Certamen Religiosum OR A CONFERENCE BETWEEN The late King of ENGLAND and the late Lord Marquesse of Worcester concerning RELIGION TOGETHER WITH A VINDICATION OF THE PROTESTANT CAUSE From the Pretences of the Marquesse his Last Papers which the necessity of the KING's Affaires denyed him Oportunity to Answer LONDON Printed for W. Lee at the Turks Head in Fleet-street and R. Royston at the Angel in Ivie-lane 1651. TO THE READER COURTEOUS READER I Doe not desire by way of Preface to trouble Thee with many words but something I must crave leave to say that thou mayest the better understand the reason and nature of this ensuing worke It may be thou art not unacquainted with a Booke which now hath beene extant some years The title of it is Certamen Religiosum and it containeth in it a Conference which was held partly by word of mouth but chiefly by Writing betwixt the late King and the Marquesse of Worcester a stiffe defender of the Romish Religion To the Marquesses first Plea I speake of that which passed betwixt them in writing the King returned Answer but the Marquesse replying the Kings occasions it seemes would not permit him to rejoyne especially the Reply being so large and so thick lin'd with quotations that the perusall and examination of it would require no little time I know there are some who account this Conference no better then supposititious which reflecting upon the Publisher of it Doctor Baily he hath lately in a Preface to a Booke which hee hath set forth of his own vindicated himself and asserted the Conference For my part I know no cause to question the truth of the Relation neither as to my purpose is it much materiall whether there were any such Conference or if there were whether it were so mannaged as is related This I see that in the Booke before mentioned to wit Certamen Religiosum the Romish cause is set out in great pompe both Scriptures and Fathers being produced as asserting most of those opinions which they of the Church of Rome maintaine and we impugne and the Reader is left naked and unfurnished with any Armes and Weapons wherewith either to defend himselfe or to offend his adversary save onely as he shall be able to provide for himselfe and bring with him The first time that I heard the Booke mentioned which was about the last Spring it was spoken of as a Booke of no little danger and so I understand since diverse judge of it Yea I have heard that some have said that the Marquesse in this Reply hath done more for the Church of Rome then any have done before him When I got the Booke and looked a while into it though I saw no reason to conceive so highly of it as it seemes some have done yet I found in it I confesse much more then I expected so much as that I thought it operae pretium no mis-pent time to answer it This I have indeavoured how I have performed it is left to Thee Reader to judge The great difficulty in the undertaking did arise from the multitude of Authors that are alleged whether the Marquess himselfe did peruse these authors or tooke them upon trust from others I will not inquire much lesse determine especially considering how lax and loose the quotations are the words of the Authors being scarce once in a hundred times cited and sometimes onely the Authour named many times only the Book but no Chapter or Section mentioned In this respect it could not be expected that every allegation should receive a punctuall answer besides that as in the Rejoynder it selfe upon occasion I acknowledge sometimes for want of the Authour I had not liberty to examine what is alleged but this I presume will not be found so frequent nor yet at all prejudiciall to the maine so much still being said as may suffice to take off the force of that which is objected There is an answer already come forth to the Marquesses last Paper with which I have to deale The authour of it is a gentleman of much reading well versed in Greek and Latin writers both Ecclesiasticall and others as appears by this work which is all that I have seene of his though I hear of something else that he hath published not without great commendation I had undertaken this task before I had any intimation that another was about it and I think this of mine was at the Presse before the foresaid Answer came from it I could not confine my selfe to such narrow bounds as that Gentleman hath done in answer to the Marquesse for he hath others also besides him to deal with the reason of his concisenes is best knowne unto himselfe I have launched further into the deepe and have exspatiated more in the discussion of those points which are handled by the Marquesse yet so as that the Reader I hope will have no cause to complaine of proxility or to thinke me tedious I have divided the worke into two parts in the former part I have indeavoured to shew the ungroundednes of the Romish doctrine in those points which the Marquesse propoundeth and the repugnancy of it both to Scriptures and Fathers notwithstanding any thing he hath alleged in defence of it In the latter part I have laboured to wipe off those aspersions which the Marquesse doth cast upon diverse of our most eminent Divines and chiefe instruments in the worke of Reformation as Luther Calvin Zuing lius Melancthon and Beza partly in respect of their Doctrine and partly in respect of their conversation This the learned answerer before mentioned hath not attempted but I did not think it meete to wave it calumnies and reproches being more apt to prevaile with some then any other argument whatsoever Some points of controversie also which the Marquesse taketh occasion to bring in having not mentioned them before are insisted on in this second Part. Some perhaps may say Quorsum perditio haec What needed all this these controversies haveing bin sufficiently handled by our writers both at home and abroad long agoe I answer 'T is true they have bin so yet if the Marquesse thought it not enough that Bellarmine and many others of the Romish party have written largely in that behalfe but judged it meet to produce his own Plea I think there is as much reason why we should consider what he saith and that some answer should be given him that so none may boast as some are apt to doe in such a case that because hee is unanswered therfore he is unanswerable And besides though Nil dictum quod non dictum priùs the matter be not new yet there may be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a handling of the same things in another manner yea and diverse treating of the same subject something may be found in one which is not in another But may some say there are many other great and grosse errours of late sprung up among us and these
a remedy Tertullian makes no mention of secret confession of sins as Rhenanus observes who conceiveth that secret confession did arise from publick confession people of their owne accord confessing secret sinnes secretly as they used to confesse open sins openly For saith he We no where read that this secret confession was injoyned he means by the Ancients One Father more there is whom the Marquesse here citeth namely Chrysostome lib. 3. de Sacerdot So Bellarmine having alledged something out of the former book of Chrysostome bids see also the third book But no doubt if there had been any thing more for Bellarmines purpose in the third book then in the second he would have been so good as to have set it before us Now the very words of Chrysostome as Bellarm cites out of lib. 2. de sacerd do shew that he speaks not of a necessity lying upon all to confesse all their sinnes to a Minister but onely that Christiani qui laborant Christians that are in a perplexed estate have need of this remedy Having thus shewed that the Fathers testifie nothing for Popish confession I shall shew how they testifie against it And to begin with him that was last mentioned Chrysostome is most copious in this kind Why art thou ashamed saith he and doest blush to confesse thy sinnes Doest thou speak to a man that he may upbraid thee Doest thou confesse to thy fellow servant that he may insult over thee To thy Lord to him that hath a care of thee to him that is kind to the Physitian thou doest shew thy wound Here he takes it for granted that there is ordinarily no necessity of confessing to any but to God onely So againe Art thou ashamed saith he to say that thou hast sinned Confesse then daily in thy prayr For doe I say confesse to thy fellow servant who may reproach thee No confesse unto God who doth cure thee Diverse such sayings hath this Father most plain and pregnant for our purpose Bellarmine with all his art and all his industry was not able to give a satisfactory answer to them He saith that Chrysostome spake onely of publick Confession not of private onely of that which is made in the open Congregation not of that which is made to a Priest in secret But it is evident that Chrysostome speaks against the necessity of confessing to any but onely unto God He bids Confesse in thy soul Make confession in thy thought Let God onely see thee confessing Such confession as this man hath nothing to do with either in publick or in private Bellarmine answers that in these places Chrysostome doth speak of confession not as it hath reference to the Priests absolution but as it hath reference to shame and confusion and in this latter respect he saith Chrysostome doth well admonish that it is not necessary to confesse unto man either in publique or in private but that it sufficeth to confesse with sorrow and tears unto God onely But here Bellarmine a thing not unusuall with him doth contradict himself For here he granteth that to confess only unto God is enough to work shame yet in another place he saith That shame useth not to be feared in that confession which is made onely unto God And againe Shamefac'dnesse hath no place in that confession which is made onely unto God These assertitions as they agree not with the truth see Ezr. 9. 6. so neither do they agree with the answer that here Bellarmine giveth unto Chrysost Where as Bellarm saith that Chrysost speaketh not of confession as having reference to the Priests absolution it is easily granted there being ordinarily no necessity of any such absolution Chrysostme willeth a man to confesse though but in his heart unto God assuring him that thereby he shall obtain Gods absolution and what need then of any others absolution Except in some speciall case viz. for the quieting of a troubled conscience and that one may the better enjoy the comfort of Gods absolution Thus for Chrysostme Austine also doth shew the no-necessity of confessing unto men which still must be understood excepting some particular case wherein it may be requisite What have I to doe saith he with men that they should hear my confessions as if they could heal all my diseases Bellarmine takes it in disdaine that these words of Austine should be alledged against their confession This he saith is nothing else but to delude the simple For that whosoever reads Austines Confessions cannot but know that he speakes not of Sacramentall Confession but of the Confession of sinnes past and forgiven by Baptisme which Confession was made to that end that thereby the mercy of God might be seen and praised But Austines words are of more force then thus to be evaded We willingly grant that Austine speaks not of Sacramentall Confession there being indeed no such Confession to be spoken of as they call Sacramentall no such I say truly so called and so much these very words of Austine doe sufficiently testifie For Sacramentall Confession as they call it is a Confession necessarily to be made unto a Priest or else no remission of sin they say committed after Baptisme can be obtained but Austine shewes that ordinarily Confessing unto men is not necessary Neither is it so that Austine in his book of Confessions doth only speak of his sins which he had committed before he was Baptized For in that tenth Book where he hath the words before cited he speaketh of sinnes which he was guilty of long after his Baptisme yea even then when he was writing his Confessions As namely impure Dreames and nocturnall pollutions as also excesse in Eating Diverse other particulars doth he also confesse saying that his life was full of such failings and that all his hope was onely in Gods exceeding great mercy To this purpose also Ambrose who speaking of Peter saith I find not what he spake I find that he wept And hence he infers that tears may procure pardon of sin though no verball Confession be made of it To this testimony of Ambrose Bellarmine answers that as then Sacramentall Confession was not instituted and therefore 't is no marvell if we doe not read of Peters confession And 't is very true that Sacramentall Confession neither then had nor at all hath any divine institution Again Bellarmine sayes that Tears of which Ambrose speaketh containe a kind of Confession in them This indeed is true in respect of God who knowes the heart and affection from whence Tears proceed and therefore David saith that the Lord had heard the voice of his weeping Psal 6. 8. which shewes that as the Tongue by speaking so the Eyes by weeping have a voice which God doth hear But what is this unto men who by tears alone without words can understand little Bellarmine grants that Tears are sufficient in that Confession which is made unto God who
Dippers Shakers Adamists Luther complaining of seven Sects risen in two years And we of new Sects rising every day If we should consider the severall species of Independency how it hath brought Religion to nothing but Confusion we would conclude with Saint Angustine That it is necessary that rent and divided into small pieces we perish who have preferred the swelling pride of our haughty Stomacks before the most holy band of Catholick peace and Unity Whilst the Catholicks have no jars undecided no differences uncomposed having one common Father one Conductor and Adviser as Sir Edward Sands confesseth None contend about the Scripture all Consent and Credit the Fathers adhere to the Councels submit to the holy Sea of Rome And the Divisions that are are but humane dissentions as is confessed by Luther Beza Whitaker Fulk c. Thus Religion being at Unity with it selfe is the true Speculum Creatoris or looking glasse of the Creatour wherein the full proportion of a Deity may be seen but once broken into pieces it may represent divers faces but no true proportion and loseth at once both its value and its virtue I have thus presented Your Majesty with a view of the Cotholick Religion asserted by the Fathers and the Protestant Religion asserted by their founders I shall humbly desire Your Majesties further patience that Your Majestie will be pleased to consider the lives and Conversations of the one and of the other First the rare Sanctity and admired holinesse which all ages and writers have ascribed unto these holy Fathers And the strange and unheard of blasphemies vilenesse and wickednesse that are cast upon the other not by any of their Adversaries but by themselves upon one another If these testimonies had been by any of our side I could not have expected credit but being by Protestants themselves I cannot see how it should be denied Luther confesseth saith the learned Protestant Hospinian that he was taught by the devil that the Masse was naught and overcome with the devils reasons he abolisht it The same confessed by himselfe I ingeniously confesse saith Luther that I cannot henceforth place Zwinglius in the number of Christians and further he affirmes that he had lost whole Christ Zwinglius saith Schlusselburg after the manner of all Hereticks was stricken with the spirit of giddinesse and blindnesse deriving it from the etimologie of his name in dutch von dem Schwindel Gualterus calls Zwinglius the Author of War the disturber of peace proud and cruell and instances in his strange attempt against the Tygurines his fellows whom he forced by want and famine to follow his doctrine and that he dyed in armor and in the Warre And Luther saith he dyed like a thiefe because he would compell others to his error And he saith further that he denyed Christ and is damn'd He tells us also that the devill or the devills dam used to appeare to Carolose and taught him the exposition of this is my body As also that he possessed him corporally and that he was possessed with more devils then one Neither would he have any man wonder that he calls him devill for he saith he hath nothing to doe with him but has onely relation to him by whom he is obsest who speaks by him The last apparition of the devill to him which was three dayes before his death is recorded by Albert. If you look into Bezas Epigrams printed at Paris An. 1548. you will find pretty passages concerning his boy Andebers and his wench Candida and the businesse debated at large concerning which sin is to be preferr'd and his chusing the boy at last Sclusselberg said that Peter Martyr was a heretick and dyed so Nicolaus Selneverus said that Oecolampadius in his doctrine built upon the sand And Saith Luther Emser and Oecolampadius and such like were hiddenly slain by those horrible blowes and shakings of the devill Simlerus saith that Brentius Miricus and Andrew Musculus in their writings did nothing else but make way for the devill Luther saith Calvin was infected with many vices I would he had been more carefull in correcting his vices God for the sin of pride wherewith Luther exalted himself took away his true spirit We have found saith Oecalompadius in the faith and confession of Luthers 12. Articles whereof some are more vaine then is fitting some lesse faithfull and over-guilefully expounded others again are false and reprobate but some there are which plainly dissent from the Word of God and the Articles of Christian faith Thou O Luther saith Zwinglius corruptest and adulterest the Scriptures imitating therein the Marcionists and the Arians In translating and expounding of Scripture Luthers errors are many and manifest Zwinglius tells us that Luther affirms sometimes this and sometimes that of one and the same thing that he is never at one with himself taxing him with inconstancy and lightnesse in the word of God That he cares not what he saith though he be found contradicting the Oracles of God As sure as God is God so sure and devilish a lyer is Luther Luthers writings containe nothing but railing and reproaches insomuch that it maketh the Protestant Religion suspected and hated He calls an anointed King Hen. 8. of England a furious dolt indued with an impudent and whorish face without a vein of princely bloud in his whole body a lying Sophist a damnable rotten worm a basilisk the progeny of an Adder scurrilous lyer covered with a title of a King a clown a block-head foolish wicked and impudent Henry and saies that he lies like a scurrilous knave and thou liest in thy throat foolish and sacrilegious King Nor did he lesse raile at other Princes as at the Duke of Brunswick in his Booke called Wider hans worst written purposely against him as also against the Bishop of Mentz one of the Princes Electors And against the Princes of Germany No marvaile that he saith that he had eaten a peck or two of Salt with the Devill and that he knew the Devill very well and that the Devill knew him againe No marvaile that he confessed of himselfe that the Devill sometimes passed through his brains No marvaile that he said the Devill did more frequently sleep with him and cling to him closer then his Catharine No marvaile that he said that the Devil walked with him in his bed chamber and that he had one or two wonderfull Devils by whom he was diligently and carefully served and they no smal Devils but great ones yea Doctors of divinity amongst the Devils No marvaile that his fellow Prot. could wonder how marvelously he bewrayed himselfe with his Devils and that he could use such filthy words so replenished with all the Devils in Hell No marvaile that they said that never any man writ more
filthily more uncivilly more lewdly and beyond all bounds of Christian modesty then did Luther No marvel that he is so taxed for his obscenity in his Henzius Anglicus against King Hen. the eight for his beastlinesse in his Hans worst against the Jewes for his filthy mentioning of Hogs for his stincking repetition of turds and dunghils in his Schemhamphorise But if you will hear of his Master-piece you mast read the Book which he writ against the Pope where he asks him out of what mouth O Pope dost thou speak is it out of that from whence thy farts doe burst If it come thence keep it to thy selfe if it comes from that wherein thou powrest thy Corisca wine let the Dog fill that with his excrements good Asse doe not kick kick not my little Pope O my dear Asse doe not so fie how this little Pope hath bewrayed himselfe Is this the way to win to his side or to gaine souls to Christ or to reforme Churches or to confute heresies It is observed that Saint Paul in his Epistles repeated the sacred name of Jesus 500 times and it is the observation of the learned Tygurin Divines that so many times Luther hath used the name of Devill in his Bookes and it is no marvaile that they burst out into this admiration How wonderfull is Luther here with his Devils what impure words he useth with how many Devils doth he burst Nor marvail that Zwinglius saith to him we fill not our Books with so many Devils nor doe we bring so many armies of Devils against thee If you can expect to gather figgs from thorns or grapes from thistles then ye may expect words from a sanctified spirit to proceed from such a mouth else not What should I say more Melancthon tells us that Carolostadius was a barbarous fellow without wit without learning without common sense in whom was no signe of the holy Ghost but manifest tokens of impiety Lastly Hutterus Beza's owne fellow Protestant thus saies of him and casts this dirt in his face which is so shamelesse a testimony that you must give me leave to throw a latine vail over it viz. Beza in fine libri de absentia corporis Christi in coena scribit Candidae sive Amascae suae culum imo partem diversam magis adhuc pudendam mundiora esse quam illorum ora qui simpliciter verbis Christi inherentes credant se praesens Christi Corpus in coena sacra ore suo accipere And another Beza by his most filthy manners was a disgrace to honest Discipline who in sacrilegious verse published to the world his detestable loves his unlawfull carnall acts whoredoms and fowl adulteries not content that himselfe onely should like a hog wallow in the durt of wicked lusts but he must also pollute the ears of studious youth with his filth I could inlarge my Paper to a volume of like instances in others but these are the prime reformers of the Protestant Churches and how the people edified under their Doctrine these Narratives from their owne mouths shall tell you When we were seduced by the Pope saith Luther every man did willingly follow good works and now every man neither saith nor knoweth any thing but how to get all to himselfe by exactions pillage theft lying usury Certainly to speak the truth there is many times found Conscionable and plainer dealing amongst most Papists then among many Protestants And if we look narrowly to the ages past we shall find more godlinesse devotion and zeal though blind more love one toward another more fidelity and faithfulnesse every way in them then is now to be found in us If any man be desirous to see a great rabble of knaves of persons turbulent deceitfull Cosoners Usureis let him goe to any City where the Gospel is purely preached and he shall find them there by multitudes For it is more manifest then the day light that there were never among the Ethnicks Turks or infidels more unbridled and unruly persons with whom all virtue and honesty is quite extinct then are amongst the Professonrs of the Gospel The children of them of the reformed Gospel grow every day worse more untractable and dare commit such crimes as men of former times were never subject to If you cast your eyes upon Protestant Doctours you shall find that some of them moved through vaine glory envious zeal and a prejudicate opinion disorder the true Doctrine disperse and earnestly defend the false some of them without cause stir up contentions and with inconsiderate spight defend them many wrest their Doctrines every way of purpose to please their Princes and the people by whose grace and favour they are maintained they overthrow with their wicked life all that they had formerly built with their true doctrine How could the people be better when their Ministers were so bad like lips like lettice I will conclude all with the learned Protestant Zanchius and then you will neither wonder at one or other I have read saith he the Latine copy of the Apology and diligently read it over not without choller when I perceived what manner of writing very many let me not say for the most part but all doe use in the Churches of the reformed Gospel who would seeme notwithstanding to be Pastors Doctors and Pillars of the Church The state of the question that it may not be understood we often of set purpose over-cloud with darknesse things which are manifest we impudently deny things false we without shame avouch things plainly impious we propose as the first principles of faith things orthodoxall we condemne of heresie Scripture at our pleasure we detort to our owne dreams we boast of Fathers when we will follow nothing lesse then their doctrine to deceive to calumniate to raile is familiar with us so as we may defend our cause good or bad by right or by wrong all other things we turne upside down Oh times Oh manners It is no marvel that M. Sutcliff saies that the Protestant writers offered great violence to the Scriptures expounding them contrary both to antient Fathers History and common reason It is no marvel that Cambden tells us that Holland is a fruitfull province of heretiques It is no marvell that Your royall Father tells us that both Hungary and Bohemia abound with infinite varieties of sects It is no marvell that he said he could never see a Bible well translated into English and that the worst of all was the Geneva whereunto were added notes untrue seditious and savouring too much of dangerous and traiterous conceits It is no marvel that He protested before the great God that you should never find among the Highland or Border-theeves greater ingratitude more lies and vile perjuries then with those phanatick spirits It is no marvel that M. Bancroft said that the Puritans of Scotland were published in a Declaration by his Majestie to
his spirit to work the life of grace in them The third and last place of Scripture which the Marquesse citeth for Free-will is that Mat. 23. 37. O Ierusalem Ierusalem how often would I have gathered thy children together as a Hen gathereth her Chickens under her wings and yee would not But what doth this place prove That men have Free-will so farre forth as of themselves to resist and reject the offers of grace which wee nothing doubt of But the question is whether men have such a Free-will as that of themselves they can receive grace when it is offered This is that which wee deny neither doth the place alledged make any thing for proofe of it The Marquesse saith There might have been a willingnesse as well as an unwillingnesse so it should be though it be printed as well as a willing or else Christ had wept in vaine and to thinke that he did so were to make him an impostor I grant that there might have been a willingnesse but not by the power of Free-will except made free by grace it being God that doth worke both the will and the deed Phil. 2. 13. So the Jewes of whom Christ complained that they would not come unto him Ioh. 5. 40. might have come but yet of themselves they could not come not except it were given unto them of God Ioh. 6. 65. not except hee did draw them Ioh. 6. 44. Whereas the Marquesse speakes of Christs weeping his minde was it seemes upon another place viz. that Luk. 19. 41 42. where it is said that Christ drawing nigh to Ierusalem beheld it and wept over it saying If thou hadst known even thou at least in this thy day the things that belong unto thy peace but now they are hid from thine eyes But that Christ wept when he said O Ierusalem Ierusalem how often would I have gathered thy children c. this we do not find though the words be recorded both Mat. 27. 37. and also Luke 13. 34. But suppose that Christ had wept when he said O Ierusalem Ierusalem c. yet had not his weeping been in vaine though Ierusalem had no power of her selfe to doe that which there Christ speaks of For yet neverthelesse Christ shewed his affection towards Ierusalem even as he did towards Lazarus when he wept over him as he lay over the grave Behold how he loved him said the Jewes Iohn 11. 36. yet it is without all question that Lazarus of himself could not have come out of the grave except Christ by his Almighty power had raised him up Some perhaps may say But why did Christ complain of Ierusalem for her unwillingnesse if it were not in her power to be willing I answer because both her unwillingnesse and also her want of power to be willing was from her self it was her own fault and therefore she was justly complained of and reproved for it But againe some may say Ierusalem had sufficient grace whereby she might have been willing or else Christ would not have complained that she was unwilling I answer Ierusalem had a sufficiency of the means of Grace which she ought to have made use of and to have been wrought upon by but would not and therefore did Christ complain of her But Ierusalem had not a sufficiency of the Spirit of Grace without which she could not improve the means as she should have done and yet neverthelesse the complaint made of her was just For God having given unto man at first Grace sufficient to doe whatsoever he should require and this Grace being lost by mans own fault Eccles 7. 29. God is not bound to restore it but when and where he pleaseth and yet may justly require the obedience that is due unto him and complain for want of it as a man may justly demand his debt of a bankrupt and complain of him for not paying it though he be not able to pay it Raimundus de Sabunde a Popish Author is large in his expressions to this purpose That man being now corrupt and made quite contrary to what he was at first cannot pay that which he oweth unto God cannot love fear honour and obey God as he ought and that yet neverthelesse the debt still remaines this is still due unto God and man is not excused because though he be not able yet he himselfe is the cause of his inability and it is his owne fault that he is not able After the allegation of these places of Scriptures the Marquesse addes that the Ancient Fathers are of their Opinion viz. in point of Free-will and he cites Euseb Caesar de praep l. 1. c. 7. Hil. de Trinit Aug. l. 1. ad Simpl. q. 4. Ambr. in Luk. 12. Chrys hom 19. in Gen. Irenaeus l. 4. c. 72. Cyrill in Ioh. l. 4. c. 7. Now for diverse of the Antient Fathers and namely for Austine whom the Marquesse alledgeth against us and who indeed is chiefly to be looked at in this Controversie as having most occasion to declare himself in it by reason of the Pelagian Heresie which arose in his time I have sufficiently shewed before how far they are from compliance with our Adversaries But to come to a particular examination of the Authors and places that are cited First Eusebius in the place mentioned hath nothing at all that I can find about Free-will the whole Chapter being de Phoenicum Theologiâ about the Divinity of the Phoenicians Hilary is so cited that there is no looking after him for he wrote twelve books of the Trinity and here he is onely cited de Trin. 1. of the Trinity but in which of the twelve Books he saith any thing to this purpose is not mentioned As for Austine that which the Marquesse I presume intended is lib. 1. ad Simplic quaest 2. not q. 4. for there are but two Questions answered in the first Book in the second Book indeed there are more then four Questions but nothing about Free-will In the first Book and second Question there is something that may seeme to make for the Opinion of the Marquesse but much more is there which doth indeed make against it indeed so much that though Bellarmine cite diverse passages out of Austine for proof of Free-will yet he was more cautious it seemes then to cite any thing out of that which Austine wrote about it to Simplicianus Let us hear what Austine himself in his Retractations wherein he did review all his Works saith concerning his books written to Simplicianus and concerning that very Question in answer whereunto he hath much about Free-will In the solution of which question saith he mans Free-will was much laboured for but the Grace of God did overcome And this will clearly appear by perusing the Book it selfe and the question handled in it The question is about the meaning of those words Iacob have I loved and Esau have I hated and the rest that follow Rom. 9. Now among other things that Austine saith there
hee takes Aquinas to be resolute in this point and hee cites him saying As predestination doth include a will to conferre grace and glory so Reprobation doth include a will to suffer one to fall into sinne and to inslict the punishment of damnation for sinne Hence Alvarez inferres that according to Aquinas the permission of the first sinne for which a Reprobate is damned is the effect of Reprobation And hee addes that of this permission there is no cause in the Reprobate Because before the permission of the first sinne and before the first sinne there is no other sinne for if there were then it were not simply the first sinne or man should commit some other sinne before which God did not permit whereas no sinne can be committed but by Gods permission He cites also Aquinas againe speaking thus why God doth chuse some to glory and reprobate others there is no reason but onely Gods Will. And having cited that of the Apostle Rom. 9. The children being not yet borne neither having done any good or evill that the purpose of God according to election might stand not of workes but of him that calleth it was said unto her The elder should serve the younger As it is written Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated having cited this I say hee addes that the Apostle here both Austine and Aquinas avouching as much plainly signifies that in the absolute Election and Reprobation of Men God did not looke at Mens merits or demerits but of his own pleasure did chuse and predestinate one to glory and not predestinate another but by an absolute will did determine to suffer him to sinne and to be hardened or to persevere in sinne to the end of his life and to inflict eternall punishment upon him for sin Hee brings in also Austine confuting those who say that Esau and Iacob being not yet borne God did therefore hate the one and love the other because hee did foresee the workes that they would doe Who said Austine can but wonder that the Apostle should not finde out this acute reason for hee did not see it c. No but flies to this hee saith to Moses I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy c. So then it is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy And that none of our Romish adversaries may sleight Austine in this point Alvarez about the beginning of his Worke hath a Disputation to shew what authority this Fathers judgement is of in the point of Grace and Predestination Hee shewes that not onely Prosper but also many Bishops of Rome did approve of Austines Doctrine concerning these points and did determine it to be sound and good And therefore in the testimony of Austine wee have many testimonies and such as are irrefragable with those with whom now wee have to doe But let us heare what some other late Writers of the Church of Rome doe say as to this point concerning Reprobation God from eternity saith Cardinall Cajetan doth truly chuse some and reprobate others doth love some and hate others in that from eternity his will is to vouchsafe some the helpe of his grace whereby to bring them to eternall glory and from eternity also his will is to leave some to themselves and not to afford them that gracious help which he hath decreed to afford the Elect. And this is for God to hate and to reprobate them with which yet it doth well stand that none is damned but by his owne workes because neither the Sentence nor Execution of damnation is before that such Reprobates doe sinne So also †Estius saith that the Apostle Rom. 9. doth teach that neither mens Election nor their Reprobation is from the Merits of workes but that God by the meere pleasure of his wil doth chuse some and Reprobate others And againe upon those words O man who are thou that repliest against God c. hee saith that the Apostles intent was to answer not so much the objection as the cause of objecting And that therefore he answers concerning the Will of God Electing and Reprobating and denies that the reason of it is to be inquired by man who is Gods creature and made by him yea that by the example of a potter the Apostle shewes that God doth this out of the liberty of his Will without any other reason And he addes that Thomas Aquinas did also thus rightly expound the words of the Apostle Bradwardine who intituled the book which hee wrote of the cause of God is not to be omitted Hee saith It 's true God doth not eternally punish any without his fault going before temporally and abiding eternally yet God did not eternally reprobate any because of sinne as a cause antecedently moving Gods will What doe our Divines say even such as are of the more rigid sort as concerning this high and abstruse point of Reprobation what I say doe they lay more then is said by these great and eminent Doctours of the Church of Rome and before them by Austine and before both him and them as both hee and they conceived by the Apostle Paul himselfe The Decree of Reprobation saith Bishop Davenant is not thus to be conceived I will damne Judas whether he believe or not believe repent or not repent for this were contrary to the truth of the Evangelicall promises but thus I am absolutely determined not to give unto Judas that speciall grace which would cause him to believe and repent and I am absolutely purposed to permit him to incurre his own demnation by his voluntary obstinacy and finall impenitency And againe It must here first of all be considered that Reprobatio aeterna nihil ponit in reprobato that is That eternall reprobation doth put nothing in the person that is reprobated It putteth onely in God a firme Decree of permitting such persons to fall into finall sinne and for it a firme decree of condemning them unto eternall punishment So both hee and diverse other of our Eng. lish Divines that were at the Synod of Dort being sent thither by King Iames as they hold that Reprobation which is the denying of election doth put in God an immutable will not to have mercy on such a person as is passed by in respect of giving eternall life And that foreseene unbeliefe is not the cause of non election So withall they lay down this position God doth damne none nor appoint unto Damnation but in respect of sinne So Doctor Ames saith that it is too great a slander to say that according to our opinion God did immediately decree mens damnation whether they be sinners or no. Our opinion saith hee is this that God did not choose some as he did chuse others but did determine to let them abide in their sinnes and for those sinnes to suffer the punishment of just damnation and that of this decree
of God an house not made with hands eternall in the Heavens And v. 6 7 8. Therefore we are alwayes confident knowing that whiles we are here in the body we are absent from the Lord. For we walke by faith and not by sight We are confident I say and willing rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord. And that Phil. 1. 21. To me to live is Christ and to die is gaine And that 2 Tim. 4. 18. The Lord shall deliver me from every evill work and will preserve me to his Heavenly Kingdom And in the same Chapter v. 6 7 8. I am now ready to be offered and my departure is at hand I have fought a good fight I have finished my course I have kept the faith henceforth is laid up for me the crown of righteousnesse c. So also S. Peter Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Iesus Christ who according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us againe unto a lively hope through the Resurrection of Iesus Christ from the dead unto an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that fadeth not away reserved in Heaven for us 1 Pet. 1. 3 4. This hope which believers have or may have of salvation is a lively hope it is a hope that maketh not ashamed Rom. 5. 5. because they are sure to obtaine that which they hope for and shall not be disappointed of it Hence it is also that believers rejoyce with joy unspeakable and full of glory 1 Pet. 1. 8. because they know they shall receive the end of their faith even the salvation of their soules v. 9. Wee have also Fathers to testifie this truth There flourisheth with us saith Cyprian the strength of hope and the firmness of faith and amongst the very ruines of the decaying world the minde is raised up and virtue is unmoveable and patience is ever joyfull and the soule is alwayes secure and confident of her God And immediatly hee confirmes this by that of the Prophet Habakkuk Although the fig-three shall not blossome c. yet I will rejoyce in the Lord I will joy in the God of my salvation Hab. 3. 17 18. So againe the same Father what place is there here for anxiety and carefulnesse who in the midst of these things can be fearfull and sad except he want hope and faith It is for him to fear death that would not go unto Christ it is for him to be unwilling to go to Christ that doth not believe that he doth begin to reigne with Christ For it is written The just shall live by faith If thou beest just and doest live by faith if thou doest truly believe in God seeing thou shalt be with Christ and art sure of Gods promise why doest thou not embrace this that thou art called unto Christ and art glad that thou art freed from the Devill God doth promise immortality and eternity to those that depart out of this life and thou doubtest this is not at all to know God this is to offend Christ the Lord and Master of Believers with the sinne of unbeliefe this is to be in the Church the house of faith and yet to have no faith Here we see how earnest Cyprian is to prove that Christians may yea ought to be confident against the feare of death and that because they may and ought to be assured of the life to come Thus also Austine I believe saith hee him that promiseth The Saviour speaketh the truth promiseth he hath said unto me He that heareth my words and believeth him that sent me hath eternall life and is passed from death to life and shall not come into condemnation I have heard the words of my Lord I have believed Now whereas I was an unbeliever I am made a Believer as he hath said I am passed from death to life I come not into condemnation not by my presumption but by his promise To this purposes also Bernard The Sun of Righteousnesse arising saith hee the mystery concerning the predestinate and those that shall be made blessed which was so long hid beginnes after a sort to come up out of the depth of eternity whiles every one being called by feare and justified by love that is by Faith working through love as hee said a little before doth assure himselfe that he is of the number of the blessed Knowing that whom he hath justified them he hath also glorified For why Hee heares that he is called when he is moved with feare he perceives that he is justified when he is filled with love and shall he doubt of his being glorified And againe Thou hast O man saith hee the justifying spirit a revealer of this secret and so testifying unto thy spirit that thou also art the Son of God Acknowledge the counsell of God in thy justification For thy present justification is both a revelation of Gods Counsell and also a certaine preparation unto future glory Or truly predestination it selfe is rather a preparation and justification is rather an appropinquation unto it And againe Who is righteous but he that doth requite Gods love with love againe which is not done but when the spirit by Faith doth reveale unto a man Gods eternall purpose concerning his future salvation Which revelation surely is no other thing but the infusion of spirituall grace by which the deeds of the flesh are mortified and so a man is prepared for that Kingdome which flesh and blood do not possesse receiving together by one spirit both this that he is assured that he is loved and also this that hee doth love againe that so he may not be ungratefull to him of whom he is loved Thus both Scriptures and Fathers testifie that Christians may be assured of their salvation And that this assurance may be had may be proved also by all that hath beene said before concerning the stability of Faith once had and the certainty of persevering in the estate of grace if a man be once in it For hence it followeth that if a man can be assured that hee is in the estate of Grace hee may also be assured of his salvation Now that he may be assured of his being in the state of grace some of the Romish Church and that since Luthers time have maintained as namely Catharinus and the Author of the Booke called Enchiridium Coloniense both which are mentioned in this respect by Bellarmine And because the Councell of Trent Sess 6. c. 9. doth seeme to determine the contrary therefore Eisingrenius hath written a whole booke to shew that the determination of the Councell is not indeed against this that a man may be assured that he hath true grace in him The booke I have seene and read many yeeres agoe though now I have it not And I remember he holds that a man may be as sure that hee hath true grace and that his sinnes are forgiven as hee is sure that twice two make
yet by the holy Ghost there is meant such a gift of the holy Ghost as the wicked may receive viz. the gift of Tongues and Prophecy for so immediately it followes and they spake with Tongues and Prophesied 2. Neither doth it appeare that the Apostle 2 Tim. 1. 7. doth explaine what he meant by the gift mentioned vers 6. but having exhorted Timothy to stir up the gift that was in him by laying on of hands hee addes as a motive to inforce the exhortation For God hath not given unto us the spirit of feare but c. As if hee should say All true Christians have received this Spirit of God and more especially all faithfull Ministers therefore stir up the gift that is in thee c. But the end of Ordination is not the justification of the person ordained but the edification of others for whom hee is ordained Hee gave some Apostles and some Prophets and some Evangelists and some Pastours and Teachers Why for what end For the perfecting of the Saints for the worke of the Ministery for the edifying of the body of Christ Ephes 4. 11 12. So Durandus an acute and learned Schoolemen saith that the Sacrament of Order is a spirituall medicine yet not for him that is ordained but for the people because by Ordination a man is made a dispenser of the Sacraments c. For the Fathers here objected there is onely one viz. Cyprian that I can punctually answer unto Hee in the place cited hath nothing that I finde about Ordination He speakes indeed there of imposition of hands for the receiving of the holy Ghost but the imposition of hands there spoken of was not by way of Ordination but by way of Confirmation of which I have spoken before For Cyprian there speakes of laying hands upon all that had beene baptized by Heretikes when they did returne to the Church and not of laying hands upon such as did receive Ordination The Marquesse himself in the point of Confirmation alledged Cyprians 71. Epistle and this which he now alledgeth is in respect of the former part of it of the same subject with that and the rest that follow as Pamelius noteth in the Argument of the Epistle The other Fathers are so cited that there is no examining what they say without more labour then the thing is worth or reason doth require Austine is cited in his questions upon Numbers now there are 65 questions upon that book but which of them is meant is not expressed In like manner are Optatus and Tertullian cited without any mention made of the booke wherein Optatus hath any thing to the purpose whereas there are seven Bookes which hee wrote or of the Chapter in which Tertullian de Praescript speaketh about Ordination whereas that Booke of Tertullian hath 53. chapters Neither doth Bellarimne in this controversie about Ordination alledge either Tertullian or Optatus at all nor Cyprian but only in a worke which himselfe confesseth to be none of Cyprians nor yet Austine in that place which the Marquesse citeth But how ever it is granted that the Fathers sometimes call Ordination a Sacrament and so doe Protestants too as hath beene shewed though they deny it to be a Sacrament of the same nature with Baptisme and the Lords Supper and so much as I have shewed Durandus himselfe doth acknowledge making it to be a remedy provided for the spirituall welfare of others and not of him that is ordained To proceede We hold saith the Marquesse that the Priest and other Religious persons who have vowed chastity to God may not marry afterwards You deny first that it is lawfull to make any such vowes and secondly that those who have made any such vows are not bound to keepe them We have Scripture for what we hold Deut. 23. 2. When thou shalt vow a vow unto the Lord thy God thou shalt not slack to pay it for the Lord thy God will require it of thee So 1 Tim. 5. 11 12. But the younger widdowes refuse for when they have begun to wax wanton against the Lord they will marry having damnation because they have cast off their first Faith What can be meant hereby but the vow of chastity or by their first faith but some promise made to Christ in that behalfe Otherwise Marriage could not be damnable So all the ancient Fathers have expounded it S. Aug. de bono viduit cap. 9. S. Athanas de Virginit S. Epiphan haer 48. S. Hier. contra Iovin l. 1. c. 7. Answ One thing is here omitted by the Marquesse which yet we must observe viz. that they of the Church of Rome hold that Priests and Clergy-men as they are called ought not to Marry and that they restraine them from Marriage causing them to vow against it Some of them hold this to be of divine institution Bellarmine though he likes not that yet makes it to be an Apostolicall decree which indeed amounts to as much Costerus the Jesuite saith It is the most holy custome of the Roman Church agreeable to reason and the Scriptures and received from our ancestors not to admit any to holy Orders but him that is unmarried or that with the consent of his wife hath consecrated his chastity unto God And the same Author affirmes that Although a Priest finne grievously if hee commit Fornication yet much more if hee Marry And therefore hee concludes that Priests are by no meanes to be suffered to Marry Yet they may be suffered to commit fornication for so the Glosse upon Gratians Decrees tells us that it is commonly held that one ought not to be deposed for simple fornication And marke the reason because sath hee very few are found without that fault And so in another place They say that now none is to be deposed for fornication except he continue in it and that because our bodies are now more fraile then they were in times past How well doth this agree with the Scripture which saith that Marriage is honourable in all and the bed undefiled but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge Heb. 13. 4. But saith Bellarmine if Marriage be honorable in all then in those that are neare allied and in those that marry without the consent of their Parents I answer Marriage may be and is honorable in all and yet not all kind of Marriage It is lawfull for any to marry yet not to marry with any they that marry must marry in the Lord. 1 Cor. 7. 39. Bellarmine himselfe approves of Theophylacts Exposition viz. that Marriage is honourable in all that is in all that are lawfully joyned together whosoever they be Now such are all they whom the Scripture doth not exclude as it doth not the Clergy Gratian himselfe confesseth that it is but an Ecclesiasticall Law that forbids Priests to marry and that before this prohibition their Marriage was every where lawfull and so in his time was accounted in the Easterne