lawfull for any to inuent allegories of scripture as it seemeth good to them selues THE SECOND PART OF THE SIXTH QVEtion to whom the chief authoritie to expound Scripture is committed The Papistes error 9 IT was decreed in the Councell of Trent that scripture should be expoūded as the Church expoundeth it and according to the common and consonant cōsent of the fathers Sect. 4. The Rhemistes say that the sense of the scriptures must be learned of the fathers and pastors of the Church Praefat. Sect. 18. If the fathers agree not the matter is referred to a generall Councell if there it be not determined we must haue recourse to the Pope and his Cardinals The Iesuite dare not referre the matter to the Pope alone to expound scripture but ioyneth the Colledge of Cardinals with him Bellarm. lib. 3. de script cap. 3. 1 They obiect that place Deut. 17.9 where the people are commaunded to resorte vnto the Priest or Iudge in doubtfull matters Ergo there ought to be a chief and supreme iudge in Ecclesiasticall matters Bellarm. We aunswere First here the ciuill Magistrate and the Iudge are ioyned together as ver 12. Wherefore if they will gather hereby that the Pope must be supreme Iudge in all Ecclesiasticall matters then the Emperour ought to be as well in ciuill Secōdly the text saith they shal come to the Priests ver 9. assigning many not to one onely Priest Thirdly they must iudge according to the law v. 11. not as they list thē selues Fourthly here is no mentiō made of doubts in interpreting scripture but of controuersies that may fall out betweene man and man either Ecclesiasticall to be decided by the Priest or ciuill by the Magistrate Fiftly we graunt that in euery country there ought be a supreme and high seate of iudgement for determining of controuersiall matters betweene men but it foloweth not that there should be a supreme iudge ouer the whole Church especially in such matters as this concerning the sense of the scriptures which i◠not commited to the iudgement of men neither is any such controuersie named in that palce ver 8. 2 Ecclesiastes 12.11 The wisemā cōpareth the wordes of the wise to nayles which are fastned geuen by one pastor Ergo the Pope is supreme iudge We aunswere the wise men are here vnderstood to be the Pastors and Ministers of Gods word but this one pastor signifieth neither the high Priest in the old law nor the Pope in the new but Iesus Christ the high shepheard for our soules What great boldnesse is this to attribute that to the Pope which is onely proper to Christ 3 They also picke out some places in the new Testament as Math. 16.19 to thee will I geue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen Christ saith so to Peter Ergo the Pope hath authoritie to expound scripture We aunswere First by the keyes here is meant commission to preach the Gospell not onely to expound doubtes Secōdly they were geuen to all the Apostles not to Peter onely Math. 28. v. 18.19 Thirdly the Pope is not successor of Peter no more then any other godly Bishop nor so much vnlesse he folow Peters steps So they abuse that place Math. 18.17 he that will not heare the Church c. Ergo the Bishops and chief pastors must expound the doubt in scriptures Aunswere First our Sauiour speaketh here of the discipline of the Church of correctiōs and admonitions not of interpreting scripture which dependeth not vpō the will fantacie of Pope Cardinals or Popish Councels but must be tryed by the scriptures them selues Secondly we must geue eare to the Church but with a double condition we must be sure it is the Church of God secōdly we must not heare them cōtrary to the scriptures but so long as they do teach the doctrine of Christ. The Protestants WE haue a more compendious way to come to the vnderstanding of the scripture It were to lōg whē we doubt of any place to stay till we haue the generall consent of the pastors of the Church or to expect a generall Councell or go vp to Rome And it were to much to trouble the Popes grauitie with euery questiō The Lord hath shewed vs a more easie and ready way see that we neede not ascend to heauen or cōpasse the earth or passe the Alpes but the word of God is amongest vs the scriptures them selues and the spirite of God opening our harts do teach vs how to vnderstand them the interpretation of Scripture is not assigned to any succession of pastors or tryed to any place or persons Our arguments folow some few of them 1 That onely hath power to geue the sense of Scripture which doth beget vs faith the spirite onely by the Scriptures begetteth faith Rom. 10.17 faith commeth of hearing the word Ergo the spirit of God is the onely interpreter of scripture The proposition also is cleare for seeing the Scripture is the true sense and meaning therof if any should geue the sense of the scripture but that which worketh faith then vpon him should our faith be grounded If the Pope therefore geue the sense of Scripture and our faith ariseth of the Scripture vnderstood then our faith is builded vpon the Popes sense argum Whitach 2. 9. 2 The Scriptures cā not be interpreted but by the same spirit wherewith they were writtē but that spirite is found no where but in the Scriptures Ergo. The first part the Papistes them selues graunt the second is thus proued the spirite of the Apostles is not geuen by secret inspiration that sauoureth of Anabaptisme where is it thē to be found whether is it like that S. Peters spirite should be found in the Popes chaire or in his Epistles or if they haue S. Peters spirite where is S. Paules found but in his writings Yet it is all one spirite appeareth not els where but in the Scriptures where euery man may finde it as wel as the Pope the spirituall man iudgeth all things 1. Cor. 2.15 you haue an oyntment from him that is holy and you haue knowen all things and ver 27. you need not that any mā teach you By these places it is euident that euery faithfull man by the spirite of God may vnderstand the scriptures 3 The doctrine of the Church must be examined by the Scriptures Ergo the scriptures are not to stand to the iudgement of the Church The former part is proued by the example of the Berrheans Act. 17.11 If they did well in examining Paules doctrine much more may the decrees of the Pope Church Coūcels be examined by the scriptures But they knew not whether Paule was an Apostle or not therefore they might examine his doctrine saith the Iesuite Answere it is no matter for the person of Paule they examined his doctrine which dependeth not vpon the person Secondly they could not be ignoraunt of his Apostleship who was famous throughout the Churches Thirdly they doubted onely whether Paul was an
was lawfull for them to read the scriptures much more for all Christians The Iesuite aunswereth that our knowledge is greater then theirs not in all scripture but in the misteries for our redemption onely We answere this is all we desire for if the misterie of saluation and redemption be plainly opened in the scripture why should not the people be admitted to the reading of the word to be confirmed in the knowledge of their redemption who seeth not what sillie aunsweres these be 4 Augustine thus writeth of this matter In ijs inquit quae aperte in Scripturis â—osita sunt inueniuntur ea omnia quae fidem continent moresque viuendi De doctrin Christia lib. 2. cap. 9. The plaine and easie places of scripture conteine all things necessarie vnto faith and good life Ergo the doctrine of saluation in the scriptures is not hard and difficult but easie of good Christians to be vnderstood THE SIXT QVESTION CONCERNING the interpretation of Scripture THis question doth diuide it selfe into three partes First concerning the diuerse senses of the scripture Secondly to whoÌ„ the chief authoritie to expound scripture is committed Thidly what meanes must be vsed in the interpretation of scripture THE FIRST PART OF THE SIXTH QVEstion of the diuerse senses of Scripture The Papistes error 7 THere are two straunge Assertions of our aduersaries coÌ„cerning this matter First they affirme that the scripture may haue diuerse senses and meanings in the same place The sense of the scripture is either literall say they historicall which is the first most proper sense or spirituall that is an higher sense deriued out of the other and it is of three kinds Allegoricall Tropologicall Anagogicall they shew by particular instance and induction that the scripture besides the literall sense may haue these also The Allegoricall sense is when besides the plaine historicall and literall meaning somewhat is signified which by an allegorie is referred vnto Christ or the Church as Gal. 4. beside the truth of the storie of the bond and free woman S. Paule applieth it vnto the two Testaments Ergo one place may haue more senses then one The Tropologicall sense is when as there is somewhat signified appertaining to manners as Deut. 25. Thou shalt not mussell the mouth of the oxe that treadeth out the corne this by S. Paule is applied to the Ministers of the Gospell 1. Cor. 9. Ergo the scripture hath diuerse senses The Anagogicall sense is wheÌ„ the place is applied to decipher set forth the kingdome of heauen and eternall things as Psal. 94. I sware vnto them if they should enter into my rest this is literally vnderstood of the rest in Canaan spiritually of life eternall Ergo many senses thus reasoneth Bellarmin lib. 3. de Scriptur cap. 3. The Protestantes WE affirme that of one place of scripture there can be but one sense which we call the literall sense when as the wordes are either taken properly or figuratiuely to expresse the thing which is meant as in this place the seede of the woman shall breake the Serpents head the literall sense is of Christ who should triumph ouer Sathan though it be spoken in a borowed and figuratiue speach There can be therefore but one sense which is the literall as for those three kinds they are not diuerse senses but diuerse applicatioÌ„s onely and collections out of one and the same sense 1 It shall appeare by a seuerall induction of all these kindes In the first example of the Allegoricall sense Galathes 4 the Apostle saith not that there is a double sense but that it may be allegorically applied which is historically set downe There is then but one sense of the place part whereof consisteth in the storie part in the allegorie so that the whole sense is conteined in them both Concerning the second exaÌ„ple of the Tropologicall there is not a twofold sense of that place but one whole generall sense that as the mouth of the oxe was not to be musled so the Minister of the Gospell must be prouided for Likewise of the Anagogicall kind it is not one sense to vnderstaÌ„d the rest of Canaan an other of the kingdome of God but there is one whole sense that as they for their Idolatrie were depriued of the land of promise so we should take heede lest by our disobedience we lose the hope of the kingdome of heaueÌ„ So we coÌ„clude that those are not diuerse senses but one sense diuersly applied 2 The literal sense is the onely sense of the place because out of that sense onely may an argument strongly be framed wherefore seeing allegories and tropes do not coÌ„clude they are not the senses of the place An allegorie or type may be part of the literall sense and then it concludeth but when an allegorie is framed beside the literall sense it concludeth not and therefore is no part of the sense as to reason thus the oxes mouth must not be musled Ergo the Minister must be maintained it foloweth well because it is part of the sense but allegories deuised beside the sense proue not though they may illustrate The Papistes THeir other assertion is this that it is lawfull to allegorise scripture both in the old and new Testament Bellarm. lib. 3. cap. 3. They reason thus Rhemens error 8 annot Heb. 4. ver 5. The Apostle applieth the rest of the Sabboth to the eternall rest Ergo the like applications of the fathers are lawfull See annot Heb. 7.2 the Apostle say they findeth great misteries euen in the very names Ergo it is lawfull to make allegories The Protestantes WE say it is daungerous to make allegories of Scripture without the warrant and direction of Gods spirite this was the occasion that diuerse of the auncient fathers greatly erred as the Iesuite him selfe repreheÌ„deth Papias Iustinus Lactantius for allegorising that place Reuel 20. which made them fall into the error of the Chiliastes by false interpreting of the thousand yeares there mentioned To their argumeÌ„ts our learned countryman D. Fulk answereth First it foloweth not because it was lawfull for the Apostles gouerned by the spirite to make allegories that it is therfore lawfull for others Secondly wheÌ„ the fathers or any other writers can be assured of the same spirite which the holy writers had and of the like dexteritie in vnderstanding and expounding Scripture they may likewise be bold to make allegories Let vs heare what Augustine saith of this matter Sicut mihi multum errare videntur qui nullas res gestas aliquid aliud praeter id quod eo modo gesta sunt significare arbitrantur ita multum audere qui prorsus ibi omnia significationib allegoricis inuoluta esse contendunt As they are much deceiued which thinke that the stories in the scripture do signifie no other thing but that which was done so they are to rash and bold that would draw all things to allegories which they read in scripture Ergo it is not
the time of Esdras till Christ and in our Sauiours time the Scriptures were not in the vulgare toung but onely in the Hebrue which the Iewes vnderstood not after the captiuitie Ergo it is not now necessary to haue them in the vulgare toūg That the people vnderstood not Hebrue the Iesuite proueth out of the 8. of Nehemiah where it is said that Esdras did expoūd the law to the people because they vnderstood it not We answere that the text saith cleane contrary that he read the law before the people that vnderstood it v. 3. and they might geue the sense though the people vnderstood the language Concerning the places obiected out of the Gospell to proue the Iewes spake another language thē Hebrue as it appeareth by those speaches Marc. 5. Talitha cumi Math. 27. Golgotha which sauour not of the Hebrue toung we answere that although they spake not pure Hebrue but many straunge wordes were vsed yet they vnderstood the Hebrue for why els doth Christ bid the people to search the Scriptures And they were not the Iewes but the Romane souldiers that vnderstood not the voyce of Christ vpon the Crosse saying he called for Elias 2 The Apostles saith the Iesuite wrote their Epistles onely in Hebrue or Greeke and not in the vulgare tounges of the natiōs to whom they preached Ergo it is not necessary that the scriptures should be in the vulgare toung We answere First it had bene an infinite labour for the Apostles to haue left their writings in euery language neither was it necessary seeing out of the original they might be trāslated into euery language Secōdly they preached the same things vnto the Gētiles in their own toūgs which they afterward left in writing Thirdly the Greeke toūg wherein they wrote was vniuersally knowen and few countryes were ignorant of it especially in the East parts 3 There is no cause say they why the Scriptures should be translated if it be for the vnderstanding of the people they vnderstād them not being translated neither We aunswere many things they may easely vnderstand and for the harder places they are nearer the vnderstanding of them being translated then before for then they haue two great lets the toung vnknowen and the obscure and hid sense now they need not to labour for the toung but onely for the sense 4 The Scriptures are occasion of offence and heresie being not right vnderstood Ergo. First because many surfet of meats and drinkes it is no reason that sober men should be forbidden the vse of them no more for heretikes wicked mens sakes ought the people of God to be barred from Scripture Secondly more haue perished by ignorance in Scripture then by misunderstanding it and the Scripture was ordained of God to meete with offences and to confute heresies 2. Tim. 3.15 Wherefore these men make them selues wiser then God that thinke the Scripture is an occasion of those diseases for the which it is apppointed a remedie The Protestantes WE do beleeue and hold that it is requisite expedient and necessarie for the Scriptures to be vttered and set forth in the vulgare and commō speach and that none vpon any occasion ought to be prohibited the reading thereof for knowledge and instructions sake and that Christian Magistrates ought to prouide that the people may haue the Scriptures in their mother knowē toung Wherefore great wrong was offered to the people of England that diuerse 100. yeares till king Henrie the eight could not be suffred to haue the Scriptures in English And how I pray you did the Papistes storme when as Tindals translatiō came forth some affirming that it was impossible to haue the Scriptures trāslated into English some that it would make the people heretikes others that it would cause thē to rebell Fox pag. 117. col 1. What fowle and shamefull slaunders were these For the vulgare translations of Scripture we reason thus 1 It is Gods commandement that the Scriptures should be read before the people that they may learne to feare God Deut. 31. vers 11.12 The people are commanded to write the law vpon their gates and in their houses to conferre and talke with their children and teach them the law Deut. 6.6.7.8 And our Sauiour biddeth the people search the Scripture Iohn 5. v. 39. Ergo what God hath commaunded no man ought to prohibite or forbid the people therfore must not be kept from reading of Scripture 2 Without Scripture there is no faith faith is necessarie for all people Ergo the knowledge of the Scripture that faith cōmeth by the scriptures read Iohn 20.31 these things are written that ye might beleeue Iesus Christ to be the sonne of God Againe the weapons of Christiā men are not denied to any whereby they should fight against their spirituall enemies but the word of God is a speciall part of our harnesse and a principall weapon euen the sword of the spirite Ergo. 3 The Gospell may be preached in the vulgare toung as our blessed Sauiour and the holy Apostles taught the people Ergo the word of God may be read and writtē in the vulgare toung The proposition our aduersaries graunt that Sermōs may be made in the vulgare toung but it foloweth not say they that therefore Scripture should be in the mother toung Rhem. 1. Cor. 14.8 But I pray you how can the preacher alledge Scripture in his Sermō vnlesse it be recited in the vulgare toung or how should the people know they preach the word vnlesse they may compare their doctrine with Scripture as the Berrheans did Act. 17. 4 We haue the practise of the Church of God in times past for our warrant for in Chrisostomes time the people had vulgare translations whereupon he exhorteth them to get them Bibles or at the least the new Testament the Actes of the Apostles the Gospels Homil. 9. Epist. ad Coloss. We heard before that the Armenians Sclauonians Gothes had the Scripture in their own language so many hundred yeares ago in England king Alured translated the Psalter a copie whereof was found in Crowland Abbey called S. Guthlakes Psalter as M. Lābert witnesseth and Bede our learned country man translated S. Iohns Gospell Fox pag. 1115. col 2. The Rhemistes also confesse that more then 300. yeare ago the Italians had the Bible translated and the French men aboue 200. yeares ago Praefatan Testam 4. sect Why should not the people of God haue the same libertie now freely to read the Scriptures as they haue had in times past 5 Let vs heare Augustines opinion Lectiones diuinas saith he in Ecclesia sicut consuestis audite in domib vestris relegite I would haue you both to attend vnto the publike readings in the Church and in your house to read ouer againe the holy lessons but how could the people read them at home if they were not in their vulgare toung AN APPENDIX OR PART OF THIS question concerning publike prayers and diuine seruice in the
he neuer so simple and therefore Priests as well as Bishops are to bee admitted to the Councel 2 He declareth the ancient practise of the Church In the Councel of Nice where there were assembled 322. Bishops Athanasius being then onely a Priest withstood the Arrians and infringed their arguments In the Synode of Chalcedon there were present sixe hundred Priests which name is common both to Bishops and Priests When Paul Bishoppe of Antioch preached that Christ was a man of common nature the Councell assembled against him at Antioch where the sayde Paul was condemned neither was there any man which did more confound the sayd Paul then one Malchion Priest of Antioch which taught Rhetorick there Concerning the second part that laye men also with Priests ought to bee admitted first we haue testimonie out of the word of God for it Tit. 3.13 for this cause Zenas the lawyer is ioyned as fellow in commission with Apollos But we haue a more euident place Act. 15.22 It seemed good to the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church here we see that not onely the Elders but the whole multitude were admitted into consultation with the Apostles To this place our aduersaries doe thus aunswere Lodouicus the Prothonotarie first thus rashly and fondly gaue his verdicte in the Councell of Basile that there was no argument to be gathered of the Acts of the Apostles whose examples were more to be maruayled at then to be followed But to this Arelatensis replied that he would stay himself most vpon the Apostles doings for what sayth he is more comely for vs to followe then the doctrine and customes of the primitiue Church And Aeneas Siluius reporteth who writeth of the actes of that Councell that all men impugned this saying of Lodouicus that the Apostles were not to be followed as a blasphemie Wherefore the Iesuite hath found out another aunswere he sayth that none but the Apostles gaue sentence the rest onely gaue consent and inwarde liking and approbation this cauill Arelatensis met withall long before the Iesuite was borne in the forenamed Councell Neither this worde sayth hee It seemed good signifieth in this place consultation but decision and determination And so it doth indeede for seeing there is one worde applyed to them all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 placuit it seemed good to the Apostles Elders and the whole multitude why should it not be taken in the one and selfe same sence and after the same manner vnderstood of them all 2. Seeing the Councel doth represent the whole Church there ought to be present and to giue sentence of all sorts and callings of men and the tather because the matter of fayth and religion is a common cause and as well appertayneth to lay-men as to Bishops it behooueth them also to bee present And further it were more reasonable that princes and temporall Magistrates should binde their subiects to their lawes without their consent then that ecclesiastical persons should lay yokes vpon Christians against their willes for ciuill matters are more indifferent and left to our choyce then spirituall are Yet we see there are no lawes enacted in our Realme but by the high court of Parliament where alwayes some are appoynted for the commons euen the whole neather house without whose consent no acte can passe So it were very reasonable that no law should be layd vpon the Church without the generall consent thereof 3. Lastly Augustines iudgement we heard before alleadged by Arelatensis that seeing the iudicial power of the keies is committed to the whole Church to Bishops to Priests they all ought to bee entertayned in generall Councels THE FOVRTH QVESTION WHO OVGHT to be the president and chiefe moderator in Councels The Papists error 32 WIth one whole consent they all agree and holde that the Pope onelie ought to haue the chiefe place in Councels either himselfe in his owne person or else his Legates and deputies for him they reason thus 1. The Pope is the chiefe pastor of the vniuersall Church for vnto Peter onely it was sayd pasce oues meas feede my sheepe and he is called and saluted in Councels by the name of father and all other both Princes and Bishops are sheepe in respect of him Wee answere first in the Iesuites argument there is petitio principij a foule fault in a good Logician though it bee none in a Sophister still to begge that which is in question for yet he hath not prooued that the Pope is the vniuersall pastor 2. That place feede my sheepe prooueth it not Augustine saith redditur negationi trinae trina confessio ne minus amori lingua seruiat quà m timori in Iohan. tract 123. he recompenceth a threefold deniall with a threefold confession lest that his tongue should be lesse seruiceable to loue then it was to feare so then by this fathers iudgement it was no priuiledge to Peter to bee thrise admonished but he is thereby put in mind of his thrise deniall of Christ. Againe I maruaile the Iesuite can so soone forget himselfe for in the 15. chapter afore he prooued by these words feede my sheepe that Bishops onely were pastors and he can now turne the wordes to serue onely for the Pope 3. What great matter is it for the Pope to be called father seeing he is not ignorant that all Bishops assembled in Councell and other learned are called by that name Nay it is no rare matter for other Bishops to be saluted by the name of Pope as Prosper writing to Augustine twise in one Epistle calleth him beatissimum Papam most blessed Pope Tom. 7.4 Princes and Bishops to the Pope are sheepe sayth the Iesuite 1. For Bishops though he had a iurisdiction ouer all which will stick in his teeth to prooue yet shall they be no more his sheep then Priests are to Bishops and Bishops to their Metropolitanes who cannot be sayd to be their sheepe though they haue some preeminence ouer them for Augustines rule must stand nemo se nostrum episcopum episcoporum constituit De baptism 2.2 No man is a Bishop of Bishops nor shepheard of shepheards Secondly for Princes he hath nothing to doe with any but those in his owne Bishopricke and as they are his sheep one way as they are taught of him so he and his Cardinals are the Magistrates sheepe another way and in respect of the ciuil gouernement he is their shepheard And both he and they prince and priest are sheep-fellows vnder Iesus Christ the chiefe shepheard as Augustine sayth tanquam vobis pastores sumus sed sub illo pastore vobiscum oues sumus in Psal. 126. we are shepheards to you but both you and I are sheep vnder that great shepheard The Protestants WE doe truely affirme that the Soueraigne Maiestie of the Emperour and chiefe Magistrate or his legate if he either be present himselfe or sende ought to be president of the Councel Or else in their absence one to be chosen and elected by the
Spirit was not giuen him by measure Ioh. 3.34 and that the holy Ghost dwelleth in him bodily but it were great blasphemie so to say of any man Apostle or Minister beside which haue receiued of the same grace but not in the like measure that Christ hath but the spirit is giuen to euery one in measure as they haue neede in their seuerall places and callings Secondly though we should grant that the Apostles had the full authoritie of Christ actually to remit sinnes which they shall neuer proue yet it may be doubted whether al Ministers whom they call Priests which name we refuse not if it be taken according to the sense of the originall word Presbyter and not for a sacrificing priesthood haue as full power in this case as the Apostles had nay it is plaine they haue not for the Apostles and other in the Primitiue Church had power to discerne spirits 1. Cor. 12.10 and to giue actually the bodies of the excommunicate to bee vexed and possessed of the diuell 1. Cor. 5.5 and after a strange manner to exercise power ouer their bodily life as Peter did vpon Ananias and Sapphira Act. 5 Yet we rather stand vpon this poynt that neither the Apostles nor any other Ministers haue power actually to remit sinnes then onely as dispensers and stewards in the name of Christ. The Protestants AL the power of binding and loosing committed to the Apostles and to the Ministers of the word and Sacraments is by declaring the will and pleasure of God out of his word both to pronounce forgiuenes of sinnes to all that are truely penitent the reteining of them to the obstinate and impenitent Fulk annot Iohn 20. sect 3. So that Ministers are not made iudges in this case but only as the Lords ambassadors to declare the will of God out of his word 1 There is a notable place for this purpose 2. Corinth 5.18 God hath reconciled vs vnto himselfe through Iesus Christ and hath giuen vs the ministerie of reconciliation So then Christ is the onely author of reconciliation the Apostles are but ministers how then say the Rhemists that Christ himselfe is but a minister also of our reconciliation yet a chiefe minister whereas the Apostle maketh him the author God was in Christ reconciling the world to himselfe vers 19. Wee are but ambassadors for Christ and pray you in Christs stead to bee reconciled vnto God this then is the office of Ministers not to reconcile men vnto God but to pray them to bee reconciled through Christ Christ onely is the reconciler they but ministers of reconciliation They are but messengers and ambassadors onely to declare their Princes pleasure their commission is certaine beyond that they cannot goe Wherefore that is a blasphemous decretal and cleane contrarie to the scripture which is ascribed but falsely to Pontianus Bishop of Rome which sayth that God hath Priests so familiar that by them he forgiueth the sinnes of others and reconcileth them vnto him Fox pag. 59. But S. Paul sayth that God onely by Christ reconcileth vs vnto himselfe 2 Augustine doth very freely vtter his minde concerning this matter who putteth this obiection If men doe not forgiue sinnes then it should seeme to be false which Christ sayth Whatsoeuer you bind in earth is bound in heauen He answereth Daturus erat dominus hominibus spiritum sanctum c. God was to giue vnto men the holy Ghost by whom their sinnes should be forgiuen them Spiritus dimittit non vos spiritus autem Deus est Deus ergo dimittit non vos the spirit therefore remitteth sinne and not you the spirit is God God forgiueth sinnes and not you Here is one argument God onely forgiueth sinnes Ergo not man Againe Quides homo nisi aeger sanandus vis mihi esse medicus mecum quaere medicum O man what art thou that takest away my sinnes but a sicke man thy selfe wouldest thou be my phisition nay let vs both together goe seeke a phisition that may heale vs. Lo another argument He cannot be a phisition to others that needeth a phisition himselfe he cannot reconcile others to God who hath himselfe neede of a reconciler Further he sayth Qui dimittit per hominem potest dimittere praeter hominem non enim minus est idoneus per se dare qui potest per alium dare He that can forgiue sinnes by man can forgiue also without man for he may as well forgiue by himselfe as he can doe it by another Here is then the third argument If man doe actually forgiue sinnes then Christ should not forgiue sinnes without man for the whole power is committed to man Yea the Rhemists affirme the same that it is necessarie we should submit our selues to the iudgement of the Priest for release of our sinnes if it bee necessarie then sinnes cannot be remitted without the Priest then is Christs power limited he cannot forgiue without man which is contrarie to that Augustine affirmeth here THE FOVRTH PART WHETHER STRAIGHT waies whatsoeuer be loosed or bound by the ministerie of men vpon earth be so in heauen The Papists AN expresse power say they is giuen vnto Priests to remit and reteyne error 76 sinnes And Christ promiseth that whose sinnes soeuer they forgiue they are forgiuen of God and whose sinnes soeuer they retaine they are retained of God Rhemist annot Iohn 20. sect 5. Whereby it appeareth it is their opinion which is manifest also by the practise of their Church that at the will and pleasure of euerie priest exercising the keyes vpon earth men are bound and loosed in heauen They ground this their opinion vpon the generalitie of the wordes Whosoeuers sinnes you remit they are remitted Iohn 20.23 and Math. 18.18 Whatsoeuer you binde in earth shall be bound in heauen Answere These places are not so to be vnderstood as though God were bound to ratifie euery decree of men vpon earth for first this power is giuen to all lawfull pastors which doe holde the Apostolike fayth not to Idolatrous ignorant and blasphemous priests such as most if not all of the popish sorte are Secondly they must decree in the earth according to Gods wil Wherefore Iohn 20.22 first Christ breatheth his spirite vpon his Apostles and then giueth them their commission signifiyng hereby that they must execute this power as they shall be directed by Gods spirite and Matth. 18.20 it followeth that they must be assembled in the name of Christ that is according to Christs rule and the direction of his word they must binde and loose and not at their owne discretion The Protestants THat no sentence or decree of men bindeth or looseth before God in heauen but that which is pronounced according to the will and pleasure of GOD and by the warrant of his worde the scripture euery where teacheth vs. 1 Prouer. 26.2 As the sparrow by flying escapeth so the curse that is causelesse shall not come Isay 5.20 Woe vnto them that speake good
reliques yea one and the selfe same relique is sayd to be in diuers places As of S. Iohn Baptists head his face they say is at S. Iean Angelz the rest of his head at Malta his skull at Nemours his braine at Nouium Rastrouiense his iaw bone at Vesalium a peece of his eare at S. Floride his forehead and haires in Spayne at S. Saluadores and yet for all this his whole head is to bee seene at Saint Siluesters in Rome and at Amiens in France Fulk Matthew 14.2 Thus they haue mangled also the bodie of Saint Peter halfe they say is at Saint Peters in Rome halfe at Saint Paules his head at Saint Iohn Laterane his neather iawe with his beard at Poycters in Fraunce at Triers many of his bones Fulk Rom. 16. sect 4. See what mockage and cosoning here is and abusing of simple people How can their whole bodies bee in one place and yet their parts and bones in another And where doe they learne thus to dismember their bodies and to rake them out of their graues The honouring of the bodies of Martyrs is to suffer them quietly to rest in their graues and not to rot aboue the ground Iosias honoured the Prophets sepulchre and would not remoue his bones herein therefore they dishonour the Martyrs and offer violence to their bodies thinking falsely that they doe great worship vnto them Augustine sayth that hee which would now renewe the ceremonies of the Iewes that are as it were buried tanquam sopitos cineres eruens non erit pius deductor aut baiulus corporis sed impius sepulturae violator Epistol 19. He should be as one raking in the ashes of the dead and so bee rather a violator of Christian buriall then a bringer of the bodie honestly to the ground So by Augustines iudgement eruens sopitos cineres he that pulleth out dead mens ashes bones or reliques is sepulturae violator a prophaner of their buriall THE THIRD PART OF THE KEEPING and preseruing of reliques The Papists error 33 WE must not thinke it impossible that the monuments of Saints as their garments reliques bones should endure a long time seeing Manna was kept so many hundred yeeres in the pot which was placed by the Arke being a thing so apt to putrifie Rhemist Hebr. 9. sect 4. Ans. When we haue a commandement for the reseruation of such things as the Israelites had we may beleeue they will keepe so long And againe the Israelites for all that did not worship the pot of Manna though it were of such long continuance The Protestants THe bodies and bones of men departed neither are to be kept out of their graues as we haue shewed neither can they be preserued without corruption Argum. 1. Vnto all Adams seede it is sayd Dust thou art and to dust shalt thou returne only the bodie of Christ had this priuiledge Psal. 16. Not to see corruption Ergo the bodies of men departed though they were neuer so holy being all the seede of Adam must be turned to dust Argum. 2. If they would glorifie God and speake the truth they doe very wel knowe by experience that the reliques of Saints haue no such promise or warrant for their continuance for most if not all of their reliques were forged and deuised and no such thing indeed S. Peters braine at Genoua was found to be a pumice stone S. Antonies arme was found to be an Harts pissle at Toures of late the image of Venus in an Agate was worshipped for the image of the Virgine Mary the blood of Hales in England was descried to be but the blood of a drake the three hostes at Caleis were but three white counters sodred into a marble stone These and many such monuments and reliques of Saints the Church of Rome hath great store no maruaile now if they be of long continuance for stones and counters may last a great while and drakes blood with other such stuffe is not so daintie but it may be still renewed Of such cosoning trickes Augustine complained in his time speaking of runnagate Monkes he saith Alij membra martyrum si tamen martyrum venditant Alij fimbrias suas phylacteria magnificant Some doe boast of reliques of Martyrs which they carrie about perhaps they are no such reliques some doe extoll their habite and Monkish weede De opere Monachorum cap. 28. See then I pray you what diuellish idolatrie was this to cause the people to worship counters drakes blood Harts sinewes and other such base creatures in stead of reliques which though they were such indeede ought not to be worshipped THE FOVRTH PART CONCERNING VISIsions and miracles done at the Tombes and reliques of Martyrs The Papists FIrst they almost make it an ordinarie thing in their Church to worke miracles Bellarmine sayth that it is a sufficient note of the Church the glorie or error 34 power of miracles De eccles lib. 4. cap. 14. Christ sayth that they that doe beleeue in him shall doe greater workes then he No maruaile then if the image of our Ladie say they and the like worke miracles as Peters shadowe did and that they seeme greater then Christs for he promiseth that his Saints shall worke greater miracles then himselfe Rhemist annot Iohn 14. sect 3. They also call vpon vs to confirme our doctrine by miracles because we preach newly and extraordinarily Rhemist 2. Corinth 12. sect 5. The Protestants Ans. FIrst that place alleadged proueth not such a generalitie and perpetuitie of working miracles for then euery one that beleeueth should do greater workes then Christ for our Sauiour speaketh generally He that beleeueth Augustine doth farre otherwise and in a better sense expound this place He that beleeueth in me shall doe the same workes that I doe Quae opera nisi vt ex impio iustus fiat prius ego facio deinde ipse faciet quia facio vt ipse faciat What workes sayth he but that he which beleeueth of a wicked man shall be made righteous which worke first I doe sayth Christ then he himselfe doth it because I make him to doe it Quod vtique in illo sed non sine illo Christus operatur Mans conuersion is wrought by Christ in man not altogether without man because Christ working in vs doth enable vs by his grace to worke out our saluation Philipp 2.12 yet is it not our selues that worke but the grace of God in vs. Then it followeth he shall doe greater workes then these Prorsus maius hoc esse dixerim quam est coelum terra The redemption and conuersion of men is a greater worke then the heauens or the earth Tract in Iohann 72. Augustine therefore doth properly vnderstand this place not of outward miracles but of the wonderfull conuersion of the heart which we are sayd to worke because Christ worketh it in vs. 2. As we denie not but that there may in these daies be miracles wrought and all such miracles as serue to confirme
purpose they do amisse And yet we deny not but that the names of holy men may be safely remembred by thankesgiuing vnto God for such excellent instruments and setting before our eyes their good example And concerning the names which haue bene superstitiously giuen in times past vnto Churches and other places though it were to bee wished that they neuer had beene so giuen yet now we vse them setting apart all superstition as ciuill names of differēce as S. Luke describeth the ship of Alexandria wherein they were carried whose badge saith he was Castor Pollux Act. 28.11 In a ciuil matter of description hee refuseth not to vse the names of the heathen goddes Augustine also giueth a good rule concerning such names He speaketh of the names of dayes which were called after the names of heathenish Idols as the 4. day in the weeke which we call Wednesday was then called and is yet in the Latine toung Dies Mercurij Mercurie his day Sic dicitur a paganis a multis Christianis sed nolumus vt dicant et vtinam corrigātur melius de ore Christiano ritus loquendi ecclesiasticus procedit So it is called of the heathē of many christians but I would not haue them called so and I wish they were amended for a Christian kinde of speaking best becommeth a Christian. Sed si quem forte cōsuetudo traxerit c. sciat illos omnes homines fuisse But if custome preuaile with a man so to speake let him vnderstand that all they were but men whome the heathen take for gods So say wee it were to be wished that we had names void of al shew of superstition but seeing for our speaking we must be ruled by custom let vs know that those saints by whose names places are called are no Gods nor Gods fellowes nor patrons or Mediators for vs nor any way to bee worshipped But they are the fellow seruants of all faithfull Christians to bee reuerenced with a Christian duety of loue not a religious worship of seruice THE THIRD PART OF THE ADORning and beautifiyng of Churches The Papists error 32 THe Temples and Churches of Christians they would haue built in the most sumptuous and costly manner yea in beauty to exceede the palaces of Princes with siluer golde silke Veluet to be decked and adorned Bellarmine cap. 6. Argum. 1. The Tabernacle of the Iewes was of exceeding beauty the Curtaines therof of silke the vessels euen to the snuffers for the Lampes were of golde the Priests garment had a breastplate of golde set about with precious stones Therfore why should not the Temples of Christians be in like sort adorned and set foorth as Isay prophecieth that the Glory of Lebanon shal come the Firre Oliue and Boxe tree to beautifie my sanctuary Isai. 60.13 which is literally to be vnderstood Bellarm. ibid. Ans. First if the Iesuite had turned his argument and reasoned thus the temple of the Iewes was gorgeous and sumptuous and beautifull to the eye therfore Churches of Christians ought not to be so now he had reasoned much better for their seruing of God was externall now God will be worshipped in spirit All things were done vnto them in types and figures the outward glorie of their temple was a liuely figure of the spirituall beautie of the Church of Christ. Secondly where you would haue the prophecie of Isay to be literally vnderstood you haue made a good argument for the Iewes for then they shall haue their sanctuarie restored againe which the Prophet speaketh of by name And if that place of Isay haue a literall sense why not that also 54.10 I will lay thy stones with Carbuncle and thy foundation with the Saphires I wil make thy windowes of Emeraudes and thy gates shining stones Say also that this shal be literally performed and so according to this grosse sense the prophecie of Haggie shal also be fulfilled the glorie of the last house shal be greater then the first Hagg. 2.10 But I thinke you neuer sawe Church built in this goodly manner in beautie surpassing the Iewish temple nor neuer shall The Protestants THat the Churches of Christians and places of praier ought decently to bee kept yea and with conuenient cost and seemely beautie to be built and repaired and Church vessels with other necessarie furniture to be of the best not of the worst sort we doe both commend it and practise it for so we learne by the example of our Sauiour that cast out of the temple sellers of doues and money changers and would not suffer them to carrie vessels through it Mark 11.15 16. that the house of praier ought to be reuerently regarded but yet it followeth not that such immoderate and excessiue cost should be bestowed vpon the walles of the Church and Idols to garnish and beautifie idolatrie and poore people in the meane time to want A Matrone ought to goe comely and decently apparelled though not tricked vp with the iewels and ornaments of an harlot Argum. 1. Our Sauiour Christ reproueth the Scribes and Pharisees because they drewe the people to bee good vnto the altar and bestowe largely vpon them and so leaue their parents helplesse Math. 15.5 And he often doth inculcate that golden saying I will haue mercie not sacrifice it is better to succour the liuing temples of God which are the bodies of his poore children then to bestowe superfluous cost vpon dead temples of stone Argum. 2. Christ also doth rebuke them because like hypocrites they did garnish the sepulchres of the Prophets yet persecuted their doctrine Math. 23.29 so all popish pharisees are worthie of blame that take greater care in garnishing the temples and tombes of the holy Apostles and Martyrs then they doe in setting forth their holy doctrine and preaching the Gospell nay they doe contemne persecute and hate that doctrine for the which those holy men died so that this prouerbe was very well deuised of them In times past we had golden Priests and woodden Cuppes now we haue woodden Priests and golden Cuppes Augustine exhorting the people to be liberall to their Bishops and Pastors thus writeth further Forte ecclesiam fabricat forte vtile aliquid in domo dei molitur expectat vt attendas expectat vt intelligas super egenum Perhaps he is in building a Church and doing some profitable worke in the house of God he looketh that thou shouldest attend and consider of his neede By this it appeareth that Churches were not superfluous costly in Augustines time for nothing was done but what was thought necessarie and profitable and the builders which were then for the most part their Bishops were not of any great abilitie to bestowe superfluous cost nay they were not able to finish the necessarie workes without the beneuolence and contribution of the people THE FOVRTH PART OF THE DEDICAtion of Churches The Papists error 53 THe superstitious dedication of their Churches with the Annuall memories thereof they would warrant
doe as well belong to the institution as the other Secondly they say that the words of institution doe not serue any thing at all for the instruction of the people to shew them the right vse of the Sacrament but onely for benediction and consecration of the elements Bellarm. cap. 19. Thirdly they doe hold that only by the pronouncing of those words the elements are consecrated whereas by the whole action and cerebration of the Sacrament the giuing receiuing inuocation thankesgiuing according to Christs institution the consecration is performed vpon the elements Fulk 1. Corinth 10. sect 4. Arg. 1. That the words of institution rehearsed do helpe as well to admonish stirre vp the people to a thankful remēbrance of the death of Christ as to consecrate blesse the elemēts it is manifest whereas Christ saith as the words are vsually rehearsed Doe this in remembrance of me and S. Paul saith That by receiuing the sacrament we doe shew forth the Lords death 1. Corinth 11.26 Ergo the people are by the words pronounced instructed and admonished and taught the right vse of the sacrament Argum. 2. that the words of institution doe helpe toward the benediction or consecration of the Elements we deny not but not by them alone but praier also and thankesgiuing and the whole action beside of receiuing To the consecration or sanctifiyng of any creature two things are required the word of God and praier 1. Timoth. 4.5 Neither the word sanctifieth without praier nor praier without the word Ergo to the sanctifiyng cōsecrating of the sacrament the bare rehearsall of the institution sufficeth not without inuocation and praier Augustine saith Accedat verbum ad elementum et fiet Sacramentum Let the word be ioyned to the element and it is become a Sacrament And in an other place he sheweth what word he meaneth Faciente verbo non quia dicitur sed quia creditur hoc est verbum fidei quod praedicamus The word effecteth this not because it is spoken or vttered but because it is beleeued this is the word of faith saith the Apostle which we preach thus farre Augustine tract in Johan 80. Wherefore it is not the muttering of a few words in a strange toung after the manner of enchaunters that by any secret force giuen vnto them hath power to consecrate but the vnderstanding hearing and beleeuing the institution of Christ with calling vpon the name of God and thankesgiuing before him AN APPENDIX OF THIS PART WHETHER THE forme of wordes in the institution of the Sacraments may not be by some addition or other alteration changed The Papists THe words of institution may be changed two manner of wayes either substantially error 89 when the sence is also altered with the words or accidētally whē the elements or syllables are onely changed but the sence remaineth the same If there be a change in the substance of the words the sacrament is imperfect if the alteration be of the forme onely of words and not of the sence the sacramēt is not destroyed but he sinneth that doth so alter them Wherefore it is not lawfull any way at all to alter or change the forme of words Bellarmine cap. 21. li. 1. Argum. It is not lawfull to adde or take to or from the words of scripture much lesse to change the words appointed to be vsed in the Sacrament Bellarm ibid. Ans. To adde or detract to or from the word of God with a purpose and intent to wrest it to a contrary meaning and destroy the true sence thereof cannot be done without great impiety and such is the manner of all heretikes But to alleadge Scripture in keeping still the full sence though we misse of the wordes is not to be counted so heinous a sinne we see the holy Apostles in citing textes of Scripture doe not alwaies binde themselues to the very wordes as Act. 7.43 Heb. 10.5 The Apostle saith A body thou hast giuen me In the Psalme we read Mine eares hast thou opened diuerse wordes yet the same sense Augustine saith very well they that vnderstand the Scripture though they keepe not alwaies the wordes are better then they that read and vnderstand not Sed vtrisque ille melior qui et cum volet ea◠dicit et sicut oportet intelligit But he is better then both that both remembreth the wordes and keepeth the sense too yet he also deserueth praise that beareth the sense in minde though he cannot the words The Protestants NO substantiall change we confesse is to be admitted in the forme of Institution which may alter the sense neither is any particular man by himselfe to make any accidentall change and bring in a new forme of wordes but the publike and vniforme order of the church must be kept yea and the church likewise is bound both to reteyne the true sense and as neere as may be the very words but where occasion serueth to make some small accidentall change of the words the sence being nothing diminished it is not condemned as an vnlawfull and sinfull act Argum. 1. The Euangelists report not all the same forme of words which should be vttered by our Sauiour neither yet S. Paul fully accordeth with them in the precise and strict forme of institution as by comparing of them together it may be seene Mat. 26. ver 27. Take eat this is my body S. Luke cap. 22. This is my body which is giuen for you do this in remembrance of me ver 19. S. Paul Take eat this my body which is broken for you doe this in remēbrāce of me 1. Cor. 11.24 ver 28. This is my blood of the new testament that is shedde for many for the remission of sinnes This cup is the new testamēt in my blood which is shed for you This cup is the newe testament in my bloud this do as oft as you drink it in remēbrance of me If it had beene a sinne to haue missed in some termes and sillables no doubt the spirite of God would not haue suffered these holy writers to haue made the least scape Is it to be thought a sinne in the Church which in stead of Take ye eate ye in the plurall number hath appointed the Sacrament to be ministred particularly in the singular number to euery of the cōmunicants saying Take thou eat thou drinke thou Wherfore all accidentall change of words carieth not with it a guilt of sinne Augustine indeede saith Certa sunt verba euangelica c. The words of the gospell are certaine whereby Baptisme is consecrated But yet he saith else where In ipso verbo aliud est sonus transiens aliud virtus manēs In the word spoken the sound which passeth is one thing the vertue or sense of the words which abideth is an other It is then the sence of the words not the sound or sillables that is certaine and permanent THE THIRD PART OF THE INSTRVMENTALL cause of the Sacraments that is the lawfull
lauer of regeneration and word of Sanctification all the sinnes in men regenerate are healed yea euen those which by humane ignorance afterward are committed Non vt baptisma quoties peccatur toties repetatur sed quia ipso quod semel datur fit vt non solum anteà verùm etiam posteà quorumlibet peccatorum venia fidelibus impetretur Not that Baptisme so oft as a man sinneth is to bee repeated but by vertue of that which is once giuen it commeth to passe that the faithfull haue remission of their sinnes not onely before but also after Ergo Baptisme hath it force not onely for the present but it reacheth vnto the time following THE THIRD PART OF THE LIBERTIE and priuiledges obtained by Baptisme The Papists 1. THey haue defined that a man by Baptisme is not onely debitor fidei sed etiam vniuersae legis Christi implendae error 109 not onely a debter of the faith but is made a debter to performe the whole law of Christ Concil Trident. sess 8. can 7. that is Baptisme is not onely a signe of free iustification by faith neither doth he which is baptized professe himselfe onely by faith to bee iustified but partly also by his workes and the keeping of the commandements of Christ. The Protestants Ans. IN Baptisme wee make profession of our obedience to die vnto sinne and rise vp to newnes of life Rom. 6.2 yet not thereby to bee iustified but in being baptized wee shew our faith and hope onely to looke for remission of sinnes and saluation of our soules by the death of Christ. Argum. 1. Circumcision in place whereof Baptisme is giuen to vs is called by the Apostle a seale of the righteousnes of faith Rom. 4 11. not of the righteousnes of workes much more then is Baptisme which is a Sacrament of the Gospell a pledge vnto vs of the iustice of faith Argum. 2. By Baptisme we are freed from the curse of the lawe for it is a Sacrament of the death of Christ and of all the benefites thereof and Christ by his death hath borne for vs the curse of the lawe Galath 3.13 But if by Baptisme we binde our selues to the obseruance of the lawe to bee iustified and finde life thereby we must needes fall into the curse because we are not able to keepe the commandements Wherefore seeing Baptisme deliuereth vs from the curse it also exempteth vs from the workes of the lawe The Papists error 110 2. ALthough Christians are bound by solemne vow in Baptisme to walke in obedience before God and to keepe his commandements yet are they not therefore freed and exempted from the obseruance of the lawes and ordinances of men the which they are bound in conscience to keepe and vnder paine of damnation Bellarm. cap. 16. The Protestants BAptisme onely bindeth vs to keepe the commandements of God and so far forth also to obey men as they commaund things lawfull but wee must not be brought in bondage to mens traditions and obseruations seeing we are the Lords free men and by Baptisme consecrate to his seruice Argum. Math. 28.19 Goe and teach baptizing them c. and teaching them to obserue all that I haue commanded you Ergo Baptisme bindeth vs onely to the obseruation of Gods precepts 1. Corinth 7.23 Yee are bought with a price be not the seruants of men Baptisme is a signe of the death of Christ the price of our redemption Ergo wee are freed from all meere humane seruice in receiuing of Baptisme For this cause is it called the Baptisme of Christ Augustine saith Paulus dixisse legitur euangelium meum baptismum autem Christi nemo Apostolorum ita vnquam ministrauit vt auderet dicere suum Paul is read to haue said My Gospell but neuer any of the Apostles durst call the Baptisme of Christ their Baptisme Ergo seeing it is the Baptisme of Christ and we are onely baptized in his name not in our owne name or the name of men wee must onely hope to bee saued by faith in him and become his seruants wholly THE SEVENTH QVESTION OF THE difference betweene the Baptisme of our Sauiour Christ and the Baptisme of Iohn The Papists THe Baptisme of John they say was of another kinde then Christs Baptisme was neither was it sufficient without Christs Baptisme nor had the error 111 like force or efficacie as his Baptisme had and therefore such as had been baptized of Iohn were afterward admitted to Christs Baptisme Concil Trident. sess 8. canon 1. Bellarm. lib. 1. de baptis cap. 20.21 Argum. 1. Matth. 3.11 Iohn himselfe saith I baptize you with water but hee shall baptize you with the holy Ghost Ergo Iohns Baptisme and Christes not all one for Iohns Baptisme gaue not the holy Ghost Bellarm. ibid. Ans. Iohn speaketh not of diuerse Baptismes but of diuerse operations and ministeries in one and the same Baptisme for Iohn as all other ministers doe did but giue water and Christ working together with them giueth the holy Ghost But it will be answered that Iohn saith not he dooth baptize but hee shall baptize Ergo Christ did not baptize together with Iohn by his spirite Ans. The same Iohn in another place speaketh of Christ in the present tense Iohn 1.33 This is hee which baptizeth with the holy Ghost Ergo Christ did both then baptize with his spirite and afterwards also more manifestly when the giftes of the spirite began to bee shed forth more plentifully vpon men Argum. 2. Saint Paul baptized twelue men at Ephesus with Christs Baptisme that had receiued Iohns before Act. 19.4.5 Ergo Iohns Baptisme was not the same that Christs was Bellarm. Ans. There can be no such thing gathered out of that place for those words in the fifth verse When they heard this they were baptized in the name of the Lord Iesus are part of the narration which Paul maketh of Iohns manner of Baptisme so that the sense is this they that heard Iohns doctrine were baptized in the name of the Lord Iesus It is not so to be read as though they were baptized againe of Paul but he laieth onely his hands vpon them that had before receiued the Baptisme of Iohn The Protestants THat Iohns Baptisme was not diuerse from Christs Baptisme but was all one with it in propertie and effect and that they which were baptized by Iohn were baptized into the name of Christ and therefore needed not againe to bee baptized thus it is made manifest out of Scripture Argum. 1. Iohns Baptisme differed not in the matter of the Sacrament for he baptized with water as Christs Apostles did There was also the same forme of both the word of God for Iohn also taught the people to beleeue in Iesus Christ that was to come Act. 19.4 There was also the same scope and ende of Iohns Baptisme For hee preached the Baptisme of repentance for remission of sinnes Mark 1.4 Ergo it was the same with the Baptisme of Christ. Argum. 2. If
yet after another maner For he is in heauen according to the naturall existence of his body in the sacrament he is really present in his flesh yet sacramentally by his omnipotent power Concil Trid. sess 13. can 1. Argum. 1. The figures must be inferior to the things that are figured and represented the sacraments of the law were figures of the sacraments in the Gospel therfore they ought to be inferior But vnles the bread wine should be the very blood flesh of Christ in the sacrament their sacraments in the law should not only not be inferior but far superior to ours As for example the Paschal Lambe is in nature to be preferred before bread and the slaying of the Lamb did more liuely represent the death of Christ then the breaking of bread the eating of flesh doth also better set forth the spirituall nourishing then the eating of bread Wherefore vnlesse we beleeue a reall presence in the sacrament their sacrifices in dignitie and excellencie should farre exceed and excel ours Bellarm. lib. 1. de sacram Eucharist ca. 3. Ans. 1. It is not true that their sacraments were figures of ours But S. Paul sheweth that both their sacraments and ours doe figure out and represent the same thing as the spiritual eating and drinking of Christ 1. Corint 10.2.3 Our sacraments are indeed figures correspondent and answerable to theirs and theirs also had a certaine reference and relation to ours but they were not types of ours for then our sacraments should bee the body of theirs whereas Christ is the bodie both of their sacraments and ours Saint Peter sayth that Baptisme is an antitypon a figure answerable to the sauing of the eight persons in the flood 1. Pet. 3.21 They are correspondent one to the other and had mutuall relation and respect one to the other But that was not properly a type of Baptisme but both Baptisme and that are figures and signes and liuely representations of our saluation in Christ. 2. If the reall presence of Christ onely commendeth the sacrament and aduanceth it before the rytes of the law which in all other respects are better by this argument Baptisme still remayneth inferior to the sacramēts of the law for you affirme no reall presence in Baptisme as you do in the Eucharist and in all other respects it must needes giue place to Circumcision for the cutting of the flesh is a more liuely representatiō of regeneratiō thē is the washing by water and the flesh of man is in nature more precious then water So by this reason though you haue wonne credite for the Eucharist yet you haue lost it for Baptisme 3 We answere therefore that although the reall presence bee set aparte yet our sacraments are more excellent then theirs First the price and woorth of thinges in their nature are not to be weighed in a sacrament but they must bee considered in respect of the vse to the which they are ordayned by the institution Flesh you say is better then bread so is wine and milke better then water in their nature but in Baptisme water is better then they because Christ hath now set it apart for a more holy vse Secondly the slaying of the Lambe doth more liuely represent say you the death of Christ then the breaking of bread Answ. We graunt that if breaking of bread had beene vsed in the law it had not been then so significant as the slaying of beasts but the breaking of bread now in the light of the Gospell in this abundance of knowledge and instruction being a signe of a thing already done and finished must needes be more pregnant and liuely in representation then the killing of sacrifices in the law which were types of things to come the mystery of the Gospel being not yet opened to the world Wherefore our sacraments are more excellent then theirs in respect of the more cleare light and fuller signification which they haue by the word of God the preaching of the Gospel ioyned vnto thē We neede not deuise any other way of excellencie for our sacraments then this which we haue sayd agreeable to the scriptures 2. Cor. 4.3 Galat. 3.1 The Papists ARgum. 2. Iohn 6.55 Christ sayth My flesh is meate indeed and my blood is drinke in deede he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him First this place must be vnderstoode not of any spirituall eating or drinking of Christ without the sacrament but is properly meant of the manducation and eating of him in the sacrament First Vers. 51. The bread sayth Christ that I will giue he speaketh of a thing to come for the sacrament was afterward instituted but if this bread were to be taken for his word and the eating thereof for beleeuing in him in this sense the bread was giuen already Answ. Christ also speaketh in the present tense vers 32. My father giueth you the true bread from heauen I am the liuing bread that came down from heauen if any man eate of this bread he shall liue for euer vers 51. Hee sayth not he that shall eate but he that euen now eateth And afterward he speaketh of the time to come The bread that I shall giue because his death and passion was not yet finished therefore he sayth The bread that I shal giue is my flesh which I will giue for the life of the worlde But he speaketh euery where of the eating of his flesh in the present tense vers 35.50.51.53 which cannot bee vnderstoode of the sacramentall eating the sacrament being not yet instituted but of a spirituall manducation The Papists SEcondly those words being applyed to the sacrament must needes also bee vnderstood properly and literally for the very eating of the flesh of Christ drinking his blood not tropically or figuratiuely 1. The flesh of Christ which Christ promiseth to giue them to be eaten he preferreth before the Manna which their fathers did eate in the wildernes the true bread which he giueth them is more excellent then the bread of Manna But if the bread in the sacrament doe but signifie the flesh of Christ and be not it in very deede it should be no better then Manna which also did signifie and shew foorth Christ Bellarm. cap. 6. Ans. Christ compareth not the spirituall substance of Manna with his flesh and blood but the corporall foode which being receiued into the belly and not receiued into the heart by fayth hath no power to giue eternall life For vers 32. Christ sayth that Moses gaue them not Manna from heauen Ergo he meaneth the corporall foode not the spirituall substance of Manna for as it was a sacrament of Christ it was heauenly bread Againe vers 49. Your fathers did eate Manna in the wildernes and dyed He speaketh of the materiall foode for they that did Manna spiritually by fayth died not in soule Ans. Now on the contrary side we will prooue that this place contayned in the sixt
the remission of sinnes in the blood of Christ is common to all faythfull Christians why should they not as well be partakers of the signe Argum. 4. This prohibition for lay men not to receiue in both kindes is but a late deuise of the Church of Rome not past two hundred yeare olde decreed no longer agoe then in the Councell of Constance Fox pag. 1150. yet after that he Councel of Basile graunted the vse and libertie of the cup to the Bohemians Fox pag. 694. Thus they take vpon them to ouer-rule mens consciences now restrayning now againe graunting libertie binding and loosing at their pleasure In Augustines time there was no such separation of the cuppe from the bread but both were indifferently vsed in the communion Cum cibo potu saith he id appetant homines vt neque esuriant neque sitiant hoc veraciter non praestat nisi iste cibus potus c. As men by their meate and drink doe prouide that they neither hunger nor thirst so this spirituall meate and drink worketh the same effect in vs. Whereupon it followeth that seeing in the sasacrament is contained and signified the full and sufficient nourishment of our soules by the flesh and blood of Christ it must needes be resembled by the outward full sufficient nourishment of our bodies which is not by eating alone but by eating and drinking THE NINTH QVESTION OF THE adoration of the Eucharist The Papists error 124 IT was decreed in the Councel of Trent that the Eucharist should be adored euen with the highest degree of worship Cultu latreiae which is proper to God that it should also be carried about in solemne processions to be shewed to the people to bee worshipped and adored of them And whosoeuer holdeth the contrary they pronounce accursed Trident. Concil sess 13. can 6. Argum. 1. Hebr. 1.6 Worship him all ye Angels Ergo Christ in the sacrament and wheresoeuer else his person is ought to bee adored of men and Angels Rhemist ibid. This Saint Paul meaneth they say by discerning the Lords bodie 1. Corinth 11.29 that is adoring worshipping it and making prayers vnto it Rhemist ibid. Answ. 1. We denie Christ to be present in the sacrament really corporally substantially therefore it is not to be adored 2. Although the body of Christ were present in that manner vnder the accidents of bread and wine yet vnlesse Christ bee so present that the elements or the accidents of the elements be ioyned and vnited vnto him in one person as the Godhead and humanitie make but one person hee is no more to bee adored then God the father is to bee worshipped in the Sunne or Moone in the which he is verily present But to say that the visible formes and elements are ioyned in an hypostaticall vnion to Christ as his humanity is to his Godhead it is great blasphemie 3. A reuerent estimation and discerning of the Lordes bodie we graunt in the sacrament in preferring the elements before all other meates and drinkes because of their mysticall signification as wee preferre the mysticall washing in Baptisme before all other but to kneele holde vp the handes and to worship a peece of bread wee count it grosse and abominable Idolatrie The Protestants THat the sacrament is not to be adored with any godly worship but onely to be duely reuerenced as an holy mysterie thus wee prooue it by the worde of God Argum. 1. In the first instituting of the sacrament the Apostles receiued it sitting not kneeling by taking of it not lifting vp their handes to it Ergo they did not adore it neither is it by vs to be adored Agayne Christ commaundeth vs onely to Take and eate and drinke and to doe all in remembrance of him the sacrament therefore was appoynted to be eaten and drunken not to be carried about or to bee gazed vpon or to be kneeled vnto Argum. 2. Christ as we haue shewed is no otherwise present in the Eucharist then in Baptisme But the water in Baptisme is not to be adored Ergo neither the bread in the sacrament Augustine did not so much as dreame of any adoration of the sacrament A Cerere Libero Paganorum dijs longè absumus quamus panis calicis sacramentum nostro ritu amplectimur Wee doe not worship the heathenish Gods of corne and wine Ceres and Bacchus although after our manner wee embrace the sacrament of the bread and of the cuppe His meaning is that Christians do not worship bread and wine in the sacrament as the heathen did Cont. Faust. In sacramenti sanctificatione distributione existimo Apostolum propriè iussisse fieri 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 orationes 1. Tim. 2.1 Quod verò quidam codices non habent orationes sed adorationes non arbitror scienter interpretatum In the consecrating and distributing of the sacrament I think the Apostle bade orations or prayers to be made not as some doe vnlearnedly interpret adorations or worshippings Epistol 59. Ergo hee approueth not the adoration of the sacrament AN APENDIX OR TENTH PART whether the wicked doe receiue the bodie of Christ. The Papists THe wicked they say doe in the sacrament eate the true flesh of Christ and error 125 drinke his blood though they be Infidels and ill liuers Argum. They are guiltie of the bodie and blood of Christ 1. Corinth 11.27 How can they be guiltie of that which they haue not receiued And agayne by the vnworthy receiuing of no other sacrament is a man made guiltie of the body and blood of Christ but onely here Ergo the wicked are partakers of his body Rhemist annot 1. Corint 11. sect 16. Answere 1. The wicked may be guiltie of the bodie and blood of Christ in vnworthy receiuing the sacrament though Christ be not corporally present Euen as he that contumeliously receiueth the seale of the prince or abuseth his image is guiltie of the Maiestie of the prince though he haue not hurt his person 2. He also may bee guiltie of the blood of Christ that despiseth Baptisme which he receiued as a signe of his washing in the blood of Christ. And so the Apostle sayth of wicked men that fall away from Christian religion that they crucifie agayne to themselues the Sonne of God Heb. 6.6 Augustine also bringeth in Christ thus speaking to the wicked in the day of iudgement Grauior apud me est peccatorum tuorum crux in qua inuitus pendeo quà m illa in quam tuimisertus ascendi the crosse of thy sinnes whereby thou didst crucifie me was more grieuous vnto me then the Crosse to the which for thy cause I was lifted vp Serm. 181. cap. 7. de tempor Thus we see that wicked men by their sinfull life may crucifie Christ though they can offer no violence to his body The Protestants THat wicked men and Infidels cannot in any sense be partakers of the true bodie and blood of Christ thus it is prooued Argum. 1. By faith only are
bond of mariage which is called repudium First then they affirme that the very bond and knot may bee dissolued in the mariage of Infidels if one of them after mariage become a Christian his reason is because mariage contracted in infidelitie is no sacrament and therefore may be dissolued Bellarmin cap. 12. Argum. Saint Paul sayth If the Infidell partie will departe let him depart a brother or sister is not in subiection in such a case 1. Corinth 7.15 Answ. Saint Paul giueth not liberty to the one partie at their pleasure vtterly to renounce the other as though they were no longer man and wife for Saint Paul had sayd before that if the Infidell partie bee content to dwell with the other he or she is not to be put away But his meaning is that if one partie wilfully depart the other is no longer bound nor in subiection for the performance of the mutuall dueties of mariage The Papists error 30 SEcondly separation from bed and boorde may be admitted they say for diuers causes Concil Trident. sess 24. can 8. Bellarmine nameth three Fornication according to Christs rule Math. 5. Heresie Tit. 3. An heretike must be auoyded Thirdly when one is a continuall offence to another a prouocation to sinne If thine eye offend thee pull it out Math. 5.29 Bellarmin cap. 14. Answ. Fornication we admit is a iust cause of separation and diuorce but not heresie for Saint Paul would not haue a woman to forsake an Infidell 1. Corinth 7.13 therefore not an heretike Wee must auoyd such that is take heede of their poysoned opinions and shun their company also where we are not otherwise bound Neither is the eye to be cut off where there is any hope but who knoweth whether the offensiue partie may returne to grace And this place proueth as well a finall â—utting off of mariage as a separation or disiunction The Protestants FIrst that there is no cause of vtter dissolution of mariage by way of diuorce but onely adulterie and fornication it is plaine by our Sauiour Christes wordes Math. 5.32 19.9 where neither infidelitie nor any cause beside is excepted but onely fornication Secondly Saint Augustine sometime was of opinion that the wife might be dismissed for infidelitie but he reuoketh and retracteth that opinion Lib. retract 1. cap. 19. For elsewhere he flatly concludeth thus A viro non fornicante non licere omnino discedere that it is not lawfull for a woman at all to leaue her husband if he committe not fornication De adulter coniug 1.7 And yet further to make this matter more playne we acknowledge no other cause of lawful diuorse in mariage but that only which is prescribed in the Gospell namely for adultery or fornication Math. 5.32 19.9 There is notwithstanding another cause whereby the mariage knot may bee dissolued though not for fornication as when one of the parties doth wilfullie renounce leaue and forsake the other vpon no iust cause but either of lightnes or for diuers religion as when an Infidel forsaketh a Christian a Papist a Protestant an heretick a true professor or vpon any other vnlawfull or vniust cause for the Apostle sayth playnely A brother or sister is not in subiection in such things 1. Corinth 7.15 that is is freed from the yoke or bond of mariage First it is plaine that the Apostle is so to be vnderstoode in this place for the word which he vseth is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is no longer a seruant or in subiection which is to be taken in the same sense as if he should say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he or she is no longer bound or tyed which word the Apostle vseth vers 39. And agayne the Apostle hath relation here to the fourth verse where hee sayth the wife 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath no power of her own bodie the husband likewise But now saith he the infidel partie hauing wilfully separated himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the innocent partie is no longer in subiection that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath now power ouer his owne body and is now become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 free exempt from the mariage knot or bond in which sense the Apostle vseth the word verse 39. Secondly we must know what kinde of desertion it is that causeth a dissolution of mariage and in what manner First it must be malitiosa desertio a malicious departure without any iust cause But when as the husband is absent by consent about necessary affayres as the Merchant beyond the seas or is employed in some waightie busines as in warfare in ambassage or such like or is violeÌ„tly deteined in prison or captiuity amongst the Turks or elswhere In these the like cases the wife is bound to waite expect the returne of her husband vnles she be otherwise aduertised of his death SecoÌ„dly the innoceÌ„t partie must vse all meanes to reconcile reclaime and bring home agayne the wilfull and obstinate partie so departing if it be possible Thirdly if he continue in his obstinacie and departe hauing no purpose to returne the matter must be brought before the iudge or Magistrate in such cases who after publike citation of the obstinate partie and certaine knowledge that he refuseth wilfully to appeare being cited and is not otherwise letted to come may with mature deliberation pronounce the innocent partie free and at libertie to marrie according to Saint Pauls rule A brother or sister is not bound in such things Thirdly neither is Saint Paul contrary to our Sauiour Christ who alloweth no diuorce but onely for fornication for that is a diuers case from this whereof Saint Paul treateth And there is great difference betweene lawfull diuorse and vnlawfull and wilfull desertion for there the innocent partie first claymeth the priuiledge of separation here the guiltie partie first separateth himselfe there diuorse is sued and required here the innocent partie seeketh no diuorse but seeketh all meanes of reconciliation So that properly the setting free the innocent partie in this case cannot be called a diuorse Christ therefore speaketh of lawfull diuorce not of euery dissolution of mariage for then mention should haue beene made in that place of naturall death and departure which is confessed by all to be a dissolution and breaking off of mariage Thus haue I shewed mine opinion with Beza and others concerning thiâ— poynt Herein further as in all the rest referring my selfe to the determination of our Church and the iudgement of our learned brethren Beza 1. Corinth 7. vers 15. Amand. Polan Hemingius Tâ—leman Heshus THE SECOND PART WHETHER IT BE LAWfull to marrie after diuorsement for adulterie The Papists FOr adulterie one may dismisse another but neither partie can marrie again error 31 for any cause during life Rhemist Math. 19. sect 4. no not the innocent partie may marrie againe for the mariage knotte is not dissolued because of adulterie Concil Trident. sess 24. can 7. Argum. 1. Rom. 7.2 The woman
life or quickening to bee made a true and right faith The words then are thus to be read and distinguished So faith without works is dead that is this kinde of faith which neither worketh nor euer shall Not thus Faith is dead without workes as though a true faith were quickened by works But euen as the bodie is dead hauing neither soule nor the operations thereof life motion sense so this vaine speculatiue kinde of faith is dead both wanting the spirite and soule that is hauing not one sparke of true faith neither the operations and fruites thereof which a liuely faith sheweth by loue as the soule worketh life and motion in the bodie for a liuely faith can neuer bee without workes And a dead faith will neuer haue workes but remaineth dead for euer Wee must not therefore thinke that it is one and the same faith which sometime is dead without workes and againe is made aliue and quickened when workes come But wee must vnderstand two kindes of faith one altogether voide of good workes which is onely a faith in name and a verie dead faith Another is a liuelie faith alwaies working and this can neuer become a dead faith so neither can the other bee euer made a liuelie faith Argum. That charitie is not the forme or any cause of faith but the effect rather and fruite thereof we doe learne out of the word of God Christ saith Iohn 3.18 Hee that beleeueth shall not bee condemned but is alreadie passed from death to life Iohn 5.24 Faith then is able to saue vs and alone iustifieth vs before God without loue which alwaies foloweth a true faith but is not ioyned or made a partner with it in the matter of iustification But faith could doe nothing without the forme thereof Ergo charitie is not the forme of faith Saint Paul also faith Faith which worketh by loue Galath 5.6 The being and substance of faith is one thing the working another Loue onely concurreth with faith in the working it is no part of the essence or being of faith August Ea sola bona opera dicenda sunt quae fiunt per dilectionem haec necesse est antecedat fides vt inde ista non ab istis incipiat illa Those onely are to bee counted good workes which are wrought by loue faith of necessitie must goe before for they must take their beginning from faith and not faith from them Faith then goeth before loue that worketh therefore loue is not the forme of faith for forma prior est re formata the forme should goe before the thing formed THE FOVRTH PART HOW MEN are iustified by faith The Papists WEe are saide to bee iustified by faith because faith is the beginning error 81 foundation and the roote of iustification Concil Triden sess 6. cap. 8. Faith then by their sentence doth not fully iustifie the beleeuer but is the beginning way and preparation onely to iustification Andrad ex Tilem de fide err 11. Rhemist Rom. 3. sect 3. The Protestants FAith is not the beginning onely of our iustification but the principall and onely worker thereof neither are wee iustified in part or in whole by any other meanes then by faith Argum. He that is at peace with God is fully and perfectly iustified his conscience cleared and his sinnes remitted But by faith wee haue peace of conscience Ergo by faith wee are fullie and perfectly iustified Rom. 5.1 The Scripture also faith The iust man shall liue by faith Rom. 1.17 But wee liue not by iustification begun onely but perfited and finished Ergo our full iustification is by faith Augustine vpon these words Iohn 6.29 This is the worke of God that yee beleeue c. Si iustitia est opus Dei quomodo erit opus Dei vt credatur in eum nisi ipsa sit iustitia vt credamus in eum If iustice or righteousnes bee the worke of God how is it the worke of God to beleeue in him vnlesse it be righteousnes it selfe to beleeue in him See then it is not initium iustitiae credere sed ipsa iustitia it is not the beginning of iustice to beleeue but iustice and righteousnes it selfe THE FIFT PART WHETHER faith bee meritorious The Papists BY faith we doe merite eternall life Catechis Roman p. 121. ex Tilemann de error 82 fide err 20. Rhemists also ascribe meriting to faith Rom. 3. sect 3. Argum. Faith is a worke Ergo if we be iustified by faith wee are iustified by workes and soe consequently by merite The Protestants Ans. FAith in deed is a worke but not any of our owne works it is called the worke of God Iohn 6.29 God doth wholly worke it in vs Ergo wee cannot merite by it Argum. Saint Paul saith Ephes. 2.8 By grace are you saued through faith not of yourselues for it is the gift of God not of workes least any man should boast himselfe Faith then is no meritorious cause of our iustification but onely an instrumentall meanes whereby we doe apprehend the grace of God offered in Christ God giueth both faith and the end of faith Vtrumque Dei est as Augustine saith quod iubet quod offertur Beleeue and thou shalt be saued both come of God the thing commanded that is faith and the thing offered namely saluation Ergo all is of grace THE SIXT PART WHETHER to beleeue bee in mans power The Papists RHemist Act. 13. sect 2. giue this note that the Gentiles beleeued by their error 83 owne free will though principallie by Gods grace therefore to beleeue partly consisteth in mans free will though not altogether this is their opinion The Protestants FAith is the meere gift of God Ephes. 2.8 and wholly commeth from God it is not either in part or whole of our selues Argum. Rom. 11.36 Of him through him and for him are all thinges Ergo fidei initium ex ipso neque hoc excepto ex ipso sunt caetera Therefore saith Augustine the beginning of our faith is of him vnlesse wee will say that all things else are of God this onely excepted And afterward hee sheweth that our faith is wholly of God not part of him part of our selues Sic enim homo quasi componet cum Deo vt partem fidei sibi vendicet partem Deo relinquat So man shall as it were compound with God to chalenge part of faith to himselfe and leaue part for God THE SEVENTH PART WHEther faith may be lost The Papists error 84 A Man may fall away from the faith which once truely he had as Saint Paul saith of some They had made shipwrack of faith 1. Timoth. 1.19 Rhemist ibid. Ergo true faith may be lost The Protestants Ans. THe Apostle saith Some hauing put away a good cōscience made shipwrack of faith Such a faith in deed that hath not a good cōscience may be lost for it is not a true liuely faith but a dead fruitelesse faith Argum. But hee that once
men nor Apostolike giftes wee are not to doubt but that this promise and prophesie of the vniuersall preaching of the Gospell is performed already Argum. 2. It appeareth in Ecclesiasticall histories that the Apostles dispersed themselues into all partes of the worlde euery where preaching the Gospell Thomas preached to the Parthians Medes Persians also to the Germanes Simon Zelotes in Mauritania Africa and in Britania Iudas called Thaddaeus in Mesopotamia Mark in Aegypt Bartholomaeus to the Indians Andrew preached to the Scythians Sogdians Aethopians So that there were fewe or no knowen countreyes in the world which heard not of the fame of the Gospell But here two things must be obserued First that the Gospel was to bee preached in the habitable or knowen world the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Many countreyes are inhabited now that were not habitable then or at the least not inhabited wherefore it was sufficient that the people of the world heard of the Gospel howsoeuer afterward they were propagated into other vnknowen places Secondly as Augustine sayth Omnes gentes promissae sunt non omnes homines omnium gentium All nations were promised to heare of the Gospel not all the men and inhabitants of euery nation And so we doubt not but the Apostles did lay the foundation of fayth through the whole worlde and were first planters of the Churches in euery nation But their plantings were watered and encreased and continued by others Wherefore seeing the world hath once already beene generally lightened with the truth of the Gospell we are not to looke any more for a solemne legacie and ambassage to be sent from the Lord vnto all nations But those countreyes rather which somtime had the trueth and now haue lost it ought now to seeke vnto those places that haue it as the Queene of Saba went a long iourney to heare Salomons wisdome They therefore that yet doe expect an vniuersall preaching may sooner see Christ comming in the cloudes then haue their expectation satisfied THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE comming of Henoch and Elias before the day of iudgement The Papists error 107 THeir common and receiued opinion is that Henoch and Elias doe yet liue in their bodies in Paradise and shall come in person to oppose themselues against Antichrist and by their preaching to conuert the Iewes Rhemist Apocal. 11. sect 4. Argum. Malachie 4.5 I will send you Eliah the Prophet before the great and fearefull day of the Lorde These are also the two witnesses spoken of Apocal. 11.3 Which shall be slaine and rise vp againe the third day Ergo Eliah and Henoch shall come before the day of the Lorde Bellarm. de Roman pontif 3.6 Ans. First the prophesie of Malachie was fulfilled in Iohn Baptist who came in the spirite of Elias as it is thrise in the Gospell applied once by the Angel Luk. 1.16 twise by our Sauiour Christ Matth. 11.14 17.13 Bellarmine saith it is not properly vnderstoode of Iohn Baptist but onely in an allegorie First the Prophet speaketh of the great and fearefull day of the Lord but the comming of Christ was the acceptable time Ans. Here the Iesuite bewrayeth great ignorance As though the comming of Christ in the flesh as it brought comfort to the Elect to as many as were ordeined to saluation was not also hastening of the iudgement of God against the wicked and therefore Iohn saith The axe was laide to the roote of the tree Matth. 3.10 and that Christ came with his fanne in his hand verse 12. The Apostle Heb. 12.26 applieth that saying of the Prophet Once againe wil I shake not onely the heauens but the earth to the preaching of the Gospell wee see then in what sence the first comming of Christ is called a fearefull and terrible day Ans. Secondly by the two witnesses is vnderstood the small yet sufficient number of the true seruants of God which shall witnesse the truth euen in the whottest persecution of Antichrist there is no mention made of Henoch or Elias And if you will needs vnderstand that literally of their rising againe why not the rest also how fire shall proceede out of their mouthes to consume the wicked and they shall turne water into blood The meaning is nothing else but that God will alwaies haue faithfull witnesses in his Church which shall alwaies stand vp in the stead of the Prophets and holy men gone before The Protestants LIke as the Pharisies deceiued the Iewes with vaine expectation of Elias and so hindred their beliefe in Christ so the Papists would not haue men to acknowledge the manifestation of Antichrist vnder this false pretence that Henoch and Elias must first come before Antichrist bee reuealed which wee doe hold as a Iewish fable and popish dreame Argum. 1. The Prophesie of Elias comming is properly fulfilled in Iohn Baptist and therefore wee are not to looke for any other accomplishment thereof neither now is there any Paradise remaining but Heauen 2. Corinth 12.4 And to affirme that Henoch and Elias went vp to Heauen in their bodies before the ascension of Christ out of Scripture it cannot be proued it is euident that they were taken vp aliue into heauen but not that they continued aliue Argum. 2. The varietie of opinions concerning the personall appearance of Henoch and Elias declare that it is an vncertaine thing and but deuised of men Hilarye saith they shal be Moses and Elias Chrysostome granteth that Elias shall come but not Henoch Iustine thinketh that not onely Henoch and Elias are aliue but all those whose bodies rose at the resurrection of Christ Hippolytus is of opinion that Iohn the Diuine shall come with them and some say Ieremie also whose death is not read of Fulk Apocal. 11. sect 4. And thus it is no meruaile if men run mad as it were in their foolish conceites hauing no warrant for their opinions out of Scriptures The nation of the Iewes wee grant according to the manifest prophesie of Saint Paul shall in the end be conuerted but not in such sort by the personall preaching of Moses and Elias for the Apostle setting downe at large the mysterie of their calling would not haue left out so necessarie a thing Augustine by the two witnesses vnderstandeth the two testaments the Old and the new But hee denieth vtterly that any shall rise before the comming of Christ as the Apostle saith 1. Corinth 15.23 The first fruites is Christ Then they that are Christs at his comming but not before Vnde saith he excluditur omnis suspicio quorundam qui putant hos duos testes duos viros esse ante aduentum Christi coelum in nubibus ascendisse Their suspition therefore or opinion is vtterly excluded which thinke these two witnesses to bee two men which should ascend into heauen before the comming of Christ. Augustine we see is flat against them THE THIRD PART WHETHER THE most grieuous persecutions that euer were shall be toward the end