bare assertion without Scripture 29. As touching their crossing of it wee need fetch no other proofe then from the Councill of Trent which in expresse words denounceth Anathema to those that make this faith whereby wee beleeue the remission of our sinnes a necessary ingredient into true repentance and yet it propoundeth reconciliation and remission of sinnes to such as doe repent let all the world therefore know to the eternall shame of the Romish Religion that remission of sinnes and reconciliation by their doctrine may bee obtained by repentance without faith then which what can bee more opposite to the Gospell of Iesus Christ 30. If they reply that they make faith the foundation of repentance I answere why doe they then exclude it out of repentance is the foundation no part of the house yes it is the chiefest part either therefore it is not the foundation of repentance or els it is necessarily required to the essence of it one or the other must needs bee false but heere is the mystery of this iniquity by faith they meane nor a beliefe of the remission of our sinnes by the bloud of Christ which is the true Euangelicall faith but a generall perswasion of the truth of their Religion and a particular conceit that he which performeth the worke of penance in the three parts thereof shall thereby obtaine pardon of his sinnes and reconciliation with God 31. Secondly whereas hee sayth that wee doe not satisfie for the eternall but for the temporall punishments of our sinnes either heere in this life or in Purgatory hee speaketh nothing for the clearing of their doctrine from opposition to the Gospell for the Gospell teacheth that Christ our Redeemer hath made a full and perfect satisfaction for the sinnes of all the world yeelding a sufficient and worthy recompence and contentment to God for them and therefore they which say that wee must giue any manner of satisfaction our selues whether for the temporall or eternall punishment due vnto them doe euidently crosse the doctrine of the Gospell And this Aquinas one of their owne illumined Doctors doth in effect confesse when hee sayth that the passion of Christ was a sufficient and super abundant satisfaction for the sinne and guilt of punishment of mankind his passion was as it were a price or paiment by which we are freed from both these obligations to bring in then the foggy mist of humane satisfactions is to eclipse and darken the glory of Christs all-sufficient redemption 32. Thirdly whereas hee findeth fault with Chytraus for saying without proofe that auricular confession is not commanded of God and yet hee himselfe doth not proue it is we might driue out one naile with another and returne vpon him his owne answere but I reply further that diuers of his owne fellow Doctors haue auouched asmuch for Maldonate Erasmus the glosse in Gratian and Gratian himselfe and Rhenanus with diuers others are of the same minde as may appeare in the texts quoted in the margent whose wordes I forbeare to set downe because I shall haue occasion to handle the same in a more proper place one thing I cannot omit that the testimony of Rhenanus is so plaine that our aduersaries not able to giue answere sufficient vnto it haue by their peremptory authority said Deleatur let it bee blotted out as they deale also with Polidore Virgill in the like point and with all other that stand in their way 33. Lastly the redeeming of penance by the purse though Bellarmine shuffle it ouer neuer so cunningly yet is so palpable an abuse and so contrary to the doctrine of the Gospell that the very naming of it is a sufficient declaration of the foulnesse of that Religion which maketh a mart of sinne and setteth repentance which is the gift of God to sale for a little earthly drosse and exchangeth punishment due to the body and soule for a little pinching of the purse 34. The Gospell teacheth that marriage is permitted and set free for all men both Priests and people and that the prohibition of marriage and meats is a doctrine of Deuils But the Romish Religion forbids marriage to a great part of men to wit Priests and Monkes and commands to abstaine from certaine meates vpon certaine dayes 35. Bellarmine excepteth and saith by a distinction that when the Apostle sayth Marriage is honourable amongst all men hee meaneth not all in generall for then it should bee honorable betwixt the father and the daughter the brother and the sister but onely those that are lawfully ioyned together which they that are bound with a vow cannot bee 36. It is a strange fore-head but no maruaile seeing it is the fore-head of the whore of Babylon when the Scripture sayth Marriage is honorable amongst al men to exempt their Votaries from this honour as if they were not in the number of men but beasts and as the assertion is strange in impudency so the reason is more strange in folly for though the father may not marry the daughter nor the brother the sister without incest yet the father may marry and the daughter may marry and the brother and the sister also so that they take those that are not prohibited by the Law of God and nature Now let him shew that Gods Law forbiddeth Votaries to marry and then hee sayth something to the purpose but by his owne confession together with many of his pew-fellowes the prohibition of marriage is no diuine but humane ordinance and institution yea the Councill of Trent it selfe calleth it but an Ecclesiasticall Law and therefore not a Law of God but a decree of the Church 37. Adde to this impudency and folly his crossing of all antiquity for in the Councill of Nice Paphnutius alleadgeth this place of Scripture against those that went about to take away the vse of marriage from the Clergie and in the sixt generall Synode it is expressely applied to the same purpose And Ierome in defence of Charterius a married Bishop produceth the same text 38. As touching Chrysostomes speech to Theodorus the Monke alledged by Bellarmine though it seemeth a little to fauour them at the first view yet in another place he cleereth himselfe from that suspition for he saith plainely that Marriage is so honourable and precious that a man with it may ascend into the sacred Chaire of a Bishop What hath Bellarmine got now by Chrysostomes testimony Surely this If all that Chrysostome saith bee sound doctrine then it is an error in the Church of Rome to inhibite all that are consecrated by holy Orders from the vse of the marriage bed For by Chrysostome Bishops may marry Saint Augustines testimonies alledged by him in the one and twentieth Chapter are little to the purpose for in the first he saith plainely that the Church of God doth not forbid marriage but onely preferre virginitie before it as a greater good and in the second hee approoueth onely abstinence from
absolution to wit if he will be absolued from adultery or incest it must cost him foure Turons if from both together it must stand him in sixe Turons if from wilfull murther being in holy orders hee must pay twelue Turons being a Bishop or an Abbot fiftie Turons twelue Ducats c. Thus there is no sinne so haynous for which pardon may not be purchased for a small summe of money as one of their owne Canonists could sing Si dederis marcas ijs impleueris arcas Culpa soluêris quaque ligatus eris If thou with markes wilt fill their arkes what ere thou doest commit By word or deed thou shalt be freed the Pope hath pardon'd it 15. If this be not a doctrine of liberty let all the world iudge Who need care what sinne hee commit when a pardon is but a money matter Is it any maruaile now if whores and theeues and notorious offenders turne Papists seeing they may haue so easily a full and plenary remission of all their offences And that which is yet a greater emboldening of men to sinne then all the rest they oftentimes for money pardon a sinne before it be committed as it is constantly reported of Parry that he brought with him his pardon in his pocket for murdering the late Queene intended by him But I haue heard of some that haue beene hanged with their pardons about their necks and so it may be was that bloudy-minded Traytor And this was it that emboldened the Germans to robbe the Popes pardoner because they had purchased of him before a pardon for the next sinne they should commit though it were a great one now this was the next and therfore iustly he could not find fault with them 16 By this it is euident to what loosenesse and lewdnesse of life this doctrine doth tend Isti enim indulgentiarum buccinatores omnimodam promitâ—unt securitatem quaeparit negligentiam negligentia offensam Dei saith the Author of that Booke called Onus Ecclesiae that is these publishers of pardons do promise all manner of security which breedeth negligence and negligence the offence of God for Culpam qui praeterit inuitat nouam conniuence at one fault is the hatching of a new Who so will plainly see in one view the monstrous licentiousnesse of life that issueth from this puddle of Popish pardons let him read the third grieuance of the German Nation in the Booke of their Centum grauamina exhibited to the Popes Legate at Noremberge Anno 1522. in the latter end whereof are these wordes of iust complaint By the sale and marchandize of this ware not onely Germany is spoyled of money but Christian godlinesse is extinguished where when euery one according to the quantity of his payment taketh vnto himselfe liberty to sinne hence whoredome incest adultery periury murther theft robbery vsury and a whole heape of mischiefes haue proceeded for what mischiefe will men be afraid to commit when they be once perswaded that they haue obtained licence and impunitie to sinne not onely in this life but also after their death Hitherto is the complaint of Germany which also may bee the iust complaint of the whole world 17 A third doctrine of the Papists opening the gap to licentiousnes is their auricular confession and popish penance I ioyne them together because they goe together in their practice and are both together members of one of their new deuised Sacraments True it is that in outward showe these carry a semblance of seuere discipline but if we search into their bowels we shall find them to be the greatest baytes that can be vnto dissolutenesse For when they teach that the enumeration and reckoning vp of all a mans finnes in the yeare of a Priest once a yeare obtaineth present absolution and pardon at the Priests hands who is both Iudge in this cause and Phisicion and hath power to loofe and binde and to open and shut to wound and heale by the key of power committed to him What is this but to open a gappe to all wickednes for when men are perswaded that there is so ready and easie a meanes to be rid of their sinne what need they be so chary of committing it Hence it is as by lamentable experience it is found true among those that are deuoted to this Religion they sinne freely that they may confesse and be absolued and when they haue confessed they sinne againe that they may confesse againe making no conscience how they liue all the yeare and what horrible sinnes they commit being perswaded that at Easter by the shriuing of a Priest they are cleane absolued Iust like a drunkard that drinkes so long till hee vomite and when his stomacke is disgorged drinkes afresh that he may vomite afresh or like a glutton that surfets all the yere long in all maner of intemperancy then in the spring takes phisick to purge out the naughty humors froÌ„ his stomake as soone as he is purged fals again to his surfeting ryot in hope to be purged again in the spring 18. This is the fruite of Popish shrift commended so highly by them to be so soueraigne a medicine against sin which if it be so why did not Christ and his Apostles vse it were they not as carefull to preserue men from sinne as the Pope and his shauelings are or is the Pope and his Apostles wiser then Christ Iesus and his Disciples why was it not vsed in the Primitiue and purer times of the Church Rhenanus and Erasmus two learned Papists affirme plainely that it was neither ordained by Christ nor vsed by the ancient Church and Chrysostome telleth vs that God doth not enforce vs to come forth and disclose our sinnes to any man He requireth no more saith he but that we speake to him alone and to him alone confesse our faults I but the Popes iudgement is more diuine and the times of Popery are more free from corruption beleeue it who list and therefore howsoeuer then yet now it is found to be a soueraigne preseruatiue against sinne as if they that feare not to offend in the presence of God will blush to confesse their offences in the eare of a sinnefull Priest or as if the law of God were of lesse force to keep men in awe which they cannot escape than the feare of a mortall man whome they may deceiue 19. But let them say what they will and cloake their licentiousnesse with neuer so holie pretences all that haue any iudgement to discerne colours which the blinde Romanists cannot do or any wisedome to trye the spirits and doctrines whether they be of God or no know that Romish shrift is nothing but a shift to diue into mens purses and a tricke of policie to search into their purposes that by that meanes they may enrich their owne coffers and vphold their Antichristian Hierarchie for by this deuice they vnderstand the secrets of state and ciscouer mens
man should say that a man may bee iustified by his owne works wrought by the power of nature without the diuine helpe by Christ Iesus and Bellarmine seemeth to affirme as much in this place Yet Andradius that famous Interpreter of that forenamed Councill one of the most learned men of his age and that knew well the mysteries of that Councill doth tell vs that by diuine helpe the Councill vnderstood not the grace of regeneration and speciall worke of Gods sanctifying Spirit but heroicall motions stirred vp in the vnregenerate and vnbeleeuers and that by this speciall helpe they might doe works void of all fault and meritorious of saluation And Bellarmine confesseth in other places that they are good suogenere that is morally and Salmeron the Iesuite that they dispose and prepare a man for iustification and the same Councill of Trent in the seuenth Canon following doth curse them that shall say they are sinnes or that they deserue the hatred of God Now if these kinde of works be good in their kinde and preparatiues to iustification and not sinnes nor deseruing the hatred of God but such as whereby the Heathen were saued then it is a probable falsehood in Bellarmine when he saith by their doctrine that these works doe not iustifie nor helpe any thing to the iustification of a sinner 10. Secondly it is false also which he affirmeth concerning the second kinde of works to wit of preparation that though they proceede from faith and grace yet they doe not iustifie for Bellarmine in another place doth not stick to say that this faith iustifieth by way of merite and deserueth forgiuenes of sinnes after a certaine manner and here in this place that these works proceeding from faith doe merite after their manner and obtaine remission of sinnes which if it be true then it must needes be false which he sayd before That they make not our works to concurre with the merits of Christ for the remission of sinnes which is the point of opposition and that which also he affirmeth here That these works doe not iustifie seeing remission of sinnes is of the verie essence of iustification for none haue their sinnes forgiuen but they are iustified and none are iustified but they haue their sinnes forgiuen they concurre in one if they bee not one and the same And therefore if these works merite remission of sinnes they must needs also merite iustification And thus Bellarmines distinction doth no waies free their doctrine from opposition to the doctrine of the Gospell 11. The Gospell teacheth that hee which repenteth and heareth the promise ought to beleeue it and bee perswaded that not only other mens sins but euen his owne are pardoned for Christs sake and that he doth please God and is accepted of God and in this faith ought to come vnto God by prayer But the Church of Rome teacheth that a man must alwaies doubt of the remission of his sins and neuer be assured thereof which doubting as Chytraeus truely speaketh is plainely repugnant to the nature of faith and a meere heathenish doctrine 12. Bellarmine answereth here not by a distinction but by a negation denying flatly that the Scripture teacheth any such doctrine that a man may be assured of the remission of his sinnes and his reconciliation with God and this hee seemeth to prooue by two arguments one because it is contrary to other plaine and manifest places of Scripture another because all Gods promises almost haue a condition annexed vnto them which no man can iustly know whether hee hath fulfilled or no. 13. It is good for Bellarmine here to vse a plaine negation for their doctrine is so manifest that it will admit no distinction the Councill of Trent hath put that out of all question and distinction For it teacheth in expresse words that no man ought to perswade and assure himselfe of the remission of his sinnes and of his iustification no though he be truly iustified and his sinnes be truely and really pardoned This doctrine is so euident that Bellarmine could neither distinguish as his custome is nor yet deny it and therefore hee freely confesseth it and yet Gropper condemned it as an impious doctrine and Catharinus at the Councill of Trent defended the contrary that the childe of God by the certainty of faith knoweth himselfe to be in the state of grace And so did also Dominicus a Sotâ— and diuers others of their owne stampe But there is great cause why the Church of Rome should maintaine this doctrine of doubting very peremptorily for as Chemnitius well obserueth all the Market of Romish superstitious wares is built vpon this foundation for when as the conscience being taught to doubt of solution doth seeke for some true and sound comfort and not finding the same in faith through the merits of Christ then it flyeth to it owne works and heapeth vp together a bundle of superstitious obseruations by which it hopeth to obtaine fauour at Gods hands hence arise voluntary vowes Pilgrimages Inuocations of Saints works of Supererogation priuate Masses sale of Pardons and a number such like trash and when as yet they could not finde any sound comfort in any of these at last was Purgatory found out and redemption of the soules of the dead out of that place of torment by the suffrages and prayers of the liuing Now the Romanists fearing lest these profitable and gainefull wares whereby an infinite tribute is brought into their coffers should be bereft them haue barred out of their Church this doctrine of certainty of saluation by faith of which if mens consciences bee once perswaded they will neuer repose any more confidence in those superstitious trumperies 14. But we with Luther may boldly say that so odious and impious is this doctrine that if there were no other error in the Romane Church but this we had iust cause of separation from them and with Chytraeus that it is repugnant to the nature of faith and a meere heathenish doctrine For it doth not onely nourish mens infirmities who are too much proâ—e to doubting but euen encourage them thereunto and teach that we ought to doubt But that we may come to the point is not this indeede the doctrine of the Gospell that wee should not doubt of our saluation why then doth our Sauiour command all to repent and beleeue the Gospell By which he plainely teacheth where true repentance goeth before there beleefe in the Gospell that is assurance of forgiuenesse of sinnes by the bloud of Christ doth follow and that wee ought euery one to be thus assured seeing this is a precept Euangelicall which doth not onely giue charge of doing the thing commanded as the Law doth but also inspireth grace and power to effect it as Saint Augustine well informeth vs when he saith The Law was giuen that grace might bee sought and grace was giuen that the Law might bee fulfilled Why doeth Saint Paul say
affections in Religion and so cunningly insinuate themselues into the managing of all affaires both for preuention of preiudice to themselues and vndermining their opposites this is the policie of Romish shrift and were this all it were to be borne withall if withall it did not open a wide doore of liberty to others as I haue in part shewed and were not a bawd of vncleanesse to the shriuers themselues Heare what one of their own writers reuealeth concerning this last poynt It is an ordinary practice saith he for Priests to commit execrable villany with women at shrift rauishing wiues and deflowring maids in the Church and committing Sodomie with young men c. Cornelius Agrippa another of their owne hath left in writing for all posterity to remember that Auricular confession is genus quoddam lenocinij and he referreth vs for proofe thereof vnto the Tripartite History Nec desunt mihi saith hee si referre velim cognita recentia exempla I need not to seeke for farre examples for I could relate many fresh and well knowen if I would And then he concludes that Priests and Friers and Monkes hauing vnder pretence of Religion free accesse vnto any woman many times whose soules they should gaine to God their bodies they sacrifice to the deuill Thus is their owne filth cast in their faces by their owne fauorites who by all likelihood would speake the best of their mother and in no respect durst slander her for feare of shame and punishment Wee finde in the Tripartite History to the which it may be Agrippa had relation of the rape of a noble woman by a Deacon in the time of shrift for the which cause Nectarius the Bishop of Constantinople banished this secret confession out of his Church as also all the Bishops of the East did the like in theirs This story is recorded by Socrates Sozomene and Nicephorus neither is it denied by the Romanists themselues though some of them condemne Nectarius for doing so As Andradius and Baronius the one calling it a most impudent fact the other saying that not a good spirit but an euill spirit perswaded him there unto And others seeke to elude ti by saying the story is mistaken and that Nectarius banished not confession it selfe but the necessitie of confessing to one certaine Priest which though it bee a vaine glosse which corrupts the text as Chemnitius fully proueth yet not to stand vpon it this is euident that such a foule fact was committed in the time of shrift and that thereupon this secret confession was either vtterly abrogated or at least so restrained that it was no more secret for feare of such like enormities and indeed graunt that Nectarius did euill in abolishing all kind of confession as Socrates and Sozomene charge him and as wee also will not excuse him for wee hold that there may be an holy profitable vse of confession in the Church for the searching of the wounds of sinnefull soules and applying of fit counsell comfort to distressed consciences yet from thence we may deriue these three conclusions first that secret shrift was then thought not to bee ex iure diuino but onely a tradition of the Church for else it could not haue been abolished secondly that it was not thought necessarie for the remission of sinnes as the Romanists teach and thirdly that it is a most dangerous occasion to vncleannes which is the matter we haue in hand to proue 20. If any here except that these enormities proceed from the abuse and not from the vse of shrift and that they bee personall frailties and not corruptions of doctrine I answer first that the very vse thereof is so daungerous especially to these ranke Votaries that it is tenne to one but it euer degenerates into the abuse for wanting the lawfull remedy ordained by God no maruaile if their lusts breake forth into lawlesse actions Againe what warrant can there be of Gods blessing to sanctifie the vse of that which is not an ordinance of God but a meere humane inuention as diuers of their owne Doctors haue confessed and is most easie to bee prooued And lastly though there may bee a profitable vse of confession as I haue said yet this Auricular enumeration and Romish shrift cannot be lawfully vsed because they make the very act thereof meritorious to saluation and the absolution of the Priest an actuall and reall remitting of sinne which opinion cannot but animate men to the committall of sinne seeing they haue their remedy so ready at hand to wit after the vttering a fewe wordes the mouth of the Priest to absolue them 21. As for Contrition which by their doctrine must goe before Confession that makes the matter neuer a whit the more difficult neither doth it any whit the more bridle from sinne for if the griefe be but small yet is the penitent absolued saith our Fisher and a Iesuite a slender griefe is sufficient and another Iesuite The least degree of griefe is able to wipe away the highest degree of sinne Surely this kind of contrition is so farre from brideling our corrupt nature from sinne that it more incites and prickes it forward for who would feare to sinne if this be true that the least griefe conceiued in heart together with the discouering of it to the Priest and the Priests formall absolution is sufficient for the full pardon and remission thereof 22. But peraduenture the last part of this Sacrament binds vp the two former in greater seuerity let vs consider a little therefore of their penance and satisfaction They condemne vs lowdly and raile with open throat against vs calling vs Libertines and Epicures for reiecting their penance and satisfactory paines after sinnes committed But who are the Libertines they or vs let any indifferent reader all preiudice set apart iudge Are we Libertines for renouncing their popish penance why there is no doctrine that more notoriously tends to liberty then this For first what are those satisfactory workes which they enioyne poore penitents Coster a Iesuite reduceth them to three heads Prayer Almes and Fasting to one of which three all particulars in that kind may be referred as to Prayer they referre Masses Dirges and Trentals visiting of holy places pilgrimage and such like to Almes building of Abbeys and religious houses giuing to Couents of Friers and Nuns as for relieuing of the poore that is the least poynt of their almes to Fasting sackcloth ashes watching whipping sleeping on the pauement going barefoote handy labour and such like If the first sort be imposed for the most part it is nothing but the shuffling ouer of their Beads so many times a day with so many Creeds and so many Aues though they vnderstand neuer a word they speake or the saying of so many Masses or going to visite the shrine of Saint Thomas of Canterbury or of some other Saint all which is so farre from pinching the soule or taming the body
vntill after Euensong vpon Sunday he was suffered to sit there out of the hellish torments to be refreshed and comforted during the Sabboth Now if Iudas found this fauour must wee not thinke that all other obtaine the like 25. The Iewish Rabbines deuise strange tales of walking ghosts for the vpholding of the walls of Purgatorie as that Rabbi Akiba should meet once in the way a man with a heauie burden of stickes on his backe who vpon examination confessed that hee was a Purgatorie Ghost carrying such a bundle of stickes euery day to burne himselfe and that the Rabbi finding out his sonne taught him to say the prayer called Kaddisch which was so effectuall that in a dreame this ghost returned to the Rabbi with thanks for his deliuery and said that hee was now in Gan Eden or Paradise and no longer in Purgatory This and such like tales they tell for their Purgatorie wherein the Romanists may behold their face as it were in a glasse for are not their Bookes and Legends full stuft with such trash is not this article of their Religion maintayned by this argument are not the mindes of the vulgar possessed with such fearefull fables I will not stand to shew how full of falshood these narrations are nor how contrary to the ancient doctrine of the chiefest Fathers and Primitiue Church that shall bee discouered in a more proper place onely I shew how poore Purgatorie both with Iewes and Romanists is vpholden by walking ghosts or else it would fall to the ground 26. The Iewish Rabbines teach their people to confesse one to another their sins the day before their feast of reconciliation which is the tenth day of the month Tisri or September and that in a secret place of the Synagogue where each receiueth mutually at his fellowes hand with a lether belt 39. blowes and at each blow the party beaten beates themselues on the brest and saith one word of his confession taken out of the 78. Psalme and 13. verse then the striker lyeth downâ— and receiueth like penance at the hands of the former this done they runne home and make merry with the Cocks and Hennes of reconciliation supping largely because of the next dayes fast Now doe not our Romanists imitate them in this May game of confession and hypocriticall penance They must also confesse their sinnes in secret and receiue a short penance for their long sinnes and that once a yeere principally with a certaine perswasion of meriting thereby remission of their sinnes and when they haue done doe they not returne like the dogge to the vomit to their old courses If a man shall obserue them well and compare their practices together hee shall easily perceiue how both of them alike turne that seuere discipline of the Church which they bragge so much of into a mere mockage and pastime 27. The Iewish Rabbines looke for Elias the great Prophet to come before their long expected Messias And doc not our Romish Rabbines tell vs that Elias must come before the second comming of Christ they are both alike in this erronious conceit saue that the Romanists erre worse then the Iewes for that they will haue Elias to bee the fore-runner of Christs second coÌ„ming whereas the Iewes expect him according to the prophecy of Malachy together with our Sauiours application thereof before the first comming of their Messias 28. The Iewish Rabbines imagined that euery one had attending vpon him two Angels one good and another bad the one to protect and blesse him if hee behaued himselfe deuoutly and reuerently in Gods scruice the other to curse and afflict him if hee found him failing in his duty Our Romish Rabbines teach the fame doctrine as if all the Angels were not ministring spirits for the good of them which are heires of saluation and as if a man had but one cuill spirit to tempt and â—nnâ—y him whereas in one man there were found a whole legion and in one woman seuen deuils at once as wee finde recorded in the historie of the Gospell 29. The Iewish Rabbines taught that those shall be more seuerely punished who should violate the precepts of their Scribes then they that should transgresse the law of Moses and doe not our Romish Rabbines affirme the same in effect when they impose a greater punishment vpon the breach of one of their traditionall decrees then if a man'breake the precepts of Gods law as for example if a man eate flesh in Lent or after a vow marrie a wife then if hee commit adulterie or breake the Sabboth 30. The Iewish Rabbines perswade the silly people that they are the onely Elect people of God who easily can keepe not the Decalogue or tenne Commandements alone but the whole law of Moses and therefore that the law consisting of sixe hundred and thirteene Commandements wherof three hundred threescore and fiue are prohibitions as many as are dayes in a yeere or veynes in a mans body and two hundred forty and eight commanding precepts iust so many as a man hath members in his body if euery member of a man doe euery day performe one of the precepts and omit one of the things prohibited the whole law of Moses may bee euery yeere and so for euer fulfilled Thus they vaunt of their owne strength to saue themselues and therefore seeke not for a Sauiour without themselues And what doe our Romish Rabbines but the same when they affirme that a man may in this state-of mortality perfectly fulfill the whole law yea euen doe more then the law requireth and so supererogate what neede haue these of the death of Christ to purge away their sinnes when they can thus by the ayde of Gods grace as they say keepe all the Commandements and so pay the vttermost debt of their obedience Let them goe together then as enemies vnto Christ in this opinion also 31. To conclude the Iewish Pharises fasted twice a weeke so doe our Romish ones saue that they alter the order but not the number of the dayes for the Iewes fast the second and fift day of the weeke the Romanists the fourth and sixt The Iewish Pharises vsed in a blinde deuotion to beate their heads against the walls till bloud came to vse thornes in their skirts to sting themselues to lye on plankes on stones and thornes to drench themselues ofâ—â—n colde water for the reseruing of their chastiâ—y so doe ou Romish Pâ—arises they make a shew of whipping and scourging their owne carkasses of going barefoote woollward of drenching themselues in colde water as we read that Fr ar Frauncis was wont to doe and all forsooth both to tame the rebel'ion of their vnruly flesh which will not be tamed by these means of their owne inuention hauing left the ordinance of God and by penance to make satisfaction for their former sinnes but it will one day bee said vnto them who required these things at your hands In vaine ye worship O ye hypocrites
God that hee cannot doe all these things by himselfe without them but rather of his omnipotencie in that hee was not onely able to doe these things himselfe but also to giue power to those creatures to doe them so it is an argument of greater power in Christs merits to giue strength to our workes to merit heauen then if hee did it for vs without our workes I but by Bellarmines leaue that I may speake with all humble reuerence to the diuine Maiestie the power of God had beene more manifest and his omnipotencie more conspicuous I doe not say had beene greater if he should doe these things immediatly by himselfe then it is by the glasse of the creatures As when the Lord came downe in person vpon mount Sinai and gaue the children of Israel the law from his owne mouth his glory was more famous and fearefull then when hee sent it them after by the hand of Moses though written with his owne finger as the other was spoken with his owne mouth And therefore it is said Exod. 20. that the people were so astonished at Gods voyce that they desired that hee would speake no more vnto them in his owne person but by his seruant Moses Adde herevnto that God in his wisedome ordayned those creatures to that end and purpose and therefore we must not dispute as Bellarmine doth whether it should haue beene a greater token of his omnipotencie if hee had or if hee had not created them but humbly submit our selues to his wisedome knowing that his thoughts are not like ours nor his counsels like ours but as the heauens are higher then the earth so are his wayes higher than ours and his thought aboue our thoughts but for the merits of Christ he hath reuealed in his word that in them onely wee are to finde saluation and therefore wee must beleeue that he is most glorified by that doctrine which teacheth vs to rely onely vpon them and as for the power in them to cause vs to merit it is no where to be found in Scripture and therefore not to be thought to be for the aduancement of his glory besides to say that Christs honour is encreased by mans merit is plaine blasphemie for who hath giuen any thing to God Rom. 11. 25. He standeth not in neede of our good decdes Psal 16. 2. Indeede we doe glorifie God by our good workes but that is not by encreasing but by publishing and proclaiming of his glory but the Romanists say that the glory of Christs merits is augmented by our merits which must needes be a most blasphemous speech In a word seeing we doe not finde in Scripture that Christ died to giue merit to our workes but to purchase pardon to our sinnes and obtaine life for vs wee must bee content to thinke that this serueth most for his glorie and that the contrarie is derogatory thereunto 35. Lastly where did we euer read that wee must be like vnto Christ in meriting we read that wee must bee holy as he is holy and humble and meeke as hee was humble and meeke and patient as he was patient to wit in quality not in quantity in imitation not in perfection but to merit as he did is no where to be found nay it is a thing impossible for it is an infinite and omnipotent worke of righteousnesse that can deserue any thing at the infinite iustice of the omnipotent God and it must bee of infinite valew that can purchase that infinite reward And therefore it was necessarie that he which should be our Redeemer should also be God because neither Angell nor Archangell nor any creature else could performe a worke of that price which might be sufficient to merit the kingdome of heauen It is therefore a most grosse blasphemie to say that we must be like vnto Christ in the point of meriting for it maketh euery man a Iesus that is a Sauiour and Redeemer to himselfe Therefore to conclude I say with S. Bernard Let the glory remaine to the Lord vntouched he hath triumphed ouer the enemie alone he hath freed the captiues alone hee hath fought and conquered alone and with S. Augustine To whom we are endebted for that we are to him we are endebted that wee are iustified let none attribute to God his being and to himselfe his iustifying for it is better which thou giuest to thy selfe than that which thou giuest vnto God thou giuest the lower thing vnto God and the higher to thy selfe giue all to him praise him in all This wee doe by our doctrine and they the contrary and therefore it is most manifest that by this doctrine of theirs mans glory is exalted and Christs defaced mans merits lifted vp and Christs pulled downe which cannot stand with the truth and sincerity of Christian Religion 36. The fourth doctrine which tendeth directly to the dishonor of God the abasing of Christs glory in the worke of our redemption is their paradox of humane satisfactions by which they teach that Christ by his death hath made satisfaction for the guilt of our sinnes and the eternall punishment due vnto them but wee our selues must satisfie the iustice of God for the temporall punishment either in earth or in Purgatory whereas we on the contrary teach and beleeue that by Christs death and passion a perfect and all-sufficient satisfaction is made to the iustice of God for all the sinnes of men and for all the punishment thereof both eternall and temporall As for our doings or sufferings we acknowledge the one to be sabordinately required as fruites of our faith and the other necessary to be sustained as meanes of our mortification And touching offences against our brethren we hold it necessary that we make satisfaction to such whom we haue wronged any wayes either by confession restitution or punishment as the case shall require yea wee acknowledge that a Canonicall or Ecclesiasticall satisfaction is to be made to the Church or any part thereof when as we haue giuen iust scandall and offence there vnto But in all these wee denie that there is any vertue or power to expiate our sinnes or to make satisfaction to God for the punishment thereof either temporall or eternall that to do is only proper and peculiar to the Crosse of Christ for as the disobedience of the first Adam brought vpon vs not onely eternall punishments but also temporall so the obedience and merit of the second Adam hath made satisfaction to God for both 37. And herein we agree both with the holy Scripture in many expresse places as 1. Iohn 2. 2. He is the propitiation for our sinnes And Rom. 5. 18. For the eternall punishment of them And Esay 53. 4. For the temporall for there it is said that he tooke vpon him our infirmities and bore our sicknesses And with the holy Fathers for Saint Augustine plainly affirmeth That temporal afflictions before forgiuenes are the punishments of sin but after forgiuenes
c. Which words they interpret as spoken to Peter onely and consequently to the Pope his successour we to the rest of the Apostles as well as to him Where now doth the Scripture decide this doubt and speake plainely which is the truest sense Mary first in the very place it selfe by the due examination of the circumstances thereof they euidently shew that our sense is the truest for whereas the question is propounded to all the Apostles verse 15. and all the Apostles held the same faith that Iesus is the Sonne of God verse 20. it must needes be that Peter was but as the fore-man of the Quest and answered not for himselfe only but for them all thereby shewing forth not any preeminence of authority aboue the rest but a greater zeale and forwardnesse then the rest And herevpon it followeth that seeing this promise of the keyes is made because of that faith and confession therefore they all beleeuing and confessing the same haue an interest to the promise as well as Peter And this Anselmus in plaine tearmes affirmeth It is to be noted saith he that this power was not giuen alone to Peter but as Peter answered one for all so in Peter hee gaue this power to all 14. Secondly by the conference of another place which is more plaine to wit Ioh. 20. 23. where is a gift and an endowment of that power of the keyes which before was promised for to binde and to loose and to remit and retayne sinnes is all one in effect as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth and containâ— the whole vertue of the keyes now here they are all inuested with equall iurisdiction the Holy Ghost is equally breathed vpon them all and equall authority be queathed vnto them all by these words of the Commission As my Father sent me so I send you which exposition is confirmed by the authority of most of the Fathers as Augustine Cyprian Hierome Theophilact Anselme c. and thus the Scripture by a most liuely voyce determineth this doubt and as of this so of all other questions and interpretations the Scripture onely must bee the Iudge which by searching the originals examination of circumstances conference of other places and consulting with the learned Fathers and Expoâ—itors together with feruent prayer to God for inward illumination will giue a most exact and precise satisfaction to all controuersies touching matters of â—aith necessarie to bee beleeued 15. To the third reason that the Scripture is the law and therefore cannot be the Iudge I answere that though the Law and the Iudge be diuers distinct things yet they are subordinate one vnto the other and so may both ioyne in the concurrence of one cause as when our Sauiour saith Call no man Father vpon earth for there is but one your Father which is in heauen his meaning is not to exclude earthly Fathers from their title but to shew that God is the primer and principall Father both in respect of time order and cause and that the other are but subordinate vnto him so in a Common-wealth the Iudge is subordinate vnto the law and the law is the Iudges Iudge and for that cause as the Law is said to be a dumbe Magistrate so the Magistrate is said to be a speaking Law and so in truth the Law is the Iudge primarily and principally and the Magistrate is but the Minister of the law and the Iudge subordinate Now if this be so in a Common-wealth gouerned by humane Lawes which are failing and imperfect in many things being the ordinances of erring men how much more may we deeme it to be so in the Church of God whose Law-giuer is God himselfe and the law the word of God and therefore though the Pastors and Ministers of the Church may interpret the Scriptures yet they must be tyed to this rule to doe it by the Scriptures and to expound the law by the law for shall not a temporall Iudge giue sentence out of his owne braine but secundum leges statuta according to the lawes and statutes of the Realme And shall any Pastour of the Church be it the Pope himselfe giue iudgement in any question out of his owne brest without the direction of Gods word This is to preferre humane lawes before Gods law and to make the state of the Church farre inferiour to the state politike and to haue a more certaine rule for the deciding of ciuill controuersies then for the determining of questions of â—aith so that in a word the Scripture is both the law and the interpreter of the Law the Iudge and the Iudgement 16. Secondly Bellarmine affirmeth and laboureth to proue that the proper and chiefe end of the Scripture was not to be the rule of faith but that it might be commonitorium quoddam vtile A certaine profitable commonitory whereby the doctrine deliuered by word of mouth might be conserued and nourished And to this end and purpose he vseth diuers reasons as first because it containes in it many things which are not necessary to faith as all the Histories of the Olde Testament and many of the New and the salutations in the Epistles of the Apostles all which were not therefore committed to writing because they were necessary to be beleeued but are therefore necessarily beleeued because they are written Secondly because all things necessary to be beleeued are not contained in the Scripture as by what meanes women vnder the law were clensed from originall sinne wanting circumcision and children that dyed before the eight day and many Gentiles that were saued againe which are the books of Canonicall Scripture and that these are Canonicall and those are not that the Virgin Marie was a perpetuall virgin that the Passeouer is to be kept vpon the Sunday being the Lords day and that children of beleeuing Parents are to bee baptized and such like Thirdly because the Scripture is not one continued body as a rule should bee but containeth diuers workes Histories Sermons Prophecies Verses and Epistles These be his three reasons by which the Iesuite would euince that the Scripture is not giuen to this end to be the rule of faith 17. To all which I will answere briefly and distinctly and first in generall secondly in particular In generall if the Scripture be not giuen to be the rule of faith why is it called Canonicall It is therefore called Canonicall because it containes the Canon that is the rule of faith and life this very inscription approued by all doth refute Bellarmines fond cauillation Againe if the Scripture was not giuen to bee the rule but onely a monitorie why were there so many Bookes written seeing fewer would haue serued for monition The multiplicity of Bookes proueth that they serue not onely to put vs in mind of our duty but also as an exact rule to square our faith and frame our life by And lastly if the Scripture was not giuen to be a rule why doth he himselfe
not iustify and yet faith alone doth iustify If they say that they speake of one kinde of faith and we of another they say nothing to the purpose for euen that any faith alone should iustify is contrary to their owne positions who affirme that the former cause of our iustification is the inherent righteousnes of works and not the righteousnes of Christ apprehended by faith And thus I leaue the Article of iustification at farre with it selfe to be atoned by their best wits if it be possible 37. Let vs come to their doctrine of workes and see how that agreeth with it selfe and here first they hold that works done before faith and regeneration are not good workes but sinnes This is proued by them out of Saint Augustine who affirmeth that the workes of vnbeleeuers are sinnes and if the workes of vnbeleeuers then of all other wicked men which bee not regenerate seeing as the same Father else-where speaketh Impij cogitant non credunt the wicked doe not beleeue but thinke they haue but a shadow of faith without substance It may be prooued also by that generall and infallible axiome of the holy Scripture Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne but the workes of wicked men are all voyd of faith and therefore are no better then sinnes in the sight of God be they neuer so glorious and beautifull in the eyes of men Or as Gregorie Nazianzene saith As faith without workes is dead so workes without faith are dead and dead workes are sinnes as appeares Heb. 9. 41. Besides Bellarmine confirmeth the same by reason because they want a good intention to direct their workes to the glory of the true God whome they are ignorant of To which I adde another reason drawne from our Sauiours owne mouth Mat. 7. Because an euill tree cannot bring forth good fruit but euery man til he be ingrafted into Christ is no better then an euill tree and therefore cannot doe a good worke 38. This is their doctrine and it is sound diuinitie but see how they crosse it ouer the face with a contrary falshood for the same men that teach this notwithstanding affirme that the workes of Infidels are good suo genere in their kind so they are good and not good sinnes and yet good works but this is in their kind say they that is Morally and not Theologically I but morall vertues in the vnregenerate are by their owne principles sinnes how then can they be good any waies Can sinne which is a transgression of Gods law and simply in it owne nature euill be in any respect good as it is sinne But to take cleare away this scruple another of them auoucheth that they are not onely morally but euen Theologically good for he saith that such works as are done by the light of nature onely without grace doe dispose and make a man in some sort fit to iustification though it be longè valdèremotè remotely and a farre off for he that yeeldeth obedience to morall lawes is thereby lesse vndisposed and repugnant to diuine grace Now how can sinnes dispose or prepare a man for iustification is God delighted with sinnes Either therefore they are not sinnes or they doe not dispose to iustification neither farre nor neere or which is the present contradiction they are sinnes and not sinnes good and not good at one time and in one and the same respect And to put the contradiction out of all question the Councill of Trent in the seuenth Canon of the sixt Session enacteth as much and denounceth Anathema to all that say the contrarie the words are these If any man shall say that all the works which are done before iustification by what meanes soeuer they are done are truely sinnes or deserue the hatred of God let him be Anathema And Andradius the interpretor of that Councill authorised by the Fathers of the same doth more perspicuously explaine the meaning of that Canon when hee saith that men without faith destitute of the spirit of regeneration may doe workes which are voyde of all filthinesse free from all fault and defiled with no sinne and by which they may obtaine saluation then which what can be more contradictory to that which before was deliuered that all the workes of Infidels and vnbeleeuers are sinnes be they neuer so glistering with morall vertue or more agreeable to the olde condemned errors of Iustine Clemens and Epiphanius who affirmed that Socrates and Her aclitus were Christians because they liued according to the rule of reason and that the Grecians were iustified by Philosophie and that many were saued onely by the law of nature without the lawe of Moses or Gospell of Christ 39. Againe their doctrine of doubel merit the one of Congruity the other of Condignity as they terme them is not onely contrary to the truth but to it selfe For this they teach that the merit of congruity which the Councill of Trent calleth the preparations and dispositions to iustification is grounded vpon the dignity of the worke and not vpon the promise of God but the merit of condignity requireth both a dignity of the worke and the promise of God to bee grounded vpon or else it is no merit This is Bellarmines plaine doctrine and is consonant to the residue of their Doctours both Schoole diuines and others for thus they define the merit of congruity It is that by which the subiect is disposed that it may receiue grace according to the reason of Gods iustice Here is onely iustice required and not any promise to the merit of congruity though I must confesse Gabriel Biel somewhat crosseth this definition when â—e saith that when a man doth what in him lyeth then God accepteth his worke and powreth in grace not by the due of Iustice but of his liberalitie And Aquinas who affirmeth that when a man vseth well the power of free-will God worketh in him according to the excellencie of his mercy But yet they all agree in this that the merit of congruity is not grounded vpon any promise as the merit of condignity is but onely vpon the worthinâ—s of the worke done Now here lurketh a flat contradiction for by this it should follow that the merit of congruity should bee more properly a merit then that of condignity Which Bellarmine denyeth in the same Chapter because this dependeth vpon it owne dignity and hath no neede of a promise as the other hath and so should bee also more meritorious and excellent then the other being neuerthelesse but a preparation and beginning to iustification and the other the matter of iustification it selfe And that a man that hath no grace dwelling in him but onely outwardly mouing him nor is yet iustified should haue more power to deserue and merite then he that is fulfilled with grace and fully iustified Thus error like a Strumpet bringeth foorth a monstrous brood of absurdities but let vs proceede 40. Their
that is falshood to falshood now in this my taske is to demonstrate how it crosseth the word of God that is falshood to truth which being proued I hope no man which is not drunke with the poisonous cuppe of the whoore of Babylons fornication will doubt of the vanity and falshood thereof Now my purpose is not to enter into the lists of disputation and confute their opinions by strength of argument that combate hath beene valiantly performed by many of our Champions onely my intent is first to shew how their doctrines coÌ„tradict the plain text of Gods word and secondly to wipe away their subtle and intricate distinctions whereby they labour to make a reconciliation betwixt the word of God and their opinions which shall be my onely taske in this Chapter for it is to bee noted that there was neuer any generation so happie or rather so miserable in distinctions as the Romanists are they maintain their kingdomes by distinctions by them they blind the eyes of the simple dazle the vnderstanding of the vnaduised set a glose vpon their counterfeit ware couer the deformity of their Apostate Church and lastly extinguish the truth or at leastwise so darken and obscure it that it cannot shine so brightly as it would but in seeking to extinguish the light of truth they distinguish themselues from the trueth and as Iacob by his party-coloured stickes occasioned a brood of party-coloured sheepe and goates so they by their fond distinctions bring foorth a party-coloured and counterfeit Religion as I trust to lay open to the world in this discourse following 2. The maior or first proposition beeing without all controuersie I passe ouer in silence and come to the minor or second proposition which is that the Religion of the Church of Rome in many doctrines is apparently opposite to the word of God 3. The Gospell teacheth that 〈◊〉 one onely God is to bee inuocated and worshipped and that after that manner which he hath appointed in his word and that all the confidence of our saluation is to bee placed in him alone but the Romanists command not onely to inuocate God but also Angels and Saints departed and in time of danger to expect helpe and succour from them and to repose our trust and confidence in them also 4. Bellarmine distinguisheth and saith that God alone indeed is to be worshipped and inuocated with that kinde of adoration which is due onely vnto God but yet the excellent creatures may bee honoured and some of them inuocated not as gods but as such as are Gods friends that is with an inferiour kinde of worship 5. But these distinctions cannot extinguish the truth for first they giue by name the highest worship that can bee to wit Latria to the Image and reliques of Christ and the crosse and to a piece of bread in the Sacrament insomuch that Gregory de Valentia a famous Iesuite and Bellarmines compeere is in this regard driuen to say that some kinde of Idolatrie is lawfull Secondly if they should deny this yet their doctrine and practice doth apparently proclaime asmuch for when they say to their Agnus deis It breaketh and quasheth all sinne as Christs bloud doe they not equall them to Christ when they place their hope and confidence in Saints and reliques doe they not equall them to God when they pray that by the merit of a golden siluer or woodden crosse they may be freed from sinne committed doe they not equall it with our Sauiour that dyed on the crosse when they desire at the Saints hands grace and glory doe they not equall them to the God of grace and glory when they call the blessed Virgine the Queene of Heauen and giue vnto her one halfe of Gods kingdome euen the halfe of mercy doe they not equall her to her maker Lastly when they offer sacrifice to reliques and Images as namely burne frankincense set vp tapers offer the calues of their lippes doe they not equall them to God for all these dueties are proper and peculiar parts of Gods seruice and therefore in attributing them to creatures they giue vnto them plainely that seruice and worship which belongeth to God alone 6. The Gospell teacheth that remission of sinnes and euerlasting life is bestowed vpon vs freely not for any works or merits sake of our owne but for Iesus Christs sake the only begotten Sonne of God who was crucified for our sinnes and rose againe for our iustification But the Romanists teach that wee are iustified and saued not by Christs merits onely but in part for Christs sake and in part for our owne contrition obedience and good works 7. Bellarmine answereth that their doctrine is falsely charged to say that sinners are iustified partly for their owne works sake and partly by Christ for saith hee by a distinction there bee three kinde of works one of those that are performed by the strength of nature onely without faith and the grace of God another of such as proceede from faith and grace but not from a man fully iustified and therefore are called works of Preparation as Prayer Almes Fasting Sorrow for sinne and such like and the third of such which are done by a man iustified and proceede from the Spirit of God dwelling in his heart and sheading abroad charity in the same Now concerning the first hee acknowledgeth that we are not iustified by them by the example of Abraham Rom. 4. and therefore that they most impudently belye their doctrine that fasten this opinion vpon them As touching the second he saith that these works Preparatiue are not meritorious of reconciliation and iustification by condignity and iustice yet in as much as they proceede from faith and grace they merite after a sort that is obtaine remission of sinnes The third sort of works hee boldly and confidently affirmeth to merite not remission of sinnes because that was obtayned before but euerlasting glory and happinesse and that truely and properly 8. This Bellarminian distinction may be distinguished by two essentiall qualities first Folly secondly Falsehood Folly for it maketh nothing to the taking away of the Antithesis before mentioned for when as he confesseth that the second kinde of works doe merite remission of sinnes after a sort and the third eternall life absolutely what doth â—e but acknowledge that which wee charge them withall and which himselfe reiected a little before as a slaunder namely that wee are iustified and saued partly by our owne merits and partly by the merits of Christ for the Gospell saith We are saued by Christs merits alone and he saith We are saued by our owne merits also And thus the folly and vanity of his distinction euidently appeareth 9. The falsehood sheweth it selfe in two things first in that hee affirmeth that they doe not teach that works done before grace doe merite any thing at Gods hand for though it be a Canon of the Councill of Trent charged with an Anathema If any
this Sacrament there is a cōmemoration of that sacrifice of the crosse which was once offered this he spake conuicted by the truth And the Councill of Trent also in another place doth almost if not fully speake asmuch when it sayth that Iesus Christ left to his Church a sacrifice by which that bloudy sacrifice which hee made vpon the crosse might bee represented and the memory thereof continued which if it be true then being conuicted by their owne consciences and confessions it remaines that that doctrine which holdeth that the masse is a true reall propitiatory sacrifice is opposite to the doctrine of the Gospell which teacheth the contrary and so this fourth Antithesis is safe and sound for all that Bellarmine can say against it 21. The Gospell teacheth that both parts of the Sacrament are to bee ministred to all Christians and of the cup it sayth expresly Drinke ye all of this but the Church of Rome hath decreed that none should drinke of the cup but the Clergie and that the people should content themselues with the other part of the Sacrament 22. Bellarmine distinguisheth of the word All and saith By it is not to be vnderstood all the faithfull but the Apostles onely which hee prooueth by Saint Marke who sayth that they dranke all of it that is all the Apostles which sate at table with our Sauiour Christ and not all the Christians that beleeued in him 23. But to his distinction not all Christians but all Apostles I answere that this is Bellarmines conceit or rather deceit and hee borrowed it of Andradius the famous expositer of the Councill of Trent but it is a miserable glosse woe bee to it that so soully corrupts the text first the fathers vnderstood by the vniuersall All all the faithfull and that the Apostles heere in this great action were not Pastors but sheep Christ himselfe the great shepheard beeing the distributer and diuider of this Sacrament I shall not need to repeat their words they are so euident and ordinary Let the margent direct the Reader to them if they desire satisfaction in this point 24. Secondly many of their owne Doctors so interprete it as Thomas Aquinas Durand Biel Alphonsus de Castro Lorichius the author of the glosse and diuers others Cassanders testimony shall stand in stead of all the rest he sayth plainly that the Westerne Church beleeued for a thousand yeeres that our Sauiour Christ gaue this Sacrament to his disciples representing the persons of all the faithfull and he addeth reasons why the wine as well as the bread was to bee receiued both for a more full representation of the passion of Christ and signification of our full spirituall nourishment in Christ and also the full and perfect redemption of our bodies and soules by the body and soule of our Sauiour This Cassander repeats to haue beene the opinion of the Latine Greeke Church for the space of a thousand yeeres What an vpstart distinction then is this of Bellarmine who notwithstanding ceaseth not to bragge that they haue all antiquity on their side 25. Thirdly wee haue Saint ` Paul thus interpreting the words of his Lord and Master who spake nothing but by the direction of the Spirit for whereas our Sauiour sayth Drinke yee all of it Saint Paul sayth Let a man examine himselfe and so let him eat of this bread and drinke of this cup. But all must examine themselues before they come to the sacrament therefore all are enioyned to drinke of the Sacramentall cup let vs chuse then whom wee will beleeue whether Saint Paul or Bellarmine for Saint Paul interprets this All one way and Bellarmine cleane contrary 26. Lastly reason it selfe disapprooueth this exposition for first I would aske him whether that which our Sauiour commanded to bee done at his last Supper were to bee done once and no more or often euen to the end of the world If hee say once and no more the words will confute him which say Doe this in remembrance of me if often then by All he meant not the Apostles onely for the Apostles liued not till the end of the world Againe if by All was intended the Priests onely then not onely the people should bee excluded from the cup but from the bread also for if in these words Drinke ye all of it hee speaketh to Priests onely then in these words Eat ye all of it hee speaketh to none but Priests for they are both spoken to one and the same persons And thus the people should haue no part of the Sacrament at all for the same All that is in one is in the other And to conclude if the Apostles stood heere in stead of Pastors or Priests why did they not minister the Sacrament It is the part of a Priest as hee is a Priest to minister the Sacrament to others and when hee receiueth it himselfe then hee standeth for a common Christian and not for a Priest for a sheepe not for a shepheard But they did not minister but receiue therefore they stood not here for Priests but for the whole body of the faithfull And thus this distinction being battered by the testimony of fathers confession of their owne Doctors authority of Saint Paul and strength of reason doth fall to the ground like Babel and this fift Antithesis is nothing weakened by Bellarmines Sophistrie 27. The Gospell teacheth that true repentance or conuersion to God is an earnest sorrow of heart for sinnes committed and faith perswading that they are certainely remitted for Christs sake But the Church of Rome teacheth that contrition indeed is one of the parts of repentance but they faine that it meriteth a remission of sinnes and to it they adde auricular confession not commaunded by God satisfaction or voluntary workes by which they say that the punishments of sinne are satisfied that these also may be redeemed by money and purse-penance All which whole doctrine is very blasphemous against the merit of the Son of God who onely made satisfaction for our sinnes 28. Bellarmine heere from distinguishing falleth to rayling and accuseth vs of manifest lying and falshood in laying that to our charge which wee are not guilty of but whether is the lyar hee or wee let the Reader iudge First therefore that true repentance is not a bare sorrow of heart for sin but such a sorrow as is ioyned with and ariseth from faith appeareth by this because contrition without faith leads to desperation and not to saluation as the wofull examples of Cain Esau and Iudas declare and therefore the Romanists themselues doe not exclude all manner of faith from repentance but onely that faith which apprehendeth remission of sinnes by Christ which speciall faith whereby remission of sinnes is beleeued and obtained is ioyned with repentance Luke 24. 47. Act. 26. 18. This is our doctrine and it is warranted by the holy Scripture though it pleaseth Bellarmine to say that it is a
of nature then the Saints are no wayes our Mediatours for if they bee they must bee one of these two wayes vnlesse wee will say that they doe that which belongs not vnto them but like busy-bodies are pragmaticall in anothers charge which farre bee it from vs to thinke of those blessed creatures but both these wayes he sayth Christ is the onely Mediatour therefore the Saints by his owne conclusion are no Mediatours at all 58. His third distinction is that therefore Christ is called the onely Mediatour because hee prayeth for all and none for him but the Saints are such Mediatours that they themselues stand in need of a Mediatour I answere that therefore they are no Mediatours at all for if the Saints in Heauen stand in need of a Mediatour themselues then it must necessarily follow that they are not Mediatours at all for they that are parties cannot bee vmpiers And this is that which Saint Augustine plainely affirmeth though Bellarmine laboureth to distort his words to another sense when he sayth He for whom none intreateth but hee intreateth for all is the onely true Mediatour And thus it is cleare that the doctrine of the Church of Rome touching the mediation of Saints is directly contrary to the doctrine of the Gospell 59. The Gospell teacheth that Christ Iesus hath made a full and perfect satisfaction for all our debts and so is our full and perfect Redeemer But the Church of Rome teacheth that Christ hath satisfied but in part for our debts to wit neither for all our sinne nor for all the punishment due vnto all our sinne and so that he is not our full and perfect Redeemer 60. This doctrine of the Gospell is so euidently propounded in holy Scripture that our aduersaries themselues acknowledge it in generall to bee true for Aquinas where the Apostle sayth I suffer all things for the Elects sake that they may also obtaine the saluation which is in Christ Iesus asketh this question What was not the passion of Christ sufficient and answereth to the same Yes as touching the working of saluation And Bayus sayth that there is but one satisfaction onely vnto God and that of Christ yea Bellarmine himselfe acknowledgeth asmuch in generall for hee affirmeth that the merit of Christ is sufficient to take away all sinne and punishment neither dare any of the rest for shame in plaine words deny the same because if they did many manifest texts of Scripture would conuince them of impiety and heresie 61. And that the other is the doctrine of the Church of Rome the Councill of Trent will witnesse which thus defineth When God forgiueth a sinner hee forgiueth not all the punishment but leaneth the party by his owne workes to satisfie till it bee washed away Yea they affirme not onely that wee our selues must satisfie for the temporall punishment but also for the relikes of sinne and for the fault it selfe yea for that punishment that should bee suffered in hell excepting the eternity yea so impious and shamelesse are some of them whose bookes are notwithstanding authorized by the Church of Rome that they affirme that Christ dyed onely for originall sinne and that the satisfaction of Christ deserueth not the name of a satisfaction for our sinnes Let the world iudge now whether these positions of the Church of Rome bee not flat contrary of the Gospell of Iesus Christ for the Gospell attributeth to Christ all sufficiencie of meriting and satisfaction but these fellowes make him a Satisfier party parpale for the sinne but not the punishment yet not for all our sinnes neither but for a part of them as for originall not actuall or iffor actuall yet for mortall onely and not for veniall And this is the Romish Religion though palliated with the name of Catholicke and hidden from the sight of the common people vnder the vaile of an implicite faith which if they should but see they could not chuse but abhorre 62. For the healing of this wound Bellarmine applyeth his wonted playster of a distinction Christs satisfaction saith he is in vertue sufficient but not in act efficient except it bee applyed by our satisfaction and therefore that there is but one onely actuall satisfaction which is ours which by the grace and efficacy of Christs satisfaction taketh away the punishment of our sinne and maketh a iust recompence to God for the same 63. But this distinction first vndermineth it selfe for if Christs bee a satisfaction then it is an actuall satisfaction if it bee not an actuall one then it is none at all Did not he actually dye and rise againe Did not hee actually by that death of his satisfy Gods iustice for all the Elect Doth not the strength and efficacy ofhis death stretch it selfe backward to Adam and forward to the last beleeuing child of Adam vpon earth If all this bee true then it must needs bee intolerable blasphemy to say that actually there is no satisfaction but our owne and that Christs satisfaction which hee made for our sinnes is indeed no satisfaction except it bee by the meanes of ours which must apply it and as it were giue efficacy vnto it 64. Againe the ground of his distinction is absurd for where doth the Scripture make our satisfaction a meanes to apply Christs satisfaction vnto vs It telleth vs of other meanes of application to wit outward the Word and Sacraments inward faith in respect of vs and the Spirit in respect of God but no where of this new-deuised meanes which they talke of and besides how can our satisfactions apply Christs vnto vs whereas they are both satisfaction and that to God and that for our sinnes Nay when as hee sayth that our satisfaction doth include the satisfaction of Christ in it and so both together make but one compound satisfaction if they be of one naturâ—â— how can one apply the other If they bee one in mixture and composition how is the one seuered from the other These bee absurd inconsequences and irreconciliable 65. Lastly if the strength power of satisfying which is in our sufferings is wholly from the grace of God the vertue of Christs satisfaction why doe some of them hold that a man by power of nature without grace may bee able to satify for Veniall sinnes and expell them nay why doth Bellarmine say that a righteous man hath right to Heauen by a twofold title one of the merits of Christ by grace communicated vnto him and another of his owne merits By which he plainely diuideth our merits from Christ and ascribeth a satisfactory power to them equall to the death of Christ it selfe and that without the helpe of grace Nay why do they not say plainly that Christ hath satisfied for vs without any intermixing of our owne but that their wisedome perceiued that then Purgatory Masses Penance Romish pardons yea and the Popes Kitchin it selfe and the very marrow of all their Pompe shall fall
sentences heere and there that see me to make for their purpose contrary to the whole scope and drift of the writer or lastly by blemishing our whole Religion by some sinister or exorbitant opinion maintained by some one or other vnaduised fellow though it bee contrary to the whole current of all other writers on our side as if for one mans errour wee were all flat Heretikes or because one souldier playeth the dastard therefore the whole army were cowards These bee their tricks of Legerdemaine by which they indeuour to disgrace our Religion and to countenance their owne but Veritas magna est preualebit I hope so to dispell and scatter these mists by the light of truth that they shall vanish like smoake and the truth bee more resplendent like the Sunne comming out of a cloud 61. To the purpose first they exclaime that our Religion is an enemy to good workes and that wee esteeme of them as not necessary to saluation which damnable errour some of them ascribe vnto vs as our direct doctrine others as a consequence of our doctrine and our secret meaning but that both are lying slanders I appeal first to our doctrine it selfe which is so cleare in this point that no man can doubt thereof but hee that is musled with malice for this we hold that though faith be alone in the worke of iustification yet that saith euer worketh through loue and is great with good workes as a woman with child which it bringeth forth also when occasion serueth and that if it bee disioyned from good workes it is but a dead carkas of faith yea the faith of Deuils and hypocrites and not of the elect And this as it is the constant doctrine of all our diuines so is it principally of Luther whom our aduersaries accuse as the chiefest enemy to good workes for thus hee writeth in one place touching the efficacy of faith Faith is a liuely and powerfull thing not an idle cogitation swimming vpon the toppe of the heart as a fowle vpon the water but as water heated by fire though it remaine water still yet it is no more cold but hote and altogether changed so faith doth frame and fashion in a man another mind and other senses and altogether maketh him a new man Again in another place he sayth that the vertue of faith is to kill death to damne hell to be sinne to sinne and a deuill to the deuill that is to be sins poison and the Deuils confusion Thus hee speaketh concerning the powerful efficacy of that true iustifying faith which wee rely our saluation vpon and they condemne as a nulli-fidian portion And touching good works their necessity and excellency heare how diuinely he writeth in one place Out of the cause of iustification no man can sufficiently commend good workes in another One good worke proceeding from faith done by a Christian is more pretious then heauen or earth the whole world is not able to giue a sufficient reward for one goodworke and in another place It is as necessary that godly teachers doe as diligently vrge the doctrine of good workes as the doctrine of faith for the Deuill is an enemy to both what can bee spoken more effectually for the extolling of the excellency of good wâ—rkesâ— and yet these fellowes make Luther the greatest aduersarie to them 62. Secondly I appeale to themselues many of the greatest Doctors amongst whom doe cleare vs from that imputation Maldonate The Protestants doe say that iustifying faith cannot bee without good workes Viega The Protestants affirme that iustification sanctification are so ioyned together that they cannot be parted Stapleton All Protestants none excepted teach that faith which iustifieth is liuely working by charity and other good workes Lastly Bellarmine The Protestants say that faith cannot stand with euill workes for hee that hath a purpose to sin can conceiue no faith for the remission of his sin and that faith alone doth iustifie but yet is not alone and that they exclude not the necessity but onely the merite of good workes nor the presence but the efficacy to iustifie Now then with what face can they bolster out this slaunder against our doctrine and accuse vs to be like the Simonian Heretike who taught that a man need not regard good workes and Eunomians who defended that perseuerance in sinne did not hinder saluation so that wee beleeued This is the first blasphemie against our Religion wherein they doe not so much thwart vs as crosse themselues and that one may see yet more clearely this to bee a malicious slaunder hearken what Bellarmine sayth concerning Luthers opinion of Christian liberty Luther seemeth sayth he to teach that Christian liberty consisteth in this that a godly conscience is free not from doing good workes but from being accused or defended by them let Luther himself speake againe By faith sayth he we are freed not from works but from opinion of workes that is from a foolish presumption of iustification to bee obtained by workes by all which we may easily iudge of the meaning of those sentences obiected Faith alone doth saue and infidelity alone doth condemne and where faith is no sinne can hurt nor condemne that they are to be vnderstood partly of sinnes before iustification and partly of such sinnes after as destroy not faith nor raigne in the beleeuer nor are perseuered in but repented of and laboured against and thus our Religion is iustified by the very aduersaries thereof from this great crime imputed vnto it 63. Againe they accuse vs as maintainers of this doctrine that all the workes of iust men are mortall sinnes and of this they make Luther Calume and Melancthon to be Patrones but with what shamelesse impudency let the world iudge To begin with Caluine these be his words Dum sancti ductu Spiritus c. i. Whilst being holy wee walke in the wayes of the Lord yet least being forgetfull of our selues wee should waxe proud there remain reliques of imperfection which may minister vnto vs matter of humiliation againe the best worke that can be wrought by iust men yet is besprinkled and corrupted with the impurity of the flesh and hath as it were some dregs mixed with it let the holy seruant of God chuse out of his whole life that which he shall thinke to haue beene most excellent let him well consider euery part thereof hee shall without doubt finde in one place or other something which sauours of the fleshes corruption seeing our alacrity in well doing is neuer such as it ought to be but our weakenes great in hindering the course although we see that the blots where with the Saints workes are stayned are not obscure yet grant that they are but very small workes shall they not offend the eyes of God before whom the starres themselues are not pure we haue not one worke proceeding from the Saints which if it be censured
vncertaintie of vnwritten traditions for the Scripture was euer the same since it was Scripture and so shall continue to the end of the World no man daring to alter or change it to adde thereto or detract ought therfrom for feare of the curse denounced against such presumption But Traditions are and haue beene euer most variable and vnconstant some that haue beene held for Apostolical traditions being vtterly abrogated and abolished as threefold immersion or thrice dipping in baptisme for signification of the Trinitie giuing the Eucharist to infants which was vsed 600. yeeres in the Church standing in publike Prayers at Easter and Pentecost and such like and some altered and changed as deferring Baptisme vntill the feasts of Easter and Pentecost into baptizing vpon any occasion fasting vpon Wednesdayes and Saturdayes into Wednesdayes and Fridayes and so many ancient constitutions dispensed withall by the pretended Apostolicall authoritie of the Church of Rome as is confessed by them And that this is an vncontroulable truth that one famous example of the contention betwixt the East and West Churches touching the obseruation of Easter doth euince for the one side pretended a tradition from Saint Iohn and Saint Philip the other from Saint Peter and Saint Paul Now if some traditions bee thus vncertaine subiect to change abrogating dispensing and abolishing all must needs bee of the same nature and if all bee of that nature then there can be no securitie in conscience to suspend our faith vpon them the safest way therefore is to relye vpon Scripture alone the fulnesse whereof Tertullian adored and of the authoritie whereof whatsoeuer was destitute Ierome iudged to bee nothing but vaine babbling and besides the which whosoeuer teacheth any doctrine of faith Saint Augustine pronounceth anathema against him 27. Thirdly and lastly by the infallible truth which shineth in the Scriptures as the Sunne in the firmament wherein no errour euer was found no spots or blemishes as in the Moone of traditions no deceit nor misleading vnlesse in sence peruerted as by Heretikes to their owne destruction but many traditions haue beene as erronious and deceitfull in themselues so the causes of much errour in the Church witnesse Papius who as Eusebius testifieth broched many exorbitant doctrines vnder pretence of tradition from the Apostles and drew manie Ecclesiasticall Doctours moued by his antiquitie for he was Disciple to Iohn into the errour of the Chiliasts and all the ancient Heretikes almost who flying from the Scriptures did shelter themselues vnder the pretext eyther of philosophicall principles fained gospels or forged traditions and hereof many ancient traditions themselues giue pregnant euidence as those alleadged by Clemens Alexandrinus to wit Iustification by philosophie Repentance after death Preaching the Gospell to the wicked in hell which the Romanists themselues condemne or that of Cyprian touching anointing to bee vsed in Baptisme and mixing wine with water which Saint Augustine relected as erronious or that of Iraeneus who saith that it was a tradition that Christ suffered at fiftie yeeres of age which is disallowed by all sound authoritie and conuinced of errour by the Scripture it selfe Of this kind a number more might bee produced if need required but these are enough to inferre the conclusion that traditions are not of that infallible truth as the holy Scripture is but rather subiect to errour and falshood and therefore it can bee no part of Christian wisedome to repose our faith vpon them for it is to build vpon a sandie foundation which will deceiue the building in time of need 28. Auricular confession hath as little securitie in the practice of it as any of the former doctrines for first it implieth inpossibilitie of performance by requiring a perfect enumeration of all particular sinnes both secret and open and that vpon danger of damnation the absolution being frustrate if this condition bee not obserued Now because no man is able to performe this therefore no mans conscience can be assured of the remission of his sinnes by that sacramentall medicine whereas on the contrarie hee that confesseth his knowne sinnes to God and forsaketh them with a generall detestation of all other vnknowne though many escape his remembrance yet by Gods promise is sure to find mercie which is the doctrine of the Protestants This is possible and easie to be done The other impossible and improbable and that many learned of their side haue ingeniously confessed as Cassander Rhenanus with diuers others And albeit the Fathers of the Trent Councell in shew seemed to qualifie the matter with this limitation that other sinnes which do not come into the mind of the partie confessing diligently thinking vpon them are vnderstood as generally included in his confession yet the Iesuite Suarez confesseth that the Priest cannot remit any one sinne except the penitent confesse all that hee ought to confesse and Maldonate another Iesuite that because the Priest can remit no sinnes but such as he heareth confessed therefore hee that must remit all must heare all And it is plaine that whatsoeuer the Councell spake yet it meant no otherwise by the reason which they giue for necessitie of confession which is that the penitent may bee iudged whether he hath sinned or no and if hee haue in what kind and degree to the end that proportionable penance may be ioyned to his offence and therefore it is required that not onely the act of sinne but all the circumstances bee discouered Who what to what end how by what helpes where when which are the seuen circūstances attending vpon euery actiō Now how can the Priest iudge of the nature qualitie quantitie of the sin except he know it with all the circumstances if he know it not how can he enioyne a competent satisfaction And if no satisfaction be enioyned then no remission eyther of the sinne or at least releasement from the temporall punishment thereof can bee obtained What a snare are mens consciences brought into by this intricate doctrine How much freer and securer a course is it to confesse necessarily to God alone voluntarily to the Pastor in cases of distresse of conscience and want of instruction and penally to the Church in publike for satisfaction not of God but of men for some publike offence committed This is the doctrine of Protestants which as it is free from impossibilitie so it is full of safetie 29. Secondly their doctrine leaueth the conscience in doubt whether the sinne bee truly pardoned or no by the absolution of the Priest for the Priest being a man is vnable to search into the heart of a sinner and so consequently may erre in the vse of the key for if the Confessor bee an Hypocrite though he make a true relation of all his sinnes with all their circumstances and be therefore absolued by the Priest yet it is certaine that such an one is not absolued in Heauen but stands lyable to Gods
iudgement because there must be by their doctrine aswell contrition in heart as confession in the mouth or else no pardon can follow but a Priest cannot discerne of the heart Nay further many if not most of their Romish shauelings are vnable to iudge of the nature and qualitie of sin much more of the quantitie and degrees thereof so consequently can neither impose a iust or proportionable satisfaction without which no releasement nor make the partie vnderstand the ease hee standeth in that hee may take vpon himselfe voluntarie penance or if need bee purchase indulgence from the Pope In all which respects it is danger to trust our soules vpon such a slipperie foundation but hee that confesseth to God his sinnes and expecteth pardon at his hand onely is sure that hee discerneth the secrets of the heart and that he shutteth and no man openeth and openeth and no man shutteth and therefore if hee absolue though all the World condemne hee is on a sure ground and if hee condemne though all the World acquite hee is in a miserable case In this doctrine there is no vncertainty but strong comfort to the penitent sinner and terrour of conscience to the obstinate and vnrepentant 30. If they say that the absolution of a Priest is certaine vnlesse there bee a barre in him that confesseth because our Sauiour saith Whosoeuers sinnes you remit they are remitted and whosoeuers sinnes yee retaine they are retained I answer that first de facto the Priest may erre but God cannot Secondly he cannot choose but erre in absoluing if the penitent doe erre in confessing which hee is verie likely to doe and thirdly that when God purposeth to absolute a sinner no barie can hinder the performance thereof yea hee infuseth grace into his soule to hate his sinne and power to forsake it Is it not better then to trust vnto God then to man and safer to confesse our sinnes to him that hath absolute power to pardon them then to a Priest whose pardon depends vpon the vncertaintie of a mans true confession These things be so cleare that no reasonable man can doubt of the truth of them 31. Lastly confession to God hath manifest and vndeniable grounds in holy Scripture but auricular Romish confession to a Priest is by the iudgement of their greatest Clarkes taken vp onely by a tradition of the Church and not by any authoritie of the olde and new Testament witnesse their Canon Law Panormitane Peresius Petrus Oxoniensis Bonauenture Medina Rhenanus Erasmus with many more and though the new Iesuites and Rhemists auouch the contrarie yet they but therein crosse their fellowes as learned and wise as themselues and yet are not able to alleadge any one direct proofe of their opinion Now is it not a safer practice to build vpon Scripture then tradition that is vpon God then man And to chuse that kind of confession which no man doubteth to be warranted from God rather then that which the Patrones thereof themselues are at variance from whom it commeth who that hath eyes seeth not which of these is rather to be chosen 32. Touching Purgatorie it breedeth diuers dangerous consequences as to their holy Pope first who taketh vpon him to haue plenarie power ouer all creatures especially ouer the soules in Purgatorie which the Canonists call peculium Papae the Popes peculiar for it proueth him eyther to bee a lying Prophet or a cruell Tyrant if hee haue full power ouer them why doth hee let so many thousand poore soules lye frying there without release His suffering them to continue in that cruell torment argueth him either to want power to relieue them or mercie to put that power in execution both which are vnbeseeming qualities for Christs Vicar If they reply against this as Antoninus doth and say that in respect of his absolute Iurisdiction he may absolue all that are in Purgatorie but if we regard the orderly execution thereof in that respect the Pope may not nor ought so to doe I say againe But why ought hee not if it bee in his power is it for feare to fill Heauen too soone with Saints but that would be a great blessing for then the consummation of all things would the sooner come or is it for feare lest the iustice of God should be fully satisfied by a proportionable punishment But the Popes indulgence can helpe that for hee hath in his Treasure-house such a surplussage of Saints merits that can serue to make good whatsoeuer is wanting in their behalfe and the Pope by their doctrine hath authoritie to dispence dispose of these merits at his discretion Or is it for feare lest purgatorie should bee emptied and so hee should lose one part of his Kingdome But our Sauiour contented himselfe with heauen and earth to be vnder him and his dominion and Saint Paul attributes to his regiment things vnder earth that is in hell and wil his Vicar needs haue a larger dominion then his Master But indeed this is the true reason For if hee should make a goale deliuerie out of this infernall prison then his chiefest sway were gone yea and his reuenue too It stands vpon him therefore not to bee pleased to deliuer any out of these paines vnlesse he bee well pleased for his paines and if hee bee so then the soules shall flye out of that place to heauen in whole troupes as they say they did at the Prayer of a certaine holy man c. In their leaden Legend this danger lighteth vpon the head of their head the Pope which according to their doctrine can by no meanes be auoided it were better then for him to forgoe his profit which ariseth by purgatorie then to vndergoe such foule discredit 33. Another dangerous consequence ariseth hencefrom to all the professors of Religion in generall that is a feareful presumption and securitie of sinning when they are perswaded that after this life they may be released from the paines of purgatorie by the prayers almesdeeds Masses and other meritorious workes of the liuing for who would bee afraid to sinne or carefull to make his saluation sure in this life with feare and trembling when hee beleeueth that by giuing a summe of monie at his death for Masses and dirges to be sung for his soule he shall be certainly deliuered out of purgatory This must needs cast men into manifest presumption if not of all sinnes yet of veniall sinnes and ordinarie offences which are to be purged by that fire as they teach Is not our doctrine more sound and safe that informeth vs that such as die in their sinnes sinke downe to the lowest Hell as hopelesse after death to bee relieued by anything that can bee done for their sakes by the liuing doth not this teach men betimes to bee wise and to finish vp the worke of their saluation before the night come and make their peace with God whilest they are here in the way of