his Commentaries upon Moses adviseth his Reader not to loath the new sense of the holy Scripture for this that it dissenteth from the ancient Doctors but to search more exactly the text and context of the Scripture and if he find it agree to praise God that hath not tyed the exposition of the Scriptures to the senses of the ancient Doctors But leaving comparisons which you know are odious the envie whereof notwithstanding your owne Doctors and Masters you see helpe us to beare off and teach us how to decline I now come to the examination of the particular points by you propounded It should indeed be your part by right to be the Assailant who first did make the Challenge and I who sustaine the person of the Defendant might here wel stay accepting only your challenge expecting your encounter Yet do not I meane at this time to answer your Bill of Challenge as Bills are usually answered in the Chancerie with saving all advantages to the Defendant I am content in this also to abbridge my selfe of the libertie w ch I might lawfully take make a further demōstration of my forwardnes in undertaking the maintenāce of so good a cause by giving the first onset my selfe OF TRADITIONS TO begin therefore with Traditions which is your forlorne Hope that in the first place we are to set upon this must I needes tell you before we begin that you much mistake the matter if you thinke that Traditions of all sorts promiscuously are struck at by our Religion We willingly acknowledge that the word of God which by some of the Apostles was set downe in writing was both by themselves and others of their fellow-labourers delivered by word of mouth and that the Church in succeeding ages was bound not only to preserve those sacred writings committed to her trust but also to deliver unto her children vivâ voce the forme of wholsome words contayned therein Traditions therefore of this nature come not within the compasse of our controversie the question being betwixt us de ipsâ doctrinâ traditâ not de tradendi modo touching the substance of the doctrine delivered not of the maner of delivering it Againe it must be remembred that here wee speake of doctrine delivered as the word of God that is of points of religion revealed unto the Prophets and Apostles for the perpetuall information of Gods people not of rites and ceremonies and other ordinances which are left to the disposition of the Church and consequently be not of divine but of positive and humane right Traditions therefore of this kinde likewise are not properly brought within the circuit of this question But that Traditions of men should be obtruded unto us for articles of Religion and admitted for parts of Gods worship or that any Traditions should be accepted for parcels of Gods word beside the holy Scriptures and such doctrines as are either expressely therein contayned or by sound inference may be deduced from thence I thinke wee have reason to gainsay As long as for the first wee have this direct sentence from God himselfe Matth. 15. In vaine doe they worship me teaching for doctrines the Commandements of men And for the second the expresse warrant of the Apostle 2. Tim. 3. testifying of the holy Scriptures not onely that they are able to make us wise unto salvation which they should not be able to doe if they did not containe all things necessary to salvation but also that by them the man of God that is the minister of Gods word unto whom it appertaineth to declare all the counsell of God may be perfectly instructed to every good worke which could not be if the Scriptures did not containe all the counsell of God which was fit for him to learne or if there were any other word of God which he were bound to teach that should not be contained within the limits of the Booke of God Now whether herein we disagree from the doctrine generally received by the Fathers we referre our selves to their owne sayings For Rituall Traditions unwritten and for doctrinall Traditions written indeed but preserved also by the continual preaching of the Pastors of the Church successively wee find no man a more earnest advocate then Tertullian Yet hee having to deale with Hermogenes the hereticke in a question concerning the faith whether all things at the beginning were made of nothing presseth him in this manner with the argument ab authoritate negativé for avoyding whereof the Papists are driven to flie for succour to their unwritten verities Whether all things vvere made of any subject matter I have as yet read no where Let those of Hermogenes his shop shew that it is written If it be not written let them feare that Woe which is allotted to such as adde or take away In the two Testaments saith Origen every word that appertayneth to God may be required and discussed and all knowledge of things out of them may be understood But if any thing doe remaine which the holy Scripture doth not determine no other third Scripture ought to be received for to authorize any knowledge but that which remaineth we must commit to the fire that is we must reserve it to God For in this present world God would not have us to know all things Hippolytus the Martyr in his Homily against the Heresie of Noëtus There is one God whom wee doe not otherwise acknowledge brethren but out of the holy Scriptures For as he that would professe the wisedome of this world cannot otherwise attaine hereunto unlesse hee reade the doctrine of the Philosophers so whosoever of us will exercise pietie toward God cannot learne this elsewhere but out of the holy Scriptures Whatsoever therefore the holy Scriptures doe preach that let us know and whatsoever they teach that let us understand Athanasius in his Oration against the Gentiles toward the beginning The holy Scriptures given by inspiration of God are of themselves sufficient to the discoverie of truth S. Ambrose The things which vve finde not in the Scriptures how can vve use them And againe I reade that he is the first I reade that hee is not the second they who say he is the second let them shew it by reading It is well saith S. Hilary that thou art content vvith those things vvhich be written And in another place he commendeth Constantius the Emperour for desiring the faith to be ordered onely according to those things that be vvritten S. Basil Beleeve those things vvhich are written the things which are not written seeke not It is a manifest falling from the faith and an argument of arrogancy either to reject any point of those things that are written or to bring in any of those things that are not written He teacheth further that every word and action ought to be confirmed by the testimony of the holy Scripture for confirmation of the faith of the
in them of the first 400 years In what Pope his dayes was the true Religion overthrowne in Rome Next I would faine know How can your Religion be true which dissalloweth of many chiefe articles which the Saints and Fathers of that primitive Church of Rome did generally hold to be true For they of your side that have read the Fathers of that unspotted Church can well testifie and if any deny it it shall be presently shewen that the Doctors Pastors and Fathers of that Church doe allow of Traditions that they acknowledge the real presence of the body of Christ in the Sacrament of the Altar that they exhorted the people to confesse their sinnes unto their ghostly Fathers that they affirmed that Priests have power to forgive sinnes that they taught that there is a Purgatory that prayer for the dead is both commendable and godly that there is Limbus Patrum and that our Saviour descended into Hell to deliver the ancient Fathers of the Old Testament because before his Passion none ever entred into Heaven that prayer to Saints and use of holy Images was of great account amongst them that man hath free-will and that for his meritorious works he receiveth through the assistance of Gods grace the blisse of euerlasting happinesse Now would I faine know whether of both haue the true Religion they that hold all these above said points with the Primitive Church or they that doe most vehemently contradict and gaine-say them They that doe not disagree with that holy Church in any point of Religion or they that agree with it but in very few and disagree in almost all VVill you say that these Fathers maintained these opinions contrary to the word of God why you know that they were the pillars of Christianitie the champions of Christ his Church and of the true Catholike Religion which they most learnedly defended against diverse heresies and therefore spent all their time in a most serious studie of the holy Scripture Or will you say that although they knew the Scriptures to repugne yet they brought in the aforesaid opinions by malice and corrupt intentions VVhy your selves cannot deny but that they lived most holy and vertuous lives free from all malitious corrupting or perverting of Gods holy word and by their holy lives are now made worthy to raigne with God in his glory In so much as their admirable learning may sufficiently crosse out all suspition of ignorant error and their innocent sanctitie freeeth us from all mistrust of malitious corruption Now would I willingly see what reasonable answer may be made to this For the Protestants graunt that the Church of Rome for 400 or 500 yeares held the true Religion of Christ yet do they exclaime against the abovesaid Articles which the same Church did maintaine and uphold as may bee shewen by the expresse testimonies of the Fathers of the same Church and shall be largely laid down if any learned Protestant will deny it Yea which is more for the confirmation of all the aboue mentioned points of our Religion wee will produce good and certaine grounds out of the sacred Scriptures if the Fathers authority will not suffice And we do desire any Protestant to alleage any one Text out of the said Scripture which condemneth any of the aboue written points which wee hold for certaine they shall never be able to doe For indeed they are neyther more learned more pious nor more holy then the blessed Doctors and Martyrs of that first Church of Rome which they allow and esteeme of so much and by which we most willingly will be tryed in any point which is in controversie betwixt the Protestants and the Catholicks VVhich wee desire may be done with christian charity and sincerity to the glory of God and instruction of them that are astray W. B. AN ANSVVER TO THE FORMER CHALLENGE TO uphold the Religion which at this day is maintained in the Church of Rome and to discredit the truth which we professe three things are here urged by one who hath vndertaken to make good the Papists cause against all gainesayers The first concerneth the originall of the errors wherwith that part standeth charged the Author and time whereof he requireth us to shew The other two respect the testimonie both of the Primitive Church of the sacred Scriptures which in the points wherein we varie if this man may be believed maketh wholly for them and against us First then would he faine know what Bishop of Rome did first alter that Religion which wee commend in them of the first 400 yeares In what Popes dayes was the true Religion overthrowne in Rome To which I answere First that wee doe not hold that Rome was built in a day or that the great dung-hill of errors which now wee see in it was raised in an age and therefore it is a vaine demand to require from us the name of anie one Bishop of Rome by whom or under whom this Babylonish confusion was brought in Secondly that a great difference is to be put betwixt Heresies which openly oppose the foundations of our Faith and that Apostasie which the Spirit hath evidently foretold should bee brought in by such as speake lyes in hypocrisie 1. Tim. 4.1 2. The impietie of the one is so notorious that at the verie first appearance it is manifestly discerned the other is a mysterie of iniquitie as the Apostle termeth it 2. Thes. 2.7 iniquitas sed mystica id est pietatis nomine palliata so the ordinarie Glosse expoundeth the place an iniquitie indeed but mysticall that is cloked vvith the name of pietie And therefore they who kept continuall watch and ward against the one might sleepe while the seeds of the other were a sowing yea peradventure might at unawares themselves have some hand in bringing in of this Trojan horse commended thus unto them under the name of Religion and semblance of devotion Thirdly that the originall of errors is oftentimes so obscure and their breede so base that howsoever it might be easily observed by such as lived in the same age yet no wise man will mervaile if in tract of time the beginnings of manie of them should be forgotten and no register of the time of their birth found extant Wee reade that the Sadducees taught there were no Angels is any man able to declare unto us under what high Priest they first broached this error The Grecians Circassians Georgians Syrians Egyptians Habassines Muscovites and Russians dissent at this day from the Church of Rome in many particulars will you take upon you to shew in what Bishops dayes these severall differences did first arise When the point hath been well skanned it will be found that many errors have crept into their profession the time of the entrance whereof you are not able to designe and some things also are maintained by you against them which have not been delivered for Catholick doctrine in the primitive times but brought in afterwards your selves
yet is daily offered for the life of the vvorld Contra quem saith he satis argumentatur Rabanus in Epistolâ ad Egilonem Abbatem Ratrannus quidam libro composito ad Karolum regem dicentes aliam esse Against whom both Rabanus in his Epistle to Abbot Egilo and one Ratrannus in a booke which he made to King Charles argue largely saying that it is another kind of flesh Whereby what Rabanus his opinion was of this point in his Epistle to Abbot Egilo or Egilus consequently what that was which the Monkes of Weingart could not indure in his Penitentiall I trust is plaine enough I omit other corruptions of antiquitie in this same question which I have touched elsewhere only that of Bertram I may not passe over wherein the dishonesty of these men in handling the writings of the ancient is laid open even by the confession of their owne mouthes Thus the case standeth That Ratrannus who joined with Rabanus in refuting the error of the carnall presence at the first bringing in thereof by Paschasius Ratbertus is he who commonly is knowen by the name of Bertramus The booke which he wrote of this argument to Carolus Calvus the Emperour was forbidden to be read by order from the Roman Inquisition confirmed afterwards by the Councell of Trent The Divines of Doway perceiving that the forbidding of the booke did not keepe men from reading it but gave them rather occasion to seeke more earnestly after it thought it better policy that Bertram should be permitted to goe abroad but handled in such sort as other ancient writers that made against them were wont to be Seeing therefore say they we beare with very many errors in other of the old Catholike vvriters and extenuate them excuse them by inventing some device oftentimes deny them and fayne some commodious sense for them when they are objected in disputations or conflicts with our adversaries wee doe not see why Bertram may not deserve the same equitie and diligent reviseall Least the heretickes cry out that we burne and forbid such antiquity as maketh for them Marke this dealing well The world must be borne in hand that all the Fathers make for the Church of Rome against us in all our controversies When we bring forth expresse testimonies of the Fathers to the contrary what must then be done A good face must be put upō the matter one device or other must be invented to elude the testimonies objected and still it must be denied that the Fathers make against the doctrine of the Papists Bertram for example writeth thus The things which differ one from another are not the same The body of Christ which was dead and rose again and being made immortall now dyeth not death no more having dominion over it is everlasting and now not subject to suffering But this which is celebrated in the Church is temporall not everlasting it is corruptible not free from corruption What device must they finde out here They must say this is meant of the accidents or formes of the Sacrament which are corruptible or of the use of the Sacrament which continueth only in this present world But how will this shift serve the turne when as the whole drift of the discourse tendeth to prove that that which is received by the mouth of the faithfull in the Sacrament is not that very bodie of Christ which dyed upon the Crosse and rose againe from death Non malé aut inconsulté omittantur igitur omnia haec It were not amisse therefore say our Popish Censurers nor unadvisedly done that all these things should be left out If this be your maner of dealing with antiquity let all men judge whether it be not high time for us to listen unto the advice of Vincentius Lirinensis and not be so forward to commit the triall of our controversies to the writings of the Fathers who have had the ill hap to fall into such hucksters handling Yet that you may see how confident we are in the goodnesse of our cause we will not now stand upon our right nor refuse to enter with you into this field but give you leave for this time both to be the Challenger and the appointer of your owne weapons Let us then heare your challenge wherin you would so faine be answered I would faine know say you how can your Religion be true which disalloweth of many chiefe articles which the Saints and Fathers of that primitive Church of Rome did generally hold to be true For they of your side that have read the Fathers of that unspotted Church can well testifie and if any deny it it shall be presently shewen that the Doctors Pastors and Fathers of that Church doe allow of Traditions c. And againe Now would I faine know whether of both have the true Religion they that hold all these abovesaid points with the primitive Church or they that do most vehemently contradict and gainsay them they that doe not disagree with that holy Church in any point of Religion or they that agree with it but in very few and disagree in almost all And the third time too for fayling Now would I willingly see what reasonable answer may be made to this For the Protestants graunt that the Church of Rome for 400 or 500 yeares held the true Religion of Christ yet do they exclaime against the abovesaid articles which the same Church did maintaine and uphold as may be shewen by the expresse testimonies of the Fathers of the same Church and shall be largely layd downe if any learned Protestant will deny it If Albertus Pighius had now beene alive as great a Scholer as he was he might have learned that he never knew before Who did ever yet saith he by the Church of Rome understand the Vniversall Church That doth this man say I who styleth all the ancient Doctors and Martyrs of the Church Vniversall with the name of the Saints and Fathers of the primitive Church of Rome But it seemeth a small matter unto him for the magnifying of that Church to confound Vrbem Orbem unlesse he mingle also Heaven and Earth together by giving the title of that unspotted Church which is the speciall priviledge of the Church triumphant in heaven unto the Church of Rome here militant upon earth S. Augustine surely would not have himselfe otherwise understood whensoever hee speaketh of the unspotted Church and therefore to prevent all mistaking hee thus expoundeth himselfe in his Retractations Wheresoever in these bookes I have made mention of the Church not having spot or wrinkle it is not so to be taken as if she were so now but that she is prepared to bee so when she shall appeare glorious For now by reason of certaine ignorances and infirmities of her members the whole Church hath cause to say every day Forgive us our trespasses Now as long as the Church is subject to these ignorances and infirmities it cannot
good and the confusion of the evill and that it is the propertie of a faithfull man to bee fully perswaded of the truth of those things that are delivered in the holy Scripture and not to dare eyther to reject or to adde any thing thereunto For if whatsoever is not of faith be sinne as the Apostle saith and faith is by hearing and hearing by the word of God then vvhatsoever is without the holy Scripture being not of faith must needs be sinne Thus farre S. Basil. In like maner Gregory Nyssene S. Basils brother layeth this for a ground vvhich no man should contradict that in that onely the truth must be acknowledged wherein the seale of the Scripture testimony is to be seene And accordingly in another booke attributed also unto him we finde this conclusion made Forasmuch as this is upholden vvith no testimony of the Scripture as false vve will reject it Thus also S. Hierome disputeth against Helvidius· As vvee denye not those things that are written so vve refuse those things that are not vvritten That God was borne of a Virgin we beleeve because we reade it that Mary did marry after shee was delivered wee beleeve not because wee reade it not In those things saith S. Augustine vvhich are layd downe plainly in the Scriptures all those things are found which appertaine to faith and direction of life And againe Whatsoever ye heare from the holy Scriptures let that savour vvell unto you whatsoever is without them refuse lest you wander in a cloud And in another place All those things which in times past our ancestors have mentioned to be done toward mankind and have delivered unto us all those things also which we see and doe deliver unto our posteritie so farre as they appertaine to the seeking and maintayning of true Religion the holy Scripture hath not passed in silence The holy Scripture saith S. Cyrill of Alexandria is sufficient to make them which are brought up in it wise and most approved and furnished with most sufficient understanding And againe That which the holy Scripture hath not said by what meanes should wee receive and account it among those things that be true Lastly in the writings of Theodoret wee meete with these kinde of speeches By the holy Scripture alone am I perswaded I am not so bold as to affirme any thing which the sacred Scripture passeth in silence It is an idle and a senselesse thing to seeke those things that are passed in silence Wee ought not to seeke those things which are passed in silence but rest in the things that are written By the verdict of these twelve men you may judge what opinion was held in those ancient times of such Traditions as did crosse either the verity or the perfection of the sacred Scripture which are the Traditions we set our selves against If now it be demanded in what Popes dayes the contrarie doctrine was brought in among Christians I answer that if S. Peter were ever Pope in his dayes it was that some seducers first laboured to bring in Will-worship into the Church against whom S. Paul opposing himselfe Coloss. 2. counteth it a sufficient argument to condemne all such inventions that they were the commandements and doctrines of men Shortly after them started up other Hereticks who taught that the truth could not be found out of the Scriptures by those to whom Tradition was unknowen forasmuch as it was not delivered by writing but by word of mouth for which cause S. Paul also should say Wee speake wisedome among them that be perfect The verie same Text doe the Iesuites alledge to prove the dignitie of manie mysteries to be such that they require silence and that it is unmeet they should bee opened in the Scriptures which are read to the whole world and therefore can onely be learned by unwritten Traditions Wherein they consider not how they make so neare an approach unto the confines of some of the ancientest Heretickes that they may well shake hands together For howsoever some of them were so madde as to say that they were wiser then the Apostles themselves and therefore made light account of the doctrine which they delivered unto the Church either by writing or by word of mouth yet all of them broake not forth into that open impietie the same mysterie of iniquitie wrought in some of Antichrists fore-runners then which is discovered in his ministers now They confessed indeed as witnesseth Tertullian that the Apostles were ignorant of nothing and differed not among themselves in their preaching but they say they revealed not all things unto all men some things they delivered openly and to all some things secretly and to a few because that Paul useth this speech unto Timothy O Timothy keep that which is committed to thy trust And againe That good thing which was committed unto thee keepe Which verie Texts the Iesuites likewise bring in to prove that there are some Traditions which are not contayned in the Scripture In the dayes of S. Hierome also this was wont to be the saying of Hereticks We are the sonnes of the wise men which from the beginning have delivered the doctrine of the Apostles unto us But those things saith that Father which they of themselves finde out and faine to have received as it were by Tradition from the Apostles without the authoritie and testimonies of the Scriptures the sword of God doth smite S. Chrysostome in like maner giveth this for a marke of Antichrist and of all spiritual theeves that they come not in by the doore of the Scriptures For the Scripture saith hee like unto a sure doore doth barre an entrance unto Hereticks safeguarding us in all things that we will and not suffering us to be deceived Whereupon he concludeth that who so useth not the Scriptures but commeth in otherwise that is betaketh himselfe to another and an unlawfull way he is a theefe How this mysterie of iniquitie wrought when Antichrist came unto his full growth and what experiments his followers gave of their theevish entry in this kind was well observed by the author of the book De unitate Ecclesiae thought by some to be Waltram Bishop of Naumburg who speaking of the Monks that for the upholding of Pope Hildebrands faction brought in schismes and heresies into the Church noteth this specially of them that despising the tradition of God they desired other doctrines and brought in maisteries of humane institution Against whom hee alledgeth the authoritie of their owne S. Benedict the father of the Monkes in the West writing thus The Abbot ought to teach or ordaine or command nothing which is without the precept of the Lord but his commandement or instruction should be spred as the leaven of divine righteousnesse in the minds of his Disciples Whereunto also hee might have added the testimonie of the two famous Fathers
But howsoever this wee are sure of that the Canonists afterward held no absolute necessitie of obedience to be required therein as unto a Sacramentall institution ordayned by Christ for obtayning remission of sinnes but a Canonicall obedience onely as unto an usefull constitution of the Church And therefore where Gratian in his first distinction de Poenitentiâ had in the 34. chapter and the three next following propounded the allegations which made for them who held that men might obtaine pardon for their sinnes without anie orall confession of them and then proceeded to the authorities which might seeme to make for the contrarie opinion Iohannes Semeca at the beginning of that part upon those words of Gratian Alij é contrario tesâ—antur putteth too this Glosse From this place untill the section His auctoritatib he alledgeth for the other part that sinne is not forgiven unto such as are of yeares without confession of the mouth which yet is false saith he But this free dealing of his did so displease Friar Manrique who by the command of Pius Quintus set out a censure upon the Glosses of the Canon law that hee gave direction these words which yet is false should be cleane blotted out which direction of his notwithstanding the Romane Correctors under Gregory the XIII did not follow but letting the words still stand give them a check only with this marginall annotation Nay it is most true that without confession in desire at least the sinne is not forgiven In like maner where the same Semeca holdeth it to be the better opinion that Confession was ordayned by a certaine tradition of the universall Church rather then by the authoritie of the new or old Testament and inferreth thereupon that it is necessarie among the Latins but not among the Greekes because that tradition did not spread to them Friar Manrique commandeth all that passage to be blotted out but the Romane Correctors clap this note upon the margent for an antidote Nay confession was ordayned by our Lord and by Gods Law is necessary to all that fall into mortall sinne after Baptisme as well Greekes as Latins and for this they quote onely the 14. Session of the Councell of Trent where that opinion is accursed in us which was held two or three hundred yeares ago by the men of their owne religion among whom Michael of Bononia who was Prior general of the order of the Carmelites in the dayes of Pope Vrban the sixth doth conclude strongly out of their owne received grounds that confession is not necessary for the obtayning of the pardon of our sinne and Panormitan the great Canonist professeth that the opinion of Semeca doth much please him which referreth the originall of Confession to a generall tradition of the Church because saith he there is not anie cleare authority which sheweth that God or Christ did clearely ordayne that Confession should be made unto a Priest Yea all the Canonists following their first Interpreter say that Confession was brought in onely by the law of the Church and not by anie divine precept if we will beleeve Maldonat who addeth notwithstanding that this opinion is eyther alreadie sufficiently declared by the Church to be heresie or that the Church should doe well if it did declare it to be heresie And we finde indeed that in the yeare of our Lord 1479. which was 34. yeares after the death of Panormitan by a speciall commission directed from Pope Sixtus the fourth unto Alfonsus Carillus Archbishop of Toledo one Petrus Oxomensis professor of Divinitie in the Vniversitie of Salamanca was driven to abjure this conclusion which hee had before delivered as agreeable to the common opinion of the Doctors that confession of sinnes in particular vvas grounded upon some statute of the universall Church and not upon divine right and when learned men for all this would not take warning but would needs be medling againe with that which the Popish Clergie could not indure should be touched as Iohannes de Selva among others in the end of his treatise de Iurejurando Erasmus in diverse of his workes and Beatus Rhenanus in his argument upon Tertullians booke de Poenitentiâ the fathers of Trent within 72. yeares after that conspired together to stop all mens mouthes with an anathema that should denie sacramentall confession to be of divine institution or to be necessarie unto salvation And so we are come to an end of that point OF THE PRIESTS POVVER TO FORGIVE SINNES FRom Confession we are now to proceed unto Absolution which it were pitie this man should receive before he made confession of the open wrong he hath here done in charging us to denie that Priests have power to forgive sinnes whereas the verie formall words which our Church requireth to be used in the ordination of a Minister are these Whose sinnes thou doest forgive they are forgiven and vvhose sinnes thou doest retaine they are retained And therefore if this be all the matter the Fathers and we shal agree well enough howsoever this make-bate would faine put friends together by the eares where there is no occasion at all of quarrell For wee acknowledge most willingly that the principall part of the Priests ministerie is exercised in the matter of forgivenesse of sinnes the question only is of the maner how this part of their function is executed by them and of the bounds and limits thereof which the Pope and his Clergie for their owne advantage have inlarged beyond all measure of truth and reason That wee may therefore give unto the Priest the things that are the Priests and to God the things that are Gods not coÌ„municate unto any creature the power that properly belongeth to the Creator who will not give his glory unto another we must in the first place lay this downe for a sure ground that to forgive sinnes properly directly and absolutely is a priviledge onely appertayning unto the most High I saith he of himselfe even I am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine owne sake and will not remember thy sinnes Esai 43.25 Who is a God like unto thee that pardoneth iniquitie saith the Prophet Micah 7.18 which in effect is the same with that of the Scribes Mark 2.7 and Luk. 5.21 Who can forgive sinnes but God alone And therefore when David saith unto God Thou forgavest the iniquitie of my sinne Psalm 32.5 Gregory surnamed the great the first Bishop of Rome of that name thought this to be a sound paraphrase of his words Thou vvho alone sparest who alone forgivest sinnes For who can forgive sinnes but God alone Hee did not imagine that he had committed anie great error in subscribing thus simply unto that sentence of the Scribes and little dreamed that anie petie Doctors afterwards would arise in Rome or Rhemes who would tell us a faire tale that the faithlesse Iewes thought as Hereticks now adayes that to forgive
other matters that there were places neere unto them that used to cast up burning flames which by the inhabitants were called the Potts of Vulcan wherein the soules of the reprobate according to the qualitie of their deserts did suffer diverse punishments the Divels being there deputed for the execution therof whose voyces angers and terrors and somtimes howlings also he said he often heard as lamenting that the soules of the damned were taken out of their hands by the almes and prayers of the faithfull and more at this time by the prayers of the monkes of Cluny who prayed vvithout ceasing for the rest of those that were deceased The abbot Odilo having understood this by him appointed throughout all the monasteries under his subjection that as upon the first day of November the solemnitie of all the Saints is observed so upon the day following the memoriall of all that rested in Christ should be celebrated Which rite passing into many other Churches made the memory of the faithfull deceased to be solemnized For the elect this forme of prayer was wont to be used in the Romane Church O God unto whom alone is knowne the number of the elect that are to be placed in the supernall blisse grant we beseech thee that the book of blessed predestination may retaine the names of all those whom we have undertaken to recommend in our prayer or of all the faithfull that are written therein And to pray that the names of all those that are written in the book of Gods election should still be retayned therein may be somewhat tolerable considering as the Divines of that side have informed us that those things may be prayed for which we know most certainly wilcome to passe But hardly I think shall you finde in any Rituall a form of prayer answerable to this of the monkes of Cluny for the reprobate unlesse it be that whereby S. Francis is said to have obtained that friat Elias should be made ex praescito praedestinatus an elect of a reprobare Yet it seemeth that some were not very well pleased that what was done so seldom by S. Francis the Angel of the Friars that for a reprobate yet living should be so usually practised by the followers of S. Odilo the Archangel of the Monkes for reprobates that were dead therefore in the cōmon editions of Sigeberts Chronicle they have cleane strucke out the word damnatorū instead of reproborū chopt in defunctorū which depravatiō may be detected aswel by the sincere edition of Sigebert published by Aubertus Miraeus out of the Manuscript of Gemblac abbay w ch is thought to be the originall copie of Sigebert himselfe as by the comparing of him with Petrus Damiani in the life of Odilo whence this whole narration was by him borrowed For there also doe we reade that in those flaming places the soules of the reprobate according to the qualitie of their deserts did suffer diverse torments and that the Divels did complaine that by the almes and prayers of Odilo and others the soules of the damned were taken out of their hands By these things we may see what we are to judge of that which our Adversaries presse so much against us out of Epiphanius that he nameth an obscure fellow one Aërius to be the first author of this heresie that prayers and sacrifice profiteth not the departed in Christ. For neyther doth Epiphanius name this to be an heresie neyther doth it appeare that himselfe did hold that praiers and oblations bring such profite to the dead as these men dreame they do He is much deceived who thinketh everie thing that Epiphanius findeth fault withall in heretickes is esteemed by him to be an heresie seeing heresie cannot be but in matters of faith and the course which Epiphanius taketh in that worke is not only to declare in what speciall points of faith hereticks did dissent from the Catholicke doctrine but in what particular observances also they refused to follow the received customes and ordinances of the Church Therefore at the end of the whole worke hee setteth downe a Briefe first of the faith and then of the ordinances and observances of the Church and among the particulars of the latter kinde he rehearseth this For the dead they make commemorations by name performing or when they doe performe their prayers and divine service and dispensation of the mysteries and disputing against Aërius touching the point it selfe hee doth not at all charge him with forsaking the doctrine of the Scriptures or the faith of the Catholick Church concerning the state of those that are departed out of this life but with rejecting the order observed by the Church in her Commemorations of the dead which being an ancient institution brought in upon wonderfull good considerations should not by this humorous hereticke have beene thus condemned The Church saith he doth necessarily performe this having received it by tradition from the Fathers and who may dissolve the ordinance of his mother or the law of his Father and againe Our mother the Church hath ordinances setled in her which are inviolable and may not be broken Seeing then there are ordinances established in the Church and they are well and all things are admirably done this seducer is againe refuted For the further opening hereof it will not be amisse to consider both of the objection of Aërius and of the answer of Epiphanius Thus did Aërius argue against the practise of the Church For what reason doe you commemorate after death the names of those that are departed He that is alive prayeth or maketh dispensation of the mysteries what shall the dead be profited hereby And if the prayer of those here doe altogether profite them that be there then let no body be godly let no man do good but let him procure some friends by what meanes it pleaseth him eyther perswading them by money or intreating friends at his death and let them pray for him that he may suffer nothing there and that those inexpiable sins which he hath cōmitted may not be required at his hands This was Aërius his argumentation which would have beene of force indeed if the whole Church had held as manie did that the judgement after death was suspended untill the generall Resurrection and that in the meane time the sinnes of the dead might be taken away by the suffrages of the living But hee should have considered as Stephanus Gobarus who was as great an heretick as himselfe did that the Doctors were not agreed upon the point some of them maintayning the soule of every one that departed out of this life received very great profite by the prayers and oblations and almes that were performed for him and others on the contrary side that it was not so and that it was a foolish part of him to confound the private opinion of some with the common faith of the universall Church That he reproved this
scholies upon the writer of the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy wisheth us to marke that even before his time that doubt was questioned Among the questions wherein Dulcitius desired to be resolved by S. Augustin we finde this to be one Whether the offering that is made for the dead did avayle their soules any thing and that MANY did say to this that if herein any good were to be done after death how much rather should the soule it selfe obtaine ease for it selfe by it owne confessing of her sinnes there than that for the ease thereof an oblation should be procured by other men The like also is noted by Cyrill or rather Iohn Bishop of Ierusalem that he knew MANY who said thus What profite doth the soule get that goeth out of this world eyther with sinnes or not with sinnes if you make mention of it in prayer and by Anastasius Sinaita or Nicaenus Some doe doubt saying that the dead are not profited by the oblations that are made for them and long after them by Petrus Cluniacensis in his treatise against the followers of Peter Bruse in France That the good deeds of the living may profit the dead both these hereticks doe deny and some Catholicks also do seeme to doubt Nay in the West not the profite onely but the lawfulnesse also of these doings for the dead was called in question as partly may be collected by Boniface archbishop of Mentz his consulting with Pope Gregory about 730. yeares after the birth of our Saviour Whether it were lawfull to offer oblations for the dead which hee should have no reason to doe if no question had beene made thereof among the Germans and is plainly delivered by Hugo Etherianus about 1170. yeares after Christ in these words I know that many are deformed with vaine opinions thinking that the dead are not to be prayed for because that neither Christ nor the Apostles that succeeded him have intimated these things in the Scriptures But they are ignorant that there be many things and those exceeding necessary frequented by the holy Church the tradition whereof is not had in the Scriptures and yet they pertaine neverthelesse to the worship of God and obtaine great strength Whereby it may appeare that this practise wanted not opposition even then when in the Papacie it was advanced unto his greatest height And now is it high time that I should passe from this article unto the next following OF LIMBVS PATRVM And CHRISTS DESCENT INTO HELL HEre doth our Challenger undertake to prove against us not only that there is Limbus Patrum but that our Saviour also descended into Hell to deliver the ancient Fathers of the Old Testament because before his Passion none ever entred into Heaven That there was such a thing as Limbus Patrum I have heard it said but what it is now the Doctors varie yet agree all in this that Limbus it may well be but Limbus Patrum sure it is not Whether it were distinct from that place in which the infants that depart out of this life without baptisme are now beleeved to be received the Divines doe doubt neyther is there any thing to be rashly pronounced of so doubtfull a matter saith Maldonat the Iesuite The Dominican Friars that wrote against the Grecians at Constantinople in the yeare 1252 resolve that into this Limbus the holy Fathers before the comming of Christ did descend but now the children that depart vvithout baptisme are detained there so that in their iudgement that which was the Limbus of Fathers is now become the Limbus of Children The more common opinion is that these be two distinct places and that the one is appointed for unbaptized infants but the other now remayneth voide and so shall remaine that it may beare witnesse aswell of the justice as of the mercie of God If you demand how it came to be thus voyd emptied of the old inhabitants the answer is here given that our Saviour descended into Hell purposely â—o deliver from hence the ancient Fathers of the Old Testament But Hell is one thing I ween saith Tertullian and Abrahams bâ—some where the Fathers of the old Testament rested another neyther is it to be beleeved that the bosome of Abraham being the habitation of a secret kinde of rest was any part of Hell saith S. Augustin To say then that our Saviour descended into Hell to deliver the ancient Fathers of the old Testament out of Limbus Patrum would by this construction prove as strange a tale as if it had beene reported that Caesar made a voyage into Brittaine to set his friends at libertie in Greece Yea but before Christs Passion none ever entred into Heaven saith our Challenger The proposition that Cardinall Bellarmine taketh upon him to prove where he handleth this controversie is that the soules of the godly were not in Heaven before the Asâ—ension of Christ. Our Iesuite it seemeth considered here with himselfe that Christ had promised unto the penitent theefe upon the crosse that not before his ascension only but also before his resurrection even that day he should be with him in Paradise that is to say in the kingdome of heaven as the Cardinaâ—l himselfe doth prove both by the authoritie of S. Paul making Paradise and the third heaven to be the selfe same thing and by the testimony of the ancient expositors of the place This belike stuck somewhat in our Iesuites stomack who being loath to interpret this of his Limbus Patrum as others of that side had done and to maintaine that Paradise in stead of the third Heaven should signifie the third or the fourth Hell thought it best to shift the matter handsomely away by taking upon him to defend that not before Christs ascension least that of the Thiefe should crosse him but before his passion none ever entred into Heaven But if none before our Saviours Passion did ever enter into Heaven whither shall we say that Elias did enter The Scripture assureth us that he went up into heaven 2. Kings 2.11 of this Mattathias put his sonnes in mind upon his death-bedd that Elias being zealous and fervent for the law was taken up into heaven Elias and Moses both before the passion of Christ are described to be in glory Lazarus is carried by the Angells into a place of comfort and not of imprisonment in a word all the Fathers accounted themselves to be strangers and pilgrims in this earth seeking for a better countrey that is an heavenly as well as we doe and therefore having ended their pilgrimage they arrived at the country they sought for as well as wee They beleeved to be saved through the grace of our Lord Iesus Christ as well as we they lived by that faith as well as we they dyed in Christ as well as we they received remission of sinnes imputation of
our Lord as in the end of this booke saith he he doth testifie meaning the apocryphall Appendix which is annexed to the end of the Greeke edition of Iob wherein we reade thus It is written that he should rise againe with those whom the Lord was to raise which although it be accounted to have proceeded from the Septuagint yet the thing it selfe sheweth that it was added by some that lived after the comming of our Saviour Christ. Touching Adam S. Augustine affirmeth that the whole Church almost did consent that Christ loosed him in Hell which we are to beleeve saith he that shee did not vainely beleeve whencesoever this tradition came although no expresse authoritie of the Canonicall Scriptures be produced for it The onely place which he could thinke off that seemed to look this way was that in the beginning of the tenth Chapter of the booke of Wisedome Shee kept him who was the first formed father of the world when hee was created alone and brought him out of his sinne which would be much more pertinent to the purpose if that were added which presently followeth in the Latin text I meane in the old edition for the new corrected ones have left it out Et eduxit illum de limo terrae and brought him out of the claye of the earth which being placed after the bringing of him out of his sinne may seeme to have reference unto some deliverance like that of Davids Psalm 40 2. He brought me up out of the horrible pit out of the mirye claye rather then unto his first creation out of the dust of the earth So limus terrae may here answere well unto the Arabians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 al-tharai which properly signifying moyst earth or slime or claye is by the Arabick interpreter of Moses used to expresse the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we translate Hell or Grave And as this place in the booke of Wisedome may be thus applied unto the raysing of Adams body out of the earâ—h whâ—rein hee lay buried so may that other tradition also which was so currant in the Church be referred unto the selfe same thing even to the bringing of Adam out of the Hell of the Grave The verie Liturgies of the Church doe lead us unto this interpretation of the tradition of the Church beside the testimony of the Fathers which discover unto us the first ground and foundation of this tradition In the Liturgie of the Church of Alexandria ascribed to S. Marke our Saviour Christ is thus called upon O most great King and coëternall to the Father who by thy might didst spoyle Hell and tread downe death and binde the strong one and raise Adam out of the grave by thy divine power and the bright splendour of thine unspeakeable Godhead In the Liturgie of the Church of Constantinople translated into Latin by Leo Thusâ—us the like speech is used of him He did voluntarily undergoe the Crosse for us by which he raysed up the first formed man and saved our soules from death And in the Octoëchon Anastasimon and Pentecostarion of the Grecians at this day such sayings as these are very usuall Thou didst undergoe buriall and rise in glory and rayse up Adam together with thee by thy almighty hand Rising out of thy tombe thou didst rayse up the dead and break the poâ—er of death and rayse up Adam Having slept in the flesh as a mortall man ô King and Lord the third day thou didst arise againe raysing Adam from corruption and abolishing death Iesus the deliverer who raysed up Adam of his compassion c. Therefore doth Theodorus Prodromus begin his Tetrastich upon our Saviors Resurrection with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rise up thou first formed old man rise up from thy grave S. Ambrose pointeth to the ground of the tradition when he intimateth that Christ suffered in Golgotha where Adams sepulchre was that by his Crosse he might rayse him that was dead that where in Adam the death of all men lay therein Christ might be the resurrection of all Which he receaved as he did many other things besides from Origen who writeth thus of the matter There came unto me some such tradition as this that the body of Adam the first man mas buried there where Christ was crucified that as in Adam all doe die so in Christ all might be made alive that in the place which is called the place of Calvarie that is the place of the head the head of mankinde might finde resurrection with all the rest of the people by the resurrection of our Lord and Saviour who suffered there and rose againe For it was unfit that when many which were borne of him did receive forgivenesse of their sinnes and obtayne the benefit of Resurrection he who was the father of all men should not much more obtaine the like grace Athanasius or who ever else was author of the Discourse upon the Passion of our Lord which beareth his name referreth this tradition of Adams buriall place unto the report of the Doctors of the Hebrewes from whom belike hee thought that Origen had received it and addeth withall that it was very fit that where it was said to Adam Earth thou art and to earth thou shalt returne our Saviour finding him there should say unto him again Arise thou that sleepest and stand up from the dead and Christ shall give thee light Epiphanius goeth a little furthet and findeth out a mysterie in the water and bloud that fell from the Crosse upon the relicks of our first father lying buried under it applying thereunto both that in the Gospell of the arising of many of the Saints Matth. 27.52 and that other place in S. Paule Arise thou that sleepest c. Ephes. 5.14 which strange speculation with what great applause it was received by the multitude at the first delivery of it and for how little reason he that list may reade in the fourth book of S. Hieroms coÌ„mentaries upon the 27. of S. Matthew in his third upon the fifth to the Ephesians for upon this first point of Christs descent into the Hell of the grave and the bringing of Adam and his children with him from thence we have dwelt too long already In the second place therefore we are now to consider that as Hádes and Inferi which we call Hell are applied by rhe Interpreters of the holy Scripture to denote the place of bodies separated from their soules so with forraine authors in whose language as being that wherewith the common people was acquainted the Church also did use to speake the same tearmes do signifie ordinarily the common lodge of soules separated from their bodies whether the particular place assigned unto each of them be conceived to be an habitation of blisse or of miserie For as when the Grave is said to be the common receptacle of dead bodies it is not meant thereby that all dead