we should haue no greater certainty of things Diuine and revealed then such as humane meanes and causes can yeeld And so seeing wee can neuer bee so well perswaded of any man or multitude of men but that we may justly feare either they are deceiued or will deceiue if our faith depend vpon such grounds we cannot firmely vndoubtedly beleeue Nay it is consequent vpon this absurd opinion that the Children of the Church and they of the houshold of faith haue no infused or Diuine faith at all for that whatsoeuer is revealed by the God of truth is true the Heathens make no doubt but doubt whether any thing were so revealed and that any thing was so revealed if these men say true we haue no assurance but by humane meanes and causes But the absurdity hereof the same Canus out of Calvin doth very learnedly demonstrate reasoning in this sort If all they that haue beene our teachers nay if all the Angels in Heauen shall teach vs any other or contrary doctrine to that we haue receiued we must holde them accursed and not suffer our faith to bee shaken by them as the Apostle chargeth vs in the Epistle to the Galatians therefore our faith doth not rely vpon humane causes or grounds of assurance Ne mens nostra vacillet altius petenda quà m ab hominum vel ratione vel auctoritate scripturae authoritas Besides our faith and that of the Apostles and Prophets being the same it must needes haue the same object the same ground and stay to rest vpon in both but they builded themselues vpon the sure and vnmooueable rocke of Diuine truth and authority therefore we must doe so likewise If any man desire farther satisfaction herein let him reade Canus and Calvin to whom in these things Canus is much beholding Others therefore to avoide this absurdity run into that other before mentioned that we beleeue the things that are diuine by the meere and absolute command of our will not finding any sufficient motiues reasons of perswasion hereupon they define faith in this sort Fides est assensus firmus ineuideÌ„s that is faith is a firme certaine ful assent of the mind beleeuing those things the truth whereof no way appeareth vnto vs. For father explication and better clearing of this definition of faith they make two kindes of certainty for there is as they say certitudo evidentiae and certitudo adhaerentiae that is there is a certainty of evidence which is of those things the truth whereof appeareth vnto vs and another of adherence and firme cleauing to that the trueth whereof appeareth not vnto vs. This later they suppose to bee the certainty that is found in fayth and there vpon they hold that a man may beleeue a thing meerely because hee will without any motiues or reason of perswasion at all the contrary whereof when Picus Mirandula proposed among other his conclusions to bee disputed in Rome hee was charged with heresie for it But hee sufficiently cleared himselfe from all such imputation and improued their fantasie that so thinke by vnanswerable reasons which I haue thought good to lay downe in this place It is not sayth hee in the power of a man to thinke a thing to bee or not to bee meerely because hee will therefore much lesse firmely to beleeue it The trueth of the antecedent wee finde by experience and it evidently appeareth vnto vs because if a doubtfull proposition bee proposed concerning which the vnderstanding and minde of man resolueth nothing seeing no reason to leade to resolue one way or other the minde thus doubtfull cannot incline any way till there bee some inducement either of reason sight of the eye or testimony or authority of them wee are well conceipted of to settle our perswasion Secondly a man cannot assent to any thing or judge it to bee true vnlesse it so appeare vnto him but the sole acte of a mans will cannot make a thing to appeare and seeme true or false but either the euidence of the thing or the testimony and authority of some one of whose judgement he is well perswaded Thirdly though the action of vnderstanding quoad exercitium as to consider of a thing and thinke vpon it or to turne away such consideration from it depend on the will yet not quoad specificationem as to assent or dissent for these opposite and contrary kinds of the vnderstandings actions are from the contrary and different appearing of things vnto vs. Fourthly the sole command of the will cannot make a man to beleeue that which being demanded why hee beleeueth he giueth reasons and alledgeth inducements but so it is that in matters of our Christian faith we alledge sundry reasons mouing vs to beleeue as Christians doe as appeareth by the course of all Diuines who lay downe eight principall reasons moouing men to beleeue the Gospell namely the light of propheticall prediction the harmony and agreement of the Scriptures the diligence of them that receiued them carefully seeking to discerne betweene truth and errour the authority grauitie of the writers the reasonablenesse of the things written the vnreasonablenes of all contrary errours the stability of the Church and the miracles that haue beene done for the confirmation of the faith it professeth Fiftly if there be two whereof one beleeueth precisely because he will and another onely because hee will not beleeue refuseth to beleeue the same thing the acte of neither of these is more reasonable then the other being like vnto the will of a Tyrant that is not guided at all by reason but makes his owne liking the rule of his actions Now who is so impious to say The Christians that beleeue the Gospell haue no more reason to leade them so to doe then the Infidels that refuse to beleeue With Picus in the confutation of this senselesse conceipt wee may joyne Cardinall Cameracensis who farther sheweth that as a man cannot perswade himselfe of a thing meerely because hee will without any reason at all so hauing reason hee cannot perswade himselfe more strongly and assuredly of it then the reason hee hath will afforde for if hee doe it is so farre an vnreasonable acte like that of a Tyrant before mentioned Durandus likewise is of the same opinion Assentiri nullus potest nisi ei quod apparet verum igitur oportâ—…t quèd illud quòd creditur appareat rationi verum vel in se vel ratione mâ—…dij per quod assentitur si non in se sed tantùm ratione medij illud medium apparebit verum vel in se vel per aliud medium si non est processus in infinitum oportet quòd deueniatur ad primum quod apparet rationi esse verum in se secundum se That is No man can yeeld assent to any thing but that which appeareth to him to be true therefore whatsoeuer a man beleeueth must seeme and appeare vnto him to bee
alleaged by Cusanus and greatly approued yea the same Cusanus complaining of the abuses of the Court of Rome in that thinges are carried thither that should bee determined in the Prouinces where they beginne in that the Pope intermedleth in giuing Benefices before they be voide to the preiudice of the originall Patrons by reason whereof young men run to Rome and spend their best time there carrying gold with them and bringing backe nothing but paper and many like confusions which the Canons forbid and neede reformation addeth that the common saying that the secular power may not restraine or alter these courses brought in by Papall authority should not moue any man for that though the power of temporall Princes ought not to change any thing established canonically for the honour of GOD and good of such as attend his seruice yet it may and ought to prouide for the common good and see that the auncient canons be obserued Neither ought any one to say that the auncient christian Emperours did erre that made so many sacred constitutions or that they ought not so to haue done For saith he I read that Popes haue desired them for the common good to make lawes for the punishment of offences committed by those of the cleargie And if any one shall say that the force of all these constitutions depended vpon Papall or Synodall approbation I will not insist vpon it though I haue read and collected foure score and sixe chiefe heads of Ecclesiasticall rules and lawes made by old Emperours and many other made by Charles the Great and his successours in which order is taken not onely concerning others but euen concerning the Bishoppe of Rome himselfe and other Patriarches what they shall take of the Bishoppes they ordaine and many like things and yet did I neuer finde that the Pope was desired to approue them or that they haue no binding force but by vertue of his approbation But I know right well that some Popes haue professed their due regarde of those Imperiall and Princely constitutions But though it were graunted that those constitutions had no further force then they receiued from the canons wherein the same thinges were formerly ordered or from Synodall approbation yet might the Emperor now reforme things amisse by vertue of old canons and Princes constitutions grounded on them Yea if hee should with good aduice considering the decay of piety and diuine worshippe the ouerflowing of all wickednes and the causes and occasions thereof recall the old canons and the auncient and most holy obseruation of the Elders and reiect whatsoever priuiledges exemptions or new deuices contrary therevnto by vertue whereof suites complaintes and controuersies the gifts and donations of benefices the like thinges are vnjustly brought to Rome to the great prejudice of the whole Christian Church I thinke no man could justly blame him for so doing Yea he saith the Emperour Sigismund had an intention so to doe and exhorteth him by no fained allegations of men fauouring present disorders to bee discouraged for that there is no way to preserue the peace of the Church whatsoeuer some pretend to the contrary vnlesse such lewde and wicked courses proceeding from ambition pride and couetousnesse be stopped and the old canons reuiued From that which hath beene obserued touching the proceeding of Christian Kings and Emperours in former times in calling Councels in being present at them and in making lawes for persons and causes Ecclesiasticall it is easie to gather what the power of Princes is in this kinde and that they are indeede supreame Gouernours ouer all persons and in all causes as well Ecclesiasticall as Ciuill which is that wee attribute to our Kings Queenes and the Papistes so much stumble at as if some new and strange opinion were broached by vs. Wherefore for the satisfaction of all such as are not maliciously obstinate refusing to heare what may be said I will endeauour in this place vpon so fitte an occasion to cleare whatsoeuer may bee questionable in this point will first intreat of the power and right that Princes haue in causes Ecclesiasticall then of that they haue ouer persons Ecclesiastical jn treating of causes Ecclesiasticall I will first distinguish the diversities of them the power of medling with them Causes Ecclesiasticall therefore are of two sorts for some are originally and naturally such and some onely in that by fauor of Princes out of due consideration they are referred to the Cognisance of Ecclesiasticall persons as fittest Iudges as the probations of the Testaments of them that are dead the disposition of the goods of them that dye intestat and if there be any other like Causes Ecclesiasticall of the first sort are either meerely and onely Ecclesiasticall and Spirituall or mixt Meerely Ecclesiasticall are of three sorts First matters of Faith and Doctrine Secondly matters of Sacraments and the due administration of them Thirdly the orders degrees ordination of such as attend the Ministery of the word Sacraments Mixtly Ecclesiasticall are of two sorts either such as in one respect belong to one kinde of cognisance and in another to another as marriages which are subiect to ciuill disposition in that they are politicall contracts and to spirituall in that they are ordered by the diuine law or such as are equally censurable by Ciuill Ecclesiasticall authority as murthers adulteries blasphemies the like All which in the time when there is no Christian Magistrate or when there is ouer-great negligence in the ciuill Magistrate are to bee punished by the spirituall guides of the Church Whereupon wee shall finde that the auncient Councels prescribed penance to offenders in all these kindes But when there is a Christian Magistrate doing his duty they are to bee referred specially either to the one or the other of these and accordingly to bee censured by the one or the other as wee see the punishment of adultery vsury and things of that nature is referred to Ecclesiasticall persons the punishment of murther theft the like to the ciuill Magistrate This distinction of causes Ecclesiasticall premised it is easie to see what authority Princes haue in causes Ecclesiasticall For first touching those causes that are Ecclesiastical onely in that they are put ouer to the cognisance of spiritual persons there is no question but that the Prince hath a supreame power and that no man may meddle with them any otherwise then as he is pleased to allow And likewise touching those things which in one respect pertaine to ciuill jurisdictiō in another to spiritual or which are equally censurable by both there is no question but that the Prince hath supreame power in that they pertaine to ciuill jurisdiction So that the onely question is touching things naturally and meerely spiritual The power in these is of two sorts of Order of Iurisdiction The power of Order is the authority to preach the Word minister the Sacraments to ordaine Ministers
Augustine saith he would not beleeue the Gospell if the authoritie of the Church did not moue him hee vnderstandeth by the name of the Church the Primitiue congregation of those Faithful ones which saw heard Christ and were his witnesses Thirdly Driedo writeth thus when Augustine saith hee would not beleeue the Gospell if the authoritie of the Church did not moue him hee vnderstandeth that Church which hath beene euer since the beginning of the Christian Faith hauing her Bishops in orderly sort succeeding one another and growing and increasing till our times which Church truly comprehendeth in it the blessed company of the Holy Apostles who hauing seene Christ his miracles and learned from his mouth the Doctrine of Faith deliuered vnto vs the Evangelicall Scriptures And againe the same ◠Driedo saith that the authority of the Scripture is greater then the authoritie of the Church that now is in the world in it selfe considered But if wee speake of the vniversal Church including all Faithfull ones that are and haue beene the authority of the Church is in a sort greater then the Scripture and in a sort equall For explication whereof he addeth that as touching things that cannot bee seené nor knowne by vs we beleeue the sayings writings of men not as if they had in them in themselues considered a sufficient force to moue vs to beleeue but because by some reasons we are perswaded of them who deliuer such things vnto vs thinke them worthie to be beleeued So S. Augustine might rightly say hee would not beleeue the bookes of the Gospel if the authority of the Church did not moue him vnderstanding the vniuersal Church of which he speaketh against Manicheus which including the Apostles hath had in it an orderly course of succession of Bishops till our time For the faithfulnes trueth credit of this Church was more evident then the Trueth of the books of the New Testament which are therefore receiued as sacred true because written by those Apostles to whō Christ so many waies gaue testimony both by word and worke and the Scriptures are to be proued by the authority of that Church which included the Apostles but in the Church that now is or that includeth only such as are now liuing God doth not so manifest himselfe as hee formerly did so that this Church must demōstrat herself to be Orthodox by prouing her faith out of the Scripture With Driedo Ockam cōcurreth his words are these sometimes the name of the Church cōprehendeth not only the whole cōgregation of Catholiques liuing but the Faithful departed also in this sense blessed Augustine vseth the name of the Church in his book against the Manichees cited in the Decrees 2. dist c. palà m where the Catholique Church importeth the Bishops that haue succeeded one another frō the Apostles times the people subiect to thē And in the same sense Augustine vseth the name of the Church when he saith he would not beleeue the Gospell if the authoritie of the Church did not moue him for this Church comprehendeth in it the Writers of the bookes of the Gospell and all the Apostles so that from the authoritie of Augustine rightly vnderstood it cannot be inferred that the Pope the maker of the Canons is rather more to be beleeued then the Gospel yet it may be granted that wee must more rather beleeue the Church which hath beene from the times of the Prophets Apostles till now then the Gospel not for that men may any way doubt of the Gospell but because the whole is greater then the part So that the Church which is of greater authoritie then the Gospel is that whereof the Writer of the Gospel is a part Neither is it strange that the whole should bee of more authority then the parts These are the words of Ockam in the place cited by me Wherfore let the Reader judge whether that I cite out of Ockam be impertinent as the Treatiser saith or not To Durandus Gerson Driedo Ockam we may adde Waldensis who fully agrees with thē shewing at large that it pertayned to the Church onely in her first best and primitiue state age to deliuer a perfect direction touching the Canon of the Scripture so that shee hath no power or authority now to adde any more bookes to the Canon already receiued as out of her owne immediate knowledge But it sufficeth to the magnifying of her authority in her present estate that euen now no other bookes may bee receiued but such only as in her first and best estate shee proposed Farther adding that the saying of Augustine that hee would not beleeue the Gospell if the authority of the Church did not moue him is to bee vnderstood of the Church including the primitiue Fathers and Pastors the Apostles Scholers By this which hath bin sayd it is euident as I thinke that the former of those two constructions which I make of Augustines words hath bin approued by far better men then this Treatiser And that therefore he sheweth himself more bold then wise when he pronounceth it to be frivolous And surely if we consider well the discourse of S. Augustine I thinke it may be proued vnanswerably out of the circumstances of the fame that hee speaketh not precisely of the present Church For it is that authority of the catholicke church hee vrgeth that was begun by miracles nourished by hope increased by charity confirmed strengthned by long continuance And of that Church he speaketh wherin there had bin a succession of Bishops from Peter till that present time So that he must needs meane the Church including not onely such faythfull ones as were then liuing when hee wrote but all that either then were or had bin from the Apostles times Wherefore let vs passe to the other construction of Augustines words which is that the authority of the present church was the ground reason of an acquisit fayth an introduction leading him to a more sure stay but not the reason or ground of that faith whereby principally he did beleeue This constructiō the Treatiser sayth cannot stand because Aug saith if the authority he speaketh of be weakned hee will beleeue no longer Whence it seemeth to be consequent that it was the cause of all thē perswasion of fayth that he had then when he wrote not only of an acquisit fayth preparing fitting him to a stronger more excellent farther degree or kind of faith For the clearing of this poynt we must note that there are 3. sorts of such mē as beleeue for there are some that beleeue out of piety onely not discerning by reason whether the things they beleeue be to be beleeued as true or not the 2d. haue a light of diuine reason shining in them causing an approbation of that they beleeue the 3d. sort hauing a pure heart conscience begin already inwardly to taste that which hereafter
not onely a condition but a cause of that perswasion of fayth which they haue yea the authority of the Church is the formall cause of all that faith seduced Papists haue And therefore the distinction of a cause and condition helpeth them not It is true indeed that the Ministerie of the Church proposing to men thinges to bee beleeued is onely a condition requisite to the producing of a supernaturall act of fayth in respect of them that haue some other thing to perswade them that that is true which the Church proposeth besides the authority of the Church but in respect of such as haue no other proofe of the trueth thereof it is a formall cause Now this is the condition of all Papists For let them tell Mee whether they beleeue the Scripture to be the Word of God without any motiue at all or not and if they doe not as it is most certaine they doe not whether besides such as are humane they haue any other then the authority of the Church if they haue not as doubtlesse they haue not they make the authority of the Church the formall cause of their faith and fall into that sophisticall circulation they are charged with For they beleeue the articles of religion because reuealed and that they were reuealed because it is so contayned in the Scripture and the Scripture because it is the Word of God that it is the Word of God because the Church telleth them it is and the Church because it is guided by the spirit and that it is so guided because it is so contayned in the Scripture this is such a maze as no wise man will willingly enter into and yet the Treatiser commendeth the treading of these intricate pathes and telleth vs that two causes may bee causes one of another That the cause may bee proued by the effect and the effect by the cause and that such a kinde of argumentation is not a circulation but a demonstratiue regresse that two causes may be causes either of other in diuerse respects we make no question For the end of each thing as it is desired setteth the efficient cause a worke and the efficient causeth the same to bee actually enjoyed Likewise we doubt not but that the cause may be proued by the effect and the effect by the cause in a demonstratiue regresse For the effect as better known vnto vs then the cause may make vs know the cause and the cause being found out by vs may make vs more perfitly and in a better sort to knowe the effect then before not onely that and what it is but why it is also So the death of little infants proueth them sinners and their being sinners proueth them mortall The bignesse of the footstep in the dust or sand sheweth the bignesse of his foote that made that impression And the bignesse of his foote will shew how bigge the impression is that he maketh but this maketh nothing for the justifying of the Romish circulations For heere the effect being knowne in a sort in itselfe maketh vs know the cause and the cause being found out and knowne maketh vs more perfectly to knowe the effect then at first wee did but the case is otherwise with the Papists for with them the Scripture which in it selfe hath no credit with them but such onely as it is to receiue from the Church giueth the Church credit and the Church which hath no credit but such as it is to receiue from the Scripture giueth the Scripture credit by her testimony And they endeauour to proue the infallibility of the Churches judgment out of the Scripture and the trueth of the Scripture out of the determination and judgement of the Church Much like as if when question is made touching the quality condition of two men vtterly vnknowne a man to commend them to such as doubt of them should bring no other testimony of their good and honest disposition but the testimony of each of them of the other It is true then which I haue said that to a man admitting the Old Testament and doubting of the New a man may vrge the authority of the Old and to a man doubting of the Old and admitting the New the authority of the New but to him that doubteth of both a man must alledge neither of them but must bring some other authority or proofe so likewise to him that admitteth the Scripture and doubteth of the Church a man may vrge the authority of the Scripture but to him that doubteth of both as all doe when they begin to beleeue a man must alledge some other proofe or else hee shall cause him to runne round in a Circle for euer and neuer to finde any way out Wherefore to conclude this poynt let our Aduersaries know that wee admitte and require humane motiues and inducements and amongst them a good opinion of them that teach vs as preparing fitting vs to fayth Secondly that wee require a supernaturall ayde light and habit for the producing of an act of faith Thirdly that we require some diuine motiue inducement Fourthly that this cannot be the authority of the Church seeing the authority of the Church is one of the things wee are to bee induced to beleeue Fiftly that wee require the ministery of the Church as a propounder of all heauenly trueth though her authority can be no proofe in generall of all such truth Sixtly that the Church though not as it includeth onely the beleeuers that are in the world at one time yet as it comprehendeth all that are or haue beene is an infallible propounder of heauenly truth and so acknowledged to bee by such as are assured of the trueth of the doctrine of Christianity in generall Seauenthly that the authority of this Church is a sufficient proofe of the trueth of particular things proposed by her to such as already are by other diuine motiues assured of her infallibility §. 7. FRom the authority of the Scripture which he would faine make to bee wholy dependant on the Church the Treatiser passeth to the fulnesse and sufficiency of it seeking amongst other his discourses to weaken those proofes which are brought by Mee for confirmation thereof Affirming that though I make shew as if it were a plaine matter that the Euangelists in their Gospels Saint Luke in the Actes of the Apostles and Saint Iohn in the Apocalyps meant to deliuer a perfect summe of Christian doctrine and direction of faith yet I bring no reason of any moment to proue it Whereas yet in the place cited by him I haue these wordes contayning in them as I suppose a strong proofe of the thing questioned Who seeth not that the Evangelists writing the history of CHRISTS life and death St Luke in the booke of the Acts of the Apostles describing the comming of the Holy Ghost the admirable gifts and graces powred vpon the Apostles and the churches founded and ordered by them and Saint Iohn writing the Revelations
in these words The Grecians are of opinion that the holy Ghost is the spirit of the Sonne but that hee proceedeth not from the Son but from the Father onely yet by the Son and this opinion seemeth to bee contrary to ours For wee say the holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father the Son But happily if two wise and vnderstanding men the one of the Greeke Church the other of the Latine both true louers of the trueth and not of their owne sayings because they are their owne might meete to consider of this seeming contrariety it would in the end appeare that this difference indeede and in trueth is not reall but verball onely For otherwise either the Grecians or wee that are of the Latine Church are truely Heretickes But who dares charge this Authour Iohn Damascen or those blessed ones Basil Gregorie the Diuine or Gregorie Nazianzen Cyril and other Greeke Fathers of like esteeme with heresie And again on the other side who dares brand blessed Hierome Augustine Ambrose Hilarie and other like Latine Fathers with the note of heresie Therefore it is likely that though there be contrariety in the words of these fathers so that they seem to bee contrary one to another yet in judgement meaning they agree Stanislaus Orichovius as Andreas Fricius reporteth a man renowned for wit eloquence profound science in divers kinds hath written of the opinions of the Russians and in an epistle to Peter Gamrat an Archbishoppe in Polonia he sheweth how the differences touching the proceeding of the holy Ghost where they seeme especially to bee contrary vnto vs may bee agreed and composed Thomas à Iesu resolueth cleerely that this question touching the proceeding of the holy Ghost is onely de modo loquendi and that the difference is not reall which hee sheweth to be true in this sort The Greekes who deny the holy Ghost to proceede from the Sonne acknowledge that hee is the spirit of the Sonne and that hee is given vnto vs by the Sonne Wee doe not say sayth Damascen that the holy Ghost proceedeth from the Sonne but wee name him the spirit of the Son If any man sayth the Apostle haue not the spirit of Christ hee is none of his And wee affirme that hee appeared by the Sonne was given vnto vs by him for hee breathed vpon his disciples sayd vnto them receiue the holy Ghost but wee neuer say that the Sonne is the son of the holy Ghost or proceedeth from him They teach therefore that the spirit is proceedeth from the Father by the Son as the brightnesse is from the Sun by the beame And that as wee may say the brightnesse is the brightnesse of the Sun-beame aswell as of the Sun but not that the beame is the beame of that brightnesse so the spirit is the spirit of the Son but the Son is not the son of the spirit So then they say the holy Ghost proceedeth or receiueth essence being from the Father onely as from the originall fountaine but by the Son as a middle person in order of subsistence betweene them receiving being immediatly from the Father so mediately deriving cōmunicating it to him Neither Greekes nor Latines therefore deny the holy Ghost to receiue being essence from the Sonne and consequently to proceede from him as from a middle person in order of subsistence betweene the Father him in such sort as the brightnesse that floweth from the sun is from the sun-beame betweene the sun and it Neither of them deny the Father to be the fountaine and the originall as the sunne is the fountaine whence floweth both the beame brightnesse of light And both agree that the Father from whom the Sonne by whom the spirit receiueth being are one cause or one beginning and that by one eternall breathing the spirit receiueth essence or subsistence from them both in such sort as the sonne and beame are one cause and doe by one action send forth that shining brightnesse that floweth from them By that which hath beene spoken sayth Thomas à Iesu it is easie to vnderstand that those Greekes which seeme to differ from the Latines differ but in words only and that the Churches may easily be brought to a reconciliation and agreement if they will but endeavour to vnderstand each the other But the Latines and those Greekes that agree with them speake more fitly expresse the thing whereof they speake better then the other Howsoever it is certaine that some of the Fathers expressed that they conceiued of this mystery in one sort and some in another Tertullian sayth the holy spirit is from the Father by the Son his words are Spiritum non aliunde puto quam a Patre per Filium Hilarie sayth he is from the Father and the Son His words are de patre filio authoribus confitendus est c. When the holy spirit is sent sayth Hierom he is sent of the Father and the Son and in Scripture hee is called sometimes the spirit of the Father sometimes of the Son And again Spiritus à Patre egreditur propter naturae societatem à filio mittitur That is the spirit proceedeth from the Father and in that he is of the same nature and essence with the Son he is sent of him Why should wee not beleeue sayth Augustine that the holy spirit proceedeth from the Sonne also seeing hee is the spirit of the Sonne The Greekes say not expressely that hee proceedeth from the Father and the Sonne for in the creede of Athanasius as it is found in the Greeke the words are the spirit is of the Father not made nor created nor begotten but proceeding without the addition of the Sonne But some of them say he is or receiued being from the Father that he appeared by the Son and is a perfect image of the Son Others that not only the Father but the Son also sendeth the holy spirit Some that hee proceedeth from the Father and receiueth of the Sonne And others that hee is from the Father by the Sonne In all which diversitie of words and formes of speaking there was one the same meaning and therefore no exception was taken by one against another But the controversie that now is touching this point began in this sort The first publishers of the Gospell of Christ deliuered a rule of faith to the Christian Churches which they founded comprehending all those articles that are found in that epitome of Christian religion which wee call the Apostles creed But in processe of time when Arrius and his complices questioned the deity of Christ and denied him so to bee the sonne of God as to bee coequall coeternall and coessentiall with the father Constantine called a Councell and assembled the Bishops of the Christian world at Nice a city in Bithinia these Bishops cleared the poynt in controversie and with vnanimous consent composed a
if they die without Baptisme dare not pronounce of them as the Romanists do 7 They deny confirmation extream vnction to be sacraments 8 Touching the Eucharist they consecrate ordinarily in leauened bread but on Maundy Thursday in vnleavened bread and in wine or the juice of raisons moistened in water and so pressed out They minister the Communion in both kinds to all both Clergie men and Lay-men The priest ministereth the bread and the Deacon the wine in a spoone They giue this Sacrment to infants when they are baptized in this sort The priest dippeth his finger into the consecrated wine and putteth it into the mouth of the child They haue neither eleuation nor reservation nor circumgestation as the Roman Church hath They all Communicate twice every weeke but the Sacrament is neuer ministred in private houses no not to the Patriarch or Emperour him selfe 9 Touching purgatorie they beleeue that soules after death are detained in a certaine place named in their tongue Mecan aaraft id est locus alleviationis that is a place of refreshing in which the soules of such as die not hauing repented of their former sinnes in such full and perfect sort as was sitting are detained and so whether the soules of good men doe enioy the vision of God before the resurrection they resolue not 10 They say no masses for the dead they bury them with crosses and prayers but specially they vse the beginning of St Iohns Gospell The day following they giue almes and so a certaine number of dayes and make feasts also 11 They grant no indulgences 12 They haue no cases reserued 13 They beleeue that the Saints do intercede for vs they pray vnto them they haue painted images but none molten or carued they much esteeme them in respect of those holy ones they represent and make sweete perfumes before them 14 Their Priests receiue no tithes but they haue lands on which they liue 15 Their Bishops and Priests are married but may not marry a second wife and continue in those degrees and orders vnlesse the Patriarch dispence with them 16 They thinke it vnlawfull to fast on Saturdaie or Sundaie and vrge to that purpose the Canon of the Apostles 17 They keepe Saturday holy as well as Sunday following the Auncient Custome of the East Church they eate flesh on that day throughout the whole yeare except only in Lent and in some Provinces they eate flesh on that day euen in the Lent also 18 They fast Wednesdaies and Saturdaies till the Sunne setting and celebrate not on those dayes till the euening 19 Betweene Easter and Whitsontide they eate flesh freely on those daies 20 They abstaine from things strangled and blood observing the Canon of the Apostles in so doing as they suppose and besides forbeare to eate of such kinds of meate as were forbidden by Moses Law 21 The Emperour hath a supreame authority in all causes aswell Ecclesiasticall as Civill though the Patriarch also exercise a spirituall iurisdiction 22 They deny the supremacy of the Roman Bish. But they yeeld a primacie vnto him acknowledging him to be the first amongst Bishops Hauing spoken of the Grecians Assyrians and supposed Monophysites it remaineth that wee come in the last place to treate of the Maronites Touching the name ◠Baronius sheweth that it was not from any heretick named Maron but that there was a holy man so named and that in honour of him a certaine monastery was founded which was named the monastery of St Maron that all the monkes of that monastery were named Maronites These in time as it may be thought ioyned them selues to the Monophysites formerly described though happily not without some litle difference And hence all the Christians that professed to beleeue so as these did were named Maronites They haue a Patriarch of their own who claimeth to be Patriarch of Antioch He resideth in a monasterie some 25 miles from Tripolis in Syria He hath vnder him some 8 or 9 suffragan Bishops These Maronites inhabit mount Libanus and some of them in Damascus Aleppo and some parts of Cyprus Mount Libanus is of such extent that it is in compasse 7 hundred miles It hath no cities but villages which are neither few nor small Within this compasse none inhabite but Christians though vnder the Turke For they redeeme it at a high rate and pay an intollerable tribute to liue without mixture of Mahumetans The particulars of their Religion are these First they beleeue that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father onely 2 They blesse consecrate the water so often as any are to be baptized And not as in the Roman Church on the Saturday before Easter only for the whole yeare The reason of which observation is for that at Easter and at Whitsontide onely in the Primitiue Church they ministred Baptisme which they did because in baptisme men are mortified to sin quickned in the life of grace by vertue of Christs death resurrection and giuing of the spirit All which things were cōmemorated in these solemnities 3 They neuer baptize males and females together lest they should contract a kind of affinity 4 None baptizeth with them in what necessity soeuer but a Priest or Deacon 5 They require not the intention of the Minister but thinke the faith of the Church sufficeth 6 They baptize not a male till the 40th day nor a female till the 80th in respect of the impurity of the mother which they thinke continueth so long 7 They seeke no confirmation from the Bishop nor haue any other anointing then that which is vsed in baptisme 8 They consecrat the Eucharist in vnleauened bread in a massie loafe out of which they giue a peece to euery cōmunicant 9 They giue the Sacraments to Lay men in both kinds 10 They celebrat but once in one day vpon one the same altar 11 They think the Person of the Holy Ghost to be in the holy oile in such sort as the Person of Christ is in the Eucharist 12 They thinke that the Eucharist receiued into the mouth goeth not into the stomack but presently diffuseth it selfe through all the members of the body 13 On fasting-dayes they celebrate not till the euening which custome Tho à Iesu saith is not to be altered affirming that it was most auncient in the Church of God the Councell of Cabilon related in the decrees prescribing that they should celebrate the Sacrament in the Ember fasts in the euening on the saturday before Easter in the beginning of the night And although saith he the Church yeelding to our infirmity permit the Latines to doe otherwise yet where the old custome may be kept it is not only not to be takē away but much to be cōmended that men when they fast may put it off as long as may be before they eat any thing In former times they did not eat in Lent till the euening as appeareth by the Councell formerly mentioned Which custom continued till
what time and against what persons he pleaseth and no otherwise and is author ordinis in malo though not mali When we say he openeth the way passage for wickednesse to break forth wee must vnderstand that he doth this in two sorts either by not hindring it from breaking forth in some one kinde which hee suffereth no otherwise to shew it selfe or in that he positiuely inclineth it hither rather then thither not by way of cause but of occasiō offered In which sense it is that Dauid saith God commanded Shemei to curse him not as if God had eyther inwardly or outwardly perswaded him so to do But because finding him full of malice against Dauid he so prospered Dauid before that he durst not reuile him not had no cause to insult vpon him But now he presented him to his eyes in such a miserable estate forsaken of many and pursued by his owne sonne as he knew would occasion these words of insultation and bitter malediction Thus then God commanded Shemei to curse Dauid not by precept outwardly requiring him so to do nor by perswasiō inwardly inclining him to so vile an actiō but by direction inclining him by words of malediction to expresse his bitter affection which long before desired to vent it selfe now at this time and for the punishment of Dauids sinnes rather then at an other time and in another sort So when wicked men had spoyled Iob he sayd The Lord hath giuen the Lord hath taken away imputing it to God not as if he had made them to become Robbers but for that being such hee directed their wickednesse and vsed it to the triall of his servant opening a passage for their wickednesse and presenting to them such things as hee knew would occasion this outrage As lakewise the Iewes in crucifying Christ are said to haue done nothing but that which God had before resolutely determined not as if God had purposed their wickednesse but only because knowing what was in them he was pleased to direct guide and turne their wickednesse and furious malice to the effecting of his owne purposes The third action that wee attribute vnto God is that hee punisheth one sin by an other In punishments Hugo de sancto victore noteth three things The matter with which a man is punished the contrariety betweene it and the party punished and the order of consequence that where such an offence went before such an euil shall follow to make the party offending feele the smart of it In those punishments which be punishments onely not sinnes God is the author and cause of all these three things implyed in the nature of punishments in those which be punishments and sinnes God is author only of the order of consequence the contrariety between them the nature of the parties punished not of the matter wherwith they are afflicted punished As for exāple Pride is punished by envie Enuie is not of God but the contrarietie betweene it and the soule of man which maketh it bitter and afflictiue is And the order of consequence that where pride went before enuy must follow Neither doth God only punish one sinne with another when there is such a dependance of one vpon the other that where one goeth before the other must follow But oftentimes when there is no such necessary dependance yet he withdraweth his grace and for the punishment of one sinne letteth men runne into another In this sense there are three things attributed to God in the punishment of wicked and godlesse men The blinding of their vrderstanding The hardning of their hearts and the giuing of them vp vnto a reprobate sense These things God is said to doe three wayes First by subtraction and deniall of that grace which should lighten the vnderstandings and soften and mollifie the hearts of men Secondly by giuing leaue to Sathan to work vpon them no way either strengthning them against him or weakning his force Thirdly occasionally and by accident when God doth that which is good which yet hee knoweth through the euill disposition that is in men will increase their wickednesse and make it greater then it was before CHAP. 24. Of the heresies of Origen touching the Image of God and touching hell falsely imputed to Caluin IN the third place the Iesuite fearing that men should thinke hee were neere driuen and wanted store hee chargeth Caluin at once with two heresies of Origen The first concerning the Image of God the second touching Hell and the punishments of it Touching the first it is true that Epiphanius chargeth Origen with heresie For saying that Adam lost the Image of God by his disobedience and sinne but how iustly it is very doubtfull Seeing neither Hierome nor Theophilus Alexandrinus most diligently noting his errours make any mention of it And therefore it may bee probably thought as Alphonsius à Castro noteth that if any such thing was found in the workes of Origen it was so deliuered by him as that it might carrie a good construction and free from heresie But leauing it vncertain what it was that Origen meant by the losse of Gods Image For the cleering of Caluin wee must note that which Thomas Aquinas no hereticke I hope in Bellarmines iudgment beeing a Canonized Saint of the Romish Church hath fittely obserued to this purpose Hee noteth first that the Image of God consisteth in the eminent perfection which is found in men expressing the nature of God in an higher degree then any excellencie of other creatures doth Secondly that this perfection is found principally in the soule Thirdly that it is threefold First naturall which is the largenesse of the naturall faculties of vnderstanding and will not limitted to the apprehension or desire of some certaine things only but extending to all the conditions of beeing and goodnesse whose principall obiect is God So that they neuer rest satisfied with any other thing but the seeing and enioying of him The second kind of this perfection is supernaturall when the soule actually or at the least habitually knoweth and loueth God aright though not so perfectly as hee may and shall bee loued hereafter The third is when the soule knoweth and loueth God in fulnesse of happinesse The first is of nature the second of grace and the third of glory The first of these is neuer lost no not by the damned in hell The second Adam had but lost it and it is renued in vs by grace The third wee expect in heauen To thinke the Image of God considered in the first sort to be lost is heresie but Caluin is free from it To thinke it lost in the second sort is the Catholique doctrine of the Church for who knoweth not that man hath lost all right knowledge and loue of God by Adams fall Some restraine the name of the Image of God to the excellency of the soules nature framed to know all things and neuer to rest
to permit leaue free the vse of the cup to the lay people being moved so to doe by Charles the Archduke his sonne the Duke of Bavaria his son in law and the due consideration of the necessity of his subiects There are extant certaine articles concerning reformation of manners Church discipline proposed in the councell of Trent by the embassadours of Charles the ninth the French King amongst which the 18 article is that the auncient decree of Leo and Gelasius touching the communion vnder both kindes might be reviued brought to be in vse againe But when the French perceiued that there were scarce any footesteps of the libertie of auncient councells to be discerned in the councell of Trent that all things were swayed and disposed by the absolute commaund of Pius the fourth then Pope the embassadours were commaunded to make a protestation in the name of the King their master the words of which protestation are these Wee refuse to bee subject to the commaund disposition of Pius the fourth Wee reiect wee refuse contemne all the judgments censures decrees of the same Pius And although most holy Fathers your religion life and learning was ever and euer shall bee of great esteeme with vs yet seeing indeed you doe nothing but all things are done at Rome rather then at Trent and the things that are here published are rather the deerees of Pius the fourth then of the councell of Trent wee denounce protest here before you all that whatsoeuer things are decreed published in this assembly by the meere will pleasure of Pius neither the most Christian King will euer approue nor the French Church euer acknowledge to be the decrees of a generall councell Besides this the King our master commaundeth all his Arch-Bishops Bishops and Abbots to leaue this assembly and presently to depart hence then to returne againe when there shall be hope of better more orderly proceedings Wherefore from this point of Romish Religion touching the communion in one kinde which findeth no helpe in the publique liturgie vsed in the dayes of our Fathers by which it is evident that the people were wont to cōmunicate in both kindes when that forme of divine seruice was first composed nor no liking or approbation of the best and worthiest guides of Gods Church then liuing let vs come to the next which is the propitiatory sacrifice for the quicke and the dead This indeede is a grand point of Romish Religion and if M Brerelie can prooue that it is contained in the publique Liturgie that was vsed in the Church at and immediatly before Luthers appearing and consequently that all that vsed that Liturgie had such an opinion of a sacrifice hee hath said much to proue that the Church vnder the Papacie was no Protestant Church but this neither hee nor all the most learned Papists in the world will euer be able to proue First therefore I will make it appeare that the Canon of the Masse importeth no such sacrifice And secondly I will shew at large that neither before nor after Luthers appearing the Church beleeued or knew any such new reall sacrificing of Christ as is now imagined Touching the canon of the Masse it is true that therein there is often mention of sacrifice and oblation but Luther professeth that the words may be vnderstood in such a sense as is not to be disliked and hee saith hee could so expound it and that somewhere hee hath so expounded it but seeing it is obseure and may beare diuers senses and a better and more cleare forme of divine celebration may be brought in he will not honour it so much as to giue it that sense which it may well carry and in which the first composers of it and others after did vse it but that wherein they of Rome will now needes haue it to be vnderstood That the forme of words vsed in the canon are obscure in sundry parts of it and hard to bee vnderstood euen by the learned Cassander confesseth and therefore thinketh it fit it were explained illustrated by some briefe scholies put in the margent or inserted into the text by way of parenthesis The obscuritie that is in it groweth as he rightly obserueth partly out of the disuse discontinuing of certaine old obseruations to which the words of the canon composed long since haue a reference and partly from the vsing of the word sacrifice in diuers and different senses though all connexed the sudden passing from the vsing of it in one sense to the vsing of it in another It is not vnknowne to them that are learned that in the Primitiue Church the people were wont to offer bread wine and that out of that which they offered a part was consecrated to become vnto them the Sacrament of the Lords body bloud other parts converted to other good holy vses Respectiuely to this ancient custome are those prayers conceiued that are named secretae the first part of the canon wherein wee desire that God will accept those gifts presents offerings and sacrifices which we bring vnto him and that hee will make them to become vnto vs the body bloud of his Son Christ which onely are that sacrifice that procureth the remission of our sins and our reconciliation and acceptation with God So that to take away this obscurity that the words may haue a true sense the ancient custome must bee brought backe againe or at least it must be conceiued that the elements of bread wine that are set vpon the mysticall table are to be consecrated are brought thither and offered in the name of the people and that as being their presents they are symboles of that inward sacrifice whereby they dedicate and giue themselues and all that they haue vnto God Touching the second cause of the obscurity of the wordes of the Canon which is the vsing of the word sacrifice and ◅ffering in so manifold and different senses and the sudden passing from the one of them to the other wee must obserue that by the name of sacrifice gift or present first the oblation of the people is meant that consisteth in bread and wine brought and set vpon the Lords table In which againe 2 things are to be considered the outward action and that which is signified thereby to wit the peoples dedicating of themselues and all that they haue to God by faith and deuotion offering to him the sacrifice of praise In this sense is the word sacrifice vsed in the former part of the canon as I haue already shewed In respect of this is that prayer powred out to God that he will be mindfull of his seruants that doe offer vnto him this sacrifice of praise that is these outward things in acknowledgement that all is of him that they had perished if he had not sent his sonne to redeeme them that vnlesse they eate the flesh and drink the blood
and grace thorough the same Lord IESVS CHRIST This forme of prayer wee finde to haue beene verie auncient but what the meaning of it is it is not soe easie to finde out For how may wee bee vnderstood to desire that the body of CHRIST which we represent vnto GOD in this commemoratiue sacrifice should bee carried into heauen seeing it is alwaies there Wherefore let vs heare what the holy Fathers haue sayd to this purpose Quis fidelium haberet dubium sayth Saint Gregorie in ipsâ immolationis hora ad vocem sacerdotis coelos aperiri in illo Iesu Cristi mysterio Angelorum choros adesse summis in a sociari terrena coelestibus iungi vnum quid ex visibilibus invisibilibus fieri That is What faithfull man or beleeuer will euer make any doubt but that in the houre of the oblation the Heauens are opened that so soone as the voyce of the Priest is heard Quires of Angels are present the lowest and highest things enter into a societie earthly things are joyned with those that are celestiall and things visible and invisible become one And in another place At one and the same time and moment that which is presented on the altar is caught vp into Heauen by the ministerie of Angels to bee ioyned in a neere sort vnto the body of Christ and is at the same time before the eyes of the Priest vpon the altar So then the oblations which we present vnto God on the Altar are then carried by the hands of Angels into Heauen when those sacramentall elements which we bring thither though they be still visible on the altar as Gregory saith yet being changed and become vnto vs in mysterie and exhibitiue signification the body and bloud of Christ once sacrificed and shed for vs and now in heauen continually represented vnto God to intercede for vs may rightly be said to bee carried vp into heauen But seeing by the precedent wordes of mysticall blessing and prayer the sacramentall Elements are so chaunged before the pronouncing of this prayer that they are already become in sort before expressed the body and bloud of Christ which is in heauen wee doe not in these wordes desire any such thing to bee done but this is that wee say Lord wee heere commemorate the death and sacrifice of thy Sonne Christ that once died for vs and now continually representeth the same his death vnto thee to procure vs good humbly beseeching thee that for his sake thus dying for vs now continually in heauen representing himselfe vnto thee setting the same his passions and sufferings before the eyes of thy Diuine Maiesty as if euen now he did hang on the Crosse all euill may bee farre remoued from vs all good brought vpon vs. And that all we that by communicating in these holy mysteries receiue the body bloud of the same thy Son Christ may be filled with all heauenly benediction and grace So that to commaund the sacrifice of Christs body and bloud once offered here by vs commemorated to be carried into heauen and to bee represented vnto God is no more but to make it appeare that that body of Christ which hee once offered by the passion of death and which we now commemorate is in Heauen there so represented vnto God that it procureth for vs all that wee desire There is nothing therefore found in the Canon of the Masse rightly vnderstood that maketh any thing for the new reall offering of Christ to God his Father as a propitiatorie sacrifice to take away sinnes neither did the Church of God at before Luthers time know or beleeue any such thing though there were some in the midst of her that so conceiued of this mystery as the Romanists now do Wherfore for the clearing of this point I will first set down what the conceipt of the Romanists now is then make it appeare that all the best learned at and before Luthers time thought otherwise touching this matter then these now doe These that now are expresse their conceipt touching this point in this sort First they shew what an oblation is Secondly what the nature of a sacrifice is And thirdly how and in what sort they imagine Christ is now newly really not offered onely but sacrificed also to take away our sinnes An oblation they rightly define to bee the bringing of some thing that we haue into the place where the name of God is called on and where his honour dwelleth a representing of it there vnto God a professing that wee will owne it no longer but that God shall bee the owner of it that it shall bee holy vnto him to bee imployed about his seruice if it bee an irrationall thing or to serue him in some speciall sort if it bee rationall as when parents presented and offered their children to God to bee holy vnto him as were the Nazarits who were to serue him in some peculiar and speciall sort and in this sort Christ presented and gaue himselfe to God his father from his first entrance into this world and was holy vnto him and an oblation But in this sort it is not for vs to offer Christ to God his father whatsoeuer any Papist may imagine For it were a wofull thing for vs so to giue vp Christ to his father as to professe that wee will owne him no longer nor haue any interest in him nor claime to him any more And besides if it were fit for vs so to doe yet who are wee that wee should present Christ vnto God his father to bee holy vnto him that so presented and gaue himselfe vnto him from his first entrance into the world that hee bringeth vs also to God to bee holy vnto him A sacrifice implyeth more than an oblation For if wee will sacrifice a thing vnto God wee must not onely present it vnto him professing that it shall bee his and that wee will owne it no more nor make any claime vnto it but wee must destroy and consume it also As wee see in the old law when liuing things were sacrificed they were slaine and consumed in fire when other that had no life were sacrificed they were consumed in fire And answerably herevnto Christ was sacrificed on the crosse when hee was crucified and cruelly put to death by the Iewes But how he should now bee really sacrificed sacrificing implying in it a destruction of the thing sacrificed it is very hard to conceiue First therefore they say that Christ may truely bee said to bee really sacrificed because when the words of consecration are pronounced ouer the bread they so cause the body of Christ to bee where the bread was that they cause not the presence of the blood and in like sort the words pronounced ouer the wine cause the presence of Christs blood and not of his body so that vpon the pronouncing of the words of consecration there would bee in the sacrament the body of Christ without the
earnestly to thirst after these waters when hee sayth Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousnes but the vngodly having tasted of the wine of mundane joy and temporall riches hate dislike and put from them this water and therefore the Lord sayth well of them by the Prophet Esay 8. Because this people haue refused the waters of Siloe that runne softly and without noyse and haue taken rather Rasin and the sonne of Romelia I will bring upon them the mighty waters of of the floud Siloe is interpreted sent and it signifieth the doctrine of the diuine Law sent vnto vs by Christ the Apostles and other faithfull ones which doctrine the Pastors of the Church are bound vnder the paine of damnation to know and teach whereupon Isidore saith de summo bono lib. 3. c. 46. The Priests shall bee damned for the iniquity of the people if either they neglect to teach them being ignorant or to reproue them when they offend the Lord hauing said by the Prophet I haue set thee as a watch-man ouer the house of Israel and if thou shalt not tell the wicked of his wickednes that hee forsake his euill way he shall dye in his iniquitie but I will require his bloud at thy hand Notwithstanding all this many of the moderne Priests cast from them this learning and say we will none of it because it is not de pane lucrando that is it serueth not to bring in gaine and profite and giue themselues to the study of humane lawes which are not so necessary for the sauing of soules as the law of God because as Odo saith here vpon the Gospell sermone 39. If Christ had knowne that we might more easily attaine saluation by the Lawes of Iustinian he would surely haue taught them vs with his own mouth and haue let that alone which he taught vs and deliuered vnto vs et in quâ continetur implicitè vel explicitè omnis scientia ad salutem necessario requisita and in which is contained expressely or implicitely all knowledge necessarily required to saluation according to that of S. Augustine 2. de doctrinâ Christianâ in fine Whatsoeuer a man learneth without and beside the holy Scripture if it be hurtfull it is there condemned if it bee profitable it may there be found But many Church-men leaue this learning and take vnto them Rasin and the sonne of Romelia Rasin signifieth a picture and Romelia high and mighty thunder so that by Rasin and the sonne of Romelia wee may vnderstand painted and glorious wordes and that wordy thunder of humane lawes which kindes of learning many Ecclesiastical persons assume that they may be by such profession exalted in the courts of great Lords and for this cause as the Prophet addeth the Lord shall bring vpon them the mighty and great waters of the floud that is infernall punishments so saith Odo Hitherto hee hath alleadged the words of Grosthead and Odo In another place he saith concerning them that so contemne the word of God that the Lord complaineth of such by the Prophet Ierem. 2. saying My people hath done two euils they haue forsaken me the fountaine of liuing water and haue digged to themselues broken cisterns to which as Gulielmus Parisiensis saith the decree or canon law may fitly be compared which is a broken cisterne that cannot hold water which though it haue water to day shall haue none to morrow because it shall bee abrogated whereas touching the Law of God it is otherwise and therefore the Psalmist saith thy righteousnesse O Lord is an euerlasting righteousnesse and thy law is trueth Yet is the holy Scripture much contemned by the profession of the Canonists so that the knowledge of holy Scripture and profession of Divinity may say to an ill Advocate or Lawyer as Sara said to Abraham in the 16 of Genesis Thou dealest ill with me I gaue thee my handmaid into thy bosome who seeing that she had conceiued despised me for as Gulielmus Parisiensis saith de vitiis part 4. cap. 6. The profession of Canonists contemneth the profession of Divines and science of holy Scripture because they are not so gainefull as it is When Ismael and Isaack played together Ismael mocked Isaack so that Sarâ—… was forced to intreate Abraham to cast out the bondwoman and her sonne So happily it were behoofefull and profitable for the Church that this Science in a great part should be cast out because it not only contemneth the diuine Science and Law of God but blasphemeth it and in so doing contemneth and blaspheameth God himselfe who is the lawgiuer Here wee haue the opinion of three worthy men touching the sufficiencie of the Scripture and the dangers confusions and horrible euils that followed vppon the multiplying of humane inuentions Many more might be alleadged to the same purpose but these may suffice to let us know what the doctrine of the Church was in the dayes of our Fathers for they deliuer not their priuate conceipts but tel vs what all good and iudicious men conceiued of these things in their times But some men will say wee find often mention of traditions in the writers of former ages soe that it seemeth they did not thinke the Scriptures to containe all things necessary to saluation For the clearing of this doubt wee must obserue that by the name of tradition sometimes all the doctrine of Christ and his blessed Apostles is meant that was first deliuered by liuely voice and afterwards written Sometimes the deliuering of the diuine and canonicall bookes from hand to hand as receiued from the Apostles is named a tradition Sometimes the summe of Christian religion contained in the Apostles creed which the Church receiueth as a rule of her faith is named a tradition but euery one of those articles is found in the Scripture as Waldensis rightly noteth though not together nor in the same forme so that this colection may rightly be named a tradition as hauing beene deliuered from hand to hand in this forme for the direction of the Churches children and yet the Scriptures be sufficient Sometimes by the name of traditions the Fathers vnderstand certaine rites and auncient obseruations And that the Apostles delivered some things in this kind by word and liuely voyce that they wrote not wee easily grant but which they were it can hardly now be knowne as Waldensis rightly noteth But this proueth not the insufficiencie of the Scripture for none of those Fathers speake of points of doctrine that are to be belieued without and besides the Scripture or that cannot be proued from thence though sometimes in a generall sort they name all those points of religion traditions that are not found expressely and in precise tearmes in Scripture and yet may necessarily be deduced from things there expressed Lastly by the name of tradition is vnderstood the sense and meaning of the Scripture receiued from the Apostles and deliuered from hand to hand together with the bookes There are
as they are in themselues euill without the consideration of any good to follow so caused a desire to decline them expressed in the prayer he made But Superiour reason considering them with all circumstances knowing Gods resolution to be such that the World should thereby be saued by no other meanes perswaded to a willing acceptance of them Betweene these desires and resolutions there was a diversity but no contrariety a subordination but no repugnance or resistance There was no contrariety because they were not in respect of the same circumstances for Death as Death is to be avoided neither did Superiour reason euer dislike this judgement of the Inferiour Faculties but shewed farther and higher considerations wherein it was to be accepted embraced There was no repugnance or resistance because the one yeelded to the other For euen as a man that is sicke considering the potion prescribed to him by the Physitian to be bitter vnpleasant declineth it while he stayeth within the bounds confines of that consideration but when casting his eyes farther he is shewed by the Physitian the happy operation of good that is in it he willingly accepteth it in that it is beneficiall and good So Christ considering death as in it selfe euill contrary to nature while hee stayed within the bounds and confines of that consideration shunned and declined it and yet as the meanes of mans saluation joyfully embraced it accepting that he refused and refusing that he accepted There is a thing saith Hugo de Sancto Victore that is Bonum in se good in it selfe the good of euery other thing There is a thing good in it selfe yet good but to certaine purposes onely And there is a thing euill in it selfe yet good to some purposes The two former sorts of things may be desired simply and absolutely the third cannot but onely respectiuely to certaine ends of this kinde was the death of the Crosse with all the wofull tormentings concurring with the same which simply Christ shunned and declined but respectiuely to the ends aboue specified willingly embraced The Papistes impute I know not what impiety to Caluine for that he saith Christ corrected the desire wish that suddenly came from him But they might easily vnderstand if they pleased that hee is farre from thinking that any desire or expressing of desire was sudden in Christ as rising in him without consent of reason or that he was inconsiderate in any thing hee did or spake but his meaning is that some desires which he expressed proceeded from Inferiour reason that considereth not all circumstances that hee corrected revoked the same not as euill but as not proceeding from the full perfect consideration of all things fit to be thought vpon before a full resolution be passed Thus hauing spoken of Christs feare agony before his passion it remaineth that we proceede to speake of the sorrowes that afflicted distressed him in his passion These sorrowes were such so great that being beset compassed about with them on euery side he professed his soule was heauy euen vnto the death Yea. such was the bitternesse of his Soule that pressed with the weight burthen of grieuous and insupportable euils he was forced to cry out aloud My God my God why hast thou forsaken me These words of sorrowfull passion the Papists say Caluine thought to bee words of despaire and that Christ despaired when he vttered them Surely this shamelesse slander sheweth that they that thus speake they care not what are desperately malitious and maintaine a desperate cause that cannot be vpholden but by falshood lying But Caluine is farre frō any such execrable hellish blasphemie For hauing by occasiō of these words amplified the sorrowes distresses of Christ in the time of his passion hee sayth there were some that charged him that hee sayd these words were words of desperation and that Christ despaired when he vttered them but hee accurseth such hellish blasphemie and pronounceth that howsoeuer the flesh apprehended destroying euils inferiour reason shewed no issue out of the same yet there was euer a most sure resolued perswasion resting in his heart that hee should vndoubtedly preuaile against them and ouercome them wherefore passing ouer this wicked calumniation of our aduersaries let vs see in what sense Christ the Sonne of God complained of dereliction and cried aloud vnto his Father My God my God why hast thou forsaken me For the clearing hereof the Diuines do note that there are sixe kindes of dereliction or forsaking whereof Christ may be thought to haue complained The first whereof is by disunion of Person the second by losse of Grace the third by diminution or weakning of grace the fourth by want of assurance of future deliuerance and present support the fift by deniall of protection the sixt by withdrawing of solace and destituting the forsaken of all comfort It is impious once to thinke that Christ was forsaken any of the foure first wayes For the vnity of his person was neuer dissolued his graces were neuer either taken away or diminished neither was it possible he should want assurance of future deliuerance and present support that was eternall God and Lord of life But the two last waies he may rightly be sayd to haue beene forsaken in that his Father denied to protect and keepe him out of the hands of his cruell bloudy and mercilesse enemies no way restrayning them but suffering them to doe the vttermost of that their wicked hearts could imagine and left him to endure the extremity of their furie and malice and that nothing might be wanting to make his sorrowes beyond measure sorrowfull withdrew from him that solace he was wont to finde in God and remoued farre from him all things that might any way lessen and asswage the extremity of his paine So that Christ might rightly complaine that he was forsaken though he were farre from despaire and words of despaire CHAP. 19. Of the descending of Christ into Hell WITH the sufferings of Christ his Descension into Hell is connexed both in the order of things and in the Articles of the creede and therefore it remaineth that in the next place we speake of that Bellarmine obserueth that the Article of Christs descending into Hell was not in the Creede with all Churches from the beginning for that Irenoens Origen and Tertullian haue it not and Augustine in his booke de Fide Symbolo and in his foure bookes de Symbolo ad Catechumenos mentioneth it not expounding the Creede fiue times though elsewhere he say that none but an Infidell will deny the descension of Christ into Hell Ruffinus expoundeth it amongst the articles of the Creede but noteth that it is not in the Symbole of the Romane Church nor those of the East The Nicene Creede hath it not but that of Athanasius hath and other of the Fathers reade it also And
according to the Translation they follow there is first a speech directed to the Church concerning Christ then an Apostrophe to Christ and then thirdly a returne unto the Church againe Secondly if that were graunted which he vrgeth touching the supposed Apostrophe it would not proue that there is no probabilitie in our Interpretation For this consequence will neuer be made good in the Schooles Christ is prophesied of in the words immediatly going before in these words God speaketh vnto him by way of Apostrophe therefore they cannot be vnderstood of deliuerance out of Babylonicall captivitie seeing it is certaine that Christ deliuered the Israelites out of all the miseries out of which they escaped But saith Bellarmine if wee admit this Interpretation in what bloud of the couenant may wee vnderstand the Iewes to haue beene deliuered out of Babylonicall captivitie Surely this question is soone answered For their deliuerance out of the hands of their enemies and all other benefites were bestowed on them by vertue of the couenant betweene God and them which was to be established in the bloud of Christ in figure whereof all holy things among the Iewes were sprinkled with bloud as the Booke of the Covenant the Altar the Sanctuary and People Wherefore seeing this place maketh nothing for the confirmation of the Popish errour touching Limbus let vs come to the last place brought for proofe thereof which is that of S. Peter concerning Christs going in spirit and preaching to the spirits in prison see whether from thence it may be proued any better S. Augustine vnderstandeth the words of the Apostle as I noted before of Christs preaching in the dayes of Noe in his eternall Spirit of Deity not of preaching in Hell in his humane Soule after death but this interpretation of S. Augustine first Bellarmine rejecteth as contrarie to the Fathers secondly endeauoureth to improue it by weakening the reasons brought to confirme it and by opposing certaine reasons against it The first of the Fathers that he alledgeth is Clemens Alexandrinus who indeede vnderstandeth the words of S. Peter not as S. Augustine doth but of Christ preaching in Hell after his death in his humane Soule but not conceiuing to what purpose preaching should serue in Hell if there were not intended a conversion sauing of some there he runneth into a most grosse dangerous error cōdemned rejected as well by Bellarm. his companions as by vs so that his authority as contrary to Augustines interpretation needed not to haue beene alledged nor would not haue beene if Bellarmine had meant sincerely For Clemens Alexandrinus affirmeth as hee well knoweth that so many Infidels as beleeued in Christ and listened to the wordes of his preaching when hee came into Hell were deliuered thence and made partakers of euerlasting saluation against which errour himselfe being Iudge Saint Augustine not without good cause disputeth in his Epistle to Euodius The second auncient Writer that hee produceth for proofe of Christs preaching in Hell after his death is Athanasius who indeed doth expound the wordes of Peter of Christs going in Soule to preach in Hell after his death but no way expresseth in what sort to whom to what purpose or with what successe he preached Epiphanius whom he produceth in the third place doth not so interprete the words of Peter himselfe but onely vpon another occasion citeth the epistle of Athanasius to Epictetus wherein hee doth so interprete them So that the authority of Epiphanius might haue beene spared Ruffinus in his explication of the Creede interpreteth the words of Peter as Athanasius doth Cyrill in the place cited by Bellarmine speaketh of Christs preaching to the spirits in Hell but saith nothing in particular of this place of Peter S. Ambrose doth not speake of this place but that other of preaching the Gospell to the dead So that there are no moe Ancient writers cited by Bellarmine that doe precisely interprete this place of Peter of Christs preaching in Hell in his humane soule after death but onely Clemens Athanasius Ruffinus and Oecumenius On the other side we haue S. Augustine Beda the authors of the Ordinarie and Interlincall Glosses Lyra Hugo Cardinalis and other interpreting the words as wee doe so that our Aduersaries haue no great aduantage in respect of the number of Interpreters and yet if they had it would not helpe them for confirmation of their supposed Limbus seing some of the Fathers cited by him as namely Clemens Alexandrinus speake directly of preaching in the lowest Hell for the conuersion of Infidels which they dislike as much as wee Wherefore let vs proceede to examine the reasons that are brought either of the one side or the other to confirme their seuerall interpretations of these words and let vs see how Bellarmine weakneth the reasons brought by S. Augustine and improueth his interpretation by reasons brought against it The first reason whereby S. Augustine confirmeth his interpretation is for that mortification in the flesh and viuification in the Spirit mentioned by the Apostle cannot be vnderstood of the body Soule of Christ as they that follow the other interpretation doe vnderstand them seeing Christ neuer dying in soule could not be said to be quickned in it Besides that the very phrase of the Scripture opposing flesh and Spirit in Christ doth euer import the infirmity of his humane nature and the power of his Deitie and in other men that part that is renued by the sanctification of the Spirit and that which is not yet so renued Against the former part of this reason of S. Augustine Bellarmine opposeth himselfe saying that it is not good seeing a thing may be sayd to be quickned that was neuer dead if it be preserued from dying kept aliue But he should know that onely those thinges may be said to be quickned in that they were preserued from dying which otherwise if they had not beene so preserued might haue beene killed or dyed of themselues Which cannot be verified of the Soule of Christ that could neither die of it selfe nor be killed by any other and therefore the Soule of Christ cannot be said to bee quickned in this sense The place in the seauenth of the Acts brought by Bellarmine to proue that those things may bee said to bee quickned that were neuer dead besides that it is nothing to the purpose is strangely wrested For S. Stephen in that place speaketh nothing of viuification or quickning in that sense we now speake of it but of multiplying increasing saying that After the death of Ioseph there rose vp another King in Egypt that knew not Ioseph who euill intreated our Fathers and made them cast out their infants and new borne children 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is that they should not increase multiplie and therefore Bellarmine should not in reason so haue pressed the Latine word of viuification vsed by the Vulgar translatour seeing the
reward is euer some good to be gained by our well doing or patient suffering counteruailing the difficultie in doing and bitternesse in suffering It is therefore most absurd that any thing which is a mans owne in as ample sort before he begin his worke as after he hath done it should be the reward of his worke But some man perhaps will say that a thing that was due in respect of the habit resting in the mind may become due in respect of the Act done and consequently that that which was due one way may become more waies due Surely wee make no question but it may because it was due to the Habit as to the Roote of such action when occasion should be offered opportunity serue not otherwise But seeing in Christ the glorification impassibility of his body was due vnto him as a consequent of personall vnion and not of any habituall quality or habit inclining fitting vnto action therefore that could not become due to any action of Christ that was due vnto him in respect of some former thing as that may bee due to the action of a Man that was formerly due to the habit that is the roote of such action The places of Scripture that are brought to proue that Christ merited for himself are specially two for though there be a third as pregnant as any of the other in the first to the Hebrewes where it is said of Christ Thou hast loued righteousnesse and hated iniquity therefore God euen thy God hath annointed thee with the oyle of gladnesse aboue thy fâ—…llowes yet doe they not much stand vpon it because if it proue any thing it proueth that Christ merited the grace of vnction which they deny who teach that Christ merited for himselfe The first of the two places alleaged to proue that Christ merited for himselfe is in the second to the Hebrewes where the Apostle saith Wee see Iesus for the passion of death crowned with glory and honour But the words as some thinke are not so to be read but to be placed in this sort Wee see Iesus who was for a litle while made lower then the Angels for the passion of death that is that he might suffer death crowned with glory and honour so expressing the finall cause of his humiliation and not the meritorious cause of his exaltation This coniecture is made exceeding probable by those words added by the Apostle that hee might taste of death which otherwise haue no coherence with any part of his speech The second place that they bring is that of the second to the Philippians The words are these Christ humbled himselfe and became obedient vnto the death euen the death of the crosse Wherefore God hath also highly exalted him and giuen him a name aboue every name c. This place as Hugo de Sancto Victore hath fitly noted importeth that the humiliation of the Son of God becomming Man was the cause of the exaltation of the nature of Man for when he personally assumed the nature of Man became Man Man became God almighty hauing all power a name aboue all names according to that of Leo Diuinae maiestat is exinanitio seruilis formae in summa prouectio est that is The abasing of the Diuine Maiestie and Person of the Sonne of God is the high aduancing exaltation of the forme of a Seruant and therefore he addeth that Ex quo Deus coepit esse homo homo coepit esse Deus Deus coepit esse homo subiectus homo coepit esse Deus perfectus Si Deus humiliatus est quantum potuit in homine homo sublimatus non est quantum potuit in Deo that is When God began to be Man and Man began to be God God began to be a Man in subiection and humilitie and Man to be God in the heighth of perfection For if God were humbled as much as hee might be in that he became man was not Man exalted as much as he might be in that hee became God God was humbled when first he became Man In quantum homo dignitate in quantum bonus voluntate that is in that a Man in condition and state in that a good man in will minde but manifested the same more specially in his passion Likewise the Man Christ was exalted when he was borne the Sonne of God but manifested the same more specially after his resurrection then before For wee must not thinke that the Man Christ did then first receiue the full and perfect power of Deitie when he sayd All power is giuen me in heauen and in earth seeing before the vttering of those words he commaunded the Diuels had the Angels to do him seruice and made the very elements of the world to bow and bend at his pleasure Wherefore this place is vnaduisedly brought by our Aduersaries to proue that Christ merited for himselfe it being most cleare and evident that the name aboue all names mentioned in this place which is the name of God Almighty was giuen to the Sonne of God donatione naturali that is by naturall communication when he was begotten of his Father before all eternity and to the Man Christ donatione gratuità that is by free gift when God was made man and Man became God as the ordinarie Glosse vpon these words fitly obserueth and so could no more bee merited by the passion of Christ then it was possible for him to doe any thing whereby to merite to be God And hereupon Caluine rightly asketh which all the Papists in the world are not able to answere Quibus meritis assequi potuit homo ut iudex esset mundi caput Angelorum atque ut potiretur summo Dei imperio that is by what merits could man attaine to bee Iudge of the world Head of Angels to haue the highest authority and power of God But some man will say that Christ pronounceth it was necessary that he should suffer and so enter into his glory and that therefore it seemeth he could not haue entred into it vnlesse hee had suffered Quomodò ergo suam saith Hugo si oportuit quomodò oportuit si suam Si gloria eius fuit quomodò vt ad illam intraret pati oportuit Sed suam propter se oportuit propter nos that is How then was it his glory if he could not enter into it vnlesse he suffered and how was it necessary that hee should suffer to enter into it if it were his Surely it was his in respect of himselfe and it was necessary he should enter into it by suffering onely in respect of vs. For Christ truly if he had pleased might haue entred into his glory some other way haue receiued it in what sort he would euen as hee needed neuer to haue wanted it vnlesse he had pleased but he would for our sakes by punishment enter into his glory that dying he might take away the
and tying them to the performance of certaine duties Secondly of sinnes Thirdly of punishments to be inflicted by Almighty God and Fourthly of punishments to be inflicted by men The bond of Lawes is of two sorts For there are diuine lawes and there are humane Lawes God bindeth men to the doing of what hee pleaseth and Men that are in authority either Ciuill or Ecclesiasticall to such things as they thinke fit Touching these bonds none haue power to loose but they that haue power to binde so that what God by precept bindeth vs to doe none but God can free vs from the necessity duty of doing it and what the Church or Magistrate binde vs to no inferiour power can loose vs or free vs from Loosing in this sense opposed to binding by law and precept is in two sorts By Reuocation and by Dispensation Reuocation is an absolute Abrogation of a Law in respect of all places times persons and conditions and that either by expresse and direct Repeale or by generall neglect and long continued disuse Dispensation is in respect of certaine persons times places and conditions of Men thinges so that a dispensation permitting the Law to retaine her wonted authority onely freeth some particular person or persons at some times in some places and in some condition of thinges from the necessity of doing or leauing vndone that which vnlesse it be in consideration of such particular circumstances the Law-giuer meant should be obserued but in such cases not so Heere the question is moued by occasion of that kinde of loosing which is by reuersing Lawes formerly in force whether God the giuer of the morall Law may revoke the same and dispense with men for the not doing of things there prescribed of the doing of things there forbidden The answere is that these Lawes are imposed vpon men by the very condition of their nature and creation as the very condition and nature of a man created by GOD requireth that he should honour loue feare and reuerence him that made him and therefore touching the precepts of the first Table that concerning the Sabaoth excepted it is cleare and euident that they cannot be altered nor Man by God himselfe discharged from the duty of honouring loving and fearing God so long as he hath any beeing Touching the precepts of the second Table it is resolued that GOD cannot dispense with man or giue him leaue to doe the thinges therein forbidden as to steale murther or lie For all these imply and involue in them that which is simply euill and to bee disliked but by some alteration in the doer or matter of action he may make that not to bee euill that otherwise would bee euill and consequently not forbidden as namely that to bee no theft or murther which otherwise would be as when hee commanded the Israelites to spoyle the Aegyptians they did not commit the act of robbery for robbery is the taking away of a thing from the owner against his will but these thinges which the Israelites tooke away were the Aegyptians no longer after God the supreme Lord had spoyled them of the title they had therevnto and assigned the same to the Israelites So likewise for one man to take away the life of another hauing no authority so to doe is murther and no man can be dispensed with lawfully to doe any such act but for a Magistrate to take away the life of an offender is a lawfull act and no act of murther and so if Abraham had slaine his sonne Isaac it had not beene murther being authorized so to doe by God who hath supreme authority in the world and may justly as a Iudge for sinne found in men take away the liues of whom he pleaseth and as supreme and absolute Lord bring all to nothing that for his wills sake he made of nothing though there were no sinne nor fault at all But touching Ceremoniall Iudiciall and Positiue Lawes of God concerning Sacraments and obseruations of what kinde soeuer seeing they are imposed after vpon the being of nature wee thinke that God may alter them at his pleasure so that at one time it may bee lawfull to doe that was forbidden at another The Gouernours that God hath set ouer his Church and people by commission from him may interprete what is doubtfull in these Lawes of God or in those of the other sort but yet according to the Law but they may not abrogate or dispense with any Law of God either naturall and morall or positiue established concerning the vse of Sacraments and things pertaining to Gods worship and seruice But concerning those Lawes that were made by the Apostles and Primitiue Fathers touching matters of outward obseruation the succeeding Guides of the Church may either dispense with them or reverse them vpon the due consideration of the difference of times Men and things And so wee see to whom it pertaineth to binde men with their lawes and to loose them from the bonds thereof The bond of sin which is the second kinde of those bonds I mentioned is two-fold for there is Vinculum captivitatis and Vinculum servitutis that is a man that is a sinner is so bound that hee can neither returne to doe good nor leaue off to doe euill for sinne holdeth him in a bond of captivitie that hee shall not returne to doe good and with a bond of seruitude that he shall not cease to doe euill And though God hath so ordered the nature of Man that hee who will doe euill shall thus bee entangled yet it is man that thus entangleth wrappeth and bindeth himselfe and not God But for the bond of eternall condemnation and the punishments following euill doers which is the third kinde of those bonds wherewith I shewed that men are tyed and bound it is of GOD. From these bonds of sin and punishment inflicted by GOD none but hee alone can free men by his fauour and the worke of his grace as the supreme and highest cause none but Christ by Merite Satisfaction The Ministers of the Church by the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments may convert Men to God instrumentally making them partakers of his graces bringing thē into such an estate wherein they shall be sure for Christs sake to finde mercie with GOD for the remission taking away of their sinnes They may pray for them and out of the knowledge of their estate assure them of remission But other power to vnloose and vntie these direfull horrible bonds of sinne and punishment they haue none only the punishments which they haue power to inflict they haue authoritie to diminish lessen or take away so that whom they bind with the bonds of Ecclesiasticall censures punishments those by the same authoritie they may vnloose For as the Guides of Gods Church may prescribe enjoyne and impose certaine actions of Mortification and penitentiall conversion vnto GOD so when they see cause they may release from the same as by
their faith and profession before they were receiued and allowed one of another and before tehy were accounted and reputed for lawfull Patriarches Wherefore presupposing that the gouernment of the Church is not Monarchicall in respect of any one supreame Pastour on earth but mixt and hauing seene how notwithstanding the diuersitie of many Pastours the Church may be preserued in peace and vnity let vs more exactly and distinctly consider what the auncient forme of Church policie and gouernment was If we looke into the monuments of Antiquity wee shall finde that there were aunciently three Subordinations in the Church For the actions of the Bishoppe of each particular Church of a citty and places adjoyning were subject to the censure and judgment of the rest of the Bishops of the same prouince amongst whom for order sake there was one chiefe to whom it pertained to call them together to sit as moderator in the midst of them being assembled and to execute what by joynt consent they resolued on The actions of the Bishoppes of a prouince and a prouinciall Synode consisting of those Bishoppes were subject to a Synode consisting of the Metropolitanes and other Bishoppes of diuerse prouinces This Synode was of two sorts For either it consisted of the Metropolitanes and Bishoppes of one kingdome and nation onely as did the Councels of Africa or of the Metropolitans and Bishoppes of many kingdomes If of the Metropolitanes and Bishoppes of one kingdome and state onely the chiefe Primate was mederator If of many one of the Patriarches and chiefe Bishops of the whole world euery Church being subordinate to some one of the Patriarchicall Churches and incorporate into the vnity of it Thirdly the actions of the Bishops of a whole kingdome and Patriarchship were subject to an Oecumenicall Synode consisting of all the Patriarches and the Metropolitanes and Bishops subject to them Touching prouinciall Councells to the censures whereof the actions of particular Churches are subject they were by the auncient Canons of the Church to be holden in euery prouince twice euery yeare It is very necessary say the Fathers of the Councell of Nice that there should be a Synode twice euery yeare in euery prouince that all the Bishops of the prouince meeting together may in common thinke vpon those thinges that are doubtfull and questionable For the dispatch of Ecclesiasticall businesses and the determining of matters in controuersie Wee thinke it were fit say the Fathers in the Councell of Antioche that in euery prouince Synodes of Bishops should be assembled twice euery yeare The first councell of Constantinople decreeth the same and the Fathers assembled in the Councell of Chalcedon complaine that in some prouinces the Synodes of Bishops are not holden and that thereby many Ecclesiasticall matters needing reformation are neglected and therefore they appoint that the Bishops of euery prouince shall assemble euery yeare twice at that place which the Bishoppe of the mother Citty shall thinke fit to amend all thinges that shall be found to bee amisse in the prouince Here we see the necessity of holding these Synodes and by whom they were to bee called and moderated Wherefore let vs now proceede to see of whom they consisted what causes they examined and determined what the power of the Metropolitane originally was and what in processe of time by positiue constitution vpon due and just considerations it grew to be Touching the persons that prouinciall Synodes consisted of it is cleare and euident that not onely Bishops but Presbyters also were present in these Assemblies and had decisiue voyces whereupon the Councell of Antisiodorum sayth Let all the Presbyters being called come to the Synode in the Citty The Councell of Tarracon Let letters bee sent by the Metropolitane to his brethren that they bring with them to the Synode not onely some of the Presbyters of the Cathedrall Church but also of each Diocese And the fourth Councell of Toledo describing the forme of celebrating prouinciall Synodes hath these words Let the Bishops assembled goe to the Church and sit according to the time of their ordination and after all the Bishops are entred and set let the Presbyters be called and the Bishops sitting in compasse let Presbyters sit behind them and the Deacons stand before them In the first Councell of Toledo we find these words Considentibus Presbyteris astantibus Diaconis caeteris qui intererant Concilio congregato Patronus Episcopus dixit c. that is The Presbyters sitting together with the Bishops the Deacons standing before them and the rest which were present in the Councell assembled Patronus the Bishop said c. The like we reade of a Synode holden by Gregory the Pope The words are these Gregorius Papa coram sacratissimo corpore Beati Petri Apostoli cum Episcopis omnibus Romanae Ecclesiae Presbyteris residens assistentibus Diaconis cuncto Clero dixit c. that is Gregory the Pope sitting before the most sacred body of blessed Peter with all the Bishops of the Romane Church and the Presbyters also the Deacons standing before them and all the Clergie said c. And that Presbyters were not only present in Provinciall Synodes but had decisiue voyces as well as Bishops it appeareth by their subscribing to the Decrees of such Synodes in the very same forme and manner that Bishops did So that it will be found most false and vntrue that Bellarmine hath that Presbyters haue no voyces in Synodes and the auncient forme of our Convocation here in England wherein not onely the Arch-bishops and Bishops but sundry Presbyters also as well out of Cathedrall Churches as Dioceses at large are present and haue decisiue voices will clearely refute the same The causes that were wont to be examined and determined in the meeting of the Bishops of the prouince were the ordinations of Bishops when any Churches were voyd and the depriving and reiecting of all such as were found vnworthy of their honour and place and in a word any complaint of wrong done in any Church was there to be heard Let the prouinciall Synodes be holden twice euery yeare saith the Councell of Antioch and let the Presbyters and Deacons bee present and as many as thinke they haue beene any way hurt or wronged there expect the determination of the Synode The power of the Metropolitane was in calling the rest of the Bishops to the Synode in appointing the place of their meeting and in sitting as President in the midst of them and so were things moderated that neither the rest might proceede to doe any thing without consulting him nor hee to doe any thing without them but was tyed in all matters of difference to follow the maior part and if hee neglected his dutie in convocating his brethren that so things might bee determined by common consent hee was by the Canons subiect to censure and punishment Thus at first all matters were to be heard determined and
in brotherly sort wished the Bishop of Antioch to resist heretiques and to let him vnderstand of the state of the Churches and to be a consort of the Apostolique See in this care to see that the priuiledges of the third See were not deminished by any mans ambition assuring him that whensoeuer he will do any thing for the aduancing of the dignity of the See of Antioch he also will be ready to concurre with him In all which passages betweene Leo and the Bishop of Antioch there is nothing found that hath any shew of proofe of the Popes supremacie Fourthly we say that Cyrill the Patriarch of Alexandria besought Leo to giue noe consent to the attempts of Iuuenall Bishop of Hierusalem seeking to prejudice the Church of Antioch to subject Palaestina to himselfe but that he besought Leo not to permit nor suffer Palaestina to be taken from Antioch and subjected to the Church of Hierusalem as if the whole power of permitting or hindring this thing had rested in Leo is but the false report of the Cardinall according to his wonted manner of misse-alleaging authors for the the aduantage of his cause So that the disposition of this matter rested not wholly in Leo but his concurrence with the Bishops of Antioch and Alexandria was necessary for the withstanding of the attempts of Iuuenall which his concurrence and helpe hee promised the Bishop of Antioch as we haue already heard and was euer ready to yeeld the same vnto him Fiftly we say that Leo did not command Dioscorus the Patriarch of Alexandria but whereas the manner was when the Patriarches were first elected ordained that they should mutually consent one to another and that hee who was newly ordained should send vnto the rest his Synodall letters and testimonies of his lawfull election and ordination Dioscorus being newly elected appointed Patriarch of Alexandria sendeth his Synodall letters to Leo Bishop of Rome that so he might giue his consent receiue embrace him as his fellow Patriarch Leo that these beginnings of Dioscorus might be more sure and firme nothing wanting to perfection fatherly as more ancient and brotherly as of the same ranke with him putting him in mind of some differences betweene their two Churches about the time of the ordination of Ministers and for that it seemed not likely vnto him that Marke the scholler of Peter tooke any other order in this behalfe then Peter did saith vnto him Wee will haue you to obserue that which our Fathers euer obserued making this a condition of the allowance consent he was to yeeld vnto him and vrging the practice of the Apostles sayth hee shall do well if obeying these Apostolicall institutions he shall cause that forme of ordination to be kept in the Churches ouer which God hath set him which is obserued in the Churches of the West that Ministers of the Church may be ordained onely on the Lords day on which day the creation of the world was begun in which Christ rose in which death was destroyed and life after which there is no death tooke beginning in which the Apostles receaued frō the Lord the trūpet of preaching the Gospel the ministration of the Sacrament of regeneration Sixtly we say that Leo intermedleth in the Churches of Africa and requireth some ordained contrary to the Canons to be put from their places tollerateth others and willeth the cause of Lupicinus a Bishop who had appealed vnto him to be heard there because he was Patriarch of the West and these parts of Africa were within his Patriarchship and that yet this his intermedling in so particular sort with the affaires of the Africane Churches was not very pleasing vnto those of Africa as shall appeare by that which followeth Lastly we say that the Church of Rome was the head of all Churches in the sence before expressed and had a presidence of order and honour amongst them and had in that sort as Leo truly saith more subject to it then euer were vnder the Romane Empire but vnder any absolute supreme commanding power of the Church of Rome they were not But saith Bellarmine if the former testimonies of Leo be auoided there is one more yet behind so cleare and full for the supremacie of the Pope that nothing can be sayd in answere vnto it in his Epistle to Anastasius Bishop of Thessalonica His words are these Amongst the most blessed Apostles like in honour there was a certaine difference and distinction of power and whereas they were equally chosen yet notwithstanding it was giuen to one of them to haue a preeminence amongst the rest from which forme the distinctiō and difference that is amongst Bishops hath taken beginning and by a most wise disposition it hath beene prouided that all without difference shall not challenge all vnto thēselues but that there should be in seuerall prouinces seuerall Bishops whose sentence judgment should be first and chiefe amongst the brethren and againe certaine other constituted and placed in greater cities who might take the care of more then the former by whom the care of the whole Church might flow vnto that one seate of Peter and nothing any where might dissent from the head These words truely make a goodly shew and may seeme most strongly to proue the supremacie that the Popes now challenge but in very deede they most powerfully ouerthrow it For the Bishops of Rome will neuer be perswaded in proportionable sort as is expressed in the words of Leo to challenge no more in respect of the whole Church then the Metropolitane Bishops doe in respect of their Provinces and the Patriarches in respect of their Churches of a larger extent For then they must doe nothing but accordingly as they shall bee swayed by the major part of the voyces of the Bishops of the Christian Church For the Metropolitane may doe nothing in his province nor the Patriarch in his larger extent but as they shall be directed swayed by the major part of the voices of their Bishops and yet surely the meaning of Leo was not to giue so much to the Bishop of Rome in respect of all Christian Bishops as pertaineth to the Metropolitanes and Patriarches in respect of their Bishops For the Metropolitane is to ordaine the Bishops of the Province and the Patriarch to ordaine and confirme the Metropolitanes by imposition of hands or mission of the Pall but the Pope neuer had any such power in respect of the Patriarches who were onely to send their Synodall Epistles to him testifying their faith as he likewise to them without expecting any other confirmation then that mutuall consent whereby one of them assured of the right faith and lawfull ordination of another receiued and embraced each other as fellowes and colleagues So that that care of the vniversall Church which Leo saith floweth together and commeth vp to that one chaire of Peter is to be vnderstood only in respect of things concerning the common faith
authority so to do Which kind of reasoning I thinke the Reader will not much like of Touching Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria Paule Bishop of Constantinople and Marcellus Bishop of Ancyra deposed by the Orientall Synode their complaints to the Bishop of Rome and other Bishops of the West of the wrongs done vnto them how the Bishop of Rome with the Westerne Bishops fought to relieue them with how ill successe and how litle this instance serueth to proue the thinge in question I haue shewed before as likewise Theodorets desiring Leo with his Westerne Synodes to take knowledge of his cause Soe that it is a vaine bragge of Bellarmine that to these and the like testimonies of Antiquity nothing is nor can be answered CHAP. 38. Of the weakenesse of such proofes of the supreme power of Popes as are taken from their Lawes Censures Dispensations and the Vicegerents they had in places farre remote from them HAVING examined the pretended proofes of the illimited vniversality of the Popes authority and jurisdiction taken from the power they are supposed to haue exercised in former times ouer other Bishops by confirming deposing or restoring them let vs come to their Lawes Dispensations Censures see if frō thence any thing may be cōcluded If they could as strongly proue as they cōfidētly endertake that Popes in ancient times made Lawes to bind the whole Christian Church dispensed with such as were made by general Coūcels cēsured al men as subject to them of necessity we must be forced to acknowledge the fulnesse of all power to rest in the Romane Bishops But their proofes are too weake to make vs beleeue any such thing For first touching the decrees of Popes they did not binde the whole Christian Church but the Westerne Provinces onely that were subject to them as Patriarches of the West And secondly they were not made by them without the consent and joint concurrence of the other Bishops of the West assembled in Synodes and sitting with them as their fellow Iudges with equall power of defining and determining things concerning the state of the Church as appeareth by the Decrees of Gregory the first who sitting in Councell with all the Bishops of the Roman Church the Deacons and inferiour Clergy-men standing before them made Decrees and confirmed them by their subscriptions the rest of the Bishops and the Presbyters also who sate in Councell with them subscribing in the very same sort that Gregory did And of Decrees in such sort made Leo speaketh when he requireth the Bishops of Campania Picene Thuscia to keepe and obserue the Decretall constitutions of Innocentius and all other his predecessours which they had ordained as well touching Ecclesiasticall orders as the Discipline of the Canons or otherwise to looke for no fauour or pardon And in the very same sort are the words of Hilarius to be vnderstood when he saith That no man may violate either the divine constitutions or the Decrees of the Apostolique See without danger of losing his place For this he spake sitting as President in a Councell of Bishops assembled at Rome of things decreed by Synodes of Bishops wherein his predecessours were Presidents and Moderatours as he was now but not absolute commaunders But Bellarmine saith that Pope Anastasius the yonger in his Epistle to Anastasius the Emperour willeth him not to resist the Apostolicall precepts but obediently to performe what by the Church of Rome and Apostolicall authority shall be prescribed vnto him if hee desire to holde communion with the same holy Church of GOD which is his Head Therefore the Pope had power to command and giue lawes to the Emperour and consequently had an absolute supreme authority in the Church Surely this allegation of the Cardinall is like the rest For Anastasius doth not speake in any such peremptory and threatning manner to the Emperour but acknowledging his breast to bee a Sanctuary of happinesse and that he is Gods Vicar on earth telleth him in modest and humble sort that hee hopeth hee will not suffer the insolencie of those of Constantinople proudly to resist against the Evangelicall and Apostolicall precepts in the cause of Acatius but that he will force them to performe and doe what is fit and in like humble sort beseecheth him when he shall vnderstand the cause of them of Alexandria to force them to returne to the vnity of the Church The last instance of the Popes Law-giuing power brought by Bellarmine is the priviledge granted to the Monastery of Saint Medardus by Gregory the first in the end whereof we finde these words Whatsoeuer Kings Bishops Iudges or secular persons shall violate the Decrees of this Apostolicall authority and our commaundement shall be depriued of their honour driuen from the society of Christians put from the communion of the Lords body and bloud and subjected to Anathema and all the wofull curses that Infidels Heretikes haue beene subject to from the beginning of the world to this present time A strong confirmation of the priviledges graunted is found in these wordes but a weake confirmation of the thing in question for the priuiledges were graunted and confirmed in this sort not by Gregory alone out of the fulnesse of his power but by the consenting voyce of all the Bishops of Italy and France by the authority of the Senate of Rome by Theodoricus the King and Brunichildis the Queene So that from hence no proofe possibly can be drawne of the Popes absolute power of making lawes by himselfe alone to binde any part of the Christian Church much lesse the whole Christian world Wherfore let vs passe from the Popes power of making lawes to see by what right they claime authority to dispense with the Lawes of the Church and the Canons of Generall Councels The first that is alleadged to haue dispensed with the Canons of Councels is Gelasius But this allegation is idle and to no purpose For first it cannot bee proued that by dispensing he sought to free any from the necessity of doing that the strictnesse of the Canon required but those onely that were subiect to him as Patriarch of the West And secondly he did not dispense but vpon very vrgent cause and driuen by necessity so to doe and yet not of himselfe alone but with the concurrence of other Bishops of the West assembled in Synode The other instances that are brought of the dispensations of Gregory the first are nothing else but the instances of the ill consciences of them that bring them For Gregory did not dispense with the English to marry within the degrees prohibited as the Cardinall vntruely reporteth but only aduised Austine not to put them that were newly conuerted from such wiues as they had married within some of the degrees prohibited in the time of their infidelity lest hee might seeme to punish them for faults committed in the daies of their ignorance and to discourage other from becomming Christians Neither
neede sent vnto them Germanus and Lupus Bishops and brethren defenders of the Catholicke faith who cleared the I le from the Pelagian heresie and confirmed it in the faith both by the word of truth signes and miracles Besides this condemnation of Palagius by the French Britaines there were sundry Councels holden to condemne both him his wicked heresies in Palestina at Carthage at Mileuise and at Arausicum and it is most certaine that the Church of GOD and all posterities are more bound to Saint Augustine for clearing the points of doctrine questioned by the Pelagians then to any Bishop of Rome whatsoeuer So that it is most vntrue that the Pelagians were condemned onely by the Bishop of Rome for other were as forward in that businesse as he yea the Africans were more forward then the Romanes and drew them into the fellowship of the same worke with themselues The like may be said of the Priscillianistes for it is more then euident out of the Councell of Bracar that they were not condemned by the Bishop of Rome alone but by many Synodes for it is there reported that Leo did write by Turibius notary of the See Apostolike to the Synode of Galitia at what time the heresie of the Priscillianistes began to spreade in those parts and that by his prescription and appointment they of Tarracon of Carthage of Portugall and Boetica met in Councell and composing a rule of faith against the heresie of the Priscillianistes containing certaine chiefe heades of Christian doctrine directed the same patterne of right beliefe to the Bishop of Bracar that then was which heads of Christian doctrine were recited in the first Councel of Bracar the heresie of the Priscillianistes thereupō more distinctly and particularly condemned then euer before In all which proceedings we may see that the Pope doth nothing of himselfe alone but being Patriarch of the West and hearing of a dangerous heresie spreading in some Churches subject to him hee causeth the Bishops vnder him to meete in Councels and to condemne the same Which as I thinke will not proue that the Pope alone condemned heresies or that some heresies were rejected onely because the Pope condemned them or that the Pope cannot erre which is the thing in question Touching Iouinian and Vigilantius their errours are so vncertainely reported some attributing to them one thing and some another and some condemning them for things for which they were not to be condemned that it is hard to say by what lawfull authority or by whom they were condemned but that in their errours justly disliked they were condemned onely by the Bishops of Rome and therefore taken to bee heretickes by the whole vniuersall Church our aduersaries will neuer be able to proue That the errours attributed vnto them are vncertainely reported it appeareth in that Austine chargeth Iouinian with two dangerous and wicked assertions touching the deniall of the perpetuall virginity of the blessed Virgin the mother of our Lord and the parity of sins whereof Hierome who yet was not like to haue spared him maketh no mention And that they were in somethings vnjustly condemned it is euident first in that Hierome blameth Iouinian for saying that married persons virgins widowes if they differ not in other workes of vertue and therein excell one another are of equall merit which the best learned both of the Fathers and Schoole-men do approue as I haue elsewhere shewed at large Secondly in in that he so bitterly inueigheth against Vigilantius for disliking the pernoctations in the Cemiteries and places of Saints buriall vsed in ancient times which a Councell for the same reasons that moued Vigilantius to dislike them took wholly away and forbade them to be vsed any more the Romane Churches haue long since disused But that the Popes peremptorie cōdemning of an error in matter of faith was not taken in ancient times to be a sufficiēt demonstration that they were heretickes that defended such errors after his cōdemning of the same it is euident in that Austine saith that the Churches might doubt stil touching the matter of rebaptization because in the times of Stephen who condemned it and Cyprian who vrged it there was no generall Councell to end the controuersie betweene them and in that after the peremptory forbidding and condemning of rebaptization by Stephen Bishop of Rome Cyprian and his colleagues still persisted in the practice of it and in vrging the necessity of it and yet were neuer branded with the marke and note of heresie but euer were and still are reputed Catholiques Bellarmine to avoid the force of this argument feareth not to say contrarie to his owne knowledge that Stephen and his adherents neuer determined the question of rebaptization But that hee did and that in most peremptory sort and manner it is more cleare and euident then that the Sunne shineth at noone For Firmilianus a famous learned Bishoppe chargeth him that hee caused great dissentions throughout all the Churches of the world that hee grieuously sinned in that hee deuided himselfe from soe many flockes of Christs sheepe that hee was a schismaticke that hee had forsaken the communion of Ecclesiasticall vnity willing him not to deceiue himselfe but to bee well assured that in thinking hee could put all other from the communion he had put himselfe out of the communion of all that hee brake the bandes of vnity with many Bishoppes in all parts of the World as well in the East as in the South with the Africanes not admitting such as came from them vnto him into his presence or to any speech with him and farther commanding the brethren that none of them should receiue them to house So that he not only denyed the peace of the Church and the communion of Christians vnto them but the entring vnder the roofe of any mans house that would be ruled by him and that thus he held the vnity of the spirit in the bond of peace rejecting them as damnable miscreants that dissented from him and calling blessed Cyprian a false Christ a false Apostle and a deceiptfull labourer or workman And Dionysius a famous and worthy Bishop reporteth that he wrote concerning Hellenus and Firmilianus and all the Bishops in Cilicia Cappadocia and Galatia and all the bordering countries that he would not communicate with them for the same cause of rebaptization which yet as hee saith was agreed on in many very great Synodes of Bishops If this bee not sufficient to proue that Stephen determined the question of rebaptization I know not what can bee For first he commaunded that none should be rebaptized when they returned from the societies and prophane conventicles of heretickes but that they should bee admitted with the onely imposition of hands Secondly he deliuered his owne opinion that rebaptization was vnlawfull confidently as hauing so learned of his elders not in doubting manner And thirdly he rejected all them
many of the Princes of Germany and first of all the Saxons formerly averse frō him withdrew their subiectiō pretending that they might justly cast off the yoake and refuse to obey him any longer seeing hauing beene called to giue satisfaction to two Popes concerning certaine crimes obiected to him he had refused to appeare and was thereupon excommunicated These rebellions and defections so affrighted the Nobles and Princes of the Empire that still remained well affected to the Emperour that for the staying of present confusiōs preventing of other they thought good that the Pope should be intreated to come into Germany and that then the Emperour should submit himselfe vnto him aske forgiuenesse which thing accordingly was effected for the Pope was perswaded consented to come into Germany was cōming towards Augusta as farre as Versella But when hee came thither pretēding feare that the Emperor meant not wel towards him he brake off his journy went to Canossū there staied Which the Emperor hearing of doubting what might be the cause of his stay hastned thither putting off all Royall robes on his bare feet came to the gates of the town hūbly beseeching that he might be let in but was staied without 3 daies though it were extreme colde winter weather which hee endured patiently continually intreating till in the end hee was let in and absolued but yet conditionally that being called he should appeare in an assembly of Princes Bishoppes to answere such crimes as were obiected to him and either to purge himselfe and so retaine his kingdome or otherwise failing so to doe to lose it This his submission afterwards he made knowne to the Italians who vnderstanding what hee had done were exceedingly enraged against him derided the Legates of the Pope contemned his curses as being deposed by all the Bishops of Italy for iust causes as namely for simony murther adultery and other most horrible and capitall crimes and told him that he had done a most intollerable thing in submitting himselfe his kingly Maiestie to an hereticke and most infamous person Yea they proceeded so farre that they told him because he had so done they were resolued to make his son Emperour in his steede and to go to Rome and chuse a new Pope by whom he might be consecrated and all the proceedings of this false Pope voided But the Emperour excusing himselfe for that which hee had done as driuen by necessity so to doe and promising to revenge these wrongs when opportunity should bee offered pacifyed them in such sort that they began to incline to him againe Yet were not his euils at an end hereby For his enemies among the Germanes presently tooke the opportunity of this his relapse and calling an assembly with the Legates of the Pope chose a new Emperour Rodolphe Duke of Sueuia to whō the Pope sent an imperiall crown hauing this inscription Petra dedit Petro Petrus diadema Rodolpho Which when he heard of hee called a Councell of the Bishoppes of Italy and Germany and charging Hildebrand the Pope with most horrible crimes of heresie necromancy periury murther and the like deposed him chose Guibertus Bishoppe of Rauenna in his place and gathering together a great and mighty army went against Rodolphe abiding in Saxony where a most terrible and bloudy battell was fought betweene them in which battell Rodolphe was wounded and going aside from his companions with many other likewise wounded was carried to Mersberge where he died who a litle before his death beholding his right hand cut off in that battell fetching a deepe sigh said to the Bishops which by chance were present Behold this is the hand with which by solemne vow and oath I obliged my faith and feaulty to Henry my Lord. Behold now I leaue his kingdome and this present life see you that made mee climbe vp into his throne what you haue done would to God you had led me the right way whom you found so willing to follow your aduice and counsell and to be directed by you Yet did neither the ill successe of the former attempt nor the speeches of Rodolphe at his death blaming those that had set him a worke and condemning himselfe for that which he had done discourage the ill affected from proceeding on in their rebellious practises For they set vp Hermannus Prince of Lorrayne in steed of Rodolphe and proclaimed him Emperour whom the Emperour Henry slew likewise as he had done the other rested not till hee made Pope Hildebrand leaue Rome and flie to Salernum and brought the new Pope named Clement to be inthronized and himselfe crowned by him in Rome The acts of Hildebrand saith Nauclerus were such that the writers bee very doubtfull whether the things that were done by him were done out of any loue of vertue or any zeale hee bare to the faith or not They that loued him best disliked his stiffenes as Auentinus witnesseth Otho Frisingensis noteth that his disposition was such that for the most part he euer liked that which others disliked So that of Lucane might bee verified of him Victrix causa Diis placuit sed victa Catoni that is The prevailing part and cause best pleased God but that which fell and had the ouerthrow had Catoes wishes And though he commend his zeale yet in his prologue of his 7. booke he taxeth him and others like vnto him in very bitter sort His words are these Videntur tamen culpandi Sacerdotes per omnia qui regnum suo gladio quem ipsi ex regum habent gratia ferire conantur Nisi fortè Dauid imitari cogitant qui Philistaeum primò virtute Dei strauit postmodùm proprio gladio iugulauit that is Notwithstanding whatsoeuer may be said the Priests seeme altogether blameable and worthy of reproofe reprehension which goe about to strike Kings and princes with that their sword which they haue by the grace and fauour of Princes vnlesse haply they doe thinke it lawfull for them to imitate Dauid who first ouerthrew and cast to the ground the proude Philistine by the power of God and afterwards slew him with his ownesword Of this Hildebrand Sigebert saith he found it thus written Wee will haue you know you that manage the Ecclesiasticall affaires and to whom the care of the Church is committed that the Lord Pope Hildebrand who also was called Gregory being in extremis drawing neare his end called vnto him one of the 12 Cardinalls whom hee loued dearely and more then any of the rest and in his hearing confessed to God to holy Peter and to the whole Church that he had sinned exceedingly and grieuously offended in the Pastorall charge committed to him and in governing the people of whom he had vndertaken the care and that by the perswasion and instigation of the Diuell he had stirred vp hatred and wrath against mankind then commanded the forenamed Confessor to make haste to goe to the Emperour
in appointing some selected men for the visitation of the rest Fourthly in joyning temporall menincommission with the spirituall guides of the church to take view of and to censure the actions of men of Ecclesiasticall order because they are directed not onely by Canons but lawes Imperiall Fifthly when matters of fact are obiected for which the canons and lawes Imperiall judge men depriueable the Prince when hee seeth cause and when the state of things require it either in person if he please or by such other as hee thinketh fitte to appoint may heare and examine the proofes of the same and either ratifie that others did or voyd it as wee see in the case of Caecilianus to whom it was objected that hee was a Traditor and Faelix Antumnitanus that ordayned him was so likewise and that therefore his ordination was voyd For first the enemies of Caecilianus disliking his ordination made complaintes against him to Constantine and hee appointed Melchiades and some other Bishoppes to sitte and heare the matter From their judgement there was a new appeale made to Constantine Whereupon hee sent to the Proconsull to examine the proofes that might bee produced But from his iudgmēt the complainants appealed the third time to Constantine who appointed a Synode at Arle All this hee did to giue satisfaction if it were possible to these men and so to procure the peace of the Church And though he excused himselfe for medling in these businesses and asked pardon for the same for that regularly hee was to haue left these iudge ments to Ecclesiasticall persons yet it no way appeareth that hee did ill in interposing himselfe in such sort as hee did the state of things being such as it was nor that the Bishoppes did ill that yeelded to him in these courses and therefore in cases of like nature Princes may doe whatsoeuer hee did and Bishops may appeare before them and submit themselues to their iudgement though in another case Ambrose refused to present himselfe before Valentinian the Emperour for tryall of an Ecclesiasticall cause Neither is it strange in our state that Kinges should intermedle in causes Ecclesiasticall For Matthew Paris sheweth that the ancient lawes of England prouided that in appeales men should proceed from the Arch-deacon to the Bishoppe from the Bishop to the Arch-bishop and that if the Arch-bishop should faile in doing iustice the matter should be made knowne to the King that by vertue of his commandement it might receiue an end in the Arch-bishops Court that there might be no further proceeding in appeales without the Kings consent From the power which Princes haue in causes Ecclesiasticall let vs proceed to the power they haue ouer persons Ecclesiasticall and see whether they be supreame ouer all persons or whether men of the Church bee exempt from their iurisdiction That they are not exempted by GODS law wee haue the cleare confession of Cardinall Bellarmine and others who not onely yeeld so farre vnto the trueth forced so to doe by the cleare euidence thereof but proue the same by Scripture and Fathers The Cardinals wordes are these Exceptio Clericorum in rebus politicis tam quoad personas quam quoad bona iure humano introducta est non diuino that is The exemption of Cleargy-men in things ciuill as well in respect of their persons as their goods was introduced brought in by mans law and not by the law of God Which thing is proued first out of the precept of the Apostle to the Romanes Let euery soule be subiect to the higher powers and addeth Therefore pay yee tribute For when the Apostle saith Let euery soule be subiect hee includeth Cleargy-men as Chrysostome witnesseth and therefore when hee addeth for this cause pay yee tribute he speaketh of Cleargy-men also Whence it will follow that Cleargy-men are bound to pay tribute vnlesse they be exempted by the fauour and priviledge of Princes freeing them from so doing which thing Thomas Aquinas also affirmeth writing vpon the same place Secondly the same is proued out of the Ancient For Vrbanus saith The tribute money was therefore found in the mouth of the fish taken by Saint Peter because the Church payeth tribute out of her outward and earthly possessions And Saint Ambrose saith if tribute bee demaunded it is not denyed the Church-Land payeth tribute Now if Vrbanus Bishoppe of Rome and worthy Ambrose Bishop of Millaine then whom there was neuer any Bishoppe found more resolute in the defence of the right of the Church say that tribute is not to bee denyed but payed vnto Princes by men of the Church and in respect of Church-land I thinke it is evident there is no exemption by any Law of GOD that freeth the goods of Church-men from yeelding tribute to Princes For touching that text where our Sauiour sayth vnto Peter What thinkest thou Simon of whom doe the Kings of the Gentiles receiue tribute of their owne children or of strangers And Peter answereth of strangers Whence CHRIST inferreth that the children are free brought by some to proue the supposed immunity of Cleargy-men to bee from GODS owne graunt Bellarmine sufficiently cleareth the matter For first hee sheweth that CHRIST speaketh of himselfe onely making this argument Kings sonnes are free from tribute as beeing neither to pay to their owne fathers seeing their goods are common nor to strangers to whom they are not subiect therefore himselfe being the Sonne of the great King of Kings oweth no Tribute to any mortall man So that when hee saide the children are free hee meant not to signifie that any other are free but onely that himselfe was free Secondly he rightly obserueth that this place would proue that all Christians are free from Tribute if it proued any other then CHRIST to bee so for all Christians are the sonnes of GOD by adoption and grace And Hierome writing vpon this place hath these words Our Lord was the Kings son both according to the flesh and according to the spirit descending of the stocke of Dauid and being the Word of the Almighty Father and therefore as being the Sonne of the Kingdome owed no tribute but because hee assumed the humility of flesh it behooued him to fulfill all righteousnesse but vnhappy men that wee are we are called after the name of Christ doe nothing worthy so great an honour He for the great loue he bare towards vs sustained the crosse for vs and payde tribute but we for his honour pay no tribute and as Kings sons are free from tribute These words are brought by some to proue the imagined freedome we speake of but first they are so far from prouing any such thing that Erasmus thinketh Hierome reprehended it and disliked it as a thing sauouring of arrogancy that cleargymen should refuse to pay tribute which hee saith is contrary to the conceit of men in our time who thinke it the height of all piety to maintaine
wife which hee marryed while hee was yet a Lay-man hee should bee put out of the Ministery of the Church Whereas all the most famous Presbyters and Bishoppes also in the East might if they pleased but were no way by any Law constrained to refraine from the company of their wiues So that many of them euen when they were Bishoppes did beget children of their lawfull wiues A particular and most approued example whereof wee haue in the Father of Gregory Nazianzene who beeing a Bishoppe not onely liued with his wife till death divided them but became the Father also of Gregory Nazianzen as worthy and renowned a man as any the Greeke Church euer had after he was entered into the priestly Office as appeareth by his owne wordes reported by Gregory Nazianzen For after many motiues vsed by him to Gregory Nazianzen his sonne to perswade him to assist him in the worke of his Bishoply Ministery the last that hee most insisteth on is taken from the consideration of his olde age dis-inabling him to beare that burden and performe that worke any longer that hitherto hee had done And therefore intreating him to put to his helping hand he breaketh out into thesewords Thou hast not liued so long a time as I haue spent in the priestly office therefore yeeld thus much vnto mee and helpe mee in that little time of my life that is yet behinde or else thou shalt not haue the honour to bury mee but I will giue charge to another to doe it Heere we see Gregory Nazianzens father was employed in the priestly function before hee was borne and that therefore hee became the father of so worthy a sonne after hee was a Bishoppe or at least after hee was a Presbyter Neither was the father of Gregory Nazianzene singular in this behalfe For Athanasius writing to Dracontius who beeing greatly in loue with a retyred and monasticall kinde of life refused the Bishoply Office when hee was chosen vnto it for that hee feared hee might not in that state liue so strictly as formerly hee had done controuleth this his conceit and telleth him that hee may in the Bishoppes office hunger and thirst as Paul did drinke no wine as Timothy and fast often as did the Apostle So that the Bishoppes Office is no cause of doing ill or doing lesse good then may bee done in other states of life and there-upon assureth him that hee hath knowne Bishoppes to fast and Monkes to eate Bishoppes to drinke no wine and Monkes to drinke it Bishoppes to worke miracles and Monkes to doe none lastly many Bishoppes neuer to haue married and Monkes to haue become fathers of children and on the contrary side Bishoppes to haue become fathers of children and Monkes to haue liued altogether as Monkes without desire of posterity Neither can this authority of Athanasius bee avoyded as Bellarmine seeketh to avoyde it namely that those Bishoppes did ill which hee sayth became fathers of children For Clemens Alexandrinus an auncient Greeke Father sayth expressely The Apostle admitteth the husband of one wife to bee a Bispoppe and that though hee bee a Presbyter Deacon or Lay-man if hee vse marriage aright and so as not to incurre iust reprehension hee shall be saued by the procreation of children Chrysostome accordeth with Athanasius and Clemens Alexandrinus and sayth that mariage is in so high a degree honourable that men with it may ascend into the Episcopall chayres euen such as yet liue with their wiues For though it be an hard thing yet it is possible so to performe the duties of marriage as not to be wanting in the performance of the duties of a Bishoppe wherevnto Zozomen agreeth saying of Spiridion that though hee had wife and children yet he was not therefore any whitte the more negligent in performing the duties of his calling and of Gregory Nyssene it is reported that though he were marryed yet he was no way inferiour to his worthy brother that liued single But some haply will obiect that Epiphanius is of another minde and that hee sayth where the strictnesse of the canon is obserued none but such as are vnmarried or resolued to refraine from matrimoniall society with their wiues are admitted into the ministery of the Church Wee deny not but that he sayth so But hee confesseth in the same place that many in the Church did liue with their wiues in his time and beget Children euen after their admission into the ministery Soe that the strictnesse of the Canon hee speaketh of was not generall but in some certaine places onely as I noted before out of Socrates Nay it is euident by Socrates that howsoeuer in Thessalia Thessalonica Macedonia and Hellas this strictnesse preuailed yet all the Bishoppes of the East besides were left to their owne liberty and howsoeuer some in diuerse places went about to take away this liberty yet the worthyest men the Church had stood in defence of it protesting they would not suffer themselues to bee inthralled in this behalfe to which purpose that of the famous and renowned Synesius is most excellent who when they of Ptolemais would needes haue him to be their Bishoppe which thing hee little desired hee made them acquainted with his present condition and resolued purpose for the time to come God sayth hee the Law and the sacred hand of Theophilus hath giuen vnto mee a wife I therefore tell all men afore-hand and testifie vnto all that I will neither suffer my selfe to be altogether estranged and seperated from her neyther will I liue with her secretly as an adulterer For the one of these is no way pious and godly and the other no way lawfull but I will desire and pray vnto God that exceeding many and most good and happy children may be borne vnto mee Neyther will I haue him that is to be chiefe in ordayning of mee to be ignorant hereof This liberty the councel in Trullo impeached in respect of Bishops but in respect of Presbyters it continueth in all the East Churches of the world euen till this day Greeke Armenian and Ethiopian warranted vnto them by the Canons of the Apostles Iudgment of Bishops Decrees of Councels and the consent of all other partes of the World For first the Apostle Saint Paule telleth the Corinthians hee had power to lead about a wife a sister as well as the brethen of the Lord and Cephas Which words Clemens Alexandrinus interpreteth in this sort Paul feareth not in a certaine Epistle to speake to his yoake-fellow which hee did not lead about with him because he had no neede of any great seruice Therefore hee sayth in a certaine Epistle Haue wee not power to lead about a sister a wife as the rest of the Apostles but they truely as it was meete because they could not spare their Ministery attending without distraction to preaching lead their wiues about not as wiues but as sisters which should minister together with them
grow vnto if it bee immutable For to dislike that which before we did not dislike or to dislike a thing more then formerly we did vpon farther better consideration argueth a mutability in the Wil so that if the Wil be immutable in those that are departed hence immediately vpon their dissolution as our Aduersaries think it is the fire of purgatory can no way helpe to the purging out of sin To these reasons they adde another takē frō the story or parable of the rich man Lazarus in the Gospell where Christ sheweth that the poore man Lazarus as soone as hee was dead was carryed by the Angels into Abrahams bosome that the rich mans soule as soone as hee was dead was found in the torments of hell By the bosome of Abraham expressing a most excellent estate in the blessed rest of such as are beloued of God and by hell and the torments thereof the vtter most condemnation and the euerlasting punishment of sinners and no way leauing any other place betweene these hauing temporall affliction and paine but making betweene them a great and vnpasseable gulfe separating the one from the other and establishing an extreame and immediate opposition betweene them then which what could bee more cleerely spoken against Purgatory for our opinion For if there be no middle place of temporall torment as the Authors of this Apologie say there is not if there be but two sorts of men the one expressed by the condition of the rich man the other of Lazarus and if the one of these goe immediately vpon death into a place of torment euerlasting the other into a place of rest and into the bosome of Abraham where is the Purgatory of Papists either in the name or in the thing in substance or in circumstance To these reasons for farther confirmation they adde two most excellent testimonies out of Gregory Nazianzen who vpon these wordes touching the Passeouer Wee shall carrie out nothing nor leaue nothing till the morning saith expresly and clearely that beyond or after this Night there is no purging calling the life of each man heere the Night and yeelding no purging to be after it and else-where hath these wordes I omitte to speake of the torments to which impunity doth deliuer men in the other world for they are such that it were better for a man to be chastised and purged heere then to be reserued and deliuered ouer to that punishment that is after this life when as there is a time of punishment but not of purgation so expressely defining that there is no purging after the departure out of this life and that there remaineth nothing but eternall punishment for such as must there be punished Elias Cretensis a learned Grecian writing vpon that place of Nazianzen where he saith Hee is a poore and a meane Pastour and not liked of other Pastors whether because hee defendeth the trueth or for what other cause he knoweth not but God knoweth and as the Apostle saith that day of reuelation and last fire shall clearely manifest it whereby all our workes are either iudged or purged hath these wordes The word iudged Gregory Nazianzen put for tried and purged for reuealed or manifested for that fire doth make the workes of iust men to shine and burneth vppe the workes of sinners and that I may speake plainly and simply manifesteth of what sort each mans workes are those thinges being taken away that in this world did hide them and suffered them not to appeare to be such as indeede they are For here oftentimes as well the workes of a vertuous man as of an euill man are hidde but there they are reuealed and made manifest therefore there judgement is passed vpon all that is all are tried and againe all thinges are purged that is manifested and not by any meanes according to the fooleries of those men who thinke that there shall be an end of punishment after a thousand yeares and that after they are purged men shall cease to bee punished Thus doth this worthy Bishoppe of Candie contradict the Papistes in their fancie of Purgatory and agree with the Authors of the Apologie In the writings of Armacanus I finde that one Athanasius a Grecian proposed sundry excellent reasons against the imagined Purgatory of the Latines which Armachanus goeth about to answere but indeede cannot answere the first is this It is no way iust that the Soule alone should bee punished for the sinnes of the whole man or that the body should haue part and fellowship in Sinne and glory after remission of Sinne and not in the punishment that purgeth out sinne The second is this It is more proper to God to reward good thinges then to punish euill So that if it were necessary that the soules of such as are truely penitent should after death goe into Purgatory punishments it were much more necessary that the soules of such as haue kept the commaundements of GOD all their life long and at last falling into sinne die in such an estate without repentance should goe first into a place of refreshing to receiue the rewardes of their well doings before they should be cast out into eternall punishments but this is not to be graunted by any meanes therefore much lesse the other Thirdly whereas some goe about to proue Purgatory by the custome of praying for the dead hee sheweth by an vnanswerable reason that if wee admitte Purgatory wee may not pray for the dead his reason is this Whosoeuer causeth another to bee afflicted doth it in one of these three sortes either onely out of vnreasonable passion and desire of tormenting and afflicting or for the vpholding of the course of iustice and the example and good of others as when murderers are put to death or thirdly in mercy for the good and benefite of him that is punished as the Physician afflict◅h the sicke patient And in this third sort it is that God is supposed to afflict soules in Purgatory As therefore the Physician and Surgeon delight not in afflicting their sicke patients but deale as tenderly with them as possibly they may due respect had to the recouering of their health and former estate so God will afflict no more then is precisely necessary for the purging out of sinne so that as it were vaine if not hurtfull to intreat the good and skilfull Physician tendering his patient and no way afflicting him more then is precisely necessary for the recouering of his health either wholly to withdraw his hand or to remitte any thing of that hee intends to doe for that if so hee should doe the patient could not recouer so in like sort it were not onely vaine but hurtfull for the soules of men departed to intreate GOD any way to lessen their afflictions which otherwise he would lay vpon them seeing hee intendeth to afflict them no more then is precisely necessary for the purging out of the impurity that is found in them and
Councell against VVickliffe simply but in comparison and so doth Gerson and disliketh it as much as I doe condemning it of partiality To the fifth and sixth I say that Gerson affirmed the one to witte that no good was to bee expected by a generall Councell that the seuerall parts of the Christian world were to reforme them-selues and feared the other namely that too great diuersity would follow vppon such diuided reformations as it will easily appeare to any one that will take the paines to peruse the places cited by Mee Neither was it hast and precipitation as Maister Higgons is pleased to censure it but necessity that made our men to doe as they did hauing no meanes to meete for common deliberation To the seauenth I answere that Gerson Grosthead and the rest were members of the Church that was vnder the Papacie but that they were not of the papall faction nor vassals of the man of sin but men of a better spirit To the eighth I answere breefely that I haue most sincerely and truly alleaged the testimony of Gerson and noe way varied from his intention which that the reader may the better be able to discerne I will first set downe what my allegation is and then what exceptions Higgons taketh to it My words are these Touching the second cause of the Churches ruine which is the ambition pride and couetousnesse of the Bishoppe and Court of Rome Gerson boldly affirmeth that whereas the Bishoppes of Rome challenging the greatest place in the Church should haue sought the good of Gods people they contrarily sought onely to aduance themselues his wordes are these In imitation of Lucifer they will bee adored and worshipped as Gods neither doe they thinke themselues subiect to any but are as the sonnes of Belial that haue cast off the yoake not enduring whatsoeuer they do that a man should aske them why they do soe they neyther feare God nor reuerence men This is my allegation now let vs see what it is that Maister Higgons excepteth against in it Are not these the wordes of Gerson Hee cannot deny but that they are but hee sayth Gerson vttered them when there was a Schisme in the Church It is true hee did soe but what then Did not the true Pope whosoeuer hee was amongst those pretenders take as much on him as the rest and is not this note of disgrace fastned vpon all but that Maister Higgons may know that Gerson spake as much of the Pope simply as I haue cited out of him without any reference to pretenders as hee would faine avoyde the evidence of his heavy sentence let him consider what Gerson hath written in his Tract de potestate Ecclesiae where hee goeth about to stop the mouth of flattery giuing too much to the Cleargy and vile Detraction taking too much from it and bringeth in flattery speaking in this sort to them of the Cleargy especially the Pope O how great how great is the height of thy Ecclesiasticall power O sacred Cleargy how is secular power nothing if it be compared vnto thine Seeing as all power both in Heauen Earth was giuen to CHRIST so CHRIST left it all to Peter and his successors so that Constantine gaue nothing to Pope Sylvester that was not his before but restored to him that which had bin vnjustly with-holden and there is no power temporall or Ecclesiastical imperial or regall but frō the Pope in whose thigh CHRIST did write King of Kings and Lord of Lords of whose power to dispute it is sacrilegious to whom no man may say why doe you so though he ouer-turne teare in sunder and ouer-throw all states possessions and dominions temporall and Ecclesiasticall let Mee be reputed a lyar saith hee if these things bee not found written by them that are wise in their owne eyes and if they bee not found to haue beene beleeued by some Popes He addeth notum est illud satyrici Nihil est quod credere de se Non possit cum laudatur diis aequa potestas That is according to that knowne saying of the Satyricall Poet what should not hee perswade himselfe of himselfe that is magnified as equall to God in power For that of the Comicall Poet is true of the flatterer that he maketh fooles to be starke madde These are the sayings of Gerson which I haue laid downe at large that the Reader may judge whether I haue depraued the intention of Gerson or not and whether Higgons had any cause to traduce Mee in such sort as he doth It seemeth the poore fellow was hired to say something against Mee or else he would neuer haue adventured to vent such fooleries yet the last accusation against Mee is not to be passed ouer Gerson saith the Popes will be adored as God and I feare not to adde that the English Reader may vnderstand Mee that they will be adored and worshipped as God out of these premises he maketh an excellent conclusion comparing Gerson to Dauid that commaunded Ioab to saue the life of Absalom and Luther to Ioab that had no pitty on trayterous Absalom in that the one would haue the Pope well dealt withall though he disliked his faults and the other sought to tread him vnder his feete But let the Reader know that as Gerson so Luther was willing to giue all due honour to the Pope contenting himselfe with that which of right pertaineth to him but if hee dishonour God wrong the Church suffocate and kill her children and heretically refuse to be subiect to the Church and Councell if he challenge infallibility of iudgement from which no man may appeale Gerson will tread him vnder feete and reiect him as an Hereticke as well as Luther The Fourth Part. §. 1. IN the fourth part of this Chapter Master Higgons vndertaketh to proue that I haue abused the name and authority of Grosthead to iustifie the Lutheran reformation which he performeth full wisely in this sort Grosthead was iudged a Catholicke and a good man by some Cardinals in Rome therefore hee could not desire that reformation of things amisse that now is wrought If the consequence of this Argument be denyed hee knoweth not how to proue it but willeth his reader to demaund of Mee whether these Cardinals which iudged Grosthead to bee a Catholicke and of the same Religion with them-selues were not reall members of the Antichristian Synagogue proud Romanists factious Papists c. which question is soone answered For I haue distinguished as he knoweth right well the Church in which the Pope tyrannized and the faction of Papists that flattered him and applied themselues to sette forward his proud and vniust claimes till they lifted him vp into the throne and seate of Antichrist the members of the Church and of the faction and though both these liued for a time in the same outward Communion as did the right beleeuers and they that denied the resurrection of the dead amongst the Corinthians yet did they
example of it in Scripture yet I affirme that it is no vnwritten tradition in that the grounds reasons and causes of the necessity of it are there contained the benefites that follow it Neither doth the place alledged by him out of Augustine proue the contrary the words of Augustine as commonly we reade them are these the custome of the Church in baptizing infants which is not to be despised or lightly regarded were not to be beleeued were it not an Apostolique tradition But whosoeuer shall consider the place will soone perceiue that Augustines meaning is that the custome of the Church in baptizing Infants which he saith is not to be despised or lightly regarded is to be beleeued to be no other but an Apostolical tradition not that it were not to be beleeued if it were not an Apostolicall tradition howsoeuer as it seemeth esset in stead of esse is crept into the text For it is something harsh to say the custome of the Church in baptizing infants is not to be beleeued vnlesse it were an Apostolicall Tradition Seeing such a custome might be beleeued though it were not an Apostolicall Tradition And besides the drift of Augustine in that place is to vrge the necessitie of this custome and to haue it beleeued to be Apostolicall and not to weaken it as if it had no support but bare tradition which can neither stand with the opinion of Augustine the truth of the thing it selfe nor the iudgement and resolution of our Adversaries themselues who thinke that the Baptisme of Infants may be proued vnanswerably out of Scripture in that CHRIST saith the Kingdome of Heauen belongeth to litle children and yet pronounceth that except a man bee borne a new of water of the spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdome of Heauen Wherein yet they contradict themselues as they doe likewise in some other things which they produce as instances of vnwritten traditions and yet goe about to proue them by Scripture Neither will the Treatisers evasion serue the turne that they goe not about to proue any thing necessarily out of Scripture that they pretend to be holden by vnwritten tradition but probably only for we know they bring Paedobaptisme as an instance of vnwritten traditions and yet say it may bee vnavoydably proued out of Scripture as they propose the testimonies of it The like may be said of the consubstantiality of the Sonne of God with the Father and the proceeding of the Holy Ghost from them both brought by them as instances of vnwritten verities and yet prooued as strongly by them out of Scripture as any other point of Faith For if they shall say an Heretique will not yeeld himselfe convinced by such proofes it will bee answered that no more he will by any other in any other point nor by the tradition of the Church neither which yet I suppose they will not make to be a weake proofe in that respect §. 9. THe next exception taken against Me is that I haue not well said that a man may still doubt and refuse to beleeue a thing defined in a Generall Councell without Hereticall pertinacie and that Generall Councels may erre in matters of greatest consequence What I haue written I will make good against the Treatiser For it is not so strange a thing as he would make vs beleeue to thinke that Generall Councels may erre that a man may doubt of things defined in thē without heretical pertinacie seeing not onely our Diuines generally so thinke but sundry of the best learned in the Romane Church informer times were of the same opinion as I haue else-where shewed at large Neither were it hard to answere the authorities hee bringeth to prooue that Generall Councels cannot erre if a man would insist vpon the particular examination of them But this may suffice in a generalitie that the Fathers produced by him blame and condemne in particular the calling of things in question that had beene determined in the Councell of Nice and some other of that sort and not generallie the doubting of any thing determined in any Councell how disorderly soeuer it proceeded In the second Councell of Ephesus there wanted not a sufficient number of worthy Bishops yet because hee that tooke on him the Presidentship vsed not accustomed moderation neither permitted each man freely to deliuer his opinion it was not accepted nor the Decrees of it receiued From the not erring of Councels the Treatiser passeth to the question concerning the Churches authority in making new Articles of faith and seeketh to cleare the Romane Church from the imputation of challēging any such authority by my confession my words alleadged by him to this purpose are these Our aduersaries confesse that the approbation and determination of the Church cannot make that a truth which was not nor that a Diuine or Catholique truth that was not so before But the good man hath vsed this poore sentence of mine as Hanun vsed the messengers of Dauid whose garments he cut off in the middle a wrong afterwards seuerely and yet most iustly reuenged by Dauid For it followeth in the same sentence that Papists do thinke that the Church by her sole and bare determination may make that veritie to be in such sort Catholique that euery one must expressely beleeue it that was not soe and in such degree Catholique before Whereby it appeareth that they attribute a power to the Church in a sort to make new Articles of faith in that shee may make things formerly beleeued onely implicite to bee necessary to bee expressely beleeued not by euidence of proofe or apparant deduction from thinges expressely beleeued but by her bare and sole authority which not onely wee but sundry right learned godly and wise in the middest of the Church of Rome euer denied Wherefore let vs passe from this imagined aduantage to consider the rest of his exceptions §. 10. IN my third booke and first Chapter speaking of the Patriarche of Constantinople I haue these words In the second generall Councell holden at Constantinople he was preferred before the other Patriarches of Alexandria and Antioch and set in degree of honour next vnto the Bishoppe of Rome in the great Councell of Chalcedon hee was made equall with him and to haue all equall rights priuiledges and prerogatiues because hee was Bishoppe of new Rome as the other was of old Hereupon the Treatiser breaketh out into these wordes I cannot doe otherwise but maruaile that a man of his place and learning doth not blush to committe such a notorious vntrueth to the Print and view of the world For not to speake of the falshood of the first part of his affirmation because it is in some sort impertinent that which hee saith of the Councell of Chalcedon is most vntrue repugnant to all antiquity and not onely contrary to all proceedings and the history of the sayd Councell but also to the wordes of the Canon by him alleaged
faith only doth not iustifie that good works are meritorious he endeauoureth to proue because I confesse that men iustified freely by grace are crowned in the world to come for that new obediēce that is foūd in thē after iustificatiō But this cōsequence I suppose wil not be thought good seeing as Cassander rightly notethout of Bucer God in respect of good works or hauing an eye to thē or for good works giueth not onely temporall but eternall rewardes not for the worthinesse of the workes in themselues but out of his owne grace for the merit of Christ first working such good workes in them that are his and then crowning his owne workes in them as Augustine long since aptly obserued Let vs see therefore if he can proue any better that fayth onely doth not justifie this hee vndertaketh to doe out of that which I haue written that justification implieth in it faith hope and charity But for the clearing of this poynt let him be pleased to obserue that by the name of justification sometimes nothing is meant but an adiudging of eternall life vnto vs sometimes the whole translation of a man out of the state of sinne and wrath into a state of righteousnesse and acceptation with God which implyeth in it sundry things concurring in very different sort without any preiudice to the singular prerogatiue of fayth For first it implyeth in it a worke of almighty God as the supreame and highest cause Secondly the merits of Christ as the meanes whereby God is reconciled and induced to take vs into his fauour Thirdly in him that is to be justified a certaine perswasion of the trueth of such thinges as are contayned in the holy word of God Fourthly motions of feare contrition hope of mercy and the like workes of preparing grace as causes disposing and fitting him that is to be justified that hee may be capable of Gods fauour Fifthly as the susceptiue cause an act of faith by which a man truely repenting of former euils and seeking deliuerance without all doubting firmely beleeueth that all his sinnes are remitted him for Christs sake Lastly an infusion of the habite of diuine and heauenly vertues as a beginning of that life of God to which he doth adiudge them whom he receiueth to fauour So that my saying that justification thus taken implyeth in it Faith Hope and Charitie contrarieth not our position that fayth onely justifieth in sort before expressed which the Treatiser knowing right well insisteth no longer vpon this cauill but passeth to an vntruth charging Mee that I say of S. Augustine whom yet I pronounce to haue been the greatest of all the Fathers and the worthiest Diuine the Church of God euer had since the Apostles times that his manner of deliuering the Article of Iustification is not full perfect exact as if I imputed some fault to him in not deliuering the poynt of justification as it became him whereas I haue no such thing but say onely that his manner of deliuering that Article was not so full perfect and exact as we are forced to require in these times against the errours of the Romanists in which saying I no way blame that worthy Father but shew that new errours require a more exact manner of handling of thinges then was necessary before such errours sprung vppe which I thinke no wise man will deny and am well assured this Treatiser cannot deny vnlesse hee will bee contrary to himselfe For hee sayth expressely that Saint Augustine before some articles of Christian Religion were so throughly discussed and defined in the Church as afterwards vpon the rising of new heresies spake not so aptly and properly as was needfull in succeeding times and therefore retracted some things which hee had formerly vttered So that the Reader will easily finde that in this passage hee hath sayd lesse then nothing neither will his next discourse be found any better wherein he laboreth to shew a contrariety between Me Luther Caluine others in that I make that acte of fayth which obtayneth and procureth our justification to bee an acte by way of petition humbly intreating for acceptation and fauour and not of comfortable assurance consisting in a full perswasion that through Christs merits wee are the children of God Whereas Luther Caluine and the rest make iustifying faith to be an assured perswasion that through Christs merits wee are the sonnes of God But the Treatiser might easily know if hee were disposed that according to our opinion iustifying faith hath some actes as a cause disposing preparing and fitting vs to the receipt of that gracious fauour whereby God doth iustifie vs and other as a susceptiue cause receiuing embracing and enioying the same in the former respect neyther they nor I make faith to consist in a perswasion that wee are the sonnes of God in the latter wee both do and so agree well enough though the Treatiser it seemeth could wish it were otherwise §. 4. WHerefore let vs goe forward and take a view of that which followeth The next thing which hee hath that concerneth Mee is that it may bee gathered out of my assertions in my Third Booke of the Church that I thinke as hee saith some other also do that it is no fundamentall point of doctrine but a thing indifferent to beleeue or not to beleeue the reall that is the locall presence of CHRISTS Body in the Sacrament But I am well assured there can no such thing be gathered out of any of the places cited by him vnlesse it be lawfull for him to reason à baculo ad angulum as often as he doth For in the pages 120 and 121 of his second part because I confesse that in the Primitiue Church the manner of some was to receiue the Sacrament in the publique assembly and not bee partakers of it presently but to carry it home that the Sacrament was carried by the Deacons to the sicke that in places where they communicated euery day there was a reseruation of some parts of the sanctified Elements and that the sanctified Elements thus reserued in reference to an ensuing receiuing of them were the bodie of Christ to wit in mysterie and exhibitiue signification hee goeth about to conclude that I must needes confesse the reall that is the locall presence of Christs body in the Sacrament which consequence is no better then if a man should goe about to conclude that this Treatiser hath written a good and profitable booke because hee hath troubled the world with one such as it is full of vaine idle and emptie discourses whereof if any man make doubt let him consider but the very next words For whereas I confessed Calvines dislike of the reseruation aunciently vsed and yet saide it cannot bee proued that hee denied the Sacramentall elements consecrated and reserued for a time in reference to an ensuing receiuing of them to bee Sacramentally the body of Christ hee saith I labour in vaine because
explicatio Canonum Apostol i Cap. 21. k Canone â—…3 l Damian a Goes de morib Aethiop m Canone 33. n Tom. 1. Conciliorum o Locor Theolog lib. 5. cap. 4. p De Imaginib lib. 2. cap. 9. q Tom. 1. anno Domini 57. num 119. trib sequent r Tom. 2. anno 305. num 42. s Canone 4 5. t Canone 9. u Dist. 20. cap. de Libellis x Actione 4. y Inter Epistolas Decâ—…etales z Can. 2. 3. a Epist. 3. b Canone 3. c Canone 1. d Canone 9. e Canone 2. f Lib. 5. Annal. Boiorum pag. 564. g Naucler vol. 〈◊〉 generat 36. h De Clericis lib. 1. cap. 19. i Vbi suprà k Vbi suprà l Lib. 7. Math. Paris in Henrico 1. pag. 67. m Math. Paris in Henrico 1. pag. 68. n Constit. Othonis de vxoratis à Beneficiâ—… amouendis n De Sacr. Ecclminist Benef l. 4. c. 8. p Heb. 13. 4 q Socrat. l. 1. c. 8 〈◊〉 In 1 ad Tim. 3 s De Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 10 t Syricli ad Himericum c. 7. Innocen ad Victricium c. 9. in cp ad Exuperium c. 1 u Can. 1. x Can. 33. 18 y Can. 12. z Turonens 〈◊〉 Canone 2. a Canone 4. b Canone 〈◊〉 c Canone 10. d Concil Tolet. 1. Canone 4. e Canone 10. f Canone 15. g Canone 32. h Canone 29. i Canone 22. k Matisconens 2. Canone 16. l Annal. Boiorum lib. 5. pag. 565. 571. m Bernard de Conuersione ad Clericos c. 29. n Saluianus de Diuina prouideutia lib 5. citat ab Eâ—…encaeo lib. 1. de Continentia cap. 12. o Sigebertus in Câ—…onico Anni 1074. * Rubric 4â—… fol. 35 p AEn Sylv. de gest concil Bas. q Ep. 307. ad Ioan. Fiundt r In Pio 2. s Ennead 10 l. 6. pag. 731. t Fastorum l. 1. u Tit. Qui Clerici vel â—…oventes matrimonia contrahere possunt Citat ab Andr. Frisio l. 4. de Ecclesia x 1 Cor. 7. 25. y De Clericis conjugatis cap. cum olim z Citat ab Andreâ—… Frisio de Ecclesia lib. 4. a De Inuent Rerum lib. 5. cap. 4. b Citat a chemnitioâ—…n exami ne Trident. Concil c In Declamat de laâ—…dib Matrimonij d Vbi spurâ e In Consultatione de Sacerd. Caelibatu * Aeneas Syluius writing to Petrus Noxetus hath these words Adhuc caui ne me â—…acer ordo inuolueret Timeo enim continentiam c. Epist. 50. f Canone 10. g De Clericis lib. 1. cap. 18. h Vide suprâ i Vbi suprà * For farther proofe hereof see the first booke of Claudius Espencaeus de Continentiâ k Cyprian lib. 1. Epist. 11. l De Monach l. 2. c. 34 m Aug. de bono Viduitatis n Epist 70 o De sancta Virginitate cap. 34. p Hieron Epist. 47. de suspecto Conâ—…bernio vitando q Heresi 61. r Erudit Theolog de Sacram. fidei lib. 2. part 11. c. 12. s Epist. 2. ad Victricium cap. 12. t In secundam secundae quaest 38. art 11. u De Monachis lib. 2. c. 34. x Secunda secundae quaest 88. art 〈◊〉 y In 4. sent dist 58. z In secunda secundae loc cit a Lib. 4. de eccl b Opus tom 1. tract 27. c Erudit theol de sacr fid l. 2. part â—…2 c. 4 d Acts 23. 〈◊〉 e Vbi supra f In Consult de Caelibatu Sacerdotum g De vita spirituali 〈◊〉 Eâ—…ud Theolog de Sacrament fidei lib. 2. part 11. ca. â—…2 i Vbi suprâ—… a 1. Tim. 3. 2. b Apologia 2. c In locum Timothei praedict in Titu d De Clericâ—… lib. 〈◊〉 cap. 23. e Annotations vpon that place f Theod. in loc Tim. praedict g In â—…und loc Hier. ad Oceâ—…m l Vbi supra m Ruffinus lib. 2. cap. 11. n Epist. 22. cap. 1. 2. o De bono coniugali p Bibliothecae Sanctae lib. 6. annot 318. 325. q Lib. 10. Epist 82. r August de bono Coniugali s Bonauentura in 4. sent dist 25. quaest 3. t In duab Epist. Citat ab Erasmo in vita Hieronymi u Aug. confess lib. 4. cap. 2. lib. 6. cap. 15. * Hieron ad â—…num x De sacr eccl minist Ben. l. 4. c. 8. y Can. 3. 7. z Referente Ambrosio in 7. c. 1. ad Cor. in 3. 1. ad Tim. Aug. serm 243. de temp Isid. l. 2. de Divin officiis c. 19 a Can 1. b Apud Gratian part 2. caus 31. q. 1 c Can. 8. d In Triphone e In Apol. post f In loc Tim. g Rhemenses in locum Titi. h In hunc locum i Lib. 3. cap. 15. k Haeresi 79. l Haeresi 61. m De Bono viduitatis n Epist. 9. ad Episc Lucaniae o Vide Binnium tomo 2. Concil pag. 115. annot in Toletan 4. a 1. Cor. 9. 〈◊〉 b Ibid. vers 11. c Galat. 6. 6. d Galat. 4. 15. 〈◊〉 Philem. 29 f In Trialogo h Leuit. 27. 30. i Malach. 3. 10. k Numb 35. 2. c. l Numb 18. 12. m 1. Cor. 9. 13 n De Clerici s lib. 1. cap. 25. o Secunda secundae quaest 87. art 1. p Gen. 14. 20 q Gen. 18. 22. r De Clericis lib. 1. cap. 25. s Ver. 21. t Orig. Hom. 1â—… in Numeros u In Malach. 3. x De tempore serm 219. y Aug. in Psal. 146. z In Math. 23 a Iuo part 2. c. â—…74 in 2. tom concil p. 954. apud Bin. b Ca. 17. c Can. 5. d Can. 14. e Canone 9. f Cap. 38. g Homil. 48. h Canone 13. i Linwood Provincial lib. 1. de consuetudine k De Clericis lib. 1. cap. 25. l M. Carleton of Tithes m Comment in Concord Euang. cap. 84. n De Clericis li 1. cap. 25. o Eod. capite Dubio 4. p Gelas. cp 9. ad Episc. Lucaniae Vide Gratian. part 2. decreti caus 12. q. 2 * This word imported no base but an honorable allowance q Cypr cp 66. 34. r In indice in appendicem Concil Lateranens 3. de Pactionib 39. 40. s Part. 2. causa 16. qu. 42. 1. c. t Citatus part 2 causa 16. qu. 1. cap. 55. u Ibid. cap. 45. x Canone 47. y Habetur Tomo 3. Concil apud Binnium pag. 65â—… z Cap. 13. a Indice in appendicem b Cabilonens 2. Canone 19. c Hier. ad Heliodorum de laude vitae solitariae d De Sacris 〈◊〉 minist benef l. 7. c. 1. e In Iohan. 13. f Acts 4. 34. 35. g Decr. part 2. caus â—…2 q. 1. c. 15 * Ibid. c. 16 h Canon 15. i Canon 25. k Duaren de sacr eccl min. benef l 2. c. r l Ibid. m Devit a contemplativa l. 2. c. 9. n Vol 2. generat 11. pa. 505. o De potest Eccleâ—…ast considerat â—…2 p De sacris Eccles minist Benef. lib. 7. cap.