impotencie of nature nor by the gift of continencie but the pope chargeth them that are eunuches no way to abstaine from marriage solemnely therefore the popes commaundement is against Gods holy ordinance Theodoretus confirmeth this point in these words Rectè autem posuit illud prohibentium contrahere matrimonium Neque enim celibatum ac continentiam vituperat sed eos accusat qui lege lata ea sequi coÌ„pellunt He put that rightly forbidding to marry he blameth not single life continencie but accuseth them that by positiue lawes compel to put such things in execution This lawe therefore of the pope is intollerable For which cause saint Clemens auoucheth them to do iniury to nature that will not vse wedlocke for procreation of children The latter parte of this proposition the apostle setteth downe so plainely as it is needelesse to say any more in that behalfe These are Saint Paules owne wordes But the spirit speaketh euidently that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith and shall giue heede vnto spirites of errour and doctrines of deuilles which speake lies through hypocrisie and haue their consciences burned with an hote yron forbidding to marry and commanding to abstaine from meats In these wordes it is very cleere that saint Paul termeth the prohibition of marriage and of meates the flat doctrine of the deuill For after hee had declared wherein the mysterie of true religion consisteth which is taught in the true church of Christ hee foorthwith giueth euident markes of the mysterie of iniquitie which is maintained in the false church of Antichrist in whose synagogue the highest points of religion are the prohibition of marriage and of meates And who seeth not this day this to bee the state of the church of Rome as in which church they are specially and in a manner onely reputed religious who obey the prohibition of marriage and also of meates And it will not helpe the Papistes to say as their woonted manner is that they neither prohibite marriage generally nor as an vnlawfull thing For first saint Paul speaketh not generally of marriage but of the precise marriage of Bishoppes Priests and Deacons This doe I prooue because so soone as hee had declared the duetie of Bishoppes Priestes and Deacons with their wiues and children by and by in the beginning of the next chapter hee addeth that in the latter dayes marriage shall bee prohibited by the doctrine of the deuill Where the worde But doeth effectually insinuate that he speaketh precisely of the marriage of ecclesiasticall persons by him aboue named Againe the words Forbidding and Commanding argue authoritie in them that restraine marriage and so it partaineth not onely to the old heretikes the Manichees the Tatians the Eucratites the Marcionists the Patritians and the Apostolickes but much more to the late Popes of Rome who strictly commaunde the whole world to abstaine from that whereof God himselfe hath granted the lawfull vse For what is to bee extolled aboue God if not to alter and chang his holie words Bishops Priests and Deacons haue alwaies beene married in the East church euen from our Sauiour Christ vntill these our dayes This I proue by the testimonie of the sixt generall councell of Constantinople where 289. Bishoppes were assembled in the yeare of our Lorde 677. In the thirteenth canon of this famous councill three speciall things are decreed First that Priests Deacons and subdeacons may haue the lawfull vse of wedlocke at such times as they do not execute the ministerie Secondly this councell excommunicateth all those Priests and Deacons that after their orders put away their former wiues vnder pretence of religion Thirdly it excommunicateth all such as labour to separate Priests and Deacons from the vse and companie of their wiues And after all this this great synode addeth this worthie and memorable obseruation to witte that they haue thus decreed albeit the lawes of Rome be otherwise Where I note by the way that so many learned bishoppes contemned the vsurped primacie of the church of Rome I proue it secondly by the verdict of their owne canon law which is the flatte opinion of Pope Vrban as their owne Gratian telleth vs his expresse words are these Cum ergo ex sacerdotibus nati in summos pontifices supra legantur esse proâ—oti non sunt intelligendi de fornicatione sed de legitimis coniugiis nati quae sacerdotibus ante prohibitionem vbique licita erant in orientali ecclesia vsque hodie eis licere probantur When therefore wee reade that the sonnes of Priests are made Popes wee must not vnderstand bastardes but sonnes borne in honest marriage which marriage was euery where lawfull for Priests before the late prohibition and is also lawfull this day in the East Church for which cause the late councell of Florence left the marriage of Priests to the free election of the Greekes Yea their owne deare Fryer and graue archbishoppe Antoninus confirmeth the same in these words Quia Graci etiam in sacerdotio coniugio vtuntur For the Greekes ioyne the vse of matrimonie euen with the priesthood Bishops Priests and Deacons were likewise married in the West and Latin church for the space almost of foure hundred yeares without any prohibition at all And afterward in some places for many hundreth yeeres This is the probation After that Christ hadde granted marriage for all men appointing such to vse it for an wholsome medicine as wanted the gift of continencie after that Saint Paul had pronounced freely marriage to bee honourable in all sorts of men after that the Apostles had decreed that neither Bishops Priests nor deacons shoulde leaue the companie of their wiues vnder pretence of religion after that many holy Bishops priests and deacons had liued laudably in the Church and had vsed the honest helâ— of holy wedlocke aboue three hundreth eightie and fiue yeares al which I haue alreadie proued then one Syricius aduaunced to the popedome in the yeare of Christ 385. seduced by Satan published wicked doctrine and prohibited marriage as an vnlawfull thing Which matter because it is verie imporâ—ant and the wordes of our holy father the pope so blasphemous as hardly anie will beleeue him to haue so written but hee that readeth the same I will alleage his wordes at large Thus therefore doth hee write in expresse tearmes Quod dignum pudicum honestum est suademus vt sacerdotes Leuitae cum suis vxoribus non coeant quia in ministerio diuino quotidianis necessitatibus occupantur ad Corinthios namque sic Paulus scribit Abstinete vos vt vacetis orationi si ergo Laicis abstinentia imperatur vt possint deprecantes audiri quanto magis sacerdos vtisque omni momento paratus esse debet munditiae puritate securus ne aut sacrificium offerat aut baptizare cogatur quisi contaminatus est carnali concupiscentia quid faciet excusabitur qua
iustos facit To conclude the onely formal cause is the iustice of God not that with which himself is iust but with which he maketh vs iust This decree is quite contrarie to my conclusion they learned it of Aquinas their angelicall doctour whose direction they followe in all theologicall questions Thus doth Aquinas write Gratia non dicitur facere gratum effectiuè sed formaliter quia per hanc homo iustificatur dignus efficitur vocari Deo gratus secundum illud Colos. 1. vers 12. dignos nos fecit in partem sortis fanctorum in lumine Grace doth not make one acceptable effectiuely but formally because man is iustified by grace and is made worthie to be accepted of god according to that which the apâ—stle saith He hath made vs worthie of the fellowship of saints in light Thus writeth Aquinas whose opinion being once confuted al other papists shalbe confuted in him I therfore say first that Aquinas was deceiued with the popish vulgar latin translation called vulgata editio which for al that the late disholy synode of Trent hath wonderfully magnified extolled aboue the starrie skies For where their vulgata editio hath worthie there the greeke and original hath meete or fit these are the very words of the original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Giuing thanks to god euen the father who hath made vs meete to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light I say secondly that since his foundation was a false translation his conclusion inferred thereupon must of necessitie bee false also And therefore wee may not reade as Aquinas did who hath made vs worthie but who hath made vs meete or fitte for the fellowshippe of Saintes and so their owne linquist Arias Montanus doth interpret it to their confusion And because the verie life of this question standeth wholly in this if there be any forme or qualitie inherent in man by which hee is worthy of glory and eternall life I will prooue pithily and succinctly that man neither hath in him nor can haue any such qualitie at all but that the formall cause of mans iustification is in Christ Iesus not in himselfe The first argument No infinite accident can be in any finite subiect but the grace of iustification is infinite Ergo it cannot be in man a finite subiect The argument is in forme the proposition is graunted of all as well Philosophers as Diuines and the assumtion is manifest because the transgression was infinite as is prooued in the third conclusion The second argument Being iustified freely by his grace saith the Apostle thorough redemption which is in Christ Iesus Where we must obserue first y t when the apostle saith freely hee doth exclude all workes and all qualities in man We must obserue secondly that when he saith by his grace he giueth vs to vnderstand that the grace of iustification is in Christ and not in our selues For otherwise he would haue termed it our grace and not his grace because that which is inherent in our selues is properly ours We must obserue thirdly that when hee concludeth the period thus which is in Christ Iesus the word which hath no lesse relation to grace then to redemption and so thone must be in Christ aswel as the other The 3. argument Being therfore iustified by faith we haue peace with God through our Lord Iesus Christ through whom we haue accesse by faith into this grace in which wee stand In which wordes of the Apostle wee are taught three thinges First that our iustification is by faith Secondly that our iustification giueth vs peace with God Thirdly that by faith we haue accesse to the grace of iustification and consequently that this grace of iustification is not in our selues For vnproperly are wee saide to haue accesse to a thing inherent in our selues The 4. argument Not hauing mine owne righteousnesse which is of the law but that which is through the faith of Christ euen the righteousnesse which is of God through faith In which wordes the Apostle teacheth vs two thinges First that the formal cause of our iustification is not our owne in these wordes not hauing mine owne righteousnesse for if our iustice or righteousnesse were inherent in our selues it should be our owne Secondly that our iustice is through faith and in faith and consequently that the formall iustice of the papists is not that true christian iustice whereof Saint Paul speaketh for they say that charitie which is the chiefest part of their formall inherent iustice is neither through faith nor in faith but aboue faith and the forme of faith The fift argument He that knewe no sinne suffered the paine due for sinne for our sakes that wee might be made the iustice of God in him In which wordes the apostle teacheth vs two thinges First that Christ died for our iustification Secondly that this iustification is the application of the iustice of God in Christ. But doubtlesse the iustice of God cannot be our inherent iustice For first Gods iustice is infinite but ours is finite Secondly Gods iustice is perfite but ours is vnperfit Thirdly Gods iustice is absolute but ours is relatiue The 6. argument For they being ignorant of the righteousnesse of God and going about to stablishe their owne righteousnesse haue not submitted themselues to the righteousnesse of God For Christ is the end of the law for righteousnesse vnto euery one that beleeueth In these wordes of the apostle wee are taught two thinges First that to ascribe anie righteousnesse to our selues is flatly to fall from the iustice of God Which certes could not be so if y t iustice by which we are iustified were inherent in our selues Againe that Christes righteousnesse is applied to euery one by faith Which thing shalbe yet more plaine by the next conclusion The 5. conclusion Man is iustified by sole and only faith that is to say faith onely is the instrument by which man applieth to himselfe the righteousnesse of God in Christ Iesus This conclusion containeth three thinges First that Gods righteousnesse is that iustice which we present for our iustification Secondly that it is ours for the merites of Christ Iesus Thirdly that we apprehend and take hold vpon it by faith only and so we haue the explication howe sole faith doth iustifie Which because the papistes so bitterly impugne I will prooue it both by y e scriptures and the fathers If Abraham saith S. Paule were iustified by works he hath wherin to reioyce but not with God For what saith the Scripture Abraham beleeued God and it was counted to him for righteousnesse Thus saith the Apostle Out of which wordes I note first that workes did not iustifie Abraham before God I note secondly that that iustice by which man standeth cleere before God is only imputatiue and not really inherent in himselfe Which imputatiue iustice the Apostle doth often inculcate
otherwise he should be contrarie to himselfe who affirmeth it to bee sinne in many places of his works as is alreadie prooued but hee onely laboureth to perswade the reader that it is neuer imputed to the faithfull that stoutly striue against it And that this is the true meaning of S. Austen I proue it by the iudgement of S. Ambrose concerning the selfe same matter Thus doth hee write Caro contra spiritum contra carnem spiritus concupiscit â—ec inuenitur in vllo hominum tanta concordia vt legi mentis lex quae membris est insita non repugnet Propter quod ex omnium sanctorum persona accipitur quod Ioannes apostolus ait si dixerimus quoniam peccatum non habemus nosipsos seducimus veritas in nobis non est cum tamen idem ipse dicat qui natus est ex Deo peccatum non facit qoniam semen ipsius in eo manet non potest peccare quoniaÌ„ ex Deo natus est Vtrumque ergo verum est quia nemo sine peccato est in eo quod nemo est fine lege peccati qui natus est ex Deo peccatum non facit quia per legem mentis id est per charitatem quae Dei semen est peccatum non facit Charitas enim operit multitudineÌ„ peccatoruÌ„ the flesh lusteth against the spirit the spirit against the flesh neither is there found in any man such concord but that the lawe of concupiscence which is ingrafted in the members fighteth against the law of the mind And for that cause Saint Iohns words are taken as spoken in the person of all saints If we say we haue no sin we deceiue our selues and the truth is not in vs when for al that the same apostle saith He that is borne of God sinneth not because his seed abideth in him and he cannot sinne because he is of God Therfore both are true because no man is without sinne for that no man is without the law of sinne that is concupiscence and he that is borne of God sinneth not bicause he sinneth not by the law of his mind that is by charitie which is Gods seede for charitie couereth the multitude of sinnes Out of these words I note first that concupiscence moueth rebellion against the spirit in the holyest man vpon earth I note secondly that this rebellion of concupiscence is sinne in euerie one because S. Iohn speaketh of sinne indeede whose words saint Ambrose applieth heere to concupiscence I note thirdly that hee speaketh of originall concupiscence because he speaketh of that concupiscence which is in the saints that is in those that are borne of God I note fourthly that the faithfull sinne not because charitie couereth their sins So then S. Austen meaneth as S. Ambrose doth that they are without sin to whom sinne is not imputed Yea Aquinas himselfe granteth which is to be admired that the inordinate motion of sensualitie euen which goeth before the deliberation of reason is sinne though in a lowe degree These are his expresse wordes Dicendum quòd illud quod homo facit sine deliberatione rationis non perfectè ipse facit quia nihil operatur ibi id quod est principale in homine vnde non est perfectè actus humanus per consequens non potestesse perfectè actus virtutis vel peccati sed aliquid imperfectum in genere horum Vnde talis motus sensualitatis rationem praeueniens est peccatum veniale quod est quiddam imperfectum in genere peccati I answere that that which man doth without the deliberation of reason he doth it not perfectly because that which is the chiefe in man worketh nothing there wherefore it is not perfectly mans act and consequently it cannot be perfectly the act of vertue or of sinne but some imperfect thing in this kinde Whereupon such a motion of sensuality preuenting reason is a venial sinne which is a certaine imperfect thing in the nature of sinne The fourth replie Concupiscence at the most is but a little venial sinne as S. Thomas Aquinas truely saith therefore it cannot bring a man to hell neither debarre him of heauen The answere I answere that euerie sin is mortall vndoubtedly as which is flatly against Gods holy commaundements For that the transgression of Gods commandements is a grieuous mortal sinne no man euer did or will denie Cursed is euery one saith the apostle that continueth not in all things which are written in the booke of the law to doe them Againe in another place The reward or wage of sinne is death And S. Iames saith Whosoeuer shall keepe the whole lawe and yet faileth in one point he is guiltie of all Nowe that euerie sinne aswel great as small is against Gods holy lawe I prooue sundrie waies First because the Apostle saith that al our thoughts words and works ought to be referred to the glorie of God for most certaine it is that no sinne at al is referred to Gods glorie For no sin no not the least of al is referrible to god but is of it own nature repugnant to his glorie Secondly because wee must yeelde an account to God for euerie idle word as Christ himselfe telleth vs and yet as euerie child can perceiue God most merciful and most iust wil neuer lay that to our charge which is not against his holy law Thirdly because the apostle saith of sin generally that the punishment thereof is death Fourthly because sinne in generall is defined by the fathers to bee the transgression of Gods law which definition could not bee true if anie little sinne could stand with his commaundement Fiftly because famous popish writers as Ioannes Gerson Michael Baius Almayn and our owne Bishop of Rochester doe all freely graunt that euerie sinne is mortall of it owne nature and deserueth eternall death their words I haue alleaged in my booke of Motiues Sixtly because Durandus and Iosephus Angles to whom the Schooles of the papistes this day accord doe sharpely impugne Aquinas his doctrine in that he teacheth Venials not to be against Gods law The 7. conclusion Although good works do not iustifie yet are they pretious in Gods sight and neuer want their reward Christ himselfe prooueth this conclusion when he promiseth that not so much as a cup of colde water giuen in his name shall passe without reward And in another place hee saith That whosoeuer shall leaue house parents brethren wife or children for his sake shal receiue much more in this world and in the world to come life euerlasting And in another place Christ telleth vs that when the sonne of man commeth in his glory and al his holy angels with him then will he pronounce them blessed that haue done the works of charitie to their poore neighbours God saith S. Paul will reward euery man according to his workes The Lord rewarded me saith holy
condition of the married For he saith indeede that the vnmarried doth better if he can so continue albeit in marrying he sinneth not yet this is not in respect of any holines that resulteth out of single life but because the vnmarried is more free from the cares of the world and so more apt forstudie the seruice of God I say secondly that S. Paul neuer meant to enforce any person either to be married or to leade a single life therfore did he say that he sought for the coÌ„modity of the Corinthians but not to entangle theÌ„ in the snare as if he had said if I shuld go about to bar you of mariage I shuld tangle you in a snare I say thirdly y t a man may be as holy in mariage as if he liued vnmarried to his liues end which S. Hierome though a great patron of single life both grauely considered and sincerely acknowledged for he saith that Abraham pleased God no lesse in wedlocke then virgins doe in their single life these are his expresse words as the popish canon law reciteth them Abraham placuit in coniugio sicut nunc virgines placent in castitate seruiuit ille legi tempori suo seruiamus nos legi tempori nostro in quos fines coelorum deuenerunt Abraham pleased God in marriage euen as virgins now please in chastity hee serued the law and his time let vs also vpon whom the ends of the world is come serue the law our time Yea S. Nazianzene saith that his father being a bishop was greatly holpen in pietie by his wife the same S. Gregory saith in another place that neither marriage nor single life doth either ioyne vs to God or to the world or withdraw vs from god or from the world This is confirmed by S. Chrysostome in these words Nuptiae licet difficultatis in se plurimum habeant ita tamen assumi possunt vt perfectiori vitae impedimento non sint Although marriage haue great trouble in it self yet may it so be vsed as it shalbe no hindrance to perâ—â—t life S. Austen after that he had auouched holy life to be nothing abated in holy Samuel and Zacharias by reason of their marriages by and by he addeth these words Qua ergo ratione accusatur quod minime obesse probatur quis neget bonum debere dici quod neminem laedit How therefore is that thing accused which is proued to do no hurt who denieth that that ought to be called good which bringeth harme to none S. Clemens Alexandrinus giueth a sufficient solution to this obiection in these expresse words Annon permittitur etiam ei qui vxorem duxit vna cum coÌ„iugio etiam esse solicitum de iis quae sunt domini sequitur ambae enim sunt sanctae in domino haec quidem vt vxor illa verò vt virgo cannot she also that is married together with hir marriage seeke the things that pertaine to the Lord for they both are holy in the lord this as a wife she as a virgin Nicephorus though he were caried away with sundry errors of his time yet doth he make S. Gregory who was a married bishop equal with S. Basill his brother who led a single life these are his words Et quamuis is coniugeÌ„ habuerit rebus tamen aliis fratri minimè cessit though he were married yet was he nothing inferior to his brother in other things In fine S Ambrose saith thus Quid ergo dicimus si virgines de deo cogitant iunctae viris demundo qu espes relinqutur nubentibus apud deum si enim ita est dubium est de salute eorum nam videmus virgines de seculo cogitare matrimonio iunctos dominicis studere operibus What therfore say we if virgins think of god and the married of the world what hope haue the married with God for if it be so their saluation is in doubt for we see that virgins do thinke of the world and that married men are careful for the works of the Lord. The third obiection Defraude not one another but for praier sake saith S. Paul ergo priests that must euer pray must euer abstaine The answere I say first that S. Paul doth here shew the necessity of marriage in that he disswadeth not from abstinence saue onely for praier sake I say secondly that priests must not euer be occupied in prayer no more then lay men their nature and condion requireth conuenient recreation I say thirdly that y e apostle speaketh not here of euery kind of praier but of extraordinary praier appointed for vrgent extraordinary causes which kinde of praiers must alwaies haue fasting ioyned with them as the apostle doth expressely say and so if the papistes will needes haue the apostle to speake of vsuall and daily praier then must their priestes vsually and daily fast which I weene their fatted headed moonkes will neuer agree vnto or at least neuer put in practise Yea they must continually absteine from wine for so the law required The fourth obiection When Dauid to satisfie his hunger being vrgent required of Abimelech the priest some cakes of bread or what els came to hand Abimelech answered that hee had no common bread but if he and his companie were not polluted with women hee would giue them hallowed bread Now it is cleere that Abimelech meant of their lawfull wiues because hee coulde not suspect holy Dauid to haue been polluted with naughtie women If therefore lawfull wedlocke did so pollute secular persons that for the vse therof they might not eate the Shew bread how much more shall the vse of wedlocke pollute priests of the new testament that they may not eate Christes body in the holy masse The answere I say first that how holy your Masse is shal by Gods grace appeare in conuenient place I say secondly that wedlocke is an honourable and vndefiled bed and therefore cannot pollute such persons as vse the same lawfully and in the feare of God Yea if the vse thereof had not been lawfull euen in Bishops and other ministers of the church holy Paphnutius durst not haue defended the same publikely in the presence of so many learned men at Nice who for all that did so and was therfore not onely highly commended but the whole councell alsagreed to his godly motion I say thirdly that there were many legall contamination aswel in men as in women whereof who list may see at large in Leniticus but neither was the lawfull matrimoniall act reputed any of them neither do those legall ceremonies concerne vs of the newe testament but the true puritie signified by the same that is Christian purification wrought in the bloud of Christ Iesus and apprehended by a true sincere and liuely faith I say fourthly that many legal contamâ—nations were no other sinnes then the manifold popish irregularities then nocturne pollutions done
like worthie for that communion not as it was in the olde lawe where the priest ate one part and the people another neither coulde the people be permitted to take part of that that the priest ate For nowe it is not so but to all is proposed one bodie and one cuppe Out of these golden words I note first that the difference in communion is a Iudaicall ceremonie from which Christs death deliuered vs. I note secondly that in the christian communion the common people ought to be as free as the minister I note thirdly that it was so in Saint Chrysostomes time when the people receiued vnder both kinds I note fourthly that the pope hath brought vs into greater bondage then euer were the Iewes S. Ignatius hath these wordes Vna est caro domini Iesu vnus eius sanguis qui pro nobis effusus est vnus etiam panis pro omnibus confractus vnus calix totius ecclesiae There is one flesh of our Lord Iesus one blood which was shed for vs one bread also broken for all and one cuppe of the whole church Saint Iustine hath these wordes Praesidens vero postquam gratiarum actionem perfecit populus vniuersus apprecatione laeta eum comprobauit qui apud nos vocantur diaconi atquo ministri distribuunt vnicuique praesentium vt participet eum in quo gratiae actae sunt panem vinum aquam After the chiefe pastour hath finished the giuing of thankes and all the people haue with ioyfull prayer approoued the same they that we cal Deacons and Ministers do distribute to euery one that is present the sanctified bread wine and water to be partaker thereof Yea the said Iustinus a little after addeth these important wordes Nam apostoli in commentarijs à se scriptis quae euangelia vocantur ita tradiderunt praecepisse sibi Iesum For the apostles in their commentaries that is in the gospelles haue taught vs that Iesus so commaunded them to minister the holie communion Where note by the way that Christ did not onelie ordaine both kindes but he also gaue commaundement to retaine the same in the church For which cause saint Paul teaching the Corinthians to communicate vnder both kinds said that he receiued that form maner from the Lord. S. Austen hath these words Cum Dom. dicat nisi manducaueritis carnem meam biberitis meum sanguinem non habebitis vitam in vobis quid sibi vult quod à sanguine sacrificiorum quae pro peccatis offerebantur tantopere populus prohibetur si illis sacrificijs vnum hoc sacrificium significabatur in quo vera sit remissio peccatorum à cuius tamen sacrificij sanguine in alimentum sumendo noÌ„ solum nemo prohibetur sed ad bibendum potius omnes exhortaÌ„tur qui volunt habere vitam When our Lord saith vnles ye shal eate my flesh and drinke my blood ye shal haue no life in you what meaneth it that the people is so greatly forbidden the blood of sacrifices which was offered for sins if in those sacrifices this onely sacrifice was signified in which there is true remission of sins From y e blood of which sacrifice for al that to be takeÌ„ for nourishment not only none is prohibited but al rather are exhorted to drinke it that desire to haue life S. Ambrose at such time as the emperour Theodosius after his great slaughter of men at Thessalonica desired to enter into the church at Millan and there to be partaker of the holie eucharist spoke these words vnto him Quî quaeso manus iniusta caede sanguine respersas extendere audes eisdem sacrosanctum corpus domini accipere aut quomodo venerandum eius sanguinem ori admouebis qui furore irae iubente tantum sanguinis tam iniquè effudisti How I pray thee darest thou stretch out thy hands sprinckled with vniust slaughter and blood and to take the holie bodie of our Lord in the same Or how wilt thou touch thy mouth with his venerable blood who to satisfy thy fury hast shed so much bloud so vnworthily Gregorius magnus their owne bishop of Rome confirmeth this veritie in these words Eius quippe ibi corpus sumitur eius caro in populi salutem partitur eius sanguis non iam in manus infidelium sed in ora fidelium funditur For his bodie is there receiued his flesh is diuided for the saluation of the people his bloud is now powred not into the handes of infidels but into the mouthes of the faithfull What need many words Their owne Gelasius in their owne canon law condemneth their fact as flat sacrilege These be his words Aut integra sacramenta percipiant aut ab integris arceaÌ„tur quia diuisio vnius eiusdeÌ„que mysterij sine grandi sacrilegio non potest peruenire Either let them participate the whole sacraments or els let them abstain from the whole bicause the diuision of one and the same sacrament cannot be done without great sacrilege The first obiection The commaundement to receiue in both kinds was onelie giuen to the twelue apostles and in them to all priestes for they onely were present when Christ spâ—ke these wordes Drinke ye all of this The answer I say first that if the commaundement pertained onelie to the apostles then are priests aswell as clarkes free from the same I say secondly that the commandement was giuen of both kindes in one and the selfe same maner and therefore the lay people are as free from the one as the from the other I say thirdly that by the common opinion of the papists they were lay people that receiued the communion at Christs handes in his supper For the apostles were vnpriested vntil after his resurrection when hee saide Receiue ye the holy ghost I say fourthly with S. Bernard that the participation of both kinds was commaunded by Christ in the first institution thereof for thus doth he write Nam de sacramento quidem corporis sanguinis sui nemo est qui nesciat hanc quoque tantam tam singularem alimoniam eâ primùm die exhibitam eâ die commendatam mandatam deinceps frequentari For concerning the sacrament of his body and bloud euery one knoweth that this such and so singular nourishment was exhibited that day the first that day commended and commaunded afterward to be frequented This commandement S. Cyprian and saint Iustine vrge for both kindes their words already are set downe I say fiftly that S. Paul who knew Christs minde aswell as any papist did communicate the vnpriested Corinthians vnder both kinds and told them that Christ had so appointed The replie S. Paul only recited Christs institution saith our Iesuite Bellarmine but gaue no commaundement for both kindes but left it as he found it indifferent and in the free choise of the Corinthians to communicate in both or in one only kind The answere I say
first that howsoeuer sundry of you admire your Iesuites whom I willingly confesse to be learned wishing they would vse their learning to Gods glorie yet cannot wise men be carried away with ipse dixit as if they were become disciples of Pythagoras I say secoÌ„dly that S. Pauls own words confute your Iesuite sufficiently For first he saith that he deliuered euen that which he receiued Againe he reciteth the precept aswel after the cup as after the bread which must bee wel obserued For hereupon doth it follow that both kinds be of like force the one not more commanded then y e other Thirdly he applieth aswel the drinking of the cup as the eating of y e bread to al the faithful in generall Fourthly he applieth the examination to euery one of the faithful Fiftly he willeth the examination to be made aswel in drinking of the cup as in eating of the bread Sixtly he wrote spake aswel to the lay people as to the priests as the beginning of the epistle declareth And in this sense doth their owne Haymo so reputed expound S. Paul for these are his words Ego nâ— accepi à domino quod et tradidi vobis .i. mysterâ—uÌ„ corporis sanguinis Dom. quomodo debeatis sumere Sicut mihi reuelauit ita tradidi vobis For I haue receiued of the Lord that which I deliuered to you that is the mysterie of our Lords body and bloud in what manner ye ought to receiue it Euen as he reuealed it to me so haue I deliuered it to you The reply S. Marke maketh it plaine that it was onely spoken to the apostles Drinke ye all of it For he addeth And they all dranke of it For it is cleare that al they dranke thereof who were commaunded to drinke The answere I say first that it was spoken to al the faithfull aswell as to the apostles For Paul exhorted the whole church at Corinth to vse both the kinds saying that God had so appointed As if he had said not I but the Lord coÌ„mandeth you thus to do for he reuealed to me euen as I haue deliuered vnto you Therefore if ye do it not you transgresse his holy commaundement Yea S. Paul declared expressely in the very beginning of his epistle that commandement of receiuing the holy Eucharist in both kindes concerned all the faithfull in the world as well to come as theÌ„ liuing For these words Ye shal shew the Lords death till he come doe euidently prooue that the forme prescribed by the apostle must continue after the death of the Corinthians euen till the day of doome I say secondly that since Christ himselfe instituted both kinds since the apostle deliuered both kinds euen to the lay people since the church communicated to the faithful laycall people in both kinds euerie where for many hundred yeres together as the papists themselues cannot denie since they confesse that both kinds may lawfully be vsed since no scripture teacheth vs that one kind is sufficient since no father did euer exhort to vse one only kind since no councell till the late synode of Constance did euer commaund one only kind in fine since the church for more then a thousand yeeres together did euer vse both kinds how impudent howe vnchristian nay how tyrannicall and bloud-thirstie is the Pope of Rome and his Iesuits that incense and excite him thereunto who labor this day with fire and fagot to enforce the faithful to the contrary I say thirdly that this obiection maketh against the papists for in that they al dranke therof it cannot folow that none else may drinke thereof otherwise the practise of the church hitherto should haue beene wicked and the apostles themselues haue sinned grieuously but that all present ought to drinke thereof For which cause their owne canon-law commaundeth all to bee putte out of the church that will not communicate when the consecration is ended Yea their own Pope Iulius doth condemne their grosse illation as who vnderstoode Christes wordes of all the faithfull Thus doth he write Illud vero quod pro complemento communionis intinctam tradunt eucharistiam populis nec hoc prolatum ex euangelio testimonium receperunt vbi apostolis corpus suum commendauit sanguinem seorsum enim panis seorsum calicit coÌ„mendatio memoratur Nam intinctum panem alijs ChristuÌ„ praebuisse non legimus excepto illo discipulo tantuÌ„ queÌ„ intincta buccella magistri proditorem ostenderet But where they giue y e dipped eucharist to the people for the complement of the communion they found not this witnessed in the gospel where Christ coÌ„mended his bodie and blood to his disciples For the bread is commended apart and the cuppe also apart For we reade not that Christ gaue dipped bread to any others saue onelie to the disciple whom the dipped morsell declared to be the betrayer of his maister The replie The councill of Constance commaunded no new thing but onelie made a law for the continual performance of that which the church had practised long before The answer I say first that thogh it were so practised before in some places yet was that practise neither generall nor approued by anie setled lawe vntil the late councill of Constance I say secondly that the great pillar of the popish church Thomas Aquinas honestly confesseth so much in this behalf as is enough for the euerlasting confusion of all Romish hypocrites And because I couet to deale faithfully in this point as in al other I will alleage the expresse wordes of Aquinas as himselfe hath deliuered them thus doth he write Ex parte quidem ipsius sacramenti conuenit quòd vtrumque sumatur scilicet corpus sanguis quia in vtroque consistit perfectio sacramenti Et ideo quia ad sacerdotem pertinet hoc sacramentum consecrare perficere nullo modo debet corpus Christi sumere sine sanguine ex parte autem sumentium requiritur summa reuerentia cautela ne aliquid accidat quod vergat ad iniuriam tanti mysterij quod praecipuè posset accidere in sanguinis sumptione qui quidem si incautè sumeretur de facili posset effundi Et quia creuit multitudo populi christiani in quâ continentur senes iuuenes paruuli quorum quidâ—m non sunt tantae discretionis vt cautelam debitam circa vsum huius sacramenti adhibeant ideo prouidè in quibusdam ecclesiis obseruatur vt populo sanguis sumendus non detur sed solûm à sacerdote sumatur In the behalfe of the sacrament it is meete that both be receiued to wit both the bodie and the blood bicause in both consisteth the perfection of the sacrament and therefore because it belongeth to the priest to consecrate and to perfite this sacrament he may in no case receiue the bodie of Christ without the blood In the behalfe of the receiuers great reuerence and circumspection is required left any thing
pope yea which is more to be admired the necessity of auricular confession was not established by popish decree before the said Innocent was pope of Rome so writes their own historiographer Platina The fourth obiection Tertullian and Cyprian who liued aboue 1300. yeres ago do both make mention of secret confession made closely to the priests yea of such sins as the people neuer did saue only that they thoght of thē in their harts Which words can neuer be rackt to publike confession but must perforce be vnderstood of that auricular cōfession which is this day vsed in the church of Rome The answere I say first that Cyprian and Tertullian speake of publike confession which the fathers of the ancient church appointed to be done for publike crimes which practise in some measure is this day obserued in our church of England I say secondly that albeit in the ancient church some deuout people of great zeale confessed to the priests their secret faults desiring their counsel prayers and instruction in that behalfe yet were such confessions voluntary vntill Innocentius neither were they made by all the people neither did they recite all their sinnes but such onely as seemed good vnto them This answer is sufficiently prooued already yet for better satisfaction of the Reader I will confute papists by papists in expresse termes Beatus Rhenanus a popish diuine and a man of great learning though carried away with the errours of his time hath testified this veritie so sincerely and so copiously as more neede not be said herein First therefore he hath these words De publica confessione siue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 facit mentionē cuius etiam Leo papa meminit de poenitentia dist 1. qua maiores nostros apparet aliquandiu vsos fuisse priusquā ista secreta nasceretur qua hodie cōscientiā nostram sacerdoti detegimus vsque ad circumstantiarū omnium minutias quā tamen saluberrimam esse nemo potest inficiari Sane sunt etiam inter iuris pontificij interpretes qui institutam ab ecclesia tradant confessionē igitur quantum conijcere datur illa sumpsit originem ex veteri instrumento haec autē hinc nata videtur quod constitutis quibusdam poenitentiae legibus quib tempus modus singulis peccatis expiandis praestituebatur Canones poenitentiales vocant opus fuit sacerdotem in consilium adhiberi praesertim à laicis He maketh mention he speaketh of Tertullian of publike confession whereof Leo also maketh mention which it is cleare that our ancestors vsed som space of time before this secret cōfession was hatched with which we this day disclose our conscience to the priest til we haue told the least circumstance of al which neuertheles no man can denie to be very good Yea ther be euen amōg them that interpret the popes law who acknowledge confession to be ordained by the church Therefore as I can coniecture the publike confession began of the olde Testament this auricular came vp thus because so soone as certain lawes were made in which the time and the maner were appointed for the punishment of euery sinne which they tearme the penitentiall canons it was needefull to haue a priest for counsell especially to the lay people Out of these words I note first that Tertullian Cyprian Leo and all the ancient writers do alway vnderstand publike when they speake of confession although some of them as Leo were bishops of Rome themselues I note secondly that the ancient church knewe not this late Popish auricular confession as which was hatched but of late yeares I note thirdly that this Beatus Rhenanus is a great papist as who acknowledgeth this confession auricular to be good consequently that his answer is most forcible against y e papists I note fourthly that this auricular confession was ordained by the law of man and neither by Christ nor by his apostles I note fiftly that the confession wherof the ancient fathers speake was of some speciall sinnes but not of all I proue it because Rhenanus saith that it began of the old testament in which it is cleare that all sins were not particularly confessed Let this be wel marked I note sixtly that after the constitution of the penitential canons priests were ordained purposely to giue counsell and instruction to the simple Lay people which in processe of time is brought to a further matter Secondly Rhenanus hath these expresse words Vides igitur necessarium fuisse sacerdotis vti consilio quatenus institutis poenitentiae legibus fieret satis quae laicis non perinde cognitae erant Sequitur caeterum soli Deo confitendum esse diuus Chrysostomus author est Thou seest therefore that it was necessary to vse the counsel of a priest that so the penitentiall canons might be obserued which the lay people vnderstood not But for al that that we must confesse our selues only to God S. Chrysost. is our author Out of these words I note first that the ancient church appointed priests ouer the penitents onely for this end and purpose that they might giue them counsell how to make satisfaction according to the canons which them selues did not vnderstand I note secondly that we are bound to confesse all our sinnes onely to God alone Which Rhenanus though a Papist granteth constantly being thereto inforced by the authoritie of the scripture of S. Chrysostome S. Cyprian S. Basil S. Bede S. Ambrose S. Hierome Tertullian Hesychius Theodulphus Theodorus Bertramus Rabanus and Nectarius all which hee alleadgeth for his opinion Who can wish further proofe Thirdly Rhenanus writeth thus Non aliam ob causam complurium hîc testimonijs vsi sumus quam ne quis admiretur Tertullianum de clancularia illa admissorum confessione nihil locutum quae quātum conijcimus penitus id temporis ignorabatur For no other cause haue I vsed here the testimonies of so many writers but lest any should maruell that Tertullian spake nothing of that secret confession which as I thinke was altogether vnknowen at that time Lo Tertullian spake not one word of auricular confession as which was not heard of in his time So then the holy fathers are wholy against the papists euen by the iudgement of a famous papist Fourthly Rhenanus saith thus Thomas Aquinas Scotus homines nimium arguti confessionem hodie talem reddiderunt vt Ioannes ille Geilerius grauis ac sanctus theologus qui tot annis argentorati concionatus est apud amicos suos saepe testatus sit iuxta corū deuteroseis impossibile esse confiteri But Th. Aquinas Scotus men too much delighted with subtilties haue brought confession this day to such a passe that Ioannes Geilerius a graue and reuerend diuine and a preacher a long time at Argentoratum said many a time vnto his friends that it was impossible for a man to make his confession according to their
behalfe Some God be thanked for it are wholy and soundly reformed Othersome are inforced so to doubt of your doctrine as they know not in the worlde what to say or thinke thereof Othersome either seduced by your sinister report or else to saue your credite if it would be affirme very desperately that you haue answered my Motiues already and all generally both thinke and say that yee will shortly answere them if there be any trueth on your side One whole yeere I haue expected your putatiue answere as who had then and still haue a most feruent desire speedily to reply vpon the same Now since mine expectation is in that point frustrate in this second yeere I haue addressed my selfe to giue you a further prouocation In this Booke I haue not concealed any thing that I knew or could possibly say for you I haue not dissembled the mightiest obiections that can be made in your defence neither haue I passed slenderly ouer them but confuted them so pithily and so exactly as if any of you or of your brethren abroad shall be able to yeelde a sufficient answere in your defence I promise vnfainedly to subscribe vnto his doctrine Remember therfore what the Orator saith to wit that to erre standeth with mans infirmitie but to perseuere in errour is proper to fooles alone If you can deuise how and in what sort to answer me all wise men both say and thinke that ye will doe it vndoubtedly If you know not how to defend your cause because the trueth preuaileth so mightily then shew your selues to be wise men by embracing the trueth willingly and not to be fooles by striuing against the same wilfully Haue the feare of God before your eies pray that your hearts may be inlightened with the true knowledge of his sacred word and let not the shame of the world keep you backe from the publike confession of the known truth Peruse my Booke seriously ponder my discourse deepely contemne nothing wilfully examine all my reasons sincerely and that done giue your indifferent censures accordinglie If you finde Poperie confuted effectuallie then yeelde to the trueth and giue God the glorie if you thinke I faile in prouing my intended purpose then vse your wittes and your pennes as well for my confutation as for the credit of your cause and the expectation of your seely brethren who shortly will renounce all Poperie if ye with speede doe not defend the same Amen To the Christian Reader IN this small volume gentle reader thou maiest behold the original of Poperie with the daily increments therof liuely discouered before thine eies as also an euident confutation of whatsoeuer can possibly be said in defence of the same Thou hast together with this a fruitfull summarie of the olde and newe Testament contained in the first second part of this present Suruey Throughout which discourse thou must euer remember that in the bookes of the Kings and of the Psalmes I commonly follow the supputation of the latins And if thou canst reape any commodity by this my labor then thanke God for it and pray that my daily studies may still tend to his glorie and the common good of his churche I haue long expected an answere from the Papists either seuerally from some one or ioyntly from many If they be still silent the world must needes iudge that the trueth is not on their side How sincerely I am perswaded as I write to God the iust iudge I appeale for witnesse Albeit the malitious and mal-content seeke by the contrarie and like slanderous reports to bring me in disgrace But as Christs Apostle saith to them that loue God all things in the end will turne to the best Fare well in Christ Iesus and continue in louing me christianly as I hope thou doest The postscript to all the readers of this Suruey in generall AFter that I had accomplished this present volume a friend of mine gaue me to vnderstand that some persons were offended because I say in the epistle dedicatory of my Motiues that S. Paul erred gentilizing For whose satisfaction if they wil be satified with reason I say first that the nature and condition of some persons is such that though they be slow to doe well themselues yet are they very propense to reprehend that which is well done by others I say secondly that if such persons would deeply consider the prudent law of the sage wise Persians other things well said shuld haue mooued them to conceale that fault though it were as ill as they imagine I say thirdly that such persons seeke Nodum in scirpo and that it is no fault at all I prooue it euidently because to gentilize is nothing els but to play the part of a gentile and consequently since S. Paul then named Saul did as cruelly persecute the Christians as euer did the tyrannicall gentiles Nero Domitianâ— Traiane Seuerus Maximinus Dâ—cius or Dioclesianus It followeth of necessitie that he did gentilize indeed For as holy writ recordeth Hee breathed out threatninges and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord. He desired letters to Damascus that hee might bring bound to Ierusalem all aswell women as men that professed the name of Christ Iesus insomuch that a voice cried from heauen vnto him and saide Saul Saul why persecutest thou me He likewise saith of himselfe that hee is not worthy to be called an apostle because he persecuted the church of God and all this doubtlesse he did in error because as himselfe saith of the Iewes his brethren if they had knowen they would neuer haue crucified the Lord of glorie Yea hee himselfe saith of himselfe that hee was receiued to mercie because hee erred ignorantly through vnbeliefe S. Paul therefore erred gentilizing though hee were a Iew in that he persecuted Christ and his church euen as did the Gentiles in the error of Gentilitie Which thing being spoken obiter in the way of mine honest purgation and not to establish anie point of doctrin was not a sufficient motiue to offend anie wel affected reader Well I say with the apostle Si hominibus placerem Christi seruus non essem As before so now againe I willingly employ my whole industry to glorifie my God and to profite his church if by any meanes I can And as I greatly wish to pleasure thankful persons who euer accept in good part godly labors so do I make no great account to discontent malitious Zoili who seldom or neuer broke that wel which is well done by others THE FIRST PART Containeth the state of the Church from Adam vntil the Monarchie of the Romanes The first booke is of the time and memorable actes from Adam vnto the captiuitie of the two Tribes The first Chapter of the Creation and other things coincident The first Section of the creation of Man GOd created heauen the foure elements and all things contained therein and this he did of nothing that is without any
Ioatham Amos prophesied against the nations adiacent to them in the time of Ozias Esaias prophesied against Iuda and Iurasalem in the time of Ioatham Ioel prophesied to Iuda and Ierusalem in the time of Ozias Michaeas prophesied against Ierusalem and Samaria in the time of Ioatham Nahum prophesied to the Assyrians and Niniuites in the time of Ioatham Abacuc prophesied against Babylon and Nabuchodonosor in the time of Manasses Ieremias prophesied to the citie of Ierusalem in the time of Iosias and Zedechias Sophonias prophesied against Iurusalem and Iuda in the time of Iosias Ezechiel prophesied to the captiues in Babylon in the time of Ioachim Daniel prophesied to his countrey men in Babylon in the time of Ioachim Haggaeus prophesied to all the people in Ierusalem and Iuda in the time of Zorobabel Zacharias prophesied to the people of Ierusalem and Iuda in the time of Zorobabel Malachias prophesied to the people of Ierusalem Iuda in the time of in the end of the captiuitie 〈…〉 CHAP. X. Containing a particular description of the time of the Prophets called the greater The first section of the Prophet Esay THe Prophet Esay was the sonne of Amos not of that Amos who was the third of the 12. lesser Prophetes but of another Amos hauing different characters with the Hebrews Aug de ciuit libr. 18. cap. 27. Hier. in 1. cap Esaiae Esay prophesied to Ierusalem and Iuda that is to the two tribes of Beniamin and Iuda Hier. in 1. cap Esaiae Esay who was also called Azarias Osee Ioel Amos prophesied at the selfe same time in the daies of Osias Ioatham Achas and Ezechias kings of Iuda Hier. in princ Esaiae The wicked king Manasses caused the prophet Esay to be sawed in peeces with a wodden saw Wherefore that which the Epistle to the Ebrewes saith of the tortures of Gods Saintes that they were hewen in sunder is very fitly referred to the prophet Esay Hier. lib. 15. cap. 57. in Esaiam The second section of the prophet Ieremie Ieremie prophesied to y e two tribes of Iuda Beniamin he foretold their captiuitie in Babylon hee began his prophesie in the daies of Iosias he continued the same in the daies of Ioachim and vntill the eleuenth yeare of Sedechias in the time of the captiuitie Orig. hom 1. in Hier. Aug. de ciu lib. 18. c. 33. Betweene the time of Ieremias and Esaias were one hundred and fiftie yeares Hier. lib. 9. cap. 30. in Esaiam He was the sonne of Helkias the priest cap. 1. Iere. v. 1. the tradition of the Hebrewes is that whensoeuer the father or graundfather of any prophet is put in the title such a one was also a prophet himselfe Gloss. ordinar Sophonias prophesied at the same time with Ieremias Athanas in synop Aug. de ciu lib. 18. cap. 33. Iehoiakim king of Iuda burnt the book which Baruc wrote wrote at the mouth of Ieremias in which booke the prophet shewed what punishment God had determined to bring vpon Iuda and Israel if they would not returne euery man from his euill way and bring forth worthy fruites of repentance But Ieremie at Gods appointment wrote another book which contained the afflictions of Iuda and Israel in a farre larger maner Ierem. cap. 36. Where we may note by the way that the wicked do euer kicke against the preachers of Gods word especially when their sinnes are reprooued But at length they tast of the cup of Gods wrath for their great contempt and disobedience And our papistes are now become Iehoiakims as who both burne the writers of all bookes that reprooue their superstitions and idolatry and also cast the bookes into the fire Yea euen the holy bibles if they be once translated into the vulgar tongue Ieremie began to prophesie when he was a childe in the 13. yeere of Iosias king of Iuda hee continued his prophesie during the reigne of Iosias the sonne of Amon. 19. yeares and after that vnder Ioachim 11. yeres and vnder Sedechias 11. yeares who was the last king of Iuda The three moneths of Ioachaz and Iechonias are reckoned in the yeares afore named So that from the beginning of his prophesie vntill the captiuitie of Ierusalem in which himselfe was taken he prophesied 41. yeres ouer and besides that time in which he was carried away into Egypt and prophesied in Taphins Hier. in cap. 2. Ierem. at which Taphins in Egypt as some write hee was stoned to death But before that time he was put in a deep dungeon of myre Iere. 38. The third section of the prophet Ezechiel Ezechiel followed Ieremie and began to prophesie in the fift yeare of the transmigration of Iechonias which was the same yeare of the reigne of Sedechias Hier. lib. 5. cap. 29. in Ieremiam in the 30. yere after some of his age Ezechias c. 1. but as S. Hierome writeth the 30. yeares whereof the Prophet speaketh are not the yeares of the age of Ezechiel himself but the yeares from the 18. of king Iosias at what time the booke of the law was found vntill the fift yeare of the captiuity of Iechonias Hier. in cap. 1. Exech 2. Ezechiel was carried away captiue into Babilon togither with Iechonias Daniel and the three children Hier. in princ Ezech. Aug. de ciu lib. 18. cap. 34. This holy prophet foretold the destruction of Hierusalem and the captiuitie of the Iewes for their manifold sinnes and wickednesse earnestly exhorting them to repentance For which cause the Iewes were so exasperated against him as the wicked are this day against the preachers of Gods word that they trailed him on the ground amongst the stones till his braines went out Author oper imperf in Matt. cap. 23. hom 46. prop. finem A golden obseruation In the dayes of Iosias king of Iuda Helkiah the Priest found the booke of the lawe of the Lord giuen by the hand of Moses Which when the good king vnderstood hee gathered togither all the inhabitantes of Ierusalem and of Iuda and the Priests and the Leuites and all the people from the greatest to the smallest and he read in their eares all the words of the booke of the couenant that was found in the house of the Lord and the king caused all that were found in Ierusalem and Beniamin to stand to it and hee compelled all the people of Israel to serue the Lord their God 2. Par. 34.4 Kin. 22. Thus saith the holy scripture By which we see euidently that the ouersight of all persons in all causes aswell ecclesiastical as ciuill pertaineth to the king and that the king hath the charge of religion committed into his handes and also that he may compel priests and Leuites to doe their dueties in that behalfe On the other side we may note the intollerable impietie of our disholy fathers the late bishops of Rome Who most irreligiously and very impudently excommunicate christian kings and monarches because they appoint the word of God to be preached in their
of the tribes and of the vse therof in reading the Prophets The first rule Whensoeuer the prophecie is directed to the ten tribes it is signified by one of these names Ephraim Samaria Israel Ioseph Iezrael Bethel Bethauen Iacob The second rule Whensoeuer the prophesie is directed to the two tribes it is signified by some one of these names Iuda Ierusalem Beniamin the house of Dauid and sometime Iacob The third rule The scripture sometime referreth Israel to all the twelue Tribes generally CHAP. XIII Of the destribution of the offices of the 12. lesser prophets These proâ—hets were â—ppointed â—ome of theÌ„ to threaten the captiuitie as Osee against both the kingdoms of Israel and Iuda Ioel against the two tribes onely Amos against the two tribes and the kingdomes adioyning Micheas against the kingdome of Israel especialy because it was y e cause of ruine to y e rest to comfort the Iewes as Abdias With threats against the kingdome of the Idumeans Ionas With threats against Niniue and the Assirians Nahum With threats against the Niniuites for their reuolt the second time Abacuc With threats against Nabuchodonosor and the Chaldeans who al wer enimies to the Iewes to call home from the captiuity as Sophonias who preached returne to come Aggeus who preached returne present Zacharias who preached returne present with aduise to build the temple Malachias who preached returne past with exhortation to pietie CHAP. XIIII Of the time when they prophecied Of the prophets some prophecied before the captiuitie as well of the ten tribes of Israel as of the two tribes Iuda and Beniamin as Esay Osee Ioel after the captiuitie as Daniel Aggeus Zacharias when the captiuitie was at hand as Ieremie in Iewrie Ezechiel in Babilon Ex Hier. in 1. cap. Ieremiae The finall scope of all the Prophets The prophets of God bicause they would neither discorage the Iewes with threatnings nor make them carelesse by the sweetnesse of Gods promises sought throughout their books to set before their eies the two principall partes of the law to wit the promise of saluation and the doctrine of good life For the first part they direct the Iewes and in them all the faithfull to the true Messias Christ Iesus by whome onely they shal haue true deliuerance for the second part they vse threatnings and menaces to bring them from their vices For this is the chiefe scope of all the prophets either by Gods promises to allure them to be godly or else by threatnings of his iudgements to feare them from sinne and wickednesse And albeit that the whole lawe containe these two points yet the prophets note particularly as well the time of Gods iudgements as the manner of the same CHAP. XV. Of the deuision of the Bookes of the Prophets The bookes of the prophets containe nine common places to wit Doctrines Ex Epiphanio de meÌ„s pond in initio Speculations Ex Epiphanio de meÌ„s pond in initio Exhortations Ex Epiphanio de meÌ„s pond in initio CoÌ„minations Ex Epiphanio de meÌ„s pond in initio LameÌ„tations Ex Epiphanio de meÌ„s pond in initio Consolations Ex Epiphanio de meÌ„s pond in initio Prayers Ex Epiphanio de meÌ„s pond in initio Histories Ex Epiphanio de meÌ„s pond in initio Predictions Ex Epiphanio de meÌ„s pond in initio CHAP. XVI Containeth the acts age time and death of famous men that were before the captiuitie of Babylon The first Section of Adam Adam was created vpon friday the day before the Iewish sabaoth Genes 1. verse 27. He was 130. yeares old when he begat Seth Genes 5.3 after Iosephus he was 230. yeares olde he liued 930. yeres and then died Genes 5. verse 5. He was buried as the Hebrewes write in the land of Israel Rabbi Isaac apud Genebr He had three sonnes Cain Abel and Seth. Cain murdered his brother Abel and for no other cause but euen for the true seruice of God Which when it is truely done the deuil can not abide it and for that end doth he alway stirre vp the wicked against the godly as hee did Cain against his brother Abel that the word of God and his doctrine may be extinguished and troden vnder foote Adam had many sons and daughters as Iosephus writeth The second Section of Seth. The posteritie of Cain was wholy extinct in Noahs floud but the stocke of Seth was multiplied vpon earth as of whom descended all the patriarkes prophets and holy men Gene. 5.6 7. The nephews of Seth made two pillers the one of brick the other of stone in which they ingraued the word of God and his prophecies for the perpetuall conseruation thereof They also diuided the yeere into twelue moneths and first obserued the course of the starres and taught astronomie Iosephus antiq libr. 1. ca 2. they are therefore grossely deceiued that either make the Egyptians or Mercurie or Atlas or Actinus the authors of Astronomie and other liberall sciences for as Iosephus saith the Egyptians were vtterly ignorant in such sciences before Abrahams comming vnto them which knowlege came first from the Chaldeans to the Egyptians from the Egyptians to the Greekes by the meanes of Abraham Iosephus libr. lib. 1. antiq ca. 6 7 8. Seth liued 912. yeeres and then died Genes 5. verse 8. Of the vngodly marriages betweene the posteritie of Seth in whose families God was truely worshipped and the posteritie of Cain who serued idolles came giants or men of huge magnitude By meanes of which wicked coniunction the knowledge of God was vtterly abolished in all but in Noah his three sonnes and their foure wiues so that God destroyed the remnant of mankind in the generall deluge Gene. 6. verse 2 7 verse 21. The third section of Noah When the earth after the floud returned to it former state againe Noah beganne to play the husbandman to till the ground to plant vines to gather the grapes and to finde out the vse of drinking wine Gen. 9. verse 20. Noah had three sonnes Sem Cham and Iaphet Sem with his children inhabited that part of the world which is towards the east For of his sonne Aram came the Syrians of Assur the Assyrians of Arphaxad the Chaldeans of Ela the Persians Cham inhabited that part of the world which is toward the south for of Canaan came the Cananites of Mizraim the Egyptians of Chus or Cush the Ethiopians of Saba the Arabians and Chanaan is now called Iewrie Iapheth inhabited the west and north parts and had manie sonnes to wit Gomer Magog Madai Iauan Tubal Mesech and Tyrus Of Iauan came the Greeks whom the Latines call Ianus and who are nowe tearmed Iones of Madai came the Medes of Gomer the Cimerians or Simbrians of Ascanes Gomers sonne the Germanes of Magog the Scythians of whome came the Turkes of Thyras the Thracians Gen. 10. Ioseph antiq lib. 1. cap. 6. Cari. pag 14. The tradition of the Hebrews is that
10. section of Iosue Iosue or Iesus the sonne of Nun was a zealous seruaunt of God and a valiant gouernour Hee brought the Israelites by Iordan into the land of promise they serued the Lord all the daies of his life He liued 110. yeares and then died Ios. 24. verse 29.31 He was buried in the borders of his owne inheritance which is in mount Ephraim Ios. 24. verse 30. Iosue slewe fiue kinges the king of Ierusalem the king of Hebron the king of Ierimoth the king of Lachis and the king of Eglon and hee hanged them on fiue trees Ios. 10. verse 26. Iosue his faith was so strong in the Lord that when hee fought against the Amorites hee praied that the sunne might stand vntill he were auenged of his enemies and not onely the sunne stood still in Gibeon but the Moone also in the valley of Aialon Ios. 10. ver 12.13 Iosue subdued all townes and cities saue Gibeon hee slew much people killed 31. kinges and gaue the whole land for an inheritance to Israel according to their portions through their tribes Ios. cap. 11. cap. 12. The 11. section of the Rechabites The Rechabites would drinke no wine all the dayes of their liues because Ionadab the sonne of Rechab their father had so commanded them Iere. 35. verse 8. The obseruation Vpon the Rechabites abstinence from wine the papistes of latter daies haue falsly grounded their superstitious fastes I say superstitious fastes because I reuerence and highly commend fasting when it is done christianly according to the word of God I therefore say first that the whole scope of the Prophet is nothing else in the storie of the Rechabites but by their example to confound the disobedient Iewes For the Rechabites kept strictly the commandementes of Ionadab euen many yeares after he was dead but the Iewes would not obey the euerliuing God Iere. 35. v. 14. I say secondly that Ionadab is not commended for his strict charge but his children for their ready obedience I say thirdly y e children are cōmanded to obey their parentes but onely in the Lord that is so farre forth as their commandementes are agreeable to Gods holy lawes So saith the Apostle Ephes. 6. verse 1. I say fourthly that their abstinence from wine was a ciuill obseruance not any religious worship And I prooue it by two reasons first because they were not onely prohibited to drinke wine but also to till the ground to plant Vineyardes and to build or haue houses Secondly because not only themselues but their wiues also their sonnes and their daughters had the selfe same charge who yet liued almost three hundred yeares after the charge was giuen Who all by popish collection should haue bin Monkes and Nunnes which to affirme is very absurd euen in their own maner of proceeding I say fiftly that Ionadabs charge was not giuen for merite or religion but for a meere ciuill respect to wit to acquaint his posteritie with an austere kinde of life that after when God should punishe the world for their sinnes they might beare it more patiently with more facility wander from place to place And because the vulgar sort is wonderfully seduced aswell by the doctrine as by the practise of popish fasting it will happily be nothing out of season heere to speake a little thereof The first proposition All mortall liuing creatures of God man excepted may lawfully be eaten with giuing of thanks I say first mortal by reason of the incorporall angels I say secondly liuing in respect of things inanimate not apt to yeeld nourishment I say thirdly except man because God made the other thinges for man but not one man for another Gen. 9. verse 3.5 The proposition is thus proued Christ reproouing the Pharisies for their fond opinions in superstitious obseruance of externall ceremonies which he termed the traditions of men willed al the multitude to hearken vnto him and to vnderstand that whatsoeuer was without man could not defile him when it entered into him Matt. 15. verse 11. Mar. 7. ver 15. I knowe and am perswaded through the Lord Iesus saith the Apostle that there is nothing vncleane of it selfe or by nature but to him that iudgeth it to be vncleane Rom. 14. verse 14. Saint Peter was long in doubt concerning this proposition His reason was because some meates were made vncleane by the olde law For which cause he in a vision saw heauen opened and a certaine vessell come downe to him wherein were all maner of foure footed beastes of the earth and wild beastes and creeping thinges and foules of the heauen And there came a voice to him bidding him kill and eate Yet Peter durst not eate but answered that hee neuer ate any polluted thing And the voice spake the second time willing him not to repute the thinges polluted which God had purified Thus Peter did and thus he erred at that time And euen so doe many silly soules this day who make lesse scruple to rap out great othes horrible blasphemies and slaunderous speeches against their neighbours then they doe in eating a peece of cheese or an egge in Lent and yet is the one directly against the law of God the other onely against the tyrannicall constitution of the pope The second proposition There are sundrie kindes of fastes To wit naturall ciuill christian miraculous coactiue religious Naturall fasting is when we fast for phisicke sake either to recouer our health lost or to preserue vs from diseases to come Of which kind of fast who list may reade at large in Hippocrates his Aphorismes and in Galens Commentaries vpon the same Ciuill fasting is when men are so seriously bent to their ciuill affaires that they will vse no intermission at all either for meate or drinke This kinde of fast vsed king Saul when hauing the victorie in his handes hee pursued the Philistines For euen then commanded he all his armie that none should eate or drink till night 1. Sam. 14. verse 24. So did the wicked Hebrewes who vowed that they would neither eate nor drinke vntill they had slaine S. Paule Acts. 23. verse 21. This fast practised Iosue when he charged the Sunne and Moone to stand still till hee was auenged of his enemies Ios. 10. verse 12. The christian fast is to keep sobrietie in our diet That is neither to eate too often neither immoderately Which kinde of fasting ought to bee more familiar then it is to many a one for want whereof the countrey aboundeth with drunkardes gluttons and idle belly-gods Miraculous fasting was practised by the apostles when our Sauiour did thereby confirme the preaching of his gospel Moses Elias and Christ himselfe vsed the same kinde of fast Coactiue fasting is when by reason of famine or want of foode we are enforced to abstaine With this fast souldiours are afflicted in warres poore folkes in their owne houses rich seldom or neuer Wherefore wisely saide the Philosopher touching the houre of dining
these expresse words Mens namque fuit Apostolorum non de diebus sancire festiuitatum sed conuersationem rectam dei praedicare culturam mihi ergo videtur quod sicut multa alia per prouincias ad consuetudinem venerunt sic Paschae festiuitas tradita sit eó quod nullus Apostolorum aliquid huic sanxisset For the meaning of the Apostles was not to make lawes for keeping holidaies but to preach the word of God and holy conuersation I therefore thinke that as many other things grew to a custome in diuerse countries so did also the keeping of Easter because none of the apostles made any lawe for the same Out of whose wordes I do note first that the scope of Christs apostles was this to preach the word of God not to appoint holidays Secondly that the keeping of Easter which is our sabbaoth was after the custome of the countrey Thirdly that the apostles made no lawe for the same Yea the first man in the world that made any positiue lawe for the christian sabbaoth was Constantine surnamed the Great who within three hundred and thirtie yeres after Christ about the 20. yere of his reigne to take away all contention in the church made a flatte Edict for the keeping of Friday and Sunday throughout the yeere Of this none can stand in doubt that shall pervse that fine Oration which Eusebius made de Laudibus Constantini the three and thirtieth yeere of his happy raigne This controuersie by the Emperours appointment was handled in the councill of Nice and immediatly after his decree which thing is euident by the saide Eusebius in his third booke de vitae Constantini and in his fourth booke hee affirmeth plainely that all subiect to the Romane empire were commaunded to abstaine from all bodily labour vppon the sundayes and fridayes Cassiodorus doeth prooue the same out of Sozomenus in these expresse wordes Die verò qui Dominicus vocatur quem Hebraei primam vocant Graeci autem soli distribuunt qui ante septimum est sanctuit à iudicijs aliÃsque causis vniuersis habere vacationem in eo tantum orationibus occupari The Emperour Constantine decreed that all people should cease from al sutes and other ciuil causes and consecrate themselues wholy vnto prayer vppon the Lordes day which the Iewes doe call the first day of the weeke and the Greekes doe terme Sunday as also vpon the friday The learned diuines in Germanie affirme directly that the Sunday may be altered These are their words Nam qui iudicant ecclesiae authoritate pro sabbato institutam esse diei Dominici obseruationem tanquam necessariam longè errant for they that thinke the church appointed the sunday to be kept for the sabbaoth of necessitie are deceiued grossely My third proofe is this Philippus Melancton Erasmus Roterodamus Iohannes Caluinus Petrus Martir Bullingerus and Vrsinus do all with vniforme consent yeelde so manifest testimonie to mine assertion as none doubtlesse that reade them attentiuely can without blushing deny the same Petrus Martir hath these words Quòd vnus dies certus in hebdomada cultui diuino mancipetur stabile firmum est an vero hic vel alius constituatur temporarium est ac mutabile That one day in the weeke must be assigned for diuine seruice it is constant firme and perpetuall but whether this or that day ought to be appointed for that purpose it is a thing that respects the time and may be changed Caluin in his Institutions after he hath commended the alteration of the saboth in the primitiue church affirmeth flatly that the day may yet be changed these be his wordes Neque sic tamen septenarium numerum morâ—r vt eius seruituti ecclesiam astringam neque enim ecclesias damnauero quae alios conuentibus suis solemnes dies habeant modò à superstitione absint Quod erit si ad solam obseruationem disciplinae ordinis bene compositi referantur Neyther do I for all that make such accompt of the seuenth day that I will haue the church tyed to keepe the same for I will not condemne churches which appoint other solemne dayes for their meetings so they be voide of superstition Which shal bee done if they appoint such tdayes onely for discipline and for comely order sake Vrsinus hath these words Summa est alligati sumus sabbato moraliter ceremonialiter in genere sed non in specie Hoc est ad aliquod ministerii publicè exercendi tempus sed non ad septimum vel aliquem alium certum diem This is the effect we are tied to the saboth morally and ceremonially in generall but not in speciall that is to say we are bound sometime to exercise the publike ministerie but wee are neither tied to the seauenth nor to any other certaine day And againe hee saith that all ceremonies appointed by the church may be altred againe by the counsell of the church Againe in another place he hath these expresse words Ecclesia christiana primum vel aliumdiem tribuit ministerio salua sua libertate the church of Christ hath libertie to appoint either the first day or some other day for Gods seruice To what end shoulde I alleage moe authorities for nothing can be more plainely spoken And as the church hath authoritie to alter the sabboth day so hath it power also which Bâ—llinger hath well obserued to appoint for the seruice of God certaine other festiuall dayes as the feast of the birth of our Lord of his incarnation circumcision passion resurrecâ—ion ascension and such like All which is this day verie prudently and laudably practised in the church of England An obiection If this your doctrine were true as you beare the world in hand it is then would it follow necessarily that there shoulde be no difference betweene the ordinance of God and man the reason seemeth euident because they both should be of like authoritie The answere I answere that they are not of like authoritie and I yeeld a double disparitie thereof for first the sabboth day is de iure diuino in generall albeit the determination thereof to this or that day in speciall be de iure humano but the other holidayes are both in generall and in speciall de iure humano Secondly because other holydaies are as well generally as specially appointed by man and therefore may be wholly abolished by the power of man But the sabboth day is generally appointed by God although the limitation thereof be reserued to his church and therefore notwithstanding that the church can limit the obseruation to this or that day yet can no power vpon earth wholly abolishe the same The fourth booke conteineth the description of the third Monarchie that is of the Greekes from Alexander vntill the Machabees CHAP. I. Of the originall of the monarchie and the circumstances of the same ALexander king of the Macedonians for his martiall
subiection But so soone as Philopator was dead his sonne Ptolomeus Epiphanes sent a mightie armie into Syria vnder the conduction of Scopa who recouered certaine Cities in Syria and a good part of Iudea Yet within a short space after Antiochus skirmishing with Scopa neere to Iordan had the vpper hand and tooke the cities againe from Scopa Then the Iewes yeelded them selues to Antiochus receiued his armie voluntarily within the walles and affoorded him large helpe against the garrisons of the said Scopa In respect of which fauour Antiochus dealt very fauourably with them gaue them rich giftes and graunted them libertie to call home againe all the Iewes that were in dispersion The third obseruation Antiochus Epiphanes was hostage at Rome where he learned by the Example of the Romaines flatterie deceite and other bad qualities to accommodate himselfe to the time and maners of men Hee was famous not for his vertues but for his naughtie dealing He was called as some write for his dissolute life not Epiphanes but Epimanes that is not noble but madde He beganne his reigne about 134. yeares after the death of Alexander at which time his brother Seleucus ceased by death to reigne in Syria At the same time Ptolemeus Epiphanes dyed in Egypt leauing behinde him to young sonnes Philometor and Physcon Ptolemeus hadde these sonnes with his wife the queene Cleopatra who was sister to Antiochus Vnder this pretence Antiochus went into Egypt and by faire speeches got the regiment during the nonage of Philometor the yong prince And when hee had contriued all thinges so as he might take the kingdome vpon him at his pleasure hee went to Hierusalem at the intreaty of Iason who sought ambitiouslie to be made the high priest by his procurement euen as popes of late yeares are made at Rome as hereafter shalbe prooued Where as writeth Iosephus so soone as hee came the gates were opened to him by men of his owne faction Which vsurped dominion hee exercised cruellie and sacrilegiously neither sparing the goods nor the liues of those that willingly opened the gates vnto him The fourth obseruation Demetrius Nicanor the twelfth king of Syria was driuen out of his kingdome by his brother Antiochus Sedetes by the aid and meanes of Tryphon Yet afterward hee was restored to his kingdome againe and ruled Syria peaceably vntil Alexander surnamed Sabineus of the house of Seleucus tooke him prisoner at Tyrus where he put him to death CHAP. III. Of the kings of Macedonia and of the diuision of the Empire after the sixt yeare of Alexander THe holy will of the liuing God was that foure mightie kings shoulde succeede Alexander the Great after the sixt yeare of his raigne whereof euerie one should possesse a part and no one be so mightie as himselfe which thing was euidently foretolde by the Prophet Daniel The foure kings that succeeded Alexander to wit Cassander who raigned in Macedonia and Grecia Seleucus who raigned in Syria Ptolomeus who raigned in Egypt and Antigonus who raigned in Asia did all descend of the house Petigree and bloud royall of Alexander that most puissant and valiant Emperour and for that cause surnamed the Great Cassander caused Olympias daughter of Neoptolemus and mother to Alexander a most chast and vertuous Queene to be beheaded cruelly that so hee might raigne more licentiouslie but God the iust iudge who for his wisedome seeth all things and for his iustice sake letteth no sinne passe vnpunished did so in his eternall prouidence dispose of Cassanders issue as it was a worthie spectacle to the world For Antipater and Alexander his sonnes had mutual mortal bloudie warres the one against the other as concerning the kindgome of Macedonia But what was the ende Antipater was slaine by Lysimachus his father in law and Alexander by Demetrius the sonne of Antigonus who both were their owne complices to whom they trusted and sought for helpe at their hands A worthie obseruation King Alexander the great was not onely full of valure and prowesse but throughly garnished with heroicall and morall vertues amongst which this was not the least that so often as he heard the complaint of one against another the accused partie being absent his continuall custome was to open one onely eare to the plaintife and to keepe the other closely shut by which ceremonie he liuely expressed vnto the world the office of euerie good Prince and righteous iudge to wit that they should neuer haue respect of persons as holy Writ beareth witnesse but heare all parties indifferently and iudge euer according to lawe and equitie Which indifferencie king Alexander fitly practised euen with the admiration of his auditory while as hee graunted to the accuser one eare so did hee to the accused reserue the other neuer condemning the one nor iustifying the other before hee vnderstood perfectly the truth of the matter But in our time wee may iustly exclaime with holy Polycarpe O God to what worlds hast thou reserued vs for nowadayes iudges lawyers are so corrupt with bribes that when a poore man crieth he can not be heard with neither eare because both are shut at once on the other side so soon as they grope the rich mans gold they open both the one eare the other there is no stay at al. Of such iudges magistrates and lawyers speaketh wise Salomon when he saith that many reuerence the person of the mightie and euerie one is friend to him that giueth gifts When a rich man commenceth any sute against the poore man euerie iudge euerie lawyer euerie iustice euerie bailife will for money be readie to further his cause for golde and money with a becke they come anone and with a winke they will bee gone though their matter were verie badde in the beginning yet wil it be right good in the ending money worketh so forcibly with them that it may bee saide to alter the case and to change the nature of the thing Gifts saith Saint Ambrose dazle the eyes of iudges and weakeneth the force of their authoritie Contrariewise when the poore man commeth to them either without money or but with a little they are dumbe deafe and sencelesse they can neither heare see nor vnderstand they will vse such dallying such demurring such shiftes and delayes vntill the poore man bee exhaust and spent so as perforce he must let the matter fall and sit downe with the losse For albeit his cause were right good in the beginning yet will it be starke naught in the ending Wherefore Innocentius his wordes are well verified in this kinde of people You respect saith he not the causes but the persons not lawes but bribes not what reason prescribeth but what will affecteth not what the minde thinketh but what it coueteth not what should be done but what yee list to haue done your eie is not single which should make your body bright but euer ye mingle a peece of leauen which corrupteth the whole dowe The
of the Iews was at an end about 30. yeeres before Christs incarnation Herode the stranger was successor to this Aristobulus in the kingdom and priesthood of the Iewes In the third yeere of the 186. Olympiade and in the age of the world 3937. yeeres then in the 32. yeere of Herod was our Sauiour borne The fourth obseruation Herod the great had many children Aristobulus Alexander Antipater Antipas Philippus and Archelaus Of which Aristobulus and Alexander were his children by his beloued wife Mariamne which Mariamne he put to death causing his children Alexander and Aristobulus to be strangled in Samaria Archelaus Herodes called Antipas Antipater and Philip yet liued amongst whom the kingdome was diuided Herodes the Great designed his sonne Archelaus to be king by his last will and testament but the Emperour Augustus would not confirme Herodes will and so hee was not king at the first yet Augustus was content that he should be Tetrarke and vpon hope of his good regiment to be king afterward This Archelaus saith Rhegino did reigne in Iudea when our Sauiour was brought out of Egypt for feare of which king he returned into Nazareth a towne in Galile where hee abode till his baptisme This was done in the seuenth yere of Christ and in the 15. yeere of his birth Archelaus being accused of treason before Augustus was banished out of Iewrie the kingdome was diuided among his 4. brethren Herod Antipater Lysanias and Philip. Yet this Antipater after Carion was slaine long before The first obseruation Whether Antipater was slaine as writeth Carion or liuing stil with Philip and the rest as saith Eusebius certaine it is that foure only are mentioned in the holy scripture to wit Archelaus who raigned in Iurie after Herod the great Antipas whom S. Luke calleth Herod who was Tetrarke of Galilie Philip who was Tetrarke of Iturea and Trachonitis Lysanias who was the Tetrark of Abilene Pilate being then president in Iewry which Lysanias after Eusebius was one of the brethren albeit other writers affirme no such thing CHAP. III. Of the 2300. daies Daniel had a vision of great persecution that shoulde come vnto the church that the daily sacrifice should cease and Gods trueth be troden vnder foote And that the sinnes of the Iewes were the cause of such horrible afflictions Yet for the solace of Gods children whom he neuer forsaketh finally the time of the desolation is appointed and pronounced in these obscure words Vnto the euening and morning two thousand and three hundreth then shall the sanctuarie be cleansed Sundrie as S. Hierome witnesseth trouble themselues miserably about the exposition of this place Some for 2300 read 2200 least sixe yeares and three monethes abound Other some vnderstand the place of Antichrist and that this shalbe reallie complete in him which was spoken typically of Antiochus And this childish imagination doe our late Iesuites and other papistes imitate whose fantasticall interpretation was confuted by S. Hierome before they were borne But the meaning is plaine and easie that is vntill so many naturall daies be past which in all make sixe yeares three monethes and an halfe For so long was the temple prophaned vnder the wicked king Antiochus And that this is the true sence of the place I prooue by two reasons First because that vnto the morning and to the euening cannot possibly be vnderstood of either yeares or monethes and yet can the same be truely and simply verified in so many natural daies Secondly because the prophet of God doth expound the rest of the vision euen of the kinges of Syria And my reasons are confirmed by S. Hieromes testimonie whose expresse words are these Vespere autem manè successioneÌ„ diei noctÃsque significat The euening and the morning doth signifie the succession of the day and the night And in the very same place hee prooueth by Iosephus and the bookes of the Machabees that the setting vp of Iupiters Image in the Temple and the time of the desolation wrought by Antiochus is correspondent to the 2300. daies CHAP. IIII. Of the priestes of the Iewes after the captiuitie vnto Alexander the Great The names of the priests Iesus Filius Iosedech Anno mun 3427 the time that they liued Anno mun 3645 72 yeares Ioachim Anno mun 3427 the time that they liued Anno mun 3645 30 Eliasib alià s Nechasib Anno mun 3427 the time that they liued Anno mun 3645 40 Ioiada Anno mun 3427 the time that they liued Anno mun 3645 24 Ionathan alià s Ioannan Anno mun 3427 the time that they liued Anno mun 3645 52 Iaddo alià s Iaddua Anno mun 3427 the time that they liued Anno mun 3645 28 yeares Iesus or Ieshua was the high priest in the returne euen as Zorobabel or Zerubbabel was the ciuill gouernour Diuers thinke diuersly of this succession but I deliuer plainly what I iudge most probable CHAP. V. Of the priests of the Iewes from king Alexander vnto the Machabees The names of y e priests Onias Priscus A. M. 3643 the time that they liued A. M. 3805 25 yeares Simon Priscus A. M. 3643 the time that they liued A. M. 3805 13 Eleazar A. M. 3643 the time that they liued A. M. 3805 20 Manasses A. M. 3643 the time that they liued A. M. 3805 27 yeares Simon Iunior A. M. 3643 the time that they liued A. M. 3805 28 Onias Iunior A. M. 3643 the time that they liued A. M. 3805 39 Iason A. M. 3643 the time that they liued A. M. 3805 3 yeares Menelaus A. M. 3643 the time that they liued A. M. 3805 7 yeares This Menelaus was a very wicked priest whom Antiochus put to death at Berytus Antiochus moreouer inhibited Onias his sonne to succeed him and appointed Alcimus aliâs Iacimus the high priest which Alcimus was of the race and petigree of Aaron but not of the same familie Onias therefore sonne to Menelaus went into Egypt and insinuating himselfe into the amitie of Ptolomee Philometor and Cleopaâ—ra his wife perswaded them to build a temple in Heliopolis like to that of Hierusalem and to make him priest in the same place Iacimus after he had been high priest three yeares died leauing no successor behinde him and so the citie of Hierusalem was seuen whole yeares togither without a priest Afterward the gouernment of the Iewes was committed to the familie of the Assamoneans and then they rebelled against the Macedonians and made Ionathan the high priest These points and specially the case of Iacimus or Alcimus ought diligently to be marked against the mangled and fondly commended popish succession whereof by the power of God more shalbe said hereafter From about this time vntill Herod the great Iudas Machabeus and others of his race had the gouernment and priesthood among them From Herode vntill Christ our redeemer were yeares 32. plus minus During which time priests were not made of the line of the Assamoneans
credite For the verie inscription it selfe auoucheth roundly and boldly that that which followeth is but chaffe Out of which wordes I note first that the pope hath a long time seduced the worlde with fabulous vanities in printed bookes I note secondly that the foundations vpon which all poperie is built is nothing els but chaffe For to these foundations set downe in the 96. distinction of their owne decrees I doe not belie them reade the place who listeth and he shall finde it to be true the popish Canonists make this plaine inscription Palea Chaffe as if they should say Gentle reader be no longer seduced with such doctrine for that which followeth is but chaffe If any liuing can yeeld a fitter exposition I desire to know his skill I note thirdly that since the papists are enforced by the spirite of God to acknowledge the counterfeite groundes of the very principal articles in their religion published to the viewe of the worlde in their owne decrees and canon lawe euery discreete and wise reader may easily perceiue what credite ought to be giuen to their popish written vanities Decretall epistles Edictes Canons extrauagantes the like wherwith they haue these many yeres bewitched and dazeled the eyes of many men I answere thirdly that although they would haue vs to beleeue as an article of our Creede that Constantine was baptized at Rome by Siluester whereupon they ground many absurd consequentes yet doe most holy learned and ancient writers S. Hierome Eusebius Socrates Theodoritus Sozomenus Pomponius and Cassiodorus affirme the same to be a fable and that Constantine was christened at Nicomedia CHAP. VI. Of the warres betweene Constantine and Maxentius The most religious Emperour Constantinus preparing for warres against Maxentius who had thirsted the bloud of christians and fearing greatly the danger of the battell imminent did often lift vp his eies towardes heauen and humbly requested helpe at Gods hands Being at that time a great fauourer of christian religion and a zealous worshipper of the euerliuing God albeit hee had not as yet receiued the signe of Christes passion he saw in the firmament the euident signe of the crosse which so glistered with fierie brightnesse as he was astonied at the sight thereof While he was doubting with himselfe he beheld the angels of God standing by him and saying thus vnto him Constantine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O Constantine in this signe get thou the victorie Constantine beeing ioyfull with this vsion and assuring himselfe of the victory against Maxentius made in his owne forehead the signe of the crosse which before he had seene in the firmament So write Eusebius Caesariensis Socrates Sozomenus Cassiodorus and many others of approoued antiquitie Whereupon the papistes would infer that it is lawfull to make images to set them vp in churches and to adore the same religiously For perspicuous confutation whereof with a manifest declaration of the state of the controuersie because it is maliciously defended by some vnsoundly impugned by others of others not throughly vnderstood I purpose to set downe these few conclusions The first conclusion The signe of the crosse appeared to the Emperour Constantine in the firmament at what time as hee was afraid to ioyne battell with Maxentius This conclusion is graunted and approoued by the vniforme consent of all learned writers Constantinus himselfe as Eusebius reporteth affirmed the same to Eusebius confirmed the veritie therof with an oth not only Eusebius but all the world for many hundreth yeares gaue credite thereunto Heereupon Constantinus and other christian kings generally vsed the signe of the crosse vpon the garments of their souldiers so often as they had warres with Infidels and such as were enemies to the name of Christ Iesus For then there was great cause so to doe as since iust occasion hath been giuen to take the same away which thing heereafter by Gods assistance more planly shall appeare The second conclusion Simplie and absolutely to make images for ciuill vse is not prohibited by the word of God This conclusion is to be prooued three speciall waies By the authoritie of holy writ by the testimonie of learned writers and by the generall practise of christian kinges Touching the first God himselfe indued Bezaleel with the spirite of wisedome vnderstanding and knowledge that he might worke curiously in gold siluer brasse in grauing stones and in caruing woode and in all maner of fine worke In the temple of Salomon were grauen Lillies Pomegranates Cherubins Lions and Palme trees God commaunded Moses to make two Cherubines aboue the mercie seate He also commanded to make a fierie or brasen Serpent and to set it vp for a signe Touching the second S. Basill is so farre from condemning the ciuill vse of images that he hath commended the making and the vtilitie thereof These are his expresse wordes Nam magnifica in bellis gesta oratores saepenumero pictores pulcherrime demonstrant Hi oratione illi tabulis describentes atque ornantes amboque plures ad fortitudinem imitandam inducentes Quae enim sermo historiae per inductionem praebet eadem pictura tacens per imitationem ostendit For not onely Oratours oftentimes but euen painters also doe finely pourtray worthy martiall exploites the one sort by their fine oratiōs the other by their fitly pourtraied tables both perswading many to the imitation of fortitude For whatsoeuer the historie doth performe by perswasion the same doth the silent picture declare by imitation In which wordes it is cleere that S. Basill approoueth the ciuill and historicall vse of images Eusebius Caesariensis maketh mention of the images of our Sauiour of Peter and Paul which were not only in his time but long before his daies The historicall vse whereof he neither reprooueth nor condemneth S. Ambrose Gregorius Magnus and many auncient fathers holde constantly the same opinion Touching the third Constantinus the first Christian Emperour surnamed the Great caused after his couersion his owne image to be engrauen in his coyne whose example therein all christian kinges at all times in all ages haue de facto approoued to be good For all kinges no one or other excepted haue their inscriptions and images vpon their gold and money neither were they at any time in any age reprooued by anie learned writer for the same Yea our Sauiour Christ himselfe seemeth to approoue the same when hee requiring to know whose inscription the money had charged to giue to Cesar that which was his owne In fine the reformed churches in Germanie this day allow thereof and the church of England approoueth the making of the signe of the crosse in the forehead of baptized infantes The third conclusion To worship and adore images religiously is superstitious and idolatricall This conclusion is prooued by the expresse commaundement of God For in Exodus it is written thus Thou shalt not make any grauē image thou shalt not bow downe to them nor
rash impious and most execrable in Gods sight The perioch of the chapter Priestes were married in the olde lawe and in time of the new testament in the East church and in the West Many popes of Rome were the sonnes of priests neither were they bastardes but legitimate children Many holy and learned bishops were married men S. Gregory S. Spiridion S. Cheremon S. Philogonius S. Eupsichius S. Paphnutius defended the marriage of priestes publickly in the councell of Nice and auouched in the spirite of God that the vse of holy wedlocke was honourable in them euen in time of their priesthood S. Cheremon and his wife fled togither from persecution euen at that time when he was Bishop of Nicopolis Eupsichius was the bishop of Cesarea and forthwith after his marriage martyred for Christ Iesus The apostles themselues were married begate children and carried their wiues about with them while they preached the gospel abroad in the countrey Clergie men vsed the benefite of marriage aswell as secular persons vntill the vntimely birth of wicked pope Syritius Bishops priests and all religious persons so termed may most lawfully marry by the lawes of God and are onely debarred thereof by the odible lawes of man or rather to vse the apostles wordes by the detestable doctrine of Satan All this I haue proued effectually in this present chapter Yea the marriage of priestes was vsed without restraint in Germanie for the space of a thousand seuentie and foure yeares after Christes sacred incarnation That is vntill the daies of the vngratious pope Hildebrand who termed himselfe Gregorie the seuenth who crept into the popedome by naughty meanes in the yeare of Christ 1074. And because I wil charge the Papistes with nothing but that which they shall neuer be able to denie their own deare moonk Lambertus Schafnaburgensis a man whom their trusty friend Ar. Pontacus Burdegalensis affirmeth to haue handled the histories of his time very exactly shalbe my witnesse against the pope and popishly prohibited marriages This writer so authenticall as ye heare writeth in this maner Hildebrandus papa cum episcopis Italiae conueniens iam frequentibus synodis decreuerat vt secundum instituta antiquorum canonum presbyteri vxores non habeant habentes aut dimittant aut deponantur nec quispam omnino ad sacerdotium admittatur qui non in perpetuum continentiam vitamque caelibemprofiteatur Sequitur aduersus hoc decretum protinus vehementer infremuit tota factio clericorum hominem plane haereticum vesani dogmatis esse clamitans qui oblitus sermonis domini quo ait non omnes capiunt verbum hoc qui potest capere capiat Apostolus qui se non continet nubat melius est enim nubere quam vri violenta exactione homines viuere cogeret ritu angelorum dum consuetum cursum naturae negaret fornicationi immunditiei fraena laxaret Pope Hildebrand togither with the Bishoppes of Italie decreed in frequent Synodes that after the ordinaunces of olde canons priestes shoulde not haue wiues and that suche as had wiues shoulde either put them awaie or bee depriued of their liuinges and that none shoulde be admitted to the order of priesthoode but hee that woulde professe the perpetual vow of single life Against this decree the whole faction of the clergy stormed wonderfully exclaming that Hildebrand was mad a flat heretike as who had forgotten the words of the Lord who saith that all cannot liue continent and the Apostle saith hee that cannot abstaine let him marrie for it is better to marrie then to be burnt and would violently compel men to liue like angels and while hee denied the accustomed course of nature gaue libertie to fornication and vncleannesse Out of which wordes I note first that this Lambertus was a Monke and a great patron of poperie which I proue by two reasons first for that hee tearmed it a faction to withstand Pope Hildebrands wicked decree Again because he affirmeth the late prohibition of priests marriage to bee according to the old canons which canons for al that were not before the daies of the late Pope Syricius as I haue proued I note secondly that since this Lambert was a great and zealous papist all must needs be of good credit that he saith against the papists and popish doctrine I note thirdly that priests were married in Germanie aboue one thousand seuentie yeeres after Christ that is till the time of this wicked Hildebrand I note fourthly that it was so strange a thing in those dayes to speake against the mariage of priests in Germanie that they reputed Pope Hildebrand a madde man and an heretique for withstanding the same And yet such is the fondnesse and madnesse of the common sorte this daye that they deeme them mad men and heretikes who speake in defence thereof I note fiftly that all the learned in Germanie proued the Pope an heretike by the flatte testimonie of Christ and his Apostle I note sixtly that by the verdict of all the learned in Germanie that great and goodly country Pope Hildebrand did not only enforce them violently against their auncient custome but withall did open the window to al filthie liuing Priests were also married in our owne countrey of England till the late dayes of the saide Pope Hildebrand if wee will beleeue our owne English Chronicles Polidorus another deare friend of the papists shall tell them what he thinks of the Popes proceeding touching the marriage of priests thus doth he write Illud tamen dixerim tantum abfuisse vt ista coacta castitas illam coniugalem vicerit vt etiam nullius delicti crimen maius ordini dedecus plus malireligioni plus doloris omnib bonis impresserit inusserit attulerit quam sacerdotum libidinis labes proinde forsitan tam è republica christiana quam ex ordinis vsu esset vt tandem aliquando ius publici matrimoni◠sacerdotibus restitueretur quod illi sine infamia sanctè potius colerent quam se spurcissimè eiuscemodi naturae vitio turpificarent Yet this I wil say that this compelled chastitie of priests was so far frō excelling chastity in wedlock as no crime whatsoeuer hath brought greater shame to priesthood more harme to religion more griefe to all good men then the vnchast life of priests Therefore perhaps it were no lesse necessarie for the publike weale of christendome then for the order of priesthood that once againe priests might marrie publikely that so they might liue honestly without shame not pollute themselues so filthily This is the iudgemēt of their own popish Polidore who being an Italian knewe best the Romish fashion He confesseth plainly as you see that priests were maried in old time wishing for great causes that it were so againe Their great Cardinall Panormitanus giueth so worthie a testimony of this controuersie as which being well marked will confoūd al papists in the world these be his words Continentia nō est
and Aquinas saw the force of this reason and grauely vrged the same Yea the holy virgin renounceth flatly their hereticall and hypocriticall doctrine in her humble thankes to God for her saluation My soule saith she doth magnifie the Lord and my spirit reioyceth in God my sauiour For this cause Bernard cryeth out in these words Non est hoc virginem honorare sed honori detrahere The virgin is not this way honored but greatly dishonored Secondly because as Bernard saieth Where lust is there must needs be sinne and therefore since the virgin was conceiued with lust or else as they dare not say by the holy ghost it followeth that she was conceiued in sinne Other reasons the same Bernard hath but these may suffice The second reply But saint Austen saith that hee will alway except the holy virgine Mary when he disputeth or reasoneth of sinners or sinne The answer I say first that saint Austen confesseth flatly as you haue heard that the blessed virgin was vndoubtedly conceiued in original sin I say secondly that originall sin is of infinite deformitie as is already proued and consequently that the blessed virgin being polluted therewith was neuer able to yeeld condigne compensation for the same howe great soeuer her holinesse was afterward the reason is afore yeelded for that the infinit malice of sin surmounteth the value of the finite actions of all creatures And if she were not able to satisfie for her own sinnes much lesse had shee any surplussage of satisfaction left which may serue to binde vp the popes pardons for the sins of others I say thirdly that albeit S. Austen would not for the honor of our Sauior as he saith call the blessed virgin into question touching sin yet doth he not affirm her to haue bin void of all actual sinne but seemeth rather to hold the contrary For he addeth these words Vnde enim scimus quod ei plus gratiae colla tum fuerit ad vincendum omni ex parte peccatum quae concipere ac parere meruit quem constat nullum habuisse peccatum For how know we that she had more grace giuen her to ouercome all sinne who did conceiue and beare him that certainely was free from al sin In which words S. Austen sheweth plainly that he can not tell whether the blessed virgin was voide of all actuall sinne or no yet is he vnwilling to call her into question for the honour of our Lord Iesus whose mother she was according to the flesh Yea Saint Austen in his questions vpon the new testament if it be his worke confesseth freely that she sinned for want of faith These are his expresse words Hoc vtique significauit quia etiam Maria per quam gestum est mysterium incarnationis saluatoris in morte domini dubitaret ita tamen vt in resurrectione firmaretur This verily is signified that Marie by whome was accomplished the misterie of the incarnation of our Sauiour doubted in the death of our Lord yet so as she was confirmed in his resurrection Thus hee writeth and yet knoweth euerie child that to doubt in matters of faith is no little sinne S. Basil dissenteth nothing from Saint Augustine when hee telleth vs that the blessed virgin standing by the crosse wauered and was doubtfull in her minde while shee behelde on one side what miserie hee suffered on the other side what wonders he had done Saint Chrysostome affirmeth so expressely that the blessed virgin sinned that their angelicall doctour Aquinas is enforced to vse this sillie shift for a colorable answere to his words to wit that hee was excessiue in his words But who wil not rather thinke that hee was presumptuous in his answere These are S. Chrysostomes expresse words Quae estmater mea fratres mei aiebat siquidem nō adhuc debitam de ipso opinionem habebant sed more matrum Maria iure omnia filio se praecepturam censebat cum tanquam dominum colere reuereri licebat ideo in hunc modum respondit who is my mother my brethren said Christ for they had not yet a right opiniō of him but Mary after the maner of mothers thought she might command her sonne to do all things albeit she might well haue honored him as her Lord therfore did he answer in this maner Againe he saith thus Optabat enim vt tam hominum gratiam conciliaret ipsa clarior filij gratia efficeretur fortasse aliquo humano afficiebatur affectu For she wished that now he would win the fauor of men that she might be more famous for his sake and perhappes she was touched with some humane affection Againe in another place he saith thus Ambitione quadam ac ostentatione commoti foris eum in praesentia omnium euocarunt vt viderentur facile ac magna cum potestate Christo imperare Infra vnde patet inani quadam gloria illos commotos fuisse nihil adhuc magni de ipso cogitantes quod apertius Ioannes significauit dicens quia neque fratres eius credebant in eum They being tickled with ambition and vaine glorie called him out in the presence of all that they might seeme to command Christ at their pleasure and with authoritie Whervpon it is cleare that they were tickled with vaine glorie hauing no great opinion on him as yet which Iohn signified euidently when he saide For neither did his brethren beleeue in him Saint Hierome shall conclude this point which I haue handled more at large because many stumble at it and fewe seeme to vnderstand it well these are his expresse words Conclusit Deus omnes sub peccato vt omnium misereatur absque eo solo qui peccatum non fecit nec inuentus est dolus in ore eius God hath shut vp all vnder sinne that he may shew mercie vnto all him onely excepting that sinned not neither was there guile found in his mouth The third replie She was Christs mother and therefore was more blessed then al other women The answere I confesse willingly that shee was blessed aboue all women and yet that shee was a sinner and had Christ not onely for her sonne but euen for her Lorde and Sauiour neither was it so great a grace simplie and barely to beare Christ as the Papists faine it to be but the holy fathers S. Austen and S. Chrysostome shal tel vs what they thinke therof S. Austen hath these expresse words Hoc in ea magnificauit dominus quia fecit voluntatem patris non quia caro genuit carnē Propterea cum dominus in turba admirabilis videretur faciens signa prodigia ostendens quid lateret in carne admiratae quaedam animae dixerunt foelix venter qui te portauit ille imò foelices qui audiunt verbum Dei custodiūt illud hoc est dicere mater mea quam appellatis foelicem inde foelix quia verbum
deteriores non remisit nobis supplicium sed vidit hoc manifeste quod peccatis ipsis non mâ—nus damnosum sit non puniri propter hoc imponit poenam non exigens supplicium de peccatis sed ad futura nos corrigens For lest we our selues should be made worse if wee should not be punished when we offend God forgaue vs not the punishment for that he saw euidently that it was no lesse hurtfull to sinne it selfe if it should not be punished For which cause he imposeth paine vpon vs not requiring satisfaction for the sinnes but correcting vs for that which is to come Out of these wordes I note first that if we should escape vnpunished when we sin we would be more prone to sin again I note secondly that the punishment which God laâ—eth on vs is not any part of satisfaction for our sinne committed but a fatherly correction to keepe vs from sinning so againe I note thirdly that saint Chrysostome was not acquainted with popish pardons wherewith the world is this day so pestered I note fourthly that whosoeuer disliketh this my answer must reprooue saint Chrysostome for the same as from whom I receiued it And yet indeede hee saith nothing which holy writ hath not taught vs long before For as wise Salomon saith He that spareth the rodde hateth the childe but he that loueth him chasteneth him betime I blesse thee saith Tobie O Lord God of Israel because thou hast scourged me Thou hast corrected me saith Ephraim and I was chastised as an vntamed heiffer Whom the Lord loueth saith saint Paul him he chasteneth and he scourgeth euery sonne that he receiueth As many as I loue saith God I rebuke and chasten be zealous therefore and amend Marke these wordes well gentle Reader God correcteth vs not in way of satisfaction which we are neuer able to performe as I haue prooued more at large in my booke of Motiues but that we may repent turne to him and amend our sinfull liues For this cause saieth the Psalmograph Blessed is the man whom thou chastisest O Lord and teachest him in thy lawe that thou mayest giue him rest from the dayes of euill while the pit is digged for the wicked For as saint Paul saieth If we would iudge our selues by true faith and repentance wee should not be iudged But when we are iudged we are chastened of the Lord that wee should not be condemned with the world which Christ himselfe confirmed when he willed the adultresse to goe and to sinne no more The sixt obiection S. Paul exhorted the Corinthians who abounded in goods but wanted merites to bestow money largely on the saints at Ierusalem that so they might be partakers of their merites Therefore it is very lawful to procure pardon with our mony by the application of godly mens merites vnto vs. The answere S. Paul meaneth nothing lesse then that the Hierosolymitains should sell spirituall things for money For when Symon the sorcerer euen after his baptisme would haue bought the distribution of holy things with money then saide saint Peter to him Thy money perish with thee because thou thinkest that the gift of God may be gotten with money But the apostle exhorteth the richer sort at Corinth to minister competently to the faithfull at Ierusalem for their necessarie releefe and sustentation and this to do the rather for that heretofore they receiued the gospel from thence so that there may bee an analogicall or proportionable equalitie betweene them For liberalitie ought to be mutuall among christians and as the apostle saith in another place It is no great thing for them that haue sowen to vs spirituall things to reape part of our carnall things Thus seemeth Chrysostome to vnderstand this place whose wordes are these Haec autem dicebat etiam diuitum superbiam deprimens ostendens quod post hanc vitam in maiori dignitate spirituales futuri sint He spake these things to abate the pride of rich men shewing that after this life the godly shal be in greater dignitie as if he had saide esteeme not better of your selues because ye haue more worldly wealth but distribute such things liberally and seeke to abound in spirituall things that so there may be an equalitie The seuenth obiection The article of our creed I beleeue the communioÌ„ of saints doth plainely shew that ones satisfaction may be applied to an other which is that application that the pope maketh when he giues pardons The answer I answer that the duties of charitie are ought to be common among the faithfull in that they are the mysticall members of one mysticall body which saint Paul proueth to be so by the example of the members in mans body And this is that communion of saints whereof mention is made in the Creede apostolike But of popish pardons and merits of supererrogation this article maketh no relation at all Yea as the apostle saith al righteousnes remission of sins and eternall life is ministred to the members of the church by Christ the head Of whose fulnes we haue all receiued euen grace for grace CHAP. VI. Of Popish purgatorie OF popish purgatorie I haue spoken sufficiently in the seuenth chapter of the second booke of my Motiues It will therefore here be sufficient to declare the originall thereof and to solue the obiections against the same The superstitious fond fantasies of purgatorie came from the old heathen Romanes for as saint Austen recordeth they had a purgatorie sacrifice these are his words Ideo terminalia eodem mense Februario celebrari dicunt cum fit sacrum purgatorium quod vocant Februm vnde mensis nomen accepit Therfore men say that the ends of things are celebrated in the same moneth of Februarie when the purgatorie sacrifice is made which they call Februs whereupon the month tooke the name Afterward Origen being too much addicted to his allegoricall speculation fained many odde things touching purgatorie as the ethnicke Plato whom he much imitateth had done before him After Origen others began to cal the matter into question others rashly to beleeue it others to adde many things to Origens conceit Thus by little and little it encreased till the late bishops of Rome made it an article of popish faith But of what credite Origen ought to be in this point his owne opinion will declare sufficiently as who held that the diuels should all be purged at the latter day For of Origen thus writeth S. Austen Qua in re misericordior profecto fuit Origenes qui ipsum diabolum atque angelos eius post grauiora pro meritis diuturniora supplicia ex illis cruciatibus eruendos atque sociandos sanctis angelis credidit Wherein Origen doubtles was more compassionable who beleeued that the deuill himselfe his angels after great long punishment for their demerites should be deliuered from their torments and placed with the
reprobate and not of the elect and godly sort but after he had pondered the text deeply he altered his opinion This is confirmed in these words of the selfe same chapter but I see another law in my meÌ„bers rebelling against the law of my mind leading me captiue vnto the law of sin which is in my members By these words of Paul it is euident that albeit he were the childe of God yet could he not merite any thing in Gods sight but rather in rigor of iustice prouoke his heauy displeasure against him For where or what could be his merite who was prisoner to the law of sinne Againe it is confirmed in these words For I doe not the good thing which I would but the euill which I would not that doe I. Thus saiâ—h saint Paul and doubtlesse since hee did the euill which he would not he sinned though he were regenerate and because he sinned he was worthie of condemnation for that death is the stipend of sinne Againe it is confirmed in these words For the law is spirituall but I am carnal sould vnder sinne Thus saith S. Paul of himselfe and yet is it true that one vnder sin can merit nothing saue hel fire and eternal paine Againe it is confirmed in these words Nowe if I do that I would not it is no more I that doe it but the sinne that dwelleth in mee Thus saith Saint Paul of himselfe and yet because sin abode in him and did that that was offensiue in gods sight he could neither merite grace nor eternal life as is already proued Further then this no man liueth without sinne as the papists grant and yet is euerie sinne mortall as I haue prooued elsewhere The first obiection Saint Paul speaketh of originall concupiscence which remaineth euen in the regenerate after baptisme but is no sinne at all For he onely calleth it sinne because it prouoketh a man to sin as a mans writing is called his hand for that it is written with his hand which exposition S. Austen approueth in sundrie places of his works The answere I say first that to say against the flat text of scripture without scripture is no reason at all I say secondly that S. Paul doth not onely call concupiscence sin but he proueth it by many reasons For first it striueth against the law of the minde Againe it leadeth one captiue into the law of sinne thirdly it doth that which is not good but euil I say thirdly that Saint Austen doth vndoubtedly iudge it to be sin neither shal any papist in the world euer be able to proue the contrarie howsoeuer they bare the world in hand I wil onely alleage a few places out of S. Austen make effectuall application of the same to which when anie either Rhemist or Romist shall answere sufficiently I promise to become his bondman The first place of Austen Concupiscentia carnis aduersus quam bonus concupiscit spiritus peccatum est quia inest illi inobedientia contra dominatum mentis poena peccati est quia reddita est meritis inobedientis causa peccata est defectione consentientis vel contagione nascentis The concupiscence of the flesh against which the good spirit striueth is sinne because it is disobedient against the dominion of the mind and it is the punishmeÌ„t of sin bicause it is inflicted for the deserts of disobedient Adam and it is the cause of sinne either by the default of him that consenteth or by the contagion of the child that is borne Thus saith S. Austen In which words he expresseth three things precisely first that concupiscence in the regenerate is the paine or punishment of sinne secondly that it is the cause of sinne thirdly that it is sin it selfe which three he doth not only distinguish but withall hee yeeldeth seueral reasons for the same And therfore most impudent are the papists who auouch with open mouthes that saint Austen onely calleth it sin because it is the cause of sinne The second place of Saint Austen Neque enim nulla est iniquitas cum in vno homine vel superiora inferioribus tur piter seruiunt vel inferiora superioribus contumaciter reluctantur etiamsi vincere non sinantur For it is some iniquitie when in one man either the superiour parts shamefully serue the inferiour or the inferiour parts stubbornly striue against the superiour although they be not suffered to preuaile Thus saith S. Austen whose words are so plaine as the papists can not possibly inuent any euasion at all For hee saith in expresse tearmes that the rebellion which is betweene the flesh and the spirit is sinne euen when it is resisted and cannot preuaile at which time and in which respect the papists wil haue it to be merite and no sinne at all The third place of Saint Austen Virtus est charitas qua id quod diligendum est diligitur haec in alijs maior in alijs minor in alijs nulla est plenissima vero quae iam non possit augeri quamdiu hic homo viuit est in nemine quamdiu autem augeri potest profecto illud quod minus est quam debet ex vitio est Ex quo vitio non est iustus in terra qui faciat bonum non peccet Ex quo vitio non iustificabitur in conspectu Dei omnis viuens Propter quod vitium si dixerimus quia peccatum non habemus nosmetipsos seducimus veretas in nobis non est Propter quodetiam quantumlibet profecerimus necessarium est nobis dicere dimitte nobis debita nostra cum iam omnia in baptismo dicta facta cogitata dimissa sint Charitie is a vertue with which we loue that that ought to be loued This in some is more in other lesse in others none at all but the perfect charitie which can not bee increased while a man here liueth is found in none so long as it can be increased that doubtlesse which is lesse then it shoulde bee proceedeth of sinne by reason of which sin there is not one iust vpon earth that doth good and sinneth not by reason of which vice none liuing can be iustified in Gods sight by reason of which vice if we say we haue no sin we deceiue our selues and the truth is not in vs by reason of which sin how much soeuer we profit yet must we say of necessitie Forgiue vs our trespasses euen after that al our thoughts words and works are forgiuen in baptisme Thus saith saint Austen Out of whose most golden words I note sundrie things to the euerlasting confusion of all impenitent papists For first Saint Austen saith that no man can haue charity in that perfite degree which the law requireth Secondly that the want thereof proceedeth of this concupiscence Thirdly that by reason of this concupiscence euerie man is a sinner Fourthly that by reason therof none liuing can be iustified in Gods sight
The cause without which the latter shall not haue effect For as vocation iustification regeneration and glorification are the effectes of predestination euen so by Gods holy ordinance being predestinate wee are called by the hearing of his word vnto â—aith which faith is the cause of our iustification by apprehending the righteousnesse of Christ Iesus after wee be iustified of our iustification proceedes regeneration as who hauing remission of our sinnes and being ingraffed in Christ by faith are indued with more aboundant grace of his holy spirite thorough which we are dayly more and more regenerate and made new creatures after we be regenerate out of our regeneration spring good workes aswel internall as externall as who being made good trees begin to bring forth good fruits and so continuing are brought at the length of Gods free mercie to the possession of eternall life For as y e apostle saith we are created vnto good workes which God hath ordained that wee shoulde walke in them and continuing in them we shall at the dreadful day of doome heare this ioyfull sentence pronounced to our vnspeakable comfort Come yee blessed of my father take the inheritance of the kingdome prepared for you from the foundation of the world For I was an hungred and ye gaue me meate I was thirsty and ye gaue me drink I was a stranger and ye took me in vnto you I was naked and ye clothed me I I was sicke and ye visited me I was in prison and ye came to me And with this it is true yet y t the apostle saith Not by the workes of righteousnesse which we had done but according to his mercie he saued vs by the washing of the new birth and by renuing of the holy Ghost which hee shed on vs aboundantly through Iesus Christ our sauiour that wee being iustified by his grace should be made heires according to the hope of eternall life This is a true saying and these thinges I will thou shouldest affirme that they which haue beleeued God might be carefull to shew forth good workes These things are good and profitable vnto men Thus saith S. Paule and therefore I thinke this a profitable conclusion By it rightly vnderstood many places of holy Scripture may easily be answered which seeme to ascribe iustification or glorification to good workes The 10. conclusion This popish assertion that workes doe iustifie and merite eternall life de condigno was for the space of a thousand and eightie yeares vnknowne to the church of God About which time Petrus Lombardus and his fellowes began their scholasticall theologie and disputed such matters doubtfully About the yeare of our Lord 1545. the late councell of Trent defined the same for an article of christian beliefe solemnely accursing al such as hold the contrary opinion This is the originall and antiquitie of this impudently defended heresie It is sufficiently confuted throughout the whole chapter CHAP. X. Of the popish idololatricall masse The 1. conclusion TO withhold from the vulgar and laycall sort of people the one part of the holy communion is a diabolical hereticall and sacrilegious fact I prooue it sundry waies First because it is flatly against the expresse scripture and Christes holy institution For Christ himselfe instituted and ministred the Sacrament in both kindes saying drinke yee all of it as Saint Mathew recordeth and they all dranke of it as witnesseth Saint Marke Saint Paule also taught all the Corinthians to communicate in both kindes protesting that hee deliuered the forme and maner of the holy communion euen as he had in spirite receiued it from the Lord. Secondly because the auncient fathers shew euidently that in their time it was the generall practise of the church to deliuer the holy communion to the lay people vnder both kindes Neither was the cup taken from the vulgar sort by any setled law vntill the late councell of Constance which was in the yere of our Lord God 1414. Origen hath these words Quis est iste populus qui in vsu habet sanguinem bibere haec erant quae in euangelio audientes ij qui ex Iudaeis dominum sequebantur scandalizati sunt dixerunt Quis potest manducare carnem sanguinem bibere sed populus Christianus populus fidelis audit haec amplectitur sequitur eum qui dicit nisi manducaueritis carnem meam biberitis sanguinem meum non habebitis vitam in vobis ipsis quia caro mea verè est cibus sanguis meus verè potus est Who is that people that hath in custome to drinke bloud these were the thinges which the Iewes that followed Christ heard in the gospel and were scandalized and said Who can eate flesh and drinke bloud but the christian people the faithfull people heare these thinges and embrace them and follow him that sayth vnlesse ye shall eate my flesh drink my bloud ye shall haue no life in your selues because my fleshe is meate indeed and my bloud drinke indeed S. Hierome hath these words Sacerdotes quoque qui eucharistiae seruiunt sanguinem domini populis eius diuidunt impiè agunt in legem Christi The Priestes also that administer the eucharist and diuide the Lordes bloud to his people transgresse the law of Christ heynously Saint Cyprian with fourtie learned bishops in their ioynt Epistle to Cornelius write in this expresse maner Quo modo docemus aut prouocamus eos in confessione nominis sanguinem suum fundere si eis militaturis Christi sanguinem denegamus aut quo modo ad martyrij poculum idoâ—â—os facimus si non eis priùs ad bibendum in ecclesia poculum domini iure communicationis admittimus Howe doe we teache 〈◊〉 them to shed their bloud for the name of Christ if wee denie them the bloud of Christ when they go to warre or how doe we make them fit for the cuppe of martyrdome if wee doe not first admit them to drinke the Lordes cuppe in the Churche and that by the right of communion where I wishe the reader to note well that the lay people haue right to both kindes and consequently that the Romish church is become the whore of Babylon in that shee robbeth vs of our christian right which wee haue de iure diuino Saint Chrysostome hath these wordes Est vbi nihil differt sacerdos à subdito vt quando fruendum est honorandis mysteriis Similiter enim omnes vt illa percipiamus digni habemur Non sicut in veteri lege partem quidem sacerdos comedebat partem autem populus non licebat populo participem esse eorum quorum particeps erat sacerdos Sed nunc non sic verum omnibus vnum corpus proponitur poculum vnum There is a place where there is no difference betweene the priest the lay person as when we are to communicate in the holy mysteries for we are all in
in his hands at his last supper that selfe same body that was borne of the virgine Mary and suffered the next day after And yet if the valure of the sacrifice of the mâ—sse be finite then doubtlesse that sacrifice can not be the sonne of God for he is of infinite power of infinite glorie of infinite maiestie of infinite valure Yea whosoeuer denieth Christes body bloud subsisting in the person of God by hypostaticall vnion to be of infinite valure hee is become a flat Arrian beleeuing Christ to bee pure man and not God And consequently howsoeuer the papistes thinke or speake of their masse yet in making it a sacrifice they are blasphemous and that must needs followe though it were freelie graunted them that Christes body were present really in the Sacrament I prooue it tenthly because our Iesuite cannot denie but that a reall destruction is necessarily required in euery true reall sacrifice Wherefore since Christ dieth not in the popish masse it cannot be that he is truly sacrificed in the same For as Bellarmine truely saith Abraham did not truely sacrifice his sonne Isaac because he was not really slain Now that this discourse may be made more manifest I will propound the strongest obiecâ—ions for the aduerse part and adde briefe solutions to the same The first obiection S. Paul saith that Christ is a priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech and Melchisedech offered bread and wine as he was Gods priest saith holy Moses To which we must adde that the thing figured is more excellent then the figure that Christ truely offered sacrifice in bread and wine otherwise hee shuld not haue exactly fulfilled y e figure of Melchisedech For al the fathers graunt that he was a true figure of Christ euen as he was a priest The answere I say first that Melchisedech did not sacrifice bread wine but as the Hebrew text saith brought forth bread wine that is sufficient victuals for the refection of Abraham and his souldiers after their returne from the slaughter of Chedor-laomer and the other kings For the whole course of y e scripture telleth vs that bread by Synecdoche signifieth meate So Moses saith that the Egyptians might not eate bread with the Hebrewes that is meate In Esay 7. women say we will eate our owne bread that is our owne meat King Dauid promised Mephibosheth that he should eate bread alwaies at his own table which had been a very small reward of a king if by bread were not signified all kinde of meat King Iehoiachim ate bread at the table of Euil-merodach the king of Babel that is al delicate fare So it is called bread that Iobs friendes ate in his house when it is certaine that they had right sumptuous cheere The like examples are in S. Mathew sundry other places of scripture This I note against the papistes who fondly vse to answere that bread was a slender refection for all Abrahams companie I say secondly that Christes priesthood is after the order of Melchisedech not in any sacrifice of bread and wine which Melchisedech can neuer be prooued to haue offered but in y t as man he was without father wonderfully coÌ„ceiued as God without beginning without ending without mother woonderfully begotten for which cause the prophet demaundeth who shall declare his generation in these points Christes priesthood differeth not from Melchisedech who as S. Paule saith was without father without mother without kinred without beginning of his daies without end of his life likened to the son of God and a priest for euer Yet in the oblation of bread and wine the priesthood of Melchisedech was not perfitly distinguished from the priesthood of Aaron as the scripture witnesseth S. Paul therfore describeth the priesthood of Melchisedech without the mention of bread and wine in such sort as it is perfitly distinguished from the priesthood of Aaron So Eusebius Caesariensis comparing the priesthoode of Christ with the priesthood of Melchisedech doth not say that it consisteth in the sacrifice of bread and wine but in the vnction the diuine similitude the eternitie and want of succession These are his expresse words Tu es sacerdos in aeternum secundum ordinem Melchisedech Hic auteÌ„ Melchisedech in diuinis voluminib sacerdos fuisse Dei summi refertur sed qui non oleo communi perunctus sit neque qui ex successione generis suscepit sacerdotium sicut apud Hebraeos fieri mos erat ideo secundum ordinem ipsius sacerdos futurus dicitur Christus qui non olei liquore sed virtute coelestis spiritus consecretur Thou art a priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech And this Melchisedech is called in the holy scriptures the priest of God most high but one which was not annointed with common oyle neither yet receiued his priesthood by the succession of kinred as the manner was among the Hebrews and therfore Christ is called a priest after his order who is consecrate not with the liquor of oyle but with the vertue of the holy ghost I say thirdly that Melchisedech in his action towards Abraham shewed himself both to be a priest and a king a priest in that he blessed Abraham a king in that he releeued Abraham and his souldiers with bread wine that is with al competent corporall sustenance I say fourthly that if there had bin any force in the oblation of Melchisedech touching Christs priesthoode S. Paul who handled euery least thing exactly in that comparison would neuer haue omitted his sacrifice in bread and wine and yet he passed it ouer as a thing of no importance I say fiftly that Christ offering himselfe vpon the crosse for the sinnes of the world was not a priest after the order of Aaron but properly and truely after the order of Melchisedech I proue the former part First because perfection could not come by the priesthood of the Leuites as the apostle beareth witnes Againe because our Lord Iesus was of the tribe of Iuda of which tribe Moses spake nothing at al touching the priesthood Thirdly because the sacrifice of the crosse was the most perfit sacrifice of all other as which did coÌ„summate them that are sanctified for euer I proue the latter part first because it must be after some order but not after the order of Aaron as is proued ergo after the order of Melchisedech Secondly because the apostle doth in expresse terms cal Christ a priest euen after the order of Melchisedech These are his words And being consummate was made the cause of eternall life to all them that obey him and is called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedech Lo Saint Paule ioyneth the order of Melchisedech with the sacrifice of the crosse offered for mans redemption as if he had said Christ is therefore called a priest after the order of Melchisedech because he
vnited if we receiued Christ corpoâ—â—lly into our bellies But as the same Cyprian saith a 〈…〉 Recipitur non includitur He is receiued but not shut vp in the sacrament I note thirdly that this bread is spirituall not corporall the bread of the soule not of the bodie I note fourthly that we eate Angell-foode here on earth in the sacrament and that we shall eate the verie same in heauen without the sacrament Which assertion vttered by holy Cyprian sheweth his catholique christian meaning so plainly as all Papistes may be ashamed hencefoorth to alleadge him for their late inuented carnall presence In heauen there is neither accident without subiect nor sacrament administred nor yet any corporall eating and drinking there vsed Angels foode is spirituall not carnall celestiall not terrestriall eternall not corporall Angels neither eate by dint of tooth nor by morsels in the mouth Their nature is not capable of anie such actions Since therefore our sacramentall meate is the same that Angels now eate and the same that our selues shall eate in heauen where all corporall carnall and fleshy eating ceaseth it foloweth of necessitie that it is meere spirituall not corporall fleshy or carnall The reply He saith that the bread is made flesh by the omnipotencie of Gods word to shew the vnspeakeable transmutation Therefore so soone as Gods worde is spoken by the priest it is no more bread but flesh indeede The answere I say first as I said not long before that it passeth the force of any power vpon earth to make common bread a sacrament I say secondly that the alteration is vnspeakeable when the diuine power of Christ doth infuse it selfe into the hearts of the faithful by the visible sacrament as by his ordinarie organ and instrument and then and there worketh the diuine effectes signified by the sacrament I say thirdly that whosoeuer wil peruse the whole treatise of Saint Cyprian De coena Domini and doe it seriously with iudgement and christian zeale that man shal doubtlesse finde his meaning to bee as I haue saide For in an other place thereof he hath these words Ideò ex consueto rerum effectu fidei nostrae adiuta infirmitas sensibili argumento edocta est visibilibus sacramentis inesse vitae aternae effectum non tam corporali quà m spirituali transitione Christo nos vniri Therefore the infirmitie of our faith being holpen by the accustomed effect of things is caught by a sensible argument that the effect of eternal life is in the visible sacraments and that we are vnited to Christ not so by corporal as by spiritual transmutation And in the very ende of the tract he concludeth in this manner Haec quoties agimus non dentes ad mordendum acuimus sed fide sincerâ panem sanctum frangimus partimur dum quod diuinum quod humanum est distinguimus separamus itémque simul separata iungentes vnum deum hominem fatemur Sed nos ipsi corpus eius effecti sacramento re sacramenti capiti nostro connectimur vnimur singuli alter alterius membra ministerium dilectionis pro inuicem exhibentes communicamus charitate participamus sollicitudine eundem cibum manducantes eundem potum bibentes qui depetra spiritali profluit emanat qui cibus potus est dominus noster Iesus Christus So often as we doe these things we doe not whet our teeth to eate but we breake and diuide the sanctified bread with a sincere faith while wee distinguish and separate what is diuine and what humane and also ioyning the same things separated together confesse one God and man Our selues also being made his body are knit to our head by the sacrament and vertue thereof and are vnited particularly one an others members exhibiting the ministerie of loue one for another we communicate in charitie we participate in solicitude we eate the same meate and drinke the same drinke which floweth and runneth out of the spiritual rocke which meate and drinke is our Lord Iesus Christ. Out of these wordes I note first that Christ is truely present in the eucharist but yet after a spiritual sort and not corporall I note secondly that we are vnited to Christ spiritually by meanes of the sacrament but not corporally For as wee receiue Christ in the sacrament so are wee vnited to Christ iâ— the same as by an ordinary instrument vnder him I note thirdly that after sanctification it is bread still as before and is broken and deuided none of which can agree indeede with Christs corporall presence I note fourthly that we eate not Christ with mouth and tooth but with a true christian faith I note fiftly that the true and sincere faith by which we must eate the Eucharist is to distinguish in Christ the humanitie from the diuinitie and to ioyne the same againe confessing one Christ to be true God and true man I note sixtly that as we eate Christ in the Sacrament so are we made one anothers members which can not be otherwise vnderstoode then in a mysticall maner I note seuenthly that our sacramentall meate and drinke is spirituall which floweth out from the spirituall rocke Christ Iesus For if the rocke be spirituall whereof we drinke then doubtles the drinke it selfe can not be corporall because as all Philosophers graunt and as right reason prescribeth qualis causa talis effectus the effect is of like condition with the cause neither can a corporall cause bring foorth a spirituall effect nor a spirituall cause a corporall effect whereupon ariseth a great question among the Schoolemen how hell fire can be materiall since a body can haue no action into a spirit The 3. obiection Saint Chrysostome hath these wordes Quod est in calice id est quod à latere fluxit illius sumus participes That which is in the cuppe is the same that flowed out of his side and wee are partakers thereof But doubtlesse no christian can or will denie that to be Christs true bloud indeede which issued out of his side vppon the crosse therefore the same must be granted to be vnder the forme of wine in the masse The answer I say first that I graunt Christes true body and his true bloud to be in the eucharist but not vnder accidents without subiects nor corporally and carnally but in a diuine spirituall and mysticall sort Neither doth saint Chrysostome S. Cyprian saint Austen or anie other ancient father speake one word of your carnall reall presence or once name your accidents without subiects No they teach no other doctrine then that which I willingly imbrace Now that Saint Chrysostome speaketh of a mysticall presence his owne wordes following within a few lines shall witnesse the same with me Thus he saith Et propter te frangi sustinet vt omnes satiet And he suffereth to be broken for thee that he may satiate all Thus saith this holy father By whose words it is