by good workes Rhemist Rom. 2.3 Ans. This is but a late and new deuice of the first and second iustification as afterward we wil shew in the proper place The scripture teacheth vs that not onely the beginning of our righteousnes but the finishing and perfiting of it is onely by grace in Christ Ephes. 2.5.6 When we were dead in our sinnes he hath quickned vs together in Christ by whose grace yee are saued and hath raysed vs vp and made vs sit together in heauenly places We see that this saluation by grace bringeth vs vp to heauen Ergo both the first second iustification are of grace for they can bring vs no further then to heauen Rhemist 2. Workes done of nature without or before fayth cannot merite but workes done by Gods grace may and are ioyned with it as causes of saluation Ans. Not onely the workes of nature but euen of grace also are excluded Wee are saued saith the Apostle by grace through fayth not of workes And then he sheweth what workes namely good workes such as the Lord hath ordayned for vs to walke in Ephes. 2.9.10 Ergo workes also of grace wrought in vs by the spirite of God are shut out from being any causes of our saluation I conclude with Augustine vpon those wordes of the Psalme Let the Lord alway be magnified Peccatores magnificetur vt vocet consiteris magnificetur vt ignoscat iam iustè viuis magnificetur vt regat perseueras vsque ad finem magnificetur vt te glorificet Art thou a sinner let God be magnified in calling thee doest thou confesse thy sinnes let him be magnified in forgiuing them doest thou liue well let him be magnified in directing thee doest thou continue to the end let him be magnified in glorifiing thee God is as much to be praysed for all things wrought after our calâ—ing and conuersion as for mercy shewed before All then is wholly to bee ascribed to Gods grace and mercie nothing is left for our merite or desert THE FOVRTH PART OF THE distinction of merites The Papists THey make two kindes of merite Meritum de coâ—gruo merite of congruitie error 91 such are the preparatiue workes before iustification as were the prayers almes deeds of Cornelius Act. 10. which though they be not simply meritorious ex debito iustitiae by the due debt of iustice yet they deserue at Gods handes of congruitie because hee doth graciously accept them Act. 10. sect 5. The other kinde they call meritum de condigno merite of condignitie when the reward is iustly due by debt such are the workes done in the second iustification which are truely meritorious and worthy of heauen Gabriel Biel. Rhemist Rom. 2. sect 3. The Protestants FIrst wee vtterly denie any such merite of condignitie For Saint Paul sayth that the afflictions of this life are not condigne of the glory to come Rom. 8.18 Condignitie then is wholly remoued and taken away Secondly a rewarde of congruitie in some sorte we graunt but neither for any thing done before fayth or iustification for it is impossible without fayth to please God or doe any thing acceptable vnto him Hebr. 6.6 Neither is it of congruitie for the merite of our workes but it is congruum it is agreeable to the mercie and iustice of God in respect of his promise graciously made in Christ to rewarde the faithfull obedience of his seruants so then the congruitie is on Gods behalfe not in respect of our workes We are iustified sayth the Apostle Gratis per gratiam freely by grace Rom. 3.24 Ergo there is no merite either of congruitie or condignitie seeing all is done freely Augustine sayth Quid ille latro attulerat de fauce ad iudicium de iudicio ad crucem de cruce in Paradisum I pray you what merite did the theefe bring with him from the prison to iudgemeÌ„t from the iudgement place to the crosse from the crosse to Paradise Here was neither merite of congruitie nor condignitie THE FIFT PART OF THE MANner of meriting The Papists OVr workes they say are pleasing and acceptable vnto God euen after error 92 the same manner that Christ and his workes were Tapper ex Tileman loc 11. Err. 14. Christes paynes of their owne nature compared to his glorie were not any whit comparable yet they were meritorious and worthy of heauen not for the greatnes of them but for the worthines of his person So our works not of their owne nature but as they are of grace are meritorious of the ioyes of heauen Rhemist Rom. 8.18 The Protestants FIrst it is a great blasphemie to say that Christs passions in themselues deserued not that glory which he hath purchased for vs neither that there was any comparison betweene them for then how could he haue fully satisfied the wrath of God Christ hath payed the ransome for our sinnes Wee are redeemed with his precious blood as of a lambe vnspotted 1. Pet. 1.19 His blood was the price of our redemption therefore of it selfe meritorious It was not in respect of Christ of grace but of merite in him Vnto vs his redemption is of grace Rom. 3.24 Wherefore his passion being the passion of the Sonne of God was a full satisfaction and worthy desert of that glory which hee hath purchased for vs. Secondly it is another great blasphemy to match and compare in the way and maner of meriting Christs workes and ours together For first there is no merite at all in vs vnto saluation we haue no merites but Christs and are saued onely by fayth in him not by workes Ephes. 2.8 Secondly by your own confession our works are not of their nature meritorious but of grace But Christs workes were of themselues full of merite without any externall helpe or accession of grace for in himselfe did all fulnes dwell Coloss. 1.19 Augustine very well sheweth the great difference in the way of meriting betweene Christ and vs thus writing Quantum interest cum duo sint in carcere interreum visitatorem eius illum causa premit illum humanitas adduxit sic in istu mortalitate nos reatu tenebamur Christus misericordia descendit Looke what difference there is when two are in prison together betweene the prisoner and his friend that commeth to visite him the one is there of necessitie the other commeth of good will Such difference is there betweene Christ vs for when we were deteined in the prison of this mortalitie for the guilt of our sinnes Christ came in mercy to visite vs. How can there now be any proportionable or like way of meriting in the guiltie prisoner and the innocent and friendly visiter THE FOVRTH QVESTION of Iustification THe partes of this question First of the preparatiue workes to iustification Secondly of the 2. kindes of iustification the first second Thirdly of inherent iustice Fourthly of Iustification only by fayth They folow now in order THE FIRST PART OF THE PREparatiue workes The Papists
life or quickening to bee made a true and right faith The words then are thus to be read and distinguished So faith without works is dead that is this kinde of faith which neither worketh nor euer shall Not thus Faith is dead without workes as though a true faith were quickened by works But euen as the bodie is dead hauing neither soule nor the operations thereof life motion sense so this vaine speculatiue kinde of faith is dead both wanting the spirite and soule that is hauing not one sparke of true faith neither the operations and fruites thereof which a liuely faith sheweth by loue as the soule worketh life and motion in the bodie for a liuely faith can neuer bee without workes And a dead faith will neuer haue workes but remaineth dead for euer Wee must not therefore thinke that it is one and the same faith which sometime is dead without workes and againe is made aliue and quickened when workes come But wee must vnderstand two kindes of faith one altogether voide of good workes which is onely a faith in name and a verie dead faith Another is a liuelie faith alwaies working and this can neuer become a dead faith so neither can the other bee euer made a liuelie faith Argum. That charitie is not the forme or any cause of faith but the effect rather and fruite thereof we doe learne out of the word of God Christ saith Iohn 3.18 Hee that beleeueth shall not bee condemned but is alreadie passed from death to life Iohn 5.24 Faith then is able to saue vs and alone iustifieth vs before God without loue which alwaies foloweth a true faith but is not ioyned or made a partner with it in the matter of iustification But faith could doe nothing without the forme thereof Ergo charitie is not the forme of faith Saint Paul also faith Faith which worketh by loue Galath 5.6 The being and substance of faith is one thing the working another Loue onely concurreth with faith in the working it is no part of the essence or being of faith August Ea sola bona opera dicenda sunt quae fiunt per dilectionem haec necesse est antecedat fides vt inde ista non ab istis incipiat illa Those onely are to bee counted good workes which are wrought by loue faith of necessitie must goe before for they must take their beginning from faith and not faith from them Faith then goeth before loue that worketh therefore loue is not the forme of faith for forma prior est re formata the forme should goe before the thing formed THE FOVRTH PART HOW MEN are iustified by faith The Papists WEe are saide to bee iustified by faith because faith is the beginning error 81 foundation and the roote of iustification Concil Triden sess 6. cap. 8. Faith then by their sentence doth not fully iustifie the beleeuer but is the beginning way and preparation onely to iustification Andrad ex Tilem de fide err 11. Rhemist Rom. 3. sect 3. The Protestants FAith is not the beginning onely of our iustification but the principall and onely worker thereof neither are wee iustified in part or in whole by any other meanes then by faith Argum. He that is at peace with God is fully and perfectly iustified his conscience cleared and his sinnes remitted But by faith wee haue peace of conscience Ergo by faith wee are fullie and perfectly iustified Rom. 5.1 The Scripture also faith The iust man shall liue by faith Rom. 1.17 But wee liue not by iustification begun onely but perfited and finished Ergo our full iustification is by faith Augustine vpon these words Iohn 6.29 This is the worke of God that yee beleeue c. Si iustitia est opus Dei quomodo erit opus Dei vt credatur in eum nisi ipsa sit iustitia vt credamus in eum If iustice or righteousnes bee the worke of God how is it the worke of God to beleeue in him vnlesse it be righteousnes it selfe to beleeue in him See then it is not initium iustitiae credere sed ipsa iustitia it is not the beginning of iustice to beleeue but iustice and righteousnes it selfe THE FIFT PART WHETHER faith bee meritorious The Papists BY faith we doe merite eternall life Catechis Roman p. 121. ex Tilemann de error 82 fide err 20. Rhemists also ascribe meriting to faith Rom. 3. sect 3. Argum. Faith is a worke Ergo if we be iustified by faith wee are iustified by workes and soe consequently by merite The Protestants Ans. FAith in deed is a worke but not any of our owne works it is called the worke of God Iohn 6.29 God doth wholly worke it in vs Ergo wee cannot merite by it Argum. Saint Paul saith Ephes. 2.8 By grace are you saued through faith not of yourselues for it is the gift of God not of workes least any man should boast himselfe Faith then is no meritorious cause of our iustification but onely an instrumentall meanes whereby we doe apprehend the grace of God offered in Christ God giueth both faith and the end of faith Vtrumque Dei est as Augustine saith quod iubet quod offertur Beleeue and thou shalt be saued both come of God the thing commanded that is faith and the thing offered namely saluation Ergo all is of grace THE SIXT PART WHETHER to beleeue bee in mans power The Papists RHemist Act. 13. sect 2. giue this note that the Gentiles beleeued by their error 83 owne free will though principallie by Gods grace therefore to beleeue partly consisteth in mans free will though not altogether this is their opinion The Protestants FAith is the meere gift of God Ephes. 2.8 and wholly commeth from God it is not either in part or whole of our selues Argum. Rom. 11.36 Of him through him and for him are all thinges Ergo fidei initium ex ipso neque hoc excepto ex ipso sunt caetera Therefore saith Augustine the beginning of our faith is of him vnlesse wee will say that all things else are of God this onely excepted And afterward hee sheweth that our faith is wholly of God not part of him part of our selues Sic enim homo quasi componet cum Deo vt partem fidei sibi vendicet partem Deo relinquat So man shall as it were compound with God to chalenge part of faith to himselfe and leaue part for God THE SEVENTH PART WHEther faith may be lost The Papists error 84 A Man may fall away from the faith which once truely he had as Saint Paul saith of some They had made shipwrack of faith 1. Timoth. 1.19 Rhemist ibid. Ergo true faith may be lost The Protestants Ans. THe Apostle saith Some hauing put away a good cōscience made shipwrack of faith Such a faith in deed that hath not a good cōscience may be lost for it is not a true liuely faith but a dead fruitelesse faith Argum. But hee that once
IVSTIFIcation onely by fayth The Papists error 94 FAyth is not the only cause of our iustificatiō but there are other also as hope charitie almes deedes and other vertues Rhemist Roman 8. sect 6. Yea workes are more principall then fayth in the matter of iustification Iam. 2. sect 7. Whosoeuer therefore sayth that a man is iustified onely by fayth and that nothing els is required to iustification we pronounce him accursed Trident. Concil sess 6. can 9. Argum. 1. Rom. 8.24 We are saued by hope Ergo not onely by fayth Rhemist Answ. 1. We are sayd to be saued by hope not because wee are thereby iustified but because by hope we do expect and waite for our saluation which is not yet accomplished as it followeth vers 25. If wee hope for that wee see not then doe we with patience abide for it Argum. 2. Galath 5.6 Fayth that worketh by charitie Fayth then hath her whole actiuitie and operation toward saluation of charitie It doth not therefore iustifie vs alone but fayth and charitie together of the which charitie is the more principall Rhemist ibid. Answ. We graunt that it is a working fayth that doth iustifie as the Apostle here sayth but not as it worketh but as it apprehendeth and beleeueth Charitie is a principall effect of fayth and followeth it how then can fayth receiue actiuitie from charitie the effect doth not giue life to the cause You know Augustine often sayth Opera non praecedunt iustificandum sed sequuntur iustificatum Workes goe not before vnto iustification but followe in him that is already iustified But if charitie should beget fayth then workes proceeding of charitie should goe before fayth by the which wee are iustified The Apostle sayth Without fayth it is impossible to please God Hebr. 11.6 Ergo neither doth charitie please God without fayth Fayth giueth actiuitie to charitie how then can it receiue that which it giueth Argum. 3. Iam. 2.24 We see how that of deedes a man is iustified and not of fayth onely Ergo we are not iustified by fayth onely Rhemist Answ. Saint Iames is not contrary to his fellow Apostle Saint Paul who concludeth Rom. 3.28 that We are iustified by fayth without workes that is as much to say as by fayth onely And he excludeth not onely workes of nature or of the law but euen workes of grace which God hath ordayned Ephes 2.10 Therefore S. Iames in saying we are not iustified by faith onely meaneth not that iustification whereby we are made iust before God for then he should impugne Saint Pauls principles But by iustifiyng or being iustified he vnderstandeth nothing els but to be declared iust as well before men as in the sight of God which declaration is testified and shewed forth by our workes proceeding of faith Thus the word iustified is taken Rom. 3.4 That thou maist be iustified in thy words that is knowne or declared to be iust Augustine also sayth Iustificabuntur id est iusti habebuntur They shall be iustified that is counted iust as we also say Sanctificetur nomen id est sanctum habeatur Let thy name bee sanctified that is reputed and acknowledged to be holy amongst men The Protestants WE are not enemies to good workes as our aduersaries falsely charge vs nay we preach good workes we exhort to good workes we establish good workes teaching the right vse of them out of the word of God which is not to concurre or be ioyned with faith in our iustification but to follow necessarily and issue out of faith as liuely testimonies thereof to the glorie of God the example of others and our comfort but faith it is onely which as a liuely instrument ordained of God doth assure vs of our iustification by grace in Christ. Argum. 1. Saluation is ascribed onely to beleefe Mark 16.16 Act. 16.31 But it is the propertie of faith onely to beleeue not of hope or charitie the effect of hope is by patience to abide Rom. 8.25 The operations also of loue are set forth 1. Corinth 13. Where amongst other Loue is sayd to beleeue all things that is mutuall loue amongst men is not mistrustfull but taketh all things in good part but to beleeue the things of God it is the propertie onely of faith as Augustine vpon those words of the Apostle How shall they call vpon him on whom they haue not beleeued In his duobus tria illa intuere fides credit spes charitas orant In these two behold those three faith beleeueth hope and charitie pray Faith therefore onely beleeueth and so consequently onely iustifieth Enchirid. cap. 7. Argum. 2. Our iustification and saluation is of the meere grace and mercie of God not at al of any merite or desert in vs Ergo we are iustified only through faith for it is of grace that we are saued through faith Ephes. 2.8 That all is to bee ascribed onely to the mercie and grace of God the Apostle euery where sheweth Rom. 9.12 It is not in him that willeth or runneth but in God that sheweth mercie We are iustified freely by grace Rom. 3.24 What hast thou that thou hast not receiued Augustine saith Intelligenda est gratia Dei per Iesum Christum dominum nostrum qua sola liberamur à malo We must vnderstand the grace of God by Iesus Christ by the which we are onely deliuered from euill Si quid boni est magni vel parui donum tuum est nostrum non est nisi malum si quid boni vnquam habui à te recepi If there bee any good in vs much or little it is thy gift nothing is ours but the euill in vs Ergo all good things are of God and onely of his grace and therefore our iustification Argum. 3. There are many euident places which doe attribute our iustification to faith without workes Rom. 3.28.11.8 Ephes. 2.8.9 In all these places in plaine termes We are sayd to bee iustified by faith without workes As for those friuolous euasions that the Apostle speaketh of the first iustification not of the second or of the workes of nature or of the lawe not of grace we haue answered before Quaest. 2. part 3. artic 3. If they will oppose that saying of S. Iames. 2.24 we answere with Augustine Nec Apostoli sunt inter se aduersi ille dicit Abrahae opus omnibus notum in filij immolatione magnum opus sed ex fide laudo fructum boni operis sed in fide agnosco radicem The Apostles are not contrarie one to the other he sayth Abrahams worke was knowne to all in offering vp his sonne a great worke but of faith I praise the fruite but it was rooted in faith His meaning then is this that Abraham was iustified that is declared to men to be iust by this worke HERE FOLLOW SVCH CONTROVERSIES AS doe arise betweene the Protestants and Papists about the natures of Christ. WE haue now through Gods gracious assistance entreated of all those
Apostle but we are sure the Pope is none neither successor of any Apostle but very Antichrist Ergo we haue more iust cause to examine his decrees 4 Lastly let Augustine speake Nouit charitas vestra omnes nos vnum magistrum habere sub illo condiscipulos esse nec ideo magistri sumus quia de superiore loco loquimur vobis sed magister est omnium qui habitat in nobis omnib You know brethren saith he that we are all felow scholers vnder one maister and though we speake to you out of an higher place yet are we not your master he is the teacher and master of vs all that dwelleth in our harts Ergo the spirite of God speaking in the scriptures is the chief and best interpreter thereof THE THIRD PART OF THE SIXTH QVEstion concerning the meanes or methode to be vsed in interpreting of Scripture The Papistes error 10 OVr aduersaries prescribe this methode and course to be takē in expounding of scripture which consisteth in foure rules the generall peactise of the Church the consonant interpretation of the fathers the decrees of generall Councels lastly the rule of faith consisting partly of the scriptures partly of traditions vnwrittē Stapleton Cōcerning the three first we haue already touched them in part they appeare to be insufficient First the Councels and fathers he made chief interpreters of Scripture before and now they are but meanes what other chief iudge then is there to vse these meanes surely none but the scriptures Secondly these meanes are most vncertaine the practise of the Church is often changed fathers agree not in their expositiōs and Councels can not alwayes be had Concerning the rule of faith consisting of vnwritten verities he groundeth it falsely vpon that place Rom. 12.6 let vs prophecie according to the rule of faith and Gal. 6.16 as many as walke according to this rule This rule was a certaine platforme of Religion geuen by the Apostles before the Scriptures were written according to the which say they the Scriptures were afterward compiled by the Apostles Rhemens in Rom. 12.6 Answere S. Paul meaneth no other rule but that which is set downe in his writings no other forme of doctrine but that conteined in his Epistles as in the 6. to the Galathians speaking of this rule he alludeth to the former verse where he saith he reioyced in nothing but in the Crosse of Christ his rule therfore is to receiue Christ onely without the ceremonies or workes of the law against the which heresie he disputeth in the whole Epistle But of all other it is a great blasphemie to say that the Apostles set downe the Scriptures by a rule as though the spirite of God by whom they spake had neede of any such direction The Protestantes WHen we say that the scriptures must expound them selues our meaning is that by certaine compendious and ready meanes we should labour to vnderstand the scriptures by them selues the meanes are especially these foure First to haue recourse to the originall toung as in the old Testament to the Hebrue in the new to the Greeke as 1. Tim. 2.15 through bearing of children they shal be saued if they continue in faith and loue In the English it is doubtfull whether this clause if they continue in faith be referred to children or to those that beare them but read the Greeke and the doubt is remoued for bearing of children is all one word in the originall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that it must needes be vnderstood of the women for this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bearing of children is in the singular number that which foloweth of the plurall and it is but an action not a person so that it should be improperly sayd if they continue that is in bearing of children Stapleton obiecteth against this meane that it is not now needefull seeing there is a perfect and absolute translatiō authorised by the Councell of Trent he meaneth the vulgare Latin We answere First it is no perfect but an erronious translation and verie corrupt Secondly if it were neuer so perfect yet for more certaintie it is profitable to search the originall euery man will trust his owne skill rather then another mans Thirdly the Councell did fondly in authorising an old blind translation before the authenticall copies of the Hebrue and Greeke 2 Secondly the scope of the place the circumstance of it with that which goeth before and commeth after must be wayghed which will bring great light to the place we haue in hand an example we haue 1. Pet. 4.8 loue couereth multitude of sinnes the Papistes gather out of these words that loue doth iustifie vs before God and taketh away our sinnes but by the circunstance of the place the Apostole saying immediatly before haue feruent loue among you it is euident he vnderstandeth brotherly loue amōgest our selues whereby faultes are buried forgeuen and forgotten Stapleton obiecteth that this is but an vncertaine way and many times fayleth for the scripture passeth many times from one matter and argument to another how then can it helpe to consider the circumstance of the place being of a diuerse matter We answere we say not that any of these meanes serueth for euery place but when one fayleth to vse another when the circumstance helpeth not to runne to the originall if there we find no succour to cōpare places together and when we may to vse them all or the most 3 Thirdly the conference of places is very profitable as Iames. 2.21 Abraham was iustified by workes compare it with that place Rom. 4.2 there S. Paule saith flatly that Abraham was not iustified by workes Wherfore seeing one Apostle is not contrary to the other we must needs gather that this word iustified is diuersly taken Paule saith that Abraham was not iustified that is made righteous before God by his workes Iames saith he was iustified that is declared to be iust before men and so Thom. Aquinas expoundeth it Stapleton obiecteth that this meanes in cōparing of places is of it selfe many times of smal force Answere as though we affirme that these meanes must be vsed asunder and not rather ioyntly together and where one fayleth another to helpe Secondly some things are found but once in the scriptures Aunswere they are then either very plaine or not greatly necessarie Thirdly heretikes haue erred in comparing of Scripture Answere they compared them not diligently nor with a syncere minde but corruptly and negligently 4 The fourth rule is the analogie and proportion of faith which is nothing els but the summe grounds of Religiō gathered out of scripture such as are conteined in the Creede the Lordes Prayer the ten Commaundements and in our whole Catechisme We must take heede that in the interpretation of Scripture we swarue not from this rule of faith nor impugne any principle of Religion Wherefore the Papistes interpretation of those wordes of Christ we do reiect Hoc est corpus meum this is my
sometime Iames sate and Iohn now sitteth In those words Augustine ascribeth as much to the succession of other Apostolicall Churches as he doth to the succession of the Bishops of Rome And therefore Canisius craftely leaueth out the one half of the sentence cōcerning the Church of Ierusalem Neither is it true which our aduersaries say that Peters Sea remaineth still at Rome when all other Apostolicall Sees are gone for euen to this day the See of Antioch standeth and hath a Patriark likewise the See of Alexandria The See of Constantinople neuer wanted successors to this day nor the Church of Ephesus In India and Aethiopia there hath been alwaies a succession in those Churches planted by the Apostles and is at this day Fulk 2. Thess. 2. sect 7. Wherefore they haue no cause to bragge of their succession which is found in other places as well as at Rome THE FIFT QVESTION CONCERNING THE primacie of the See of Rome THis question hath diuers partes which must be handled in their order First whether the Bishop of Rome haue authority ouer other Bishops Secondly whether appeales ought to be made to Rome from other countries Thirdly whether the Pope be subiect to the iudgemēt of any Fourthly whether he may be deposed Fiftly what primacie he hath ouer other Churches how it began Sixtly of the titles and names giuen to the Bishops of Rome THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE BISHOP of Rome hath authoritie ouer other Bishops The Papists error 41 THey doubt not to say that the Bishop of Rome hath authoritie and ought so to haue to ordaine and constitute Bishops to depriue and depose them to restore them likewise to their former dignities and this power hee exerciseth ouer the vniuersall Church The Iesuites principall only argument is drawen from certain examples how the Bishops of Rome haue in times past constituted deposed and restored some Bishops in the Greeke Church as in the patriarchal Seas of Constantinople Alexandria Antioch Ergo hee hath power ouer all Bishops We answere First It was not done by the absolute authority of the Roman Bishops any such constitution or deposition though perhappes their consent and allowance were required as Leo writeth thus to Martianus the Emperour about the ordayning of Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople Satis sit quod vestrae pietatis auxilio mei fauoris assensu episcopatum tantae vrbis obtinuit It is sufficient that by your godly helpe and my fauourable assent he hath obtained so famous a Bishoprick Whether was greater now the help and furtherance of the Emperor or the base assent of Leo Secondly wee denie not but that the Pope sometimes what by sufferance of others what by his owne intrusion hath vsurped this power ouer other Bishops by this ought not to make a law that which is once or twise done by a false title cannot prooue the iustnes of the title Thirdly that the Bishop of Rome hath no such authoritie it appeareth by this that he doth not neither of many yeares hath constituted or ordayned the patriarks of the Greeke Church they came not vp to Rome nor yet sent thither for their palls as other Archbishops here in the West parts haue done paied full dearely for them being made slaues to the beast of Rome The Protestants THat the Pope neither hath nor yet ought to haue any such authority ouer other Bishops but that euery one in his owne precinct and iurisdiction hath the chiefe charge It is thus proued 1. Peter was not chiefe neither did exercise iurisdiction ouer the twelue Ergo neither the Pope ought to doe ouer other Bishops The antecedent or first part is thus confirmed The heauenly Hierusalem which is the Church of God is described Apocal. 21. not with one foundation onely of Peter but with 12. foundations after the number of the Apostles argument Tunstalli To this purpose also hee alleadgeth in saying out of Hierome contra Iouinian All the Apostles receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and vpon them all indifferently and equally is the strength of the Church grounded and established Fox p. 1066. 2. Till the yeare of the Lord 340. there was no respect had to the Church of Rome but euery Church was ruled by their owne gouernment afterward followed the Councel of Nice wherein was decreed that the whole Church should be deuided into foure circuites or precincts ouer the which there were foure Metropolitanes or patriarkes set first the Bishop of Rome next the Bishop of Alexandria the third was the Bishop of Antioch the fourth the Bishop of Ierusalem and not long after came in the Bishop of Constantinople in the roume of the B. of Antioch All these had equall authoritie in their prouinces and one was not to deale within anothers charge Ergo the Bishop of Rome had not then the iurisdiction ouer the whole Church argument Nili plura Fox p. 9. 3. We will adioyne the testimonie of the fathers of Basile which were all of the Popish sect what haue the Bishops been in our daies say they but only shadowes might they not haue been called shepheards without sheepe what had they more then their Miters and their staffe when they could determine nothing ouer their subiects Verily in the primitiue Church the Bishops had the greatest power and authoritie but now it was come to that poynt that they exceeded the common sort of priests onely in their habite and reuenewes What plainer testimonie can we haue then from the papists themselues Augustine also agreeth to their sentence habet omnis episcopus saith he pro licētia libertatis potestatis suae arbitrium propriū tanquam iudicari ab alio nō possit quomodo nec ipse potest alium iudicare sed expectemus vniuersi iudiciū domini nostri Iesu Christi Euery Bishop is priuiledged by his own authoritie to follow his owne iudgement neither is subiect to the iudgement of other Bishops as he is not to iudge them but they all must be referred to the iudgement of Christ See then in this place Augustine setteth Bishops in the highest roume in the Church and sayth they haue no iudge aboue them but Christ. THE SECOND PART CONCERNING APpeales to bee made to Rome The Papists SVch say they is the preeminēt authority of the Bishop of Rome that appeals error 42 may be made vnto him from all Churches in the world and that all ought to stand to his sentence and determination For the proofe hereof they bring no scripture nor any sound argumēt but stand chiefly vpon certain odde examples of some that haue appealed to Rome which we denie not to haue been done but our answere more at large is this 1. One cause of these appeales was both for that they which were iustly cōdemned of other Churches found greater liberty and fauour at Rome as Apiarius did who being condemned in the 6. Aphricane Councel for his detestable conditions found fauour with Zosimus Bishop of Rome who
and determination of the parents 2. Let vs heare what authoritie Augustine yeeldeth to the father ouer his children Agite vicem nostram in domibus vestris Episcopus inde appellatus est quia superintendit vnusquisque ergo in domosua si caput est domui suae debet ad eum pertinere episcopatus officiū de Sanct. Ser. 51. You saith Augustine their Bishop must supplye our stead in your houses a Bishop or Superintendent is so called because he ouerseeth therefore euery housholder being the head of his house ought to playe the Bishop in his house The father then is a Bishop ouer his children shall any man then dare to take any out of his house that is his Bishoprike or any sheepe out of his folde without the Bishop and sheepheardes consent THE THIRD PART WHETHER Married persons may with mutuall consent become votaries The Papists WIth mutuall consent the man the wife may separate thē selues and vow error 92 and promise single life for euer so long as they both shall liue Bellarm. Cap. 37. Marie and Ioseph were perfitely man and wife yet by mutuall consent they liued continently all their daies Ergo it is lawfull for married couples to separate themselues for euer both agreeing therunto Bellarm. cap. 37. Answ. 1. It appeareth by the text that there was no such thing purposed by Ioseph before he was admonished by the Angell in a dreame but that as she was already betrothed so there was an intent on Iosephs parte that they should come together Math. 1.18 But that in the meane time Marie was found with childe by the holy ghost and so from that time Ioseph being a iust man neuer knew his wife there was no such purpose or vowe before 2. That this was an extraordinary exāple who seeth it not When any man shall be admonished by an Angell as Ioseph was and shall haue the like cause as Ioseph had to abstaine which shall neuer bee hee may be bould to doe as Ioseph did The Protestants THey that are once ioyned together in marriage and haue made a couenaunt each to other before God can not separate them selues though they both consent there being no other cause but a purpose of single life for more holines sake 1. It is flat contrary to S. Pauls rule 1. Corinth 7.5 Defraud not your selues except it be with cōsent for a time that you may giue your selues to fasting and prayer and againe come together lest Satan tempt you for your incontinencie First the Apostle saith directly they should but separate themselues for a time Secondly we doe thus reason out of his wordes there is no cause of separation but to be giuen to fasting and prayer but this may be done by a separation for a time neither is it necessary we should alwaies be giuen to fasting and prayer but vpon speciall occasion therefore perpetuall separation is not needfull 3. They that are long separated are subiect to fall into tentation the same cause therefore that moued them first to marrie for auoiding of incontinencie ought to moue them to come together againe Therefore it is not good nor lawful they should separat them selues for euer 2. That which God hath coupled no man ought to put asunder but they that are married haue made a couenant to God Pro. 2.17 as well as to themselues and are ioyned by Gods law together Ergo they can not dissolue their mariage by their owne power and will the Lord hauing an interest therein Augustine Thus writeth Non licet excepta causa fornicationis coniugem a coniuge dirimi nec sterilem coniugem fas est relinquere vt faecunda ducatur de nupt concupiscen Lib. 1. Cap. 10. It is not lawfull for married couples one to be separat frō another vnlesse it be for fornication nor to leaue a barren wyfe to marrie a frutefull Therefore if fornication onely be a iust cause of finall separation there can be no other If there were any other it is most like it should be for procreation of children But neither for that cause is a man to leaue his wife Ergo for no other Therefore not for any vow of continencie is marriage to be dissolued or any separation to be admitted Bellarm. saith that by their separation Marriage is not dissolued Auns It is asmuch dissolued as by your law in cases of diuorse 1. For these are your words for aduoutrie one may dismisse another but neither party can marry againe for any cause during life Rhemist Math. 19. Sect. 4. So ye allowe onely a kinde of dismission in the case of adultery and so you do in the vowing of continencie And thus you make this cause as forceable as the other to break off the Matrimonial duety which is contrary to the gospell THE FOVRTH PART WHETHER MARIage contracted not consummate may without consent be broken for the vow of continencie The Papists error 93 THeir opinion is that if the mariage be contracted onely and ratified but not yet consummate by the parties comming together it is lawful for either of them without the others consent to vowe chastitie cap. 38. Bellarm. His reason is because it is lawfull for a man to passe from a lesse perfect state of life to a more perfect if it may be done without detriment as this may be for yet they haue no children and the partie may as well bee maried to another Bellarm. Answ. First a single life is not alwayes the perfecter state nor to all as it is not to them that haue not the gift to containe as it is most like hee hath not that is contracted and hath made promise of mariage for then all this needed not Secondly though there be none of those impediments named yet there is a greater namely their fayth promise made each to other before God which they ought not to violate Thirdly Saint Paul saith If thou be bound to a wife seeke not to be loosed 1. Corinth 7.27 But they that are espoused one to the other are bound vnlesse you will say that the couenant made by them vnto God Prouer. 2.17 bindeth not The Protestants MAtrimonie whether ratified onely by lawfull contract or espousals or consummate ought not any way to be broken with consent or without for Monasticall profession 1 Our reason is because it is perfect mariage already in substance and before God which is ratified by contract onely and solemne vowe and couenant made each to other And being thus betrothed the one giueth power of their body to the other and now they are no more free That this mariage is perfect before God and in substance it appeareth by the law of Moses by the which a man defiling a mayd betrothed was to suffer death as well as if hee had committed vncleannes with a woman already maried Deuteron 22. verse 22.23 And Math. 1.18 Marie that was but betrothed to Ioseph is by the Angel called his wife vers 20. 2 August saith Coninges fidem sibi pariter
God so the manner of celebrating and keeping it holy is to be learned out of the word and neither custome nor authority ought to giue liberty for such workes vpon the Lords day as are not warranted by the word First we graunt that we are not so necessarily tied to the rest of the Sabboth as the Iewes were for those things are abolished which appertained to the Iewish Sabboth First the prescript of the day Secondly the ceremonious exercises of the Sabboth in the sacrifices and other rites of the Law Thirdly the typicall shadowes and significations of their Sabboth as first it betokened their rest in Canaan then the rest and peace of the Church by Christ Hebre. 4.3 5. Fourthly the strickt and precise rest wherein Christians haue more liberty then the Iewes had and againe they obserued their rest as being properly and simply and in it selfe a sabboth daies duty but we doe consider it as being referred to a more principall end as making of vs more fit for spirituall exercises Secondly we allow these workes to be done First opera religiosa or pietatis the religious workes and conferring to piety as the Priestes did slaye the sacrifices vpon the Sabboth and yet brake not the rest of the Sabboth Math. 12.5 so the people may walke to their parish Church though somewhat farre off the Pastor Minister may goe forth to preach yea and preaching is of it selfe a labour of the body to study also and meditate of his Sermon to ring the bels to call the people to the Church all these are lawfull as being helpes for the exercises of religion Secondly opera charitatis the workes of mercy are permitted as to visite the sicke the Phisitian to resorte to his patient yea to shew compassion to brute beastes as to helpe the sheepe out of a pit Math. 12.11 Thirdly opera necessitatis the workes of necessitie as the dressing of meat and such like Math. 12.1.3 Our Sauiour excuseth his Apostles for plucking the eares of Corne when they were hungry As for opera voluntaria workes of pleasure and recreation we haue no other permission to vse them then as they shal be no le ts or impediments vnto spirituall exercises as the hearing of the word and meditating therein and such other Otherwise they are not to be vsed Augustine saith speaking of the Iewes who did greatly prophane their Sabboth in sporting and dalliance Melius toto die foderent quà m toto die saltarēt It were better for them to digge all day then to daunce all day euen so verily it were better for many poore ignorant people that vpon the Sabboth giue themselues to drinking and quaffing gaming if they should goe to plough or cart all the day But as for other seruile workes as to keepe Faires and Markets vpon the Lords day to trauell themselues their seruants and beastes vpon the Sabboth it is flat contrary to the commaundement of God and the practise of the Church Nehemiah 13.16 where there is no extream and vrgent necessitie so that it is not to be doubted but that as the keeping of the Lords day is a moral commaundement so also the manner of the obseruing thereof in sanctifying it and resting therein is morall the ceremonies of the rest being abolished that is the Iewish strictnes thereof and the opinion which they had of their rest as being simply a part of the sanctifying of the Sabboth But we doe consider it as referred vnto more principall duties and obserue it not as of it selfe pleasing God but as making vs more fit for spirituall exercises Contrary to these rules we acknowledge neither power in Ordinaries nor priuiledge in custome to dispence with the sanctification of the Sabboth The Papists THey affirme that the Apostles altered the sabboth day from the seaueth day to the eight counting from the creation and they did it without scripture error 62 or any commaundement of Christ such power say they hath God left to his Church This then they holde that the sabboth was changed by the ordinarie power and authoritie of the Church not by any especiall direction from Christ thereupon it followeth that the Church which they say cannot erre may also change the sabboth to any other day in the weeke Rhemist Apoca. 1. sect 6. The Protestants 1. THe Apostles did not abrogate the Iewish sabboth but Christ himselfe by his death as he did also other ceremonies of the Law and this the Apostles knew both by the scriptures the word of Christ his holy spirite 2. They did not appoint a new sabboth of their owne authoritie for first they knew by the scripture that one day of seauen was to be obserued for euer for the seruice of God and exercise of religion although the prescript day according to the Law were abrogate for the Lord before the morall law was written euen immediatly after the creation sanctified the seauenth day shewing thereby that one of the seauen must be obserued so long as the world endured Secōdly they knew there was the same reason of sanctifiyng the day of Christs resurrection and the restitution of the worlde thereby as of sanctifiyng the day of the Lords rest after the creation of the world Thirdly they did it by the direction of the spirite of God whereby they were so directed and gouerned that although they were fraile men by nature and subiect to error yet they could not decline in their writings and ordinances of the Church from the truth which assurance of Gods spirite in the like measure the Church hath not but so farre forth is promised to be led into all truth as she followeth the rule of truth expressed in the Scriptures Wherefore the Church hath no authority to change the Lords day and to keepe it vpon Munday or Tuesday or any other day seeing it is not a matter of indifferency but a necessary prescription of Christ himselfe deliuered by the Apostles for the Lords day began in the Apostles time and no doubt by their Apostolike authority directed by the spirite of Christ was instituted Act. 20.7 Apocal. 1. ver 10. Neither can there come so long as the world continueth so great a cause of changing the Sabboth as the Apostles had by the resurrection of Christ. Wherfore the law of the Sabboth as it is now kept and obserued is perpetuall The Papists errour 63 4. THey affirme that the keeping of the Lords day in stead of the Iewish Sabboth is a tradition of the Apostles and not warranted by Scripture Rhemist Math. 15. sect 3. The Protestants THe obseruation of the Lords day is not deliuered by blinde tradition but hath testimony of holy Scriptures 1. Corinth 16.2 Act. 20.7 Apocal. 1.10 and the obseruation thereof is according to Gods commaundement not after the doctrine of men Fulk ibid. The Papists errour 64 5. THey teach that the Lords day is commaunded and likewise kept for some mysticall signification not onely for the remembraunce of benefites already
chapter of Iohn cannot be so vnderstoode as they expound it First Christ speaketh not onely of the sacramentall eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood but generally of the spirituall participation by fayth whether in the sacrament or without which is wrought in vs by the holy Ghost 1. If it be vnderstoode of the sacrament then it will follow that no man can be saued vnlesse he doe receiue the sacrament for Christ saith vers 53. Except you eate my flesh and drink my blood you cannot haue life in you This I am sure they will hardly grant that the Eucharist also should bee necessarie as they make Baptisme to saluation 2. If Christ hath relation to the sacrament then must it of necessitie bee ministred in both kindes for in euery place he ioyneth both these together the eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood Augustine also thus writeth vpon these wordes Hoc est manducare illam escam illum bibere potum in Christo manere illum manentemin se habere This it is to eate that flesh and to drinke that drinke to abide in Christ and to haue him abiding in vs but this may be done without the sacrament Ergo it is not necessary to vnderstand it of the sacrament Secondly though we should graunt that this whole treatise Iohn 6. may fitlie be referred to the sacrament yet the wordes must be taken figuratiuelie for the spirituall eating and drinking of Christ in the sacrament and not otherwise 1 Vers. 35. Christ so expoundeth his owne words I am the bread of life he that commeth to me shall not hunger and he that beleeueth in me shall not thirst To eate then and to drinke Christ is to beleeue in him 2 Christ vnderstandeth another manner of eating of his flesh then the Capernaites did But they imagined that Christ would giue his very flesh and blood to bee eaten And therefore they went away offended and sayd This is an hard saying vers 60. Therefore Christ to correct their erronious conceit sayth vnto them that his words were spirite and life that is spiritually to be vnderstoode verse 63. So Augustine interpreteth those wordes of Christ as if he had sayd Spiritualiter intelligite quod locutus sum You must vnderstand spiritually that which I haue sayd You shall not eate this body which you see nor drinke that blood which shall be shed for you Sacramentum vobis aliquod commendaui spiritualiter intellectum viuisicabit vos I haue commended a certaine mystery and sacrament vnto you which being spiritually vnderstood shall quicken you The Papists ARgum. 3. Christ in the institution of this sacrament sayd vnto his Apostles after hee had giuen thanks and blessed Hoc est corpus meum This is my bodie that is that which is contayned in this bread or vnder the formes of this bread is my very body Bellarm. cap. 9. So that these wordes must needes be taken properly not to bee a trope or figure 1 It is not the manner of the scriptures to set down flatte precepts and commaundements and directorie rules in obscure termes or figuratiue speeches but plainely and euidently therefore it is not like that Christ being now to prescribe vnto his Apostles the perpetuall lawe and forme of this sacrament would speake obscurely 2 Though he spake by parables and signes to the Pharisies yet there was no cause why he should so doe none being present but his Apostles Bellarmin ibid. Ans. 1. It is very well that you will now though I thinke vnawares grant vnto vs that the precepts and rules in scripture are set downe simply and playnely wherefore the scriptures cannot bee so hard and obscure as you would beare vs in hand they are for if the precepts and rules of fayth be euidently in scripture expressed as you seeme to confesse what reason haue you to keepe back the people from the reading of scripture 2 It is false that the scriptures vse no figures nor tropes in the declaration of the lawes and sacraments of the Church for sayth not Saint Paul speaking of the sacraments of the Iewes Petra erat Christus the rock was Christ 1. Cor. 10.4 that is signified Christ Likewise in the 17. vers We that are many are one bread that is our spirituall vnitie and coniunction is represented in that we are partakers of one bread 3 Sometimes our Sauiour would speake darkely being alone with his Apostles thereby to stirre them vp more diligently to attend vnto his wordes as when he biddeth them beware of the leauen of the Pharisies Mark 8.15 Yet this speech of our Sauiour Christ vttered in the hearing of his Apostles This is my bodie was neither so darke nor obscure that the Apostles neede much bee troubled about the vnderstanding Nay many things being spoken in borrowed and metaphoricall wordes are vttered with greater grace and carrie a fuller sense When Christ sayd I am the doore Iohn 10.9 I am the vine Iohn 15.1 he spake by figure as he doth here for neither was he a vine or a doore as the bread was not his bodie Yet which of the Apostles was there that vnderstoode him not when he called himselfe a vine and a doore Neither could they doubt of our Sauiour Christs meaning here Contra. Now on the other side we will make it playne that these words of Christ are spoken tropically 1 Where Christ sayth according to Saint Luke This cuppe is the new Testament in my blood Luk. 22.23 we must needes admitte a double trope or figure for first the cuppe is taken for that which was contayned in the cuppe Secondly the wine in the cuppe was not the newe Testament but a signe of the new Testament If then in one parte of the sacrament hee spake by a figure why not also in the other when he sayth This is my bodie that is a liuely signe and seale thereof 2 It is no vnusuall phrase in the scripture to say this is that is signifieth as Genes 17.10 Circumcision is called the couenant it selfe where it was a signe onely of it And Exod. 12.11 the Lambe is called the Lords passeouer which it betokened onely In the same sense Christ sayth This is my bodie that is exhibiteth and representeth vnto you my bodie Augustine so expoundeth these wordes Non dubitauit Dominus dicere Hoc est corpus meum cum daret signum corpus sui Christ doubted not to say This is my bodie when hee gaue a signe and sacrament of his bodie The Protestants THat Christ is present with all his benefites in the sacrament wee doe willingly graunt neither doe we thinke that the elements of bread and wine are bare and naked signes of the bodie and blood of Christ but Christ is verily by them exhibited vnto vs and spiritually by fayth we are truely made partakers of his precious bodie blood not that Christ descendeth from heauen to vs but we ascend by faith and in spirit vnto him yea we confesse
to continue Wherefore it consisteth not in such laborious workes which if a man should long endure he should end his life sooner then repentance The Papists 3 THey measure their penance by number of yeares and dayes They haue error 28 their quadragenas fortie dayes penance septenas seuen yeares penance Ex Tileman Heshus loc 9. de poenitent Err. 83. And they lengthen or cut short the time of penance at their pleasure to continue three seuen or tenne yeares yea sometime more Bellarmin lib. 1. de poenitent 22. The Protestants THat true repentance is not to bee measured by the time but by the right sorrow and contrition of the offender Saynt Paul teacheth vs who writeth for the young man to be released because of his great and sufficient heauines for his fault 2. Corinth 2.7 Augustine also sayth Poenitentia vera non annorum numero sed amaritudine animicensetur poenitentia quamuis sit exigui temporis c. True repentance is not measured by number of yeares but by the bitternes of the soule though it be but for a short time yet it is not despised before that iudge which regardeth the heart THE FIFTEENTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE OF MATRIMONIE THe seuerall questions belonging to this Controuersie are these First whether Matrimonie bee a sacrament properly so called 2 Of the causes of diuorce and whether it bee lawfull to marry after diuorce 3 Of the degrees in mariage First the maner of supputation or accounting of degrees Secondly whether the degrees forbidden Leuit. 18. may bee dispensed with Thirdly whether any other degrees may bee by humane law prohibited 4 Of the impediments of mariage of two sortes First of those that may hinder the contract of mariage onely Secondly of such impediments as may both dissolue the contract and the mariage also consummate 5 The comparison of mariage and virginitie whether either bee preferred before the other before God Of these now in their order 6 Of the times of mariage prohibited 7 Of the ceremonies and rites of mariage THE FIRST QVESTION WHETHER Matrimonie be a sacrament The Papists error 28 THat it is properly and rightly a sacrament instituted of God and not deuised of men Concil Trid. sess 24. can 1. Argum. 1. Ephes. 5.32 This is a great sacrament Matrimonie is here a signe of an holy thing representing the coniunction of Christ and his Church Ergo a sacrament Answ. 1. The wordes are thus to be read rather This is a great mystery Or if we reade sacrament they haue no great aduantage seeing they are not ignorant that the originall word Mysterie which they translate sacrament is attributed to other things then sacraments as 1. Timoth. 3.16 Mysterie of godlinesse Apocal. 17.5 A mysterie great Babylon Neither doe they themselues much vrge this argument 2. The Apostle sayth not that Matrimonie is a mysterie but I speake of Christ and his Church vers 32.3 Matrimonie we confesse to be instituted of God and to be a signe of a holie thing yet no sacrament for so was the Sabboth ordayned of GOD and signified the rest in Christ Hebr. 4.8 yet was it no sacrament Wherfore al significatiue and mysticall signes are not sacraments Argum. 2. Matrimonie giueth grace of sanctification to the parties maried They shal be saued in bearing of children if they continue in faith and loue 1. Timoth. 2.15 These are the graces giuen by matrimonie Ergo a sacrament Answ. 1. We denie that any sacraments giue or conferre grace they are instruments only of grace 2. We also grant that by matrimonie God giueth to the faithfull this speciall grace to liue in holines purenes from the filthy pollution of the flesh but the sacraments are seales of spirituall graces and serue for the increase of fayth it is not sufficient to bee a meanes of any common gift but of the spirituall and iustifiyng grace to make a sacrament 3. Wherefore if by fayth and loue here they vnderstand only the fidelity and duety of wedlocke they are not those spirituall graces whereof sacraments are seales if wee take them for the true faith and loue which are the common graces of the faythfull as the very meaning is they are as well to be had out of wedlock as in it The Protestants THat matrimonie is no sacrament of the Gospell speaking now properly and vnderstanding a sacrament for the seale of the grace of God in the remission of our sinnes by Christ it is thus proued Argum. 1. Matrimony was instituted by GOD before sinne in Paradise therefore it can be no sacrament of the Gospell Argum. 2. Our aduersaries are contrary to themselues for they call matrimonie a prophanation of Orders Martin sect 15. cap. 11. And they say it is more tolerable for a Priest to keepe many concubines then to marrie Pighius ex Tileman Hesbus loc 21. Err. 2. Doe these fellowes meane in good sooth that matrimonie is a sacrament which they make so vile polluted and vncleane a thing 3 In euery sacrament there ought to be an external sensible element as the matter and a sanctifiyng word as the forme But in matrimony there is neither Ergo it is no sacrament Bellarm. The forme are the wordes pronounced by the parties themselues when they contract matrimonie I doe take thee c. They also themselues are the matter yea and the Ministers of the sacrament too For the Iesuite holdeth that it is a sacrament in the very contract and giuing of mutuall consent before it be solemnized in the Church De matrim cap. 6. Ans. 1. The sacrament is one thing and the receiuers another therefore the maried parties cannot be the sacramental matter being the receiuers 2. It is not euery word that sanctifieth but the word of God 1. Tim. 4.5 but these words I take thee are no parte of the word Ergo they want also the forme of a sacrament 3. The ministers of Christ preachers of the word are only the dispēsers of the mysteries and sacraments of the Church 1. Cor. 4.1 Wherefore the parties themselues could not be ministers of matrimonie if it were a sacrament Augustine thus writeth Ne quis istam magnitudinem sacramenti in singulis quibusque hominib vxores habētib intelligeret ego autē dico inquit c. Lest any man should think when the Apostle had said This is a great sacrament that this great Sacrament is to be vnderstood of all maried persons the Apostle addeth but I speake of Christ and his Church But if so be matrimony were a sacrament why is it not to be found in al maried folke THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE CAVSES of diuorse in mariage and whether it be lawfull to marrie after diuorse THE FIRST PART WHETHER THERE MAY BE more causes of diuorse then fornication onely The Papists DIuorse as Bellarm. defineth it is either from the dueties of mariage as from error 29 bed and boord as we say which is properly called diuortium or it is a dissoluing of the knot and
bond of mariage which is called repudium First then they affirme that the very bond and knot may bee dissolued in the mariage of Infidels if one of them after mariage become a Christian his reason is because mariage contracted in infidelitie is no sacrament and therefore may be dissolued Bellarmin cap. 12. Argum. Saint Paul sayth If the Infidell partie will departe let him depart a brother or sister is not in subiection in such a case 1. Corinth 7.15 Answ. Saint Paul giueth not liberty to the one partie at their pleasure vtterly to renounce the other as though they were no longer man and wife for Saint Paul had sayd before that if the Infidell partie bee content to dwell with the other he or she is not to be put away But his meaning is that if one partie wilfully depart the other is no longer bound nor in subiection for the performance of the mutuall dueties of mariage The Papists error 30 SEcondly separation from bed and boorde may be admitted they say for diuers causes Concil Trident. sess 24. can 8. Bellarmine nameth three Fornication according to Christs rule Math. 5. Heresie Tit. 3. An heretike must be auoyded Thirdly when one is a continuall offence to another a prouocation to sinne If thine eye offend thee pull it out Math. 5.29 Bellarmin cap. 14. Answ. Fornication we admit is a iust cause of separation and diuorce but not heresie for Saint Paul would not haue a woman to forsake an Infidell 1. Corinth 7.13 therefore not an heretike Wee must auoyd such that is take heede of their poysoned opinions and shun their company also where we are not otherwise bound Neither is the eye to be cut off where there is any hope but who knoweth whether the offensiue partie may returne to grace And this place proueth as well a finall â—utting off of mariage as a separation or disiunction The Protestants FIrst that there is no cause of vtter dissolution of mariage by way of diuorce but onely adulterie and fornication it is plaine by our Sauiour Christes wordes Math. 5.32 19.9 where neither infidelitie nor any cause beside is excepted but onely fornication Secondly Saint Augustine sometime was of opinion that the wife might be dismissed for infidelitie but he reuoketh and retracteth that opinion Lib. retract 1. cap. 19. For elsewhere he flatly concludeth thus A viro non fornicante non licere omnino discedere that it is not lawfull for a woman at all to leaue her husband if he committe not fornication De adulter coniug 1.7 And yet further to make this matter more playne we acknowledge no other cause of lawful diuorse in mariage but that only which is prescribed in the Gospell namely for adultery or fornication Math. 5.32 19.9 There is notwithstanding another cause whereby the mariage knot may bee dissolued though not for fornication as when one of the parties doth wilfullie renounce leaue and forsake the other vpon no iust cause but either of lightnes or for diuers religion as when an Infidel forsaketh a Christian a Papist a Protestant an heretick a true professor or vpon any other vnlawfull or vniust cause for the Apostle sayth playnely A brother or sister is not in subiection in such things 1. Corinth 7.15 that is is freed from the yoke or bond of mariage First it is plaine that the Apostle is so to be vnderstoode in this place for the word which he vseth is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is no longer a seruant or in subiection which is to be taken in the same sense as if he should say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he or she is no longer bound or tyed which word the Apostle vseth vers 39. And agayne the Apostle hath relation here to the fourth verse where hee sayth the wife 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath no power of her own bodie the husband likewise But now saith he the infidel partie hauing wilfully separated himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the innocent partie is no longer in subiection that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath now power ouer his owne body and is now become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 free exempt from the mariage knot or bond in which sense the Apostle vseth the word verse 39. Secondly we must know what kinde of desertion it is that causeth a dissolution of mariage and in what manner First it must be malitiosa desertio a malicious departure without any iust cause But when as the husband is absent by consent about necessary affayres as the Merchant beyond the seas or is employed in some waightie busines as in warfare in ambassage or such like or is violeÌ„tly deteined in prison or captiuity amongst the Turks or elswhere In these the like cases the wife is bound to waite expect the returne of her husband vnles she be otherwise aduertised of his death SecoÌ„dly the innoceÌ„t partie must vse all meanes to reconcile reclaime and bring home agayne the wilfull and obstinate partie so departing if it be possible Thirdly if he continue in his obstinacie and departe hauing no purpose to returne the matter must be brought before the iudge or Magistrate in such cases who after publike citation of the obstinate partie and certaine knowledge that he refuseth wilfully to appeare being cited and is not otherwise letted to come may with mature deliberation pronounce the innocent partie free and at libertie to marrie according to Saint Pauls rule A brother or sister is not bound in such things Thirdly neither is Saint Paul contrary to our Sauiour Christ who alloweth no diuorce but onely for fornication for that is a diuers case from this whereof Saint Paul treateth And there is great difference betweene lawfull diuorse and vnlawfull and wilfull desertion for there the innocent partie first claymeth the priuiledge of separation here the guiltie partie first separateth himselfe there diuorse is sued and required here the innocent partie seeketh no diuorse but seeketh all meanes of reconciliation So that properly the setting free the innocent partie in this case cannot be called a diuorse Christ therefore speaketh of lawfull diuorce not of euery dissolution of mariage for then mention should haue beene made in that place of naturall death and departure which is confessed by all to be a dissolution and breaking off of mariage Thus haue I shewed mine opinion with Beza and others concerning thiâ— poynt Herein further as in all the rest referring my selfe to the determination of our Church and the iudgement of our learned brethren Beza 1. Corinth 7. vers 15. Amand. Polan Hemingius Tâ—leman Heshus THE SECOND PART WHETHER IT BE LAWfull to marrie after diuorsement for adulterie The Papists FOr adulterie one may dismisse another but neither partie can marrie again error 31 for any cause during life Rhemist Math. 19. sect 4. no not the innocent partie may marrie againe for the mariage knotte is not dissolued because of adulterie Concil Trident. sess 24. can 7. Argum. 1. Rom. 7.2 The woman
Our Rhemists thus define the matter Man they say was neuer without free will but hauing the grace of Christ he is truely made free Iohn 8. sect 2. Againe though our election calling or first comming to God lye not wholly or principally vpon our owne will or workes yet our willing or working of any good to our saluation is the secondary cause Gods speciall motion grace and assistance is the principall Rom. 9. sect 4. So then this is their sentence that neither our free will is so corrupt that it had neede wholly to be assisted by the grace of God but that it worketh somewhat of it selfe nor yet so perfect that it is able of it owne strength to obtaine saluation But their plaine meaning is this that Gods grace and mans free will do worke actiuely together as the Rhemists note The Gentiles though they beleeued specially by Gods grace and preordination yet they beleeue also by their owne free will Act. 13. sect 2. Argum. 2. Timoth. 2.21 If any man purge himselfe from these he shall be a vessell of honour 1. Iohn 3.3 Euery man that hath this hope sanctifieth himselfe Ergo man hath free will to make himselfe a vessell of saluation or damnation And this teacheth vs that man may sanctifie himselfe by his free will working together with the grace of GOD Rhemist in vtrumque locum Ans. First these places of scripture doe not proue that there is any freedome or libertie in mans will to doe good by nature but that our will being enlarged by Gods spirit consenteth vnto grace not of it selfe or by it owne power This then is the difference betweene vs We hold that our free will is wholly corrupt by nature and can doe nothing vnlesse it be holpen by grace They say that there is some strength left by nature in free will and it worketh together with the grace of God Argum. 2. If there be no free will vnto good what need exhortations admonitions precepts lawes reward punishment seeing nothing is left in a mans owne power Eckius Ans. Though all good things doe come of God and we haue no power in our selues to doe that which good is yet this hindereth not exhortations teaching industrie and labour no more then the doctrine of predestination doth For as God giueth all grace so he bestoweth them by meanes faith is the gift of God yet it commeth by hearing The staffe of bread is the blessing of God yet for all that the husbandman must not leaue tilling of his ground So our will is directed by the grace of God vnto goodnes but wee must vse the meanes notwithstanding whereby the grace of God worketh in vs. The Protestants THat it may fullie appeare wherein the chiefe poynt of this controuersie lyeth we will first shewe what manner of free will we denye not to be in man 1. We confesse that our first parents had free will before their fall both to choose the good and refuse the euill as Augustine sayth Magnas liberi arbitrij vires homo cum conderetur accepit sed eas peccando amisit Man by creation had great strength in his free will but hee vtterly lost it by his sinne 2. We acknowledge a free will in man that is a gouernment of reason Non per quod sit idoneum quae ad Deum pertinent sine Deo inchoare perficere sed tantùm in operibus vitae praesentis as Augustine sayth Not a free will whereby men are able to begin or finish any worke to Godward without his grace but onely in the affayres of this life as to labour to eate to drinke to build to plant and to doe other affayres of this life These things hath God left vnto mans discretion whom he hath endued with a reasonable soule yet so that al these things are gouerned and directed by the generall prouidence of God And therefore in all these actions we must say as the Apostle teacheth vs If the Lord will I will doe this or that But in the preparing of our will vnto good the generall prouidence of GOD is not sufficient but there must be also a speciall influence of his grace 3. A free will to doe euill also we graunt free from compulsion or coaction of it selfe inclined to euill without any enforcing as Augustine sayth Liberum hominis arbitrium ad malum sufficit ad bonum parum est nisi adiuuetur ab omnipotente bono The free will of man sufficeth vnto euill but it is of small force vnto goodnes vnles it be holpen by the almightie Good 4. Neither doe we so denye free will in good things as though men were violently forced and compelled against their will to the kingdome of GOD as the Papists doe charge vs Iohn 6. sect 3. But God so chaungeth our willes that of vnwilling hee maketh vs willing as Augustine Ex nolentibus volentes facit and giueth vs grace most gladlie to embrace Christ as our Sauiour sayth If the Sonne make you free then are you free indeede So man hath free will from coaction both in euill things to the which he is voluntarily enclined as also in good things wherein his will being regenerate he walketh willingly without compulsion 5. Neither doe we so take away free will from man as though there were no more in him then in a piece of clay as our aduersaries falsely charge vs Rom. 9. sect 7. As Augustine sayth Non sicut in lapidibus insensatis aut in ijs quae rationem non habent Deus salutem nostram operatur God worketh not our saluation in vs as in senseles stones or in vnreasonable creatures So we do not take away mans proper motions or thoughts as the Rhemists accuse vs. 2. Corinth 3. sect 2. God giueth not a new mind soule will or vnderstanding to the regenerate but onely altereth and changeth it so that it remaineth the same in matter and substance but God by his grace casteth it as it were into a new mould and giueth a new forme and shape vnto it So August Cogitantes credimus cogitantes agimus quicquid agimus sed tamen quod attinet ad pietatis viam verum Dei cultum non sumus idonei cogitare aliquid ex nobis sed sufficientia nostra ex Deo est We by our owne thoughts beleeue by our owne cogitation we enterprise whatsoeuer is done yet in the way of godlines and in the worship of God we are not able to thinke any thing of our selues but our sufficiencie is of God Wherefore two things are to be considered in our will and thoughts the naturall power of willing and thinking and the goodnes and holines of our thoughts the first is in vs and is properly ours by the gift of God but the other commeth onely of God by his grace The will the vnderstanding the thoughts are ours but the goodnes is meerely and entirely wrought by the spirit of God So that in respect of the goodnes inspired into
opera be expiatoria The Papists THe workes of charitie and mercie as almes deedes and such like haue error 89 force to extinguish our sinnes as Saint Peter saith Charitie doth couer a multitude of sinnes Epist. 1.4.8 Rhemist ibid. The Protestants Ans. THe Apostle speaketh of mutuall charitie amongst our selues whose propertie is to couer a multitude of our neighbours offences as Solomon saith Prou. 10.11 Hatred stirreth vp contentions but loue couereth trespasses what is this to the extinguishing of our sinnes before God Argum. It is an abominable and blasphemous opinion that any man by his workes should be able to redeeme his sinnes for the Scripture saith that by himselfe Christ hath purged our sinnes Heb. 1.3 If hee haue wholly done it by himselfe he hath not giuen this power and force of redemption to any other meanes If they vnderstand by the force of extinguishing sinnes the meanes onelie of applying Christs merites in that sense faith onely is saide to saue vs Ephes. 2.8 Augustine Si merita nostra aliquid facerent ad damnationem nostram veniret sed non venit ad inspectionem meritorum sed remissionem peccatorum If our merites were auailable to any purpose God should come to our condemnation but hee commeth not to behold our merites but to forgiue vs our sins Ergo by our merites our sinnes are not forgiuen THE THIRD ARTICLE WHEther our works be meritorious The Papists error 90 GOD giueth as well euerlasting life and glorie to men for and according to their workes as he giueth damnation for the contrary works Rhemist Rom. 2. sect 2. And men by their workes proceeding of grace doe deserue or merite heauen and the more or lesse ioy in the same 1. Corinth 3. sect 2. Argum. 1. He will render to euery man according to his workes Rom. 2.6 Euery man shall receiue his reward according to his labour Here we see the kingdome of heauen is a retribution hyre wages for workes Ergo our works are the value price worth and merite of the same Rhemist Answ. Our labors and workes are a measure of the reward according to the which God doth mete out and render vnto his Saints of the heauenly reward but they are no meritorious or deseruing cause thereof The reward is of mercie not of desert of grace not of merite for life eternall is the meere gift of God through Iesus Christ Rom. 6.23 But the wages of sinne is death Where the Apostle doth set a manifest difference betweene the reward of the righteous and the iust recompence of the wicked for life eternall is the free and gracious gift of God not deserued but eternall damnation is the due debt of sinne Wherefore the Papists doe bid open battell to the Apostle in saying that the one is as due by debt as the other Argum. 2. Saint Paul sayth 2. Timoth 4.8 that there is a crowne of righteousnes layd vp for him which God the iust iudge shal giue him Ergo the crown is giuen not of mercie but of iustice as a wages and iust recompence to the Apostle Answ. God rendreth heauen as a iust Iudge not to the merite and worthines of our workes but to the merite and worthines of Christ and as due to vs by his promise made to vs in Christ. The reward therefore of heauen is of the mercie of God who hath freely promised it vs in Christ It is of his iustice in that he is faythfull and iust in keeping of his promise made to vs. So that it is a debt not in respect of any desert in vs but in regard of his owne promise As Augustine sayth Debitorem ipse se dominus fecit non accipiendo sed promittendo Non ei dicitur redde quod accepisti sed redde quod promisisti God hath made himselfe a debtor by promising not by receiuing any thing at our handes We say not to him render that thou hast receiued but giue that which thou hast promised in Psalm 83. The Protestants WE confesse a necessary vse of good workes As first they doe serue as notable meanes and instruments to set forth Gods glory by Math. 5.16 Secondly by them also our fayth is shewed published and made knowen for the good example of others Iam. 2.18 Thirdly our own conscience also is thereby quieted and our election daylie made more sure vnto vs we doe grow and increase in the certainty and assurance thereof 1. Pet. 1.10 But we acknowledge no power force or efficacie at all in them to deserue and merite any thing at the hands of God neither doth the scripture in any place so speake Argum. 1. If man consider his deserts he shall finde that he is worthy of nothing but death To vs sâ—yth the Prophet belongeth shame Dan. 9.9 There is nothing els by debt due vnto vs as Augustine also sayth Nihil praecesserat in meritis nostris nisi vnde damnari deberemus Nothing goeth before in our merites but that whereby we ought iustly to be condemned And agayne Omne peccatum nostrae est negligentiae omnis virtus sanctitas est Dei indulgentiae All euill and sin in vs is of our owne negligence all goodnes and holines of the free mercy of God Si misericordiae domini multae multus egò in meritis If the mercies of God be many my merites are many Gods mercies are our merites our due debts are nothing els but punishment for sinne Argum. 2. Betweene the desert or merite and the wages or recompence there ought alwayes to be some proportion a like stipend for a like labour But heauen without comparison exceedeth the worthines of our workes Ergo it is not giuen as a debt but as a free gift therefore the Apostle sayth that the afflictions that are present are not worthy of the glory that shall bee reuealed Rom. 8.18 Augustine sayth Quà m paruo constat regnum coelorum duob minutis emit vidua regnum coelorum How little doth the kingdome of God stand vs in a certaine widow for two mites bought the kingdome of heauen Shall we think that the widowes casting in of two mites deserued the kingdome of heauen Farre be it from vs so to think it is then a gift of â—auour and mercie not wages of debt Argum. 3. Saint Paul sayth Fayth is counted to him for righteousnes that worketh not Rom. 4.5 If it be of grace it is no more of workes for then grace were no more grace If of worke then not of grace for then worke were no more worke Rom. 11.9 We see that the righteousnes of fayth or of grace and the righteousnesse of workes cannot stand together nor be matched one with the other Our aduersaries haue here two euasions First they graunt that the beginning of our iustification which they call the first iustification is meerely of Gods grace neither can we haue any acceptable works before we are iustified but in the second iustification which is the increase of the former iustice a man may merite
WOrkes done before iustification though they suffice not to saluation error 93 yet be acceptable preparatiues to the grace of iustification and such as moue God to mercie As were the almes deedes and prayer in Cornelius Act. 10. sect 5. Rhemist The Protestants Ans. COrnelius prayers and almes were not without fayth as Augustine confesseth Non sine aliqua fide donabat orabat He did not giue almes pray without some fayth And he proueth it by that saying of the Apostle Rom. 10.14 How shall they call on him in whom they haue not beleeued Seeing then Cornelius had fayth his iustification also was begun for so soone as fayth commeth it iustifieth These were not then workes preparatiue to fayth and iustification but the fruites of his fayth and iustification begun Argum. Before fayth come there can be no workes of preparation acceptable to God because Without fayth it is impossible to please God Hebr. 11.6 Augustine also sayth Ea ipsa opera ante fidem quae videntur hominibus laudabilia inania sunt those very workes which seeme to be commendable before fayth are altogether vaine and vnprofitable If they be vaine they are no preparations to fayth THE SECOND PART OF THE two kindes of iustification The Papists error 94 THere is a first iustification which is meerely of grace without workes as when an Infidel is made iust who had no acceptable workes before to be iustified by The second iustification is that wherein hee that is in Gods grace daylie proceedeth in by good workes Rhemist Rom. 2.3 This iustification and sanctification are all one Concil Trident. sess 6. cap. 7. And it is augmented and increased by the merite of worke sess 6. can 24. Argum. Of the first iustification S. Paul speaketh where he saith We are iustified by fayth without workes Rom 3.28 Of the second Saint Iames intreateth A man is iustified by workes and not of fayth onely 2.24 Rhemist Ans. This your deuice of first and second iustification is but a new deuice not yet 60. yeare olde your second iustification is nothing els but the effect fruits of iustification before God and a declaration that wee are iust before men Saint Paul and Saint Iames do speake of one and the same iustification by faith But they take the word diuersly for Saint Iames by iustifiyng meaneth nothing els but a testifiyng or declaration of our iustification before men And in this sense is the word taken Math. 11.19 Wisdome is iustified of her children that is declared to be iust The Protestants FIrst iustification and sanctification are two diuers things We are iustified by fayth onely by the imputation of the righteousnes of Christ Roman 4.7 We are sanctified when by fayth working by loue we walke in newnes of life These two are perpetually distinguished in the scriptures I meane iustification and sanctification 1. Corinth 1.30 6.11 and Galath 5.25 If wee liue in the spirite let vs walke in the spirite Our iustification is the liuing in the spirit our sanctification the walking in the spirite Secondly our workes can be no cause of the increase of our iustification and the grace of God in vs But both our iustification and sanctification are the free gifts of God For what hast thou that thou hast not receiued 1. Corint 4.7 This was the olde Pelagian heresie that the grace of God is giuen according to our workes confuted by Augustine Epistol 106. Gratia iam non erit gratia quia secundum merita datur nam merces fidei auctae erit merces coeptae Thus grace shal be no grace for it is giuen according to merite for the increase of fayth or iustice is made the hyre or wages of fayth that is begun Thirdly the scripture speaketh but of one iustification which glorification followeth Rom. 8.30 Whom he iustified them also hee glorified vnles you will haue another iustification to come after our glorificatiō Likewise Rom. 4. Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen ver 7. The iustification in remission of sinnes doth make a man blessed Ergo it is the onely sufficient iustification And Augustine accordingly sayth Donando delicta fecit se debitorem coronae by forgiuing our sinnes he hath made himselfe a debtor for the crowne or reward We see heauen is promised at the first remission of our sinnes what neede then any other iustification Wherefore it is a false and blasphemous decree in the Councel of Trent that wee are not iustified onely by remission of our sinnes sess 6. can 11. THE THIRD PART OF inherent iustice The Papists THey teach that men are not iustified by the onely imputation of the righteousnes error 95 of Christ Trid. Concil sess 6. can 11. Neither that wee are formally made iust by the righteousnes of Christ can 10. but by iustice inherent in vs whereby we are not onely reputed and accounted iust but are truely called iust and are so indeede sess 6. cap. 7. Rhemist Rom. cap. 2. sect 4. Argum. Rom. 2.13 Not the hearers of the law but the doers are iustified Ergo we are iustified by an inherent iustice Rhemist Ans. 1. Saint Paul speaketh of the iustification of the law and proueth by this argument that none could be iustified by the law because none were able to doe it And without performing of the law there was no iustification by the law what is this to the iustification of fayth 2. But if we will vnderstand it of the true iustification of Christians it must so be taken as August saith Non vt factorib iustificatio accedat sed factores legis iustificatio praecedat not that iustification doth come to the doers but that it goeth before the doers of the law The Protestants WE acknowledge an inherent iustice in all faithful men beleeuers but it is imperfect not able to iustifie them before God it is no other then sanctification which is a fruit of iustification But that iustice whereby we are iust before God not falsely accounted but made truly iust by God is by the righteousnes of Christ onely which we apprehend by fayth Argum. That iustice whereby we haue peace with God is the only iustice whereby we are iustified before God for vntil we are cleared and made iust before God it is impossible to haue peace with him But this is onely the iustice of faith Rom. 5.1 Ergo by this iustice onely are we iust before God August hath a good speech Si dixerimus quod nihil iustitiae habemus aduersum Dei dona mētimur si enim iustitiae nihil habemus nec fidem habemus si autem fidem habemus iam aliquid habemus iustitiae If we say we haue no iustice at all in vs we do belye the good gifts of God for if we haue no iustice we haue no faith But if we haue faith then haue we some iustice in vs. Here Augustine acknowledgeth no inherent iustice but onely the iustice of fayth THE FOVRTH PART OF
Pastors and of the election of the Pope pag. 197 3 Of Ecclesiasticall degrees and orders 3. parts 1 Of the seuen degrees of popish priesthood p. 199 2 Of the difference of Bishops and other Ministers pag. 201 3 Of the office of Cardinals pag. 205 4 Of the keyes of the Church 4. parts 1 Wherein the authoritie of the keyes consisteth pag. 206 2 To whom the authoritie of the keyes â—s committed p. 208 3 Whether the Pastors of the Church haue absolute power to remit sinnes pag. 210 4 Of the effect of binding and loosing pag. 212 5 Of the marriage of Ministers three parts 1 The marriage of Ministers lawfull pag. 214 2 Men may be admitted to Orders after second marriage pag. 219 3 Whether perpetuall abstinence be required in married Ministers pag. 221 6 Of the maintenance of Ministers by tithes two parts 1 Whether the paiment of tithes bee necessarie pag. 228 2 By what right tithes are due pag. 229 The sixt controuersie of Monkes and Friers sixe questions 1. quest Of the originall of Monkes and of their diuers sects pag. 232 2 Of the difference betweene Euangelicall Counsels and precepts pag. 236 3 Of vowes in generall three parts 1 Whether it be lawfull for Christians to vow pag. 239 2 Wherein lawfull vowes consist pag. 241 3 Whether voluntarie vowes properly be any part properly of the worship of God pag. 242 4 Of Monasticall vowes 3. parts 1 Of the vow of voluntarie pouertie pag. 244 2 The vow of Monasticall obedience p. 246 3 Of the vow of chastitie pag. 247 5 Of Monasticall persons foure parts 1 Whether the younger sort ought to professe Monkerie pag. 251 2 Whether children may be made Monkes without their parents consent pag. 253 3 Whether married persons may with mutuall consent become votaries pag. 254 4 Whether marriage not consummate may without consent bee broken for the vow of continencie pag. 256 6 Of the rules and discipline of Monasticall life foure parts 1 Of the solitarie austere life of Monks pag. 257 2 Of the habite and shauing of Monkes pag. 259 3 Of their Canonicall houres pag. 261 4 Of the maintenance of Monkes pag. 262 The seuenth generall controuersie of the Ciuill Magistrate foure questions 1 Of the authoritie of the Prince in Ecclesiasticall matters foure parts 1 His authoritie ouer Ecclesiasticall persons pag. 266 2 Ouer Ecclesiasticall goods pag. 267 3 In causes Ecclesiasticall pag. 268 4 Whether the Prince may be sayd to bee the head of the Church in his kingdome pag. 271 2 The authoritie of the Prince in punishing heretikes 1 Whether the iudgement of heresie any way belongeth to the Prince pag. 274 2 How an heretike is to be tried pag. 275 3 How heretikes are to be examined and punished Ibid. 3 Whether the positiue lawes of Princes doe binde in conscience 4 Whether the Prince may be excommunicate of the Pope THE SECOND BOOKE CONTAINETH SIXE CONTROVERSIES The first controuersie which is the eight in the whole is concerning Angels three questions 1. quest Of the hierarchie of Angels 2. parts 1 Of the degrees of Angels p. 291 2 Whether Michael be the Prince of the Angels pag. 292 2 Of the ministerie of Angels three parts 1 Of their externall ministerie in the protection of the Church pag. 293 2 Of their spirituall office about our prayers pag. 295 3 Whether Angels know our hearts pag. 296 3 Of the worship of Angels 2 parts 1 Of their worship in generall pag. 299 2 Of the inuocation of Angels pag. 300 The ninth generall controuersie concerning Saints departed two parts 1. part Of those that suffer punishment being departed two questions 1 Of Limbus Patrum and of the apparition of Samuel pag. 302.305 2 Of Purgatorie foure parts 1 Whether there be any Purgatorie pag. 307 2 Of the circumstances of Purgatorie pag. 310 3 Of prayer for the dead p. 312 4 Of burials funerals p. 315 2. part Of the Saints that are in ioy and blisse after their departure 9. quest 1. quest Of the blessed estate of the Saints and of Canonizing of Saints pag. 320 2 Of the adoration of Saints 3. parts 1 Whether they are to bee adored and of othes vowes made to Saints pag. 325 2 Of the diuers kindes of worship pag. 330 3 Of the kissing of holy mens feete pag. 331 3 Of the inuocation of Saints three parts 1 Whether prayers are to be made vnto them pag. 332 2 Whether they pray for vs pag. 334 3 Whether they vnderstand our praiers p. 335 4 Of the reliques of Martyrs foure parts 1 Of the worshipping of Reliques pag. 338. 2 Translation of Reliques pag. 340. 3 Preseruing of Reliques pag. 342. 4 Miracles of Reliques pag. 343. 5. question 1. Of Images foure parts 1 Of the difference of Idols Images p. 347 2 Whether it bee lawfull to haue Images pag. 348 3 Whether to be worshipped pag. 350 4 What manner of worship it should be p. 353 2. Of the signe of the Crosse 4. parts 1 Of the Crosse whereon Christ suffered p. 355 2 Of the image of the Crosse. pag. 357 3 Of the signe of the Crosse. pag. 359 4 Of the power or efficacie of the Crosse. p. 360 5 An appendix concerning the name of Iesus pag. 361 6. quest Of Temples and Churches fiue parts 1 Of the situation and forme of Churches pag. 3â—2 2 Of the ende and vse of Churches three parts pag. 365 1 Whether they are built for sacrifice pag. 365 2 Whether they be holy places in theÌ„selues pag. 367 3 Whether they may be dedicate to saints pag. 368 3 Of the adorning of Churches pag. 370 4 Of the dedication of Churches pag. 372. 5 Of thinges hallowed for Churches pag. 373 7 Of Pilgrimages and Processions and of the holy land pag. 375 8 Of holy and festiuall daies fiue parts 1 Of holy dayes in generall 378 2 Of the Lords day 379 3 Of the festiuall dayes of Christ and the holy Ghost pag. 386 4 Of the festiuities of Saints 1 The number of them 2 The manner of keeping them pag. 388 3 Of their vigils p. 391 5 Of Lent and Imber daies pag. 392 9 Of the Virgin Mary 1 Whether she were conceiued without sinne pag. 398 2 Whether she vowed virginitie pag. 400 3 Of her assumption into heauen pag. 401 4 Of the worship due vnto her pag. 402 5 Of the merites of the virgine and of the Aue Maria. pag. 404 The tenth controuersie hath but one question concerning the mediation and intercession of Christ. pag. 406. The eleuenth controuersie concerning the Sacraments in generall three questions 1. quest Of the definition and nature of a Sacrament 1 Of the efficient cause or institutor of the sacrament pag. 408 2 Of the forme manner of consecration pag. 409 3 Of the instrumentall cause which is the Minister pag. 413 4 Of the vse whether the Sacraments be seales pag. 414 2. quest Of the efficacie and vertue of the Sacraments 1 Whether the SacrameÌ„ts
confer grace p. 416 2 Of the difference of the olde and new sacraments pag. 418 3 Of the character imprinted by the Sacraments pag. 419 4 Of the necessitie of the sacraments pag. 420 3 Of the number and order of the Sacraments 1 Of the number of them pag. 42◠2 Of their degrees amongst themselues pag. 424. The twelfth controuersie of the sacrament of Baptisme eight questions 1 Of the name and definition of Baptisme pag. 426 2 Of the partes that is the matter and forme of Baptisme pag. 427 3 Of the necessitie of Baptisme and whether baptisme may by any other way be supplied pag. 428 4 Whether women and lay men ought to baptise pag. 432 5 Of the baptisme of infants and whether they haue faith and of the baptizing of bels pag 434.436 6. Of the effectes of Baptisme 1 Whether our sinnes be cleane taken away in baptisme pag. 436 2 Whether baptisme be onely for sinnes past pag. 438 3 Of the priuiledges of Baptisme pag. 439 7. Of the difference between the baptisme of Christ and the baptisme of Iohn p. 441 8. Of the ceremonies and rites of baptisme pag. 442 The thirteenth controuersie of the Eucharist or Lords Supper two parts 1 part Of the sacrament it selfe 10. questions 1 Of the Real presence pag. 445 2 Of Transubstantiation pag. 455 3 Of the reseruation of the Sacrament pag. 459 4 Of the elements of bread and wine pag. 461 5 Of the words of consecration pag. 463 6 Of the proper effect of the Lords Supper pag. 465 7 Of the manner in receiuing the cōmunion whether it ought to be receiued fasting pag. 467 8 Of receiuing in one kinde pag. 468 9 Of the adoration of the Eucharist pag. 472 10 Whether the wicked receiue the body of Christ. pag. 473. 2. part Of the sacrifice of the Masse 8. quest 1 Of the diuers representations of the death of Christ. pag. 475 2 Of the sacrifice 1 The name of the Masse pag. 476 2 Of the sacrifice it selfe pag. 477 3 Of the name of priests pag. 481 3 Of the vertue and efficacie of the Masse pag. 483 4 For whom the Masse is auaileable pag. 484 5 Of priuate Masses pag. 485 6 Of the manner of saying Masse pag. 487 7 Of the idolatrous ceremonies of the Masse pag. 488 8 Of the forme which is the Canon of the Masse pag. 490 THE CONTENTS OF THE THIRD BOOKE The fourteenth controuersie of Penance nine questions 1 Of the name of penance pag. 501 2 Whether it be a Sacrament pag. 502 3 Whether any other sacrament of repentance beside baptisme pag. 504 4 Of the materiall partes of Baptisme 1 Of the matter and forme pag. 504 2 Of the three partes Contrition pag. 505. Confession pag. 505. Satisfaction pag. 505. 3 Whether repentance goe before faith pag. 506 5 Of Contrition pag. 507 6 Of Auricular confession pag. 510 7 Of Satisfaction 1 Whether the punishment remaine after the sinne is pardoned pag. 514 2 Whether a man may satisfie the wrath of God by his workes ibid. 3 Whether one man may satisfie for another pag. 516 8 Of penall iniunctions 1 Whether penall workes be necessary to repentance pag. 517 2 By whom they are to be enioyned pag. 518 3 Of pardons and indulgences pag. 519 9 Of the ceremonies and circumstances of Penance pag. 522 The fifteenth controuersie of Matrimony seuen questions 1 Whether Matrimonie be a sacrament pag 524 2 Of Diuorcement 1 Whether there be any other causes of diuorce beside fornication pag. 525 2 Whether mariage be lawfull after diuorcement for adulterie pag. 528 3 Of the degrees prohibited in mariage three partes 1 Of the supputation of degrees pag. 529 2 Whether any of the degrees prohibited in Moses law may be dispenced with pag. 531 3 Whether any other degrees by humane law may be prohibited pag. 533 4 Of the impediments of marriage pag. 535 5 Of the comparison between virginitie and the married estate pag. 536 6 Of the times of mariage prohibited pag. 537 7 Of the ceremonies of marriage pag. 539 The sixteenth controuersie three questions 1 Of Confirmation 1 Whether 〈◊〉 be a sacrament pag. 541 2 Of the matter and forme thereof pag. 542 3 Of the efficacie and vertue pag. 543 4 Of the rites and ceremonies pag. 544 2 Of Orders 1 Whether it be a Sacrament pag. 545 2 Of the efficacie pag. 547 3 Of the ceremonies pag. 548 3 Of extreame Vnction 1 Whether it be a Sacrament pag. 549 2 Of the vertue and efficacie pag. 550 3 Of the minister and the ceremonies pag. 551 The seuenteenth controuersie of the benefites of our redemption three partes 1 part Of Predestination 1 Of the reprobation of the wicked pag. 553 2 Our election free without respect to our workes pag. 555 3 Of the certaintie of predestination pag 556 2 part Of our Vocation 1 Of sinne 1 Of Originall sinne pag. 558 2 The difference of sinnes pag. 559 3 Of veniall sinnes pag. 560 4 Whether all sinnes be remissible pa. 561 5 God no author of sinne pag. 562 6 Of the works of the not regenerate 563 2 Of the law 5. parts 1 Whether it be possible in this life to keep the Laws pag. 564 2 Whether iust men doe sinne pag. 566 3 Of the works of supererogation p. 567 4 God not to be serued for feare pag. 568 5 Of the vse of the Law pag. 570 3. part Of iustification 1. Of freewil 1 Whether it be vtterly lost pag. 571 2 Of the power of free will in man Ibid. 2. Of Faith 1 What faith is pag. 576 2 Of the diuerse kindes of faith pag. 578 3 Charitie not the forme of iustifiyng faith pag. 579 4 How men are iustified by faith pag. 581 5 Whether faith be meritorious Ibid. 6 Whether faith be in mans power pag. 582 7 Whether it may be lost Ibid. 8 Whether wicked men haue faith pag. 583 3. Of good workes 1 Which be the good workes of Christians pag. 584 2 Whether there be any good workes without faith Ibid. 3 The vse of good workes 1 Whether they be applicatorie pag. 585 2 Expiatorie pag. 586 3 Meritorious Ibid. 4 Of the distinction of merites pag. 589 5 The manner of meriting pag. 590 4. Of Iustification 1 Of preparatiue works to iustification pag. 591 2 Of two kindes of iustification pag. 592 3 Of inherent iustice pag. 593 4 Of iustification onely by faith pag. 594 The 18. controuersie concerning the humanitie of Christ fiue questions 1 Of the vbiquitie or omnipresence of the bodie of Christ pag. 596 2 Whether Christ encreased in knowledge pag. 599 3 Of the manner of our Sauiours birth pag. 601 4 Whether Christ suffered in soule pag. 602 5 Whether Christ descended in soule to Hell to deliuer the Patriarkes pag. 605 6 Of the place of Hell pag. 607 The 19. controuersie concerning matters belonging to the diuine nature of Christ three questions 1 Whether Christ be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God of