much strength in them He that reads the Scriptures with a spiritually enlightened mind cannot but confess that never meer man spake like the Holy Writers and that flesh and blood revealed not those things to them which they declare but God only 2. Upon what account was this truth taken up by the first Christians for the space of three hundred years after Christ they could not take it up upon the Churches account and credit for your Authors hold that its only in the power of Oecumenical Sinods to define which are the Scriptures and for this time there was no such a Sinod called The first Sinod that I finde delivering the Canon of Scripture was that of Laodicea held about the year 364. Afterwards the third Council of Carthage both Provincial Sinods only though afterwards confirmed in a General Council 3. Upon what account or credit doth your Church take up this truth that the Scriptures are the Word of God Sure you are so great an Enemy to Spiritists that you will not think of extraordinary Revelations or Enthusiasms I hardly think that ever the Holy Ghost fell upon your Popes or Councils in fiery Tongues or that they had either visions or dreams nor do I think that you will say that your Church propoundeth the Canon of Scripture meerly upon the supposal of former practise that former Churches did allow and believe the Scriptures now received are Canonical for this is only a testimony concerning matter of fact in which 't is confessed the Pope may erre through wrong informations There may be spurious Canons foisted into former Councils like Pope Zozimus Canon of the Nicene Council whereby he maintained his Supremacy I therefore suppose that your judgment must be that your Church assisted by the Spirit doth from internal notes of Scripture conclude the divine authority thereof Hence 't is that Councils proceed by argument and reason and there is an acknowledgment of the truth before they proceed to definition or Decree Now if the Church take up Scripture upon this account that she through the assistance of Gods Spirit discerns the notes and marks of Gods Word why may not a Christian by the same assistance discover these notes and so believe that the Scriptures are Gods Word upon the same account that the Church takes up this beliefe though withal he doth and ought to reverence and highly account of the judgment of the Church or Pastors of it as that which hath a Priority and is an occasion of Christians private judgment and a confirmation of it yet as I hinted before it must not be denied that Christians have a divine light in themselves being taught of God Joh. 6.45 which is for the discovery of divine objects as natural light or reason is for the discovery of natural This Bellarmine confesseth saying Bellar. de lumine fid Conc. 1. Quemadmodum omnes homines c. As all men are indued with a certain natural light whereby they understand the first principles to be true without labour without arguments nor is there any that demands reasons and arguments when those principles are propounded So also all Christians enlightened by God with a certain divine and supernatural light do acknowledg the first principles of our Faith though difficult and exceeding reason to be most true Origen in his Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where he proves the Divinity of Scriptures by divers arguments Origen lib. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cap. 1. as Protestants do hath a notable speech to this purpose Si quis cum omni judicio c. If any one doth judiciously and with that reverence that is meet consider of the Sacred Writ while he reads and diligently searcheth into it most certainly having his minde and senses affected with some divine inspiration he acknowledgeth that the word he reads is not the word of men but of God and of himselfe perceives ex semetipso sentiet that these books are written not by humane art or mortal eloquence but by the hand of God Thus I suppose it was with the first Christians of whom you cannot say that they believed the books of Scripture to be the Word of God meerly because the Apostles and others held them they were so but upon other account this overthrows your Position What I have said of the Scriptures may be said of other points of Faith that they are not taken up meerly or mainly upon the Churches credit and account but rather because God hath revealed them in his Word wherein they are therefore written that we might have a sure argument for our Faith But I come to your next inference 2 Consequence or Conclusion Whatsoever comes upon any other score is to be reputed Apocriphal and no way appertaining to the obligation of faith Magna Diana Romanorum Great is your Roman Goddess but its only with the Shrine-makers of Rome your conclusion is very high but notoriously false For 1. It s not the Churches definition that makes any book Apocriphal but the want of divine inspiration in those who wrote them so that whatsoever is not written by the Prophets or Apostles the Subjects of divine inspiration that is certainly Apocriphal whether the Church receive them or not Hence many of your learned men reject those books as Apocriphal which the Council of Trent declared to be Canonical the Apostle saith All Scripture is by divine inspiration 2 Tim. 3.16 the Scriptures of the Old Testament are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Pet. 1.19 read Luke 24.27 2. It was six hundred years after Christ before any General Council delivers the Canon of Scripture now will you say that till that time the books of Scripture were Apocriphal and no way appertaining to the obligation of Faith 3. The Spirit of God may work Faith in the Soule while it is reverently reading the Word of God without the testimony of the Church the person for the present being ignorant what the Church teacheth of particular points this is clear by the place of Origen even now mentioned Lyranus speaks of a teaching of the Spirit Lyran. in 1 Joh. 2.27 Vbi deficit humana Doctrina 4. When the Thessalonians received the Apostles Doctrine not as the word of men but as the Word of God Greg. Analus fid lib. 1. c. 15. was this Doctrine no way appertaining to the obligation of Faith Your Gregory of Valence confesseth Multa sunt c. There are many points of Christian Doctrine which of themselves can procure to themselves credit and authority Lastly the Greek Church with the reformed Churches receive all the Articles of the Apostles Creed because consonant to Gods Word not because delivered by your Roman Diana are those Articles therefore to be reputed Apocriphal and no way appertaining to the obligation of Faith Sure you cannot be so impudent as to assert it though we know Jesuitical impudency is not little For your Scriptures Sect. 2. When I see them reduced to arguments I shall
by faith without the deeds of the Law They must therefore be reconciled which they may by saying that faith only doth properly justifie us before God and Works do justifie our faith to be a true faith for as much as true faith is productive of good works for we abhor those mens conceit who imagine that faith may suffice a man though he live ill and have no good works Or 2. By saying that good works do evidence our justification Aquinas confesseth that works in c. 3. ad Gal. are not the cause that any man is just before God but they are rather manifestations of Righteousnesse and Justification Certainly Abraham was justified in the sight of God before he offered up his son Isaac which is the foundation of Saint James's speech Papists are so much convinced of this that to evade Protestant Doctrine at least seemingly they invent a distinction of a first and second justification from that they exclude all works and attribute it only to faith and the other is not properly personal justification 8. Inst Prayer to Saints The Angel that delivered from all evils blessed the Children Gen. 48. Answ 1. Here is no mention of Saints much lesse of prayer to them not so much as an implicite hint of such a thing for I suppose Jacob was not of the mind of the Grecian Daemon worshippers who said it mattered not whether they called the souls of the defunct angells or gods 2. By Angel is meant Jesus Christ the Angell of the Covenant Mal. 3.1 who is true God and he who delivered Jacob out of all his evils Thus both Jewish and Christian Expositors understand it 3. I think you mistooâ— this for the latter part of the verse which Papists urge to prove invocation of Saints But seeing you doe not urge it I shall not at present answer it 9. Inst Prayer for the dead It is an holy and wholsome cogitation to pray for the dead 2 Maccab 12. A. 1. This book is not Apostolicall nor part of the Canon of Scripture the Hebrews keepers of the book of the Old Testament received it not as is generally confest and though some fathers commend this and other books of this nature to be read yet they commended them onely as profitable Treatises not as Canonicall Scriptures and therefore advise men to reade them with discretion and prudence Christ though he gives testimony to the Prophets and Psalms he gives none to these or in speciall to this besides there are divers things in this render it suspected 1. The Author of this book supposed to be Josephus professeth it to be onely an abridgement of Jason of Cyrene c. 2.23 and the Holy Ghost is not used to Epitomize profane Histories 2. He makes an excuse for himself and such a one as the holy Writers never used nor becomes a Divine History c. 15. 38. Answ 2. The Text you urge may be divers wayes oppugned 1. The words are not rightly translated by you the Greek is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A holy and pious cogitation therefore he made expiation or satisfaction by sacrifice for the dead to free them from sin the words are not to be read without a middle distinction Vatablus who includes these words Piam et sanctam cogitationem in a parenthesis refers them neither to prayer nor sacrifice but to the resurrection of the dead saying it s an holy and pious thought to think that the bodies of them who have deserved well of their Country should rise again and not perish for ever 2. Supposing Sacrificing or Prayer seeing you will have it so for the dead were lawfull yet as to these persons it cannot be allowed For first they were Idolaters slain for their idolatry verse 40. Dying for any thing appears to the contrary in a mortall sin 2. They were not in Purgatory the onely place from whence Prayers bring souls for at this time Purgatory had not so much as an imaginary existence 3. Supposing Prayer for the dead and holy and wholesome cogitation and might be proved so from this place yet how can we be said to maintain a Doctrine clean contrary and opposite to that which the Apostles in plain and formall tearms expressed Though here be expressed the opinion of Judas or Jason of Cyrene yet neither Judas nor Jason were the Apostles of Christ nor yet any of the Prophets of God the last of whom was Malachi It is evident that you want spirituall proofs for your charitable devotion else you would not have urged against us those books you know we account Apocriphal and not bring one syllable of Scripture you must first prove unto us the Divine authority of the books of Maccabees and then prove our contrarietie to Scriptures in dissenting from them till then you beg the question 10. Inst Extream unction Is any body sick amongst you let him bring in the Priests of the Church and pray over him anoynting him with oyl in the name of our Lord. Jam. 5. Answ 1. Here are not the plain and formal tearms of extream unction nor do I think that you read them in any ancient Author the word Extream shews your extram abuse of this ordinance as Lorichius otherwise as much for this supposed Sacrament as any o-any other clearly demonstrates in these words Abusus vocbuli est quod dicitur extrema unctio c. It s an abuse of the word to call it extream unction For it s not a Sacrament of dying men but of those who are sick not relateing to their burial but conducing to their recovery Whence it was that in the primitive Church many when they were anointed did recover health And even at this day many wâ—uld be healed if this Sacrament were rightly used I observe that these Popish Authors who pretend to follow antiquity do avoid this tearm Extream calling this supposed Sacrament either sacramentum unctionis aegrotorum as Lorichius or simply Cass consult Art 22. p. 985. unctio infirmorum as Cassander who also shews that its of use for the sick in order to their recovery of bodily health 2. This text of the Apostle proves not your extream unction It speaks of that miraculous anointing which Saint Mark mentions Mark 6.13 and which Bellarmine saith was a sign used in miraculous healing of the diseased your Rhemists imply that it had a miraculous medicinal vertue to heal diseases which you will hardly say of your extream oyl Cajetan expresly denies that this text of James Cajet in cap. 5. Jac. proves extream unction and proves it by divers reasons 1. Saint James saith not if any man be sick unto death but absolutely if any man be sick 2. The proper effect of Saint James unction is recovery of health If he speaks of remission of sins onely conditionally whereas extream unction is not given but at the point of death and directly tends as its form stands to the remission of sins besides Saint James requires that many Elders be called to one sick person
both to pray with him and to anoint him which is far from the ceremony of extream unction thus far Cajetan 3. Saint James's unction is no Sacrament it neither pretends to the name of Sacrament nor refers to any express institution of Jesus Christ which is the property of Evangelicall Sacraments but Popish unction assumeth to it self this name and that in a proper acception against both Scripture and antiquitie Scripture mentioning onely Christs institution of Baptisme and the Supper and antiquity when it speaks of proper Sacraments doing no more Rabanus Maurus who lived about 800 years ago acknowledgeth no more but Baptisme and the Lords Supper Hence I conclude that Protestants though opposite to Popish fopperies are not contrary to Apostolicall Doctrine 11. Inst The Bishop of Romes supremacie in spirituall matters Thou art Peter and upon this rock will I build my Church Feed my sheep To thee will I give the keyes of the kingdome of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven whatsoever thou shalt tie on earth shall be tied in Heaven Matth. 16. Answ 1. Why do you seperate the Popes Spirituall from his Temporall power for we deny both and they are alike expressed in Scripture but 2. The Popes Supremacy in Spirituall matters is not in plain and formall tearms here expressed for 1. Here is no mention of any Pope or his Supremacy in Spirituall matters here is mention of Peter but few of your Popes have had that name 2. What is commanded and promised to Peter is commanded and promised to him not as Bishop of Rome but as an Apostle and therefore the same is commanded and promised to other Apostles The other Apostles are foundations as well as Peter and I am sure he is not the corner stone The keyes are promised to them as well as to him John 20.22 23. the other Apostles are to feed Christs sheep as well as he yea it is the duty of all Pastors Act. 20.28 3. What reason can be given why Peters supremacy should descend upon his Successors at Rome rather then his successors at Antioch 4. If Peter had any supremacy it was in regard of Apostleship so as to be the prime Apostle and have power over the rest but Apostolike power is not derived by succession upon any The truth is Peter had no power over the rest from Christ for Christs gift of such a power would have prevented the Apostles contention about supremacy or would have answered the question better then those words wherewith Christ did answer He might easily have said why do you strive which should be greatest know you not that I have made Peter your Prince and have made him Supreme but Christ thought of no such matter Thus I have shewed that Protestants do not professe a Doctrine contrary to the Apostles and I further adde that the Apostles doctrine expressed in Scripture is fully received by them We believe all that the Apostles have taught so far as God reveals their Doctrine to us It s therefore a most false slander to say that Protestants refuse some points the Apostles beleeved p. 65. We hold the Catholique faith entire and inviolate in Athanasius's sence we fully believe all the Articles of its Creed It s true we deny divers points that Papists believe we dislike the new articles of your late Creed which Athanasius as well as we received not into his Creed nor were they believed by the Apostles But you object sect 5. It is evident they were there being the same ground to assure us thereof as of Scripture or any other point they believed and that without which under a miracle there would not be the least knowledg of the Apostles belief to wit the Churches constant tradition Answ 1. It s most evident that the points Protestants deny were not believed by the Apostles For 1. The Scriptures mention them not the writings of the Apostles approve not of communion in one kind private masse prayer in an unknown tongue imagined worship auricular confession pardons indulgences restraint of people from reading Scripture or Clergy-men from marriage Popes infallibility sumpreamacy of temporal and spiritual power purgatory prayer for the dead or to Saints departed c. 2. The ancient Creeds do not mention any of these points which they would certainly have done if the Apostles had beleeved them much lesse do they make them necessary articles of faith See Caranz de concil conc Nic. p. 51. Syrm. p. 89. Constant p. 102. Tollet p. 131. Ephes p. 151. Calced p. 181. Read the Creeds of the Apostles of the Nicen Fathers of Syrmium Constantinople Tolet. Ephesus which Caranza calls a summe of all Christian Doctrine of the Romans with divers others and you shall not find one of your new articles so much as hinted in any of them 2. The proof of your evident assertion contains divers falsities as 1. That the Scripture is known only by Tradition or humane testimony whereas it gives testimony to it self as I have before shewed 2. That without the Churches constant tradition there would not be the least knowledg of the Apostles belief For 1. God can make the enemies of his Church the publishers and propagators of his truth Thus Cajetan notes that by the Apostacy and obstinacy of the Jews we know which are the true books of the old Testament 2. The Scriptures might be preserved though there should be a general apostacy and these could testifie of the Apostles belief 2 Reg. 22.8 as that book found in the days of Josiah testified of Moses's commands and threatnings 3. Christians for a long time had not the Churches Tradition i. e. the testimony of a general Councill informing them what was the Apostles belief or which were the books of Scripture 3. Those points of yours I mentioned cannot be evidenced to be the Apostles belief by the Churches constant tradition you cannot name one Author in every age since the Apostles out of whose writings you can prove that the Apostles maintained those Doctrines which we reject much lesse are you able to tell us of any visible Church or national Councill that will affirm it Concil Const Sess 13. The Councill of Constance acknowledgeth that Christ administred the Sacrament under both kinds and that the Primitive Christians did receive it under both kinds Can we then think that the Apostles thought communion under both kinds unlawfull How then durst he so administer it Was his practise contrary to his belief This would be a great wickedness not to be imagined of an Apostle 4. We approve of the Churches tradition as a witness of what the Apostles believed but only in subserviency to Scripture which doth principally discover what was the Apostles belief if your Councills had told us that the Apostles administred not the Sacrament in both kinds or that they allowed of prayers in an unknown tongue we would not beleeve your Councills because the Scripture speaks contrary to them and
chief of you been designed to speedy ruine as our King and Nobles by you in the Gun-powder Treason Have forraign Nations been sent for to come and destroy you yet such usage as this have Protestants had from you How many Protestants have been murdered by you in the daies of Q. Maâ—y in this Kingdome How many thousands have suffered miserable tortures by you in Ireland within these few years And it s more then probable the slaughters that have been in these late Wars have proceeded from you time would fail to tell of forraign murders committed by Catholikes The Duke of Alva boasted that he had slain 36000. Protestants in Belgium only in a very few years France can give sad instances of very many murders and yet our English Papists are great sufferers by Protestants as if Papists might cut our throats lawfully yet it were unlawful for us yea grievous persecution to hold their hands 2. How come your sufferings to be glorious or how are they for truth What truth is it you suffer for Popery is a combination of Heresies old and new with the Valentinians and Gnosticks you add to holy Scripture a number of Apocriphal Books and Traditions Iren. adv Haeres lib. 1. c. 16 17 18 22 30. lib. 2. c. 39. you use Extream Unction you cry out against Marriage and abstain from flesh you worship the Image of Christ you make Christs body phantastical being one thing and seeming another with the Ebionites you adore places you use strange language before the people who cannot understand you how then can you suffer for truth which you do not hold but supposing Popery to be the truth do you suffer for it Can you name one Papist that is a great sufferer and that meerly for his Religion It s true many of you stand sequestred and some of your estates are set to sale but this is only upon a civil account had you lived peaceably out of arms you had still enjoyed your estates for ought I know neither are you alone sufferers this way but have Protestants going along with you you suffer as evil doers murderers busibodies thieves your oppressions and murders of the Parliaments friends whilst you were in power may put you in mind that you suffer not for Truth or Religion your sufferings have still been for Treason such were the sufferings of some of you in Q. Elizabeths K. James and King Charls's Raign and such is your present suffering you being the kindlers of those flames that have burnt down the glorious Towers of this Land The truth is your Religion is Treason and as such might well be rooted out from amongst us but yet you have not met with such strict measure from us your Doctrines put us in fear of you left if we binde you not to good behaviour we may come to loose our lives by you we know that in the Popes Books we stand as Heretiques such as are not to be suffered and that you are the Popes Slaves ready to execute his Decrees without scruple you are all Cross-bearers actors of the Popes pleasure whether against Prince or people It s one of Bellarmines Positions Bellarm. tract de Pontif. potestate advers Guil. Bard. cap. 20. p. 191. Non licet Christiane tollerare Regem infidelem aut alios pervertintem and he gives this reason why the first Christians rose not up against their Magistrates Hoc fuit quia tum Christianis deerant vires temporales So that if you had power in your hand you would not sit still and it s your weakness that makes you loyal Subjects what we do therefore to you is for our own security your practises and Doctrine put us upon it your sufferings are just and that deprives them of glory and merit yea and of being imitations of the Saints sufferings neither are you for all your obstinacy so much as Conquerours much less the best and greatest conquerours c. Had the Spanish Armado or the Gunpowder Treason taken effect or had the Irish fury gone on without stop it may be you would have proclaimed your selves Conquerours Champions c. But blessed be God that those snares were broken and were escaped I shall conclude with this prayer that this cry of persecutions which is made by these late Popish writers with one mouth be not a Trumpet calling up a discontented Party in this and other Nations about us to execute an Irish fury upon us in England The Epistle to the Reader OF many Religions professed in this Land several Writers even of approved integrity and profound learning have so clearly demonstrated that there is only one true rule and that the Roman is it that I cannot but impute the ungeneral acknowledging of the same to prejudice or impatience of labour to prejudice in them that have read their works and yet do not believe accordingly to impatience of labour in others that will not bestow the pains to turn over great volumes A. 1. I may well retort your words with a little variation and say that of several Religions professed in the Christian world and in special in this Land if we may justly call the several opinions and wayes of worship many Religions several writers men of approved integrity and profound learning have most clearly demonstrated that there is only one ttue and that not the now Roman but that which the reformed Churches do hold and maintain is it So that mens rejecting of it cannot be imputed to any want of truth evidence of this Religion but to other causes amongst which your two shall have the leading in my Catalogue 1. Prejudice in them that have read our works yet give no credit to them nor can it be otherwise with you whilst your faith is pin'd upon others sleeves Let us speak never so much reason let our assertions be plain Scripture yet if your Priests affirm it not you will not believe us yea many times when you are convinced of the truth of our assertions you will not believe them because they are ours as if a truth might be an error because we hold it When Augustine had affirmed that the Jewish Sacraments though differing in signs yet were the same in signification with ours because the Apostle saith Mald. in Joan. 6.11.60.62 they did all eat the same spiritual meat 1 Cor. 10.3 Maldonate answers that he is perswaded that if Augustine had lived in these times he would have thought otherwise especially perceiving the heretical Calvinists to be of his opinion and saith further that he rather approves of his own opinion then of that of Augustine because this is more contradictious to that of Calvin How can these men read our books without prejudice when they will not receive a truth professed by ancient and eminent Fathers because we hold it Sure if we have thoughts of convincing these men we must write for Popery and then they will become Protestants for fear of joyning with us in our opinions
which are dangerous meerly because we hold them 2. Impatience of labour Papists will not set themselves to read our books or if they read not to study them should I go over these parts where I live I believe I should not finde one Papist that doth seriously read our books nor can tell you truly what we hold they spend their time in other things and will not be perswaded to imploy themselves this way 3. The restraint that is laid upon them that they dare not read them Pope Pius by his Bull forbad Papists to look into the books of Calvin Bucer Bullinger and such like Heretiques as he calls them contrary to the practise of Protestants who are permitted to read Popish Books Dr. Reynolds takes notice of this injunction Reynold praelec 3. de lib. Apocr and saith Licet Pontif. Rom. prudentiam admirari qui suis interdicit ne legant habeant ve librum aliquem haeresiarcharum istorum quos appellat nempe si Calvinum Bucerum Bullingerum inspicere sinerent viderent quales Medii sint ipsorum Magisiri Hic in officinis Bibliothecis nostris cujus legendi permittuntur haeresiarchae Pontificii fortasse nimium peccamus in alteram partem Nay such is the care of these men that what we hold be not known to their people that the controversies written by their own men wherein our Doctrines are discovered and weakly confuted are not suffered to walk publikely where the Pope bears sway its observeable what Sir Edvin Sands writes Those principal Writers who have imployed themselves wholly in refuting from point to point the Protestants Doctrine and Arguments are so rare in Italy as by ordinary enquiry not to be found the controversies of Bellarmine I sought for in Venice in all places neither that nor Gregory of Valenza nor any of such quality could I ever in any such Shop in Italy set eye on but instead of them an infinite of meer invectives and declamations yea further they are not ashamed to censure some of the Holy Writers as seemingly at least consenting with us as the same Author notes Europ Specul pag. 156. The Papists saith he are very jealous of S. Pauls Epistles and think them dangerous so that some of their Jesuites of late in Italy in solemn Sermons and other of their favourers elswhere in private communication commending S. Peter for a worthy Spirit have censured S. Paul for an hot-headed person who was transported so with his pangs of zeal and eagerness beyond all compass in sundry his disputes that there was no great reckoning to be made of his assertions yea he was dangerous to read as savouring of Heresie in some places c. Certainly Papists are much afraid of books whereby the judgment might be informed lest their Disciples reading them should with that Author who was set to confute Calvin by our books be converted to the truth while they find our arguments solid and those accusations of Heresies cast on us by their Rabbi's to be nothing but slander and therefore most prudently the children of this world being wiser in their Generation then the children of light do they confine them to some kinde of books whereby a kinde of devotion may be excited in them but little of sound knowledg attained by them or rather tying them to Beads instead of books to dumb Pictures instead of the Gospel those lively representers of Jesus Christ and to railings and invectives instead of controversie When I consider these things I cannot but pity the common sort of Papists and withal admire the impudency of their Priests who while they cry up the peoples freedom of will yet flatly deny them to have any judgment 2. I desire to know who these Authors you mention are and whether they are yet unanswered I 'm sure there are many learned answers extant to the Popish books formerly written and for the late ones they are not yet grown common as they come to the knowledg of learned men I doubt not but they will receive their answers In the meane time though the meanest of that Tribe that desires to be learned I have attempted to answer your book to which I now depending on the assistance of Gods Spirit do address my self CHAP. I. Of Happiness WHen I had considered this Title and read the Chapter and compared it with others following I presently thought of those Locusts that came out of the smoak of the bottomless pit and of the shape wherein they are represented to us Apoc. 9.7 On their heads were as it were crowns of gold and they had brest-plates as it were brest-plates of iron and the sound of their wings was as the sound of charets of many horses running to battel and they had tails like unto scorpions and there were stings in their tails c. This Chapter is the crown like gold in the head of your Book one or two of your Chapters following have the faces of men the countenance of truth though not without some excrements of the Romish Whore the rest of your Book is military and hath a sound of War and the tail of it which is your Epilogue is the tail of a Scorpion and hath a sting in it wherewith to hurt the simple I shall therefore pass over this Chapter which is Christian to come to that in the others which is Popish CHAP. II. Of the Way to Happiness SEct. 2. you say God hath appointed the means to mans natural happiness to be acts of his understanding aâ—d will for by them he may seek and find out God as he is the Author and End of Nature by these cleave and unite and so enjoy him to mans supernatural happiness to be a Conformity of Faith to the Church a Conformity of Hope to our Lords Prayer and a Conformity of Charity to the Commandments Reply 1. Are not the acts of understanding and will means to supernatural happiness for by them he seeks and finds out God as he is the Author of Grace by these he cleaves and unites and so enjoys God his Saviour and Redeemer When you say Sect. 3. that by faith a man comes to the knowledg of God as he is the Author and End of Grace do not you think that faith is an act of the understanding or will But you were so big-bellyed with the Church that you travelled to be delivered of it and therefore not heeding what you have said you tell us of a Conformity of Faith to the Church 2. I confound Means of divers natures viz. those that are proximate and have an agency or activity in them as understanding and will and those that are remote and do only dispose and help those proximate and active means towards their intended end The proximate means of natural and supernatural happiness are the same only those faculties are helped as to natural happiness by the Books of Nature and the Creatures as to supernatural happiness by the Word of God contained in the Scriptures of the Old and
was a Canonical book of the Old Testament which now you affirm So that in this example you kill two Birds with one stone Ecce duo gladii I pray Sir who told you that Tobit was a part of the Old Testament 1. The Jews told you not for they and to them were committed the Oracles of God received it not but cut it off from the Canon as Hierome in his Prologue to this Book Hierom. ad Chrom Heliod in Tob. Prolog and the Annotator upon him doth also confesse 2. Nor ancient Fathers Bellarmine observes that many of the Ancients as Melito Epiphanius Hilarius Hieronimus Ruffinus to whom add Cyril of Jerusalem in their delivering the Canon of the Old Testament Cyril Catech. 4. p. 99. Stapl. princip Doctr. Christ l. 9. do clearlie follow the Hebrews Stapleton also confesseth that this and other such like books were accounted by the most ancient Christians but as doubtful and Apocriphal 3. Did the Councils affirm it to you I know Trent did but she is a Novice and of no great authoritie in this point The Council of Laodicea confirmed afterwards in a General Council omits this book when she delivers the Canon of Scripture Ans Divers later writers do refuse this book as Lyranus and as I remember Lyran. praefat ad lib. Tobit Sixtus Senensis For a conclusion of this I shall tell you that there were some adjudged Heretiques by the General Council of Vienna amongst whose errors this is the Leader as mentioned by Caranza Quod homo in vita praesenti Caranz Sum. Concil p. 434. c. That man in this present life may attain to such and so great a degree of perfection that thereby he becomes altogether impeccable I pray shew us the difference betwixt this error and your supposed truth of possibilitie of keeping the Law 3. Your Arguments now come to be considered of The 1. is Gods conditional promises to David and his Posteritie could be tearmed no better then jeers unless the Commandments were possible A. I deny your consequence For 1. God may accept of that which man can perform though he do not perform what he should You know Hezekiah's prayer occasioned by a multitude of people that had not cleansed themselves and came to eat the Passeover The good Lord pardon every one that prepareth his heart to seek the Lord God of his Fathers 2 Cron. 30.18 19.20 though he be not cleansed according to the purification of the Sanctuary and the Lord hearkened to Hezekiah Here was a defect in their obedience and yet Gods acceptation and performance of his promise to them which was the benefit of this Sacrament as Lyranus tells you God did fulfil his promise to David and his Posteritie as Solomon acknowledgeth Who hast kept with thy servant David my Faiher that thou promised'st him 1 King 8.24 thou spakest also with thy mouth and hast fulfilled it with thine hand as it is this day Yet you cannot say that David or his Posterity yeelded exact obedience to Gods Commandements for they fell into grievous sins but the main of their lives was holie and this God was pleased to accept of The Falls of the Saints do not nullifie the Covenant of God though somtimes they bring Gods Rod upon them Ps 89.28 c. I should suppose that your self hope for an accomplishment of Gods promise yet I hardlie think that you dream of yeelding exact and perfect obedience to Gods Law before you can obtain the promise 2. God doth not jeer men by exacting obedience which they cannot yeeld For 1. He requires nothing but what they owe him 2. He requires nothing but what he gave them once power to pay him 3. He requires nothing but what Jesus Christ is able to pay for them and God therefore exacts it of them that they may seek unto him on whom he hath laid help This is clearlie taught Isai 55.3.4 I will make an everlasting Covenant with you even the sure mercies of David saith God But Jesus Christ must be given or else this Covenant cannot be sure See Rom. 8.3.4 a most plain text for this purpose 2. Argument is this To what purpose is so much perswasion in books and Pulpits to live well if the Commandments be impossible Is living well any other than keeping of the Commandments It is assuredly as ridiculous as impious to term him a good liver that steals murders and commits adultery c. A. 1. Those perswasions are regulated by Gods command God commands men to live well which as you say is to keep the Commandments and Ministers in books and Pulpits perswade men thereto But to what purpose say you are these if the Commands be impossible I answer it is to much purpose As 1. To shew men what they ought to do It 's a noted Speech of that great Anti-Pelagian St. Augustin O homo in praeceptione cognosce c. O man in the precept know what thou oughtest to have You perswade many to joyn themselves to your Roman Church as the way to salvation which its impossible for many of them to do if you consider either Gods decree or their stability They should deceive if it were possible the very Elect but its impossible that 's implied Now if we ask why you perswade such I know no better reason you could render then this that you shew them what according to your judgment they ought to do 2. To beat down pride and conceit of justification by works whilst we see that there is more owing to God than we can pay This appears in the Apostles speech Rom. 7.9 I was alive without the Law once but when the commandment came sin revived and I dyed This the Law is a worker of fear and bondage and a killing letter 3. To drive them to Christ and the Grace of God through him Propterea enim mandatur saith devout Bernard Therefore God hath enjoyned as to observe his Commandments Bern. in vigil Nat. dom Ser. 2. that seeing our weakness and defects and that we cannot do what we ought we might fly to the mercy of God Thus the Law is a School-Master to lead us to Christ making us ready to hearken to his invitations to lay hold upon his promises meditate on that text Math. 11.30 If this end were not in it I know not why it should perswade those in an unregenerate estate to obey the commands for its impossible they should keep them as all except Pelagians will grant 2ly Whereas you say Is living well any other then keeping of the Commands I Answer Living well and absolute perfect obedience to Gods Commands are not convertible You say of many that they live well but confess you cannot name one man that perfectly keeps the Commandments It would be a harsh note if I should tell you that I know not one Papist in England that lives well Or if some Traveller should affirm that he met not with one man in all
Christ which they had before resisted 4. Your fourth text shews if it be any thing to our present purpose that the Spirit and your Roman Church are two Masters that cannot both be served and therefore it s not strange you have opposed the Spirit whilst you have stood for your Churches interest But Sir know that the Spirit of God and the true Church are not contrary Masters much lesse the Spirit of God in private persons and the same Spirit in publique Ministers The Spirit of God is in the Church and in every particular and reall member thereof revealing himself to each according to the capacity and need of every member 2. You affirm concerning the Scriptures that the Scripture is deficient which you prove by Scripture and by Reason 1. By Scripture for Scripture attesteth it in that it refers to the Church Answ 1. The Scripture never refers to the Church for the perfecting of it that so it may become a perfect Rule of Faith Azor. instit moral part 2. l. 5. c. 24. ad finem if it do shew me where for I know not 2. Your own Authors confesse that the Church cannot make an article of faith how then can she supply the Scriptures deficiency 2. You attempt to prove it by reason saying reason makes it good because it declares not all points that Christians are bound to believe which they acknowledg themselves bound to beleeve Answ 1. I could bring many testimonies to prove that Scripture is a rule your selves grant it to be a rule when you call it Canonical with exclusion of other writings now it s no rule if it be not perfect for the rule that faith requires ought to be as full and ample as the duty of faith 2. The Scripture asserts that whatsoever we are bound to beleeve as necessary to salvation to be beleeved is contained in Scripture that noted place 2 Tim. 3.15 16. makes it evident the abundant utility shews its sufficiency to instruct any to salvation that speech of Biel Quomodo anima hominis In Can. miss lect 7. f. 146. c. How can the soul of man live the life of Righteousnâ—sse and Grace unlesse it know Gods will and those things which according to it are just or unjust to be done or to be left undone to be loved or to be hated to be fear'd or to be attempted and what are to be beleeved and wâ—at to be hoped for with what ever else is necessary to our salvation all which sola docet sacra Scriptura the sacred Scripture alone tâ—acheth Indeed we grant that all things to be beleived are not expresly set down in Scripture nevertheless what is not expressed may be deduced from that which is expressed or analogically reduced thereunto But I come to your instances of points of faith which Scripture declares not 1. Instance concerning Scriptures You say they declare not that those books of Scripture which are received for Canonical are so indeed that some are Canonical other some Apocriphal that they are determinately these or others â—nsw 1. They do declare that those books which are received for Canonical by Protestants are such and the Apocryphal books are not such For 1. One part of Scriptures gives testimony of another The New Testament bears witness of those books that go under the name of Moses the Prophets and Psalms again they give testimony to the New Testament Yea the whole Scripture doth bear witness to it self that it is the Word of God haveing those intinsecal notes whereby it may be known thus it is with the book of the creatures which sets forth the wisdom power and goodness of God and is therefore a witnesse thereof Now if it be asked whence it appears that this is a witnesse it must be granted that it appears by that order which is in the Creation together with the profitablenesse and usefullnesse of all things in their places The harmony consent spiritual profit c. of Gods Word in Scripture doth evidence that it is Gods Word and sacred Scripture If it were not thus that Scripture gave testimony of it self how doth the Church it self know Scripture to be Scripture She cannot plead Enthusiasme and the humane testimony of Fathers is no sufficient ground for infallibility 2ly All things are written by the Apostles which are necessary to be beleeved by all men Bellarm. de suffis script c. 11. these are Bellarmines words but to beleeve the Scriptures to be the Scripture is necessary for all men say you therefore it must needs follow that its written by the Apostles that the Scriptures are Scriptures 3ly By way of retortion I pray Sir how do you know that this or the other is the true Church for this Bellarmine saith must be certainly known in as much as all opinions depend upon his testimonies The same way that you say the Church may be known even by it self the same way do we know the Scriptures they give evidence to themselves 4th The exact knowledg of what books are Canonical is not absolutely necessary to be beleeved I deny not but the knowledg of Gods Word is thus necessary and this may be where that knowledg is wanting It cannot rationally be denyed that Christians for some hundred years after the Apostles did know the Word of God yet wanted exact knowledg of what books were Canonical nor was the knowledg of them judged necessary to salvation 2. Instance concerning the Jewish Sabboth You say The Scripture declare not that the Jews Sabboth â—s to be neglected and laid aside and the sunday solemnized An w. The Scriptures declare both The first Col. 2.16 17. Let no man judg you in respect of the Sabboth days which are a shaddow of things to come but the body is of Christ Azorius saith the precept of the Sabboth Azor. inst tuor p. 2. l. 1. c. 1. if you consider the determinate and set time did belong to the ceremonial Law and therefore was abolished by the death of Christ Now the Scriptures are most clear and full for the abolishing of the ceremonies For the second the Scriptures expresly teach the solemnization of Sunday 1 Cor. 16. Apoc. 1. Calling it the Lords day Rhem. amot on Gal. 4.10 The Rhemists say In the Apoc. c. 1. There is plain mention of the Sunday that is our Lords day unto which the Jewes Sabboth was altered 3. Instance Concerning the Creed you say The Scriptures declare not that the Creed is authentique and truly the Apostles Answ 1. If you consider the matter of it the Scriptures declare that it is truly authentique and the Apostles for the articles thereof are Apostolique Doctrine contained in the Scriptures Every article may be proved by them 2ly If you consider the form or composure of it that the Apostles made it each one of them addding an article to it this is not necessary to be beleived being but grounded on humane fallible testimony 4. Inst Concerning things indifferent
New Testament See Rom. 1.19 20. 2 Tim. 3.15 16.17 John 17.3 3. Your Conformity of Faith to the Church in a Popish sence is a novel phrase not used by the first Christians nor the Apostles of Christ in any of their writings nor did they ever bid men beleeve as the Church beleeved though that was of greater authority then the present Church is but still called their faith to the Word of God contrary to which if Paul or any other Apostles yea or Angels from Heaven did preach the people were to reject them and no doubt if Paul had preached such stuff as now Popish Sermons are filled with traditions and new decrees ungrounded on Gods Word the Beraeans had rejected him and his praying It was for want of this Conformity of Faith to the Word of God that our Saviour upbraids the two Disciples that travelled to Emaus Luk. 24.25 He saith not O flow of heart to beleeve all that the Church beleeves this as I said was no Scripture language nor known to primitive Christians but to beleeve all that the Prophets have spoken And that he may lead them to this Conformity of Faith he expounds not the Decrees and Constitutions of Scribes and Pharisees who sat in Moses Chair whereof there were many but 't is said Beginning at Moses and all the Prophets he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself vers 27. Sir I beleeve you are so dutiful a son to the Church that had you been in Christs stead you would rather have told them of Popes decretal Epistles then of Prophets writings of Traditions rather then Scripture if such things then had had a being But 4. Why could not you say a Conformity of Faith to the Truth revealed as well as a Conformity of Faith to the Church revealing the Truth The Truth revealed not the Church revealing it is the Rule of Faith as I shall shew hereafter 1. You might have done well once for all to have told us what you mean by The Church for the word is diversly attributed even by those who in general agree that it is only the Roman Church as you seem by your Epistle to the Reader to understand it 2. You urge Scripture to prove your Assertion viz. three Texts Mat. 28.19 Luke 10.16 Mat. 16. The two first do not so much as mention the word Church the last mentions the word but proves not the thing you bring it for 1. Mat. 28. Going teach ye all Nations Ans I wonder in what word the proof lies I suppose it 's not in Going and I dare say Teaching proves it not for then every Teacher should be a Rule of Faith besides the Apostles were not to teach men to hang their faith upon themselves or others whether of the Roman or any other Church but they were commanded to teach men to do whatsoever Christ had commanded vers 10. amongst which this was the principal work to believe on him whom God had sent Joh. 6.29 viz. Jesus Christ to whom they were brought by the Apostles preaching as living stones to be built upon a foundation 2. Luke 10.16 He that heareth you heareth me Ans I suppose this Text is brought to explain the other which had need of a Commentary to make it speak your language But 1. This is spoken primarily and absolutely of the Apostles who were Christs mouth in delivering the Scriptures and therefore infallibly inspired by the Holy Ghost that they could not err in what they delivered to us That which Moses was to the Jews in delivering the Law the same were the Apostles to us in delivering the Gospel So that he that heareth the Apostles heareth Christ because it was the word of Christ which they did speak and this way we hear the Apostles speak yet whilest wâ— read or hear the Scriptures which they pen'd but what is this to the present Roman Church and her unwritten Traditions 2. As it 's understood of ordinary Ministers in the Church it can only be understood conditionally He that heareth you while your doctrine agreeth with the Word of God heareth me so that faith is not a conformity to any Teachers or their doctrine but so far as their doctrine is agreeable with the Scriptures which indeed are the Rule both of their preaching and our beleeving Consonantly hereunto the Apostle saith If any man teach otherwise and consent not to wholesom words even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ he is proud from such withdraw thy self 1 Tim. 6.3 c. The Scribes and Pharisees who were the Church in a Popish sence were to be heard but it was whilest they sate in Moses Chair that is whilest they preached not their own traditions and phancies but Moses doctrine Arias Montanus saith Elucid in Mat. 23. Christ bids them do what the Scribes and Pharisees commanded Ex praescripto legis id est ex Cathedrâ Mosis So Origen Origen apud Lyran. Super Cathedram c. isie sermo de me est qui bona dâ—ceo contraria gero 3. The Text speaks not of the Church for particular Ministers in the Church are not the Church Now your Rhemists expound it of them in these words It is all one to despise Christ RheÌ„ Annot. on the Text. and to despise his Priests and Ministers in the Catholique Church to refuse his doctrine and theirs And indeed it must be understood of those who labour in the Word and Doctrine not of non-preaching Popes and Prelates 3. Mat. 16. you would say Mat. 18.17 which you read thus He that heareth not the Church let him be as an Heathen and a Publican Not to say any thing of your false quotation or reading a fault common throughout your Book Protestants may take notice what great cause we have to put these men into our bosoms as they expect whilest they profess we are no better then Heathens or Publicans though I am sure their usage from us hath shewed us Christians But to the Text How little it makes for your purpose the Context words themselves will shew It speaks not of Conformity of Faith to the Church but of obedience of the offending party to the admonition of the Pastors of the Church Thus Lyranus Si non aud Eccles pr ceptum praelatos contemnendo Lyr. in loc You might as well say that faith is a conformity to our selves because it 's said If he neglect to hear thee vers 15. or to two or three witnesses because it 's said If he neglect to hear them vers 17. whereby is implied that he ought to hear them Hence it might well follow that faith ought rather to be resolved upon a neighbor that is a private man then upon the Church because the offended party is first to be heard before the Church And then Sir who is guilty of the Private spirit that you anon talk of Sure your selves and not the Protestants In stead of these misapplied Scriptures for you I shall give you
infer'd from the other because the observation of the Law is through the Faith of Christ This righteousness of Faith is easie in regard of Law righteousness which was to be done by us whereas it is rather fulfilled in us by Christ Rom. 8.3.4 This is further confirmed by the Jews who unanimously affirm that this thirtieth Chapter belongs to the Kingdom of the Messiah 3. If they be spoken of the Commandements and prove that they may be kept it remains yet to prove that this keeping of them is an exact and perfect fulfilling of them indeed to those that are regenerate the Commandements are said not to be grievous 1 Joh. 5. but this is only because they keep in them in such measure that God is pleased freelie to accept and reward them for it 4. These words are spoken to the people of the Jews in general even to all and therefore to each of them amongst whom there were many unregenerate Will you say now that unregenerate and graceless ones can keep the Commandments of God perfectly Concil Tri. dent Sess 6. Can. 18. This were to oppose your unerring Council of Trent who limit this possibilitie to the regenerate only 2. Text. Matth. 11.21 't is v. 30. My yoke is sweet my burthen light A. 1. By Yoke many understand the Gospel not the Law and by burthen Christs Discipline Christs yoke saith Chrysostome Gloss ordin Chrysost apud Lyran. is the Gospel which unites Jews and Gentiles in one Faith Lyranus and Emanuel so call it Lex Evangelica Now this is Faith working by love This is the work of God that we believe on him whom God hath sent Joh. 6.29 This is most suitable to the context for our Saviour is speaking to poor souls burthened with sin or the Lawes yoke as your Glosse and Lyra who calls the Law Onus patribus antiquis importabile speak Now can we think Christ should send them to the Law again This were to deliver up a poor oppressed servant to his rigid Master which the Law forbids Is it not rather more suitable to Christs temper to advise them thus Poor souls the Law hath terrified you by exacting of you perfect obedience or in case of defect subjecting you to the curse Come therefore to me believe on me by a true Faith accompanied with love applying my perfect obedience for the covering of your disobedience look upon my stripes see me become a curse for you and rest upon my promise of application of my obedience to you this is sweet and profitable whereas your own righteousness is unprofitable as to the acquitting of you from subjection to the curse See this Phil. 3. init And though you meet with a burthen of afflictions and sufferings these are but light and they work for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glorie 2. If it should be understood of the Law it cannot demonstrate a facilitie of exact and perfect obedience This is most difficult so as its hard you say to name any particular man that attains unto it but of an inclination of the heart to and an endeavour of obedience this is easie to one that comes to Christ the Apostle shews this in his own experience saying To will is present with me but how to perform that which is good I find not Rom. 7.18 Which is notably confirmed by S. Augustine Aug. apud Lyran. Semper bonus vult c. A good man hath alwayes a will not to sin but he never attains to this perfection in this life that he should not sin There is a kinde of Emphasis in the Apostles word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he did some good but he did not throughly do it he was not altogether free from concupiscense Athan. apud Eund as that Father shews Thus Athanasius propounding the question how the Gospel is lighter then the Law seeing the Law condemns evil works and the Gospel concupiscense he answers In Lege multa jubentur c. In the Law many things are commanded which the Apostle saith cannot be done in the Gospel there is required the will which alone may suffice and be rewarded Certainlie where Grace is there is an inclination to good yea a delight in the Law of God according to the inward man yet there is no perfection And hereupon the most godlie have their sighes groans tears complaints for their weakness and miscarriages 2. Your examples are many some of them say you out of the Old Testament others out of the New to which I say 1. Those you mention of the Old and New Testament viz. Noe Ezekias Josias Josephat Asa Jotham J b Simeon John Baptist Zecharias Elizabeth the B. Virgin were all of them godly and holy persons and did keep the Commandments in such measure that God in his mercie did accept of them But I denie that any of them did so perfectly fulfil the Law that they were able to stand the trial of Gods exact Justice And therefore read the lives of the most holy men that the Scripture mentions and you shall find their blemishes and sins which are inconsistent with exact and perfect obedience David is said to be a man after Gods own heart yet committed two mortal sins to use your word Murder and Adulterie Noe was a just man but guiltie of drunkenness Gen. 9.21 a sin that excluded from Heaven 1 Cor. 6.10 Zecharias is taxed with unbelief Luk. 1.20 It 's easie to instance in the rest but for brevities sake I desire you to find your own quotations and peruse them that which the Scripture asserts of these is that for the main of their lives they were blameless before men This is fully propounded by S. Augustine in answer to your Fathers the Pelagians whose argument this of yours was For speaking of Zacharias and Elizabeth how they were blameless Aug. de Grat. Dei Contr. Pelag. caelest l. 1. c. 48. he hath these words Dictum est c. It 's spoken as it seems to me of their conversation which was approved and commendable in the sight of men and which none could justly accuse or complain of c. 2. There is one example which you bring in amongst the crowd of Scripture examples and if it were one of them it is of Tobias mentioned Tob. 2. I shall answer this particularlie because fetcht out of an Apocriphal book 1. Therefore I say in the place you quote I read nothing of Tobias that can prove your assertion to argue from one or two particular acts of charity to an absolute perfection of charity is no good Logick But sure Sir you were in love with his name and thought he was perfectly good because his name was Tobias rather then because the second chapter of Tobit saith any thing of it But what fault had good David made that he could not have a room in the Old Testament as well as Tobias I believe he should but then you could not have told us that Tobit
Spiritus c. They are Spirit as if he should say the words I have spoken have a Spirituall sence and so they vivifie they have a Spirituall understanding the flesh of Christ is eaten in this Sacrament in a spiritual manner Your pleas for this opinion are vain 1. You say The question was not what says he that they knew would be trifling and ridiculous Christ having immediately before confirmed the signification of his first words This is my Body By other latter Vnless ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood you shall have no life in you and they both heard and understood the language he spake in Reply 1. Pray where are those first words This is my Body You shut your eyes and laid aside your honesty when you brought them in as spoken by Christ before his supposed answer But suppose them there tell us next how those latter words doe confirme the signification of them 2. When you tell us they knew what he said and both heard and understood the language he spake in you will shew your self a notorious trifler Wil it follow that because they knew his words heard understood his language that therfore they understood his meaning I trow not Those that read the hard of places of Pauls Epistles did both hear understand the language he spake in yet knew not his meaning and therefore wrested them to their own perdition The Jews both heard and understood the language Christ delivered his parables in yet it was not given them to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven Nicodemus understood Christs language but not his meaning about regeneration You cannot deny but the Laity may both hear and understand the language whereinto the Scriptures are translated yet their private Spirit must not think of understanding the Scriptures meaning Thus though these Capernaits might and did understand his language yet they did remaine ignorant of their true meaning as all prudent Expositors confess and your Rhemists expresly affirm saying Their gross and carnal conceiving of his words of his flesh and the manner of eating the same was unprofitable which is plain by the sentence following where he warneth tâ—em that his words be spiri life of high mystical meaning and not vulgarly and grosly to be taken as they took them 2. You adde Therefore except you will say that Christ answered not to the purpose his scope and aime must be to declare his power to the â—nd to convince the Capernaits that he was full able to perform what he said Reply 1. If you will have it the aim of Christ to declare his power to perform what he said and that directly in answer to the Caperâ—aits question you must grant that Christ did declare his ability to give them his body cut mangled into pieces for so they understand the eating of his flesh and thereupon grounded their question How can this man give us his flesh cut and mangled into pieces for the effecting of this they expected a proof of his power if you will have it so Now this your selfe will grant impossible being contrary to the will of God the measure of his power therefore you must confess that Christ spake not to the purpose as you object against us Or grant as the truth is that they understood not Christ's meaning and therefore that he answered concerning the manner of their eating not his power of giving his flesh c. 2. We do not find how Christ declares any power in these words You answer He doth it effectually and home by saying my words are spirit A Spirit having strength and vertue to do more then all bodyes put together can either do or conceive Reply A goodly Argument and fit for your children that are content with stones in stead of bread Christ is a Spirit is he therefore able to give his flesh to be eaten then all Spirits have the same power But Sir why cannot a man a body give his flesh to be eaten carnally I see no difficulty in it nor need of any spiritual power to effect it if there be but Popish or other Cannibals that will eat it 2. How can the words of Christ be called a Spirit in your sence for you take not spirit for breath but properly Are words living and intelligent beings as Spirits are But I suppose this quaint Exposition was hammered out of your own brain and though it agrees neither with Fathers nor your elder brethren yet because it opposeth the wicked Calvinists you like it well And indeed so do I both because it shews you to be a most ingenious learned acute and reverend Expositor and also discovers the goodness of your cause that needs such Expositions Objection 2. The second Objection say you The Roman Church committeth idolatry in her adâ—ration at Mass bowing to the Name of Jesus Altars Images and Relicks You answer 1. By the Commandment Thou shalt not make to thy selfe any graven thing nor adore it Exod. 20. is neither forbid the Art of Engraving Carving Printing Painting Casting Sowing Embroydering nor yet all manner of religious honour to be given to creatures Reply 1. The Art of Engraving c. is certainly lawful yet the exercise of it hath its limitations which I conceive may be reduced to these two heads 1. That nothing be engraven c. but what ought to be engraven c. whereby is forbidden the engraving carving painting any lascivious pictures tending to excite lust but especially as to our purpose painting engraving and carving any images of the divine Persons thus Moses tells the Jews Ye heard the voice of the words but saw no similitude only ye heard a voyce Take ye therefore good heed unto your selves for ye saw no maÌ„ner of similitude on the day that the Lord spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire lest ye corrupt your selves Deut. 4.14 15 16. and make you a graven image the similitude of any figure the likenesâ— of male and female c. For this reason Eusebius refused to send Constantia the Image of Christ Euseb Eccles l. 7. c. 17. and imputes the Erection of Christs Image to an heathenish Custome saying It is not any marvel at all that they which of the Gentiles were cured by our Saviour made and set up such things for the men of old of an Heathenish custome were wont to honour after this manner such as they counted Saviours Lorichius doth excellently set forth this Ger. Lorich instit Cathol in praecept fol. 95. Est praeterea abusus imaginum c. There is saith he besides an abuse of Images in that we presume to express the sacred Trinity which is truly a most pestilent heresie for what can be more contrary to the Holy Trinity then to paint the Father like a crooked old man the Son in the form of a young man and the Holy Ghost like a flying fowle What can Ideots learn from such a
book truly nothing but errour and heresie This is the first 2. That nothing be engraven carved or painted for this end that it may be an object of adoration or worship Thus Moses saith Ye shall make you no idol nor graven image to bow down unto it Hence its observable that though we reade that Images used many years ago yet Cassander tells us they were used as Historicall remembrances which use is not sinfull they were not objects for a religious and devout eye to be fixed upon nor did they challenge any religious prostration or honour yea the giving of Religious honor to them whether under 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is expresly forbidden in the Scriptures as Exod. 20.5.23.33 but of this more even now In the interim I come to examine your proofs 1. You say In the Old Testament where this Commandement is enjoyned the use of those severall acts was held lawfull and religious honour exhibited c. Reply 1. The former part of your assertion is manifestly true the later is evidently false and your proofs altogether unsatisfactory 1. Say you Religious honour was exhibited to the fiery bush by Moses Exod. 25. Reply the Text which you misquote it being Exod. 3. proves no religious honour to be given to the bush nor indeed any kind of honour Those things that might carry any shew of such a thing to you if you consulted the Text before you urged it which I much question are these ver 2. He looked v. 3. Moses said I will now turn aside to see this great sight v. 4. He said to God Here am I v. 5. He is bid to put off his shooes verse 6. He hid his face excepting these I know nothing in this Chapter can be urged for honour to the bush and which of these make for it I cannot tell but 2. If it was honoured it was neither Masse nor Altar nor Image nor Relique If it have resemblance to any of them it is to Image But this it hath not as Lyranus observes in these words Erat populus Israel ad Idolatriam pronus c. Lyran. in loc The Israelites were prone to idolatry and therefore God appeared in the flame which cannot be figured by any image and in the bush because in such things there could no image be made c. 2. To the Oracle of the high Priests 3 King 27. Reply This book hath but 22. Chapters where then shall we finde your 27. but I remember not any words of Scripture either in that or any other book that seems to express the high Priests religious honour to the Oracle and therefore shall stay for your correction 3. To the Ark of David Exod. 3. Levit. 26. Psal 131. Reply your two former proofs are mistakes neither of these books mentioning David at all Your third Text hath these words We will go into his Tabernacles we will worship at his footstool some Papists reade the latter words thus Adoremus scabellum pedum ejus i.e. we will worship his footstool whom I suppose you follow and there upon ground Davids worship of the Ark. But I appeal from the private to the publick spirit from the translation of L. B. to the vulgar Translation of the Romish Church which is Adorabimus in loco ubi steterunt pedes ejus we will worship the place where Gods feet do stand which may be meant of the Tabernacle as Psalm 26.8 Lord I have loved the habitation of thine house and the place where thine honour dwells not said we will worship the place for God is the object of worship as Euthymius well shews In these words saith he is foretold how the Temple should again be erected and how they should goe into it and there worship God as before Euthym. apud Lyran. 2. You say God himself justified them therein by striking Uzziah with Leprosie and Oza with death for not forbearing to meddle with holy and sacred things without authority 2 Paralip 26 2 King 6. Reply 1. What you say is most true but nothing to purpose Vzziahs sin was that He burnt incense upon the Altar of incense and so usurped the Priests Office v. 16.18 not that he did not bow to the altar which you should prove If Vzziah had crept to it upon his knees and kissed it and acknowledged Divinâ—â—â— in it this would not have mitigated his guilt nor have prevented his Leprosie Joseph lib. 7. An iq cap. 4. The sin of Oza or Vzzah is diversly conceived of Josephus conceives it was because being no Priest he yet presumed to meddle with the Ark which is also Augustines opinion others think he was punished not so much for this as some former sinne because it often happens that lesser faults doe bring on punishments of former sins now this other sin of Vzziah is mentioned by Procopius in these words Alterius delictum huc poenas c. He is punished for another sin for whereas God commanded that the Priests should carry the Ark upon their shoulders he illegally carried it in a cart and therefore David when he fetcht it from the house of Obed-Edom carried it not in a cart as before but on mens shoulders in humeris v. 13. ne percuerent sicut Oza as the ordinary gloss Now what maks all or any of this for you here is not a syllable for adoration of Mass Altars Images Reliqus nor indeed for any religious adoration of any thing Thirdly you say by way of conclusion so that all this Commandement forbids is to make graven things to the end to honour them with divine honour that is to make gods of them as the Pagans did Reply 1. Your premises have been already confuted and therefore this conclusion if it had direct dependance on them as it hath not would fall with them Your self in saying the Commands forbids not all religious honour implies that some manner of religious honour is forbidden and if so then not onely Divine for you clearly distinguish betwixt religious honour and divine Page 103. 2. I shall add to what I have already said and in opposition to what you say that Religious honour is forbid by this Commandment religious and divine honour being the very same see Azor. Instat Moral part 1. l. c 10.9.2 For the clearing of this let us see what religion and what religious worship is religion saith the Orator is that which is contained in the pious worship of the Gods Augustine notably expresseth it Si cultus tantummodo dicatur c. Aug. de Civit. Dei L. 10. c. 1. Aquin. 22 ae q. 81. Art 1. c. ad 4. Art 4. If it be only called worship it agrees not to God onely But religion signifies more distinctly not any but onely the worship of God Thus Religion is defined with your Schoolmen by its relation to God Religion saith Aquinas is a vertue whereby men give due worship and reverence to God yea by it speciall honour is given to God And