Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n apostle_n bishop_n church_n 1,754 5 4.4354 3 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A16173 The second part of the reformation of a Catholike deformed by Master W. Perkins Bishop, William, 1554?-1624. 1607 (1607) STC 3097; ESTC S1509 252,809 248

There are 12 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

in Adam c. I therefore ô my prayse my life and God of my hart laying aside for a season her good workes for which I rejoycing doe giue thee thankes doe nowe pray vnto thee for the sinnes of my Mother heare me I beseech thee through the salue of our woundes that hanged vpon the tree and nowe sitting at thy right hand doth plead for vs. I knowe that shee did many workes of mercy and from her hart forgaue all them that trespassed against her doe thou ô Lord also forgiue her her trespasses if shee committed any after baptisme Pardon her pardon her ô Lord I beseech thee and enter not into judgement with her let thy mercy surpasse thy judgements because thy wordes are true and thou hast promised mercy to the mercifull c. Could that most vvorthy Doctor more directly crosse Caluins false relation of his coldnesse in this matter or in better manner cleare himselfe from his spitefull slaunders Caluin blushed not to say that S. Augustine out of passion prayed for his mother but he himselfe relateth howe he did it some yeares after her death of setled judgement hauing his hart cured from humane affection And thus I end this question of Purgatory OF THE SVPREMACY IN CAVSES ECCLESIASTICAL OVR CONSENT M. PERKINS Page 283. TOuching the point of Supremacy Ecclesiasticall I will set downe howe neare we may come vnto the Roman Church in two conclusions The first conclusion For the founding of the primitiue Church the Ministery of the word was distinguished by degrees not only of order but also of power and Peter was called to the highest degree for Apostles were aboue Euangelists and Euangelists aboue Pastors and teachers nowe Peter was an Apostle and so aboue all Euangelists and Pastors howsoeuer he were not aboue other Apostles The second conclusion Among the 12. Apostes Peter had a three-fold priuiledge or prerogatiue first of authority I meane a preheminence in regard of estimation whereby he was in reuerence aboue the rest of the twelue Secondly of primacy because he was the first named as the fore-man of the quest Thirdly of principality in regard of measure of grace wherein he excelled the rest of the twelue but Paul excelled Peter euery way in learning zeale and vnderstanding as farre as Peter excelled the rest ANNOTATION MAster PERKINS as his manner is at the first vvould seeme to approch somewhat neare vnto the Catholike doctrine and therefore giueth as braue wordes for S. Peters prerogatiues as we doe to wit That he surpassed the other Apostles both in authority primacy and principality but p●●●ently after his old fashion he watereth his former wordes with such cold glosses that they shrinke in exceedingly for all Peters priuiledges doe extend no further then that he excelled the rest in priuate grace of learning zeale and vnderstanding and was therefore somewhat more esteemed then the rest and named first so that with M. PER. a great mill-post is quickly thwited as they say into a pudding pricke Againe all this is besides the purpose for the question is not vvhich of the Apostles excelled in those priuate gifts of vnderstanding zeale and piety for it is not vnlikely hat S. Iohn the Euangelist who sucked diuine mysteries out of our Sauiours breast was not inferior to either S. Peter or S. Paul in these spirituall graces of heauenly knowledge and charity but vve leauing these secretes vnto him vvho is the judge of the hart and of his inward gifts doe affirme S. Peter to haue beene aduanced aboue all the rest of the Apostles in the externall gouernement of Christes Church and the Bishops of Rome his successors to inherite the same supremacy THE DIFFERENCE by M. PERKINS THe Church of Rome giueth to Peter a supremacy vnder Christ aboue all persons and causes this standeth in a power to determine which bookes of Scripture be Canonicall and what is the true sence of any doubtfull place of them and for this purpose to call and assemble generall Councels and to confirme the decrees of them and by these meanes to decide all controuersi●● about matter of faith Besides he can excommunicate any Christian be he King or Kaesar if they by obstinate withstanding Gods lawes or the decrees of holy Church shal justly deserue it Moreouer to him it doth belong to make Ecclesiasticall Canons and lawes for the due discipline and ordering of matters of the Church which doe binde in conscience Finally to confirme the election of Bishops and to decide all such greater controuersies as by appeale are brought vnto him from any part of Christendome These indeede be the chiefest points of the Popes supremacy as for that of pardoning of sinnes it is no proper part of his primacy but common vnto all not only to Bishops but also to Priests We saith M. PERKINS hold that neyther Peter nor any Bishop of Rome had or hath any such supremacy ouer the Catholike Church but that all supremacy vnder Christ is appertaining to Kinges and Princes with him in their Dominions And that our doctrine is good and theirs false I will make manifest by sundry reasons First Christ must be considered as he was a King two wayes first as he is God so is he King ouer al by right of creation and so as God hath deputies on earth to gouerne the world namely Kings and Princes Secondly he is King by right of redemption ouer the whole Church which he hath redeemed with his pretious bloud and so as mediatour and redeemer he hath no fellowe nor deputy for no creature is capable of this office to doe in the roome and stead of Christ that which himselfe doth because euery worke of the mediatour must arise from the effectes of two natures concurring in one action namely the God-head and Man-hood Againe Christes Priest-hood cannot passe from his person to any other whence it followeth that neyther his Kingly nor his Propheticall he vvould haue said Priestly office can passe from him to any creature Nay it is needlesse for Christ to haue a deputy considering that a deputy only serueth to supply the absence of the principall whereas Christ is alwayes present by his word and spirit it may be said that the Ministers in the worke of the ministery are Christes deputies I answere that they are no deputies but only actiue instruments because they doe only vtter the word but it is Christ that worketh in the hart In like manner in excommunication it is Christ that cutteth that excommunicate person from the Kingdome of heauen and the Church doth only declare this by cutting him off from the rest of Christes people vntill he repent so that in all Ecclesiasticall actions Christ hath no deputies but only instruments the whole action being personall in respect of Christ. Is not this trowe you a prety peece of an argument but we must beare with the length of it because it alone will serue as M. PER. opineth to ouerthrowe many points of Popery let it be therefore wel
vvas so commanded to doe by the formall lawes of those foure his temporall Soueraignes and so might without any offence to God haue beene nowe of the old religion then of the newe and againe of neither old nor newe but of a hotch-potch and mingle-mangle of some of the one and some of the other vvhich is most absurd euen so is that of which it followeth And to confirme this with some testimony of antiquity S. Ambrose a most firme pillar of the West Church spake resolutely vnto the Emperour Valentinian saying Epist 35. Trouble not your selfe ô Emperour with thinking that you haue any imperial jurisdiction ouer those thinges that be Diuine and Holy for the right of Ciuill causes was committed vnto you but not the chardge of Holy thinges And another his auncient S. Athanasius Epist ad solita vitā agētes the first of the foure Doctors of the Greeke Church doth reprehend the Emperour Constantius for intermedling vvith Ecclesiasticall causes and recordeth an notable saying of that venerable Bishop Hosius vvho vvas present at the first generall Councell of Nyce vnto the same Constantius to vvit Command vs not ô Emperour in this kinde of affaires rather learne these thinges of vs for God hath committed the Empire to your chardge but hath bequeathed vnto vs and put vs in trust with the affaires that appertayne vnto his Church And therefore vvould not that most renowmed Emperour Constantine the great judge of Bishops causes although the Bishops themselues referred thei● matter to him and requested him to compose them but said That it did not belong vnto him to judge them but to be judged by them vvhose blessed steps the most learned and juditious Emperours that followed him chose rather to followe then the euill example of his Arrian Sonne Constantius For Iustinianus the elder that famous lawe-maker faith vnto Iohn the second Pope of that name In Codice tit primo We doe not suffer any thing to passe that belongeth vnto the state of the Church but that we make it knowne vnto your Holynesse who are the head of all the holy Church And Valentinian the Emperour in an Epistle vnto Theodosius vvriteth We must in our times mainetaine the dignity of ●u● reuerence vnto the most blessed Apostle S. Peter Extat inter praeambulas ad Concil Chalced. so farre-forth as the most happy Bishop of Rome vnto whome antiquity hath yeelded the principality of Priestly office aboue all others may haue place and power to judge of matters of faith and of Priests And thus much by the way against the Supremacy of Princes in causes Ecclesiasticall It remayneth nowe that I briefly proue S. Peter to haue had this Supremacy in his time and that therein the Bishops of Rome doe succeede him And for a foundation of this Question I take that for an assured truth vvhich the best Philosophers doe grant and the practise of the best and greatest Kingdome hath confirmed to wit That in one Kingdome it is best to haue one King and supreme gouernour assisted with the counsell of his wisest subjects which is so well knowne and confessed generally that he must needes betaken for a vvrangler that will denie it nowe then to our purpose Christes Church is but one state or spirituall Kingdome vvhich hath but one faith one baptisme and forme of Sacraments one true religion and solemne manner of diuine seruice Nowe seing vve are not to doubt but that he who purchased himselfe this one Church with the shedding of his owne most pretious bloud would haue it gouerned in the best sort therefore we must confesse that he hath ordayned one supreme Gouernour of it They say that this supreme Pastor is Christ himselfe and that he is alwayes present with it in spirit and by his word vvherefore there needeth no deputy or other in his roome This I haue once before confuted graunting that Christ is present to his Church in spirit and that he doth inwardly quicken and gouerne it but that is not sufficient for vnlesse we haue one certayne person visibly present to assure vs vvhich is the vvord of God and what is the true sence of all doubtfull places of it we shall neuer haue vnity of faith for if they who mistake the true sence must be left to their owne judgement and the direction of their owne spirit which they beleeue to be guided with the holy Ghost then shall vve haue so many heresies currant in the Church as there be Archeretikes to coyne and stampe them The like may be said for Sacraments and sacred rites of religion the which without one Supreme Moderatour cannot be kept vniforme so that it resteth most cleare that our Sauiour Christ being to leaue this world and to returne vnto his heauenly Father he was to commit the high charge of his only Spouse and Doue vnto the custody and fidelity of one supreme Pastor This is confirmed by the example of the old Testament vvhich vvas a figure of the newe Deut. 17. ab 8. ad 13. vvhere the soueraigne and supreme authority of deciding all doubtfull questions that should arise about the lawe was by Gods expresse order giuen vnto the high Priests and euery Israelite bound vnder payne of death to obey him and stand to his sentence And that this Supremacy continued all along the state of the old Testament euen vntill Christes dayes both the Magdeburgenses and Caluin doe testifie Centur. 1. lib. 1. c. 7. Lib. 4. Instit ca. 6. But the Protestants object that some Iudges and Kinges of Iuda did take vpon them to deale in matters appertayning to religion I graunt that good Kinges as principall members of the temporalty ought to haue a speciall regard to the preseruation of the seruice of God and to see that matters of religion be duly ordered because the peaceable gouernement of their temporall affaires dependeth much vpon the concord piety and vertue of Ecclesiasticall persons and therefore they are to admonish and call vpon the Bishops and Gouernours of the Clergy to redresse all disorders among them but not to meddle by themselues as their superiours in spiritual causes so did those good Kinges of Israell as it is recorded of one of the best of their King Iosaphat who sought for reformation of Church matters 2. Paralip 19. But reserued the Presidency of those thinges which appertayne vnto God vnto Amarias the high Priest And nowe a-dayes we giue many priuiledges to Princes as the denomination of most Bishops and higher Magistrates of the Church that the two states spirituall and temporal may the better agree and liue more peaceably together S. Augustine also doth declare it to be the duty of Kings to defend the Church and her decrees and to punish with seuere lawes all Heretikes and other condemned by the Church But directly to the former objection let the places of the old Testament be perused where the authority and right of Kinges be specified and you shall not finde
promise of Christ made although in and by him to the great benefit of the whole Church In cap. 16. Math. But Theophilact hath that they who receiue the gift of a Bishop haue the power of committing and binding as Peter had Answere We grant that all lawfull Bishops can binde and loose both in the court of conscience and publikely but thereof it followeth not that that promise of Christ for building his Church on S. Peter c. was common vnto the rest of the Apostles In psal 38 But Ambrose saith that which is said to Peter is said to the Apostles Then belike that was also said vnto the rest as well as to him This night before the Cocke crowe twise thou shalt denie me thrife which no man can say To vnderstand then such generall propositions take this distinction vvith you that thinges spoken vnto S. Peter are of three sundry sortes Some are spoken vnto him as an ordinary Christian and such sentences doe agree vnto all Christians other thinges are spoken vnto him as an Apostle and those are common vnto the rest of the Apostles there be lastly certayne thinges spoken vnto him particularly as head of the Church which may not be extended vnto any other of the Apostles but only vnto his successors Nowe S. Ambrose speaketh of the second kinde of thinges but against this M. PER. excepteth thus That although Peter be admitted to haue beene in commission aboue the rest for the time yet hence may not be gathered any supremacy for the Bishops of Rome because the authority of the Apostles were personall and consequently ceased with them without being conueyed vnto any others and he addeth the reason of this to be because that when the Church of the newe Testament was once founded it was needefull only that there should be Pastors and Teachers for the building of it vp vnto the worldes end Reply What meaneth this man by Pastors doth he comprehend Bishops vvithin that word then he ouerthroweth himselfe for if such Pastors be yet necessary then is it needfull that the Bishops of Rome doe succeede S. Peter in that ample power which he had If by Pastors he vnderstand Parish Priestes or Ministers that haue charge of flockes and by Teachers other Preachers then doth he here as much for the Bishops as in his last discourse he did for temporall Princes that is as he vvent about there to proue that Christ as our redeemer could haue no creature for his deputy in gouernement and consequently that Kings cannot be Christs Lieutenants in Ecclesiasticall causes so here he doth insinuate that Bishops be not necessary to the building vp of Christes Church but the Minister of euery Parish with the Elders thereof will suffice for ordinary matters and that affaires of greater moment must be referred belike to the Consistoriall assembly of many Ministers and Elders togither Doth not this sauour rankely of Puritanisme but because he only saith this without any proofe let it suffice for answere to say that as Ministers are necessary to teach the word of God and to administer the Sacraments so are Bishops both to institute and ordayne the Ministers and to see that they doe diligently discharge their duty And as Bishops are necessary to ouer-see Priests and Ministers so are Archbishops and Metropolitanes to looke vnto Bishops and to prouide that there be no schismes or diuisions among them and to determine their controuersies if any arise betweene them And in like manner one Supreme Pastor is necessary in the Vniuersall Church of Christ to hold all Archbishops Primates and Patriarkes in vnity of faith and in conformity of Christian ceremonies and manners M. PERKINS third reason When the Sonnes of Zebedee sued vnto Christ for the greatest roomes of honour in his Kingdome Christes answere was Ye knowe that the Lordes of the Gentils haue dominion and they that are great exercise authority ouer them but it shall not be so vvith you Bernard applyeth this to Pope Eugenius on this manner Lib. 2. do consid it is playne that here dominion is forbidden the Apostles goe to then dare you if you will to take vpon you ruling an Apostleship or in your Apostleship rule and dominion if you will haue both alike you shall leefe both otherwise you must not thinke your selfe excempted from the number of them of whome the Lord complayned ye haue raygned but not of me Answere Insolent and tyrannicall dominion such as was in those daies practised by the Gentils Pagans and Idolaters is there by our Sauiour forbidden the Apostles but not modest and vigilant Prelature in Ecclesiasticall gouernement as the very text it selfe doth plainely shewe for in that he doth foretel that there should not be such a haughty disdaineful kinde of superiority among his disciples he doth giue vs to vnderstand that there should be some other better and saith further Luc. 22. vers 26. That he who is greater among you let him become as the lesser and he that is your leader or as it is in the Greeke égouménos your Captaine or Prince let him be your wayter See he vvill haue among them one greater then the rest to be their Captayne and leader which he confirmeth with his owne example saying As I my selfe came not to be wayted on or ministred vnto but came to minister or to wayte vpon others so that this discourse of our Sauiours only disproueth in Christians such Lord-like domination as vvas then in vse among the Gentils who were giuen for the most part to take their owne pleasures to ouer-rule lawes as they listed to oppresse their subjects with taxes and to vse them like slaues Nowe in Ecclesiasticall gouernementall must be otherwise the Prelate must not seeke his owne ease wealth or pleasure but most vigilantly study day and night to feede and profit his flocke vvith whome he must conuerse most modestly not scorning or contemning to speake familiarly vvith the meanest amongst them And this is that vvhich S. Bernard counsaileth Eugenius to doe To rule as an Apostle and not to ouer-rule or to dominier like vnto some temporal Princes which in the same booke he doth plainely teach saying That when Eugenius was created Pope he then was exalted ouer Nations and Kingdomes yet not to domineer ouer them but to serue them And further he doth in the same booke deliuer the Popes Supremacy in these most euident wordes speaking thus to the same Pope Eugenius Who art thou a great Priest the highest Bishop thou art the Prince of the Bishops the heyre of the Apostles c. Thou art he to whome the keyes of heauen were deliuered to whome the sheepe were committed There are also indeede other Porters of heauen and Pastors of sheepe but thou art so much the more glorious as thou hast inherited a more excellent name aboue them They haue their flockes to each man me but to thee all were committed as one flocke to one Pastor Thou art not only Pastor
of the sheepe but of all other Pastors thou alone art the Pastor Thus farre S. Bernard and much more doth he say in fauour of the Popes Supremacy in the same booke vvherefore to pike out a broken sentence of his against ouer-ruling thereby to disproue that which he doth most plainely proue and allowe argueth an euill conscience in M. PERKINS and a minde fully bent to deceiue them that be so simple as to beleeue him Ephes 4. His fourth reason Mention is made of gifts which Christ gaue to his Church after his ascension whereby some were Apostles some Prophets some Euangelists some Pastors some Teachers nowe of there had beene an office in which men as deputies of Christ should haue gouerned the whole Church that calling might here haue beene named and no doubt but that Paul would not haue concealed it where he mentioneth callings of lesse importance Answere This man will neuer leaue playing the Sophister and vsing of fallacies insteade of sound arguments vvhat a reason is this there is no mention made of the supreme Pastors calling in one place of S. Paul therefore there is no mention made of it at all Let vs returne this his weapon vpon his owne pate In that place of the Apostle there is no mention made of the Kinges supreme authority in causes Ecclesiasticall but rather a playne declaration that the Church of God needeth no such officer for her Ecclesiasticall gouernement ergo Kinges haue no such authority And because M. PER. seemeth not greatly to care for the Princes supremacy let this argument be vrged against the admirable Elders of their consistoriall discipline who notwithstanding they be such peerelesse peeres of the reformed Churches yet were vtterly concealed or rather neuer thought vpon by the Apostle when and where he mentioneth callings of lesser moment Nowe the direct answere to that place may be twofold eyther that there is not mention made of all Church officers as it is euident and must be confessed on all parts or else that by conuenient interpretation they may be reduced vnto some of them there named and so may the supreme Pastor of Christes Church be contayned well in that name of Pastors or because it belongeth vnto the supreme Pastor to haue a generall care of all Christendome and to send alwayes some to conuert Infidels his chardge and calling may be well an Apostleship as it is in the very wordes cited by M. PER. in his last argument out of S. Bernard Epist 162. Lib. 2. cōt Ruffinum Besides S. Augustine and S. Hierome with others doe call the Sea of Rome an Apostolicall chayre and seate M. PERKINS fift reason The Popes supremacy is condemned by sentences of Scripture before it was manifest to the world by the spirit of prophesie to wit the man of sinne which is Antichrist shall exalt himselfe aboue all that is called God nowe this whole Chapter with all the circumstances of it 2. Thess 2. most fitly agreeth to the sea of Rome and the head thereof Answere This is a capitall accusation and therefore should haue bin throughly well proued and yet you vvould meruaile to see how sleightly he goeth about it I can scarse bring his proofe into any forme of argument it is so substantiall But thus he seemeth to argue At the decay of the Roman Empire the man of sinne shal be reuealed but the Sea of Rome neuer slourished till the Empire decayed ergo that Sea is the man of sinne Here is a newe found manner of arguing Let vs admit the first proposition because it may hap to be true though it be very vncertaine what is meant by that defection mentioned by S. Paul But let vs graunt it shall euery thing that beginneth then to flourish be the man of sinne and if euery flourishing state shall not then be that man of sinne vvhy shall the Sea of Rome be rather that man of sinne then any other flourishing estate sure it is that it hath no consequence out of that argument Secondly it is most false also that the Sea of Rome neuer flourished till the Empire decayed for when did it euer flourish more then in that good Emperors daies Constantine the great and in many other excellent Christian Emperors that liued an hundred yeares after him Thirdly S. Paul speaketh not of a decay of the Roman Empire or vvhatsoeuer else he meaneth but rather of a generall reuolt or vtter ruyne and decay of it vvhich is not as yet happened for the Empire to this day yet continueth in some part of Hungary and Beameland so that man of sinne cannot be the Sea of Rome vvhich so many yeares hath flourished together with that Roman Empire Finally S. Peter and three and thirty other Popes of Rome after him enjoyed the supreme gouernement of the Church more then foure hundred yeares before that declination decay of the Roman Empire which they speake off so that nothing can be more fond and absurd then to draw thence any argument against the Popes supremacy And whereas he saith that all that chapter agreeth fitly to the Sea of Rome I say wil briefly proue that nothing in that Chapter agreeth vnto it any thing aptly First the Apostle speaketh of one particular man as his vvordes doe manifestly shewe for he calleth him the man of sinne Vers 3. the sonne of perdition and that with the Greeke article which doth more formally particularize howe can this be applyed vnto more then two hundred Popes Vers 4. In illum locum Secondly it is said that that man of sinne shall be extolled aboue all that is called God and as S. Chrysostome expoundeth it shall command himselfe to be adored and worshipped as God vvhich is and hath euer beene most farre from the thoughtes of all Popes vvho professe themselues seruants of all Gods seruants Vers 9. Thirdly that man of iniquity shall worke many strange signes and wonders Let them name vvhich of the Popes hath so done for these last 900. yeares vvhich they accuse most Fourthly that man shall be receiued of the Iewes for saith S. Paul Vers 10. Because they receiued not the charity of truth that they might be saued therefore God will send them the operation of errour to beleeue lying now al the Greeke interpreters doe vnderstand this of the Iewes as the very text leadeth them With whome agreeth S. Hierome interpreting these vvordes thus Quaest 11. ad Algasiū Antichrist shall doe all these signes not by the power but by the permission of God for the Iewes that because they would not receiue the charity of truth that is the spirit of God by Christ and so receiuing the Sauiour they might haue beene saued God will send them c. With these accord both S. Augustine and S. Cyril vpon this sentence of our Sauiour speaking to the Iewes I come to you in the name of my father Ioh. 5. vers 43. and you receiued me not if any
other shall come in his owne name him you receiue that is Antichrist but the Iewes haue not yet receiued the Bishop of Rome for their Messias Nay they take the Pope for the greatest enemy of their religion in the world and like much better of all them vvho vvith-drawe themselues from society in religion with him Vers 9. Finally it is there said that Christ with the spirit of his owne mouth shall kill that man with the manifestation of his aduene or comming whence the learned interpreters gather first that Antichrist shall be punished with a very extraordinary and exemplare death which hath not hapned to any of these Popes Secondly that Antichrist is to tyranize only some fewe yeares before the latter comming of Christ to judgement which cannot stand with the Protestants computation of Antichrists raigne which they drawe nine hundreth yeares in length already and yet are vncertayne howe much remayneth behind By this I hope you see howe well you may trust M. PER. on his word another time who blushed not to affirme all the circumstances of the man of sinne related in that Chapter to agree most fitly vnto the Pope of Rome when as not one sentence there penned by the Apostle doth touch him any whit at all but are only by the wresting of his enemies violently torne and cast vpon him Nowe to M. PERKINS last reason which is taken from the testimony of the auncient Church Cyprian saith De simpl Praelator Doubtlesse the same were the rest of the Apostles that Peter was indued with equall fellowship both of honour and power but a beginning is made of vnity that the Church may appeare to be one Answere Doubtlesse here is a prety peece of cosinage for the words are strooken out vvhich vvould haue made all playne against the Protestants for S. Cyprian there saith that the beginning proceedeth from one and the primacy is giuen to Peter that the Church may appeare to be one So that he allowing all the Apostles to be equall in honour being all of the same calling and power to preach the Gospell to all nations yet affirmeth the Supremacy to haue beene giuen vnto S. Peter that by that vnity of one head the Church might be kept perpetually in vnity of one faith and vniformity of religion Note howe his owne vvitnesse doth giue playne euidence against him Gregory saith If one be called vniuersall Bishop In regist lib. 6. epist 118. the vniuersall Church goeth to decay And cap. 144. I say boldly that whosoeuer calleth or desireth to call himselfe vniuersall Priest in his pride he is a fore-runner of Antichrist And lib. 7. cap. 30. Behold in the preface of your Epistle a proude title calling me vniuersall Pope Answere I could vvish that the cause might be determined by that blessed Bishop S. Gregories sentence it were then already gayned on our side for in those bookes of his Epistles he doth almost nothing else but declare the Popes Supremacy in ordering of all Ecclesiasticall matters and that ouer all Countries but whence the Bee sucketh hony thence also the Spider draweth some poyson They regard not what or how much he vvriteth there in fauour of the Supremacy but they thinke to haue some aduantage for their cause out of that vvhich he writeth against the name of vniuersall Bishop or Priest but they are miserably deceiued for one may very well be supreme head of the Church and yet not vniuersall Bishop as S. Gregory there taketh that word For he is only an vniuersall Bishop after S. Gregory who is Bishop in euery Diocesse of the vniuersall Church other Bishops being but his Suffraganes or Deputies such an vniuersall Bishop is not the Pope for excepting the speciall points of his prerogatiues he is not to intermedle with the particular businesse of my other Bishop within his Diocesse no more then the Archbishop of Canterbury is to deale with the gouernement of any other Bishop vnder him sauing in cases of his prerogatiue But euen as it appertayneth vnto the Metropolitane to compose the controuersies that may arise betweene the Bishops of his Prouince and to determine all such causes as by appeale or otherwise belong vnto his court to call a Prouinciall Councell and to confirme the decrees of it and to make Ecclesiasticall Canons and constitutions for his Prouince in like manner doth it appertayne vnto the supreme Pastor of the Church to appease and end all debates that shal happen betweene the Metropolitanes or Priuates to judge of some such matters of great moment that may by appeale be very worthylie referred to his court to call generall Councels and to be President in them to make Ecclesiasticall lawes for the vvhole Church in vvhich and such like matters the point of his Supremacy principally consisteth And these vvere all most carefully vndertaken and practised by S. Gregory though he misliked the name of vniuersal Bishop because that did seeme vnto him to exclude all other Bishops from their proper dignities and callings Lib. 7. epist 69. as he expoundeth himselfe saying If there be one vniuersall Bishop it remayneth that you be no Bishops And if you make one vniuersall Patriarke you depriue all the other Patriarkes of their title and dignity l. 4. ep 36. In this sence tooke S. Gregory the name of vniuersal and therefore did justly refuse it himselfe and very sharply reprehended the Patriarke of Constantinople for vsurping of it for although in a good sence it might haue beene attributed vnto the Sea of Rome who is supreme Pastor of the vniuersall Church yet it could not without apparant pride and arrogancy be vsed of the Patriarke of Constantinople who had nothing to doe vvithout the compasse and limits of his owne Patriarkeship The testimony of S. Bernard is easie to be answered for he saith only that Eugenius is not Lord of Bishops but one of them and that he is not to drawe all power to himselfe but to leaue to euery Bishop and Archbishop his bretheren in gouernement their proper causes all vvhich vve say with him But he returneth to Pope Gregory who saith That he was subject to the Emperours commandement and had euery way dischardged that which was due in that be had performed his allegeance vnto the Emperour and yet did not conceale what he thought in Gods behalfe Answere VVhy did he not cite the place where S. Gregory hath these wordes there lurketh some padde vnder that strawe but he might very well vse such wordes excepting the word allegeance which sauoureth of a false translation Per Ioh. Diaconū l. 4. c. 58. For S. Gregory as it is to be seene in his life was of so profound humility that he called all Priestes his Brothers al Clarkes his Sonnes and all lay-men his Lordes or Masters and so might well vvrite vnto the Emperour that he was subject to his commandements for it is an vsuall phrase both in Italy and France to call all their friendes requests
soueraigne authority for the very light of nature and common custome of all nations doth teach vs that he vvho succeedeth vnto another in any established estate and calling doth at his lawfull enstalement therein enter into ful possession of al the rights dignities and priuiledges therevnto belonging For example vvhen one is crowned King of any nation he presently there vpon is endowed with al the power and prerogatiues which his Predecessors in that Kingdome enjoyed before him And to speake of spirituall Prelates vvho doubteth but that assoone as any Ecclesiastical person is chosen confirmed for example Archbishop of Canterbury but that forth-with he is not only made gouernor of that Diocesse but also Metrapolitane and supreame Pastor of the Church of England his very succession in that Sea making him as it were inheritour vnto all the priuiledges and prerogatiues of his Predecessours in that seate Euen so the Bishops of Rome succeeding vnto S. Peter in that Apostolicall Sea doe inherite and succeede him in that supreme authority which Christ gaue vnto S. Peter for to be continued in his Church vntill the worldes end Now to auouch as some desperately doe that S. Peter did not die at Rome nor neuer was at Rome is so grosse and palpable an vntruth auerred by meere ghesse and phantasie contrary to the euident testimony of all auncient fathers and repugnant vnto the expresse and sensible monuments of the place of his execution of his reliques and Churches builded by Constantine the great to the perpetuall remembrance of them in the City of Rome yet to this day most famously knowne through the world this their assertion is I say so blockish and impudent that it were but lost time to stand about the proofe of it for he that is so sencelesse as to beleeue such a paradoxe deserueth small paynes for his recouery But for an vpshot of this question let vs heare the opinions of the principal Doctors of the East Church who of all men are most likely not to attribute any such supremacy vnto a Bishop of the West Church if they had thought it due vnto any Patriarke of theirs or if they had not judged it to be a cleare case in true Diuinity that such soueraigne authority was due vnto that one chiefe Pastor in Gods Church The first shall be one the auncientest of them that most worthy champion of Christ Athanasius who was also one of the chiefest Patriarkes of the East Church as being Bishop of Alexandria He in a speciall treatise of Dionysius one of his predecessours in that Sea sheweth howe he went to Rome to another Dionysius then Pope there to haue his cause heard and determined which he would not haue done if he had not acknowledged the Bishop of Rome for his superiour and one to whose finall sentence all of the East Church as vvell as of the West were bound to obey And in his Epistle vnto Pope Foelix he hath these wordes God hath therefore placed you and your predecessours Apostolicall Prelates in the tower of superiority and hath commanded you to take charge of all Churches that you may succour and helpe vs. This Epistle indeede of Athanasius M. PER. doth mislike but because he sheweth not vvherefore his authority vvill not serue to discred it it But he saith as much in another of his and of all the Bishops of Aegipt joyned with him to Pope Marke to wit That they al with al committed to their charge were and euer would be obedient vnto the Bishop of Rome Lib. 3. hist cap. 7. It is also recorded by the Ecclesiasticall Hystoriographer Zozemene howe that both Athanasius Patriarke of Alexandria and Paule Patriarke of Constantinople with diuers others of the Greeke Church being by the Arrians banished out of their owne Bishoprickes did flie vnto the Bishop of Rome for refuge Who as that authour witnesseth because the care of all did belong vnto him through the dignity of his place and seate did restore their Churches to euery of them Athanasius also in his second Apology hath recorded these words of the same most holy Pope Iulius to the Bishops of the East Are yee ignorant this to be the custome that first of all you must write vnto vs that from hence it may be defined what is just Wherefore if there had beene any such suspition against the Bishop you ought to haue related it to our Church of Rome thus much of S. Athanasius the first of the foure Greeke Doctors Nowe to the second S. Gregory Nazianzene who had beene also Patriarke of Constantinople In c●r●a de vita sua Epist 52. ad Athan. he saith That the Church of Rome had alwaies mainetayned the true faith and opinion of God as it became the City that was superiour to all the world His diuine companion S. Basil aduertiseth Athanasius That he thought it good to write vnto the Bishop of Rome to heare their matters and by the decree of his judgement to determine them and because it was hard to send from thence that the Pope would giue to certayne chosen men authority to compose their controuersies and to reuerse and make voide the actes of the Councell of Arimini See what soueraignety this learned auncient Father of the East Church doth attribute vnto the Church of Rome The very same doth that golden mouth and most learned and holy Doctor S. Chrysostome acknowledge vvriting vnto Innocentius the first Pope of Rome Epist 1. ad Innocentium Beseeching him that he would repeale and make voide the wicked fact of the Patriarke of Alexandria with a whole Councell of the East and lay the Ecclesiasticall censures and punishments vpon them vvhich euery man knoweth that he could not haue done if he had not power and jurisdiction ouer all the East Church Vnto these foure most firme pillars of the Greeke Church let vs joyne one neighbour of theirs little inferiour vnto them for either standing learning or authority I meane Theodorete a Bishop in Asia that had 800. Churches vnder him He notwithstanding his distance from Rome writeth thus vnto Leo the first Epist ad Leonem I doe expect the sentence of your Apostolicall Sea and in humble wise doe beseech your Holynesse that your just and right judgement may helpe me appealing vnto you and that you will command me to runne vnto you to verifie that my doctrine is consonant to the Apostles And in another Epistle to Renatus a Priest of Rome he writeth That the Heretikes had spoyled him of his Bishopricke and cast him out of the Cyties without any reuerence or respect of his gray-hayres wherefore saith he I request you that you will perswade the most holy Archbishop Leo that he will vse his Apostolicall authority and command vs to come to your Councell for that holy seate of Rome boldeth the stearne of gouerning all the Churches in the world Well then to conclude this long and intricate question seing the Bishops of Rome from all antiquity as is
an other auailable to entreate and deserue that the vertue of the former generall may be deriued vnto men in particuler because although those sinnes and iniquities were vnto Christ pardoned in general yet at his death or by it only those sinnes were not remitted and pardoned vnto any man in particuler so that it was meete and requisite that besides the Sacrifice to purchase that generall redemption there should be an other to apply the vertue of it in particuler And thus much of this argument not that it deserued as it was proposed nakedly by M. PER. any more then a flat deniall but to explicate this difficulty and to interprete some obscure places of S. Paul omitted by M. PERKINS M. PER. fift reason If the Priest doe offer to God Christes reall body and bloud for the pardon of our sinnes then man is become a mediator betweene God and Christ This illation is too too ridiculous Is he Christes mediator that asketh forgiuenes of sinnes for Christes sake then are al Christians mediators betweene God and Christ for we all present vnto God Christs passion and beseech him for the meritte thereof to pardon vs our sinnes I hope that we may both lawfully pray vnto God and also imploy our best endeauours that Christ may be truly knowne rightly honoured and serued of all men without incroaching vpon Christs mediation These be seruices we owe vnto Christ and the bounden duties of good Christians wherein it hath pleased him to imploy vs as his seruantes and ministers not as his mediators But Master PERKINS addeth that vve request in the Cannon of the Masse That God will accept our gifts and offerings namely Christ himselfe offered as he did the Sacrifices of Abell and Noe he would haue said Abraham for Noe is not there mentioned True in the sence there following not that this Sacrifice of Christes body is not a thousand times more gratefull vnto him then was the Sacrifices of the best men but that this Sacrifice which is so acceptable of it selfe may be vnto all the partakers of it cause of all heauenly grace and benediction and that also through the same Christ our Lord as it there followeth in the Canon His sixt and last reason Is the judgement of the ancient Church which is the feeblest of al the rest for that he hath not one place which maketh not flat against himselfe Conc. Tol. 12. cap. 5. heare and then judge First saith he A Councell held at Toledo in Spaine hath these wordes Relation is made vnto vs that certaine Priests doe not so many times receiue the grace of the holy communion as they offer Sacrifice but in one day if they offer many Sacrifices to God they suspend themselues from the Communion Is not this a fit testimony to proue that there is no Sacrifice of the Masse whereas it teacheth the quite contrary to wit that there were at that time Priests that did offer Sacrifice daily but were complained on and reproued for that they did not themselues communicate of euery Sacrifice which they offered M. PER. biddeth vs marke that the Sacrifice then was but a kinde of seruice because the Priest did not communicate But why did not he marke that they were therefore reprehended as he well deserueth to be for grounding his argument vpon some simple Priests abuse or ignorance Mileuit cap. 12. Secondly he saith That in an other Councell the name of Masse is put for a forme of prayer It hath pleased vs that prayer suppliations and Masses which shall be allowed in the Councell be vsed Answ Very good It is indeed that forme of prayer which the Catholike Church hath alwayes vsed set downe in the Missals or Masse-bookes so that the Councell by him alleadged doth allowe of Masse Priests and Sacrifice But saith he very profoundly Masses be compounded but the Sacrifice propitiatory of the body and bloud of Christ admitteth no composition This is so deepe and profound an obseruation of his that I can scarce conjecture what he meaneth The Masse indeed is a prayer composed of many parts so I weene be all longer prayers but in what sence can that be true that the Sacrifice of Christ admitteth no composition If he meane the passion of Christ on the Crosse it was a bundell of Mirhe and heape of sorrowes shames and paines tyed together and laid vpon the most innocent Lambe sweet IESVS If he signifie their Lordes supper doth it not consist of diuers partes and hath it not many compositions in it let the good man then explicate himselfe better that one may ghesse at his meaning and then he shall be answered more particulerly But Abbot Paschasius shall mende all hee should by his Title of Abbot seeme rather likely to marre all he saith Because we sinne daylie L. de corpore sanguine Christi Christ is sacrificed for vs mystically and his passion is giuen vs in mistery Very good in the mistery of the Masse Christ is sacrificed for vs not as he was on the Crosse bloudily but in mistery that is vnder the formes of bread and wine which may serue to answere al that he citeth out of Paschasius specially considering that in that whole treatise and one or two other of the same Authour his principall butte and marke is to proue the reall presence and Sacrifice In the first Chapter of the booke cited by M. PER. he hath these wordes Our Lord hath done all thinges in heauen and earth as he will himselfe and because it hath so pleased him though the figure of bread and wine be here that is in the Sacrament notwithstanding it is to be beleeued that after consecration there is nothing else but the flesh and bloud of Christ vvhich he also expresly proueth there at large And in an other treatise of the same argument he hath these among many such like wordes Christ when he gaue his Disciples bread and broke it did not say this is a figure of my body nor in this mistery there is a certaine vertue of it but he said without dissimulation This is my body and therefore it is that which he said it was and not that which men imagine it to be Did I not tell you that this Abbot vvas like to helpe M. PER. but a litle Thus at length we are come to the end of M. PER. reasons in fauour of their cause let vs heare what he produceth for the Catholike party The first argument Christ was a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedecke but Melchisedeckes order was to Sacrifice in bread and wine Psal 109. ad Hebr. 5. 7. therefore Christ did offer vp Sacrifice in formes of bread and wine at his last supper And what Christ then did that did he ordaine to be done to the worlds end by the Apostles their successors therefore there is now in the true Church a true and proper Sacrifice offered in our Lordes supper To seperate that which is certaine
vs from all oppressions of the wicked one In euang de sanct Deipara c. Athanasius Patriarke of Alexandria and first of the foure principall Doctors of the Greeke Church after many prayses of the immaculate Virgin Mary saith Therefore all the rich men of the earth doe pray vnto thee to be enriched with thy goodes and spirituall contemplations We doe cry vnto thee remember vs most sacred Virgin c. Gregory Nazianzene the second of these famous Doctors doth thus pray vnto S. Athanasius who dyed in his time Orat. in sanct Athanas O Athanasius ô sacred and louing hart c. thou from aboue looke fauourably vpon vs and gouerne this holy people that adore the holy Trinity and cherish and feede vs in peace c. The like prayer he maketh to S. Cyprian and to S. Basil in his funerall orations made of them S. Basil speaking of fourty Martirs Orat. in quadrag Mart. of whome he made his sermon saith He that is troubled flyeth vnto these fourty and he that rejoyseth runneth vnto them they that they may be deliuered from their aduersity these that they may continue in prosperity here the Godly woman is found praying for her children c. S. Chrysostome the last but not the least of the foure highly commendeth the Emperour of Rome for praying vnto S. Peter and S. Paul saying He that is revested in purple Hom. 66. ad populū Antioch Ibid. goeth to embrace their tombes and all state laid aside doth become an humble suppliant to the Saints that they would pray vnto God for him he that goeth crowned with a Diademe and imperiall crowne humbly prayeth v●to the fisher-man and to the maker of tents as to his patrones and protectors Let vs to make vp the halfe dozen joyne one other their equall vvith the former it shall be Gregory Nyssene S. Basils brother he speaking vnto the Martir Theodore saith Make intercession vnto the King of all for our Country Orat. in Theodor. we stand in dread of great persecution The wicked Scithians are at hand and about to wage battle against vs thou as a souldier fight for vs as a Martir speake boldly in our cause and much more to this purpose which I omit that I be not ouer tedious To those of the Greeke Church let vs joyne as many of the Doctors of the Latin Church beginning with S. Ambrose the first of the foure more famous Doctors he first teacheth Lib. de viduis That Angels and Martirs are to be besought vnto and earnestly prayed vnto by vs alleadging that they are our Presidents and the beholders of our life and actions and encourageth vs not to be ashamed to vse them as intercessors of our infirmity And in another place prayeth thus That this my prayer may be of greater force Serm. 91. de inuent corpor Geruas Prothas I request the aide of the blessed Virgin Mary of the Apostles Martirs and Confessors the prayers of such personages thou ô Lord doest neuer despise if it shall please thee to inspire them to pray for me S. Augustine also first teacheth vs to pray to Martirs saying a Tract 84 in Iohan. We doe not so remember Martirs at that table as we doe others that rest in peace for we doe not pray for them but rather pray to them that they will pray for vs. And else where he saith b Serm. 7. de verbis Apostoli That it is an injury to pray for a Martir vnto whose prayers we ought to recommend our selues Secondly he himselfe c De bapt cōt Donat lib. 7. ca. 1. prayeth vnto S. Cyprian to helpe him with his good prayers Thirdly he hath recorded d Lib. 22. de ciuitat Dei cap. 8. the miraculous helpe which two seuerall persons obtained by praying vnto the Martir S. Stephen S. Hierome is so formall for vvorshipping of Relikes and praying to Saints in his treatise against Vigilantius that the Protestants are driuen to preferre that odious Heretike before him Yet because some of them denie him to speake there of praying to Saints note these wordes of his Thou Vigilantius sayest that whilest we liue we may pray one for another but after we be dead no mans prayer shall profit other c. see the objection of the Protestant Nowe heare that learned Doctors answere If saith he Apostles and Martirs whiles they liued here might pray for others when they ought to be carefull for themselues howe much more nowe after their crownes and triumphes Take also another place of his which is so cleare that it cannot admit any exception Epist ad Eustochiū in epitaph Paulae Farewell saith he to that blessed vvidowe Paula being then departed this life and with thy prayers helpe the old age of him that worshippeth thee thy faith and good workes haue joyned thee to Christ being present thou shalt more easily obtayne that which thou wilt aske The fourth of Latin Doctors is Gregory the great to whome vve English-men are so much bound for our conuersion to the Christian faith he perswadeth praying to Saints in this sort Homil. 31 super euāg ●fine If any of vs had a great cause to be heard tomorrowe before a high judge we would this day most diligently seeke out a wise well spoken and gratious counsailour that were likelyest to handle it in the best manner Behold saith he the seuere judge IESVS assisted with a terrible troupe of Angels and Archangels is to sit vpon vs before that majesticall assembly the cause of our saluation is to be discussed and yet we doe not nowe prouide vs Patrones that may on that day defend vs Martirs will then be good aduocates but they looke to be requested and as I may say doe seeke that they may besought vnto therefore seeke by praying vnto them to gette them to be your Patrones make them before hand intercessors of your guiltynesse because he that is to be our judge will be nowe intreated that then he may not punish vs. To these foure pillers of the Latin Church I will to make the number equall with the Greeke Fathers adde two others the first shall be out of Ruffinus vvho vvas of S. Hieromes standing of the most Christian Emperour Theodosius Ruffin li. 2. hyst ca. 33. He assisted with the Priestes and People visited the holy places and clad in bayre-cloath lay prostrate before the shrines of the Apostles and Martirs and by his faithfull intercession and praying to the Saints most humbly sued for succour The last shall be our famous country-man venerable Bede Let vs saith he with swift flight Lib. 4. in Cant. circa finem seeke vnto the holes of the wall that is let vs flie vnto the often intercession of Angels and Saints that they may pray for vs vnto our mercifull creatour for these are the most strong and surest fortresses of holy Church Nowe I vvould gladly knowe vvhether the testimony of these dozen of
serm 66. in Cant. Euen so doe S. Bede and S. Bernard with diuers others expound those wordes of our blessed Sauiour The third text of the newe Testament shall be taken out of S. Paul to the Corinthians vvhere he by a similitude of building declareth that some men vpon the only sound foundation IESVS Christ 1. Cor. 3. doe build gold siluer and pretious stones that is very excellent and perfect workes others doe build vpon the same foundation wood hay and stubble that is imperfect and many vaine trifling workes He addeth that the day of our Lord which shall be reuealed in fire shal proue the workes of the afore-said builders and they who haue built gold siluer and pretious stones because their workes will abide the proofe of fire shall receiue their reward but because the other sort of builders workes cannot resist the fire but will burne they shall suffer detriment but shall be saued yet so as by fire Hence we gather that after the triall of Gods judgement some men who are found guilty of lighter faults shall be saued because they keept the foundation notwithstanding they shall suffer detriment and passe through the fire of Purgatory as a man that hath an halfe-timber house couered with thetch set on fire he being in the middest of it must passe through the flames of fire to escape and saue his life The Protestants say that it is the fire of tribulation in this life that doth try our workes and that through it only lighter faults are purged We reply first that tribulation of this life doth not commonly discerne and try good mens workes from the badde because very often good men are more afflicted in this world then the badde Againe it is said in the text that at the day of our Lord this tryall shall be made vvhich day of our Lord being expressed vvith the Greeke article as here it is ordinarily in Scripture signifieth the day of his judgement so that by the very circumstances of the text it is very plaine that the Apostle S. Paul deliuered the doctrine of Purgatory which yet is made more assured by the vniuersall consent of the holy Fathers who take this place to proue Purgatory See Origen homil 6. in Exodum S. Basil saith He threatneth not vtter ruine and destruction In cap. 9. Esay but signifieth a cleansing according vnto the Apostles sentence but he shall be saued yet so as by fire Theodorete This same fire we beleeue to be the fire of Purgatory In scholijs Gr. in 1. Cor. 3. In psal 36 in which the soules of the departed are tryed and purged as gold is in the furnace Oecumenius and Anselmus vpon the same place be of the same judgement S. Ambrose vpon those wordes Sinners haue drawne their swordes saith though our Lord will saue his yet so they shall be saued as by fire and albeit they shall not be consumed with fire yet they shall be burnt S. Hierome in 4. cap. Amos. S. Augustine in almost twenty places expoundeth this text after the same manner Heare this one taken out of his Commentary vpon the 37. Psalme O Lord reproue me not in thy indignation that I goe not to hell neither correct me in thy wrath but purge me in this life and make me such a one that shall haue no neede of that purging fire prepared for them who shall be saued yet so as by fire And why so but because here they doe build vpon the foundation wood hay and stubble if they did build gold siluer and pretious stones they should be safe from both fires not only from that euerlasting which is to punish the wicked euerlastingly but from that also which shall correct them who shall be saued by fire for it is said he shall be saued yet so as by fire And because he shall be saued that fire is contemned yea truly though they shall be saued yet that fire is more grieuous then whatsoeuer a man can suffer in this life These fewe testimonies of the most approued Doctors may suffice to assure vs that the Apostles speeches are to be taken of a purging fire prepared after this life for them that vpon their true faith in Christ doe build through the frailty of our nature many idle odde and vaine workes The last text of holy Scripture shall be this taken out of S. Iohn 1. Epist 5. vers 16. He that knoweth his brother to sinne a sinne not vnto death let him aske and life shall be giuen him there is a sinne to death for that I say not that any man aske Hence I reason thus a sinne to death must in this place needs be taken for sinne wherein a man dyeth for which no man can pray because that he vvho dyeth in deadly sinne shall neuer afterward be pardoned wherefore a sinne not vnto death is a sinne of vvhich a man repenteth him before his death and for such a one doth S. Iohn exhort vs to pray therefore the prayer which he speaketh of when he biddeth vs not pray being prayer for the dead the other prayer also must be prayer for the departed and so doth he will vs to pray for such men departed that dyed not in deadly sinne but with repentance The Caluinists say That S. Iohn speaketh rather of Apostataes and some such like haynous offendors for whome yet aliue he would not haue vs to pray But this is very vvicked doctrine for vve may pray euen for Turkes and Iewes and the most sinnefull persons that liue whiles they liue and haue time to repent for vvhat knowe vve whether God vvill take them to mercy or no and S. Paul saith expresly that he would haue vs to pray for all persons 1. Tim. 2. vers 1. De correct gratia cap. 12. whiles they liue Much more conuenient therefore is that exposition before rehearsed which is taken out of S. Augustine who affirmeth That a sinne to death is to leaue faith working by charity euen till death To these arguments selected out of holy Scripture I will joyne another of no smaller moment with vs Catholikes which is drawne from Apostolicall tradition and the practise of the vniuersall Church in her primitiue purity which hath vsed alwayes to pray for the dead Let vs heare two or three substantiall vvitnesses speake in this matter S. Chrysostome that most renowmed Patriarke of Constantinople shall be the first vvho saith Hom. 69. ad populū That it was not without good cause ordayned and decreed by the Apostles that in the dreadfull mysteries there be made a commemoration of the dead For they did knowe that they should receiue thereby great profit and much commodity S. Augustine as famous for his learning and sincerity in the Latin Church as the other was in the Greeke De verbis Apostoli serm 34. saith to this point thus It is not to be doubted but that the dead are holpen by the prayers of holy Church and by the
to be seene in their decretall Epistles haue euer chalenged this right of Supremacy ouer the whole Church as the successours of S. Peter and that the very Patriarkes and principall Prelates euen of the East Church who were likelyest to haue resisted if they had seene any cause vvhy haue from the very beginning of the free practise of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction acknowledged and confessed the same and that finally the greatest vvisest and best Emperours of both the Latin and Greeke Church haue as you haue heard before declared the same right to appertayne vnto the said Roman Sea the matter cannot be but cleare enough to all that list not to remayne vvranglers vvhere the right of the Supremacy resteth OF THE EFFICACY OF THE SACRAMENTS OVR CONSENT M. PERKINS Page 295. THe first conclusion We teach and beleeue that the Sacraments are signes to represent Christ with his benefits to vs. The second conclusion We teach further that the Sacraments are indeede instruments whereby God offereth and giueth the fore-said benefits to vs. THE DIFFERENCE THe Catholikes teach that the Sacraments are true and proper instrumentall causes which being moued by God thereunto doe produce and giue grace to the worthy receiuer Euen as the penne doth make the letter or as the axe doth cut the wood being thereto applyed by the workeman so for example doth the Sacrament of baptisme wash away the sinnes of the baptised being by God therevnto ordayned and rightly vsed by the Minister But M. PERKINS holdeth that the Sacraments haue no operation to that effect of forgiuenesse of sinnes but are only outward meanes which being applyed vnto the party God of himselfe doth immediately purge him from sinne and not by meanes of the Sacraments Againe Whereas we require a fit disposition in the receiuer to make him capable of the grace presented and exhibited vnto him by the Sacrament He holdeth that all the vertue of the Sacrament consisteth in the receiuer Who beholding those signes from God in the handes of the Minister must conceite and imagine First that God himselfe by his owne mouth doth promise him seuerally and by name remission of his sinnes the signe and pledge whereof is that Sacrament which the minde considering reasoneth thus he that vseth the elements aright in faith and repentance shall receiue grace thereby but I vse the elements aright therefore shall I receiue from God increase of grace Thus then faith is confirmed not by the worke done but by a kinde of reasoning the proofe whereof is borrowed from the elements being signes and pledges of Gods mercy Contrarylie vve hold that the Sacrament it selfe conferreth and doth giue great grace so that there be no impediment or let of it by reason of the receiuers euill disposition Now if the receiuer come throughly vvell prepared with great humility charity and attention he then ouer and besides the ordinary grace of the Sacrament shall receiue more grace according vnto the measure of his owne preparation Lastly whereas we teach the very grace of justification to be giuen in some Sacraments as in Baptisme and Penance M. PER. saith no because A man of yeares must first beleeue and be justified before he can be a meete pertaker of any Sacrament But vvhat vvill he then say vnto Infants must not they receiue the grace of justification by Baptisme before they haue wit to beleeue and to reason in such sort as he prescribeth Before I come vnto the arguments of either party I thought fit to giue the reader to vnderstand that whether the Sacraments be true physicall instruments of grace or no Lib. 2. de Sacram. in gener cap. 11. is not a matter of faith as Cardinall Bellarmine declareth so we hold them to be true morall causes of the same grace to which M. PER. yeelded his consent wherefore I will not be long in this question Secondly to perceiue well the state of the question you must obserue what difference there is betweene a physical and moral instrument That then may be called a morall instrument vvhich moueth the principall agent to doe any thing albeit he vse not that thing it selfe as a meanes to doe it vvithall so that if God be effectually moued to bestowe grace vpon him that receiueth a Sacrament by the sight of the Sacrament though he giue not the grace by the vvorke of the Sacrament but immediatly from him felfe the Sacrament is the morall meanes of the same grace but it cannot be called the physicall or naturall instrument of that grace vnlesse God doe vse and apply the Sacrament it selfe as the meane and instrument to conuey the same grace into the soule of the receiuer Nowe vve hold it more agreable with the word of God and sentences of the holy Fathers and more for the dignity of the Sacraments themselues to say that God by them as by true naturall instruments doth conuay his graces into our soule M. PERKINS goeth about to proue the contrary thus The word preached and the Sacraments doe differ in the manner of giuing Christ vnto vs because the word worketh by the eare and the Sacraments by the eye otherwise for the giuing it selfe they differ not Christ saying that in the very word is eaten his owne flesh and what can be said more of the Lordes supper Augustine saith that beleeuers are pertakers of the body and bloud in baptisme Serm. ad Infant so saith Hierome to E●●bia Nowe vpon this it followeth that seing the worke done in the word preached conferreth not grace neyther doth the worke done in the Sacrament conferre grace I answere that his owne first word must stand wherein he said that the word preached and the Sacraments doe differ in the manner of giuing vs Christes grace for preaching doth by perswasion drawe vs vnto grace and goodnesse but the Sacraments as conduite-pipes doe take and deriue grace from Christes passion and conuay it into the soules of all them who doe not stoppe vp those diuine conduits by their owne default and want of due preparation To his idle and ill shapen commation I answere that Christes body may be eaten two vvayes either really as in the blessed Sacrament or else spiritually by beleeuing in Christ and being incorporate into his mysticall body and in this second sort Infants in baptisme and all true beleeuers doe eate the body of Christ But howe this proueth that the vvord and the Sacraments doe giue grace after the same manner is there any man that can tell His second reason I baptise you with water to repentance Math. 3. vers 11. but he that commeth after me shall baptise you with the holy Ghost and with fire Hence saith M PER. it is manifest that grace proceedeth not from any act of the Sacrament for Iohn though he doe not disjoyne himselfe and his action from Christ and the action of the spirit yet doth he distinguish them plainely in number persons and effect Answere He that can let him pike some English out
of this and shewe howe it maketh for M. PERKINS But to the purpose I answere that S. Iohn there doth put a playne difference betweene his owne baptisme and the baptisme of Christ saying of his owne That it was the baptisme of water nor giuing the holy Ghost as the baptisme of Christ should doe which also most of the Fathers both Greeke and Latin doe playnelie testifie and the wordes of the text doe euidently confirme the same Whence I reason thus S. Iohns baptisme was such an instrument and meanes of grace Mat. 1. as M. PER. describeth for there was a promise of remission of sinnes to him that receiued it with faith and repentance yet vvas it nothing comparable vnto Christes baptisme vvhich is nowe only vsed therefore Christes baptisme doth ouer and besides the representation of grace vvhich was in S. Iohns baptisme effectually conuay the same grace of the holy Ghost into our soules by the very applying of it to vs so that this worthy argument of his proceedeth wholy against himselfe He goeth forward and saith That Paul who trauayled of the Galatians and begat them by the Gospell 1. Cor. 3. vers 7. saith of himselfe that he is not any thing not only as he was a man but as be was a faithfull Apostle thereby excluding the whole euangelicall Ministery from the least part of diuine operation or efficacy in conferring grace Answere This is nothing to the purpose for S. Paul speaketh there of preaching the Gospell and we treate here of ministring the Sacraments Preaching as hath beene said doth not conferre grace of it selfe but by perswasion no more doth the preacher and so may be said to be nothing in that worke of producing grace and faith in the hearer but the Sacraments conferring grace he that administreth the Sacrament doth really concurre as an instrument of producing the same grace Moreouer such an instrument may be sa●● to be nothing because they themselues with al their endowments can doe nothing in that matter vnlesse they be therevnto applyed and moued by the principall agent vvhich is God as a penne or other instrument be it neuer so good can doe nothing of it selfe and therefore may be said to be nothing M. PERKINS third reason The Angels nay the flesh of the sonne of God hath not any quickning vertue from it selfe but all his vertue is from the God-head nowe if there be no effi●●cy in the flesh of Christ but from the God-head howe shall bodily actions about bodily elements conferre grace immediately Answere This is too too simple for a base bodily thing may conuay grace immediately as an instrument of God when as the highest creature hath not power of it selfe to produce and conferre the same grace as principall agent as a meane subject by speciall commission and authority from the Prince may haue power of life and death which the greatest Peere in the realme hath not of his owne authority without some priuiledge from the Prince Rom. 4. His fourth reason Paul standeth much vpon this to proue that justification by faith is not conferred by the Sacraments and gathereth it because Abraham was first justified and afterward receiued circumcision the signe and seale of his righteousnesse Nowe the generall condition of all Sacraments is one and the same and that baptisme succeedeth circumcision Answere He mistaketh greatly S. Pauls discourse which is nothing lesse then that he saith but to proue that neither by the obseruation of Moyses lawe nor yet by the morall carriage of the Gentils men vvere to he saued but by faith in Christ and obedience vnto his Gospell Yea he is so farre off from denying justification to be conferred by the Sacraments that in the same epistle he teacheth vs to be justified by baptisme saying We are buryed together with Christ by baptisme into death Cap. 6. vers 4. that as he is risen againe from the dead c. so we may walke in newnesse of life Againe if Baptisme be but a signe and seale of righteousnesse how commeth the infant that cannot for lacke of discretion beleeue to that righteousnes whereof Baptisme is the seale Abraham in deede was justified before he vvas circumcised because he vvas aboue 70. yeares old before he heard of any circumcision but thence it followeth not that the infants circumcised at eight dayes old vvere justified before they vvere circumcised And so it may be that Cornelius the Italian Captayne was justified before he heard a word of the Sacrament of baptisme but that is nothing to proue or disproue the ordinary vvorking of the Sacraments for before the lawefull publication of any lawe no man is bound to obserue that lawe so that Abraham before he had heard of circumcision and Cornelius knowing nothing of Baptisme were not bound to them but had other meanes of justification according to Gods vvill and afterward receiued those Sacraments in obedience to God both in testimony of their former righteousnesse and to increase the same grace Hence it doth not followe but that the ordinary vvorking of both circumcision and baptisme in infants vvas and is to purge them from originall sinne and to powre the grace of justification into their soules But let vs admit al to be true which he saith yet this argument helpeth not the maine point which he is to proue to vvit that the Sacraments doe not produce grace into our soules for albeit they produced not the first justifying grace as the Sacrament of the Alrar and some others doe not yet they may truely produce and worke in vs an encrease of Gods grace and so be true physicall instrumentall causes of grace according as the Catholikes hold Consequently you may judge vvhat a pithy reason his fourth is vvhich may be answered foure manner of wayes His fift is the judgement of the Church Basil De spiritu sancto 15. If there be any grace in the water it is not from the nature of the water but from the presence of the spirit Could any man haue produced a vvitnesse to speake more formally against himselfe M PER. holdeth that there commeth no vertue from the water to sanctifie the soule S. Basil the fore-man of his quest auerreth that grace commeth from the water and is in the water marry that grace the water hath not of his owne nature but from the spirit of God there present In 14. Esaiae His second authour Hierome saith Man giueth water and God giueth the holy Ghost This is true but vvhether God giueth that grace by the ministery of the man and meanes of the Sacrament S. Hierome in that place saith neyther yea nor no and therefore his testimony helpeth not M. PER. cause But in his 83. Ad Oceanum Tract 80. in Iohan. Epistle he doth at large declare what efficacy baptisme and the water sanctified in Christ hath Augustine said Water toucheth the body and washeth the hart Answere His wordes are What great force and vertue is this of water
our hart and soule that it maketh it whiter then snowe the temple of the holy Ghost Psal 50. 1. Cor. 6. 2. Tim. 2. vers 21. sanctified and apt to all good workes as the word of God witnesseth The third conclusion is about Christes imputatiue justice vve hold that no man is formally justified by that justice which is in Christ which is infinite and vvould make vs as just as Christ himselfe is but that God through Christes merits doth bestowe vpon euery righteous man a certayne measure of justice vvherewith his soule being purged from sinne and adorned with all honesty fit for his degree and calling is made righteous in Gods sight and worthy of the Kingdome of heauen M. PERKINS holdeth that Euery just man hath faith created in his hart whereby he layeth hand on Christes justice and drawing that to himselfe maketh it his owne He proueth it by these wordes of the Apostle 1. Cor. 1. vers 30. Christ is made vnto vs of God Wisdome Righteousnesse Sanctification and Redemption I answere that Christ is in that place so made our righteousnesse as he is made our wisdome nowe no man holdeth that he is made our wisdome by imputation therefore is he not our righteousnesse by imputation The Apostles meaning is that Christ is the procurer and meritorious cause of both our wisdome and justice and of whatsoeuer other spirituall gifts we enjoy And this righteousnesse which God bestoweth on vs in this life is sufficient to enable vs to keepe Gods lawe as I haue proued in seuerall questions before and to make vs worthy of life euerlasting The fourth conclusion Catholikes hold it the surest course to put their trust in the mercy of God and merits of Christ for their saluation yet in sobri●t● they may haue confidence both in their owne merittes and in other good mens prayers That is because God saueth none of yeares who doe not merit life euerlasting by vsing his grace well therefore a vertuous honest man may haue some confidence in the good course of his life Marry because we are not throughly assured of our owne good workes past neither can we tell howe long we shall perseuer in that Godly course of life therefore vve rather stand in feare when we consider our owne vvorkes and our whole confidence is in the mercies of God vvho for Christes sake calleth most vnworthy creatures to his grace and doth neuer for sake any endeauouring to continue in his seruice Neyther doth that visitation of the sicke in the Dutch tongue found in a dusty corner any whit helpe them for we teach all especially notorious sinners that vvallowe in sinne vntill their dying day such as it seemeth that visite was made for to trust not in their owne naughtinesse or little goodnes vvho haue a hundreth times more euill then good in them but in the infinite mercy of God and inestimable merits of our Sauiours death and passion vvhich letteth not but that a good man may haue some confidence in his owne merits and in the prayer of Saints And M PER. considereth little what he saith vvhen he affirmeth That we make that our God in which we put our trust for albeit vve must trust only in God as in the author of all good thinges yet may vve trust in diuers other thinges as in the meanes of our saluation Doe not the Protestants trust in Christes passion and yet I hope they made not his passion their God Haue they not a confidence and trust in their liuely faith yes I vvarrant you or else they would not be farre from desperation so notwithstanding his vaine babling Catholikes vvell grounded in vertue may haue some confidence in their owne good deedes and in the prayer of Saints as orderly meanes to attayne vnto saluation albeit vve trust in God only as in the authour of it The fift and last conclusion That we must not only beleeue in generall the promises of life euerlasting but apply them to vs in particular by hope M. PER. somewhat faintly excepteth against this and saith That by faith we must assure our selues of our saluation present and by hope continue the certainety of it Marry he addeth further That they teach not that euery man liuing within the precincts of their Church is certayne of his saluation by faith but that he ought so t● be and must endeauour to attayne thereto Why then that man hath not the faith of Protestants vvhich cannot but apply vnto themselues in particular the promises of life euerlasting and that as the nature of faith requireth without all staggering doubt but to sowe pillowes and to lay them vnder poore deceiued mens elbowes he sometimes saith that he requireth not such certainety of saluation yet in the conclusion of this very Chapter he forgetting himselfe so quickly saith That we abolish the substance of faith namely in denying the particular certayne application of Christ crucified and his benefits vnto our selues A vvorthy authour that can no better agree with himselfe OF REPENTANCE OVR CONSENT M. PERKINS Page 316. THe first conclusion Repentance is the conuersion of a sinner which is twofold passiue and actiue passiue is an action of God whereby he conuerteth a sinner Actiue is an action whereby the sinner once turned by God turneth himselfe and doth good workes as the fruit there of of this later the question is The second conclusion That repentance standeth specially for practise in contrition of hart confession of mouth and satisfaction in worke or deede There be two sortes of contrition one when a man is sorrowfull for feare only of hell and other punishments in this life this he calleth legall though in the state of the lawe there was most perfect contrition in some The other Euangelicall when one is greeued for his sinnes not so much for feare of hell as because he hath offended so good and mercyfull a God which is alwayes necessary Secondly We hold confession necessary to be made first to God then publikely to the congregation if any man be excommunicate for any crime Thirdly To our neighbour when we haue offended and wronged him Lastly In all true repentance there must be satisfaction made First to God by intreating him to accept of Christes satisfaction for our sinnes Secondly to the Church for publike offences in humiliation to testifie the truth of our repentance Thirdly satisfaction is to be made to our neighbour because if he be wronged he must haue recompence and restitution made The third conclusion That in repentance we are to bring forth outward fruites worthy amendment of life whereof the principall is to endeauour day and night by Gods grace to leaue and renounce al and euery sinne and in all thinges to doe the will of God THE DIFFERENCE WE dissent not from the Church of Rome in the doctrine of repentance it selfe but in the abuses thereof first in generall because they beginne repentance part of the holy Ghost and part of themselues by the