to grammer is not the true sense Or why should he not allow it for congrue being indeede congrue Or why should Beza imagine and he allovv of a sense that is not congrue when the text was congrue enough This point being the state of the question Doctor Fulke stealeth away from and medleth not vvith it because it vvas too plain for vs and against his sacramentarie doctrine As likevvise vvas that place of S. Luke vvhere drinking at his Supper in vvine to his Disciples before hee instituted the Sacrament he told them hee vvould drinke vvine no more till in his kingdome vvhich vvas after his resurrection and yet a litle after he d VVhat did Christ drinke his owne bloud we can not beleue it drank to them in the Sacrament vvhich if it had beene vvine hee had contraried his former speech an absurditie I thinke not to be admitted R. Abbot 31. FOr further answere as touching the conformitie vsed in these wordes This is my body I shewed how S. Luke and S. Paul varie from S. Mathew and S. Marke as touching the other part of the sacrament For whereas these say this is my bloud of the new testament c. The other say This cup is the new testament in my bloud c. And these latter wordes I shewed to â—e the ouerthrow of transubstantiation But the Answ in good sooth telleth me that he cannot sée to what purpose this is alleaged I pray you therefore M. Spence put him in minde of his headlesse reason which he hath vsed before Christ saith he will call nothing by a wrong name If he should call fire water earth by the names of ayre stones or bread they would sooner become ayre stones bread then he would misname any thing He did not lie to his Disciples he did not â—eguile them Therefore when he said This cup is the new Testament without doubt the cup was substantially turned into a Testament Nay not so saith he there is a figure here Yea and may a thing be called by a wrong name by a figure is there now a figure in these words Why then is the man so straight laced that he cannot yéeld a figure in the other words especially séeing the auncient Fathers so expresly expounde them by way of figure and neither he nor his can make any certaine exposition of them but by a figure But it followeth not he saith that because there is a figure in the one spéech therfore there is so also in yâ— other Yet say I if it follow not that because Christ taking the cup said thereof This cup is the new Testament therefore the cup was turned into the testament then it followeth
alreadie and therefore it will not serue the Answerers turn to carry him so farre as he would faine go That which he mentioneth first of false Gréeke is but his péeuishnesse and malice Beza nameth it Solaecophanes which is a figure noting an appearance of incongruitie by departure from the vsuall and ordinary course of Grammar construction The same hee noteth may be excused in this place as being borrowed from an Hebrew manner of speaking And whereas g Discou ca. 1. sect 39. Gregory Martin without regard of his owne credit auouched that not one example could be brought of the like constructtoÌ„ to be resolued as Beza translateth this M. Fulke sheweth him diuerse the very same in all respects as Col. 1. 26. Apoc. 1. 4. 5. and 3. 12. and 8. 9. And therefore a man might haue said to him as Austen saide to Iulian the Pelagian heretike h August coÌ„t Iul. Pelagâ—li 5. cap. 2. I am sory that you should so abuse the ignorance of them which know not the Greeke tongue that you would not feare the iudgement and censure of them that haue knowledge of it As touching the other point Beza indéed vpon some coniecture supposeth that the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is shed for you might happily be added from the margin into the text as in other places sundrie haue obserued But yet he fréely and ingenuously confesseth that he found them in all copies generally that he saw and therefore leaueth them in the text entire and whole and translateth them as the words of the holy Ghost No man denieth the words no man maketh question of them but receiueth them for Canonicall scripture Therefore all that the Answ saith in that respect is but vaine cauilling Let vs consider the words of the text which he saith are so against vs. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This cup is the new Testament in my blood which is shead for you Here saith he the words which is shead for you must by the order of construction be referred to the cup and so the cup that is to say that in the cup shall be said to be shed for vs which must néeds be vnderstood of the blood of Christ whereof it must follow that that which was in the cup was the blood of Christ I answere him that there is no necessitie by the Gréeke construction to referre those words to the cup as is proued by the examples of the like construction before alleaged And in this point G. Martine was so taken tardie by M. Fulke for his bold asseueration that I doubt it was one matter that killed his heart The Answ by some secret intelligence belike hath learned to vrge the matter otherwise and leaueth Martin to go alone He denieth not therefore but that the like incongruities may be found but demaundeth reason why we should translate it to a sense that admitteth incongruitie of spéech and refuse the sense wherein the text is congrue inough Reasons inough haue bene giuen but they are not yet confuted and therefore it was folly to make any further mention of this matter First there is not found any one of the auncient Fathers either Gréeke or Latin that taketh the words otherwise then as we translate them Secondly i Basil Ascet defin 21. S. Basil expresly readeth the Gréeke according as Beza translateth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In my blood which blood is shed for you Whereby it is apparant that either the text was so read at that time as is likely for that Basil in that booke setteth downe thâ— very words of the scripture or at the least that he being a Bishop so famously learned and most â—loquent in the Gréeke tongue tooke the construction and sense of those words to be no otherwise Thirdly Erasmus in his translation dedicated to Leo the tenth Bishop of Rome and approued by him at which time he was knowne to be no enemy to Transubstantiation yet translated those words as Beza doth being a man I trow as well séene in Gréeke construction as Gregorie Martin was Fourthly what reasonable man will déeme that the Euangelist or Christ himselfe would thus speake This blood which is shedde for you is the newe Teshament in my blood or thus This blood is the newe Testament in my blood which I alleaged to the Answerer to be an absurd tautologie and he speaketh nothing at all whereby to defend it Moreouer it séemeth strange to me that the Euangelist setting downe the proper name of bloud to which shedding must be applied and that betwixt the word cup and the mention of shedding should notwithstanding intend the word shed to be referred rather to the cup which is further of and to say that the cup was shed for vs then to the proper name of bloud which is next vnto it and to which it properly belongeth Againe the bloud of Christ could not be in the cup without being shed and separated from his bodie and to this end did Christ beside the Sacrament of his bodie institute seuerally and distinctly the sacrament of his bloud thereby to betoken the shedding the issuing forth the seuering of the same bloud from his bodie in his passion for the forgiuenesse of our sinnes in respect whereof he saith This is my bloud which is shed for you Nowe his bloud was not shed or seuered from his bodie but in his passion For hee shed not his bloud twise Therefore the wordes of shedding cannot be referred to that in the cup. Seuenthly the bloud of Christ as the k Bellar. tom 2 conâ— â— lib. 1. cap. 11. Papistes themselues confesse is not in the cup till the wordes of consecration be all spoken Therefore when Christ had sayd no more but This cup the bloud was not yet there but onely wine and therefore the words which is shed for you cannot be referred to the cup because it was not wine which was shed for vs. Further also the Answ saith straightwaies after that Christ began to his Disciples of that which was in the cup. But wee cannot beléeue that Christ did eate himselfe or that he dranke the very bloud of his owne body Therefore we beléeue not that that in the cup was the bloud that was shedde for vs or that the Euangelist would intend to say This cup which is shed for you Last of all the Answ fellowes of farre greater worth then himselfe confesse partly that there is not at all partly that it may be iustly doubted whether there be or not any place of Scripture sufficient to prooue Transubstantiation as I haue before shewed Therefore they graunt that this place doth not necessarily require any such construction as whereby Transubstantiation should be concluded Whereby they giue to vnderstand that they themselues do know that all that they say both of this place and others is nothing els but cauilling without any certaine ground or assurance of truth These reasons I take it are sufficient and strong
defiled clothes Our cleannesse then is in Christ not in our selues in his innocency we appeare before God vndefiled and whiter then snow Not but that God cleanseth vs inwardly also but this clensing is yet but in part and therefore we haue still néed of a couer to hide the remaines of our vncleannesse Therefore howsoeuer the Answ scorneth a curtaine as he speaketh to be drawne before him to couer his sinnes yet S. Bernard embraceth the righteousnesse of Christ as a cloke or garment for that purpose O Lord saith he r Bernard â—â— Ca 〈…〉 〈◊〉 I will make mention of thy righteousnesse onely for that is mine also For thou art of God made righteousnesse vnto me Should I be afraid least that one righteousnesse be not enough for vs two It is not a short cloke or garment which caÌ„not couer two Thy righteousnes is for euer It is large and euerlasting and shall largely couer both thee and me And in me surely it couereth a multitude of sinnes but in thee O Lord what but the treasures of pietie the riches of goodnesse With this garment we desire to be clothed and to be found in Christ as Å¿ Phil. 3. 9. S. Paul saith not hauing our own righteousnesse which is by the law but the righteousnesse which is by the faith of Christ as knowing that otherwise we can neuer endure to stand before the face of God But we say saith the Answ that we haue inherent iustice If he haue so let him reape the benefite thereof but if a sinfull man haue opened his mouth against heauen and said I am iust his own conscience shall scourge him for it in due time Contrariwise he derideth imputed iustice as an ape of iustification but let him remember that therein he hath reuiled tâ—e spirite of God who in the fourth to the Romanes hath by that word expresly set forth the iustification of man before God t Rom. 4. 5. 6. 3. 23. To him that beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is imputed for righteousnesse Dauid declareth the blessednesse of the man to whom the Lord imputeth righteousnes without works Abraham beleeued God and that was imputed to him for righteousnesse And this is not written for him onely that it was imputed to him for righteousnesse but for vs also to whom it shal be imputed beleeuing in him that raised vp Iesus our Lord from the dead c. Where saying in the future tense It shall be imputed to vs after that he had béen now a long time a worthy Apostle of Christ hee giueth to vnderstand that that imputing of righteousnesse without works as he hath before termed it was not only in the beginning but still to be his and our iustification in the sight of God and so excludeth that friuolous and shifting distinction of first and second iustification But thus doth the Apostle expresly auouch imputed righteousnesse And I maruell that the Answ and his fellowes thinke so strangely of imputing the righteousnesse of Christ vnto vs who yet defend the like imputing of the righteousnesse and merites of other men This they teach and practise as u Rhe. Annot. 2. Cor. 8. 14. concerning their own beggerly and sinfull deâ—otions their moonkish and frierly obseruations their workes of supererogation whereby they merite further then is néedfull for themselues and appoint this ouerplus to serue for the helpe and benefite of other being dispensed applied and imputed vnto them by a pardon from the Pope or from such as to whom he giueth commission in that behalfe So the Friars héere in England made men beléeue that w Out of the copy of a pardon graunted by the armelâ—te Friers in London in the yeere 1527. they gaue them participation of all the masses praiers fastinges watchinges preachings abstinences indulgences labours and al good workes that were done by the brethren of that order being heere in England Now with what face do these men denie that to the righteousnesse of Christ which thus blasphemously they yéeld to the supposed righteousnesse of sinfull men But so drunke are they with their owne fansies that whatsoeuer the holy Scripture saith it is but apishnesse if it be contrarie to their conceipt His description of iustification is but his owne and his fellowes deuise the bastard of the Iesuites and schoolemen Let him burie it where it was borne S. Paul by the spirite and word of God purposely treateth of iustification to the Romanes and Galatians to teach vs what it is and wherein it consisteth Him wee followe and out of him describe and set forth iustification in that maner as I haue declared before But to countenance his matter he nameth S. Austen againe in this place The best is hee doth but name him I must tel him that either he neuer read S. Austen or else vnderstandeth him not We confesse according to the word of God and the doctrine of S. Austen taken from thence that God iustifying vs and receiuing vs into his fauour by faith in Christ doth giue vnto vs his holy spirite to renew vs to holinesse and righteousnesse of life wherein wee are to encrease from day to day But yet this newnesse is not such in this life as whereby we can stand iust before the iudgement seate of God Nay we haue still to crie out x Rom. 7. â— 4 Vnhappie man that I am who shall deliuer mee from the bodie of this death and againe y Mat. 6. 12. O Lord forgiue vs our trespasses and againe z Psal 143. 2. Enter not into iudgement with thy seruaunt For in thy sight shall no man liuing be found righteous Thus hath Christian wisedome taught vs to confesse but what meaning doth Popish wisedome teach vs to make of this Christian confession We say forgiue vs our trespasses saith the Answ for veniall slips which hinder not iustice And this he falsly collecteth out of a place of S. Austen where there is no mention or word of any such thing But I alleaged to him that S. Austen affirmeth that the very Apostles themselues were to say so for this reason a August in â—sal 142. because no man liuing shal be found iust before God The Answ saith we say so for veniall slips which hinder not but that a man is iust S. Austen saith the Apostles themselues were to say so for this cause because no man liuing shall be found iust before God Why doth hee passe ouer this without answere and without proofe affirme that which is héereby ouerthrowen As for veniall sinnes we knowe none as touching their own nature because the scripture absolutely saith b Rom. 6. 23. The reward of sinne is death and c Gal 3. 10. Cuâ—sed is euerie one that continueth not in all thinges that are written in the law Therefore he that offendeth in any thing whatsoeuer is accursed by the lawe and the end of the curse is d Mat. 25. 41. euerlasting fire as our Sauiour Christ
admonisheth Further he telleth vs why we must say to God Enter not into iudgement with thy seruaunt for in thy sight no man liuing shal be found iust Because saith he in respect of the puritie of God no man nor angell nor heauen is pure Now I thought that it was but a word in iest when he defied the Pelagians before In this very maner and with this very aunswere did they séeke to shift off these wordes in the like case S. Hierome reporteth it thus e Hieroni. in epistola ad Ctesiphon This testimonie the Pelagians delude by a new reason vnder the name or shew of pietie They say that in comparison of God no man is iust or perfect He answereth them As though this were that which the scripture speaketh of surely it saith not No man liuing shal be found righteous but in thy sight no man liuing shal be found righteous When it saith in thy sight it will haue vs vnderstand that euen they which seeme holy vnto men are not holy as touching the notice and knowledge of God and God looking vpon and viewing all things whom the secrets of hearts cannot deceiue no man is iust Let him heare S. Hierome telling him againe that those wordes are not spoken as touching f Idem dial 1. cont Pelagia righteousnesse in comparison of God but as touching that righteousnesse which concerneth the frailtie of man S. Bernard giueth this reason why we are to cry so g Bernard in fest sanct ser 1 because all our righteousnesse euen our verie righteousnesse is found vnrighteousnesse if it be streightly iudged Therefore for this cause are we to pray in this sort because indéede we are not iust if God consider of vs and iudge vs according to that righteousnesse which is by workes The iustified man is ignorant of his state saith he and therefore may not boast thereof But the iustified man of whom the Scripture speaketh is not ignorant of his state for he h Râ—m 5. 1. 2. hath peace towardes God through Iesus Christ our Lord yea and that in such sort as that hee reioyceth vnder the hope of the glorie of God Now a man reioyceth or i Chrysost in ep ad Rom. hom 9. glorieth saith Chrysostome of those thinges which hee hath alreadie in hand But because the hope of things to come is as certaine and sure as of things alreadie giuen vs. Therefore saith S. Paul we doe alike glorie thereof But this glorying hee groundeth not vpon his workes for there he findeth no assurance but vpon confidence of the mercie and goodnesse of God towardes him in Iesus Christ k Bernar. de Euangel 7. pa. num serm 3. I consider the things saith S. Bernard wherin all my hope consisteth the loue of Gods adoption the truth of his promise and his ablenesse of performance Now let mine owne foolish thought murmure as much as it will saying Who art thou and how great is that glorie and by what merites hopest thou to obtaine it And I will boldly answere I know whom I haue beleeued and I am sure because he hath adopted me in exceeding great loue because he is true in his promise and able for the performance therof These three saith he do so confirme and strengthen my heart that no want of merites no consideration of mine owne vilenesse no estimation of the heauenly blisse can cast me downe from the height of my hope wherein I am firmely rooted This is the faith this is the assurance of the iustified man which the scripture teacheth this giueth him comfort in life and death in outward troubles and inward terrors in which there is no comfort if a man must be ignorant and doubtfull of his state The Answ intimateth further that the iustified man vseth those former spéeches by way of humbling himselfe before God l Bernar. de triplici custodia c. Indeed saith S. Bernard by vvay of humilitie but what against trueth Nay m Idem de verb. Esaiae serm 5. with no lesse truth then humilitie as we heard him say before n Aug. epis 89 in Psal 118. con 2. de nat grat cap. 36. not with counterfeit humilitie but with words of trueth as saint Austen saith concerning Daniel and o Idem de peccat merit remis lib. 2. cap 10. knowing in truth that it is so that there is noâ— a man that is iust in the sight of God as hee also speaketh out of Iob. His third iustification we know not by that name God in this life beginneth his good worke of sanctification in vs but it is yet but begunne p Rom. 8. 23. We haue receiued but the first fruites of the spirite saith S. Paul q Aug. de â—eÌ„p Serm 49. In comparison of that which we hope for at the resurrection saith S. Austen it is but dongue which wee haue in this life So that our r Idem de ciuit dei lib. 19. cap 27. righteousnesse in this life as he saith again consisteth rather in forgiuenesse of sinnes then in perfection of vertues But Å¿ 2. Pet. 3. 13. according to the promise of God we looke for newe heauens and a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousnesse t Rom 8. 23. We waite for the adoption and full redemption of out bodies u 1 Cor. 15. â—3 when this mortall shall put on immortalitie and this corruptible shall put on incorruption when sinne and death shal be no more and w 1. cor 13. 10. that which is perfect being come that which is now in part shal be done away Now because this our sanctification and righteousnesse is yet but vnperfect and in part therefore we resolue that the righteousnesse whereby we stand iust before God is only the righteousnes of Iesus Christ and that by inherent iustice no man liuing shal be found iust in his â—ight The cause why God doth not perfect vs in this life wee take to be this which S. Austen giueth x August de spiri lâ—tera cap 36. that the mouth euen of the righteous may be shut in their owne praise and not be opened but to the praise of God as S. Bernard saith y Bernard in cantie Ser. 50. that we may know at that day that not for the workes of righteousnesse which we haue done but of his owne mercie he hath saued vs. The places which your simplicitie M. Spence as I gesse added in the margin to that which your authour had saide néede no great answere The two former are Apocryphall and prooue nothing Yet the one of them is nothing to the purpose z VVised 3. 15 the fruite of good workes is glorious the other is a false translation where in stéede of a Eccle. 16. 12. workes is put in merite of workes The third is of S. Paul b Rom. 2. 6. God will render vnto euery man according to his workes So we preach so wee enforme the people