serm 66. in Cant. Euen so doe S. Bede and S. Bernard with diuers others expound those wordes of our blessed Sauiour The third text of the newe Testament shall be taken out of S. Paul to the Corinthians vvhere he by a similitude of building declareth that some men vpon the only sound foundation IESVS Christ 1. Cor. 3. doe build gold siluer and pretious stones that is very excellent and perfect workes others doe build vpon the same foundation wood hay and stubble that is imperfect and many vaine trifling workes He addeth that the day of our Lord which shall be reuealed in fire shal proue the workes of the afore-said builders and they who haue built gold siluer and pretious stones because their workes will abide the proofe of fire shall receiue their reward but because the other sort of builders workes cannot resist the fire but will burne they shall suffer detriment but shall be saued yet so as by fire Hence we gather that after the triall of Gods judgement some men who are found guilty of lighter faults shall be saued because they keept the foundation notwithstanding they shall suffer detriment and passe through the fire of Purgatory as a man that hath an halfe-timber house couered with thetch set on fire he being in the middest of it must passe through the flames of fire to escape and saue his life The Protestants say that it is the fire of tribulation in this life that doth try our workes and that through it only lighter faults are purged We reply first that tribulation of this life doth not commonly discerne and try good mens workes from the badde because very often good men are more afflicted in this world then the badde Againe it is said in the text that at the day of our Lord this tryall shall be made vvhich day of our Lord being expressed vvith the Greeke article as here it is ordinarily in Scripture signifieth the day of his judgement so that by the very circumstances of the text it is very plaine that the Apostle S. Paul deliuered the doctrine of Purgatory which yet is made more assured by the vniuersall consent of the holy Fathers who take this place to proue Purgatory See Origen homil 6. in Exodum S. Basil saith He threatneth not vtter ruine and destruction In cap. 9. Esay but signifieth a cleansing according vnto the Apostles sentence but he shall be saued yet so as by fire Theodorete This same fire we beleeue to be the fire of Purgatory In scholijs Gr. in 1. Cor. 3. In psal 36 in which the soules of the departed are tryed and purged as gold is in the furnace Oecumenius and Anselmus vpon the same place be of the same judgement S. Ambrose vpon those wordes Sinners haue drawne their swordes saith though our Lord will saue his yet so they shall be saued as by fire and albeit they shall not be consumed with fire yet they shall be burnt S. Hierome in 4. cap. Amos. S. Augustine in almost twenty places expoundeth this text after the same manner Heare this one taken out of his Commentary vpon the 37. Psalme O Lord reproue me not in thy indignation that I goe not to hell neither correct me in thy wrath but purge me in this life and make me such a one that shall haue no neede of that purging fire prepared for them who shall be saued yet so as by fire And why so but because here they doe build vpon the foundation wood hay and stubble if they did build gold siluer and pretious stones they should be safe from both fires not only from that euerlasting which is to punish the wicked euerlastingly but from that also which shall correct them who shall be saued by fire for it is said he shall be saued yet so as by fire And because he shall be saued that fire is contemned yea truly though they shall be saued yet that fire is more grieuous then whatsoeuer a man can suffer in this life These fewe testimonies of the most approued Doctors may suffice to assure vs that the Apostles speeches are to be taken of a purging fire prepared after this life for them that vpon their true faith in Christ doe build through the frailty of our nature many idle odde and vaine workes The last text of holy Scripture shall be this taken out of S. Iohn 1. Epist 5. vers 16. He that knoweth his brother to sinne a sinne not vnto death let him aske and life shall be giuen him there is a sinne to death for that I say not that any man aske Hence I reason thus a sinne to death must in this place needs be taken for sinne wherein a man dyeth for which no man can pray because that he vvho dyeth in deadly sinne shall neuer afterward be pardoned wherefore a sinne not vnto death is a sinne of vvhich a man repenteth him before his death and for such a one doth S. Iohn exhort vs to pray therefore the prayer which he speaketh of when he biddeth vs not pray being prayer for the dead the other prayer also must be prayer for the departed and so doth he will vs to pray for such men departed that dyed not in deadly sinne but with repentance The Caluinists say That S. Iohn speaketh rather of Apostataes and some such like haynous offendors for whome yet aliue he would not haue vs to pray But this is very vvicked doctrine for vve may pray euen for Turkes and Iewes and the most sinnefull persons that liue whiles they liue and haue time to repent for vvhat knowe vve whether God vvill take them to mercy or no and S. Paul saith expresly that he would haue vs to pray for all persons 1. Tim. 2. vers 1. De correct gratia cap. 12. whiles they liue Much more conuenient therefore is that exposition before rehearsed which is taken out of S. Augustine who affirmeth That a sinne to death is to leaue faith working by charity euen till death To these arguments selected out of holy Scripture I will joyne another of no smaller moment with vs Catholikes which is drawne from Apostolicall tradition and the practise of the vniuersall Church in her primitiue purity which hath vsed alwayes to pray for the dead Let vs heare two or three substantiall vvitnesses speake in this matter S. Chrysostome that most renowmed Patriarke of Constantinople shall be the first vvho saith Hom. 69. ad populū That it was not without good cause ordayned and decreed by the Apostles that in the dreadfull mysteries there be made a commemoration of the dead For they did knowe that they should receiue thereby great profit and much commodity S. Augustine as famous for his learning and sincerity in the Latin Church as the other was in the Greeke De verbis Apostoli serm 34. saith to this point thus It is not to be doubted but that the dead are holpen by the prayers of holy Church and by the
was impossible who hath bestowed so great grace vpon vs. S. Siluester as Nycephorus hath recorded speaketh thus of baptisme e Lib. 7. hystor cap. 33. This water hauing receiued by the inuocation of the blessed Trinity heauenly vertue euen as it washeth the body without so doth it within cleanse the soule from filth and corruption and make it brighter then the Sunne-beames So that it is most conformable both vnto the holy Scriptures and the auncient Fathers to affirme and hold that the Sacraments doe really contayne and convay the graces of God into our soules as his true and proper instruments OF SAVING FAITH M. PERKINS Page 305. HEre followeth a Chapter which for the most part doth nothing but repeate points of doctrine which hath beene particularly handled in the questions of Iustification Satisfaction and Merits and aboue twenty times touched by the vvay in his booke therefore a tedious and loathsome thing it is to me here againe to heare of them yet because the man thinketh that in these points the principall glory of the newe Gospell consisteth and that there fore they are alwayes to be inculcated in season and out of seasorr I vvill briefly runne them once more ouer shewing as he doth only vvherein we differ without repeating the arguments which are to be seene in their proper places To come to the matter he putteth downe fiuâ— conclusions The first conclusion The Catholikes teach iâ— to be the property of faith to beleeue the whole word of God and especially the redemption of mankinde by Christ M. PERKINS DIFFERENCE THey beleeue indeede all the written word of God and more then all for they beleeue the bookes Apocryphall and vnwritten Traditions Answere Touching vnwritten Traditions see that Chapter in the first part M. PER. saith here Because they come to vs by the handes of men they cannot come within the compasse of our faith Then I say vpon the same ground the vvritten word cannot come within the compasse of our beleefe because it also commeth vnto vs by the handes of men And as the Apostles and their Schollers are to be credited when they deliuered the vvritten word vnto vs for Gods pure word so are they to be beleeued vvhen they taught the Church these poynts of Gods vvord vnwritten to be embraced as the true word of God although not written but committed to the harts of the faithfull And when we haue the testimony of auncient Councels or of many holy Fathers that these points of doctrine vvere by Tradition deliuered vnto the Church by the Apostles vve as firmely beleeue them as if they were written in the holy Scriptures For which bookes of Scripture be Canonicall vvhich not and what is the true meaning of hard places in Scripture we knowe no other way of infallible certainty then by the declaration of the Catholike Church which we therefore aswell beleeue telling vs these thinges were deliuered from the Apostles by Tradition as those thinges in vvriting And that such credit is to be giuen to the Catholike Church the Apostles Creede witnesseth which biddeth vs beleeue the Catholike Church Nowe touching those bookes of holy Scripture vvhich vvere some hundreth yeares after Christ doubted off by some of the auncient Fathers vvhether they were Canonicall or no thus we say That albeit it were vndetermined by the Church vntill S. Augustines time vvhether they were Canonical or no and so were by diuers auncient Fathers though not condemned as Apocryphall yet not comprehended vvithin the Canon of assured Scriptures notwithstanding that matter being in a Councell holden at Carthage where among many other learned Bishops S. Augustine vvas present throughly debated Concil Cartag 3. cap. 47. those bookes doubted off before were found by the holy Ghost and them to be true Canonicall Scripture and afterward vvere by the sixt generall Councell that confirmed this Councell holden at Carthage declared and deliuered to the whole Church for Canonicall Nowe as we receiued at the first the other bookes of Canonicall Scripture on the â—â—edit of the Catholike Church euen so ought vve to doe these shee hauing declared them to be such yea the Protestants themselues haue admitted many bookes of the newe Testament vvhich vvere doubted off for three hundred yeares after Christ why then doe they not as vvell receiue them of the old The difference betwixt vs is that they only of passion and priuate fancy admit these and reject those vvhereas vve of obedience relying vpon the judgement of the vvhole Church admit those bookes for Canonicall which the Catholike Church hath declared for such And thus much of the first conclusion Nowe to the second touching saluation by Christ alone wherein the Protestants either cannot vnderstand or will not report our doctrine aright We confesse that Christ IESVS hath merited the redemption and saluation of all mankinde yet say we further that not one man is saued through Christ vnlesse he for his owne part first beleeue in Christ if he be of yeares and be content to doe all those thinges that Christ hath commanded vs to doe so that to saluation two thinges are required the first and principall is Christes mediation the second is the applying of Christes mediation and merits vnto vs vvithout this latter the former will stand no man in steede Nowe to be made partaker of Christs merits we must not only beleeue in him as the Protestants teach but also keepe his commandements and by good workes deserue heauen otherwise according to Christs decree we shall neuer come thither as in the question of Merits hath beene plentifully proued out of the holy scriptures so we teach then that besides Christs sufferings and merits we must haue some of our owne or else vve shall neuer be partakers of Christes And M. PERKINS cannot be excused from a vvilfull corruption of Gods word when he affirmeth S. Paul to say We are not saued by such workes as God hath ordayned men regenerated to walke in for those be not the wordes of the text but his peeuish construction S. Paul putting a playne distinction betweene workes that we are not saued by and workes that we must walke in calling these later good workes and the other barely workes To the other text I say that we haue no righteousnesse of our owne strength or by the vertue of Moyses lawe but through the mercy of God and Christs merits we haue true righteousnesse giuen vs by baptisme Christ indeede by himselfe and his owne sufferinges not by sacrifice of Goates or Calues hath meritoriously washed away our sinnes that is deserued of God that they should be washed away but formally he hath washed away our sinnes by infusion of Christian righteousnesse into our soules He that will see more of this let him reade the question of Iustification And where as M. PER. saith that all grace of God powred into our hartes is by the corruption of our hartes defiled he little knoweth the vertue of Gods grace vvhich so cleanseth and purifieth
article of our beleefe borne of the Virgin Mary No more is there vnto that other specified by M. PERKINS he ascended into heauen and from thence shall he come to judge c for albeit he ascended the fortith day after his resurrection and shall at the last day come from thence to judgement yet betweene those two daies he may be where he will and wheresoeuer else he be it hath no direct repugnance with either branch of that article and therefore it doth but bewray the insufficiency of the Protestants skill in the rules of opposition or repugnances who so confidently auerre such great contrariety to be where there is none at all But Augustine saith Tract 50. in Ioannē Lib. 9. in Ioannem Lib. 2. ad Thras Cont. Eutich lib. 1. cap. 4. that Christ according vnto his Majestie prouidence grace is present with vs to the end of the world but according vnto his assumed flesh he is not alwaies with vs the same doth also Cyril Fulgentius and Vigilius testifie We answere that Christ in deede according vnto that visible forme of a man in which he once liued here vvith his Disciples hath very seldome beene seene vpon earth since his ascension but according vnto that forme of assumed flesh sitteth on the right hand of his Father which answere I take out of Vigilius cited here by M. PER. For he saith that Christ is departed from vs in the forme of a seruant that is according vnto his naturall shape of man but may neuerthelesse be very well with vs vnder the formes of bread and wine in the Sacrament which S. Augustine insinuateth in the very treatise alleaged by M. PERKINS saying that Christ is nowe with vs in foure sortes by Faith by the signe of the Crosse by Baptisme and by the Eucharist where making his manner of being with vs in the Eucharist distinct from his presence both by faith signe and grace doth shewe it to be a reall bodily presence which he teacheth most plainely vpon these wordes of the Psalme adore his foote-stoole concluding thereon Psal 98. that the same flesh which our Sauiour tooke of the blessed Virgin Mary was then and is nowe to be adored in the Sacrament therefore notwithstanding his being in heauen in forme of man he assuredly belieued his naturall body to be really present in the Eucharist So did S. Cyril another of M. PER. authours Libr. 12. cap. 31. who vpon S. Iohn auoucheth Christ by his flesh receiued in the Eucharist to sanctifie the soules and bodies of all communicants and to be wholy in euery one of them to vvhome I will joyne their equall S. Gregory of Nisse who saith Orat. de Paschate like as the God-head doth fill the vvhole vvorld euen so consecration is made in very many places and yet is it but one body so that by these worthy writers judgements Christes ascention to heauen doth not any whit hinder the reall presence of his body in the holy Sacrament And to dispatch here together that which M. PER. repeateth againe and againe that a true body cannot be in two places at once we plainely hold with the holy Fathers that one and the same body may by the omnipotent power of God be in as many places at once as it shall please him to set it That this hath no repugnance vvith true Philosophy shall be proued in the next argument And here by the warrant of Gods word I will proue that Christes body de facto hath beene in two places at once That since the ascension it sitteth at the right hand of God in heauen both we and they confesse but longe after his ascension Actor 9. he appeared bodily vnto S. Paul as he went towardes Damasco ergo his body hath beene in two places at once Caluin turneth himselfe on both sides seeketh all possible meanes to shift from the euidence of this place saying first In cap. 9. Actor Act. 22. vers 15 Act. 26 vers 16. that it was some voice only heard from heauen by S. Paul as at Christes baptisme but Christ was not there really This is said most manifestly against the plaine text God ordained that thou shouldest see the just one and heare a voice out of his owne mouth therefore he vvas really present and Christ saith to this end I appeared vnto thee And S. Paul himselfe vvitnesseth a 1. Cor. 3 vers 1.6 1. Cor. 15. vers 8. that he had seene Christ after his resurrection euen as the other Apostles had done which was in bodily presence in the same b Act. 9. vers 5. 4. Instit 17. § 29. chap. S. Paul demanded of him that appeared who art thou Lord and he answered I am IESVS was not he then present What can be more plainely set downe or is more often repeated in the very text of Scripture yet the blind obstinacy of Caluin was such that not being able to defend but that Christ appeared turneth himselfe the other way and had rather say that S. Paules eye-sight was so much strengthned and made so sharpe that it pearced through the heauens and did see Christ sitting there on the right hand of his Father and so Christ did not descend or was seene out of heauen but S. Paules sight mounted vp thether Reply This doctrine is first repugnant to himselfe vvho scoffeth at vs for maintayning that the Saints in heauen can heare our prayers 3. Instit 20. §. 24. and asketh howe they can haue so long eares and so sharpe eyes as to heare and see so farre off vvhich here notvvithstanding hee attributeth vnto a poore earthly creature nothing comparable to the Saints in heauen But besides that contradiction this his answere is much more absurde then the other For vvhome he imagineth to be so Eagle-eyed that he could see into heauen Act. 9. vers 8. the text vvitnesseth to be strooke starke blinde and not able to see the broad high-vvay before him Againe if that vision had beene through the vertue of S. Paules sight his companions should not haue beene partakers of it Act. 26. vers 13. Act. 9. vers 8. Act. 9. vers 17. but they did both see the light and also heard the voice though not so distinctly as to vnderstand it Further there passed many speaches betweene them Who art thou Lord What wilt thou haue mee to doe c. vvhich doth conuince a sensible and bodily presence Lastly it is said directly that Christ appeared vnto S. Paul in the way not that he had seene him in heauen so that nothing can be more certaine euen by the euidence of Gods vvord then that Christes body hath beene in two places at once as vvell may it be in two thousand or in as many more as it shall please God to imploy it for there is no greater repugnance in reason for being in many places then for being in tvvo at once S. Chrisost S. Ambros Primasius in cap. 10. And as you
Doctor void of partiallity Homil. 24 in praeoratione ad Corinth marry that of these wordes this is the sence and meaning That which is in the Chalice is the very same that flowed out of Christes side Note that the bloud of Christ is in the Chalice and so we need not runne so farre off to seeke it and saith further that we are made partakers of it with the like reall and close conjunction as the word of God and the nature of man were joyned together which was not by faith or imagination only but actually and substantially With vvhome accordeth S. Cyril vvho out of the same wordes of S. Paul proueth that Christes body is vnited with vs not only by faith or charity but bodily and according vnto the flesh saying When the vertue of the mysticall blessing is in vs Lib. 10. in Ioan. 13. doth it not make Christ to dwell in vs bodily by the participation of the flesh of Christ Here by the way obserue that the Apostle calleth the blessed Sacrament bread either because in exterior appearance it seemeth so to be as Angels appearing in the shape of men are in holy write commonly called men so the body of Christ being vnder the forme of bread is called bread or els for that bread in Scripture according to the Hebrewe phrase signifieth al kind of foode So is Manna called bread which was rather like the dewe Ioan. 6. vers 32. Psal 77. and so may our Sauiours body which is the most substantiall foode of our soules be called bread although it be nothing lesse then ordinary bread Lastly it is such bread as our Sauiour in expresse tearmes hath christened it when he said And the bread which I will giue you is my flesh Ioan. 6. vers 51. 1. Cor. 11. vers 29. Vers 27. for the life of the world Our fift argument is taken out of S. Paul He that eateth and drinketh vnworthily eateth and drinketh judgement to himselfe not discerning the body of our Lord and is guilty of the body and bloud of our Lord whence I argue thus Vnworthy receiuers who are destitute of that faith whereby they should receiue Christ according vnto the Protestants opinion or els they should not receiue vnworthily such vnworthy communicants I say doe receiue the body of Christ albeit vnworthily therefore it is not the receiuers faith that maketh it present but it is there present by the vvordes of consecration whether the party beleeue it or no or else howe should the man eate his judgement for not discerning Christes body and be guilty of his body the Protestants answere first That he is guilty of the body because he receiueth it not then when he should for lacke of faith But this glose is cleane contrary to the text that saith expresly That they receiue it by eating and drinking of it but yet vnworthily and all ancient Interpreters doe so expound it Let one S. Augustine serue in steed of the rest who saith De baptis contr Donatist lib. 5. cap. 8. That like as Iudas to whome our Lord gaue the morsell gaue place to the Deuill not by receiuing that which was euill but by receiuing of it euilly euen so euery one receiuing our Lordes Sacrament vnworthily doth not make it euill because he is euill or receiue nothing because he receiueth it not to saluation For it was the body and bloud of Christ euen to them of whome the Apostle saith He that eateth vnworthily eateth his owne damnation By which notable sentence of so worthy a Prelate the other cauill of our wrangling young-Masters is also confuted For they perceiuing that their former shift would not serue their turnes fly vnto a second that forsooth the vnworthie receiuer is guilty of Christes body because he abuseth the signe of it for the dishonour done to the picture redoundeth to the person himselfe Reply When we complaine of them for dishonouring of Images and tel them that they thereby dishonour the Saints alleadging this sentence That the dishonour done to the picture redoundeth to the person then they will not allowe of it which nowe they are glad to take hold of To the purpose we say first that the Sacrament is no picture of Christ no not in their owne opinion but a signe only and great difference is there betweene disfiguring a mans owne picture and abusing of some signe or signification of him neither is the disfiguring or breaking of a mans picture so heinous a fault if it be not done expresly in contempt of the person which formall contempt is not to be found in many vnworthy receiuers Lastly the Israelites that eate Manna or drunke of the Rocke vnworthily were not guilty of Christes body and bloud although those thinges were signes and figures of them therfore if there were nothing but a signe of Christes bodie in our Sacrament no man should be guilty of so heynous a crime for vnworthy receiuing of it but being by the verdict of S. Paul made guilty of damnation for not discerning Christes bodie it must needes followe that Christes body is there really present To these arguments collected out of holy Scriptures let vs joyne one other of no lesse authority taken from miracles done in confirmation of the reall presence For a true miracle cannot be done to confirme any vntruth or else God by whose only power they are wrought should testifie an vntruth which is impossible One miracle of preseruing a young boy aliue in a glasiers hot burning furnace I haue before rehearsed out of Nicephorus cited by M. PER. two others I will choose out of hundreths because they be recorded in famous Authors and my purpose is to be briefe Ex vita per Ioan. Diac. lib. 2. cap. 4. The first out of the life of S. Gregory the great surnamed by venerable Bede the Apostle of England This most honourable Bishop administring the blessed Sacrament came to giue it vnto the woman who had made those Hostes which he had consecrated She hearing S. Gregory say as the manner was and is The body of our Lord Iesus Christ preserue thy soule vnto euerlasting life smiled at it wherefore the holy Bishoppe withdrewe his hand and did not communicate her but laide that Host downe vpon the Altar Masse being done he called the woman before him and demanded before the people whom shee might haue scandalized what was the cause why shee beganne to laugh in that holy and fearefull misterie she muttered at the first but after answered that she knewe it to be the bread vvhich she her selfe had made and therefore could not beleeue it to be the body of Christ as he called it Then the holy man prayed earnestly to God that in confirmation of the true presence of Christes body in the Sacrament the outward forme of bread might be turned into flesh vvhich vvas by the power of God done presently and so was she conuerted to the true faith and all the rest confirmed in it The
question but that they heare all prayers made by vvhosoeuer to them and obtayne very many of their requests And as S. Gregory saith What doe they not see Lib. 12. Moral cap. 13. who see him that seeth all thinges yea contayneth all thinges within himselfe Yet M. PER. blusheth not to say that it is but a forgery of mans braine to imagine that the God-head is such a cleare glasse representing all thinges because it should then followe that the Angels who behold Gods face should be ignorant of nothing but the Angels haue learned some thinges of the Church as S. Paul witnesseth therefore they see not all thinges in God To this we answere that in God all thinges are represented and shine more brightly then in their owne naturall places yet doth not God communicate and reueale all thinges vnto euery body there present but his diuine nature in three persons Christ God and Man with all other naturall and ordinary thinges from the cope of heauen to the center of the earth are seene of euery Cytizen of heauen though with a different degree of clearenes but of Gods counsels concerning the gouernement of the world so much is only knowne vnto either Angell or Men as appertayneth vnto their state and that when it belongeth vnto them therefore the Angels might well not knowe many thinges belonging to the gouernement of the Church vntill they sawe it accomplished and therefore might be said to haue learned some such thing of the Church But as we haue said before it properly appertayneth vnto the state of Saints in heauenly blisse to knowe their friendes reasonable requests made vnto them or else their conditions should not be so perfect but that they might in equity require the bettering of it and consequently they could not be so throughly contented as their estate of perfect felicity in heauen doth demande and thus much of M. PER. reasons To which I will here adde one argument commonly vsed by the Protestants though M. PER. for the weakenesse of it perhaps thought best to omit it it is taken ab authoritate negatiuè which Schollers knowe to be naught worth Math. 11. vers 28. Christ saith come yee vnto me all yee that labour and be burdened and I will refresh you he saith not goe to the Saints but come to me I answere neither doth he say doe not goe to the Saints and therefore here is nothing against vs. We goe to Christ for remission of our sinnes which lye more heauy then a talent of lead vpon our backes and through our redeemers merits doe we craue pardon of them but to moue more effectually this our redeemer and God his father to haue pitty vpon vs we humbly desire the Saints his best beloued seruants to speake a good vvord in our behalfe acknowledging our selues vnvvorthy to obtayne any thing at Gods handes through our owne vngratefull wickednes Now that our Sauiour Christ IESVS doth very well like and approue the mediation of others euen to himselfe may be gathered out of very many euident texts of holy Scripture Math. 8. vers 13. for he at the intercession of the Centurion cured his seruant and * Math. 9 vers 2. seing the faith of them that brought a man sicke of the palsey before him he healed the sicke man and a Luc. 4. vers 38. at his disciples request cured S. Peters mother in lawe And vvhen the vvoman of Chanaan sued vnto him for her daughter b Math. 15 vers 23. he answered her not a word before his disciples had besought him for her by which and many such like recorded in the Gospell euery man that is not wilfully blinde may well see that the intercession of others for vs doth much preuaile euen with our soueraigne intercessor and mediator Christ IESVS himselfe nowe to his authorities Lib. 3. cōt Parmenia cap. 3. The first is out of S. Augustine Christian men commend each other in their prayers to God And who prayeth for all and for whome none prayeth he is the one and true mediatour I answere these wordes be rather for vs for approuing and confessing our Sauiour Christ to be the only mediatour of redemption as we haue already declared they teach that all Christians may commend themselues each to others prayers Nowe the Saints departed be Christians I trust as good as we or rather farre better therefor all other Christians may very well in S. Augustines judgement commend themselues vnto the Saints holy prayers because each one may commend himselfe to any others prayers Concerning the word Mediatour S. Augustine neuer attributeth it vnto any sauing only to our Sauiour taking it alwaies in the second signification aboue named to which three thinges are properly required according to S. Augustine first that he pray for all and that none pray for him which property M. PER. toucheth but misquoteth the place for it is in lib. 2. cap. 8. cont Parmenianum The second property and the most necessary of all is that he pay the full price and ransome of all our sinnes and that his redemption may in equall ballance counterpoise the grieuousnesse of our sinnes which is taken out of diuers places of Scripture The third which is the ground of al the rest is that the Mediatour be both God and Man that participating of both natures he may be as it vvere a naturall middle or meanes to reconcile the two Extreames and so as Man be able to suffer something to appease Gods wrath and as God to giue to that suffering of his man-hood infinite value making thereby Christs sufferinges more then sufficient to pay for the redemption of an hundred vvorldes if neede had beene And these proprieties gathered out of c Lib. 9. de ciuitate cap. 15. alibi S. Augustine and other Fathers will put downe M. PER. odde deuise of proprieties of a Mediatour all which make nothing against the intercession of Saints who be not in that sence to be called mediatours and yet cease not to pray for vs let vs then goe on M. PERKINS citeth secondly another sentence out of S. Augustine where he bringeth in our Sauiour saying Tract 22. in Iohan. Thou hast no whether to goe but to me thou hast no way to goe but by me Answere S. Augustine there alludeth vnto those vvordes of our Sauiour I am the way the truth and the life and saith that for life and truth vve haue no other way to seeke vnto but vnto Christ vvho according vnto his diuinity is truth and life vnto the vvorld And in this high degree of redemption and mediation he was the only way vnto his Father for neither the Gentiles by their morall vertues nor Iewes by the power of their law could without him leade them to God All this is very good doctrine but no whit more against praying to Saints then against commending of vs one to anothers prayers or vsing any other meanes of saluation as S. Augustine vpon
the like occasion doth himselfe plainly declare For vpon these wordes of S. Iohn If any man offend 1. Ioan. 2. tract 1. we haue an aduocate with the Father IESVS Christ the just one where he putteth this doubt but some man will say therefore doe not the Saints pray for vs doe not the Bishops and gouernours pray for the people After hee solueth this doubt concluding that all the members of Christes body doe pray one for another marry the head prayeth for all vvhere he most plainely sheweth that the soueraigne intercession or mediation of Christ the head doth not exclude the intercession of Saints departed no more then it doth of any other yet liuing M. PERKINS citeth also one sentence out of S. Chrysostome who hath vvritten thus Thou hast no neede of Patrones to God De perfect Euangel nor much running vp and downe to flatter and fawne vpon others for though thou be alone and want a Patrone and by thy selfe pray vnto God thou shalt obtayne thy desire Answere It seemeth by his wordes of running vp and downe and flattering of others vvhich Gods Saints vvill not endure that he speaketh against seeking vnto vaine-glorious and euill mortall men to be our Patrones to God which were folly But admit he meant the Saints departed then let vs take his whole meaning and not wrest his wordes to any other sence then he vvill allowe and like of he doth then often inueigh both against certayne rich men vvho hauing giuen some little almes to the poore thought themselues sure of pardon of their sinnes and of saluation through the poore mens prayers though they prayed not themselues and also against all such sluggish lazie persons as relyed wholy vpon the intercession of Saints not praying much for themselues vpon such as these doth S. Chrysostome often call to pray for themselues and not to trust wholy vnto the prayers of others perswading them that it were better to pray for themselues vvithout Patrones then leauing all to Patrons not to pray themselues at all But the best of all to be both to pray themselues and to imploy also good men and the Saints to pray for them this is his owne declaration in these his wordes Homil. 5. in Math. Let vs not like sluggards and slouthfull companions depend wholy vpon the merits of others for the prayers and supplications of Saints for vs haue their force and that surely very great but then truly when we our selues doe withall by our penitence request and sue for the same And making the like discourse in another place he concludeth thus Homil. 1. in 1. ad Thessal Knowing these thinges neither let vs despise the prayers of the Saints neither let vs cast all vpon them Nowe to the arguments for the Catholike party my first argument shal be to proue that we may pray to the Angels in heauen to blesse vs and to pray for vs to whome after our blessed Lady vve assigne the first place in our Lytanie We haue for our vvarrant the authority and example of the holy Patriarke Iacob expresly set downe in holy Scripture for prayer to Angels Genes 48.15 16. in these wordes God before whome my fathers Abraham and Isaac haue walked God who hath fedde me from my youth vnto this present day and the Angell that hath deliuered me from all euill blesse these children What can be more playne then that this blessed old Patriarke did pray vnto his good Angell Guardian Nay saith M. PER. for by the Angell there you â—â—st vnderstand Christ for that in Malachie Christ is signified by the Angell of the couenant A bonny reason because that an Angell is once in the old Testament vsed to signifie Christ therefore it shall signifie him in vvhat place soeuer it shall please the Protestants Neither doth an Angell in that one place singly put signifie Christ but with an addition the Angell of the couenant to distinguish that Angell from all others so that there is no appearance or colour of likelyhood out of that place so vnlike to interprete this It remayneth then that the vvord Angell be taken properly as it is most commonly in holy Scripture for an heauenly spirit appointed by God to keepe Iacob vvhich I confirme by the circumstance of the place because Iacob prayeth vnto that Angell as to one that vvas then extant and liuing that had also before deliuered him from many perils but Christ vvas not then borne nor had any doings in the vvorld therefore he did not pray to him Againe the wise Patriarke and Prophet must be made to speake very fondly if he should pray him that was not in rerum natura to blesse those children he might very well haue prayed God for Christes sake that vvas to come to blesse them but to pray Christ himselfe whome he knewe then not to be any where liuing or extant to blsse them hath no sence in it for blessing as all other working supposeth a reall being and existence of the same party To this example of Iacob vve may joyne the consaile that Eliphas the Thamite gaue vnto Iob Turne thy selfe vnto some of the Saints and Iobs owne practise * Cap. 19. vers 21. Tob. c. 12. vers 12. Iob cap. 5. vers 1. Haue pitty on me haue pitty on me at least you my friendes Vpon which place S. Augustine saith that Iob the holy man made intercession to the Angels or to the Saints to pray for him to vvhich we may also adde howe that Raphael offered vp good Tobias prayers to God and howe that another a Apoc. 8. vers 3. Angell did giue of the incense of prayers of all Saints vpon the Altar of gold which is before the throne of God Out of which places and such like I frame this argument The Angels be most holy and charitable creatures of themselues they also haue by Gods appointment charge ouer vs and doe assist vs wherevpon it followeth most clearely that they are most ready in vvord and deede to further all our good desires and honest demandes and consequently being by vs requested to pray for vs cannot refuse it To say that they haue no care of our prayers is both contrary to their charity and to their charge and the places in Scripture already cited to vvhich this may be added Christ to discourage men from offending children and little ones alleageth this inducement Math. 18. vers 10. That their Angels see the face of his father in heauen signifying that they vvould complaine of them to God and sue for seuere punishment against such offendours vvhich argueth that they doe very well knowe and carefully tender our good vvhich is also strengthned by an other place Luc. 15. vers 10. where our Sauiour declareth what great joy they make at the conuersion of a sinner Out of all vvhich textes is plainely to be collected that they knowe of our conuersion see the particular wrongs that be offered vs and the
thereunto requested Wherefore saieth M. PERKINS secondly there is a great difference betweene requesting one to pray for vs and by inuocation to request them that are absent for this is a worshippe that is giuen to them and a power to heare and helpe all that call vpon them Reply First that by inuocation we may pray vnto men S. Augustine teacheth directly grounding himselfe vpon the expresse text of Scripture Locut in Gen. 200. Gen. 48. vers 15. where Iacob commandeth that his name and the name of his fore-fathers be inuocated vpon of the children of Israel And vvhat is inuocation in English but the calling vpon one vvhich is as lawfull as the praying vnto him That we doe them an honour and worship thereby I grant and say that the Saints being better then the liuing are better worthy of that worship then the liuing Further that we assigne them a power to heare them that be absent more then the liuing can doe it is no maruaile for the perfection of their heauenly state requireth that prerogatiue as I haue more then once declared But because this point of their knowledge breedeth the greatest doubt of praying vnto the Saints let S. Augustine a most juditious Doctor and one that was not partiall in that matter deliuering his sentence grounded also vpon holy Scripture be hearkened vnto and followed he treating of the happynesse of Saints in heauen hath these vvordes Lib. 22. de ciuit 29. If the Prophet Helizeus being absent in body did see his seruant Giësy receiuing the gifts which Naaman the Syrian gaue him c. how much more in that spirituall body shall Saints see all thinges not only if they shut their eyes but also from whence they be in body absent this he confirmeth by that sentence of the Apostle 1. Cor. 13. ver 9.10 We knowe in part and in part doe we prophesie but when that shall come which is perfect then shall that be made voide which is in part c. Hence thus reasoneth S. Augustine If the knowledge of this life in such as the Prophets and Apostles were be no more in comparison of the Saints knowledge in heauen then is a little childe compared to a man and this which is in part to that which is perfect then surely if Helizeus and other Prophets did see thinges done farre distant from them yea thinges that were to be done many hundred yeares after their times they being without doubt indued with this admirable knowledge from God howe much abundantly shall all they in heauen enjoy this gift when their bodies shall not hinder them yea they shall not neede bodylie eyes to see thinges absent but with the hart or spirit they shall be present to them 4. Reg. 5. vers 26. as Helizeus was who said was not my hart present when the man returned from his chariot to meete thee Can any thing be more euident or more soundly proued then that the Saints in heauen haue great preheminence aboue all that liued vpon the earth to see and knowe thinges absent and farre distant from them which the same father proueth also by most euident experience in the fifteenth and sixteenth Chapters of his booke intituled de cura pro mortuis agenda And that you may perceiue that that is not the opinion of S. Augustine alone I will joyne the testimonies of three or foure other Fathers with him S. Cyril Patriarke of Hierusalem saith Euen as S. Peter did question Ananias Catach 16 Act. 5. willing him to tell whether he had sold his ground for so much so did the Prophet Helizeus though he were not ignorant of it aske his seruant Giësy whether he had not receiued money of Naaman the Syrian for saith he nothing done euen in the darke is hidden from the Saints S. Basil writeth thus Let a Virgin first of all feare her owne conscience L. de Virginitate and if shee be neuer so solitary yet hath shee her Angell guardian present whose sight shee must not contemne specially when as they haue Angels as it were patterns of virginity but before all Angels let her respect and reuerence her spouse Christ who is present euery where And why did I speake of an Angell for shee hath an innumerable company of Angels present and with them the holy spirits or soules of the Fathers for there is none of these who doth not see all thinges euery where not truly beholding them with corporall eyes but by a spirituall sight pearcing vnto the knowledge of all thinges The same doth S. Athanasius that famous ancient Doctor resolue in his 32. question Quaest 32. See S. Augustine also lib. 20. of the Citty of God the 22. Chapter Teaching that the Saints in heauen doe knowe in particular what is done among the damned in hell And S. Hierome doth proue against Vigilantius that The Saints who followe the Lambe whither soeuer he goeth be excluded from no place and scorneth that dreaming Heretike for imagining that vnlesse the soules of the Martirs did lye houering about their shrines they could not heare their prayers that went thither to pray affirming him therefore to be a monster worthy to be banished into the vttermost câ—asts of the earth Encherines a most holy and learned Arch-bishop of Lyons all most 1200. yeares since confirmeth the same grounding his discourse vpon the same texts of Scripture that S. Augustine did saying If the Prophet Helizeus absent in body did see his seruant Giësy taking gifts howe much more shall Saints in that spirituall body see all thinges not only if they shut their eyes but also from whence they are in body absent For then shall be that perfection of which the Apostle speaketh in part we knowe and in part doe we prophesie 1. Cor. 13. but when that shall come which is perfect it shall be voyded which is in part therefore when that shall come which is perfect and this corruptible body shall no longer cumber the soule but it shall haue a glorious body which shall nothing hinder it shall the Saints then neede the helpe of bodylie eyes to see such thinges which Helizeus absent needed not to behold his seruant The testimonies of so many vvorthy Fathers will I hope suffice to perswade any reasonable man that the Saints in heauen doe very well heare our prayers To these I will joyne that which M. PER. maketh our second objection because it doth fortifie the same Luc. 16. vers 24. Abraham not then in possession of heauenly knowledge after our doctrine but in heauen as the Protestants thinke did heare Diues from hell vvhich is further off from heauen then the face of the earth which we inhabite and therefore more easily might he haue heard any liuing body praying vnto him then he did that rich glutton out of hell M. PERKINS answereth That this is a parable and out of a parable nothing can be gathered but that which is agreable vnto the intent
vers 12. considering his owne frailty Marry very good hope and confidence ought we all to haue in respect of Gods infinite mercy and goodnesse and in the inestimable merits of our Lord and Sauiour IESVS Christ but by faith we cannot beleeue it vnlesse God doe extraordinarylie reueale any such thing vnto vs which he doth to very fewe of his best beloued and best tryed seruants In the matter of our difference he saith first That we teach not faith to be a knowledge of thinges beleeued but a reuerent assent vnto them whether they be knowne or vnknowne But this he saith very vntruly for we hold faith in his owne nature to comprehend a certayne kinde of knowledge though not so cleare and euident yet of as great assurance as is the knowledge of naturall thinges but the man harpeth vpon something else if he could hitte on it We say indeede that it is not of necessity for the simpler sort and ignorant people to reade the holy Scriptures and to goe fish their faith out of that profound Ocean but may content themselues with their Pastors instructions and with their Catechismes and other bookes of piety and deuotion albeit we wish them of better vnderstanding if they be not too curious and wilfull to reade the holy Scriptures vvith reuerence seeking humbly to better their knowledge and especially to amend their liues and in places of difficulty not to trust vnto their owne wits but to referre themselues to the exposition of the Catholike Church which is the pillar and fortresse of truth and there vpon vvholy to rely Yet vve require much more knowledge in the simpler sort of people then the Protestants doe for we teach that euery one is to knowe expresly the 12. articles of the Apostles Creede the tenne Commandements and those Sacraments which they themselues are to receiue Further also all such lawes and ordinances of either the spirituall or temporall Gouernour which doe appertayne vnto their owne estate that they may knowe howe both in spirituall and temporall matters to carry themselues vvithout offence Let those our Authors which teach cases of conscience be consulted in those points and you shall finde them to charge euery man in conscience to knowe all these thinges whatsoeuer some men haue thought to the contrary who be not in that allowed but disproued euen by the testimony of that Authour Banes vvhome M. PERKINS quoteth And touching praying in Latin the lawes of the Catholike Church doth not bind any man to pray in Latin who is not first bound to learne the Latin tongue that is men in holy orders are bound to their Latin Breuiary but no man ignorant of the Latin tongue must be admitted vnto holy orders for them that are ignorant of the Latin tongue vve haue diuers bookes of English prayers vvherein they may exercise themselues fruitfully If any deuout women or others who vnderstand not Latin desire to reade some selected and approued Latin prayers we doe not forbidde them because those prayers haue many priuiledges aboue others And vve doubt not but that many of them doe reade the same Latin prayers with much more humility attention and eleuation of their mindes vnto God and all goodnesse then thousandes of Protestants or Puritans who reade and pronounce gallantly many glorious English prayers composed very curiously when their harts be farre from God Lastly he dissenteth from vs for that we say That some articles of faith were at the first beleeued generally by an infolded faith which afterward being by generall Councels vnfolded and declared to be articles of faith were beleeued expreslie This implicity of faith touching articles of religion M. PER. rejecteth saying That all matters of faith are contained plainelie in the Scriptures This he saith without probation and it is by me in the question of Traditions refuted already therefore to that place I referre the reader OF PVRGATORY OVR CONSENT M. PERKINS Page 278. WE hold a Christian Purgatory by which we vnderstand first the afflictions of Gods children here on earth secondly the bloud of Christ is a Purgatory for our sinnes and so Augustine calleth the mercy of God our Purgatory To this I say that the word Purgatory may be taken diuersly and signifie many thinges which because they be not to the present purpose may be here well omitted THE DIFFERENCE WE differ in two thinges first concerning the place the Catholikes hold it to be vnder the ground into which mens soules after this life doe enter This we deny as hauing no warrant in the word which mentioneth only two places for men after this life Luc. 16. v. 25.26 Ioh. 3. Apoc. 22. heauen and hell Here M. PER. beginneth the disproofe of Purgatory with his ordinary hackney it is not mentioned in the Scriptures To which I answere first that it is as shall be proued hereafter but if it were not yet were it to be beleeued because it vvas receiued by Tradition euen from the Apostles time Besides this fault in M. PER. argument there is another more childish to wit because there is no mention made of Purgatory in three or foure places by him quoted he concludeth that it hath no warrant at all in any other place of Scriptures as who should say there is no Doctor of Phisicke in two or three Colledges of Cambridge therefore there is not one in all the Vniuersity besides Finally Luc. 16. vers 25. the very first place by him cited ouerthroweth flatly his owne position it being truly vnderstood according vnto the generall exposition of the most learned Doctors for Abraham then was not in heauen but in a third place called Lymbo Patrum because before Christ had paid their ransome by his death on the crosse the Fathers of the old Testament were holden captiue and so of Christ it is said That ascending on high he ledde captiuity captiue Ephes 4. vers 8. Hebr. 9. v. 8. 15. And S. Paul proueth by the entring of the high Priest only into the second part of the Tabernacle called Sancta Sanctorum that the way of the Holies was not then manifested but by the bloud of Christ to be laid open and they by the death of the testatour to receiue the eternall redemption But this is by the way to shew the wisdome of the man to bring one text in controuersie to established another But he goeth forward and saith stoutly that there can be no place for Purgatory for that it is saide That they who dyed in the Lord Apoc. 14. vers 13. are bidden to rest from their labours which cannot be saith he if they goe into Purgatory And to cut off all cauils it is further said their workes that is the reward of their workes followe them euen at the heeles I answere first that we haue here by the way heauen to be the reward of workes by M. PER. confession which in the question of merits he denied most absolutely Secondly that albeit they who die in our
in Adam c. I therefore ô my prayse my life and God of my hart laying aside for a season her good workes for which I rejoycing doe giue thee thankes doe nowe pray vnto thee for the sinnes of my Mother heare me I beseech thee through the salue of our woundes that hanged vpon the tree and nowe sitting at thy right hand doth plead for vs. I knowe that shee did many workes of mercy and from her hart forgaue all them that trespassed against her doe thou ô Lord also forgiue her her trespasses if shee committed any after baptisme Pardon her pardon her ô Lord I beseech thee and enter not into judgement with her let thy mercy surpasse thy judgements because thy wordes are true and thou hast promised mercy to the mercifull c. Could that most vvorthy Doctor more directly crosse Caluins false relation of his coldnesse in this matter or in better manner cleare himselfe from his spitefull slaunders Caluin blushed not to say that S. Augustine out of passion prayed for his mother but he himselfe relateth howe he did it some yeares after her death of setled judgement hauing his hart cured from humane affection And thus I end this question of Purgatory OF THE SVPREMACY IN CAVSES ECCLESIASTICAL OVR CONSENT M. PERKINS Page 283. TOuching the point of Supremacy Ecclesiasticall I will set downe howe neare we may come vnto the Roman Church in two conclusions The first conclusion For the founding of the primitiue Church the Ministery of the word was distinguished by degrees not only of order but also of power and Peter was called to the highest degree for Apostles were aboue Euangelists and Euangelists aboue Pastors and teachers nowe Peter was an Apostle and so aboue all Euangelists and Pastors howsoeuer he were not aboue other Apostles The second conclusion Among the 12. Apostes Peter had a three-fold priuiledge or prerogatiue first of authority I meane a preheminence in regard of estimation whereby he was in reuerence aboue the rest of the twelue Secondly of primacy because he was the first named as the fore-man of the quest Thirdly of principality in regard of measure of grace wherein he excelled the rest of the twelue but Paul excelled Peter euery way in learning zeale and vnderstanding as farre as Peter excelled the rest ANNOTATION MAster PERKINS as his manner is at the first vvould seeme to approch somewhat neare vnto the Catholike doctrine and therefore giueth as braue wordes for S. Peters prerogatiues as we doe to wit That he surpassed the other Apostles both in authority primacy and principality but pâ—â—â—ently after his old fashion he watereth his former wordes with such cold glosses that they shrinke in exceedingly for all Peters priuiledges doe extend no further then that he excelled the rest in priuate grace of learning zeale and vnderstanding and was therefore somewhat more esteemed then the rest and named first so that with M. PER. a great mill-post is quickly thwited as they say into a pudding pricke Againe all this is besides the purpose for the question is not vvhich of the Apostles excelled in those priuate gifts of vnderstanding zeale and piety for it is not vnlikely hat S. Iohn the Euangelist who sucked diuine mysteries out of our Sauiours breast was not inferior to either S. Peter or S. Paul in these spirituall graces of heauenly knowledge and charity but vve leauing these secretes vnto him vvho is the judge of the hart and of his inward gifts doe affirme S. Peter to haue beene aduanced aboue all the rest of the Apostles in the externall gouernement of Christes Church and the Bishops of Rome his successors to inherite the same supremacy THE DIFFERENCE by M. PERKINS THe Church of Rome giueth to Peter a supremacy vnder Christ aboue all persons and causes this standeth in a power to determine which bookes of Scripture be Canonicall and what is the true sence of any doubtfull place of them and for this purpose to call and assemble generall Councels and to confirme the decrees of them and by these meanes to decide all controuersiâ—â— about matter of faith Besides he can excommunicate any Christian be he King or Kaesar if they by obstinate withstanding Gods lawes or the decrees of holy Church shal justly deserue it Moreouer to him it doth belong to make Ecclesiasticall Canons and lawes for the due discipline and ordering of matters of the Church which doe binde in conscience Finally to confirme the election of Bishops and to decide all such greater controuersies as by appeale are brought vnto him from any part of Christendome These indeede be the chiefest points of the Popes supremacy as for that of pardoning of sinnes it is no proper part of his primacy but common vnto all not only to Bishops but also to Priests We saith M. PERKINS hold that neyther Peter nor any Bishop of Rome had or hath any such supremacy ouer the Catholike Church but that all supremacy vnder Christ is appertaining to Kinges and Princes with him in their Dominions And that our doctrine is good and theirs false I will make manifest by sundry reasons First Christ must be considered as he was a King two wayes first as he is God so is he King ouer al by right of creation and so as God hath deputies on earth to gouerne the world namely Kings and Princes Secondly he is King by right of redemption ouer the whole Church which he hath redeemed with his pretious bloud and so as mediatour and redeemer he hath no fellowe nor deputy for no creature is capable of this office to doe in the roome and stead of Christ that which himselfe doth because euery worke of the mediatour must arise from the effectes of two natures concurring in one action namely the God-head and Man-hood Againe Christes Priest-hood cannot passe from his person to any other whence it followeth that neyther his Kingly nor his Propheticall he vvould haue said Priestly office can passe from him to any creature Nay it is needlesse for Christ to haue a deputy considering that a deputy only serueth to supply the absence of the principall whereas Christ is alwayes present by his word and spirit it may be said that the Ministers in the worke of the ministery are Christes deputies I answere that they are no deputies but only actiue instruments because they doe only vtter the word but it is Christ that worketh in the hart In like manner in excommunication it is Christ that cutteth that excommunicate person from the Kingdome of heauen and the Church doth only declare this by cutting him off from the rest of Christes people vntill he repent so that in all Ecclesiasticall actions Christ hath no deputies but only instruments the whole action being personall in respect of Christ. Is not this trowe you a prety peece of an argument but we must beare with the length of it because it alone will serue as M. PER. opineth to ouerthrowe many points of Popery let it be therefore wel
the holy Ghost in penning this passage hath as fully preuented this euasion as it was possible by such a particular description of Peters owne person as a curious lawyer could not in so few wordes haue done it more precisely For Christ specifieth both his former name of â—inâ—â—â— and his Fathers name Ionas and then his owne newe name Peter and so particularized singled out from the rest directeth his speech to him I say to thee thâ—â— art Peter c. How could he better haue expressed himselfe to haue spoken to Peter particularly Againe he said before that Peter had not learned that his confession of flesh and bloud but by the reuelation of his heauenly Father vvhereby he signifieth that Peter had not receiued his answere from his fellow Apostles or spoke it as deliuered by conference from them but out of his owne hart inspired by the holy Ghost vvherefore to him alone were his vvordes following directed And thus much concerning the promise which our Sauiour made vnto S. Peter of the Supremacy nowe to the wordes of performance which are written in S. Iohn Iob. c. 21. vers 15. IESVS faith to Peter Simon the sonne of Iohn dost thou loue me more then these he saith to him yea Lord thou knowest that I loue thee he saith to him feede my lambes He saith to him againe Simon of Iohn loâ—est thou me yea Lord thou knowest that I loâ—e thee he saith to him feede my lambes He saith to him the third time Simon of Iohn louest thou me Peter was strooken fadde because he said to him the third time louest thou me And he said vnto him Lord thou knowest all thinges thou knowest that I loue thee he saith vnto him feede my sheepe Amen amen I say to thee when thou wast younger thou diddest gird thy selfe c. These vvordes haue I set downe at length that euery one may first see and be well assured that they vvere spoken to S. Peter only because Christ doth first seuer part him from the rest saying Dost thou loue me more then these to wit then the other Apostles vvho were then present Againe Peter vvas sad and began to misdoubt himselfe vvhich argueth that he tooke it spoken to himselfe and sheweth playnely that he spoke in his owne name only and thirdly the wordes following Amen I say vnto thee are without all question spoken particularly to Peter Nowe that Christ in giuing him chardge to fâ—ede his lambes and sheepe did giue him the supreme gouernement ouer his Church I proue first by the word pasce feede or be thou Pastor of my flocke for it doth signifie not bare feeding but to feede as a sheepe-heard doth his sheepe which is not only to prouide them meate but to keepe them also from the woulfe to cure their diseases to leade or driue them whither he will briefly to rule and gouerne them And this word pasce and much more the Greeke Poimaine is frequent in holy Scripture in this sence of gouerning see psal 2. vers 9. Thou shalt rule them in an yron rodde Michaeae 5. vers 2. Math. 2. vers 6. Apocal. 19. vers 15. vvhere the Greeke word Poimaino is put for to rule and gouerne And in the 77. psalme v. 71. Dauid was chosen to feede his seruant Iacob and Israell his in heritance that was to rule ouer them but like a good sheepe-heard mildly vigilantly and rather for the good of the sheepe then for his owne pleasure or profit Nowe that the chiefe feeding and supreme gouernement of all Christs flocke was committed vnto him it appeareth first by those wordes of our Sauiour to him Doest thou loue me more then these why should he require greater charity in S. Peter then in the rest of the Apostles but for that he meant to aduance him to a chardge aboue the rest secondly in that he committed to Peter the feeding of both sheepe and lambes that is of both the Temporalty signified by the lambes and of the Clergy vvho be sheepe let vs heare S. Leo. Againe Serm. 3. dâ— anniuers Assumpt suae In that he committeth to him absolutely without exception of any his sheepe feede my sheepe he maketh him Pastor of his whole flocke as S. Bernard whome M. PER. often alledgeth against vs in this question doth very learnedly inferre Lib. 2. de consid cap. 8. Thou saith he wilt aske me howe I proue that both sheepe and Pastor are committed and credited to thee euen by our Lordes word For to whome of all I will not say Bishops but Apostles were the sheep so absolutely and without limitation committed if thou loue me Peter feede my sheepe he saith not the people of this Kingdome or of that City but my sheepe whosoeuer therefore will acknowledge himselfe to be one of Christes sheepe must submit himselfe to be gouerned by S. Peter or by some of his successours You see then by the very wordes and circumstances of the text that the supremacy is giuen to S. Peter let vs heare whither the most learned and holy auncient Fathers haue not so vnderstood them S. Cyprian saith To Peter our Lord after his resurrection said De vnitat Eccles feede my sheepe and builded his Church vpon him alone Epiphanius in Ancorato This is he who heard spoken to him feede my sheepe to whome the fold is credited alluding to that place Iob. 10. vers 16. Lib. 2. de Sacerdâ—r there shall be one Pastor and one fold S. Chrysostome Why did our Lord shedde his bloud truly to redeeme those sheepe the chardge of which be committed to Peter and to his successours And a little after Christ would haue Peter indued with such authority and to be farre aboue all his other Apostles for he saith Peter doest thou loue me more then these In cap. 2. vers 21. see him also in his learned Commentaries vpon that text of S. Iohn S. Augustine also vpon the same place saith That he committed his sheepe to Peter to be fedde that is saith he to be taught and gouerned And because he produceth S. Gregory against vs he must giue vs leaue to cite him for vs. Lib. 4. epist 76. He saith It is euident to all that knowe the Gospell that by our Lordes mouth the chardge of the whole Church is committed vnto Peter Prince of the Apostles for vnto him it is said Peter doest thou loue me feede my sheepe to him is it also said Luc. 22. vers 31. Behold Satan hath required to sift you as wheate but I haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not and thou once conuerted confirme thy brethren c. By these two places of holy Scripture to omit for breuities sake twenty others it is cleare enough to them who desire to see the truth that S. Peter by our Sauiours owne choise and appointment vvas not only preferred before all the rest of the Apostles in some particular gifts but vvas made also gouernour of his Church Nowe
Secondly they make him much inferiour vnto the other persons for they teach in their French Catechismes that the Father alone is to be adored in the name of the Sonne In cap. 6. 17. Isa in 16. Marc. And Caluin against Gentil saith that the title of creatour belongeth only to the Father and else where that the Father is the first degree cause of life and the Sonne the second And that the In 26. Math. v. 64. Father holdeth the first ranke of honour and gouernement and the Sonne the second where the holy Ghost is either quite excluded from part with the Father and the Sonne or at most must be content with the third degree of honour 9. I beleeue the holy Catholike Church the communion of Saints First where as there is but one Catholike Church one as the Councell of Nice expresly defineth following sundry textes of the word of God they commonly teach that there be two Churches one inuisible of the elect another visible of both good and bad Secondly they imagine it to be holy holy by the imputation of Christes holinesse to the elected Bretheren and not by the infusion of the holy Ghost into the hartes of all the faithfull Thirdly they cannot abide the name Catholike in the true sence of it Catholike that is they wil not beleeue the true Church to haue beene alwaies visibly extant since the Apostles time and to haue bin generally spread into all Countries otherwise they must needes forsake their owne Church which began with Friar Luther and is not receiued generally in the greatest part of the Christian world Finally they beleeue no Church no not their owne in all points of faith but hold that the true Church may erre in some principall points of faith Howe then can any man safely relie his saluation vpon the credite of such an vncertaine ground erring guide may they not then as well say that they doe not beleeue the one Catholike Church because they doe as well not beleeue it as beleeue it And as for the communion of Saints their learned masters doe commonly cassier it out of the Creede and that not without cause For by the Saints vnderstanding as the Apostles did al good Christians whither aliue or departed this world they that deny praier to Saints and for the soules in Purgatory haue reason to reject the common society entercourse that is betweene the Saints and the mutuall honour and help which such good Christian soules doe yeeld and afford one to another 10. The forgiuenesse of sinnes It is not easily to find what is their setled opinion touching the forgiuenes of originall sinne in Infants Some attribute it to Baptisme but that cannot stand with their common doctrine that Sacraments haue no vertue in them to remit sinnes or to giue grace Others say that God without any meanes doth then when they be baptised of himselfe immediately justifie them but that cannot stand in their owne doctrine because Infants want the instrumēt of faith to lay hold on that justice then offered by God and therefore cannot being so yonge take it vnto them Others will haue Infants sanctified in their mothers wombe by vertue of a couenant which they suppose God to haue made with old father Abraham and all his faithfull seruants that forsooth their seede shall be holy But this is most phantastical and contrary to the Scriptures and daily experience for Isaac was the sonne of promise and yet Esau his sonne was a reprobate Dauides father was a Godly Israelite and yet Dauid affirmeth Psal 50. that he himselfe was conceiued in iniquities and we may see whole Countries nowe turned Turkes whose ancestors were good Christians therefore not all the soules of the faithfull are sanctified in their mothers wombes Secondly how euil soeuer they agree about the remission of sinne yet there is a perfect consent among them that such relikes of originall sinne remaine in euery man baptised and sanctified that it infecteth all and euery worke he doth with deadly sinne yea that which remaineth is properly sinne in it selfe though it be not imputed to the party so that sinne is alwaies in them though their sinnes be neuer so well forgiuen And as for the Sacrament of Penance by which we hold al sinnes committed after Baptisme to be forgiuen they doe renounce the benefit of it and are at vtter defiance with it 11. The resurrection of the bodies Whether Farel the first Apostle of the Geneuian Gospel doubted thereof or no let his successor Caluin tell you who answereth Farels letter thus Episto ad Farellum That the resurrection of this our flesh doth seeme to thee incredible no meruaile c. Againe many of them teach that Christ tooke not his bloud againe which he shed vpon the crosse yea some of them are so gracelesse as to say that his pretious bloud wherewith we were redeemed Vide Conradum li. 1. art 20. rotted away on the earth 1600. yeares agoe If then it be not necessary to a true resurrection to rise againe with the same bloud why is it necessary to rise againe with the same bones and flesh the one being as perfect a part of a mans body as the other 12. Life euerlasting First Captaine Caluin holdeth it for very certaine that no soule doth enter into the joyes of heauen wherein consisteth life euerlasting vntill the day of doome 3. Institu 25. sess 6. These be his wordes the soules of the Godly hauing ended the labour of this war-fare doe goe into a blessed rest where they expect the enjoying of the promised glory And that all thinges are holden in suspence vntill Christ the redeemer appeare whose opinion is yet better then was his predecessor Luthers For he teacheth in many places that the soules of the Godly departing from their bodies Enarra in Gen. c. 26. In Ecclesi c. 9. v. 10. haue no sence at all but doe lie fast a sleepe vntill the latter day Take this one for a tast Another place to proue that the dead feele or vnderstand nothing wherefore Salomon thought the dead to be wholy a sleepe and to perceiue nothing at all And againe the sleepe of the soule in the life to come is more profound then in this life And Luther with this one position of his as that famous historiographer Iohn Sleidan recordeth ouerthrewe two points of Popery Li. 9. hist to wit praying to Saintes for they are so fast a sleepe that they cannot heare vs and praying for the dead For they in Purgatory slept also so soundly that they felt no paines A meete foundation surely to build such false doctrine vpon In 20. Luc hom 35. But Brentius is most plaine in this matter who ingeniously confesseth that albeit there were not many among them that did professe publikely the soules to die with the body yet the most vncleane life which the greatest part of their followers did lead doth clearely shewe that in their hartes they thinke no life to be
well to declare why Melchisedecke brought forth bread and wine because he was a Priest that vsed to Sacrifice in that kinde and to honour and thanke God for that victory he either did then presently or before had sacrificed it and as such sanctified foode made a present vnto Abraham of it who needed not either for himselfe or for his souldiers any victuals because he retourned loaden vvith the spoile of foure Kinges wherefore the bread and wine that he brought forth was a Sacrifice and not common meate And if further proofe needed this is sufficiently confirmed by the Fathers already cited who all teach that bread and wine brought forth then by him were Melchisedecke his Sacrifice a figure of ours I will yet adde one more out of that most ancient Patriarke Clement of Alexandria L. 4. strom versus finem who saith Melchisedecke King of Salem Priest of the most high God gaue bread and wine being a sanctified foode in figure of the Eucharist The Protestants feeling themselues wonderfully pinched and wringed with this example of Melchisedecke assay yet to escape from it a third way For saith M. PER. be it graunted that Melchisedecke offered bread and wine and that it was also a figure of the Lordes supper yet should bread and wine he absurd tipes of no bread nor wine but of the bare formes of bread and wine Reply The thing prefigured must be more excellent then the figure as the body surpasseth farre the shadowe so albeit the figure vvere but bread and wine yet the thing prefigured is the body and bloud of Christ vnder the formes of bread and wine sacrificed in an vnbloudy manner as bread and wine are sacrificed without shâ—dding bloud and therein principally consisteth the resemblance And thus much of our first argument Nowe to the second The Paschall lambe was first sacrificed vp by the Master of the family and then afterward eaten as a Sacrament but the Eucharist succeedeth in roome of that as the verity doth to the figure therefore it is first sacrificed before it be receiued M. PER. first denyeth the Paschall lambe to haue beene sacrificed but yeeldeth no reason of his deniall and therefore might without any further adoe be rejected Yet fore-seing that we might easily proue it to be sacrificed by expresse Scripture for Christ saith to his Disciples Mar. 14. vers 12. Exod. 12. vers 6. Goe and prepare a place to sacrifice the passe-ouer or Paschall lambe also in Exodus Yee shall sacrifice the lambe the foure-tenth day of the Moneth and in many other places to this hath he nought els to say but that Sacrifice in those places is taken improperly for to kill only His reason is because that in one place of Scripture the word Sacrifice is taken saith he for to kill but in more then one hundreth it is taken otherwayes and that properly Why then should we not take it there as it doth vsually and properly signifie rather then improperly not any reason doth he render for it at all but because it made so plaine against him he must needes shift it off so wel as he could But what if in the very place where he saith it is taken for to kill only and not for to Sacrifice he be also deceiued then hath he no colour to say that in any place it is taken otherwise Surely the reason that he alleageth for it is very insufficient For by Iacobs bretheren inuited to his feast may be vnderstood according to the Hebrewe phrase men of his owne religion who might well come to his Sacrifice wherefore S. Paul calleth the Romans Corinthians and men of all nations that were Christians his bretheren But if the Paschall lambe were not properly sacrificed howe could S. Paul resemble Christ crucified vnto the Paschall Sacrificed saying 1. Cor. 5. vers 7. Dialog cuÌ„ Triph. Our Paschall lambe Christ is sacrificed Surely that famous and ancient Martyr Iustine vvho vvas best acquainted vvith the rites of that people himselfe being bredde and brought vp among them saith most plainely That the killing of the Paschall lambe among the Iewes was a solemne Sacrifice and a figure of Christ. Wherefore Master PERKINS prouideth an other answere to our argument and saith That if it were graunted that the passe-ouer were both a Sacrifice and Sacrament yet would it make much against them For they may say that the supper of the Lord succeedeth it only in regard of the mayne end thereof which is to increase our communion with Christ. What is this a Gods blessing if that be all the vse of it the Lordes supper may also bee no Sacrament at all for many other thinges besides Sacraments increase our communion with Christ But to the purpose our Lordes supper and also the Paschall lambe vvere instituted not only to increase our communion vvith Christ but also to render thankes to God for benefits receiued as their Paschall for their deliuery out of the land of bondage so our Eucharist for our redemption from sinne and hell and therefore as they are Sacraments to feede our soules so are they true Sacrifices to giue thankes to God for so high and singuler benefits And because I loue not to leaue my reader in matter of diuinity naked reasons vvithout some authority heare vvhat S. Ambrose speaking of Priests ministring the Lordes supper saith Lib. 1. in Lucam When we doe offer Sacrifice Christ is present Christ is sacrificed for Christ our passe-ouer is offered vp S. Leo is yet more plaine vvho speaking of the passe-ouer saith Serm. 7. de pass That shadowes might giue place to the body and figures to the present verily the old obseruance is taken away by the newe Testament one Sacrifice is turned to an other and bloud excludeth bloud and so the legall feast whiles it is changed is fulfilled Marke howe the Eucharist succeedeth the Paschall lambe the Sacrifice of the Paschall being changed into the Sacrifice of Christes body Our third argument is selected out of these vvordes of the Prophet Malachy Cap. 1. vers 11. I will take no pleasure in you saith the Lord of Hostes and I will not receiue a gift from your handes for from the East vnto the West great is my name among the Gentils and in euery place a cleane oblation is sacrificed to my name Hence we inferre that after the reprobation of the Iewes and calling of the Gentils that is in the state of the newe Testament a cleane Sacrifice shall be offered vnto God of the Gentils being made Christians as vvitnesseth the spirit of God in the holy Prophet ergo it cannot be denyed of Christians M. PERKINS answereth That by that cleane Sacrifice is to be vnderstood the spirituall Sacrifice of prayers because that the Apostle exhorting vs to pray for all states hath these wordes Lifting vp pure handes What good Sir are cleane handes and a cleane Sacrifice all one vvith you a worshipfull exposition This man conferreth places of
Scripture very handsomely together and would no doubt write a faire Commentary vpon the text if he were let alone but yet tell me I pray you by the way howe Christians can lift vp such pure handes and offer so cleane a Sacrifice if al their best workes be defiled with sinne and no cleaner then a filthy menstruous cloute as you doe teach But to confute him directly our Lord speaketh there to the Priestes of the old lawe and rebuketh them sharpely for their fault committed in their Sacrifices offered to him and therefore foretelleth them that he will reject al their Sacrifices and accept of an other cleane Sacrifice among the Gentils Nowe as Sacrifice in the former part of his speach is taken most properly as no man can denie so must it be in the latter or else there were a great equiuocation in that sentence and no plaine opposition of Sacrifice to Sacrifice cleane to polluted And if he had reprehended the Iewes for their vnpure prayers then had it beene correspondent to haue said that he vvould haue receiued cleane prayers of others in lieu of them but inueighing against Priestes and sacrifices the very order and proportion of the sentence necessarily requireth that for those euill Priestes and poluted sacrifices he would establish good Priestes and cleane sacrifices according vnto the proper signification of the wordes Againe God is not so extreamely bent against the Iewes nowe but that he would receiue the spirituall Sacrifice of prayer and thankes-giuing euen from them if they doe offer it but he speaketh there of a kinde of Sacrifice that he vvill not receiue from their handes therefore that Sacrifice cannot be vnderstood to be any such spirituall thing but a true proper kind of Sacrifice And Iustine Martyr whome M. PER. citeth is so farre off from saying supplications and thanks-giuing to be the only perfect Sacrifices that Christians haue that in the very same Dialogue he applieth this prophesie of Malachie vnto the Sacrifice of the Masse saying That euen then Malachie the Prophet did speake of our Sacrifices which are offered vp in all places to wit of the bread and Chalice of the Eucharist which his equall Ireneus cited also by M. PER. doth more amply deliuer in these wordes Christ tooke bread and gaue thankes L. 4. cont Haeres cap. 32. saying This is my body and that in the Chalice be confessed to be his bloud which the Church receiuing from the Apostles doth offer to God through the whole world as the first fruites of his giftes of which Malachie one of the twelue Prophets did prophesie thus I take no pleasure in you c. citing the place all at large It is to be noted that in the Hebrewe text and Greeke translation there is in the text of Malachie before a cleane Sacrifice this word incense Incense is offered to my name and a cleane Sacrifice the which the ancient Interpreters doe expound of prayer and make it a distinct thing from the Sacrifice there also distinctly put Orat. cōt Iud. ca. 9. S. Augustine doth proue out of this place of Malachy that the Leuiticall Sacrifices should all cease and further that though all their Sacrifices ceased yet there should stil remaine a true Sacrifice to be offered by the Christians to the true God of Israell and biddeth them open their eyes and see it And in an other place specifieth vvhat that Sacrifice is Li. 18. de ciuit c. 35 Li. 1. cōt Aduersar legis Prophet cap. 20. Lib. 4. de fide c. 14. saying Nowe we see this Sacrifice by the Priest-hood of Christ after the order of Melchisedecke to be offered and againe They knowe who read what Melchisedecke brought forth when he blessed Abraham to wit bread wine and they are partakers of it and doe see such a Sacrifice to be offered nowe to God throughout the whole world Theodoret vpon that place of Malachy doth expresly teach that according to his prophesie There is now offered the immaculate Lambe in lieu of all their Sacrifices And S. Iohn Damascene speaking of the blessed Sacrament saith This is that pure and vnbloudy Sacrifice that our Lord by his Prophet did foretell to be offered from the rising of the sunne vnto the setting Thus much of the three first arguments which M. PER. propounded in our fauour out of the olde Testament but he hath skipped ouer other three which we haue in the newe of which I must needes stand vpon one because it is the ground of all the rest the other two I am content to omitt for breuities sake it is taken out of the wordes of consecration and as our fourth argument may be framed thus Christ at his last supper did properly sacrifice vnto God his owne body and bloud vnder the formes of bread and wine but what Christ then and there did the same is to be done in the Church by his ordinance vntill the worldes end ergo There is and alwayes must be a proper Sacrifice in the true Church They doe denie that Christ offered any such Sacrifice in his last supper we proue it thus Luc. 22. by his owne wordes For he saith That his body which he gaue them to eate was euen then giuen for them to God that his bloud was then presently shed for remission of their sinnes But to offer his body and bloud to God by such a sacred action and vnder such visible creatures to be there eaten is properly to Sacrifice ergo Christ at his last supper did properly offer Sacrifice They answere that albeit it be said in the present tense then giuen and shedde yet the meaning is that it should be giuen only the morrowe after on the Crosse the present tense being put for the future further adde that in the Canon of the Masse the verbe is put in the future tense We reply that men may not at their pleasure change tenses or else the Iewes might defend that our Messias were not yet borne and if we proue it saying The Word is made flesh they may by this licence of changing the present tense into the future say that it is not so yet but it shall be hereafter therefore to flie vnto chopping and changing the text without any reason or authority is rather to shift off then to defend a cause well But say they it is in the Masse booke effundetur God helpe the poore men that louing the Masse no better are driuen yet from the plaine text of holy Scripture to flie to the Masse-booke for succour but it vvill not serue their turne because both are true and agree vvell together For Christes bloud vnder the forme of vvine vvas presently sacrificed and shedde at his last supper and the same in his owne forme vvas to be shedde the morrowe after on the Crosse and againe vnder the forme of wine also was to be shedde in the same Sacrament vnto the worldes end so that truly properly both may be said it is