Certamen Religiosum OR A CONFERENCE BETWEEN The late King of ENGLAND and the late Lord Marquesse of Worcester concerning RELIGION TOGETHER WITH A VINDICATION OF THE PROTESTANT CAUSE From the Pretences of the Marquesse his Last Papers which the necessity of the KING's Affaires denyed him Oportunity to Answer LONDON Printed for W. Lee at the Turks Head in Fleet-street and R. Royston at the Angel in Ivie-lane 1651. TO THE READER COURTEOUS READER I Doe not desire by way of Preface to trouble Thee with many words but something I must crave leave to say that thou mayest the better understand the reason and nature of this ensuing worke It may be thou art not unacquainted with a Booke which now hath beene extant some years The title of it is Certamen Religiosum and it containeth in it a Conference which was held partly by word of mouth but chiefly by Writing betwixt the late King and the Marquesse of Worcester a stiffe defender of the Romish Religion To the Marquesses first Plea I speake of that which passed betwixt them in writing the King returned Answer but the Marquesse replying the Kings occasions it seemes would not permit him to rejoyne especially the Reply being so large and so thick lin'd with quotations that the perusall and examination of it would require no little time I know there are some who account this Conference no better then supposititious which reflecting upon the Publisher of it Doctor Baily he hath lately in a Preface to a Booke which hee hath set forth of his own vindicated himself and asserted the Conference For my part I know no cause to question the truth of the Relation neither as to my purpose is it much materiall whether there were any such Conference or if there were whether it were so mannaged as is related This I see that in the Booke before mentioned to wit Certamen Religiosum the Romish cause is set out in great pompe both Scriptures and Fathers being produced as asserting most of those opinions which they of the Church of Rome maintaine and we impugne and the Reader is left naked and unfurnished with any Armes and Weapons wherewith either to defend himselfe or to offend his adversary save onely as he shall be able to provide for himselfe and bring with him The first time that I heard the Booke mentioned which was about the last Spring it was spoken of as a Booke of no little danger and so I understand since diverse judge of it Yea I have heard that some have said that the Marquesse in this Reply hath done more for the Church of Rome then any have done before him When I got the Booke and looked a while into it though I saw no reason to conceive so highly of it as it seemes some have done yet I found in it I confesse much more then I expected so much as that I thought it operae pretium no mis-pent time to answer it This I have indeavoured how I have performed it is left to Thee Reader to judge The great difficulty in the undertaking did arise from the multitude of Authors that are alleged whether the Marquess himselfe did peruse these authors or tooke them upon trust from others I will not inquire much lesse determine especially considering how lax and loose the quotations are the words of the Authors being scarce once in a hundred times cited and sometimes onely the Authour named many times only the Book but no Chapter or Section mentioned In this respect it could not be expected that every allegation should receive a punctuall answer besides that as in the Rejoynder it selfe upon occasion I acknowledge sometimes for want of the Authour I had not liberty to examine what is alleged but this I presume will not be found so frequent nor yet at all prejudiciall to the maine so much still being said as may suffice to take off the force of that which is objected There is an answer already come forth to the Marquesses last Paper with which I have to deale The authour of it is a gentleman of much reading well versed in Greek and Latin writers both Ecclesiasticall and others as appears by this work which is all that I have seene of his though I hear of something else that he hath published not without great commendation I had undertaken this task before I had any intimation that another was about it and I think this of mine was at the Presse before the foresaid Answer came from it I could not confine my selfe to such narrow bounds as that Gentleman hath done in answer to the Marquesse for he hath others also besides him to deal with the reason of his concisenes is best knowne unto himselfe I have launched further into the deepe and have exspatiated more in the discussion of those points which are handled by the Marquesse yet so as that the Reader I hope will have no cause to complaine of proxility or to thinke me tedious I have divided the worke into two parts in the former part I have indeavoured to shew the ungroundednes of the Romish doctrine in those points which the Marquesse propoundeth and the repugnancy of it both to Scriptures and Fathers notwithstanding any thing he hath alleged in defence of it In the latter part I have laboured to wipe off those aspersions which the Marquesse doth cast upon diverse of our most eminent Divines and chiefe instruments in the worke of Reformation as Luther Calvin Zuing lius Melancthon and Beza partly in respect of their Doctrine and partly in respect of their conversation This the learned answerer before mentioned hath not attempted but I did not think it meete to wave it calumnies and reproches being more apt to prevaile with some then any other argument whatsoever Some points of controversie also which the Marquesse taketh occasion to bring in having not mentioned them before are insisted on in this second Part. Some perhaps may say Quorsum perditio haec What needed all this these controversies haveing bin sufficiently handled by our writers both at home and abroad long agoe I answer 'T is true they have bin so yet if the Marquesse thought it not enough that Bellarmine and many others of the Romish party have written largely in that behalfe but judged it meet to produce his own Plea I think there is as much reason why we should consider what he saith and that some answer should be given him that so none may boast as some are apt to doe in such a case that because hee is unanswered therfore he is unanswerable And besides though Nil dictum quod non dictum priùs the matter be not new yet there may be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a handling of the same things in another manner yea and diverse treating of the same subject something may be found in one which is not in another But may some say there are many other great and grosse errours of late sprung up among us and these
hee takes Aquinas to be resolute in this point and hee cites him saying As predestination doth include a will to conferre grace and glory so Reprobation doth include a will to suffer one to fall into sinne and to inslict the punishment of damnation for sinne Hence Alvarez inferres that according to Aquinas the permission of the first sinne for which a Reprobate is damned is the effect of Reprobation And hee addes that of this permission there is no cause in the Reprobate Because before the permission of the first sinne and before the first sinne there is no other sinne for if there were then it were not simply the first sinne or man should commit some other sinne before which God did not permit whereas no sinne can be committed but by Gods permission He cites also Aquinas againe speaking thus why God doth chuse some to glory and reprobate others there is no reason but onely Gods Will. And having cited that of the Apostle Rom. 9. The children being not yet borne neither having done any good or evill that the purpose of God according to election might stand not of workes but of him that calleth it was said unto her The elder should serve the younger As it is written Jacob have I loved but Esau have I hated having cited this I say hee addes that the Apostle here both Austine and Aquinas avouching as much plainly signifies that in the absolute Election and Reprobation of Men God did not looke at Mens merits or demerits but of his own pleasure did chuse and predestinate one to glory and not predestinate another but by an absolute will did determine to suffer him to sinne and to be hardened or to persevere in sinne to the end of his life and to inflict eternall punishment upon him for sin Hee brings in also Austine confuting those who say that Esau and Iacob being not yet borne God did therefore hate the one and love the other because hee did foresee the workes that they would doe Who said Austine can but wonder that the Apostle should not finde out this acute reason for hee did not see it c. No but flies to this hee saith to Moses I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy c. So then it is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy And that none of our Romish adversaries may sleight Austine in this point Alvarez about the beginning of his Worke hath a Disputation to shew what authority this Fathers judgement is of in the point of Grace and Predestination Hee shewes that not onely Prosper but also many Bishops of Rome did approve of Austines Doctrine concerning these points and did determine it to be sound and good And therefore in the testimony of Austine wee have many testimonies and such as are irrefragable with those with whom now wee have to doe But let us heare what some other late Writers of the Church of Rome doe say as to this point concerning Reprobation God from eternity saith Cardinall Cajetan doth truly chuse some and reprobate others doth love some and hate others in that from eternity his will is to vouchsafe some the helpe of his grace whereby to bring them to eternall glory and from eternity also his will is to leave some to themselves and not to afford them that gracious help which he hath decreed to afford the Elect. And this is for God to hate and to reprobate them with which yet it doth well stand that none is damned but by his owne workes because neither the Sentence nor Execution of damnation is before that such Reprobates doe sinne So also †Estius saith that the Apostle Rom. 9. doth teach that neither mens Election nor their Reprobation is from the Merits of workes but that God by the meere pleasure of his wil doth chuse some and Reprobate others And againe upon those words O man who are thou that repliest against God c. hee saith that the Apostles intent was to answer not so much the objection as the cause of objecting And that therefore he answers concerning the Will of God Electing and Reprobating and denies that the reason of it is to be inquired by man who is Gods creature and made by him yea that by the example of a potter the Apostle shewes that God doth this out of the liberty of his Will without any other reason And he addes that Thomas Aquinas did also thus rightly expound the words of the Apostle Bradwardine who intituled the book which hee wrote of the cause of God is not to be omitted Hee saith It 's true God doth not eternally punish any without his fault going before temporally and abiding eternally yet God did not eternally reprobate any because of sinne as a cause antecedently moving Gods will What doe our Divines say even such as are of the more rigid sort as concerning this high and abstruse point of Reprobation what I say doe they lay more then is said by these great and eminent Doctours of the Church of Rome and before them by Austine and before both him and them as both hee and they conceived by the Apostle Paul himselfe The Decree of Reprobation saith Bishop Davenant is not thus to be conceived I will damne Judas whether he believe or not believe repent or not repent for this were contrary to the truth of the Evangelicall promises but thus I am absolutely determined not to give unto Judas that speciall grace which would cause him to believe and repent and I am absolutely purposed to permit him to incurre his own demnation by his voluntary obstinacy and finall impenitency And againe It must here first of all be considered that Reprobatio aeterna nihil ponit in reprobato that is That eternall reprobation doth put nothing in the person that is reprobated It putteth onely in God a firme Decree of permitting such persons to fall into finall sinne and for it a firme decree of condemning them unto eternall punishment So both hee and diverse other of our Eng. lish Divines that were at the Synod of Dort being sent thither by King Iames as they hold that Reprobation which is the denying of election doth put in God an immutable will not to have mercy on such a person as is passed by in respect of giving eternall life And that foreseene unbeliefe is not the cause of non election So withall they lay down this position God doth damne none nor appoint unto Damnation but in respect of sinne So Doctor Ames saith that it is too great a slander to say that according to our opinion God did immediately decree mens damnation whether they be sinners or no. Our opinion saith hee is this that God did not choose some as he did chuse others but did determine to let them abide in their sinnes and for those sinnes to suffer the punishment of just damnation and that of this decree
authority of the Church as if were it not for the authority of the Church the Scripture were of no force neither could deserve any credit So the Romanists do frequently pervert those words of Austine but Austines meaning was only this that the Churches authority by way of introduction was a means to bring him to beleeve the Gospel by propounding and commending the Gospel unto him as a thing to be beleeved whereas otherwise he should not have given heed to it nor taken notice of it not as if he did finally rest in the authority of the Church and resolve his faith into it No for as I have shewed before he would have the Church it selfe sought in the Scripture and proved by it Had not the woman of Samaria told those among whom she lived of Christ they had not come to the knowledge of him much lesse to beleeve in him yet having heard Christ himselfe they did not rest in the testimony of the woman but said unto her Now we beleeve not because of thy saying for we have heard him our selves and know that this is indeed the Christ and the Saviour of the world Joh. 4. 42. So should not the Church hold out unto us the Scriptures we should not know much lesse beleeve them but at length God by his Spirit opening our understandings that we may understand the Scriptures Luke 24. 45. we come to be convinced by the Scriptures themselves that they are the Oracles of God and of divine authority Melchior Canus a learned Writer of the Church of Rome holds that the formall reason of our faith is not the authority of the Church that is that the last resolution of our faith is not into the Churches testimony And he saith that he could not dissemble their errour who hold that our faith is to be reduced thither as to the utmost cause of beleeving For the confuting of this errour he saith belongs that Ioh. 4. Now we beleeve not because of thy saying for we our selves have heard him and know c. The same authour averres that the authority of the Church is not a reason by it selfe moving to beleeve but only a cause or meanes without which we should not beleeve viz. Because as he addes the Church doth propound unto us that the Scripture is the word of God and except the Church did so propound it we should never ordinarily come to beleeve it yet we doe not therefore beleeve the Scripture to be Gods word because the Church doth say it but because God doth reveal it If the Church saith he doth make way for us to know such sacred books we must not therefore rest there but we must goe further and must relye on Gods solid truth And then he brings in that very speech of Austine and shewes what he meant by it Hereby is understood saith he what Austine meant when he said I should not beleeve the Gospell except the authority of the Church did move me And again By the Catholikes I had beleeved the Gospell For Austine had to doe with the Manichees who without dispute would have a certain Gospell of theirs beleeved and so would establish the faith of the Manichees Austine therefore askes them what they would doe if they did light upon a man who did not beleeve so much as the Gospell what kind of perswasion they would use to bring him to their opinion He affirmes that himselfe could not be otherwise brought to embrace the Gospell but that the authority of the Church did overcome him He doth not therefore teach that the faith of the Gospell is grounded upon the Churches authority but only that there is no certain way whereby either infidels or novices in the faith may have entrance to the holy books but one and the same consent of the Catholike Church This he himselfe hath sufficiently explicated in the fourth Chapter of that Epistle and in his book to Honoratus concerning the benefit of beleeving I have thus largely cited the words of this learned Romanist because no Protestant can speak more clearly and more fully to the purpose That which the Marquesse after addeth is nothing against us viz. That there was a Church before there was any Scripture that though the Scripture be a light yet we have need of some to guide us though it be the food of our soules yet there must be some to administer it unto us though it be an antidote against the infection of the devill yet it is not for every one to be a compounder of the ingredients that though it be the onely sword and buckler to defend the Church from her Ghostly enemies yet this doth not exclude the noble army of Martyrs and the holy Church which through all the world doth acknowledg Christ All this I say is nothing at all against us who do so assert the authority of the Scripture as that we doe not evacuate the Churches ministery Timothy must preach but it is the word viz. of God contained in the Scriptures which he must preach 2 Tim. 4. 2. If any man speak for the instructing of others he must speak as the Oracles of God 1 Pet. 4. 11. He must confirm that which he doth speak by the Scriptures And so on the other side they that hear must take heed how and what they hear Luke 8. 18. Mark 4. 24. They must not beleeve every Spirit but must try the Spirits whether they be of God 1 John 4. 1. They must to the Law and to the Testimony for that if any speak not according to this word it is because they have no light in them Isai 8. 20. They must search the Scriptures diligently to see whether the things delivered unto them be so or no. Acts 17. 11. OF THE CHVRCH of ENGLAND THE SECOND PART OF THE Rejoynder to the Marquess of WORCESTER'S Reply MAJESTIE' 's Answer to the said Marquesse's Plea for the ROMISH RELIGION THE Marquesse saith that he will now consider the Opinions of Protestants apart from them of the Church of Rome and begin with the Church of England The Religion of this Church he saith as it is in opposition to theirs consists wholly in denying for that what she affirms they affirm the same as the Real presence the Infallibility Visibility Universality and Unity of the Church Confession and Remission of sinnes Free-will Possibility of keeping the Commandments c. And you may as well saith he deny the blessed Trinity for we have no such word in Scripture only inference as that which you have already denied for which we have plain Scripture c. But 1. it is not altogether so that what the Church of England doth affirm the same they of the Church of Rome do affirm also For the Church of England Art 9. doth affirm alleadging the authority of the Apostle for proof thereof that Concupiscence hath of it self the nature of sinne even in the regenerate which the Romanists deny the Councel of Trent accurseth
filthily more uncivilly more lewdly and beyond all bounds of Christian modesty then did Luther No marvel that he is so taxed for his obscenity in his Henzius Anglicus against King Hen. the eight for his beastlinesse in his Hans worst against the Jewes for his filthy mentioning of Hogs for his stincking repetition of turds and dunghils in his Schemhamphorise But if you will hear of his Master-piece you mast read the Book which he writ against the Pope where he asks him out of what mouth O Pope dost thou speak is it out of that from whence thy farts doe burst If it come thence keep it to thy selfe if it comes from that wherein thou powrest thy Corisca wine let the Dog fill that with his excrements good Asse doe not kick kick not my little Pope O my dear Asse doe not so fie how this little Pope hath bewrayed himselfe Is this the way to win to his side or to gaine souls to Christ or to reforme Churches or to confute heresies It is observed that Saint Paul in his Epistles repeated the sacred name of Jesus 500 times and it is the observation of the learned Tygurin Divines that so many times Luther hath used the name of Devill in his Bookes and it is no marvaile that they burst out into this admiration How wonderfull is Luther here with his Devils what impure words he useth with how many Devils doth he burst Nor marvail that Zwinglius saith to him we fill not our Books with so many Devils nor doe we bring so many armies of Devils against thee If you can expect to gather figgs from thorns or grapes from thistles then ye may expect words from a sanctified spirit to proceed from such a mouth else not What should I say more Melancthon tells us that Carolostadius was a barbarous fellow without wit without learning without common sense in whom was no signe of the holy Ghost but manifest tokens of impiety Lastly Hutterus Beza's owne fellow Protestant thus saies of him and casts this dirt in his face which is so shamelesse a testimony that you must give me leave to throw a latine vail over it viz. Beza in fine libri de absentia corporis Christi in coena scribit Candidae sive Amascae suae culum imo partem diversam magis adhuc pudendam mundiora esse quam illorum ora qui simpliciter verbis Christi inherentes credant se praesens Christi Corpus in coena sacra ore suo accipere And another Beza by his most filthy manners was a disgrace to honest Discipline who in sacrilegious verse published to the world his detestable loves his unlawfull carnall acts whoredoms and fowl adulteries not content that himselfe onely should like a hog wallow in the durt of wicked lusts but he must also pollute the ears of studious youth with his filth I could inlarge my Paper to a volume of like instances in others but these are the prime reformers of the Protestant Churches and how the people edified under their Doctrine these Narratives from their owne mouths shall tell you When we were seduced by the Pope saith Luther every man did willingly follow good works and now every man neither saith nor knoweth any thing but how to get all to himselfe by exactions pillage theft lying usury Certainly to speak the truth there is many times found Conscionable and plainer dealing amongst most Papists then among many Protestants And if we look narrowly to the ages past we shall find more godlinesse devotion and zeal though blind more love one toward another more fidelity and faithfulnesse every way in them then is now to be found in us If any man be desirous to see a great rabble of knaves of persons turbulent deceitfull Cosoners Usureis let him goe to any City where the Gospel is purely preached and he shall find them there by multitudes For it is more manifest then the day light that there were never among the Ethnicks Turks or infidels more unbridled and unruly persons with whom all virtue and honesty is quite extinct then are amongst the Professonrs of the Gospel The children of them of the reformed Gospel grow every day worse more untractable and dare commit such crimes as men of former times were never subject to If you cast your eyes upon Protestant Doctours you shall find that some of them moved through vaine glory envious zeal and a prejudicate opinion disorder the true Doctrine disperse and earnestly defend the false some of them without cause stir up contentions and with inconsiderate spight defend them many wrest their Doctrines every way of purpose to please their Princes and the people by whose grace and favour they are maintained they overthrow with their wicked life all that they had formerly built with their true doctrine How could the people be better when their Ministers were so bad like lips like lettice I will conclude all with the learned Protestant Zanchius and then you will neither wonder at one or other I have read saith he the Latine copy of the Apology and diligently read it over not without choller when I perceived what manner of writing very many let me not say for the most part but all doe use in the Churches of the reformed Gospel who would seeme notwithstanding to be Pastors Doctors and Pillars of the Church The state of the question that it may not be understood we often of set purpose over-cloud with darknesse things which are manifest we impudently deny things false we without shame avouch things plainly impious we propose as the first principles of faith things orthodoxall we condemne of heresie Scripture at our pleasure we detort to our owne dreams we boast of Fathers when we will follow nothing lesse then their doctrine to deceive to calumniate to raile is familiar with us so as we may defend our cause good or bad by right or by wrong all other things we turne upside down Oh times Oh manners It is no marvel that M. Sutcliff saies that the Protestant writers offered great violence to the Scriptures expounding them contrary both to antient Fathers History and common reason It is no marvel that Cambden tells us that Holland is a fruitfull province of heretiques It is no marvell that Your royall Father tells us that both Hungary and Bohemia abound with infinite varieties of sects It is no marvell that he said he could never see a Bible well translated into English and that the worst of all was the Geneva whereunto were added notes untrue seditious and savouring too much of dangerous and traiterous conceits It is no marvel that He protested before the great God that you should never find among the Highland or Border-theeves greater ingratitude more lies and vile perjuries then with those phanatick spirits It is no marvel that M. Bancroft said that the Puritans of Scotland were published in a Declaration by his Majestie to
the words of the Apostle Rom. 12. 6. Except we must to use the Marquesses expressions take them margin'd with their own notes sens'd with their own meaning and enlivened with their own private spirit As for the rule mentioned Gal. 6. 16. it is no generall rule of faith or of interpreting Scripture but a speciall rule that in Christ Iesus neither circumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision but a new creature as is cleare by the context ver 15. As many as walke according to this rule that is as Oecumenius expounds it as many as are content with this rule and this doctrine that all things are made a new creature and doe not subject themselves to the Law Neither is the place 2 Cor. 10. 15. to the purpose For the Apostle there speakes of a ruleby way of similitude as Cardinall Cajetan doth well expound it viz. that as an Architect or the like chiefe workman doth by rule divide the worke that is to be done and appoint under-workemen where they shall imploy themselves and how farre they shall reach so God did as it were by rule appoint Paul where he should preach the Gospell and how farre his imployment should extend in that kinde This plainly appeares to be the Apostles meaning by the two verses immediately preceding But we will not boast of things without our measure but according to the measure of the rule which God hath distributed unto us a measure to reach even unto you For we stretch not our selves beyond our measure as though wee reached not unto you for we are come as farre as you also in preaching the Gospell of Christ Then he addes Not boasting of things without our measure that is of other mens labours but having hope when your faith is encreased that we shall be enlarged by you according to our rule abundantly To preach the Gospell in the regions beyond you and not to boast in another mans line of things made ready to our hand All may plainly see that here is nothing spoken of a rule of faith or a rule for the understanding of the Scripture And therefore most impertinently is 2 Cor. 10. 16. cited as if the Apostle there did speak of a rule of faith made ready to their hands And so also is that of not measuring our selves by our selves 2 Cor. 10. 12. Neither can our Adversaries ever be able to prove that by the forme of Doctrine mentioned Rom. 6. 17. the Apostle did meane any other Doctrine then what is contained in the Scripture or that any Doctrine but the Doctrine of the Scripture is meant by that which was committed to Timotheus trust 1 Tim. 6. 20. which the Apostle there bids him keepe avoiding profane and vaine bablings c. Though such as are unlearned and unstable wrest the Scriptures c. 2 Pet. 3. 16. yet the same Apostle in the same Epistle doth teach us to take heed to the Scripture as to a light shining in a darke place 2 Pet. 1. 19. That the Apostle spake of any unwritten tradition as a rule whereby to interpret Scriptures 2 Tim. 2. 2. can never be made good by the things which Timothy heard him and was to commit to faithfull men c. hee meant nothing but the Doctrine of the Gospell as the forementioned Cajetan doth truly interpret and that Doctrine I presume is no where to be found but in the Scripture Surely the Apostle in the next Chapter after tells Timothy that from a child hee had known the holy Scriptures which were able to make him wise unto salvation thorough faith which is in Christ Iesus 2 Tim. 3. 15. After the Scriptures the Marquesse cites the Fathers as being of this opinion viz. Ireneus l. 4. c. 45. Tertull. de Praescript and Vincent Lirin in suo Commentario perhaps it should be Commonitorio But it will not appeare that the Fathers held any rule of faith and of interpreting the Scripture besides the Scripture it selfe His Majesty as I noted before cited above twice as many Fathers as the Marquesse here alledgeth plainly testifying that the Scriptures are their own interpreters and that matters of faith are to be decided by them I will adde a few more testimonies of the Fathers to this purpose As wee doe not deny saith Hierome those things which are written so we refuse those things which are not written I adore saith Tertullian the fulnesse of the Scripture And againe Let Hermogenes saith hee shew that it is written If it be not written let him feare that woe appointed for those that either adde to the Scripture or detract from it Wee doe Cyprian no wrong saith Austine when wee distinguish any of his writings from the canonicall authority of the Divine Scriptures For not without cause is such a wholesome Ecclesiasticall rule of vigilancy constituted to which certaine Bookes of the Prophets and the Apostles belong which we may not at all dare to judge and according to which wee may freely judge of other writings whether they bee of Beleevers or of unbelievers And againe I am not bound saith hee by the authority of this Epistle viz. of Cyprian because I doe not account Cyprians writings as Canonicall but I examine them by those that are Canonicall and that which is in them agreeable to the authority of the Divine Scriptures I receive with his praise and what is not agreeable I refuse with his leave For the Fathers here cited by the Marquesse Irenaeus lib. 4. cap. 45. hath nothing that may seeme to make that way except this Where saith hee the gifts of the Lord are placed there wee ought to learne truth of those with whom is that succession of the Church which is from the Apostles and that sound speech not to be reproved For they keepe that faith of ours which is in one God that made all things and increase that love which is towards the Son of God who did such great things for us and they without danger expound unto us the Scriptures neither blaspheming God nor dishonoring the Patriarcks nor contemning the Prophets Here Irenaeus speakes of some of whom truth was to be learnt who kept the faith and did expound the Scriptures without danger but hee doth not say that they had any unwritten rule of faith or any such rule whereby to expound the Scriptures No for so Irenaeus should not agree with himselfe who saith as His Majesty observed that the evidences which are in the Scriptures cannot be manifested but by the Scriptures themselves Adde hereunto another saying of the Father very pertinent to the purpose We have not known saith hee the dspensation of our salvation but by those by whom the Gospell came unto us which Gospell they preached aad afterward by the Will of God delivered unto us in the Scriptures as that which should be for the foundation and pillar of our Faith So much for Irenaeus The Marquesse cites the words of
we are unprofitable servants c. but not when they had done more then was commanded them But did they so They left all indeed and followed Christ but did not Christ call them to it and command them to doe it In this therefore they did no more then their duty was to doe We must distinguish therefore betwixt generall duties and speciall duties All were not bound to forsake all actually as the Apostles did and to follow Christ because there was no generall precept for it but the Apostles were bound to do it because they had a speciall call and command from Christ that did oblige them to it Thus then Ambroses words must be understood that in respect of a generall precept obliging all to the thing done some may be said to doe more then their duty was to doe though simply and absolutely they did not more For if it were more for Gods glory to doe what they did then not to doe it they were bound to doe it For else how did they love God with all their heart and with all their soule and with all their might as all are commanded to doe Deut. 5. 6. Origon is next cited who saith that such as live in virginity doe not that which is commanded but above what is due But the meaning is that virginity is not a thing generally commanded not a duty required of all yet to some who have the gift and are called of God to improve it to the greater advancement of his glory it is a duty every one is bound to doe that which doth make most for Gods glory that being the end for which wee ought doe whatsoever wee doe 1 Cor. 10. 31. After Origen followes Eusebius who saith that in the Church of God two kindes of life are instituted one exceeding our nature and the common course of life not seeking marriage nor off-spring nor substance but addicted wholly to Gods worship And this is the manner of a perfect life in Christianity The other kinde of life is more remisse and humane which is intangled in modest wedlock and procreation of children c. To such belongeth the second degree of piety Thus Eusebius who yet is far from asserting such workes of supererogation as are now disputed of We grant that to live unmarried so as thereby the better and the more freely to serve God is a life of more perfection then to live married and so to be entangled with the affaires of the world But we deny that they who so live unmarried doe supererogate i. e. that they not only do all that is commanded but also over and above what is commanded This neither doth Eusebius say neither can it be proved Next comes Chrysostome who may seeme to speake much but indeed it is not much to the purpose Hee saith that many doe exceede the Commandements But how is that Not in respect of the whole latitude of the Commandements for as David testifies they are exceeding broad Psal 119. 96. It is therefore onely in respect of some outward act which is not directly and precisely commanded And thus Chrysostome sayes that the Heathens many of them did exceede the Commandements and yet I presume our Adversaries will not ascribe any extraordinary perfection to the Heathens The testimony then of Chrysostome makes but little for their works of superetogation except they will acknowledge such workes to have been done by Heathens many of which might forbear marriage so the vestall Virgins did and this was according to Chrysostomes manner of speech to exceede the Commandements namely to go beyond that Thou shalt not commit adultery But consider this and so any other Commandement in the full extent of it as forbidding all wanton lookes and all unchast thoughts Mat. 5. 28. Iob. 31. 1. and so neither the Vestall nor the Popall Virgins will finde any great cause of boasting The last Father here cited is Gregory Nicen. in the Marquesses paper is to be blotted out as superfluous this here cited being not Gregory Nissen but Gregory sirnamed the great Bishop of Rome who saith The elect sometimes doe more then God hath vouchsafed to command For bodily virginity is not commanded but onely commended for if it were commanded then marriage would be a fault And yet many live in virginity and so performe more then the Commandement doth require of them It is true there is no precept directly commanding virginity and in that respect they that live in virginity may be said to doe more then the Commandement doth require of them Yet if any have the speciall gift given of God and see it a meanes whereby the more to glorifie God then by consequence the precept of loving God with all our heart and with all our soule and with all our might Deut. 6. 5. and of doing all to the glory of God 1 Cor. 10. 31. these precepts I say in such a case doe require virginity But alas what is all this that hath beene alledged both from Scriptures and Fathers to prove workes of supererogation to prove that men may not onely doe all that is commanded but also more then is commanded How will this consist with the Scriptures which tell us There is not a just man upon earth that doth good and sinneth not Eccles 7. 20. In many things we offend all Jam. 3. 2. If God shall contend with us wee cannot answer him one of a thousand Job 9. 3. And doe not the Fathers concurre with the Scriptures in this Then are wee righteous saith Hierome when wee confesse our selves to be sinners And againe So Leo This is the true righteousnesse of those that are perfect that they never presume themselves to be perfect Thus also Gregory the great If God shall strictly examine us what hope of salvation is there for us when as our evill deeds are simply evill but the good deeds which we suppose wee have cannot be simply good And againe The Saints know that all mans righteousnesse is found to be unrighteousnesse if God doe strictly judge it After workes of Supererogation the Marquesse passeth to Free-will saying that they hold that wee have Free-will and that we deny it But a question should be stated before it be disputed we doe not deny that we have Free-will though wee deny that our will is so free now in the estate of corrupt nature as that wee have of our selves any ability to that which is truly good Calvin allowes both the name of Free-will and also the thing it selfe so it be rightly understood viz. that the will of man is free as freedome is opposed to coaction the will is so free as that it cannot be compelled or constrained But that the will is free as to be able of it selfe to chuse either good or evill this is it that he contends against and because many when they heare or read of Free-will understand it in this sense this made him wish that
of Reprobation as the good merit of Election 2. To that question Is there unrighteousnesse with God he doth not answer that therefore there is not because the whole lumpe is depraved by sinne c. but he answers so as that he refers as well the Reprobation of these as the election of those unto the sole Will of God and so represses the curious inquirer O man who art thou c. 3. That comparison of a Potter of the same lumpe making one vessell unto honour and another unto dishonour doth exclude the supposition of a corrupt lumpe For here verily is nothing supposed in the lumpe but that it is indifferent and may be fashioned both the one way and the other Thus this learned Papist goes as farre in the point both of Election and of Reprobation as any Protestant that I know whatsoever Neither would he have us thinke that he goes alone for hee cites many as Lombard Hugo de S. Victore Aquinas Cajetan Lyra Titleman and Pererius as being of the same opinion with him and interpreting the words of the Apostle in the same manner And this I suppose may suffice to vindicate the Doctrine of Protestants even such as goe highest in this point as touching Reprobation Now for the Scriptures objected against us the first viz. Wis 1. 13. is not Canonicall Hierome brandes that booke called the the Wisdome of Solomon as falsly intituled and saith that it is no where to be found among the Hebrewes to whom the Oracles of God were committed Rom. 3. 2. and that the style doth smell of Greeke eloquence and that some ancient writers affirme it to be the worke of Philo a Jew Therefore saith he as the Church doth read indeed the Bookes of Judith Tobie and the Maccabees but doth not receive them amongst the Canonicall Scriptures so also doth it reade these two volumes viz. Ecclesiasticus and the wisdome of Solomon for the edifying of the people but not for the confirming of Ecclesiasticall Doctrines But suppose it were Canonicall the place alledged is answered to our hand by one of the Roman Church viz. Alvarez when it is said God made not death the meaning hee saith is that God doth not primarily of it selfe intend the death of any but in respect of some other great good that is joyned with it And againe that place hee saith is expounded of death in respect of the cause to wit sinne These expositions of the place doe free the Doctrine of Protestants from suffering any prejudice by it were the authority of it greater then indeed it is The next place is that 1 Tim. 2. 4. Who will have all men to be saved c. Austine gives diverse interpretations of those words First thus that the meaning is that God will have all to be saved that are saved and that none but such as hee will save can bee saved Secondly this that by all men are meant men of all sorts how ever distinguished Kings and private persons noble and ignoble c. This hee shewes to be agreeable both to the Context and also to the phrase of Scripture Luke 11. 42. You tithe Mint and Rue and every Herbe i. e. every kinde of Herbe This latter exposition of the Apostles words Alvarez saith is also followed by Fulgentius Beda and Anselme The same Alvarez relates two other interpretations which Austine gives of these words viz. first this God will have all men to be saved that is hee makes men to will or desire that all may be saved as the Spirit is said to make intercession for us Rom. 8. 26. that is makes us to make intercession or supplication c. Estius upon the place doth embrace this Exposition before any other VVho will have all men to be saved that is saith hee He willeth and maketh godly men to desire the salvation of all Though God will not save all but onely the Elect yet he will have all to be saved to wit by us as much as in us lies in that he commands us to seek the salvation of all and this desire and indeavour he workes in us This Exposition wee embrace rather then any of the rest The other Exposition which Alvarez relates is that the Apostle speakes of Gods antecedent will Thus hee saith Austine doth expound it in diverse places and for this Exposition hee also cites Damascene Prosper Theophylaot Oecumenius Aquinas as also Chrysostome and Ambrose and saith that it is common among the Doctors Now in the next Disputation hee tels us that Gods antecedent Will is that which respects the object simply considered and by it selfe and that this will is called antecedent not because it goes before the good or ill use of our will as some thinke but because it goes before that will whereby God respects the object considered with some adjunct which is the consequent and latter consideration of it If saith hee the salvation of the Reprobate be considered simply by it selfe so God doth will it but if it be considered as it hath adjoyned the privation or want of a greater good to wit the universall good of manifesting Gods Iustice in the Reprobate and of causing his Mercy the more to shine forth in the Elect so God doth not will it And in this respect were affirmed that God by a consequent will doth not will that all shall be saved but only such as are predestinate Now take any of all these foure Explications of the Apostles words wherein hee saith that God will have all men to be saved as for my part I like best either the second or the last take any of them I say and the Apostles words are nothing against that which Protestants hold concerning Reprobation As for that of Peter that God is not willing that any should perish 2 Pet. 3. 9. Bellarmine himselfe expounds both it and the former place viz. 1 Tim. 2. 4. of that Will of God which Divines call Gods Antecedent will Now what that Antecedent will of God is we have seene even now out of Alvarez if Bellarmine did understand it otherwise as Alvarez notes that some did hee is confuted by Alvarez in the place above cited Where hee also cites Austine saying Many are not saved not because they will not but because God will not which without all controversie is manifested in young children whence he inferrs that the condition which is included in Gods Antecedent will whereby he will have all men to be saved is not this if they will and if they doe not hinder it And Bellarmine himselfe also though he say It is most true that all are not saved because they will not for if they would God would not be wanting unto them Yet immediately hee addes But none can have a will to be saved except God by preventing and preparing the will make him to will it And why God doth not make all to will this who hath knowne the mind of the Lord
Church Yea hee saith that many whose Fathers were Priests were promoted to be Popes and that they were not to be thought borne of fornication but of lawfull wedlock Cassander also acknowledgeth it to have beene but a constitution of the Church and that though for a while it was expedient yet afterwards it became a snare to many He saith that by the rigid and unseasonable exacting of this constitution most grievous and abominable scandals are in the church For that the causes which moved them in former times to make that constitution are not onely now ceased but even turned quite contrary That by this decree chastity and continency is so far from being confirmed that thereby a window may seeme to be set open unto all kinde of lust and lewdnesse And that it fares so now with some Priests that the society of their godly wives is not onely no hinderance but it is a helpe and furtherance unto them in respect of their Ecclesiasticall functions and imployments as Gregory Nazianzen testifies of his parents It remaines therefore he saith that henceforth this statute be released and that according to the custome of the ancient Church and of the Easterne Churches unto this day honest married men may be admitted to the Ministery of the Church c. There are weighty causes hee saith why this constitution should be released And he cites Panormitan a Cardinall and great Canonist observing and admonishing that experience shewes that a quite contrary effect hath followed by that Law of continency when as now they doe not live spiritually nor are pure but defiled with unlawfull copulation to their most great sinne whereas with their own wives they might live chastly That the church therefore ought to doe as a good Physician doth who if he finde by experience that the medicine doth more hurt then good hee will prescribe it no longer He goes further yet and holds that not onely they who were married before may be ordained and yet still keepe their conjugall society but also that such as are allready ordained may afterwards marry and yet still continue their Ministery though Bellarmine doth call this an errour much more grievous then the other that not onely before Ordination but even after Ordination it is lawfull to marry But surely both Scripture and reason shewes this as lawfull as the other And to returne to Cassander hee testifies that marrying after Ordination is onely forbidden by humane statute and that ancient examples doe shew that such Statutes are not precisely observed but that when the necessity of the Church doth require it they are dispensed with and therefore so it ought to be now hee saith in this case there being so great neede of it And hee gives this reason why they that are ordained should be permitted to marry because not onely no offence but much benefit is to be expected by it For that scarce one of a hundred is to be found who doth wholly abstaine from women and the people are so affected that if a Priest be a fornicatour or keepe a concubine they will either altogether condemne his Ministery or make lesse account of it and will rather suffer a Priest that is married it being now known even to the people that Marriage is honorable in all and that Whore-mongers and Adulterers God will judge Wherefore he saith if ever it were time to change an ancient custome then certainly these times call for a change of this custome though it be ancient when as all most good and religious Priests acknowledging their weakenesse and abhorring the filthinesse of continuall Fornication if they dare not doe it publikly yet privately doe marry Hee concludes that the matter being brought almost to this that a Priest must either be married or have a concubine every one must needs see that though there be some inconvenience in this Marriage yet it is to be chosen as a lesse evill then the other This was the judgement of Cassander a man of such note and eminency in his time that two Emperours viz. Ferdinand the first and Maximilian the second made choyce of him above all as a man most meete to compose if it might be the differences betwixt Protestants and them of the Church of Rome Now whereas the Marquesse saith that Protestants hold it unlawfull to make vowes of chastity it is true such vowes of chastity as are made maintained in the Church of Rome which as hath beene shewed by the testimony of Cassander prove snares and occasions of much unchastity such vowes I say Protestants doe indeed and that most justly hold unlawfull None ought to vow that which is not in his power to performe this is granted by all Now it is not in every ones power to live unmarried nor in the power of any but to whom God is pleased to give it I would that all men were even as I my selfe saith S. Paul but every man hath his proper gift of God one after this manner and another after that 1 Cor. 7. 7. And when the Disciples said If the cause of the man be so with his wife it is good not to marry our Saviour answered All men cannot receive this saying but they to whom it is given Mat. 19 10 11. And againe v. 12. having said There be Eunuches which have made themselves Eunuches for the Kingdome of Heavens sake hee addes immediately He that is able to receive it let him receive it Maldonate though hee would wrest the words another way yet hee is forced to confesse that generally all do expound them thus All are not able to performe that which you speake of viz. to be without a wife because all have not the gift of continence but onely they to whom it is given And though any see no necessity of marrying for the present yet they know not what necessity there may be of it afterwards and therefore to vow against it must needes be rash and dangerous The Apostle bids to avoide Fornication let every man have his own wife and let every woman have her own husband 1 Cor. 7. 2. And is it lawfull then for any to vow never to marry when as they know not but that thereby they shall expose themselves to the danger of Fornication Even as they of the Church of Rome by their vowes doe very few being free from Fornication as I have shewed before by the confession of Cassander and so of the Glosse upon Gratian. So also againe the Apostle speaking to the unmarried saith If they cannot containe let them marry for it is better to marry then to burne 1 Cor. 7. 9. But the vowes of chastity which the Romanists speake of and contend for presuppose that it is in any ones power to containe and that there is no feare of such burning as the Apostle speaks of And whereas the Apostle would not have any under 60. years old to be chosen into the number of widdowes though without any vow that