lauer of regeneration and word of Sanctification all the sinnes in men regenerate are healed yea euen those which by humane ignorance afterward are committed Non vt baptisma quoties peccatur toties repetatur sed quia ipso quod semel datur fit vt non solum anteà verùm etiam posteà quorumlibet peccatorum venia fidelibus impetretur Not that Baptisme so oft as a man sinneth is to bee repeated but by vertue of that which is once giuen it commeth to passe that the faithfull haue remission of their sinnes not onely before but also after Ergo Baptisme hath it force not onely for the present but it reacheth vnto the time following THE THIRD PART OF THE LIBERTIE and priuiledges obtained by Baptisme The Papists 1. THey haue defined that a man by Baptisme is not onely debitor fidei sed etiam vniuersae legis Christi implendae error 109 not onely a debter of the faith but is made a debter to performe the whole law of Christ Concil Trident. sess 8. can 7. that is Baptisme is not onely a signe of free iustification by faith neither doth he which is baptized professe himselfe onely by faith to bee iustified but partly also by his workes and the keeping of the commandements of Christ. The Protestants Ans. IN Baptisme wee make profession of our obedience to die vnto sinne and rise vp to newnes of life Rom. 6.2 yet not thereby to bee iustified but in being baptized wee shew our faith and hope onely to looke for remission of sinnes and saluation of our soules by the death of Christ. Argum. 1. Circumcision in place whereof Baptisme is giuen to vs is called by the Apostle a seale of the righteousnes of faith Rom. 4 11. not of the righteousnes of workes much more then is Baptisme which is a Sacrament of the Gospell a pledge vnto vs of the iustice of faith Argum. 2. By Baptisme we are freed from the curse of the lawe for it is a Sacrament of the death of Christ and of all the benefites thereof and Christ by his death hath borne for vs the curse of the lawe Galath 3.13 But if by Baptisme we binde our selues to the obseruance of the lawe to bee iustified and finde life thereby we must needes fall into the curse because we are not able to keepe the commandements Wherefore seeing Baptisme deliuereth vs from the curse it also exempteth vs from the workes of the lawe The Papists error 110 2. ALthough Christians are bound by solemne vow in Baptisme to walke in obedience before God and to keepe his commandements yet are they not therefore freed and exempted from the obseruance of the lawes and ordinances of men the which they are bound in conscience to keepe and vnder paine of damnation Bellarm. cap. 16. The Protestants BAptisme onely bindeth vs to keepe the commandements of God and so far forth also to obey men as they commaund things lawfull but wee must not be brought in bondage to mens traditions and obseruations seeing we are the Lords free men and by Baptisme consecrate to his seruice Argum. Math. 28.19 Goe and teach baptizing them c. and teaching them to obserue all that I haue commanded you Ergo Baptisme bindeth vs onely to the obseruation of Gods precepts 1. Corinth 7.23 Yee are bought with a price be not the seruants of men Baptisme is a signe of the death of Christ the price of our redemption Ergo wee are freed from all meere humane seruice in receiuing of Baptisme For this cause is it called the Baptisme of Christ Augustine saith Paulus dixisse legitur euangelium meum baptismum autem Christi nemo Apostolorum ita vnquam ministrauit vt auderet dicere suum Paul is read to haue said My Gospell but neuer any of the Apostles durst call the Baptisme of Christ their Baptisme Ergo seeing it is the Baptisme of Christ and we are onely baptized in his name not in our owne name or the name of men wee must onely hope to bee saued by faith in him and become his seruants wholly THE SEVENTH QVESTION OF THE difference betweene the Baptisme of our Sauiour Christ and the Baptisme of Iohn The Papists THe Baptisme of John they say was of another kinde then Christs Baptisme was neither was it sufficient without Christs Baptisme nor had the error 111 like force or efficacie as his Baptisme had and therefore such as had been baptized of Iohn were afterward admitted to Christs Baptisme Concil Trident. sess 8. canon 1. Bellarm. lib. 1. de baptis cap. 20.21 Argum. 1. Matth. 3.11 Iohn himselfe saith I baptize you with water but hee shall baptize you with the holy Ghost Ergo Iohns Baptisme and Christes not all one for Iohns Baptisme gaue not the holy Ghost Bellarm. ibid. Ans. Iohn speaketh not of diuerse Baptismes but of diuerse operations and ministeries in one and the same Baptisme for Iohn as all other ministers doe did but giue water and Christ working together with them giueth the holy Ghost But it will be answered that Iohn saith not he dooth baptize but hee shall baptize Ergo Christ did not baptize together with Iohn by his spirite Ans. The same Iohn in another place speaketh of Christ in the present tense Iohn 1.33 This is hee which baptizeth with the holy Ghost Ergo Christ did both then baptize with his spirite and afterwards also more manifestly when the giftes of the spirite began to bee shed forth more plentifully vpon men Argum. 2. Saint Paul baptized twelue men at Ephesus with Christs Baptisme that had receiued Iohns before Act. 19.4.5 Ergo Iohns Baptisme was not the same that Christs was Bellarm. Ans. There can be no such thing gathered out of that place for those words in the fifth verse When they heard this they were baptized in the name of the Lord Iesus are part of the narration which Paul maketh of Iohns manner of Baptisme so that the sense is this they that heard Iohns doctrine were baptized in the name of the Lord Iesus It is not so to be read as though they were baptized againe of Paul but he laieth onely his hands vpon them that had before receiued the Baptisme of Iohn The Protestants THat Iohns Baptisme was not diuerse from Christs Baptisme but was all one with it in propertie and effect and that they which were baptized by Iohn were baptized into the name of Christ and therefore needed not againe to bee baptized thus it is made manifest out of Scripture Argum. 1. Iohns Baptisme differed not in the matter of the Sacrament for he baptized with water as Christs Apostles did There was also the same forme of both the word of God for Iohn also taught the people to beleeue in Iesus Christ that was to come Act. 19.4 There was also the same scope and ende of Iohns Baptisme For hee preached the Baptisme of repentance for remission of sinnes Mark 1.4 Ergo it was the same with the Baptisme of Christ. Argum. 2. If
the sacrament of the Lords bodie Baptisme is equiualent to the word of God by our aduersaries own confession Ergo also it is of equall value and dignitie with the other sacrament THE TWELFTH GENERALL CONTROVERSY OF THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISME THis controuersie standeth vpon diuers questions 1. Of the name and definition of Baptisme Secondly of the partes of Baptisme Thirdly of the necessitie of Baptisme Fourthly of the Minister of Baptisme Fiftly of the parties which are to be baptized Sixtly of the effects of Baptisme Seuenthly of the difference of Christs Baptisme and Iohns Eightly of the ceremonies of Baptisme THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE NAME and definition of Baptisme COncerning the name there is no question betweene vs for the name of Baptisme hath the originall and beginning from the scripture Saint Paul vseth this word Coloss. 2.12 We are buryed with him through Baptisme And againe Heb. 6.2 All the question is about the definition of Baptisme The Papists error 98 THey define Baptisme to bee a sacrament of regeneration by water in the worde that is not which signifieth and sealeth vnto vs our regeneration and assureth vs of remission of sinnes but actually iustifieth and regenerateth vs Bellarm. lib. 1. de Baptism cap. 1. The Protestants WE rather according to the scriptures define baptisme to be a signe or seale of our regeneration and new birth whereby wee are assured that as verily by fayth in the blood of Christ we are cleansed from our sinnes as our bodies are washed with water in the name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost So that Baptisme doth not actually bestow remission of sinnes by the work wrought but is a pledge and seale of the righteousnesse of fayth as Saint Paul sayth of Circumcision Rom. 4.11 for it is not the washing of the flesh by water but the establishing of the heart with fayth and grace that saueth vs 1. Pet. 3.21 See this poynt handled more at large Controuers 11. next before quest 2. part 1. Augustine saith Per fidem renascimur in baptismate by fayth wee are borne agayne in Baptisme De tempor serm 53. It is then the proper act of fayth to regenerate vs not of Baptisme the vse and end whereof is to strengthen and increase our fayth THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE PARTES which are the matter and forme of Baptisme AS touching the matter that is the externall element vsed in Baptisme there is no question betweene vs but that it ought to bee plaine and common water Act. 10.47 Saint Peter saith Can any man forbid water that these should not bee baptized Wherefore wee condemne the foolish and vngodly practises and inuentions of heretikes that either exclude water altogether as the Manichees with others or doe vse any other element as the Iacobites that in stead of water burned them that were to be baptized with a whot yron or as the Aethiopians which are called Abissines that vsed fire in stead of water misconstruing the words of the Gospell Matth. 2.11 That Christ should baptize with the holy Ghost and with fire which is not literally to bee vnderstoode but thereby is signified the internall and forceable working of the spirite which kindleth zeale and loue in our hearts as fire Concerning the forme of Baptisme we all agree that no other is to be vsed then that prescribed by our Sauiour Christ to baptize in the name of the Father the Sonne and holy Ghost that it is neither lawfull to change this forme in sense as many heretikes haue done nor yet in words as to leaue out any of the three persons in Trinitie and inclusiuely to vnderstand them by naming of one for whereas some alleadge that place Act. 2.38 Bee yee baptized in the name of Iesus Christ for remission of sinnes to proue that it is lawfull onely in the name of Christ to baptize wee are to vnderstand that the forme of Baptisme is not in that place expresly set downe but the scope onely and end of Baptisme which is to assure vs of remission of sinnes in the name of Christ as Beza very well noteth vpon that place The point of difference betweene vs concerning the forme of Baptisme is this The Papists THey are bold to affirme that this forme of Baptisme to baptize in the name error 99 of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost is not fully concluded out of Scripture but deliuered by tradition for say they the commandement of Christ to baptize in the name of the Trinitie Matth. 28. may bee vnderstoode thus to baptize them into the faith of the Trinitie or by the authoritie of the Trinitie And it were sufficient by those words to doe and performe it in act without saying the wordes were it not that wee haue otherwise learned by tradition that this very forme of wordes is to bee kept Bellarmine de baptism lib. 1. cap. 3. The Protestants WE neede no tradition for this matter the very forme which is to bee vsed in Baptisme is plainely proued out of the Scriptures for that commandement of Christ Goe and baptize c. doth necessarily imply a forme of speech to be vsed Wee grant that in the Scriptures this word name is taken for power vertue authoritie as Act. 3.6 In the name of Iesus arise and walke So also as there is a Baptisme with water there may be a baptizing with fire Matth. 3.11 Wherefore if part of the commandement bee to bee taken properlie and literally as this Goe and baptize why not the rest also In the name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost If then the whole commaundement bee properly and plainely vnderstoode how can they baptize in the name of the Trinitie vnlesse the Trinitie bee spoken and named Secondly it appeareth also out of other places of Scripture that this forme was vsed in the Apostles time As Act. 10.47 Can any man forbid water why these should not be baptized which haue receiued the holy Ghost as well as wee As if Saint Peter should haue reasoned thus these haue receiued the giftes of the holy Ghost Ergo they may be also baptized in the name of the holy Ghost Likewise Act. 19.2 When the brethren at Ephesus had answered Paul that they had not heard whether there were a holy Ghost he saith vnto them Vnto what then were you baptized By this interrogatorie it appeareth it was their manner to baptize in the name of the holy Ghost and so consequently of the whole Trinitie Wee haue no cause then to flie vnto tradition this matter being so plainely decided by the Scripture Augustin tract in Iohann 80. Vpon those wordes of our Sauiour Iohn 15.3 You are cleane thorough the word which I haue spoken vnto you Detrahe verbum quid est aqua nisi aqua Accedit verbum ad elementum fit sacramentum Take away the word and what remaineth in Baptisme but bare water let the word be ioyned to the element and it maketh a Sacrament The forme then of Baptisme is the word which Christ
spake and where else speaketh Christ but in the scriptures Ergo the forme of Baptisme is the word of Christ prescribed and commanded in the scriptures Away therefore with your vncertaine and deceitfull traditions Our Baptisme is builded vpon a surer foundation namely the word of God THE THIRD QVESTION OF THE necessitie of Baptisme The Papists THey affirme that Baptisme is simply necessarie to saluation by Gods appointment error 100 so that all which die vnbaptized vnlesse the want of Baptisme be recompensed either by Martyrdome or penance must needes perish and be depriued of eternall life Concil Trident. sess 7. can 7. Bellarm. lib. 1. de baptism cap. 4. Argum. Iohn 3.5 Our sauiour Christ saith Vnlesse a man bee borne of water and the spirite he cannot enter into the Kingdome of GOD Ergo it is necessarie to saluation to bee baptized Bellarm. ibid. Rhemist in hunc locum Ans. First it is not necessarie by water here to vnderstand materiall water but the purifying grace of Christ which is called the water of life Iohn 4.11 Water then is here added as an Epithete of the spirite because it clenseth and purgeth as water as Iohn 7.38 He that beleeueth out of his bellie shall flowe riuers of waters of life Quid aqua sit saith Augustine euangelium interroga Inquire of the Gospell what this water is Then it followeth vers 39. This spake hee of the spirite which they that beleeued in him should receiue By water then it is no rare thing to vnderstand the spirite Secondly Why may not water bee here figuratiuely taken to expresse the working of the spirite as fire is added to the spirite Matth. 3.11 He shall baptize with the holy Ghost and with fire What greater necessitie is there in this place to vnderstand water literally then fire in the other Thirdly as you expound these wordes of Baptisme so yee doe applie another place Iohn 6.53 to the other Sacrament Vnlesse you doe eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood you shall not haue life in you If this bee spoken of the Sacramentall eating and drinking of Christ as the Rhemists take it then belike there is as great necessitie of the Eucharist as of Baptisme and so indeede Augustine sometime thought that the one was as necessarie to saluation as the other Sine Christi carne sanguine nec paruuli vitam habere possunt in semetipsis Without the flesh and blood of Christ neither can infants haue life in themselues And therefore it was the custome of those times to giue of the Sacrament to children Paruulis adhuc infirmis stillantur quaedam de sacramentis some part of the Sacrament is instilled and powred into the mouthes of young and tender children But our aduersaries in no wise will admit that the Eucharist is as necessarie as Baptisme wherefore they doe thus comment vpon our Sauiours wordes that they also doe eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his blood which ioyne in heart and desire to be partakers of the Sacrament and so mystically and spiritually doe receiue it Rhemist Iohn 6. sect 8. And why I pray you may there not be as well a mysticall and spirituall receiuing of Baptisme without the Sacrament as of the Eucharist or Lords Supper seeing this place Iohn 6.53 doth as necessarily enforce the receiuing of this Sacrament as that place Iohn 3.5 doth lay a necessitie of Baptisme The Protestants WEe acknowledge no greater necessitie in Baptisme then in the other Sacrament both which wee grant to be necessarie as helpes and proppes and profitable meanes to increase our faith but not so simplie necessarie as that without them there being no neglect or contempt had of them it were impossible to be saued Argum. 1. The children of the faithfull are holy already euen before they are baptized for they are within the couenant and to them also belongeth the promise The Lord saith I will be thy God and the God of thy seede Genes 17.7 And Saint Paul saith that the children of the faithfull are holy 1. Corinth 7.14 If the Lord then be the God also of children if they be holy being borne of the righteous seede how can they possibly perish although they die vnbaptized Argum. 2. Circumcision was as necessarie to the Israelites as Baptisme is to vs but their children which died before the eight day when they were to bee circumcised perished not for Dauid doubteth not to say of his child that died the seuenth day I shall goe to him hee cannot returne to me 1. Sam 12.18.23 He pronounceth that the child was saued Ergo neither children dying without Baptisme now are condemned Argum. 3. The holy Ghost may be giuen without Baptisme so it bee not contemned and neglected when it may be had therefore life eternall may be had without Baptisme for the holy Ghost is able without the sacrament to regenerate vs and bring vs to eternall life The first is proued Act. 10.47 Who can forbid water that these should not be baptized which haue receiued the holy Ghost as well as wee They had the holy Ghost before and without Baptisme as Augustine saith Adhuc loquente Petro non dico nondum imponente manum sed nondum baptizante venit spiritus sanctus While Peter yet spake before he laid on his hand or Baptized them the holy Ghost came Ergo Baptisme not necessarie Argum. 4. You your selues make two exceptions of Martyres and them that doe penance which may be saued without Baptisme Ergo Baptisme is not simplie necessarie And if our Sauiour speake of Baptisme Iohn 3.5 as yee say he doth there is no priuiledge for any no not for Martyres for all must bee borne of water and the spirite that is say you baptized Neither are your two exceptions generall enough for the theefe vpon the crosse was saued and yet neither died a Martyr for he himselfe confesseth that he was righteously punished Luk. 23.41 neither did he any such penance or made any such satisfaction as you require AN APPENDIX WHETHER THE want of Baptisme may bee by any other meanes supplied The Papists OVr aduersaries make three kindes of Baptisme Baptismum fluminis baptismum sanguinis baptismum flaminis error 101 the Baptisme of water the Baptisme of blood which is Martyrdome and the Baptisme of the spirite which is contrition and penance by these two the first say they may be supplied They affirme that Martyrdome and penance or contrition doe by the very act or worke wrought remit sinnes and iustifie the workers and not in respect of the faith onely which is in Martyrs or penitent persons Bellar. cap. 6. lib. 1. de baptism Argum. The Innocents which were slaine by Herod were saued onely by their Martyrdome they had neither faith nor workes So the theefe vpon the Crosse was not onely iustified by his faith but by the act and worke of contrition Ans. First it is not necessarie to hold all those children to be
the Baptisme instituted by Christ were another Baptisme then Iohns was and yet hee himselfe was baptized of Iohn then it would followe that wee are baptized now with another Baptisme then Christ himselfe was for hee receiued Iohns Baptisme but this were very absurd to say that there is not the same Baptisme of the head and the members of Christ and his Church Ergo Iohns Baptisme all one with Christs Bellarmine denieth that the proper end and scope of Iohns Baptisme was for remission of sinnes yet Augustine granteth it who notwithstanding being carried away with the error of that time doth else where put some difference betweene the Baptisme of Iohn and Christ Si quis contendat in baptismo Iohannis dimissa esse peccata non ago pugnanter If any man will contend that remission of sinnes also was giuen in Iohns Baptisme I will not bee against it There being then the same proper end and scope of both these Baptismes how can they choose but be all one THE EIGHT QVESTION OF the ceremonies and rites of Baptisme The Papists error 112 THey haue brought into the Sacrament of Baptisme a multitude of superstitious ceremonies whereby they haue greatly polluted the holy Sacrament of Baptisme mixing therewith their owne inuentions First before Baptisme they haue deuised these toyes to bee vsed First they doe exorcise coniure and exufflate the euill spirite from the partie to bee baptized Secondly they touch the eares and nostrels with spittle that his eares may bee opened to heare the worde and his nostrels to discerne betweene the smell of good and euil Thirdly the Priest signeth his eyes eares mouth breast forehead nostrels with the signe of the crosse that all his sences thereby may be defended 4. Then halowed salt is put into his mouth that he may be seasoned with wisdome and be kept from putrifiyng in sinne 5. The partie is anoynted then with oyle in his breast that he may be safe from euill suggestions between the shoulders which signifieth the receiuing of spiritual strength Secondly these ceremonies doe accompany Baptisme it selfe 1. The Font and water therein is consecrated and halowed in the name of the Father the Sonne and holy Ghost 2. Hee is thrise dipped in the water to signifie the being of Christ 3. dayes in the graue Thirdly after Baptisme they haue this vse 1. He is anoynted with holie Chrisme in the top of the head thereby is become a Christian. 2. A white garment is put vpon him to betoken his regeneration 3. A vaile is put vpon his head in token that he is now crowned with a royal Diademe 4. A burning taper is put into his hand to fulfil that saying in the Gospel Let your light so shine before men c. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Baptism 25.26.27 Catechism Rom. p. 310. Gabr. Biel. lib. 4. distinct 6. qu. 3. The Protestants AGainst these Popish ceremonies which they vse in baptisme we doe reason thus 1 It is contrary to the rule of the Gospell that there should bee such types shadowes significations brought into the seruice of God as they make in Baptisme for seeing we haue the body which is Christ all such shadowes ought to be abolished Coloss. 2.17 2 In one sacrament they haue forged and found out many as their chrisme oyle salte spittle which they make not onely seales of holy things but giuers and conferrers of grace which is more then any sacrament can haue and it is contrary to the scripture for the spirit of GOD is as the winde that bloweth where it listeth Iohn 3. It is not tyed to creatures elements externall signes as they include the spirite as it were in these outward things which haue power as they affirme to giue wisedome strength power against the diuell and such like But Saynt Paul sayth that the weapons of our warfare are not carnall 2. Corinthian 10.4 The meanes whereby Christans both obtayne spirituall graces and shend them from euill are spirituall For if in Christ Circumcision auayle not any thing which was notwithstanding instituted of God but fayth is all in all Galath 5.6 Much more vaine and vnauaileable are the deuises and inuentions of men 3 This beggerly company of ceremonies doth also deface and impugne the sincere and pure institution of Christ None of all those ceremonies were vsed when Christ himselfe was baptized Math. 3. which notwithstanding had beene most fitte considering the worthynes of his person that was baptized Neither did Christ giue any such thing in charge to his Apostles but biddeth them onely preach and baptize in the name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost Math. 28.19 nor yet were any such ceremonies in vse in the Apostles time Saynt Peter sayth Act. 10.47 Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized He calleth not for oyle salt spittle or any such thing but onely for water Augustine vtterly misliketh this combersome rabble of needlesse ceremonies Ipsam religionem quam Deus paucissimis sacramentis liberam esse voluit onerib premunt vt tolerabilior sit conditio Iudaeorum qui etiamsi tempus libertatis non agnouerint legalibus tamen sarcinis non humanis praesumptionibus subijciuntur They doe cumber religion with their burdensome inuentions which Christ made free with a very few sacraments so that the Iewes case was more tolerable who though they knew not the libertie of the Gospell yet were subiect to the legall ceremonies not to the inuentions of men And is it not euen thus I pray you in the Popish Church for neuer was Iewish circumcisiō stuffed with the third part of ceremonies which their Baptisme is defiled withall THE THIRTEENTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE OF THE SACRAMENT OF THE LORDS SVPPER OR EVCHARIST THis Controuersie hath two parts First of the sacrament it self Secondly of the sacrifice which they say is offered vp in the sacrament which they call the sacrifice of the Masse THE FIRST PART OF THE SAcrament of the Eucharist THis part of the controuersie standeth vpon diuers questions First whether the body of Christ be really and substantially in the sacrament Secondly whether the elements of bread and wine be changed conuerted and transubstantiate into the very body and flesh of Christ. Thirdly whether the Eucharist remayne a sacrament after the vse and celebration Fourthly of the outward elements in this sacrament Fiftly of the words of consecration Sixtly of the proper effect of the Lords supper Seuenthly of the maner of celebrating it Eightly whether it ought to be ministred in one kinde Ninthly whether it is to be adored THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING the reall presence of Christ in the sacrament The Papists IN the sacrament of the Eucharist vnder the formes of bread and wine by error 113 the efficacie of the word of Christ spoken by the Priest is really verily and substantially present the naturall body and blood of Christ which was conceiued of the virgin Marie the same bodie that is now in heauen Rhemist Mat. 26. sect 4.
which is vsed in the Sacrament ought to be vnleauened because it is most agreeable to Christs institution who made the sacrament of vnleauened error 117 bread for he instituted his last Supper after he had eaten the Passeouer which was to be eaten with sweet and vnleauened bread according to the Lawa neither was there any leauen to be found in Israel for seuen daies together and not onely Christ but all the Iewes at that time did keepe the Passeouer and the next day after in the which Christ suffered was the first solemne festiuall day of the seuen being the fifteenth day of the moneth as it was commanded Leuiticus 23.5 Rhemist 1. Corinth 11. sect 10. Bellarm. lib. 4. de Eucharist cap. 7. The Protestants 1. WE deny not but that Christ vsed vnleauened bread at the institution of his last Supper hauing immediately before eaten the Paschall Lambe which we doubt not but he kept according to the Lawe with sweete bread yet in the time they are greatly deceiued affirming that all the Iewes eate the Passeouer like wise ouer eeuen and crucified Christ on the morrow which should haue beene and was vnto them as they say a chiefe festiuall day The truth is that Christ eate the Passeouer the 14 day at eeuen as it is appointed in the Law but the Iewes had a contrary tradition they would in no wise keepe two festiuall daies together and therefore because the sixteenth daie was their Sabboth they would not haue the feast of vnleauened bread vpon the fifteenth day though it were so appointed by the law to auoide the concurrence of two holy daies together but deferred it till the next day which was their Sabboth and eate the Passeouer the eeue before which was the 15. day at night whereas Christ reforming that abuse kept the Passeouer the eeue before according to the Law that is the 14. at night It appeareth then that the next day following which we call Friday wherein Christ was put to death was not kept of the Iewes as a holy day First the text saith they would not put Christ to death vpon the feast day fearing the tumult of the people Mark 14.2 Secondly if they had kept it holy as the Law commaunded they should haue done no seruile labour therein that is no work of the body Leuitic 23.7 But what could be a more seruile worke then to crucifie Christ to carry the Crosse and pitch it in the ground and such like which the Iewes would not haue done vpon that day which they were as straightly to keep as the Sabboth It is also called the preparation of the Sabboth Mark 15.43 Wherein they were wont to prepare against the Sabboth what was needfull but such workes of preparation could not haue bene done in that great festiual day Augustine also saith that the day of Christs suffering was not Pascha sed praeparatio Paschae It was not the Pasch but the preparation to it it is not therefore true that it was kept holy of the Iewes the day of Christs passion neither that they did eate the paschall Lambe the same eeue that Christ did but the night following If they shall obiect that place Mark 14.12 where the Euangelist saith It was the first day of vnleauened bread when Christ eat his passeouer and therefore all the Iewes began then to eate sweet bread We answere that the Euangelist hath relation vnto the right time of keeping the Passeouer as it was prescribed by the Law and obserued by Christ not to the corrupt custome of the Iewes Wherfore we graunt that Christ might eate vnleauened bread but not in such manner and order as they say Secondly it was not of the substance of the institution to eate vnleauened bread no more then to eat it at night and to receiue it sitting we are not more bound to the one then to the other Againe Christ vsed vnleauened bread because it was the vsuall bread at that time so we do vse that which is the vsuall bread in our time And S. Paul speaketh of such bread as was vsuall among the Gentiles when he saith The bread which we break 1. Cor. 10.17 Ergo ordinary bread and leauened to be vsed not vnleauened The Papists 2. COncerning the other element of wine which is vsed in the sacrament error 118 they say it is to be mixed with water and they impudently condemne all those Churches that doe not mixe water with wine in the Sacrament Argum. Water gushed out together with blood out of the side of Christ. Ergo wine and water is to be vsed together in the Eucharist Rhemist 1. Cor. 11. sect 10. Bellarm. lib. 4. de Eucharist cap. 10. The Protestants 1. WE deny not but that of ancient time in hot Countries especially where their wine was strong they vsed to mixe water with wine in their common drink and thereupon they so vsed it in the sacrament but it was neuer generally the practise of the East Countries so to do for the Armenians and Iberians vsed not of ancient time to put water in the Cup in the ministration Fulk nnot 1. Corinth 1â— sect 10. Secondly Be it that this mixture of wine were conuenient to be vsed you cannot make such a matter of necessitie of it as to charge them with heresie and denounce damnation against them that keepe not that custome especially seeing your Canonists and schoolemen do graunt that it is de honestate tantâ—m of decency onely not of necessitie And yet we are faine to drinke mingled wine many times against our willes for the Minister need put in no water it is mixed to his hands many times The Vintners craft standeth very well with popish profession Thirdly we holde it rather to be a superstitious custome and contrarie to Christs institution for he in his last supper gaue wine not water to be drunk for he calleth it the fruit of the Vine which is wine and not water Fourthly the water and bloud which issued out of Christs side signifie no such thing but rather as S. Iohn expoundeth them by water is betokened our washing from our sinnes whereof Baptisme is a pledge by blood the full satisfaction that Christ hath made for our sinnes whereof the other sacrament is a â—eale 1. Iohn 5.6 This is that Iesus Christ that came by water and blood not by water onely but by water and blood By the which words the Apostles meaning is not that by the water and blood which were shed vpon the crosse we should vnderstand the Sacraments of the Church but those spirituall graces whereof the Sacraments are liuely signes namely the satisfaction and ransome of our sinnes by Christs blood and our ablution and washing from the same Augustine picketh out no such fancie out of this mysterie as you doe for the mixture of wine and water but he doth more fitly apply it to the sacraments of the church E Christi latere dormientis in cruce promanarunt sacramenta ecclesiae in Psal.
accomplished as of the resurrection of Christ and the Aduent or comming downe of the holy spirite but also to betoken vnto vs things to come as our rest and glory in the kingdome of God Bellarm. de cultu sanctor li. 3. ca. 11. The Protestants 1. WE graunt that the Sabboth may be so applied both to call to remembraunce things already as vpon that day done as the resurrection of Christ and the descending of the holy Ghost Some think also that Christ vpon that day was baptized vpon that day turned water into wine fed fiue thousand with a few loaues came vnto his Apostles after his resurrection the dores being shut and that as vpon this daye he shall appeare to iudgement but vpon what ground I know not Certaine it is that vpon this daye Christ rose againe and that the holy Ghost came downe then vpon his Apostles We denye not but that the keeping of the Lords day holy may fitly bring vnto our remembrance these things yea and that it may be a type and symbole vnto vs in some sort both of things spirituall as to betoken our ceasing and resting from the workes of sinne Hebr. 4.10 and 1. Pet. 4.1 as also of things to come as the kingdome of heauen is called a Sabboth Isai. 66.23 But we dare not neither will affirme that the Sabboth was ordained constituted for any such end for the commandement of the Sabboth now to vs is onely moral not typical or ceremonial as the Iewish Sabboth was but looke wherein the Sabboth was moral to the Iewes so it is kept still As in these two poynts it was morall to them first to be a signe betweene them and the Lord and to distinguish them from other people Exod. 31.17 And so also the right keeping of the Lords day is a notable outward marke of difference betweene the Church of God all others Secondly that vpon the Sabboth they should resort together and heare the lawe read and preached Act. 15.21 And for this cause namely the exercise of religion are Christians chiefly bound to the Sabboth It may I say fitly be drawne to resemble heauenly and spirituall things but that is not any end of the institution The Iewes had two kind of types typos factos and typos destinatos types made and applied and types appoynted and ordained of God to shadowe forth some notable thing as the Paschall Lambe was typus destinatus of our Sauiour Christ as they were not to breake a bone of the Lambe so was it accordingly performed in Christ. They had also many types beside that were not destined to signifie any certaine thing of such S. Paul speaketh 1. Corinth 10 6 11. So wee say of the Sabboth that it is not typus destinatus it is not instituted for any shadowe or signification though it may be fitly applied to such an vse The Papists 6. THey say that we are not bound vpon the Sabboth by any peculiar commandement to abstaine from sinne more then vpon any other day neither error 65 that the internall act of religion appertaineth to the keeping of the Sabboth but the external that any sinne committed vpon the Sabboth is not therby the greater neither that we are more bound vpon the Sabboth to seeke for internall grace then vpon any other day Bellarm. lib. 3. cap. 10. propos 4. The Protestants Ans. FIrst we grant that all sinne as of theft adulterie and the like are in their owne nature alike at what time soeuer they are committed yet they may be made more hainous by the circumstances as of the place as sacriledge is greater then common theft so why not of the time Secondly if that which is no sinne vpon the worke-day be a sinne vpon the Sabboth as to digge to plough to cart then that which is a sinne of it selfe as to steale to coÌ„mit adulterie must needs be greater more hainous being done vpon the Sabboth for beside the sinne he also prophaneth the Sabboth which is the breach of another commandement Thirdly the internall act of religion is properly commanded in the sanctifying of the Sabboth for it cannot be sanctified by the externall act of going to Church and hearing the word vnlesse a man be inwardly in the deuotion of his heart prepared for those holy exercises So inward grace is more sought for vpon the Sabboth not in respect of that inward desire which we haue vnto them which ought alwaies to be alike feruent in vs if it were possible but because of those outward meanes of hearing the word publique prayer receiuing the Sacraments which are vpon the Sabboth for the which we ought more especially to prepare examine our selues Ecclesiast 4.17 1. Corinth 11.28 Augustine sayth speaking of the Iewish women Quanto meliùs foeminae eâ—ruÌ„ lanam facerent quà m illo die in neomenijs saltarent spiritualiter obseruat Sabbatum Christianus abstinens se ab opere seruili id est à peccato Tractat. 3. in Iohan. Their women might be better occupied in spinning at home then in dauncing vpon this day for a Christian doth spiritually keepe the Sabboth in abstaining from al seruile worke that is from sinne They then that do obserue the Sabboth onely in externall acts doe but carnally keepe it The Papists error 66 7. THey hold it a thing vnlawfull for Christians to fast vpon the Lords day Bellarm. lib. 3. de cultu sanctor cap. 11. The Protestants Ans. FIrst we grant that this opinion is very ancient that in Tertullians time it was receiued in many Churches and they thought it as vnlawfull to bow the knee vpoÌ„ the Lords day Tertul. lib. de coron Militis Die dominico ieiunare nefas ducimus de geniculis adorare We count it vnlawfull to fast vpon the Lords day and to pray kneeling But the Papists obserue not the one why then should they binde themselues to the other Ignatius maketh fasting vpon the Sabboth as great an offence as the killing of Christ himselfe Epistol ad Philipp But I trust they will not say so Secondly the reasons why fasting is not to be vsed vpon the Lords day because the Iesuite setteth downe none I will supplie out of Augustine first Sentio saith he ad significandam requiem sempiternam vbi est verum Sabbatum relaxationem quà m constrictionem ieiunij aptius conuenire I thinke that to signifie the eternall rest which is the true Sabboth libertie rather then the vrging of fasting doth most fitly agree But to this we answere that this signification of eternall rest is no essentiall part of sanctifying the Sabboth nor no end of the institution as we haue shewed afore though it may haue such an application and therefore this reason proueth not such a necessitie of not fasting vpon the Sabboth Secondly Die dominico ieiunare magnum est scandalum It is a great offence to fast on the Lords day because the Manichees made choise of that day to fast in Per quod factum
and rooted out Et tolli omne illud quod veram habet propriam rationem peccati And all that wholly to be taken away which hath the nature and qualitie of sinne Concil Trident sess 5. For the concupiscence or originall sinne remaining after Baptisme is now no more to bee called sinne In infants then newly baptized there is neither mortall nor veniall sinne Rhemist 1. Iohn 1. sect 5. Argum. The Scripture saith Beholde the lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world Ioh 1.29 Christ doth sanctifie and cleanse his Church by the washing of water through the word Ergo by remission sinnes cleane taken away Rhemist Rom. 4. sect 7. Ans. First if sinne in baptisme were wholly remoued not onely the guilt but the very staine and blot of sinne how commeth it to passe that many which are baptized doe fall afterward into deadly sinnes yea there is no man that liueth without sinne If sinne once haue been vtterly expelled and banished out of the flesh how commeth it in againe if their iustification haue once clearely rid them from sinne how can they be subiect to it againe for the grace of iustification being once obtained can neuer bee lost the giftes of God are without repentance Rom. 11.29 2. The Scripture is true that Christ by his blood cleanseth washeth taketh away our sinnes not by actually purging vs from all corruption but in freely acquiting and discharging of vs before God both of the guilt and punishment of sinne so the Scripture saith Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen and to whom the Lord imputeth no sinne Rom. 4.7.8 Our sinnes therefore may be truely forgiuen though some corruption of sinne doe still remaine in vs. The Protestants THere are three things to bee considered in sinne First the staine or blot corruption or remnant of sinne in vs. Secondly the guilt fault and offence of sinne Thirdly the punishment and stipend due vnto it By our spiritual washing in the blood of Christ whereof Baptisme is a seale both the guilt and punishment of our sinnes are not onely hid and couered in Gods sight as our aduersaries doe falsely charge vs to say but they are truely forgiuen vs for Christs sake and shall neuer be remembred any more But yet there is left in vs some remnant of sinne so long as we liue in this flesh which in the end together with the corruption and mortalitie of the bodie shall bee cleane taken away Argum. 1. If wee say wee haue no sinne wee deceiue our selues and the truth is not in vs 1. Iohn 1.8 Ergo there are none liuing at any time voyde of sinne no not in their Baptisme Saint Paul also exhorteth to bee renewed in minde and to put on the new man and put off the old Ephes. 4.23 Ergo there remaineth some sinne and corruption after Baptisme what neede else this renewing of the minde and putting on the new man afterward Argum. 2. Originall sinne is not taken away in Baptisme therefore some sinne remayneth still And that this originall corruption is properly called sinne and is sin indeede S. Paul sheweth euidently Rom. 7. ver 7 8. where he nameth lust and concupiscence sinne Augustine thus writeth Meminisse debemus peccatorum omnium plenam remissionem fieri in Baptismo hominis verò qualitatem non totam continuò mutari We must remember that all our sinnes are fully remitted in Baptisme but the quality of man that is the corruption and staine or blot of sinne is not wholly chaunged THE SECOND PART WHETHER BAPtisme serue onely for remission of sinnes past not for the sinnes also to come The Papists error 108 CHristes death applyed to man by Baptisme wypeth away al sinnes past for new sinnes other remedies be dayly requisite Rhemist Heb. 10. sect 4. The councell of Trent holdeth them accursed that thinke all sinnes to be forgiuen fide Baptismi suscepti by faith of Baptisme receiued sess 7. can 10. Heereupon their saying ariseth that Baptismus est prima tabula post naufragium that Baptisme is the first boord of refuge after shipwracke Poenitentia est secunda tabula post naufragium penance is the second boord of refuge So that if a man do fall after Baptisme he must vse other helpes and meanes for the remission of sinnes for Baptisme is not auaileable for sinnes afterward committed Bellarm. cap. 18. Argum. It is impossible saith the Apostle for them that haue beene once lightened and tasted of the heauenly grace if they fall away to bee renewed by penance Heb. 6.6 that is they which fall away from faith and grace after Baptisme cannot be baptized againe or be illuminated or renouated by so easie a cleansing of sinnes as the Sacrament of Baptisme did yeeld Ergo Baptisme is not auaileable for remission of sinnes which men fall into afterward Bellarm. cap. 18. Ans. The Apostle speaketh not of this or that kinde of Repentance but generally of all shewing that there is no hope of remission nor grace to repent left for those which fall into the grieuous sinne of Apostasie which hee heere describeth for they crucifie againe the Sonne of God and make a mock of him ver 6. And that the Apostle vnderstandeth the sinne of Apostasie the sinne against the holy Ghost it appeareth by comparing that other place Heb. 10.29 with this for there they are said to tread vnder foote the sonne of God and to despite the spirit of grace The Apostle then cutteth off such from all hope of grace and repentaunce not onely barreth them from some speciall kinde of repentance The Protestants THe externall act of Baptisme neither wipeth away sinnes going before or comming after but it is the inward working of the spirite of God which by the vertue of Christs death testified and shewed forth in Baptisme that washeth away our sinnes And Baptisme is a seale of remission of sinnes for the confirmation of our faith euen of those which are committed after Baptisme as well as of sinnes done before and although the ceremonie of Baptisme be not repeated yet the vertue of Gods spirit testified thereby remaineth to our liues end Argum. 1. Mark 16.16 He that shall beleeue and be baptized shall bee saued Wee reason thus Baptisme is a seale of that faith whereby men are saued or to the which saluation is promised but that faith beleeueth remission of all sinnes both past and to come therefore Baptisme also sealeth vnto vs the remission of all our sinnes going before or following after Argum. 2. Baptisme is a signe and seale of our mysticall washing in the blood of Christ But all our sinnes both before and after are washed away by the blood of Christ Ergo Baptisme doth assure vs of a perfit remission of all our sinnes So saith Augustine Eodem lauacro regenerationis verbo sanctificationis omnia prorsus mala hominum regeneratorum sanantur etiam quae posterius humana ignorantia aut infirmitate committuntur By the same
person of Christ euen as his humanitie so that Christ was bread by consecration as he was man by his incarnation an horrible and monstrous opinion which is fathered vpon Rupertus the Abbot Iohannes Parisiensis also came neere this opinion who likewise affirmed that the bread was assumed to the person of Christ and vnited vnto him yet not immediatly as the other taught but by the mediation and meanes of the humanitie of Christ. Secondly of those that maintaine the conuersion of the elements First some would haue the forme onely of bread chaunged not the matter as Durandus Secondly some contrariwise would haue the matter altered and the forme to remaine Thirdly the Iesuits affirme the bread wholly in substance both in matter and forme to be changed the outward formes and accidents onely remaining ex Bellarm. lib. 3. de sacram Eucharist cap. 11. Thus men when they begin once to leaue the truth the Lord leaueth them to themselues and they runne mad in their owne inuentions not finding any end and so it is iustly come vpon them as S. Paul saith of the heathen Because when they knew God they did not glorifie him as God neither were thankfull they became vaine in their own imaginations and their foolish hart was full of darkenes when they professed themselues to be wise they became fooles Rom. 1.21.22 We therefore leauing these shalow pittes of humane inuentions which will holde no water will betake vs to the fountaine of truth This then to conclude is our definitiue sentence and full determination according to the Scriptures that Christ indeed is verily present in the Sacrament neither by conuersion of the bread into his body either wholly or in parte nor by assumption of the bread to the vnity of his person nor yet by the coniunction of his body and bread together but he doth verily exhibite himselfe with all his benefits spiritually by faith to be eaten and drunke of the worthy receiuer as we haue sufficiently proued before out of the Scriptures THE THIRD QVESTION WHETHER THE Eucharist being once consecrated be a Sacrament though it be neither eaten nor drunk The Papists THe elements in the Sacrament that is the bread and wine being once consecrate error 116 which say they is done by the prolation of those words hoc est corpus meum This is my body whether they be receiued or not at that instant but be reserued and kept in boxes and pixes and other vessels of the Church for daies weekes moneths to be caried solemnely to those that are sick and to be applyed to other vses are still the very body and blood of Christ. Trident. Concil sess 13. can 4.7 Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 2. Argum. 1. Christs words which were spoken ouer the bread This is my body were true as soone as he brought them forth before he said Take eat and so likewise of the cup therefore it was a Sacrament before they did receiue and eate it and had beene a Sacrament still if it had not bene receiued at all at that time Bellarm. ibid. Ans. 1. Those wordes of Christ This is my body were not spoken before he brake the bread and distributed it but first as S. Math. setteth it downe he brake the bread and gaue it to his Disciples saying Take eate and then follow those words This is my body Math. 26.26 which seeme to haue bene vttered euen in that instant when they tooke the bread and began to eate it Secondly the institution of the Sacrament consisteth partly of a promise partly of a precept the promise is this Hoc est corpus meum This is my body the precept Accipite manducate Take eate Christ doth no otherwise make good his promise then we performe the condition vnlesse therefore accordingly we doe take and eat it it is not the body of Christ. The Protestants THe Eucharist is no sacrament beside or without the vse thereof so that though some form of words be pronounced ouer it if it be not receiued and eaten and drunk it is no sacrament neither is that which remaineth after the distribution the Eucharist being ended either of the bread or wine any part of the sacrament but so much onely as is taken and vsed Argum. 1. It is no Sacrament vnlesse it be vsed according to the institution as Christ hath commanded it but to the institution it belongeth on the behalfe of the Minister to blesse break and distribute it on the behalfe of the communicants to take eate and drinke it in them all thereby to shew the Lords death and to doe it in remembrance of Christ. But this cannot be performed by vsing the words of benediction onely but by the whole action for how can they shew the Lords death or doe it in remembrance of Christ vnlesse they take and eate Ergo if it be not so vsed it is no Sacrament Argum. 2. The Sacraments of the new testament are alike and of one and the selfesame kinde there is one way of instituting and consecrating both but the water in baptisme is no part of the Sacrament but during the solemne action of baptizing afterward it returneth to the common vse so much as is not vsed Ergo it is so also in the Eucharist for as Christ saith to his Apostles Ite baptizate Goe and baptize so that it was no Sacrament vnlesse some body were baptized euen so he saith Accipite â—anducate Take eate No SacrameÌ„t then vnlesse it be receiued and eaten And here I pray you let it be noted how well the Iesuits agree amongst themselues our Rhemists doe commend the reseruing also of the water in baptisme and carrying of it home to giue it the diseased to drink annot Iam. 5. sect 5. Bellar. saith that Res permanens in baptismo That the thing permanent in Baptisme that is water which remaineth is not the sacrament but ipsa actio the action of baptizing it selfe and alloweth onely the Eucharist to be reserued and remaine a Sacrament Etiam extra vsum Without the vse thereof Bellar li. 4. de Eucharist cap. 3. But we haue shewed already that both the Sacraments are halowed and sanctified alike and that both in the one and the other the vse onely and present action according to Christs institution maketh the Sacrament In Augustines time some vsed to receiue the Communion dayly but vpon the Sabboth or Lords day it was commonly receiued of all Quotidie Eucharistiae communionem percipere nec laudo nec reprehendo omnib tamen dominicis diebus communicandum suadeo et hortor Euery day to receiue the Eucharist I neither commend nor dispraise it but euery Lords day I doe perswade men and exhort all to communicate It should seeme then that in those daies there was no such superstitious reseruation of the Sacrament seeing euery day or at the least euery Sabboth it was administred THE FOVRTH QVESTION CONCERNING the elements or materiall part of the Sacrament namely bread and wine The Papists 1. The bread
would haue promised health by calling for the Elders if the gift had not beene generall in euery congregation Ans. 2. Neither is remission of sinnes annexed to the element but to the generall doctrine of prayer made in fayth The prayer of fayth saith the Apostle shall heale the sicke The Protestants EXtreme Vnction is no conuenient ceremonie at all to be vsed in the Church as tending to superstition and breeding a vayne confidence in terrene elements much lesse is it to be holden for a sacrament Argum. 1. It hath no institution from Christ For they themselues confesse that Mark 6.13 there is but a preparatiue to the sacrament of extreme Vnction Rhemist the promulgation and publishing thereof is set forth by the Apostle Iam. 5. But this is not to be admitted that Christ was a preparer of sacraments onely and that they were perfited and finished by his Apostles Nay they were not to adde any thing to the institution of sacraments but to take them as Christ deliuered them 1. Cor. 11.23 Agayne the place in Iames maketh nothing for their popish aneeling for the Apostle would haue al the Elders called but one priest is sufficient to bring your oyntment box Secondly if any man be sick sayth Saint Iames though it be not deadly or mortall sicknes but whensoeuer he is sicke But your Vnction is neuer ministred before the poynt of death Thirdly here health is certainely promised But not one amongst tenne recouereth after your popish aneeling Argum. 2. Christ vsed sometime clay and spittle sometime other elements in healing the diseased as the Apostles vsed oyle why I pray you then may not they be sacraments as well as this For they were signes of healing but for a time no more was the anoynting with oyle Augustine sayth De latere Christi in cruce sacramenta ecclesiae profluxerunt The sacraments of the Church issued out of Christs side vpon the Crosse There gushed out â—â—is side water and blood but wee reade not that any oyle was shedde from 〈◊〉 therefore by Augustines argument Vnction is no sacrament THE SECOND PART OF THE effect and vertue of extreme Vnction The Papists error 53 FIrst it giueth health of body Secondly it wipeth away the reliques of sinne And therefore the priest thus sayth Per istam sanctam Vnctionem suam pijssimam misericordiam indulgeat tibi Deus quicquid deliquisti per visum c. By the vertue of this holy oyntment and the most merciful fauour of God the Lord forgiue thee what thou hast offended by thy sight hearing c. Bellarm. cap. 7.8 The Protestants 1 YOur popish aneeling is not able to heale the bodie as wee see by daylie experience for more die then liue after your anoynting And they that doe recouer should doe as well without your aneeling Wherefore this anoynting of oyle is not like to that vsed by the Apostles for then health certainly followed Iam. 5.14 2 It is also a great blasphemie to ascribe remission of sinnes to a terrene and beggerly element The Apostle saith not the oyle but the Prayer of fayth shall saue the sicke The scripture also testifieth that the Iust shall liue by fayth Rom. 1.17 And we walke by faith not by sight 2. Corinth 5.7 But he that ascribeth remission of sinnes to oyle or any other externall element walketh by sight not by fayth THE THIRD PART OF THE MINISTER of extreme Vnction and the ceremonies The Papists FIrst they giue power only vnto their anoynted Masse priests to aneele the sicke with oyle Lay men haue no authoritie to doe it nor whosoeuer are error 54 no Priests Concil Trident. sess 14. can 4. Secondly for the rite and ceremonie the Priest comming to the sicke must anoynt his fiue senses his eyes eares nostrels mouth and hands also the reines which is the seate of concupiscence and his feete which are the instruments of execution Bellarmin cap. 10. The Protestants 1 THis anoynting which Saint Iames speaketh of was done by the whole company of Elders in euery congregation which were not all the Pastors of the Church Yea and it appeareth by their own Canons Innocent 1. Epist. 1. cap. 8. that it was lawfull for lay men and all Christians to vse this anoynting see Fulk annot Iam. 5. sect 5. 2 What neede the body be anoynted in so many places It is meere superstition of the like minde was Peter sometime when he sayd to Christ who would wash his feete Lord not my feete onely but my hands and my head To whom Christ answered He that is washed neede not saue to wash his feete but is cleane all Iohn 13.9 Where although the words of Christ haue a spirituall meaning yet we see the euident and playne practise of them in Baptisme In the which sacrament we doubt not but that infants are thorougly baptized though euery part be not touched with water And euen so if your aneeling were a sacrament why might it not suffice in some one part of the bodie to be anoynted and not in so many This we are sure of that nowe you speake without booke For the Apostle maketh no mention of anoynting eyes hands or mouth but onely generally of anoynting the sick And thus it appeareth that your extreme Vnction is no sacrament nor any of the other foure which you haue inuented THE CONCLVSION OF THIS treatise concerning the sacrament THus I trust we haue made it pliane by scripture and euidence of argument that there are but two sacraments onely Baptisme and the Supper of the Lord left and enioyned to the people of God by our Sauiour Christ for foure things are required to make a sacrament First the authority of Christ in commanding it Secondly the element or external signe as the matter Thirdly the word of institution as the forme Fourthly the end and vse to be a seale of our fayth for remission of sinnes 1 Concerning the efficient cause we finde that two sacraments onely in the new testament are commanded by Christ to be vsed for euer in the Church Baptisme and the Lords Supper which both by his owne example and presence as also his precept and commandement were established 2 There must be an outward visible elementall signe as is water in Baptisme bread and wine in the Lords Supper But so is there not in the fiue popish sacrameÌ„ts For in some there is no signe at all as in Matrimonie where they are driuen to say that the parties that are maried are the signes In some there is a signe but not visible as in absolution the audible voyce of the priest ponouncing the words of absolution is they say the outward signe But in all the sacraments of Christs institution we finde a visible signe In some there is an outward signe but it is an action or gesture only no material element which is not sufficient so is the imposition of hands in giuing of Orders In some there is a materiall signe as Chrisme in Confirmation oyle in extreme Vnction
the holy and blessed babe in the constitution both of bodie and soule excelled the common condition of all other infants for as he was voyd of originall sinne so he was without the effects and fruites thereof which doe shewe themselues in children for neither suffered he the like pangs and infirmities in bodie being in his infancie as other children doe that are vexed and tormented in bodie neither was he subiect to the vnreasonable and brutish motions of the minde which are in children Therefore Augustine sayth Hanc ignorantiam animi infirmitatem quam videmus in paruulis nullo modo fuerim in Christo paruulo suspicatus This kind of ignorance and infirmitie of minde which is in children I cannot thinke to haue been in the babe Christ. And what ignorance and infirmitie he meaneth afterward he expresseth Cum motibus irrationabilibus perturbantur nulla ratione nullo imperio cohibentur When their brutish and vnreasonable motions come vpon them they are ruled neither by reason nor any other gouernment These infirmities both in bodie and soule wee denye to haue been in Christ and yet we doubt not to conclude that as Christ grewe in stature of bodie as Augustine sayth Mutationes aetatum perpeti voluit ab ipsa exorsus infantia He passed through the ages of mans life beginning with his infancie so likewise as the scripture sayth he increased in wisedome Luk. 2.52 AN APPENDIX OF THE MANNER of Christs birth The Papists THey say Christ came out of his mothers wombe the clausure not stirred as error 99 he passed thorow the doores when he came in to his disciples the doores being shut Iohn 20.19 and as he passed thorow the stone arising out of the Sepulchre Rhemist annot Iohn 20. sect 2. Bellarm. de Eccles. lib. 4. cap. 9. The Protestants 1. IT can neuer be proued that Christs bodie came either thorowe the wood of the doores or thorowe the stone of the Sepulchre or clausure of his mothers wombe And concerning the last the scripture is euident to the contrarie where it is sayd that our Sauiour Christ was presented to the Lord according as it is written Euery male that first openeth the matrix c. Luk. 2.29 2. We graunt that both the birth of Christ his rising out of the graue his comming in the doores being shut was strange and miraculous because one substance gaue place to another for a time and after the passing of his bodie the place remained whole and shut as before but not in the very instant of passing The red sea gaue place to the Israelites while they passed and closed together againe so did the prison doores open miraculously to the Apostles Act. 5.19 An incredulous Iewe seeing the eare of Malchus so soone healed would not haue thought that Peters sword went betweene it and his head as we are sure it did So we say concerning the birth of Christ that the place gaue way while he passed and closed vp afterward againe as before Augustine bringeth in Christ thus speaking Ego viam meo itineri praeparaui and a little after transitu meo illius non est corrupta virginitas I made a way for my selfe out of the wombe neither by my passage was her virginitie lost Christ had a way out of his mothers wombe but if the clausure had not giuen place there had been no way made Againe he sayth Spatia locorum tolle corporibus nusquam erunt quia nusquam erunt nec erunt Take away space of place from bodies and they shall be no where and if they be no where then are they not at all But the Papists in saying that Christ went thorow the very substance and corpulence of things doe take away from his bodie his proper place for two substances cannot be in one place and therefore they destroy the nature of his bodie THE THIRD PART WHETHER CHRIST suffered in soule The Papists THey vtterly denie that Christ felt any paine or anguish in soule vpon the error 100 Crosse otherwise then for griefe of his bodily torments but doe charge them with horrible blasphemie that doe so affirme Rhemist Math. 27. sect 3. 1. The scripture doth ascribe the worke of our redemption and reconciliation only to the blood of Christ vpon the Crosse Coloss. 1.20 Ephes. 1.7 Ergo the death of the bodie of Christ without any further anguish in soule was sufficient Bellarm. de Christi anima lib. 4. cap. 8. Ans. 1. By the blood of Christ vpon the Crosse must needes bee vnderstood all the parts and circumstances of his passion both his sufferings in bodie and soule for if it should be vnderstood properly the blood of Christ onely were sufficient and so his bodie and flesh should be excluded and if the shedding of his blood be taken simply we shal finde that it was no part of his death for his side was pearced whereout issued water and blood after he had yeelded vp the ghost and all the torments of death were past yea after he had vttered these words vpon the Crosse It is finished that is he had payd the full raunsome for mankind Iohn 19. vers 30.34 Wherefore by his blood must be vnderstood by a Synecdoche when one part is taken for the whole all the other paines and torments which he suffered in his flesh Secondly yea and the paines of the soule to are by that speech fitly expressed for the blood of euery creature is the life thereof Genes 9.4 Leuit. 17.14 But the soule is the life of man Ergo not vnproperly by the shedding of Christs blood euen the vexation and at the last the expiration of his soule and so his whole passion both in body and soule is signified Wherefore as in those places alleadged we read the blood of Christ or the blood of the Crosse so otherwhere in more generall termes the Apostles call it The dying of Christ 2. Cor. 4.10 And the suffrings of Christ 1. Pet. 4.13 Argum. 2. If Christ when he cried out vpon the Crosse O God my God why hast thou forsaken me had felt the wrath of God and despaired of his help he should most greeuously haue sinned Bellarm. ibid. Ans. 1. It cannot be that Christ thus cried out for the paine of bodily death for then he had beene of greater infirmitie then many of his seruants that in the midst of extreme torments neuer complained And therefore it must needs be the burthen of the wrath and curse of God that he endured for our sinne that made him so to cry out vpon the crosse 2. Neither doth it follow that Christ vttered those words in despaire but only to shew the great anguish trouble and perturbation of his spirite being vpon the crosse considered now as a meere man his diuine nature and power repressing and hiding it selfe for a time and although in the vexation of his soule he thus cryed out yet he was not altogether left comfortlesse in spirite in that he said My God