and Espenceus confesse that p LindaÌ„ de opt gen interpret scrip l. 3. ca. p 3. Espenc Digres in 1. epist. ad Timoth. lib. 1. cap. 11. apud Rainold Thess 5. there are many Apocryphall things thrust thereinto out of the Gopell of Nicodemus and other toies that there is a false beginning shamefully and ignorantly set before the lecture of the Gospell that the canon of the Masse and the secrets are beraied with most foule faults that there are the festiuals of some saints whose names happily are scantly well warranted And what doe they now condemne the diuine seruice which they haue commended to the people haue set foorth for holy good for so many former ages Of their Bibles we haue heard before and shall I now say to them to whom he spake before If these Popes and Popish Bishops and doctours had once deceiued you in a mony matter you wold beware how you trusted them againe and will you beleeue them still they hauing by their owne confession so long deceiued you both in your Church-seruice and in your Bible commending the one to you as diuine seruice and the other as Gods pure word and since condemning them both If he will thinke vs fooles to argue in this sort let him put his hand to his owne nose and returne the imputation of this folly to himselfe remembring that it is an ill bird that beraieth his owne nest and that hee should first haue looked at home before hee had made this wise reason against vs. This only by the way as being impertinent to this place but by that that hath beene said of translations we may beforehand perceiue how faint and spiritlesse M. Bishops voice will be when the time shall come which so manfully he threatneth that he shall exclaime against vs as corruptours and deprauers of Gods sacred word At the most it will be but as the crie of a gander amongst the geese which thrusteth out the necke and hisseth and happily shaketh a man by the gowne and backe againe he runneth with a great noise and is applauded by all the flocke as if he had done some valiant worthy act It will then appeare further that it is rather for forme than for matter that hee thus bableth of peruersly mangling the Scriptures Of expounding Scriptures and resoluing doubts and of our owne pew-fellowes crying out shame vpon vs. Of resoluing doubts and difficulties I haue answered him the section last saue one I will not say as there onely of the ancient church but setting aside the foolish and idle dreame of a priuiledge resting in the Pope which is no other but an ambitious vsurpation and a meere Antichristian tyrannie subiecting the whole faith of the church to the will and fancy of one wicked man what meanes hath the Church of Rome for resoluing of doubts but that we haue in any respect as good as they Yea there are not so many difficulties or doubts in very materiall points vnresolued amongst vs as at this day remaine questioned vndecided in the Church of Rome As for ancient Fathers and Councels they are more truely regarded with vs than they are with them With vs they are made to yeeld onely to God and to his word but with them they must giue place to all their sacrilegious and abominable deuices Let the Fathers and Councels say what they will yet q Bellar. de Sacram li 2. c. 25. Omnium conciliorum veterum omnium dogmatum firmitas ab authoritate praesentis ecclesiae dependet the authority of them all and the certainty of all Doctrines must depend vpon the authority of their church As touching that which he saith that we beare our followers in hand that euery faithfull man by himselfe examining the circumstances of the text and comparing other like places shal find out the right meaning of al obscure sentences how impudeÌ„t a lie it is hereby appeareth for that we do not attribute so much to the industry or learning of any mortal man We say with Aust that r Aug lâ—b 83. quaest 69 solet circumstantia scripturae illuminare sententiam the circumstance of the scripture is woont to giue light of the meaning of it with Hilary that Å¿ Hilar. de Trinit li. 9. Dictorum intelligentia aut ex praepositis aut ex consequentibus expectatur the vnderstaÌ„ding of the sayings of Scripture is to be expected either from that that is gon before or that that followeth after We say with Origen that t Origen cont Cels l 4. Ex ipsius Scripturae locis inter se collatis verum sensum elicimus by comparing places of Scripture together we gather the right sense But yet neither doe we make these the onely necessarie meanes for vnderstanding of Scripture neither doe attribute to euery faithfull man the abilitie of doing these things neither doe we affirme of any man whatsoeuer that by these or any other meanes hee can attaine to the vnderstanding of all obscure sentences And yet we say that a vulgar faithful man hauing by plaine and euident texts learned the substance of true faith exercising himselfe in the reading of the Scriptures and being assisted by the ministery of the word may by comparing of places and examining of circumstances much further himselfe for the increase of his knowledge to his comfort and soules health Many are there of that great number of which M. Bishop speaketh who by such exercise of Scripture are able to stoppe his mouth and to giue him good instruction in the mysterie of true faith u Ps 119.105 The word of God is indeed the lanterne to their feete and the light to their steps and so farre are they from stumbling and falling thereby as that they x vers 104. gaine by it vnderstanding to hate and abhorre all wicked waies 20. W. BISHOP Now to make vp an euen reckoning with M. PER. Atheism I must come vnto their diuine seruice and worship of God the third point that I promised to handle because he spared not to speake his pleasure of ours First then whereas a true reall and externall sacrifice is among all externall works the most excellent seruice that can be done to the diuine Maiestie as shall bee prooued in the question of the sacrifice which also hath euer since the beginning of the world beene by the best men practised to acknowledge and testifie aswell the soueraigne dominion that God hath ouer vs as our dutifull subiection vnto his almightie goodnesse the Protestants to make knowne vnto the wiser sort that they are not Gods true loy all people will not vouchsafe to performe to him any such speciall seruice as to sacrifice in his honour nay they are fallen so farre out with this principall part of Gods true worship that they do in despight of it powre out most vile reproches against the daily sacrifice of the Catholike Church which conteineth the blessed body and most pretious
expected or hoped for nor they cannot according to their owne rules from their heart make the said petitions being out of all hope to obtaine them R. ABBOT There is a notable picture of the regenerate man in the holy woman Rebecca when a Gen. 25 22.23 the children stroue within her and the Lord said vnto her Two nations are in thy wombe and two maner of people shall be diuided out of thy bowels and the one people shall be mightier than the other and the elder shall serue the yonger For so are there in the faithfull the old and the new man the flesh and the spirit somewhat whereby they are the children of God and somewhat wherby they are still the children of this world The originall leprosie still cleaueth vnto vs but it is begun to be clensed and the strength of it is abated already Sinne still possesseth and dwelleth in our members but we do not say as M. Bishop falsly pretendeth that it hath the commanding of them b Aug. de peecat mer. remiss l. 2. c. 7. Nunc ei similes esse tam coepimus per primitias spiritus adhuc dissimiles sumus per reliquias vetustatis proinde in quantū similes in tantum regenerante spiritu filij dei in quātum autem dissimiles in tantum si ij carnis seculi Illinc ergò peccare non possumus hinc verò si dixerimus quia peccatum non habemus nosi so◠decipimus c. We are now like vnto God saith S. Austin by hauing the first fruits of the spirit and we are still vnlike vnto him by the remnants of our old state So far therefore as we are like him so far are we by the spirit of regeneration the sonnes of God and so far as we are vnlike him so far are we the children of the flesh and of the world On the one side therefore we cannot sinne but on the other side if we say that we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues and there is no truth in vs. Now then semblably wee answer M. Bishop that according to that we are renued and by the spirit of God are become the sonnes of God the name of God is sanctified in vs his kingdome is begun in vs and we doe his will in earth with ready will as it is done in heauen But by the remainder of the corruption of flesh and of the old man there is a let that Gods name is not perfectly sanctified in vs his kingdome taketh not full place in vs neither doe we his will in such measure as we ought to doe Yet we pray that the old man the body of sinne may more and more be destroied that the worke of Gods kingdome may more and more be fulfilled in vs that we may more and more keep his commandements and do his will not only with ready will but without all let and hinderance fully and perfectly as they in heauen doe Herein we pray that we may increase from day to day and we beleeue that God heareth vs and granteth our request and will goe forward with his good worke till he bring vs in heauen to the perfection of it so far are the Protestants from being out of hope of the obtaining of these three first petitions as M. Bishop fondly dreameth 44. W. BISHOP In the fourth we aske aswell to be made partakers of Christs blessed body in the Sacrament which is the food of our souls as for our daily corporall sustenance For so do the ancient fathers expound that petition as namely S. Cyprian in oratione Dominica S. Hiero. in 6. Matt. S. Amb. li. 5. de Sacra c. 4. where he hath these memorable words of the blessed Sacrament that before the words of Christ it was bread but after it is the body of Christ Why then saith hee is it called heere bread he answereth that it is called bread not simply but supersubstantiall bread For so doth the Greeke word Epióusion signifie as well as daily it is saith he not such bread as passeth into our body but it is the bread of eternall life that vpholdeth the substance of our soules Now you may be well assured that Protestants who will not beleeue any such bodily presence doe not pray to God to giue it them R. ABBOT Wee wot well that sundry of the ancient Fathers haue expounded this petition Reall presence fondly collected out of the Lords praier not onely literally of corporall foode but also mystically of the participation of the blessed Sacrament wherin Christ is spiritually offered and giuen vnto vs to be vnto vs the bread of euerlasting life Of this we will not contend with the fathers onely we would know of M. Bishop if this daily bread bee vnderstood of the Sacrament how is it that the people with them are not called and vrged to the daily participation of the Sacrament that daily they may be partakers of this bread accordingly as they are taught to pray Or if without the receiuing of the Sacrament a man may be partaker of the spirituall food of the body and bloud of Christ as by their construction of this petition compared with their practise it may seem they do confesse then they must acknowledge that there is no necessitie of their reall presence to make vs partakers of the body and bloud of Christ Which although I do not see how M. Bishop should well and hansomly auoid yet he thought good here to put in one place for the same reall presence of Christs bodie his choise notwithstanding being so smal as that he hath brought vs one that saieth nothing for him yea in very truth saith altogether against him The words of Ambrose are these a Ambr. de Sacram l. 5. cap. 4. Ante verba Christi quod offertur panis est vbi Christi verba deprompta suerint iam non panis dicitur sed corpus appellatur Before the words of Christ that which is offered is bread but when the words of Christ are vttered it is not now termed bread but it is called the body M. Bishop falsifieth the words but taking them as they are what doth hee finde in them for assertion of the reall presence Is it anie proofe of reall presence to say that the Sacrament is called the body of Christ Now as it is called the body of Christ so is it also called supersubstantiall bread not for that that it is really to the mouth belly but for that that it signifieth and presenteth to our faith And this doth Ambrose himselfe immediately declare when hee addeth b Ibid. Non iste panis est qui vadit in corpus sed ille panis vitae eternae qui anima nostrae substantiam fulcit for it is not this bread which passeth into the body but that bread of eternall life that vpholdeth the substance of our soule Where when he deuideth the bread of eternall life from that which goeth into the bodie hee plainly sheweth that
towards mankinde for he neuer refused to redeeme vs and therefore neuer failed in his loue towards mankinde But in the last question he most of all plaieth the wretch and vnder colour of an imputation to vs vttereth a wicked blasphemie of his owne If the first motions to euill be deadly sinnes in vs as the Protestants hold what will they make of such tumultuous and vnbrideled passions in him who had a greater command ouer them then wee haue The Protestants doe hold indeed that the first motions to euil are deadly sinnes if God weigh them in iudgement as they are but the Protestants doe not hold in Christ any first motions to euill and much lesse any such passions as are woorse then those motions that this absurd man should thus argue as from the lesse to the greater from euill motions in vs to tumultuous and vnbrideled passions in him We acknowledge a difference of will in Christ testified by most passionate and effectuall words and wee acknowledge it as the Fathers did out of the same words against the heretikes the Monothelites but in this difference we deny any thing to haue been tumultuous or vnbridled but all dulie composed and ordered so that the discord was a concord and the difference made no other but harmony and conformitie as before was said 14. W. BISHOP But we are not yet come vnto the height of his blasphemies which he powreth foorth more abundantly vpon those our Sauiours words Matt. 27.46 My GOD my GOD why hast thou forsaken me saying when this kinde of temptation was proposed to Christ as though God being auerted from him he had beene appointed to vtter destruction hee was seised with horror * Li. 2. Instit c. 16. sess 11. And in his Institutes treating of the same subiect saith Christ feared to haue beene swallowed vp of death as a sinner And there can be no more dreadfull bottomelesse gulfe then for a man to feele himselfe forsaken and estranged from God and not to be heard when he calleth vpon him euen as if God had conspired his destruction euen thither we see that Christ was throwne downe so that by enforcement of distresse he was compelled to crie out my GOD my GOD why hast thou forsaken me In the Paragraffe before he speaketh more plainly that Christ did hand in hand wrestle with the armies of hell and the horror of eternall death finally that in his soule he suffered the torments of the damned and all those punishments that are due to wicked men in hell He then belike was the traytour Iudas companion for the while he was in the Diuels hands to be tormented he dispaired and fared as men doe in these hellish torments What greater blasphemy can bee inuented then to condemne the King of heauen that came to redeeme vs all from hell euen to the very pit of hell it selfe Beza not willing to come behinde his master Caluin in this kinde of impiety whereas Caluin craftily admitted onely that Christ then despaired In cap. 5. ad Heb. vers 7. he affirmeth plainely that from Christ stroocken with the horror of Gods curse escaped the word of desperation And else-where that Christ was with the huge heauy burden of Gods wrath ouerwhelmed and adiudged to the flames of hell yea In c. 27. Mata 22. Luc. buried and drowned in the bottome of the infernall gulfe This man you see desires to lodge Christ low enough that would haue him drowned in the very bottome of hell This their pestilent venime they might haue sucked out of theire good grandsire Luthers writinges who vpon the very same wordes doth make this goodly commentary What shall we therefore say In Psal 22. v. 1. Christ to haue been together both the most iust and greatest sinner both the most notorious lier and truest teacher at the same instant both the most highly glorying and deepely despairing both happy in the highest degree and most miserably damned Vnlesse we say this I see not saith this Oracle of the new Gospel how Christ was forsaken of God See him also vpon the third chapter to the Galatians where he vttereth yet more detestable speeches of Christ to wit that all the Prophets did in the spirit foresee him to be the greatest theefe robber murtherer adulterer sacrilegious person and blasphemer that euer liued I could cite you diuers others of the same opinion but I had rather note their extreame blindnesse who neglecting the ancient Fathers learned expositions of the holy Scriptures were led away with such horrible extrauagant conceites of our Sauiour vpon so small occasion For he at that very time hanging on the Crosse declared himselfe to be most farre off from all such hellish torments yea he shewed all possible signes of a most quiet and peaceable minde praying for the saluation euen of his persecutors he was not then belike in doubt of his owne promising also to the good theefe that the same day he should be with him in Paradise wherefore hee doubted nothing of being there himselfe recommending his Mother vnto his beloued Disciple and him likewise to her and to fulfill the Scriptures both saying I thurst and citing euen those very words that they are scandalized at out of one of the Psalmes of Dauid And finally aduisedly considering all things belonging to his passion to be accomplished commended his spirit vnto his Fathers hands so that there could not possibly be more calme setled iudgement more valiant constancy and resolution then there was But what meant he then to say My GOD my GOD why hast thou forsaken me Forsooth nothing else but to signifie that in all these torments which he suffered he had not any comfort or consolation at that time from God who is wont to giue extraordinary aide and comfort to all those that suffer for his names sake but that Christ might as he himselfe desired be put to suffer all kinde of extremity all manner of inward consolation was wholly with-holden from him which it pleased him then to expresse by manner of complaint in those most pittifull words Christ suffered for vs both in bodie and soule My GOD my GOD c. the more to mooue vs to compassion Thus much of their impieties against Christs person now to those that they teach against the office of his mediatorship R. ABBOT Theodoret citeth it as a memorable sentence out of Irenaeus that a Theodoret. dialog 3. ex Iren. adu haer lib. 5. Câ—â—â—ergò proprio sanguine nos Christus redemerit animaÌ„ suam pro animis nostris dederit carnem suam pro nostru carnibus c. Christ gaue his soule for our soules and his body for our bodies So doe we hold that by Christian faith we are bound to beleeue that b Hieron in Esai 53. li. 14. Ex quo perspicuum est sicut corpus flagellatum laceratum signa inâ—uriae in vibicibus liuore portabat â—ta animam verè doluisse pro noâ—is
ne exparte veritas ex parte mendacium credatur in Christo. as the scourged and rent body of Christ did carry the markes of wrong done to him by stripes and blewnesse of wounds as Hierome saith so that his soule did verily endure griefe for vs lest partly a truth and partly a lie should be beleeued in Christ If we say that Christ suffered for vs in body onely it shall be a lie to say of Christ as touching his soule that he suffered for vs but therefore doe we beleeue that both in body and soule he suffered that it may be wholly a truth which we beleeue and Christ may be acknowledged to be a perfect Redeemer both of body and foule Now it is true indeede that the soule suffereth by the body because the body of it selfe hath no sense or feeling whereby to suffer but when we speake of Christs suffering in soule we meane not that which the soule suffereth by the body but whereby it suffereth properly and immediately in it selfe For inasmuch as it was a part of punishment due to our sinnes to suffer in this sort therefore we beleeue that Christ taking vpon him to suffer for vs did suffer in the same fort Because c Hieron vt supra Quod nos pro nostris debebamus sceleribus sustinere ille pro nobis passus est he suffered for vs what we ought tesuffer for our owne sinnes And accordingly doth the Prophet say of him d Esa 53.10 He shall giue his soule an offering for sinne which he verifieth in the Gospell when yet there was no passion but of the soule e Matt. 26.38 My soule is heauy euen vnto the death Wee beleeue therefore that not in body onely but in soule also Christ f 2. Cor. 5.21 was made sinne for vs that not in body only but also in soule g Gal. 3.13 he was made a curse for vs to deliuer vs from the curse h Ambros in Orat. con Auxent ep li. 5. Non maledictus ille sed in te maledictus not accursed himselfe but accursed in vs as saith Saint Ambrose blessed in i August cont Faust. Manith l. 14. c. 6. Benedictus in sua iustitia maledictus autē propter peccata nostra cap. 7. Maledictum eum dixit ex cōditi ne poenae nostrae ex qua in ligno suspensus est his owne righteosnesse but accursed for our sinnes and by condition of our punishment wherby he was hanged vpon the tree Now in that he according to his humane spirit and soule k Amb. vt supr Maledista nostra suscepit tooke vpon him our maledictions and curses it followeth that the effects of those maledictions tooke place in his soule horror anguish vexation astonishment wrastling with dispaire with hell death damnation and the whole power of darkenesse and whatsoeuer else may be reckoned in the vnknowen sorrowes of Christ as the Greekes tearmed them in their Litany For putting himselfe into our place and condition he stood liable to all that was due to vs and therefore l Hilar. in Psal 68 Vsque ad mortis profundae descendit omnis in eum terror desaeuientis in nos tempestatis inculuit he descended into the depths of death and all the terrour of that tempest that raged against vs lighted vpon him Therefore doth Saint Peter attribute vnto his passion m Act. 2.24 the sorrowes of death that is to say the sorowes that appertaine to death of which Dauid by Prophecy bringeth him in complaining n Psal 18.4 The paines of hell came about me the snares of death ouertooke mee o Psal 69.1 Saue me O God for the waters are come in euen vnto my soule I sticke fast in the deepe mire where no ground is I am come into deepe waters and the streames runne ouer me Whereof he praieth anon after p ve 15. Let not the water floud drowneme neither let the deepe swallow me vp and let not the pit shut his mouth vpon mee What are these floods this deepe this pit wherat he standeth thus as it were amated as fearing therby to be swallowed vp Surely the Prophet foresaw herein more then bodily passion euen a sea of spirituall afflictions hell and destruction opening her mouth wide at him and threatning to deuoure him the wrath of God his indignation furiously marching against him to require of him as who had vndertaken it the full recompense and satisfaction for our sinnes In respect whereof the Prophet saith q Esay 53.10 The Lord would breake him r v. 6. the Lord hath laid our iniquities vpon him as to note that we are not to consider only what was done by men but to behold God himselfe also wreaking his anger vpon him braying him as it were in a morter and beating him in pieces as the Hebrew word importeth Therefore Athanasius saith that the Prophet Dauid in another Psalme saith ſ Athanasale interpret Psal Dicit ex persona eius In me constitutus est furor tuus c. Iram contra nos conteptam ob praeuaricationem in se sustinuit in the person of Christ Thy wrath is bent against me because saith he he did beare in himselfe the wrath that was conceiued against vs for sinne We read the words t Psal 88.6 vulgat 87. Thine indignation lieth hard vpon mee and thou hast vexed me with all thy stormes Which Hierome in like sort applieth to Christ in this sort u Hieron in Psal 87. Iram procellam macellationis suroris tui quas in gentibus effusurus eras super me induxisti qui peccata corum suscepi Thou hast brought vpon me the wrath and storme of thy fury which thou shouldest haue powred foorth vpon the nations because I haue taken vpon me their sinnes Againe in the Psalme it followeth Lord why reiectest thou my soule and hidest thou thy face from me Thine indignations goe ouer mee and the feare of thee hath vndone me They come about me daily like water and compasse mee together on euery side that is as Lyra saith x Lyra in eund Psal sicut aqua tangit intrantem ipsam Circumquaque ita punitiones tuae tegiterunt me in anima corpore As the water on euery side toucheth him that entreth into it so thy punishments haue touched me both in soule and body Now these things duely considered which are hitherto set downe it will easily appeare that the speeches of Caluin and the rest heere mentioned truly reported are so farre from blasphemy as that they lay before vs a most firm and sure foundation of Christian hope In the first place Caluin hauing affirmed that Christ did not onely giue his body to be a price of our attonement with God but that in his soule also he suffered the punishments due to vs and that they are too sottish who setting a side this part of our redemption doe stand onely vpon the outward punishment
of eternall death We professe so much and denie it not because there is no conquest without battell and therefore Christ hauing k Col. 2.15 spoiled principalities and powers and triumphed ouer them must needs bee supposed to haue had encounter and combate with them There followeth in Caluins next words the sentence of the Prophet that l Esay 53.5 the chastisement of our peace was laied vpon him that hee was wounded for our transgressions and broken for our iniquities Hereby he saith is giuen to vnderstand that he was put in the place and steed of wicked men as a surety or a hostage yea and as if he had been himselfe a partie guiltie to make good and to paie all the punishments that were to be required of them this onely excepted that he could not be holden of the sorrowes of death By and by after hee saith that wee are to know that not onely the body of Christ was giuen for a price of redemption but that it was a greater and more excellent price that he suffered in soule the cruell tortures that belong to man damned and cast away In which words if wee consider what hath beene before said we shall peceiue that there is nothing said amisse For what is there in damnation it selfe greater then the vndergoing of Gods curse what are all the torments thereof but the effects of the same curse and if Christ haue borne the curse that was due to vs if the wrath of God that should haue beene powred vpon vs were laid vpon him if he haue suffered for vs that that we should haue suffered for our selues as hath beene before said out of Athanasius Ambrose and Hierome why doth it seeme strange that Christ should be said to suffer for vs the tortures of damnation If m Athanas de passione cruce dom Amaritiemirae ex praeuaricationem legis obortam in quae omnes detinebat accipiens absumpsit euacuauit he tooke the bitternesse of the wrath that rose by the transgression of the Law and made it voide as Athanasius againe saith if all the terror thereof did fall vpon him that should haue befallen to vs as Hilary before hath said then Caluin hath said nothing but trueth that hee made good and paied all the penalties and punishments that were to be required of vs. I say not that he suffered all precisely in qualitie and kinde but in quantitie and measure I say with Caluin all that should haue beene required of vs. And therefore albeit wee affirme that Christ suffered the very anguish of hell yet we doe not thereby condemne him to the very pit of hell it selfe as M. Bishop wrangleth because it was the suffering it selfe not the place of suffering whereby satisfaction was to be made to God Now then taking it as wee say it is no blasphemie to say that hee that came to redeeme vs from hell did suffer for vs the paines of hell because hee was therefore to suffer the same for vs that he might redeeme vs therefrom Yea what a silly collection of blasphemie hee hath heere made will plainly appeare by a little change of words because it is all one as if he should haue said What greater blasphemie can be inuented then to condemne the Lord of life that came to redeeme vs from death euen to the very suffering of death it selfe As for that which hee saith of Christs being heereby made the companion of Iudas the traitour I passe it by as the speech of a wicked wretch who out of the poison of a malicious and wicked heart dareth of his owne wretched collection to say what hee list dishonorable to the Sonne of God From Caluin he coÌ„meth to Beza albeit in the first point hee mistaketh Beza for Caluin for Beza in the place by him cited hath not the words which he alleageth Caluin hath them indeed but so as that M. Bishop I trow will blush if at least he can blush when he shall heare in what sort he hath them He maketh a question or obiection in these words n Calu. in Mat. 27.46 sed absurdum videtur Christo elapsam esse desperationis vocem solutio facilis est quanquam sensus carnis exitium apprehenderet fixam tameÌ„ sletisse fidem in cius corde qua deum praesenteÌ„ intuitus est de cuius absentia conqueritur But it seemeth absurd that from Christ should slippe or escape a speech of despaire Hereto he saith The answer is easie that albeit the sense and feeling of the flesh apprehended destrustion yet his faith abode stedfast in his heart whereby he beheld God present with him of whose absence he complaineth By and by he saith againe o Ibid. In hoc diro cruciatu illaesa fuit eius fides ita vt relictum se deplorans propinquo tamen dei auxilio confideret Cum desperatione luclatus est non fuit tamen victus neque enim qui desperati sunt possunt deum appâ—llare suum Cum dicit Deus meus triumphum agit de tentatione In all this cruell torture his faith was vntouched so as that crying out that he was forsaken yet he trusted to Gods helpe as hard at hand He wrestled with despaire but was not ouercome for they who are desperate can not call God their God When he saith My God he triumpheth ouer that temptation Marke I pray thee gentle Reader how whilest hee tendereth thee an obiection in steed of a resolution hee seeketh to abuse thee with a shamefull vntruth affirming of Caluin though vnder Beza his name that he saith that Christ despaired whereas Caluins words are expressy to the contrarie that his faith was still inuiolate and continued firme and stedfast in his heart And euen as impudently doth hee behaue himselfe in the next words for Beza hath no such as he allegeth no not in any of the places by him cited that Christ was ouerwhelmed or adiudged to the flames of hell He doth not say that Christ was buried drowned in the bottom of the infernal gulf His words are that p Beza Annot. noui Testam Heb. 5.7 Quum iâ—â— se derelictum vociferatur cogitemus animum noniam in cogitatione metu impendentis mali prorsus eccupatum sed in profundo summae calamitatis gurgite sepultum qui ad emergendum maxima cum difficultate luctetur wheÌ„ Christ crieth out that he is forsaken we are to conceiue his minde not now occupied with the conceite or feare of euill at hand Christ how termed a sinner but euen buried in the deepe gulfe of extreme calamity so as that with great difficulty he wrestieth or striueth to swimme out Where are the flames of hell M. Bishop where is the infernall gulfe for shame man leaue this lying this grosse lying lest the liers meed befall you that no man beleeue you when you say truth Luthers words haue their christian godly meaning if a maleuolent minde haue not the construing of them I haue
mercy of God if Christs merites did in iustice deserue our saluation it is to be noted that both be true if they be duely considered For we are saued by Christs merits in rigor of iustice he satisfying of God as far-forth fully as we offended him and yet we be saued freely by the mercy of God too both because he hath of his meere mercy without any desert of ours giuen vs Christ his Sonne to be our Sauiour and also for that he hath out of the same his mercy freely applied vnto euery one in particular that is saued the merits of Christ through which he is saued R. ABBOT The value of our redemption is not to be rated by the wilfull conceits of men Christs other sufferings not sufficiēt vvithout his finall suffering and death but by the estimation and ordinance of God himselfe who doth nothing superfluously nothing idlely and without cause and therefore would not haue decreed the death of Christ but that a Luk. 24.46 it behooued Christ to suffer death and to rise againe from the dead the third day that repentance and remission of sins might be preached in his name As the Apostle saith b Gal. 2.21 If righteousnesse be by the law then Christ died in vaine so may we also conclude If the least thing that Christ suffered in his life were sufficient to redeeme vs as M. Bishop dreameth surely then Christ died in vaine It is not for man to take vpon him to be wiser then God nor for vs to say that this or that had beene sufficient to redeeme vs when we see what God hath decreed and done in that behalfe It is true in deed that the dignity of Christs person gaue worth to his sufferings but we are to learne of the wisedome of God what it was conuenient those sufferings should be to which the dignity of his person should giue that woorth so that not the dignity of his person howsoeuer but the dignity of his person in such and such sufferings certainely before determined of God was to be the merit and purchase of our redemption and saluation So then necessary it was that Christ should die for our redemption though his death had beene no sufficient price therefore but by the infinitenesse of his person Molineus therefore might very iustly and truely say not that the incarnation and birth of Christ profited vs nothing or could doe nothing but that without the death of Christ they had profited vs nothing or could haue done nothing for vs because it was by his death that God had appointed to redeem vs euen as M. Bishop against himslfe confesseth though his eies were not open to see it that an hundred places of expresse scripture doe assigne our redemption to the bloudshedding and passion of Christ The Papisticall Doctoures then their Monkes and Priests are to be condemned who vrge Christs incarnation and birth onely as a sufficient price for vs or doe stint the same as did Campian that c Campian Rot. 8. Cutus cruoris vna quaeuis guttula propter dignitatem bostiae mille mundos redimere potuisset Christ suffered for vs in soule also one drop of his bloud had sufficed to redeeme a thousand worlds not but that his incarnation and birth were profitable to vs but because whatsoeuer Christ did or suffered otherwise all concurred in his death as being preparations thereunto and in his death the fruit and effect thereof doth redound vnto vs not that we deny the value of any drop of the blood of Christ but because we hold no lesse needfull to redeeme vs then God deemed needfull that he should shead for vs. The words of Caluin which he translateth at randon are these d Caluin Instit l. 2. c. 16. se 10. Nihil actum erat si corporea tantúm morte defunctus fuisset Christus sed operae simul pretium erat vt diuinae vltionis seueritatem sentiret quo irae ipsius intercederet satisfaceret iusto iudicio It had beene to no effect if Christ had died onely a corporall or bodily death but it was withall needfull that he should feele the scuerity of Gods reuenge that so he might appease his wrath and satisfie his iust iudgement For disproofe of which assertion he vseth the words a little before mentioned that an hundred places of expresse Scripture doe assigne our redemption to the passion of Christ Full wisely I warrant you as if the scripture when it assigneth our redemption to the passion of Christ did not assigne it to those spirituall sufferings which Caluin there intendeth when as it describeth those sufferings to be a part of the same passion and the same are by Caluin so vnderstood to be If he will say that his meaning is that the scripture assigneth our redemption to the death of Christ let him vnderstand death in his true nature as he ought to doe with the complements and furniture thereof that is the wrath and curse of God and sorrowes of death as hath beene before said and then we answer as the truth is that the Scripture in assigning our redemption to the death of Christ doth consequently assigne the same to those spirituall anguishes and sufferings because those spirituall agonies are also a part of the same death Now seeing the Father sent his Sonne e Esay 53.10 to giue his soule an offering for sinne as the Prophet teacheth vs and is before declared surely Caluin rightly concludeth that if he had died onely a bodilie death he had done nothing for vs because he had not done that that the father had required nay he had not done that which the worke of redemption did require for f Athanas de incarnat Christi Neque potuit aliud pro alio in redemptionem praestari sed corpus pro corpore anima pro anima integriū aliquid pro integro homine c. one thing saith Aathanasius might not for redemption bee paied for another but the body was to be giuen for the bodie and the soule for the soule and the whole for the whole man From hence he proceedeth and telleth vs of one of Foxes martyrs as he tearmeth them Who held that Christ with all his workes could not merit heauen for vs. Thus like a madde dogge he runneth vp and downe snapping at one and biting at another and seeking in this man and that man to fasten his venemous tooth of slander and reproach Who this was he nameth no tand whereas he citeth Acts and monuments pag. 487. I finde not in the edition that I haue which is the last any matter tending to that purpose Wheresoeuer it is that he meaneth I doubt not but hee hath plaied his part in it with like fidelity as he is wont to doe As for the Martyrs and the Martyr-monger of whom he speaketh let him not doubt but the Prophets words are verified in them g Esay 57.2 peace shall come they shall rest in their beds euery
Rom. 8 11. quickened by his spirit h Rom 5.19 iustified by his obedience i 2 Cor. 1.22 Ehâ— 1.13.14 2. Tim. 2.19 sealed to the remssion of sinnes and euerlasting life That God hath such a people we beleeue it we see it not neither can our eies discerne who they are that appertaine to this number it being one of the proper emblemes of Gods honour j The Lord knoweth who are his In this sort doe we in the articles of our Creede professe to beleeue the holy Catholike church That there is a church also visible no man denieth no man doubteth nay we affirme that it is amidst that church which wee see that God gathereth vnto himselfe that church which we cannot see And to speake of this visible church also we cannot see it to be Gods church or that it is Gods word that there is preached or that they are the Sacraments of Christ which are there administred or that there is any fruit or benefite to be reaped thereby We see these things done but the estimation of them is a matter of faith and not of fight we see the persons but we do not by our eies perceiue them to be that that they take vpon them to be But being by faith instructed that these things are of God or professing so to be beleeue we discerue by hearing and seeing who they are to whom we are to adioine our selues for the exercise of our faith So then the church is both visible and inuisible visible as touching the persons visible as touching open assemblies and exercises but not visible to bee the church of God for then Iewes and heathens would see so much and would leaue to persecute which now they doe not because they haue no faith and the church is no otherwise knowen so to be but onely by faith Now what saith M. Bishop to hurt any thing that we say The persons saith he in the Catholike church are visible but their indowments are inuisible Well and men are not true members of the true church by being such and such persons but by hauing such and such inward indowments and therfore though they bee visible as touching their persons yet they are not visible as true members of the church The church therefore which wee professe to beleeue which consisteth in them that are the true members of the visible church must needs be granted to be inuisible Yea I say further that men are not at all members of the visible church by being such and such persons but by profession of the faith and name of Christ and participation of his Sacraments And therfore M. Bishop doth much amisse to compare visible persons and inward qualities with the body the soule because to be a visible person is not to be in part a member of the church as the body is part of a man for then euery Turke and Infidell might be said to be in part a member of the church because he is a man but outward acceptance of the faith and visible communion with the church maketh a man outwardly a member thereof and is as it were the body the life and soule wherof is the inward grace of the spirit whereby he is indeed to the eies of God that which outwarly he seemeth to bee to the eies of men But a further difference also there is for that the soule though in it selfe it be inuisible yet is certainly perceiued and discerned by the actions and motions of the body and therefore well may a man be said to be visible as a man though as touching the soule it selfe he be inuisible whereas there are no such actions or motions of a member of the visible church whereby the eie of man can certainely see that hee hath life within or is spiritually the same to God that outwardly he giueth semblance to men to be Because therefore the true members of the church are not to be discerned with the eie it followeth that the church properly so called consisting of those true members is visible to God onely 7. W. BISHOP His last obiection against vs out of the Creed is That the articles of remission of sinnes resurrection of the body and life euerlasting containe a confession of speciall faith For the meaning of them is thus much I beleeue the remission of mine owne sinnes and the resurrectition of mine owne body to life euerlasting Answer That is not the meaning vnlesse you adde some conditions to wit I beleeue the remission of my sinnes if I haue duly vsed the meanes ordained by our Sauiour for the remission of them which is after Baptisme the Sacrament of Penance Item I beleeue I shall haue life euerlasting if I keepe as Christ willed the yong-man to keepe Gods commandements or at the least if I doe die with true repentance Now whether I haue done or shall doe these things required of me I am not so well assured as that I can beleue it for I may be deceiued therein but I haue or may haue a very goood hope by the grace of God to performe them Neither is there any more to be gathered out of Saint Augustine as some of the words by himselfe heere alleaged doe conuince For he requireth besides faith that we turne from our sinnes conforme our will to Gods will and abide in the lap of the Catholike church and so at length we shall be healed See the question of certainty of saluation Note also by the way the vncertainty of of M. PER. doctrine concerning this point for he holdeth that it is not necessary to haue a certaine perswasion of our owne saluation Pag. 2â—0 275. but that it is sufficient to haue a desire to haue it and that doctrine he putteth there as he saith himselfe to expound the Chatechismes that propound faith at so high reach as few can attaine vnto yet heere and elsewhere the goodman forgetting himselfe chargeth vs to crosse the Creed because we doe not wrest faith vp to so high a straine and so in heate of quarelling often expoundeth this contrary to his owne rule Now for proofe of S. Augustines opinion heerein whom he onely citeth take these two sentences for the two points be speaketh of For the first that we be certaine by ordinary faith of our saluation let this serue Of life euerlasting which God that cannot lie hath promised to his children De bono perseuer cap. 22. De correct grat cap. 13. no man can be secure and out of danger before his life be ended which is a tentation vpon earth Secondly that a man once truely iustified may afterward fall We must beleeue saith this holy father that certaine of the children of perdition doe liue in faith that worketh by charity and so doe for a time liue faithfully and iustly they were then truly iustified and yet afterward doe fall and that finally because be calleth them the children of perdition Thus much in answere vnto that which M. PER. obiecteth
words diuers of the ancient fathers i Tertull. de carne Christi propè finem Origen in Luc. hom 14. Ambros in Luc. 2. lib. 2. Hierom. cont Pelag. l. 2. Tertullian Origen Ambrose Hierome hold to be most properly verified in the birth of Christ who opened the wombe that was not opened before whereas for all other the wombe is first opened by carnall copulation Heereupon Tertullian saith that k Tertul. vt supra Virgo non virgo virgo quantum à viro non virgo quantum à partu the virgin Mary was both a virgin and not a virgin a virgin as touching man not a virgin as touching child-bearing that is a virgin as free from hauing the wombe opened by man not a virgin as free from hauing the wombe opened by birth of childe So Saint Austin saith that l August de fide cont Manich. cap. 22. Maria non incongruè propter partum dicitur mulier virgo verò quòd virilem nescierit conuentionem neque pariendo virginitas eius corruptasit Christ as God our Mâ—diator yet the God head it selfe suffereth not shee may not vnfitly be called a woman in respect of her child-birth and a virgin for that she know not the company of man neither was her virginity corrupted by bearing child What will M. Bishop now say that all these were heretikes and did deny that the mother of Christ continued a virgin Let him say what he will but we will hold him for a sorry fellow that concludeth breach of virginity of that opening of the wombe As touching the fourth article that Luther affirmed the Godhead it selfe to suffer it is a lie These are but deuices of Gifford and Knogler and such other base hungry staruelings who to gaine fauour make collections and conclusions of their owne and then affirme them of our men That Christ according to his diuine nature also is our Mediatour euen whole Christ both God and man hath beene before iustified in answer to the seuenth section of his preface to the Reader But to inferre that therefore the Godhead it selfe suffereth is as good a reason as to say that because the man dieth therefore the soule is mortall But saith M. Bishop the chiefest act of Christs mediation consisteth in his death True and what then If then saith hee the Godhead of Christ doe not suffer that death it hath no part in the principall act of Christs mediation As if he should say the chiefest act of a faithfull and good subiect is to die for his Prince and country if then the soule it selfe doe not suffer that death it hath no part in the chiefest act of a faithfull and good subiect Would he take it patiently to heare another man to reason in this sort If he would not why doth he himselfe thus play the wiseman and mocke simple men that are not able to perceiue his fraude It is the man that dieth though he die not in the soule but in the body and it is Christ God and man that suffereth though he suffer not in the God head but in the manhood m Vigil cont Eutych lib. 2. Passus est deus in vnione personae non est passus in proprietate naturae siquidem possionis iniurias etiam diuinitas pertulit sed passionem sola etus caro persensit God suffered by vnion of person saith Vigilius but in propriety of nature he suffered not the Godhead did beare the iniuries of the passion but the flesh onely did feele the same Though the soule it selfe die not yet it is the soule that exposeth the body vnto death and though the Godhead suffered not yet it was the Godhead that yeelded the manhood to suffering and death n Heb. 9.14 offering himselfe without spot vnto God by his eternall spirit as the Apostle speaketh The rest of his quarrels being most impudent and shamelesse fictions are already handled in the thirteenth and fourteenth sections of the answer to the preface 9. W. BISHOP 5. Descended into hell the third day hee arose againe from the dead It is worth a mans labour to behold their goodly variety of expositions about Christs descending into hell Beza followed of Corliel our Country-man 2. Apolog. ad Sanct. thinkes this to haue crept into the Creed by negligence and so the French Hugonots and Flemish Gues haue cast it cleane out of their Creed but they are misliked of many others who had rather admit the words because they be found in Athanasius Creed and also in the old Roman Creed expounded by Ruffinus but they doe most peruersly expound them Caluin saith that Christs suffering of the paines of hell on the Crosse is signified by these words but he pleaseth not some others of them because Christs suffering and death also goeth before his descending into hell and the words must be taken orderly as they lie Thirdly diuers of them will haue it to signifie the laying of Christs body in the graue but that is signified plainely by the word buried Wherefore some others of them expound it to signifie the lying of his body in the graue three daies which M. PER. approueth as the best but it is as wide from the proper and literall signification of the words as can be For what likenesse is there betweene lying in the graue and descending into hell Besides Caluin their great Rabbin misliketh this exposition as much as any of the rest Lib. 2. Instit cap. 16. sess 8. and calleth it an Idle fancy Fourthly Luther Smideline and others cited by Beza art 2. doe say that Christs soule after his death went to hell where the Diuels are there to be punished for our sinnes thereby to purchase vs a fuller redemption which is so blasphemous that it needes not any refutation As ridiculous is another receiued of most Protestants that Christs soule went into Paradise which well vnderstood is true For his soule in hell had the ioyes of Paradise but to make that an exposition of Christs descending into hell is to expound a thing by the flat contrary of it All these and some other expositions also the Protestants haue deuised to leads their followers from the ancient and only true interpretation of it to wit that Christ in soule descended vnto those lower parts of the earth where all the soules departed from the beginning of the world were detained by the iust iudgement of God till Christ had paied their ransome and were not admitted into the kingdome of heauen before Christ had opened them the way thither R. ABBOT We hold Of Christs descending into hell that all the articles of our Creed are so to be vnderstood as that our faith may make vse thereof concerning our selues and not onely concerning others It is a very barren and cold construction which M. Bishop maketh of the descending of Christ into hell that his soule descended into the lowest parts of the earth to bring from thence the soules that were detained there by the
cap. 3. Et nuncille viuit in sinu Abraham He now liueth in Abrahams bosome Now then we are come to this that because Abrahams bosome is in heauen and Christs descending to hell was no other but his going to Abrahams bosome therefore the meaning of Christs descending into hell is that hee ascended vp to heauen It were well that they should first cleere these matters for themselues and make good their owne assertion before they should take in hand to question ours Whatsoeuer the meaning bee of Christs desecending into hell we are sure that that which they bring is vaine and false Now the article of Christs descending into hell being according to their exposition impertinent and idle and no vse to bee made thereof in the Creede some in respect thereof haue thought the same to haue crept into it of latter time and not to haue beene there from the beginning and some it may be for I know it not neither dare I take M. Bishops word for it haue quite omitted it in the Creed Neither doe they want inducements heereunto from the ancient church in which there are many Creedes and confessions of faith in which there is no mention of Christs descending into hell And heerein we are to note Doct. Bishop to be a man singularly impudent who alleageth the article to be in the old Roman Creed expounded by Ruffinus whereas the words of Ruffinus himselfe doe expressely affirme the contrary n Ruffin in exposit symb Apost Sciendum sanè est quòd in ecclesiae Romanae symbolo non habetur additum Descenditad inferna sed neque in Orientis ecclesiis habetur hic sermo We are to know saith he that in the Creed of the Roman church it is not added that he descended into hell neither are those words vsed by the Easterne churches The Nicene Creed saith nothing of it which in likelihood would not haue omitted it if it had beene found in the ancienter Creed of the Apostles Saint Austin hath o Tom. 9. de symb vel reg fidei ad Catechumenos foure expositions of the Creed in one place and p Tom. 3. de fide symbolo one in another and in none of these expositions is it found that Christ descended into hell Tertullian hath q Tertul. de praescript adu Praxean de veland virginib three declarations of the rule of faith and this point is not found in any of them Neither doth Ireneus mention it where r Iren. adu heres lib. 1. c. 2. lib. 3. cap. 4. twice he expresseth the Apostolike faith There is a confession of faith set downe by Å¿ Synod Roma tom 1. Concil a Synod at Rome in the time of Iulius the first another in the t Concil Constantin 1 cap. 7. first Councel of Constantinople another in a Councell at u Synod Aleuand apud Cyril in Concitio Ephes Alexandria confirmed by the Councel of Ephesus and many other moe wherein there is nothing said of Christs descending into hell Thus from many examples and authorities of the ancient church those men parhaps thinke that they haue warrant to leaue out that article without being culpable of any violation of Christian faith And although Athanasius and sundry other in their writings haue deliuered this as a point of faith yet they hold that those acts and instruments of publicke recognition which are very frequent to this purpose do ouerwaigh priuate iudgements and are sufficient to excuse or defend that that is done by them But for our parts wee see no sufficient reason to moue vs to follow them herein We see diuers phrases of Scripture tending to the assertion of this article of our beleefe We read our Sauiour Christ professing his reioycing to his Father x Acts. 2.27 Psal 16.10 for that he would not leaue his soule in hell which is vainely spoken if the soule of Christ were not at all in hell Therefore we admit the article and in the confession of our faith we alwaies recite it neither doth any man make question to doe otherwise But M. Bishop excepteth against the variety of expositions that are found amongst vs concerning the same And what is there no variety of expositions thereof to be found amongst them Doe they all so accord in one as that we can obserue no difference of one from another first that learned deuout Authour Durand as M. Bishop y Preface to the Reader sect 5. before hath stiled him doth hold that z Durand apud Bellarm. de Christianima cap. 15. Christ descended not into hell at all by reall presence but only by effect and power a Tho. Aquin. sum p. 3. q. 52. art 2. in concl Christus secundùm effectum in omnem inferâ—â— locum descendit secùndum verò substantialem praesentiâ—m non descendit nisi ad locum iustorum Thomas Aquinas determineth that by reall presence he went onely to Limbus Patrum but to the other parts of hell he descended by vertue and power Bellarmine setteth it down for b Bellarm. de Christianima c. 16. Probabile est profectò animam Christi ad omnia inferni loâ—a descendisse probable that the soule of Christ did verily descend to all the places of hell Thomas Aquinas resolueth that c Tho. Aqui. vt supra art 4. in concl Animam Christi tamdiu fuisse in inferno credendum est quamdin corpus fuit in sepulchro the soule of Christ was so long in hell as his body was in the graue and so they commonly hold as did Vigilius of old d Vig. â—o Eutyc lib. 2. Anima Christi per illud triduum in inferno that for those three daies space the soule of Christ was in hell But S. Austin holdeth it a thing impious to be affirmed e Augst cont Felic Arian ca. 15. Si mortuo corpore ad paradisum anima latronis mox vocatur quenquamnè adhuc tam impium credimus qui dicere audeat quoniam anima saluatoris nostri triduo illo corporeae mortis apud inferos custodiae mancipetur that the soule of the theefe being foorthwith called to Paradise the soule of our Sauiour should for the three daies space of his bodily death be in custody in hell Thomas Aquinas is of opinion that f Thom. Aquin. sum pa. 3. qu. 52. art 1. in corp Conueniens fuit Christen ad infernum descendere quia ipse venerat portare poenas nostras vt nos a poena eriperet ex peccatâ— autem homo incurrerat non solum mortem corporis sed etiam descensum ad inseros it behooued that Christ should goe to hell because he came to beare our punishments so to deliuer vs from the same and we by sinne had incurred not onely bodily death but also going to hell But Bonauenture saith and to him Bellarmine inclineth that g Bellerm de Christi anima cap. 16. ex Bonauentura Dicit Christi animam
hold it impossible for him to remooue thence at any time before the last iudgement for feare they should otherwise be inforced to confesse that his body may be in two places at once which is to make him not Lord of the place but some poore prisoner therein And as for Christs sitting one the right hand of his Father they are not yet agreed what it signifieth See Conrad * L. 2. Insti c. 14 ss 3. Caluin plainely saith that after the latter iudgement hee shall sit there no longer That God shall then render to euery man according to his workes as holy Scripture very often doth testifie all the packe of them doth vtterly denie R. ABBOT I doe not know any of our writers that denieth Christ in his resurrection resumed his blood againe but that Christ in his resurrection by his almighty power resumed his bloud againe He quoteth M. Caluin and M. Perkins affirming the contrary but I could not finde that which he mentioneth of them For my part I resolue that if any of them or any other haue said so they haue erred therein because I beleeue that it is true both of the whole and euery part of the body of Christ which Dauid saith a Psal 16.10 Thou wilt not suffer thine holy one to see corruption Saint Austin resolueth that b Aug. de ciu Dei lib. 22. ca. 19. Non quòd existimeÌ„ corpori cuiquam periturum quod naturaliter inerat of our bodies there shall nothing perish that is naturally belonging thereto and groundeth vpon the words of Christ that c Ibid. cap. 14. 20 Luk. 21.18 not a haire of our head shall perish If then it be so in our bodies much more are wee so to conceiue of the body of Christ that nothing at all perished that did belong to the substance of it As for the now remaining of the print of the nailes in the hands feete of Christ of the wound in his side M. Bishop can giue no reason why Caluin might not well account it an old wiues dreame For whereas he alleageth that Christ after his resurrection did shew the same to his Disciples it may well be answered that so Christ after his resurrection did eate and drinke with his Disciples and yet it doth not follow that therefore now Christ doth eate and drinke Both these Saint Austin holdeth to be of like vse to giue to his Disciples assurance of his resurrection whereas now there is no such vse and therefore no reason of the remaining of them d August de ciui dei lib. 22. cap. 19. Quando ille à suis ita deberet attendi vt pâ—ssâ—t agnosci Quò pertinuit etiam vt contrectantibus ostenderet suorum vulnerum cicatrices vt etiam cibum potumque sumeret non alimentorum indigentia sed ea qua et hoc poterat potestate He was so to be seene of them saith he as that he might be knowen Thereto it serued that to them handling him he shewed the skarres of his wounds as also that he did eate and drinke not for want of food but by that power whereby he could so doe at his owne pleasure But of Christ ascending he saith e August in Psal 23. Contrecta cicatrices senties reparatas immortalitati redditam humanam infirmitatem The heauens gaue way to Christs body in his ascension Handle his skarres and thou shalt perceiue them to be repaired and that humane infirmity is restored to immortality That in the ascension of Christ the heauens opened way and passage to his body we beleeue and that necessarily it was so because Christ had a true body which was glorified in taking possession of heauen where is the place of glory albeit in the glorifying of it f August epi. 57. Cui profectò immortalitatem dedit naturam non abstulit he gaue it immortality but tooke not from it the nature of a body so that g Ibid. sub finem In aliquo cali loco propter veri corporis modum it is in some certaine place of heauen because of the condition of a true body Thus Saint Austin saith that he ascended h Idem in Psal 23. Patefactis sibi caelestibus the heauens being made open for him So where the Psalme saith Lift vp your heads O yee gates Saint Hierome saith that i Hieron in Psal 23. Ipse dominus nunc regna caelestia repetens nunciatur c. Tollite portas c. Hoc est reserate caelestes aditus pateat aeternalis ingressus therby is set foorth Christ ascending to heauen and expoundeth the words thus Open yee the entrances of heauen let the euerlasting entry be set open As for M. Bishops foolish Philosophy we regard it not in this case we would know of him by his Philosophy how Saint Steuen said k Act. 7.56 Behold I see the heauens open and the Sonne of man slanding at the right hand of God We wish him to remember that in the measuring of matters of faith by rules of Philosophy Tertullian saith that l Tertul. adu Hermog Philosophi haereticorum patriarch Philosophers were the Patriarchs of heretikes the Apostle therefore giuing warning m Col. 2.18 Beware lest any man spoile you through Philosophy and vaine deceit through the traditions of men according to the rudiments of the world and not according to Christ We aske him againe how it standeth with his Philosophy that n 2. Kin. 2.11 Elias in a whirlewind ascended into heauen We beleeue that the heauens yeelded him way to goe thorow and M. Bishop will not say that he had as yet a glorified body to goe otherwise What he will affirme otherwise The soules of the faithfull in heauen before Christs incarnation let him prooue it or else he shall not finde vs very hasty to beleeue it Now that Elias ascended into heauen the text plainly affirmeth as I haue alleaged and therefore we beleeue vndoubtedly that he did so The same Elias with Moses o Luk. 9.31 appeared vnto Christ in glory and to his Disciples which glory they could not bring with them from the Popish Limbus patrum and therefore wee cannot doubt but they brought it with them from heauen We cannot doubt therefore but that the soules of the faithfull that died before the incarnation of Christ were receiued into heauen For as by the faith of Christs death and resurrection they were acquitted from hel euen so doe we beleeue that by the faith of Christs ascension they were receiued to heauen And of faith the Apostle telleth vs that p Heb. 11.1 it is the subsistence of things hoped for the demonstration or euidence of things which are not seene to which in effect and after a sort the things are which yet indeed are not By faith Abraham so long before q Iohn 8.56 saw the day of Christ and was glad thereof To faith Christ was r Reuel 13.8 the
do not beleeue the one Catholike Church because they doe as well not beleeue it as beleeue it And as for the communion of Saints their learned Masters doe commonly cassier it out of the Creed and that not without cause For by the Saints vnderstanding as the Apostles did all good Christans whether aliue or departed this world they that deny praier to Saints and for the soules in Purgatory haue reason to reiect the common society and enter course that is betweene the Saints and the mutuall honour and help which such good Christian soules doe yeeld and afford one to another R. ABBOT The holy Catholike church which wee beleeue in the Creed being the communion of Saints is onely one The Catholike Church only one which is the body of Christ whereof all the faithfull are members being ioyned into this society by one spirit Visible and Inuisible being but circumstances cannot argue any multiplication of the church because the inuisible church importeth all them and them only who are the true members in their time of the visible church For in the visible church the name of the church properly belongeth to them onely who liue by faith and by the spirit of Christ the rest are not members but a August in 1 Ioan. epist tract 3. Sic sunt in corpore Christi quomodo humores mali as euill humours in the body which wait their time to be purged out In the meane time because all professe to seeke Christ and to serue him and our eies cannot distinguish betwixt them that truely doe so and them that doe not therefore visibly and to vs all goe together vnder the name of the church though many there be hypocrites and time seruers who with God and to his sight are no part thereof So then the church visible and inuisible in substance are the same they differ only in respect and M. Bishop knoweth that respects change not the natures of things and therefore those different respects doe nothing hinder but that the church in nature is alwaies one As touching the holinesse of the church M. Bishop in the deliuering of our opinion keepeth his woont He saith The holines of the church imputatiue and reall that we imagine it to be holy by the imputation of Christs holinesse to the elected brethren and not by the infusion of the holy Ghost into the hearts of all the faithful Whereas we doe not imagine only but by the word of God beleeue and know that the church and all the members thereof are holy not onely iudicially by the imputation of Christs holines but also really by the infusion of the holy Ghost begun in this life by b Rom. 8.23 the first fruits of the spirit and fully to be perefected when the promise of Christ shall be fullfilled c Mat. 5.6 Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousnesse for they shal be satisfied Againe he excepteth against vs that we cannot abide the name Catholike in the true sense of it Of the true sense of the name Catholike But what is that true sense That is saith hee they will not beleeue the true church to haue beene alwaies visibly extant since the time of the Apostles But what ancient father did euer set this downe for the true sense of the name Catholike If any let him be brought foorth If none why doth he contrary to his owne prescription introduce a new exposition of an article of our beleefe Cyril in his Catechisme bringeth in all the meanings of the name Catholike that he could learne that the church is so called for that d Cyril Hierosci Catechis 18. Illuminat Catholica vocatur quia per vntuersum sit orâ—em terrarum diffusa c. Et quia doret Catholicè hoc est vniuersalitèr sine vllo defectu vel differentia omnia dogmata quae deberent venire in cognitionem c Et quòd omne genus hominum ipè subiugat et quia in vniuersum curat omne genus peccatorum c. hab turque in illa omne genus virtutis c. it is vniuersally spread thorow the whole world for that it teacheth vniuersally all doctrines that are to be known for that it subiecteth to it alkinde of men for that it healeth all kinde of sinnes for that it hath in it all kind of vertues but of M. Bishops meaning that it should be alwaies visibly extant he had learned nothing Surely S. Ambrose saith e Ambros Hexaem lib. 3. cap. 2. Ecclesia habet tempora sua persecutionis pacis videtur sicut luna deficere sed non deficit obumbrari potest deficere non potest The church hath her times of persecution and peace it seemeth as the Moone to faile but it faileth not it may be ouershadowed but vtterly faile it cannot If the church may be as the Moone so ouershadowed by persecution as not to be seene then it is not necessary to be alwaies visibly extant and if that be not necessary then M. Bishop hath plaied heere the false merchant to tell vs that the church is therefore called Catholike because it is alwaies visibly extant Albeit there is somewhat also to be obserued concerning the name of the true church that we may speake to that time of the visibility of the church which M. Bishop specially intendeth For if wee call that the true Church which truely hath the outward vocation and calling of the church then we deny not but that the church in the time of Antichrist must bee and hath beene alwaies visibly extant because Antichrist was to possesse and hath possessed the visible state of the church But if by the true church we meane those members of the church which are truely correspondent to the vocation and calling of the church in faith and obedience vnto God then the true church is not alwaies visible because the greater part being the woorse doth many times oppresse the better and weaker part and proudly carrying it selfe in the opinion and confidence of it selfe persecuteth and driueth into corners all them that gainesay their traditions and wilworships which by their owne authority they establish to delude thereby and frustrate the word of God And thus we say that the true church in the time of the exaltation of Antichrist was in a sort inuisible the publike state of the church yeelding it selfe in thraldome to his tyranny and persecuting the true members of the church who disclaiming his obedience sought to keepe themselues entire and faithfull vnto God Whereas hee further addeth for the notation of the name Catholike that the church was so called as being generally spred into all countries we willingly acknowledge the same as being before acknowledged by the ancient church and defended against the Donatists who by other expositions sought to draw the name vnto themselues as the Papists now doe Onely wee adde that caution which Bellarmine himselfe hath deliuered as necessary for himselfe that f Beliarm
de notis eccles cap. 7. Si solae vna prouincia retineret veram fidem adhuc verè propriè diceretur ecclesia Catholica dummodo clarè ostenderetur eam esse vnam eandem cum illa quae fuit aliquo tempore vel diuersis in toto mundo if one only countrey should retaine the true faith yet the same should truly and properly be called the Catholike church so that it might cleerely be shewed to be one and the same with that which hath been at any time or times ouer the whole world For by this rule nothing hindreth but that our church though now it be not receiued generally in the greatest part of the Christian world yea if it were but in one onely country yet may truely and properly be called the Catholike church if it be prooued to be one and the same with the church which at any time heeretofore was spred ouer all the world But that our church is the same with that which at the first was spred thorowout the world it is very euident as Tertullian teacheth vs to prescribe g Tert. de praescript adu haeret In eadem fide conspirantes non minus Apostolicae deputantur pro consanguinitate doctrinae by consanguinity or agreement of our doctrine with the doctrine of that church For by the Gospell which the Apostles preached the church was founded thorowout the whole world h Iren. lib. 3. cap. 1. Quod quidem tunc praeconiauerunt postea per dei voluntatem in Scripturis nobis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futurum The gospell which the Apostles preached they afterwards by the will of God deliuered to vs in the Scriptures to be the foundation and pillar of our faith The same Gospel deliuered to vs in the Scriptures we receiue we adde nothing to it we take nothing from it as we finde it so we teach it Our faith therefore is the same with the faith of that church which at the first was planted thorowout the whole world There is no cause then for vs to forsake our owne church or to thinke that the same began with Friar Luther as this dreamer imagineth which by so plaine deduction is approoued to be the same with the first church and consequently to be truely and properly the Catholike Church Finally saith he they beleeue no church in all points of faith But doth his wisedome finde it in the articles of the Creed that we are to beleeue any church in all points of faith The church how farre to be beleeued in points of faith We are taught there to beleeue that there is a holy catholike Church which is the communion of Saints but nothing doe we finde there of beleeuing any Church in all points of faith We beleeue the Church in points of faith so farre as she yeeldeth herselfe like a faithfull and obedient spouse to be guided by the voice of her Lord and husband Iesus Christ But if the Church preferre her owne will before the word of Christ as the proud harlot of Rome doth it should be a wrong to Christ to beleeue the Church and a way to set vp humane errour in stead of diuine truth It is not the voice of the Church but the word of the written Gospell which God hath appointed as Irenaeus euen now hath told vs to be the foundation and pillar of our faith For the words of the Church are many times the words of errour and vntruth and therefore if we should relie our saluation vpon the credit thereof wee should indeed relie vpon an vncertaine ground and erring guide but the word of the Gospell is alwaies one and the same without any variablenesse or vncertainty and therefore safely may wee relie our saluation thereupon Now therefore it cannot be said but that wee alwaies beleeue one holy catholike Church according to the profession of faith specified in the Creed though sometimes and in some things we doe not beleeue that is credit the visible Church as touching points of faith because the Church sometimes teacheth vs to beleeue otherwise than God hath taught Which though it seeme strange to M. Bishop in that language which he hath learned to speake yet to vs it is not strange who in the Canonicall histories of the Churches both of the old and new Testament do so often see them diuerting and turning from the right way As for that hee saith that our learned masters doe commonly cashiere out of the Creed the addition of the cōmunion of saints it is but a fruit of the harnessing of his face and he is therefore bold to say it because he hath learned not to be ashamed of any thing that he list to say That by the Saints are there meant al good Christians all the faithful whether aliue or dead we will not denie Communion of Saints implieth neither Purgatorie nor praier to saints but that either praier to saints or praier for soules in purgatorie belong to this communion of Saints we neuer yet learned and are too old to learne it now For as for the Saints in heauen i Aug. de vera relig cap 55. Honoramus eos charitate non seruitute honorandi propter imitationem non propter religionem adorandi We honour them with loue as Austin saith but not with seruice to follow them by imitation not to adore them by religion and therefore not to pray vnto them Further entercourse as yet there is none betwixt them and vs because k Esay 63.16 they know vs not nor are acquainted with vs nor can we any way acquaint them what wee say vnto them Now beside the Saints triumphant in heauen wee acknowledge none but those that are militant vpon the earth because the holie Ghost diuideth the whole body of the Church into l Eph. 1.10 Col. 1.20 those that are in heauen and those that are in earth and pronounceth them all m Reu. 14.13 blessed that are dead in Christ as who rest from labours and sorrowes and thereby are discharged from all Purgatorie paines But if there be any soules in Purgatorie to which all good Christian soules should yeeld and affoord their helpe to doe them ease and this be one matter of the entercourse and communion of Gods Saints why doth the Pope violate the communion of Saints by withholding from those tormented soules that helpe and ease which he is able to affoord them Surely if he cannot doe them ease then is he an impudent liar and a notable impostour and cozener of the world If he can do it then is he a cruell wretch that without compassion suffereth poore souls to lie broiling in those fierie flames But we rather approoue the former member of this diuision and take him for a liar both for that without warrant hee thrusteth in Purgatorie into the articles of our faith and with lesse warrant challengeth the same for a iurisdiction to himselfe 13. W. BISHOP 10 The forgiuenesse of sinnes
affirmeth them hauing ended this warfare to goe into blessed rest and in his other words in the same very place might haue seene and in likelihood did see it that he placeth this blessed rest no otherwhere but with Christ in heauen Hee applieth generally a Cal. Instit l. 3. ca. 25. sect 6. De fidelibus loquens to the faithfull the words of the Apostle that b 2. Cor. 5.1 when this earthly house shall be dissolued wee haue a house or building in heauen Hee saith that c Nisi superstites essent animae corporibus quid est quod habet deum praesentem vbi fuerit à corpore separatum Nisi etiam animae corporibus exutae retinerent suam essentiam ac beatae gloriae capaces essent non dixisset Christus latroni Hodie mecum eris c. the soule separated from the body hath the presence of God that vnlesse the soules seuered from their bodies did still retaine their being and were capable of blissefull glorie Christ would not haue said to the theefe This day shalt thou be with me inparadise Hereupon he taxeth as well he might the infinite curiosities of the schoole-men in inquiring and disputing of the place and state the maner and degrees of heauenly glory as now it is and heereafter shall be and condemneth it as a point of rashnesse and folly further to search concerning things vnknowen to vs than God permiteth vs to know d Scriptura vbi dixit Christum illis praesentem esse eas recipere in Paraedisum vt consolationem percipiant reproborum verò animas cruciatus quales meritae sunt perpeti non vltra progreditur The Scripture saith he haning said that Christ is present with them meaning the faithfull soules before spoken of and doth receiue them into Paradise to receiue comfort and that the soules of the reprobate doe suffer the torments which they haue deserued goeth no further For conclusion he saith by and by after e Quum scriptura vbique iubeat pendere ab expectationae aduentus Christi gloriae coronam eousque differat contenti simus his finibus diuinitus nobis praescriptis animas piorum militiae labore perfunctas in beatam quietem concedere vbi cum foelici laetitia fruitionem promissae gloriae expectent atque ita omnia suspensa teneri donec Christus appareat redemptor Seeing the Scripture euery where biddeth vs to depend vpon the expectation of Christs comming and thither doth deferre the crowne of glory let vs conteine our selues within these bounds which God hath prescribed vnto vs that the soules of the godly hauing ended the labour of this warfare doe goe into blessed rest where with happy ioy they expect the fruition of the promised glory and so all things are holden in suspense vntill Christ our redeemer shall appeare By all which words it appeareth that although Caluin according Col. 3.3.4 1. Ioh. 3.2 1. Pet. 5.4 to the scriptures doe referre the full reuealing of the glory of the faithfull vnto the comming of Christ when the same both in soule and bodie shall be made manifest to the whole world yet that in the meane time hee denieth not but that their soules departed are receiued into Paradise into heauen and doe enioy blissefull glory blessed rest the presence of God the presence of Christ and therefore doth not exclude them from the ioies of heauen vnlesse Christ himselfe whose presence they enioy be excluded from heauen And wheras M. Bishop maketh him absolutely to say that all things are holden in suspence vntill the comming of Christ he leaudly falsifieth his words by leauing out the terme of limitation the same being thus set downe as hath beene said And that so all things are holden in suspence vntill Christs comming importing that these things acknowledged before expressed all things further are to vs holden in suspence vntill Christ shall come are therefore God not hauing reuealed the same and not to be curiously enquired of The summe of all which beleefe Caluin himselfe in another place hath briefely comprised thus that g Caluin adu Libertin ca. 22. Etsi fidelium animae simulac separatae sint à corporibus viuunt cum deo ac foelici regni gaudio potiuntur tamen perfecta omnium filiorum dei foelicitas vsque ad secundum Christi aduentum defertur albeit the soules of the faithfull so soone as they are separated from their bodies do liue with God and doe obteine the blessed ioy of the heauenly kingdome yet the perfect happinesse of all the children of God is deferred vntill the second comming of Christ Now what is there heere for blinde Bishop to dislike in captain Caluin but that his malice ouerruleth his wit and carrieth him as it were with a violent streame to condemne that which notwithstanding his owne iudgement and conscience doth approoue And if Caluin had beene of that minde yet M. Bishop might with the more fauour haue excused it for that Bellarmine driuen thereto by the testimonie of Pope Adrian doth confesse that Pope Iohn the two and twentieth was of that minde h Bell. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 14. Reuera sensit animas non visuras deum nisi post resurrectionem that the soules of the faithfull shall not see God till after the resurrection But as he dealeth with Caluin so doth he also with Luther most maliciously and leaudly It is true that Luther writing vpon Ecclesiastes reteining as yet somewhat too much of the dregs of Popery speaketh heereof somewhat obscurely though not to that meaning as M. Bishop citeth him Vpon the words of the Preacher i Eccles 9.10 Whatsoeuer thy hand can doe doe it instantly for there is neither worke nor inuention nor knowledge nor wisedome in hell as he readeth whither thou goest he commenteth thus that k Luth. Eccl. 9. Alius locus quòd mortui nihil sentiant nulla enim inquit est ibicogitatio ars cognitio sapientia sensit ergò Solomon mortuos omninò dormire nihil prorsus sentire Iacent ibi mortui non numerantes dies vel annos sed excitati videbūtur sibi vix momentum dormiuisse the place sheweth that the dead perceiue nothing for there is there no cogitation arte knowledge wisedome Solomon therefore thought saith he that the dead doe sleepe and haue no sense of any thing The dead lie there not reckoning daies or yeeres but being raised vp they shall seeme to haue slept a verie little while Now in these words there is no ambiguitie as shall appeere by the other place because that which he saieth of sleeping and not perceiuing any thing hath reference onely to the affaires and doings of this life Onely his errour is that he construeth hell for which wee rather choose to reade the graue to be the place where the soules thus sleepe expounding it l Ibid. Insernus propriè me iudice significat illum abditum recessum in quo
of the new testament c. The words of c Mark 24.23.24 S. Marke doe beare also the same sense which as it is the very Grammaticall construction of the words so it is also fully confirmed in that S. Luke and S. Paul doe expresly deliuer it in that sort So then by all three Euangelists and S. Paul there is a figure in one part of the Sacrament let vs then aske M. Bishop againe why may there not be so in the other also But hee doth not loue to be troubled with too many questions He cannot tell as yet what answer to giue vs and therefore we must be content to giue him further time till he may better bethinke himselfe 51. W. BISHOP Fiftly Christ did eat that supper but not himselfe Per. 5. Answ A Protestant cannot say that Christ did eat of that Sacrament as M. PERK doth because hee hath no warrant for it in the written word yet we doe grant that he did so and hold him most worthy to taste of that heauenly food R. ABBOT If the written word doe not warrant that Christ did eat of the Sacrament I maruell why M. Bishop citeth to that purpose out of S. Luke those words which a Sect 62. ex Luc 22.15 anon he doth that he maruellously desired to eat this last banquet with his disciples Whether hee cite it truely or falsly let himselfe looke to that but either hee must confesse that hee hath cited amisse there or else that he hath spoken rashly here But if Christ did eat of the Sacrament will M. Bishop haue vs to beleeue that he did eat himselfe or dranke the bloud of his owne bodie May we be perswaded that one and the same Christ at one and the same time was both wholly within himselfe and wholly also without himselfe that hee sate visible by his Apostles and yet was then wholly conteined within the compasse of his owne bowels or that in his owne bowels hee at that time caried his owne bloud or that moreouer hee was then by the Sacrament in the bellies of all the Apostles euen of the traitour Iudas Surely what Christ did eat the same Iudas did eat also But of Iudas S. Austin teacheth that b Aug. in Ioan. tract 59. Non est ex eis iste c. Illi manducabant panem dominum ille panem domini contra dominuÌ„ hee did eat of the Lords bread but not of the bread which is the Lord. Therefore although Christ did eat the Sacrament yet may wee not imagine that hee did eat himselfe These are horrible and vnchristian fancies but out of the schoole of Transubstantiation they come and they that maintaine the one must necessarily maintaine the other also 52. W. BISHOP Sixtly We are bid to doe it till he come Christ then is not bodily present Answ Wee are bid by S. Paul to shew the death of our Lord till he come to iudgement which we may very well doe 1. Cor. 11. v. 26. his body being present as certaine noble Matrons preserued of their husbands blood to represent more freshly vnto their children the slaughter of their fathers R. ABBOT It is true that his comming shall bee to iudgement but what shall he need to come if he be here already It was not questioned whereto he should come nor whether we may shew the death of the Lord his body being present if it were present but why the Apostle should say till he come if he be intended to be here already present His body being present saith he as though he meant that Christ were not wholly present whereas they tell vs that whole Christ is in the Sacrament both God and man soule and body flesh blood and bone as hee was borne of the virgin and nailed afterwards to the Crosse And if Christ be wholly present what reason had the Apostle to say till he come He telleth vs a ridiculous and impertinent tale of certaine noble Matrones who preserued of their husbands blood to represent more freshly to their children the slaughter of their fathers But what is this to the matter here in hand If those noble matrones had had their husbands with them and in the presence of their children then let him tell vs whether it had not been a witlesse thing to bid them expect their fathers till they come But hee stealeth away from the point and though he doe but gull his Reader with an idle iest yet he would haue it thought that hee hath giuen a worthy answer As touching the truth of this matter our Sauiour informeth vs when he telleth his disciples a Iohn 12.8 The poore ye shall haue alwaies with you but me ye shall not haue alwaies S. Austin giueth a reason of those word b August in Ioan tract 50. Quoniam conuersatus est secundum corporis praesentiam quadraginta diel us cum discipulis suis eis deducentibus videndo non sequendo a scondit in caeiuâ— non est hic because according to the presence of his body he was conuersant forty daies with his disciples and then they bringing him on the way by seeing but not by following he ascended into heauen and is not here Christ then according to the presence of his body is not here yea c Acts 3.21 the heauen must containe him saith S. Peter vntill the time that all things be restored and therefore d Phil. 3.20 from heauen wee looke for him saith S. Paul euen as in our Creed we professe to beleeue that from thence hee shall come to iudge both the quicke and the dead Now because we beleeue according to the scripture that Christ as touching his body is in heauen and not here and that from heauen we are to looke for him at the last day we are able to giue a iust reason why the Apostle should say vntill he come which M. Bishop out of his learning cannot doe 53. W. BISHOP Seuenthly Christ bid vs to doe it in remembrance of him but signes of remembrance are of things absent Answ We see one thing and remember another By Christs body really present we remember the same to haue been nailed on the Crosse for our redemption as Goliaths sword was kept in the tabernacle in remembrance of the cutting-off of Goliaths head with the same sword and the women before rehearsed kept their husbands blood might much easier haue prescrued their bodies embalmed to keepe the better their deaths in fresh memory R. ABBOT We see one thing saith M. Bishop and remember another But a Aug. serm ad infantes apud Bedam in 1. Cor. 10 Quod videtis panis est calix quod vobis esiam oculi renuntiâ—nt that which you see saith S. Austin is bread as your very eies tell you If then our remembrance be by our sight it is by bread that we remember the body of Christ M. Bishop I hope will not say that we see the body of Christ really present and
calum vtique integrum Cum vid eritis filium hominis c. certè vel tunc videbitis quia noÌ„ eo modo quo putatis erogat corpus suum certè vel tunc videbitis quia gratia eius non consumitur morsibus They thought saith Austin that he would impart to them his very body but he telleth them that he will goe vp to heauen euen whole When ye shall see the sonne of man ascend where he was before surely then ye shall see that he doth not impart his body in that maner as you thinke ye shall then vnderstand that his grace is not deuoured by morsells Now if the ascending of Christ into heauen were an argument for the reforming of their fancy and correcting of their error then it must needs be a misconstruction of eating and drinking the flesh and blood of Christ whereby the same is said to be done by his being really present vpon the earth And that it might not be so vnderstood he further saith k vers 63. The words which I speake vnto you are spirit and life it is the spirit that quickneth the flesh profiteth nothing thereby aduertising them as S. Austin giueth to vnderstand that l Aug ibi Quomodo quidem edatur quisnam sit manducandi modus ignoratis they knew not in what sort his flesh was eaten or what the maner thereof is and that they should spiritually conceiue the doing of it in such maner as was before expressed out of Austin And hereof Origen saith m Ori. in Leuit. hom 7. Est in nouo testameÌ„to litera quae occidit eum qui non spiritualiter aduertit Nam si secunduÌ„ literamsequaris id quod dictum est Nisi manducaueritis carnem c. litera illa occidit There is in the new Testament a letter which killeth him that doth not spiritually listen to it for if thou folow according to the letter that which is written Except yee eat the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood that letter killeth Therefore S. Austin deliuering certaine rules whereby figuratiue speeches are to be knowen doth by his rule find that this speech of Christ is not properly or literally to be vnderstood but by a figure n Aug. de doct Christ l. 3. c. 16. si flagitium aut facinus videtur iubere aut vtilitatem beneficentiaÌ„ vitare figurata est Nisi manducaâ—eritis carnem filij hominis c. facinus vel flagitium videtur iubere figura ergò est praecipiens passioni domini esse coÌ„municandum suauitèr atque vtiliter recondendum in memoria quod carâ— eius pro nobis crucifixa vulnerata sit If any speeche seem to command a hainous or wicked act or to forbid well doing or any profitable thing it is a figuratiue speech Where Christ saith Except yee eat the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his blood c. he seemeth to command a hainous thing It is therefore a figure instructing that we are to communicate of the passion of the Lord and sweetly and profitably to lay vp in minde that his flesh was crucified and wounded for vs. In which sort S. Bernard also expoundeth that o Bernar de verb. Habac. super custodiaÌ„ c. sub edendi corporis sus mysterio discipulos ad communâ—â— andum passionibus suis aumonens vnder the mystery of eating his body Christ admonisheth his disciples to communicate of his passions Here is therefore no other but a spirituall action of the heart and soule which requireth no reall presence because the spirit of man by faith climbeth vp to heauen and looketh backe vnto the crosse of Christ and there receiueth nourishment and strength of him to liue by him for euer 58. W. BISHOP Thirdly Christ said in most cleere tearmes this is my body this is my blood What could be more certaine or more perspicuous R. ABBOT The words as wee expound them out of the circumstance of the text and the consent of ancient fathers are indeed perspicuous and cleere yeelding this meaning This bread is my body this wine is my blood that is the signe the sacrament the participation of my body and blood But M. Bishop for his life cannot make any certaine and definite meaning of them whereby their transubstantiation and reall presence may be made good If the words be so perspicuous and cleere for them how commeth it about that they haue so tossed and tumbled them and yet there is no certaine meaning thereof concluded amongst them till this day I need not stand hereupon hauing before said what is sufficient for this purpose in the eight and fortieth section 59. W. BISHOP Fourthly These words of the institution are recorded by three Euangelists and by S. Paul and they all vniformely deliuer it to be not the figure of Christs body but his body and that his body which should be giuen for our redemption on the crosse ergo it was that his true reall body which was nailed to the crosse for vs. R. ABBOT Euen so three Euangelists and S. Paul doe vniformely deliuer that the cup is the bloud of Christ or the new testament in his bloud as hath been a Sect. 50. before said and yet M. Bishop will not say I hope that the cup is really the bloud or testament of Christ That the Sacrament is the figure of Christs body is no new speech S. Austin saith that b Aug in Psal 3. Conuinium in quo corporu sanguinis sui figuram discipuâ—usuis coâ—mendauit tradidit Christ commended and deliuered to his disciples the figure of his bodie and bloud Tertullian expoundeth thus c Tertul. cont Marcion â—â— 4. Acâ—eptum panem corpus suum fecit dicâ—â—do hoc est corsus meum id est figura corporis mei This is my body that is to say a figure of my body Gelasius the Bishop of Rome saith that d Gelas cont Eutych Nest. Et certo imago similitudo corporis sanguinis domini in actione mysteriorum celebratur an image and semblance of the body and bloud of Christ is celebrated in the administration of the Sacraments Chrysostome saith that e Chrysost Opimperf in Mat. hom 11. In quibus non verum corpus Christi sed mystâ—rium corporu eius continetur in the sacred vessels not the true body of Christ but the mysterie of his body is conteined The ancient Liturgies doe vsually call the Sacraments f Constit Clem. l. 7. c. 26. Antitypa corporis c. Iacobâ— Liturg Typus corporis sanguinis Christi tui the signes of the body and bloud of Christ and so g Carol. Magn. epist. ad A cuin Panem fregit calicâ—m paâ—iter dedit eis in figuram corporis sanguinis sui Charles the great stileth them in his epistle to Alcuinus It should not therefore seeme strange to M. Bishop that wee also should expound the sacrament to
bee the figure of Christs body Yea but Christ saith he saith not that it is the figure of his body but his body And euen so S. Paul saith not that the rocke was a figure of Christ but h 1. Cor. 10.4 The rocke was Christ i August in Leuit. q. 57. Quod vtique non erat per substantiam sed per significationem which yet saith Austin was not Christ in substance but in signification If S. Paul might say that the rocke was Christ though in substance it were not so then might Christ say of bread this is my body though it bee not so in substance but in signification and power onely euen as hath beene k Sect. 48. before said that Sacraments commonly beare the names of those things whereof they are sacraments and that because though they be signes and figures yet they are such signes as doe by the ordinance of God truely and effectually exhibite and yeeld to the faith of the beleeuer the heauenly and spirituall grace that is signified thereby Now when we say that the Sacrament is thus the figure of Christs body how doe wee meane it but of his bodie which was giuen for our redemption vpon the crosse and therefore that addition set downe by M. Bishop is impertinent and maketh nothing at all for him 60. W. BISHOP Fiftly 1. Cor. 10.16 S. Paul demandeth thus the Chalice of benediction which we doe blesse is it not the communication of the bloud of Christ and the bread that we breake is it not the participation of the body of our Lord if then wee doe in receiuing the blessed Sacrament participate Christs body and communicate his bloud they surely are there really present R. ABBOT We doe in receiuing the blessed Sacrament participate Christs body and communicate his bloud and yet they are not there really present because wee participate Christs body by faith in spirit and soule not in body by the mouth and belly as hath beene before shewed S. Austin supposing Christ to be absent in body yet teacheth vs how wee receiue him when he saith a Aug. in Ioan. tract 50. Quomodo tenebo absentem quomodo in coelum manum mitâ—am vt ibi sedentem teneam fidem mitte tenuisti How shall I lay hold of him being absent how shall I put vp my hand to heauen to lay hold of him sitting there send vp thy faith saith he and thou hast taken hold of him There needeth then no reall presence for the receiuing of Christs body but by faith we lay hold thereof sitting at the right hand of God the father 61. W. BISHOP Againe S. Paul saith He that eateth and drinketh vnwoorthely 1. Cor. 11.28 eateth and drinketh iudgement to himselfe not discerning the body of our Lord and before is guilty of the body and bloud of Christ ergo the body and bloud of Christ are there present or else why should a man incurre that guilt but by his vnwoorthy receiuing of it and by not discerning Christs body to be there present R. ABBOT M. Bishop thinketh that we doe indignitie to the Saints when wee pull downe their images which they worship and yet hee will not say that those images are the Saints themselues and can he not conceiue that in the dishonor of the sacrament is the dishonour of Christ though the sacrament be not verily Christ himselfe but the representatâ—on and signe of his body and bloud the despight and villaine that is done to the Princes picture or seale is construed to be an indignitie to the Prince and so will the Apostle haue vs to conceiue of the Sacrament of the bodie and bloud of Christ It is by Gods ordinance to vs and in our vse as it were the body and bloud of Christ and therefore iustly is he said not to discerne the Lords body and to be guiltie of the body and bloud of Christ who vnreuerently and with contempt presumeth to offer himselfe to these mysteries of Christ though Christ himselfe be not really present in the vsage thereof 62. W. BISHOP Besides all these plaine texts of holy Scripture in confirmation of the reall presence the very circumstances of it doe much fortifie our faith therein In S. Luke we haue Luc. 22.15 that our Sauiour maruellously desired desiderio desideraui to eat that this last banquet with his Diâ—ciples S. Iohn addeth that whereas he loued his that were in the world vnto the end he loued them and knowing that the Father gaue all things into his hands and that he came from God and goeth to God c. What coherence I say with this exceeding loue and infiâ—â—te power of Christ to bee shewed in his last supper if he hath left onely bread and wine to bee taken in remembrance of him any meane man might easily haue done as much and Helias departing from his Disciple Heliseus did much more for hee left a more noble remembrance of himselfe behinde him to wit his cloake and double spirit But Christ bequeathing vs his true naturall body to bee the foode of our soules and comfort of our hearts as wee beleeue and teach he then indeed shewed his iâ—finite power and loue towards vs and that he came from God and as God bestowed an inestimable gift vpon vs such a one as neuer any other did or could possibly doe R. ABBOT It is truly said by Tertullian that a Tertul. de Baptism Nihil adeò est quod obiurat mentes hominum quà m simplicitas diuinorum operum quae in actu videntur magnificentia quae in effectu repromittitur c. nothing so much offendeth mens mindes in the Sacraments as the simplicitie of Gods works as they seeme in act and the magnificence which is promised in effect M. Bishop looking to the outward signes in the Lords supper taketh the same to be a simple token of Christs exceeding loue towards vs a matter that any man might doe and not so much as that that Elias left to his scholar Elizeus Thus in his blinde fancie hee amplifieth the matter as if wee taught that Christ in his last supper had recommended nothing to vs but bread and wine But let him vnderstand that we see and teach in this sacrament the exceeding great loue of Christ not in those simple creatures which we see in act but in the magnificence of grace which is promised in effect If wee consider these creatures in act they are but bread and wine but consider them in vse and effect and then this bread is heauenly bread the bread of life the food of immortalitie there is in it the spirit of Christ euen the power of the word of God not onely feeding but also sanctifying and clensing the soule I will expresse it by M. Bishops owne words that Christ hath bequeathed and heereby giueth vnto vs his true naturall body to be the food of our soules of our soules I say not of our bodies which if he did rightly meane
ye not be content to be a foole but ye must be a foole in print I must be thrust into an Asses skin but it seemeth that you need not be thrust into it who doe of your owne accord so willingly put it on or let the skinne light to whom it will sure I am that the eares must belong to you Men would haue thought before that you had had some learning but now you giue them cause to thinke that you vnderstand not the Latin tongue or if you doe then remember him that said k Esay 5.20 Wo vnto them that put darknesse for light and light for darknesse Once againe gentle Reader to giue thee more full satisfaction in this matter thou shalt vnderstand that Epiphanius setting downe the heresie of Origen and intending as in the rest a confutation thereof l Epiphan haer 64. pag. 175. Contentus esse duxi his quae rectè a beato Methodio in sermone de resurrectione contraâ—psum Origenem dicta sunt c. thought best for one part of it to borrow the said confutation from Methodius a Bishop of former time Take knowledge by the way that I follow the edition of Epiphanius translated by m Iano Cornario interprete Basileae ex officina H. ruagiana c. 1578. Ianus Cornarius printed at Basil anno 1578. Heereupon he setteth downe from Methodius the words of Origen and hauing ended them there followeth towards the end of the next page this distinction set downe by the translatour n Pag. 176. Hactenus Methodius Origenis verba retulit sequuntur nunc Procli verba quae item Methodius recenset Hitherto Methodius hath rehearsed the words of Origen there follow now the words of Proclus which Methodius also setteth downe where in the Greeke there is no more but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the words of Proclus who namely in the time of Methodius maintained the condemned opinions of Origen and with whom it seemeth that Methodius had much to doe These words of Proclus extend to the seuenth line of the next page 177. the verie effect and substance whereof is this as Master Bishop also hath expressed it o Pag. 177. Siquis potens fuerit exactè intelligere c. cognoscet resurrectionem de hoc corpore non oportere accipi vt sp non possit in a ternuÌ„ iâ— mutabile permanere sed despirituali in quo idem ipse character qui nunc in hoc habetur conseruabitur quo vnusquisque nostrum etiam secundum formam idem sit quemadmodum ab Origene dictum est c. that the resurrection must not bee vnderstood of this body as which cannot abide for euer without change but of a spirituall body wherein the same shape that now is in this body shall be kept that euery one of vs in forme and proportion may be the same as saith he Origen hath said This being the opinion of Proclus by M. Bishops owne confession if he would haue had all the discourse following to be taken for the words of Proclus he should haue shewed vs how the same had suted to this opinion and haue laid before vs some of his arguments whereby hee had endeuoured the proofe of it He saw that I had so done and that the speeches which I alleaged from Methodius doe fully tend to the confuting of this opinion which he in his booke hath wholly suppressed knowing that no man can see those words but hee must also see his folly that would take those for the words of Proclus which tend directly to the ouerthrowing of that which he confesseth to be the errour of Proclus But to make the matter plaine the words of Proclus being thus set downe there follow these words in the next line p Pag. 177. Verùm hanc ipsorum contentionem ex his ex alijs pluribus quis redarguere poterit Demonstrabimus enim in sequentibus ac sermonis progressu per naturae veritatem non per coniecturaes neque Hieremiam vinctos terrae nos dixisse propter societatem ad corpus neque Dauidem hac de causa ligatos Operaepretium enim est haec proferre in quibus maximè labi videntur Proinde cúm de pelliceis tunicis quòd ante structuram ipsarum primi parentes vixerunt cum corpore immortalitate fruentes insuperque quòd non potest corpus vinculum carcer putari ea quae conueniunt dixerimus ô viri Iudices deinceps ad consequentia me conuertam velut promisi vt dilucidiùs videamus quod volumus But this which they contend for a man by these and many other reasons may reprooue for we will shew in the processe of our speech following by truth of nature and not by coniectures that neither Ieremy calleth vs prisoners of the earth because of the society with the body nor Dauid calleth vs bound or fettered for that cause for it is woorth the while to alleage those things wherin they specially seeme to erre Therefore when we shall haue spoken what is conuenient of the coates of skinnes and that our first parents before the making thereof liued with a body enioying immortality and moreouer that the body cannot bee taken to be a bond or a prison then I will turne me to those things that follow that we may the more plainly see that that we desire Heere we see a disputation plainely propounded against the foundations of the opinion of Proclus before set down whose Master Origen held q Pag. 173. Anâ—â—am humâ—nam pâ—ae existere dicit esse autem hae augelos virtuces supernas in peâ—catis constitutas ea gratia in supplicium in hoc corpus conclusas Quaproter inquit etiam vinculum vocatuÌ„ est corpus eò quod anima in corpore ligatdest c. Et hinc inquit Scripturam etiampelliceas tunitas indicasse quia fecit ipsis inquit tunicas pelliceas induit ipsos hoc corpus est c. Et mortuorum resurrectionem defectnosam facit c. that the soule was first created without the bodie and that when it sinned God created it a body and shut it vp thereinto as into a prison wherein it is fettered and bound and that this the Scripture meaneth where it saith that God made to the man and the woman coates of skins put vpon them by these saith he is vnderstood the bodie Hence drew he the rest of that absurd fancie whereby as Epiphanius there addeth he made the resurrection defectiue inferring that sith this is the nature and vse of the body it cannot be that this body should rise againe but that God will create a more excellent and spirituall body for the soule to dwell in And that this was the opinion of Proclus appeareth in the dialogue which is afterwards set downe betwixt Methodius and Auxentius on the one side and on the other side not Proclus and Origen as M. Bishop dreameth Origen being dead many a yeere before but Aglaophon and Proclus
Methodius on the one side speaking for Auxentius and himselfe and Aglaophon as the better man on the other side for Proclus and himselfe where Methodius saith to Aglaophon thus r Pag. 185. b. Dicebator anima corpus hoc nobis circumsitum propter transgressionem suscepisse cùm superioribus temporibus absque ipso foelicitèr degissetpelliceas enim tunicas corpora esse in quae concludi animas contigitsquo mortale gestantes pro his quae fecerunt poenam darent Annon erant haec quae primùm in principio ante dicta sunt Imò aâ—mone si non vidèor tibi rectè meminisse Non opus habes inquit ille admonitione haec ipsa enim erant quae inprimis à nobis dicta sunt It was said that the soule receiued this body that is about vs for sinne and transgression when as before time it had litted happily without it and that the coats of skin are these bodies wherein it hath befallen our souls to be shut vp whereby in state of mortalitie they may be punished for the things they did amisse Was it not this that was before said Tell me if I seeme not rightly to remember Aglaophon answereth Thou needest no telling thus it was indeed that wee said before Anon after hee asketh him againe Å¿ Pag. 186. a Nonne illud inquam ô Aglaophon videtur tibi non rectè habere dicere vinculum pedicas corpus construcluÌ„ esse contra animam quòd propheta vinctos terrae nos dixit ideoque etiam Dauid ligatos Et ille Non habeo inquit in promptu quod tibi respondeaÌ„ Et paulò post Tu inquam ergo vinculis carcerem sepulchrum onus pedicas ipsum corpus esse dixisti Vera inquit ille mihi dicis Seemeth it not amisse to thee Aglaophon to say that the bodie is made for fetters and chaines against the soule and that the Prophet called vs prisoners of the earth and that Dauid termeth vs men in bonds Where being doubtfull to be circumuented he answereth I cannot readily tell what to say But being perswaded by Methodius to say his minde and charged againe that he said that the body is a bond and a prison and a graue and a burden and fetters he answereth It is true as thou saiest Now sith this is the opinion of Aglaophon and Proclus according to the doctrine of their master Origen whom in this behalfe they followed how is M. Bishop bewitched to take those words which propound the confutation of this opinion to be the words of Proclus Yea it is further to be noted that as in the latter part where M. Bishop confesseth Methodius to speake so in the former also the speaker still directeth his speech against Aglaophon the companion of Proclus t Pag. 177. c. At fortassis opponentis vosipsos aduersus relata O Aglaophon dicetis c. But you Aglaophon will oppose your selues against the things that haue beene spoken u Pag 180. b. Attende ó sapientissime Aglaophon Listen heere O wise Aglaophon x Pag. 182. b. Vbi dominum pronunciasse dixisti c. mox intuâ—sti c. ignarus quòd qui c. Thou saiest thus Aglaophon not knowing that he that hath made all things of nothing c. y Pag. 183. c. Sic te O sapientissime Aglaophon considerare oportet Thus it behoueth thee to consider O wise Aglaophon What will M. Bishop heere say will he to saue himself set Aglaophon and Proclus together by the eares Can he make vs beleeue that Proclus heere disputeth against Aglaophon his owne fellow Nay is he so mad as so to beleeue himselfe But if this be not enough let vs looke into the matter of the discourse and see how well it accordeth with the opinion of Origen and Proclus Remember briefely what their conceit was that the soule was first alone without the body that in that state it sinned and for a punnishment was thrust into the body and that this body is not that wherein we shall rise againe but that God will create a spiritual and more excellent body bearing only the figure and shape of this Now the speaker in this discourse disputeth first z Pag. 177. b. Homo verissimè dicitur secunduÌ„ naturaÌ„ neque anima sine corpore neque corpus sine anima sed quod ex compage animae corporis in vna boni formaÌ„ coÌ„posituÌ„ est vnde hinc immortaleÌ„ hominem factuÌ„ esse apparet that God in the beginning made man immortall consisting of a body and a soule because according to truth of nature man is called neither the soule without the body nor the body without the soule but that which is made into one by the coniunction of body and soule Marke heere in the very beginning an expresse contradiction to the opinion of Proclus namely that man was at the first created not a soule alone but a body and a soule Then he sheweth that a Pag. 179. a Pollutus inquinatus est homo à sententia Dei dis essione facta multas maliciei maculas sibi affricuit quas princeps ille pater erroris peperit c. Deus omnipetens immortale malum ex insidijs ipsum factuÌ„ intuitus velut etiam diabolus seductor erat pelliceas tunicas ob id fecit velut mortalitate ipsos amiciens quò per corporis solutionem omne in ipso factum malum moreretur man became polluted defiled by swaruing and declining from the commandement of God and did set vpon himselfe many spots of wickednesse which the prince and father of errour brought foorth and that God beholding man thus made by the subtilty of Satan immortally euill as Satan himselfe was did make for the man and the woman garments of skinnes as it were clothing them with mortality to the end that by the dissolution of the body all the euill that was wrought in him might die Heereupon he prooueth that the making of coates of skines cannot be vnderstood of the making of bodies seeing b Ibid. Adam confitetur se ossa habere carnes c. Accepit Deus limuÌ„ de terra formauit hominem quod propriè de corpore dictum esse apparet noÌ„ enim de limo grauioribus essentiam aedepta est amma Quarè verissimè certuÌ„ est vndequaque ante pelliceas tunicas incorporatum fuisse hominem it is euident that man before the coates of skins had a body for that it was said by Adam concerning Euah This is flesh of my flesh and bone of my bone and of the creation of man it is written that God formed him of the dust or slime of the earth which is manifestly spoken of the body because the soule had not his being thereof This is also directly against the fancy of Proclus for Proclus held that the making of those coats was the making of bodies but this authour prooueth that the bodies were
in state of incorruption crowned with glory and honour and thereby likened to the angels In a word he saith that it is a most absurd thing to say that because Christ saith we shall in the resurrection be seene as Angels therfore these bodies marke what he saith these bodies doe not rise againe And that it must be vnderstood of these bodies he prooueth euen by the terme of resurrection r Ibid. Resurrectio nâ—n de non lapso sed de lapso dicitur resurgente c. Moritur autem caro Anima enim immortalis est Promde si anima est immortalis corpus autem ipse mortuus qui râ—surrectionem quidem esse dicunt verùm carnis non esse hi resurrectionem negant For resurrection is not named of that that is not fallen but of that that is fallen and doth rise againe Now it is the flesh that dieth for the soule is immortall and if the soule be immortall and it be the body that is dead then they that say there is a resurrection but not of the flesh doe deny the resurrection For conclusion he setteth foorth death and resurrection by comparison of sleeping and waking affirming that Å¿ Ibid. c Quemadmâ— dum ex dormiendo excitari ac vigilari contingit sic etiam viuere ex morte continget non omninò qui mortuus est postquam mortuus suerit in eodem maneâ— as it befalleth a man to rise and wake from sleepe being the same rising that hee was when hee lay downe to sleepe so doth it befall also to liue again from death so as that the dead doth not still continue in that state Hitherto then it is plaine that all this discourse tendeth directly to the confuting of Proclus and Origen and therefore that M. Bishop was scarsely in good temper in the reading heereof that tooke all these words to be the words of Proclus One onely exception he yet further hath that what is Proclus his opinion and proposition in the beginning where I designed it the very same is his conclusion fiue leaues after where he endeth his discourse with a comparison of our mortall bodies to a beasts hide filled with water He setteth downe the words and then saith Doe you not see how the same that Proclus propounded in the beginning with Origen the same he concludeth in the end Wherefore all that whole discourse betweene those two places was his owne and no word in it of Methodius But by M. Bishop I see that a wise man would as well haue looked to the middle as to the beginning and the end It is true indeed that in the end as it is distinguished there are certaine words of Proclus but M. Bishops vnderstanding should haue serued him to looke in what maner they come in For the authour of that discourse hauing proceeded so far as I haue declared concludeth that matter thus t Pag. 183. c. c. Caeterum de his plura dicere in praesens eptime Theophile voique reliqui sermonis iudices omittamus Arriptamus autem ea quae deinceps ad haec consequuntur quomodo longè ab eo â—p oportet discessit quando in prophetia sexagesimi quinti Psalmi quam coactè impropriè exponit resurrectionem in sola specie seruari sperare oportet dicit But let vs giue ouer O noble Theophilus and you other Iudges of our speech to speake any more of these things at this time Whereupon follow these words But let vs take also those words which heereupon further follow how far he departed from the right when in the prophecy of the threescore and fift Psalme which he expoundeth forcedly and vnproperly he saith We must expect that the resurrection shall be performed in shape only Marke well gentle Reader how he that hath spoken all this while professeth to cite other words of Proclus taxing him for departing from the right for forced and vnproper exposition and setting downe the opinion wherein he departed from the right to be this that the resurrection shall be onely in the same shape What doe wee heare him that speaketh condemning Proclus and yet must we beleeue M. Bishop to take the words whereby he is condemned to be the words of Proclus Nay heereupon are the words of Proclus rehearsed to the same effect as M. Bishop hath set downe that as a beasts hide being filled with water if by little and little it be emptied and by little and little be filled againe it carrieth still the same shew though it be not still the same water euen so our bodies being by food and euacuation altered and changed from day to day though they still haue the same shape and shew yet in substance of flesh continue not the same and therefore being not now the same for a few daies together shall not be the same at the resurrection This he setteth downe as the summe of Origens opinion and then against the obiection of the body of Christ he answereth that Christs body was not as ours are his being not conceiued in sinne but by the power of the holy Ghost whereas ours are sleepe and pleasure and filth fit to be lest to beasts and wormes The words of Proclus being thus deliuered the Latine interpreter maketh a diuision thus Sequuntur nunc ipsius Methodij verba there follow now the words of Methodius himselfe where in the Greeke there is no more but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the rest or the remnant of Methodius wherein he setteth downe a narration of that which befell as it seemeth vpon Proclus his declamation already mentioned vpon the threescore and fift Psalme namely that therupon they grew to a disputation Methodius and Auxentius on the one side Aglaophon and Proclus on the other side as was before said In which disputation Methodius hauing conuinced Aglaophon that u Pag. 186. Qui ligatus est non potest peccare Coarctatur enimâ— nec permittitur a vinculo At corpus ad peccandum est auxiliarium c. Non ergo corpus est vinculum c. the body cannot be said to be the prison of the soule as Origen held it to be because a prison is for restraint of a man from doing that for which he is imprisoned but the body is so far from being a restraint from sinne as that it is a helper thereto goeth on forward againe in another large speech to the same effect and purpose as hath beene already declared Thus I haue at large handled the matter of that large discourse that thou maiest see gentle Reader how absurdly and vnhonestly M. Bishop dealeth with thee who being admonished of his ouersight will yet wilfully goe on to perswade thee that that is a bad discourse as he calleth it of an hereticke which so plainely appeareth to bee a memorable speech of a reuerend and godly Bishop Proclus held that the same body shall not rise againe The authour of that discourse prooueth that the same body shall rise againe Therefore the
This deniall of a third place M. Higgons z Book 1. part 1. ch 2. § 4. num 10. acknowledgeth and noteth me in his margent for citing the places where it is denied but seeketh to auoid it by saying that Austin thereby onely denied against the Pelagians any third place of eternall rest heere vpon earth after the day of iudgement for children dying without baptisme for this is the briefe of the differences that hee hath there set downe But this will not serue his turne because Austin doth not meerely deny their third place but from the absolute denial of a third place inferreth that their third place cannot be a August de peccat mer. remiss l. 1. cap. 28. Non est vllus vlli medius loâ—us vt possit esse nisi cum diabolo qui non est cum Christo Hinc ipse dominus volens auferre de cordibus malè credentium istam nescio quam medietatem quam conantur quidam parunlis non baptizatis tribuere c. definitiuam protulit ad haec ora obstruenda sententiam vbi ait Qui mecum non est contra me est There is not any middle place for any man saith he that he may be but with the diuell that is not with Christ He addeth Heereupon the Lord himselfe also willing to take away from the hearts of misbeleeuers this I know not what middle place which some seeke to assigne to children vnbaptised hath to stop their mouthes pronounced a definitiue sentence where he saith He that is not with me is against mee There is then no middle place for infants vnbaptised because there is not after death any middle place for any man and therfore doth the Lord pronounce that definitiue sentence from which how M. Higgons will shift Purgatory I cannot well tell The other sentence is as plaine b August Hypognostic lib. 5. Da mihi praeter hunc alterum locum vbi vitae possit requies esse perennis PrimuÌ„ enim locum fides Catholicorum diuina authoritate credidit regnum essâ— coelorum c. Secundum Gehennam vbi omnis Apostata vel à fide Christi alienus aeterna supplicia experietur Tertium penitùs ignoramus imò nec esse in Scripturis Sanctis inuenimus Giue me beside this that is the kingdome of heauen any other place where there may be perpetuall rest of life For the first place the faith of catholick men by diuine authority haue beleeued to be the kingdome of heauen The second hell fire where euery Apostata and alien from the faith of Christ shall feele euerlasting punishments A third we are vtterly ignorant of yea wee finde by the holy Scriptures that there is none such Where we see that S. Austin taking in hand to refute the third place affirmed by the Pelagians distinguisheth generally how many places there be and resolueth that that third place of theirs cannot be because there is no third place Heauen and hell he saith he findeth in the Scriptures but third place he findeth none and therefore maketh vs confident against beleeuing any Purgatory because in the Scriptures we find none The Papists say they find it there but they say vntruely they finde it in their owne constructions forced vpon the Scripture but in the Scripture it selfe they finde it not All the places which they alleage haue their iust and perfect vse euen by the exposition of the fathers themselues without any Purgatorie to be inferred thereby 37. In the same chapter num 12. he toucheth me again for that wheras Austin reuerenceth Epiphanius as a holy man and famous in the Catholike faith it seemeth good to me to iustifie Aerius a damnable heretike against him But I reuerence Epiphanius as farre as Austin did or teacheth me to doe I acknowledge hee was a holy man and famous in the Catholike faith but yet I say of him as S. Austin saide of Ambrose another holy man and famous in the Catholike faith c August con Pelag. Cele lib. 1. cap. 43. Quantis praedicat laudibus quamlibet sanctum doctuÌ„ virum nequaquam tamen authoritati Canonicae Scripturae comparandum Though he were a holy and learned man yet is he not to be compared to the authoritie of the Canonicall Scripture I dissent from Epiphanius as Austin himselfe did concerning fasting daies as I touched a little before who denieth that to be Apostolike tradition which Epiphanius affirmeth to be so I iustifie Aerius against Epiphanius in one point as in another point S. Hierome did as I haue shewed also d Sect. 21. before not reiecting a truth for that either an heretike hath affirmed it or a Catholike doctour hath denied it but therefore embracing it wheresoeuer I finde it because God hath taught it And although Aerius for Arianisme were iustly to be accounted a damnable heretike yet doe I not thinke that M. Higgons can make good his word which before hee hath giuen that for those matters wherein we approoue him there were beside Epiphanius and Austin many other that did condemne him Epiphanius indeed doth so and Austin professing to follow Epiphanius transcribeth the same from him but Philaster and Theodoret writing of heresies mention no such matter neither doe I thinke that M. Higgons can bring vs any father or story of those times that taxeth Aerius in that behalfe Yea I may not omit that which I pointed at before that when Dulcitius mooued the question to Austin e Aug. ad Dulcit quaest 2. Vtrum oblatio quae fit pro quiescentibus aliquid eorum conferat animabus c. Ad quod multi dicunt quòd si aliquis beneficij in hoc locus esse possit post mortem quantò magis sibi anima ferret ipsa refrigeria sua per se illic confitendo peccata quà m in eorum refrigerium ab alijs oblatio procuratur Whether the offering that is made for the dead doe auaile their soules any thing he setteth downe the opinion of many in that time concerning that point Many say to this matter that if heerein any good were to be done after death how much rather should the soule it selfe obtaine ease to it selfe by confession of sins there than that for the ease thereof an offering should be procured by other men which opinion hee would neuer haue set downe neither would Saint Austin haue let it goe without hard censure if it had beene then publikely taken for heresie so to thinke yea Dulcitius would neuer haue mooued the question thereof if Purgatory had been a knowen and vndoubted point of faith as M. Higgons would faine haue it thought to bee But this is not all that hee hath heere to blame me for for in the margent he chargeth me that I peruert the sense of Epiphanius as though the church had praied for the Saints c. If they did not so what is it then that Epiphanius reporteth Epiphanius reporteth saith he that when we make a memoriall of
bloud of our redeemer IESVS Christ Secondly of seauen Sacraments instituted by our Sauiour both to exhibite honour to God and to sanctifie our soules they doe flatly reiect fiue of them And do further as much as in them lieth extinguish the vertue and efficacy of the other two For they hold Baptisme not to be the true instrument all cause of remission of our sinnes and of the infusion of grace in our soules but only to bee the signe and seale thereof And in steade of Christs sacred body really giuen to all Catholikes in the Sacrament of the Altar to their exceeding comfort and dignity the Protestants must be content to take vp with a bitte of bread and with a sup of wine a most pittifull exchange for so heauenly a banquet They doe daily feele and I would to God they had grace to vnderstand what a want they haue of the Sacrament of Confession which is the most soueraigne salue of the world to cure all the deadly and dangerous woundes of the soule Ah how carelesly doe they daily heape sinne vpon sin and suffer them to lie festring in their breasts euen till death for lacke of launcing them inseason by true and due confession Besides at the point of death when the Diuell is most busie to assault vs labouring then to make vs his owne for euer there is amongst them no anointing of the sicke with holy oile in the name of our Lord as S. Cap. 5. vers 14. Iames prescribeth joyned with the Priests praier which should saue the sicke and by meanes whereof his sinnes should be forgiuen and he lifted vp by our Lord and inwardly both greatly comforted and strengthned these heauenly helpes I say many others which our Catholike religion affords vnto all persons and by which rightly administred God is highly magnified are quite banished out of the Protestant territories and consequently their religion for want of them is mightily maymed They haue yet remaining some poore short praiers to be said twise a weeke for fearing belike to make their Ministers surfet of ouer much praying they will not tie them to any daily praiers Mattins Euensong and other set houres they leaue to the Priests sauing that on the Sabboath they solemnely meet together at the Church to say their seruice which is a certain mingle-mangle translated out of the old portaise and Masse booke patched vp together with some few of their owne inuention And though it be but short yet it is the Lord he knowes performed by most of them so slightly that an indifferent beholder would rather iudge them to come thither to gaze one vpon another or to common of worldly businesse than reuerently there to serue God Now as concerning the place where their diuine seruice is said if goodly stately Churches had not beene by men of our religion built to their handes in what simple cotes trow you would their key-cold deuotion haue beene content to serue their Lord if one Church or great steeple by any mishap fall into vtter ruine a collection throughout all England for many yeeres together will not serue to build it vp againe which maketh men of iudgement to perceiue that their religion is exceeding cold in the setting forward of good workes and that it rather tendeth to destruction than to edification Againe whereas our Churches are furnished with many goodly Altars trimmed vp decently and garnished with sundry faire and religious pictures to strike into the beholders a reuerent respect of that place and to draw them to heauenly meditations theirs haue ordinarily bare wals hanged with cob-webs except some of the better sort which are daubed like Ale-houses which some broken sentences of Scripture Besides the ancient custom of Christās being to pray with their faces toward the Sunne-rising to shew the hope they haue of a good resurrection and that by tradition receiued euen from the Apostles as witnesseth Saint Basil their Ministers in their highest mysteries De Spiritu sancto 27. looke ouer their Communiontable into the South to signifie perhaps that their spirituall estate is now at the highest and that in their religion there is no hope of rising towards heauen but assurance of declining R. ABBOT Our Diuine seruice and worship of God is not such as the Church of Rome and the followers thereof would haue it but it is sufficient for vs that it is such as God himselfe hath commanded Of true reall and externall sacrifice I haue answered him before both in the confutation of his a Sect. 27. Epistle more at large and briefly heere in the b Sect. 3. answer of this Preface Here I answer him againe in a word with the words of Iustin Martyr that c Iustin Mart. Dialog cum Tryph. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prayers and thanksgiuings are the onely perfect and acceptable sacrifices to God and that Christians haue learned to doe these onely euen in the memoriall of their dry and moist foode the bread of the Eucharist and the cup of the Eucharist as hee hath before called it in which is the remembrance of the passion which God by God himselfe suffered for vs. So then we doe not denie all sacrifice but we say as we haue beene taught by the Apostle S. Peter according to the ancient doctrine of the Church of Rome d 1. Pet. 2 5. We are made a spirituall house a holy priesthood to offer vp spirituall sacrifices the sacrifice e Psal 4.5 of righteousnesse the sacrifice f Ps 50.14.23 Heb. 13.15 of praise and thankesgiuing the sacrifice g Psal 51.17 of a broken and contrite heart the sacrifice h Phil. 4.18 of almes the sacrifice i Rom. 12.1 of our own bodies acceptable to God by Iesus Christ By these sacrifices we doe all loialtie and seruice to God and we doe not doubt but that we please God therein If we please not that wiser sort of which M. Bishop speaketh the reason is because they take vpon them to bee wiser than God For that propitiatory sacrifice which he driueth at is beyond Gods deuice God neuer taught it Christ neuer ordeined it the Primitiue Church neuer intended it there is no reason at al for it because the bloud of Christ once shed for vs is a sufficient propitiation and attonement for all our sinnes And because by k Heb. 1.3 10.14 once offering of himselfe hee hath purged our sinnes and made vs perfect for euer therefore it is no despight to Gods true worship but a iust assertion thereof to hold that the pretence of any further sacrifice for sinne is an impious and blasphemous derogation to the crosse of Christ As for his seuen Sacraments Seuen Sacraments a late deuice if he can prooue them to bee as he saith instituted by our Sauiour we are very readie to acknowledge the same But it is worthy to be noted that l Bellarm. de effect sacram cap. 25. Bellarmine standing vpon the proofe thereof