afterwards when they are grown inveterate for that then they will corrupt the monuments of antiquity 8 That the whole present Church may be ignorant of some things and erre in them but that in matters necessary to bee knowne and beleeued expressely it cannot erre and that it cannot erre in any the least thing with pertinacie such and so great as is found in Heretickes Ninthly that Councels and Popes may erre in matters of greatest consequence This our opinion thus layde downe is defended by Waldensis Occam and others Waldensis saith the Church whose faith neuer faileth according to the promise made to Peter who bare the figure of the Church when Christ said I haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not is not any particular Church as the Church of Africa within the bounds whereof Donatus did inclose it nor the particular Romane Church but the vniversall Church not gathered together in a generall Councell which hath sometimes erred as that at Ariminium vnder Taurus the Governour and that at Constantinople vnder Iustinian the younger but it is the Catholique Church dispersed through the whole world from the Baptisme of Christ vnto our times which doth holde and maintaine the true faith and the faithfull testimony of Iesus CHAP. 6. Of the Churches office of teaching and witnessing the truth and of their errour who thinke the authority of the Church is the rule of our faith and that shee may make new articles of our faith THus hauing spoken of the Churches assured possession of the knowledge of the truth in thenext place wee are to speake of her office of teaching witnessing the same touching the which our adversaries fall into two dangerous errours the first that the authority of the Church is Regula fidei ratio credendi the rule of our faith the reason why we belieue The second that the Church may make new articles of faith Touching the first of these erroneous conceipts the most of them doe teach that the last thing to which the perswasion of our faith resolueth it selfe the maine ground whereupon it stayeth is the authoritie of the Church guided by the spirit of truth For say they if infidels and misbeleeuers demaund of vs why we beleeue the Trinity of persons in the Vnity of the same Divine essence the Incarnation of the Sonne of God the Resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come we answere because these things are contayned in the Scriptures If they proceede farther to aske why wee beleeue the Scripture we answere because it is the word of God if why wee beleeue it to bee the word of God because the Church doth so testifie of it if why we beleeue the testimony of the Church because it is guided by the spirit of truth so that that vpon which our faith settleth her perswasion touching these things is the authority of the Catholique Church ledde and guided by the spirit of truth If it be said that it is one of the things to bee beleeued that the Church is thus guided by the spirit therefore that the authority of the Church cannot be the reason cause of beleeuing all things that pertain to the Christian faith because not of those things which concerne her owne authority Stapleton who professeth to handle this matter most exactly Sometimes seemeth to say that this article of faith that the Church is guided by the spirit and appointed by God to be a faithfull mistrisse of heauenly truth is not among the Articles of faith nor in the number of things to be beleeued Which the Rhemists vpon these words The Church is the pillar and ground of truth most constantly affirme saying We must beleeue heare and obey the Church as the Touchstone Pillar and firmament of truth for all this is comprised in the principle I beleeue the holy Catholique Church Sometimes that though perhaps in that Article it be implyed that wee beleeue whatsoeuer the Church teacheth vs yet not necessarily that wee beleeue that the Church is a faithfull and infallible witnesse mistresse of trueth And sometimes as in his triplication against Whitaker he sayth that when we professe that we beleeue the holy Catholike Church we doe not onely professe to beleeue that there is such a Church in the world but that wee are members of it and doe beleeue and embrace the doctrine of it as being guided infallibly by the spirit of trueth and that wee are taught in the Articles of our faith that the Church ought to bee listned vnto as to an infallible mistresse of heauenly trueth Surely it seemeth his braine was much crased when he thus wrote saying vnsaying saying he knew not what That which he addeth that this proposition God doth reveale vnto vs his heavenly truth teach vs the mysteries of his kingdome by the ministery of his Church is a transcendent wherevpon that article wherein wee professe to beleeue the Catholike Church doth depend as all the rest do is not an Article of the Creede doth but more more shew the distemper of his head But in that which hee addeth for confirmation hereof that we do not professe in the first Article of our faith to beleeue God as the reuealer of all hidden and heauenly truth and to rest in him as in the fountaine of all illumination is the note brand of an impious miscreant For this doubtlesse is the first thing implyed in our faith towards God that we yeeld him this honour to be the great master of all trueth vpon whose authority we will depend renouncing all our owne wisedome knowing that as no man knoweth the things of a man but the spirit of a man so no man knoweth the things of God but the spirit of Got and that flesh and blood cannot reueale these things vnto vs but our father which is in heauen That the precept of louing God aboue all is not distinctly set downe among the rest of the tenne commaundements but is implyed though principally in the first yet generally in all is to no purpose If he thinke it is not at all contayned in the Decalogue his folly is too too great CHAP. 7. Of the manifold errours of Papistes touching the last resolution of our faith and the refutation of the same THus wee see hee cannot avoid it but that the Church is one of the things to be beleeued therefore cannot be the first generall cause of beleeuing all things that are to be beleeued For when we are to be perswaded of the authority of the Church it is doubtfull vnto vs and therefore cannot free vs from doubting or settle our perswasion because that which setleth the perswasion must not be doubted of There is no question then but that the authority of the old Testament may bee brought to proue the new to him that is perswaded of the old and doubteth of the newe and the authoritie of the newe to
Canons prouided that Bishops and other Cleargy-men might make their last Will and Testament and giue to whom they pleased that which came to them by inheritance the gift of their friendes or which they gained vppon the same But that which they gayned vpon their Church-liuings they should leaue to their Churches But the Church of England had a different custome neither were these Canons euer of force in our Church And therefore her Bishops and Ministers might euer at their pleasure bequeath to whom they would whatsoeuer they had gained either vpon their Church liuings or otherwise And surely there was great reason it should be so for seeing The labourer is worthy of his hire why should not they haue power to giue that which was yeelded vnto them as due recompence and reward of their labours to whom they please And how can it bee excused from iniustice and wrong that men spending a great part of their owne Patrimonie in fitting themselues for the Ministery of the Church which conuerted to the best aduantage and benefitte might greatly haue enriched them should not haue right and power to dispose of such thinges as they haue lawfully gayned out of those liuings which are assigned to thē as the due reward of their worthy paines Yet are there some that are much more iniurious to the holy Ministery For Waldensis out of a Monkish humour thinketh that Cleargy-men are bound to giue away whatsoeuer commeth to thē by inheritan ce or by any other meanes that they ought not to possesse any thing in priuate and as their owne And alleageth to this purpose the saying of Origen Hierome and Bernard that the Cleargy-man that hath any part or portion on earth cannot haue the Lord for his portion nor any part in heauen But Cardinall Bellarmine answereth to these authorities That these Fathers speake of such as content not themselues with that which is sufficient but immoderately seeke the things of this world and proueth that Cleargy-men may haue and keepe lands and possessions as their owne First because the Apostle prescribeth that such a one should be chosena Bishop As gouerneth his owne house well and hath children in Obedience which presupposeth that he hath something in priuate and that is his owne Secondly hee cofirmeth the same by the Canons of the Apostles the Councell of Agatha Martinus Bracharensis in his Decrees and the first Councell of Hispalis and further addeth that a man hauing Lands Possessions and Inheritance of his owne may spare his owne liuing and receiue maintenance from the Church for proofe whereof he alleageth the Glosse and Iohn de Turrecremata a Cardinall in his time of great esteeme and confirmeth the same by that saying of Christ The Labourer is worthy of his hyre and that of the Apostle Saint Paul Who goeth to warfare at any time at his owne charge FINIS AN APPENDIX CONTAYNING A DEFENSE OF SVCH PARTES AND PASSAGES OF THE FORMER foure bookes as haue bin either excepted against or wrested to the maintenance of Romish errours Diuided into three partes THE EPISTLE TO THE READER SINCE the time I presumed good Christian Reader to offer to thy view what I had long before for my priuate satisfaction obserued touching certaine points concerning the nature definition notes visibility and authority of the Church much questioned in our times first there came forth a Pamphlet intituled The first part of Protestant proofes for Catholique Religion and recusancie After that a larger discourse bearing the name of A Treatise of the grounds of the old and new religion thirdly the first motiue of one Theophilus Higgons lately minister to suspect the integrity of his Religion The Author of the first of these worthy workes vndertaketh to proue out of the writings of Protestant Diuines published since the beginning of his Maiesties raigne ouer this Kingdome that his Romish faith and profession is Catholique The second endeauoureth to make the world belieue that Protestants haue no sure grounds of Religion And the third hauing made shipwracke of the faith and forsaken his calling laboureth to iustifie and make good that he hath done Euery of these hath beene pleased for the aduantage of the Romish cause amonst the Workes of many worthy men to make vse of that which I haue written the first seeking to draw mee into the defence of that hee knoweth I impugne and the other two taking exceptions to certaine parts and passages scattered here and there Such is the insufficiencie and weakenesse of the idle and emptie discourses of these men that I almost resolued to take no notice of them But finding that the last of these good Authors fronteth his booke with an odious title of Detection of falshood in Doctor Humfrey Doctor Field and other learned Protestants and addeth an Appendix wherein hee vndertaketh to discouer some notable vntruethes of Doctor Field and D. Morton pretending that the consideration thereof moued him to be come a Papist I thought it not amisse to take a little paynes in shewing the folly of these vaine men who care not what they write so they write something and are in hope that no man wil trouble himselfe so much as once to examine what they say yet not intending to answere all that euery of these hath said for who would mispend his time and weary himselfe in so fruitlesse a labour but that which concerneth my selfe against whom they bend themselues in more speciall sort then any other as it seemeth because I haue treatised as Maister Higgons speaketh of that subiect which is the center and circumference in all religious disputes And b◅cause Mr Higgons is pleased to let vs know his name whereas the other cōceale theirs it being no small comfort for a man to know his Aduersary I will do him all the kindnesse I can first begin with him though he shewed himselfe last and from him proceed to the rest What it is that maketh him so much offended with me I cannot tell but sure it is he hath a good vvill to offend me for hee chargeth mee vvith trifeling egregious falshood collusion vnfaithfull dealing abusing the holy Fathers and I knowe not what else But such is the shamelesse and apparant vntrueth of these horrible imputations that it is altogether needelesse to spend time bestow labour in the refutation of them Yet because in the suspicion of heresie falsehood and vfaithfull dealing in matters of faith religion no man ought to be patient I will briefely take a view of his whole booke And though his beginning bee abrupt and absurd his whole discourse confused and perplexed and all that he doth without order or method yet to giue satisfaction to all I will follow him the same way hee goeth I was vnwilling good Christian Reader to trouble thee with such discourses but the restlesse importunity of our aduersaries setting euery one a worke to say something against vs forceth mee thereunto Read
many worthies of the world in so diuerse places and at so diuerse times giue testimony to our opinion Touching the creation fall and state of originall sinne there were some and they excellently learned who thought as we doe that man must either be lifted aboue himselfe by grace or fall below himselfe by sinne that there is no middle estate of pure nature that originall righteousnesse was required to the integrity of nature and consequently that being lost nature is corrupted and depriued of all naturall and morall rectitude so that a man after the fall of Adam till grace restore him can do nothing morally good or that is not sin These men defined originall sin to be a priuation of originall righteousnesse that is of that grace without which a man can neither feare loue nor serue God aright And consequently do teach that after Adams fall without grace renewing vs wee cannot keepe the commaundements of God do the workes of morall vertue or any way dispose our selues to a true conuersion and turning vnto God This opinion is lâ—…rnedly defended by Thomas Bradwardin in his discourses against the Pelagians of his time and confirmed by him out of the Scriptures and Fathers and likewise by Gregorius Ariminensis as it was before them by Augustine and Prosper Many there were who thought otherwise whom Cardinall Contaren blameth as inclining too much to the Pelagian heresie but the best men concurred in judgment with these For proofe whereof Cassander citeth an excellent saying of Bonauentura Hoc inquit piarum mentium est vt nil sibi tribuant sed totum gratiae Dei vnde quantumcunque aliquis det gratiae dei a pietate non recedit etiamsi multa tribuendo gratiae Dei aliquid subtrahit potestati naturae vel liberi arbitrij cum vero aliquid gratiae dei subtrahitur naturae tribuitur quod gratiae est ibi potest periculum interuenire That is it is the property of pious and good mindes to attribute nothing to themselues but to ascribe all vnto the grace of God for how much soeuer a man giueth to the grace of God hee offendeth against no rule of piety noe though by giuing much to the grace of God he subtract something from the power of nature or free-will but when any thing that pertaineth to grace is denied vnto it and giuen to nature there may be some danger Concerning iustification there is a very maine difference betweene the Papists and vs for though we deny not but that there is a donation and giuing of the spirit to all them that are iustified changing and altering them in such sort as that they beginne to do the workes of righteousnesse yet we teach that iustification consisteth in such sort in the remission of sinnes and the imputation of Christs righteousnesse that the faithfull soule must trust to no other righteousnesse but that which is imputed the other beeing imperfect and not enduring the triall of GODS seuere judgement Now that this was the faith of the best and worthiest men in the Church in former times it will easily appeare vnto vs. The righteousnesse of another sayth Bernard is assigned to man because he had none of his owne and vppon the Canticles he sayth I also will sing the mercies of the Lord for euer Shall I sing of mine owne righteousnesse noe Lord I will remember thy righteousnesse onely for that is mine seeing thou art made vnto mee of God righteousnesse Is there any cause for mee to feare least it should not suffice vs both it is no short cloake which according to the Prophet cannot couer two With Bernard all other good men agreed who in respect of the imperfection of our inherent righteousnesse pronounced it to be as the polluted ragges of a menstruous woman Who is there saith Gerson that shall dare to boast that hee hath a cleane heart and who shall say I am innocent and I am cleane who is hee that will not quake for feare when he shall stand before God to bee iudged who is fearefull in his counsels Hence Iob in his affliction saith vnto God I feared all my workes knowing that thou sparest not the sinner and again if he will contend with me I cannot answere him one of a thousand Whereunto the prayer of the Prophet agreeth enter not into iudgement with thy seruant O Lord for no liuing man shall bee iustified in thy sight And againe if thou shalt obserue iniquities O Lord Lord who shall endure it Furthermore we reade that Esay wrapping vp himselfe with other and waxing vile in his owne eyes in all humility professed that all our righteousnesse is as the polluted ragges of a menstruous woman Who therefore in boasting sort shall dare to shew his righteousnesse to God more then a woman dareth shew the ragges of her confusion and shame to her husband There are two kindes of iustice to which faith leadeth vs saith Cardinall Contarenus the one inherent the other imputed it remaineth that wee enquire vpon which of them we are to stay our selues and by which wee are to thinke that wee are iustified before God that is accounted iust and holy as hauing that iustice that pleaseth God and answereth to that his law requireth I truely saith hee thinke that a man very piously Christianly may say that wee ought to stay to stay I say as vpon a firme and stable thing able vndoubtedly to sustaine vs vpon the iustice of Christ giuen and imputed to vs and not vpon the holinesse and grace that is inherent in vs. For this our righteousnesse is but imperfit and such as cannot defend vs seeing in many things we offend all c. But the iustice of Christ which is giuen vnto vs is true and perfect iustice which altogether pleaseth the eyes of God and in which there is nothing that offendeth God Vpon this therefore as most certaine and stable wee must stay our selues and beleeue that wee are iustified by it as the cause of our acceptation with God this is that precious treasure of Christians which whosoeuer findeth selleth all that he hath to buy it With Contarenus agree the Authors of the Enchiridion of Christian religion published in the prouinciall Synod of Collen in the yeare of our Lord 1536. Which as Cassander saith the more learned diuines in Italy and France approued the authours of the booke called Antididagma Coloniense Albertus Pighius and sundry other who if they were now a liue and should thus teach our Iesuited Papists would soone condemne them as Heretickes Touching merits I haue shewed else-where that Scotus Cameracensis Ariminensis and Waldensis doe thinke there is no merit properly so named With whom agreeth Adrian the Pope vpon the fourth of the sentences writing thus like a Protestant as I thinke Our merits are as a staffe of reed vpon which if a man stay himselfe it will breake and pierce the hand of him that
Augustine saith he would not beleeue the Gospell if the authoritie of the Church did not moue him hee vnderstandeth by the name of the Church the Primitiue congregation of those Faithful ones which saw heard Christ and were his witnesses Thirdly Driedo writeth thus when Augustine saith hee would not beleeue the Gospell if the authoritie of the Church did not moue him hee vnderstandeth that Church which hath beene euer since the beginning of the Christian Faith hauing her Bishops in orderly sort succeeding one another and growing and increasing till our times which Church truly comprehendeth in it the blessed company of the Holy Apostles who hauing seene Christ his miracles and learned from his mouth the Doctrine of Faith deliuered vnto vs the Evangelicall Scriptures And againe the same ◠Driedo saith that the authority of the Scripture is greater then the authoritie of the Church that now is in the world in it selfe considered But if wee speake of the vniversal Church including all Faithfull ones that are and haue beene the authority of the Church is in a sort greater then the Scripture and in a sort equall For explication whereof he addeth that as touching things that cannot bee seené nor knowne by vs we beleeue the sayings writings of men not as if they had in them in themselues considered a sufficient force to moue vs to beleeue but because by some reasons we are perswaded of them who deliuer such things vnto vs thinke them worthie to be beleeued So S. Augustine might rightly say hee would not beleeue the bookes of the Gospel if the authority of the Church did not moue him vnderstanding the vniuersal Church of which he speaketh against Manicheus which including the Apostles hath had in it an orderly course of succession of Bishops till our time For the faithfulnes trueth credit of this Church was more evident then the Trueth of the books of the New Testament which are therefore receiued as sacred true because written by those Apostles to whō Christ so many waies gaue testimony both by word and worke and the Scriptures are to be proued by the authority of that Church which included the Apostles but in the Church that now is or that includeth only such as are now liuing God doth not so manifest himselfe as hee formerly did so that this Church must demōstrat herself to be Orthodox by prouing her faith out of the Scripture With Driedo Ockam cōcurreth his words are these sometimes the name of the Church cōprehendeth not only the whole cōgregation of Catholiques liuing but the Faithful departed also in this sense blessed Augustine vseth the name of the Church in his book against the Manichees cited in the Decrees 2. dist c. palà m where the Catholique Church importeth the Bishops that haue succeeded one another frō the Apostles times the people subiect to thē And in the same sense Augustine vseth the name of the Church when he saith he would not beleeue the Gospell if the authoritie of the Church did not moue him for this Church comprehendeth in it the Writers of the bookes of the Gospell and all the Apostles so that from the authoritie of Augustine rightly vnderstood it cannot be inferred that the Pope the maker of the Canons is rather more to be beleeued then the Gospel yet it may be granted that wee must more rather beleeue the Church which hath beene from the times of the Prophets Apostles till now then the Gospel not for that men may any way doubt of the Gospell but because the whole is greater then the part So that the Church which is of greater authoritie then the Gospel is that whereof the Writer of the Gospel is a part Neither is it strange that the whole should bee of more authority then the parts These are the words of Ockam in the place cited by me Wherfore let the Reader judge whether that I cite out of Ockam be impertinent as the Treatiser saith or not To Durandus Gerson Driedo Ockam we may adde Waldensis who fully agrees with thē shewing at large that it pertayned to the Church onely in her first best and primitiue state age to deliuer a perfect direction touching the Canon of the Scripture so that shee hath no power or authority now to adde any more bookes to the Canon already receiued as out of her owne immediate knowledge But it sufficeth to the magnifying of her authority in her present estate that euen now no other bookes may bee receiued but such only as in her first and best estate shee proposed Farther adding that the saying of Augustine that hee would not beleeue the Gospell if the authority of the Church did not moue him is to bee vnderstood of the Church including the primitiue Fathers and Pastors the Apostles Scholers By this which hath bin sayd it is euident as I thinke that the former of those two constructions which I make of Augustines words hath bin approued by far better men then this Treatiser And that therefore he sheweth himself more bold then wise when he pronounceth it to be frivolous And surely if we consider well the discourse of S. Augustine I thinke it may be proued vnanswerably out of the circumstances of the fame that hee speaketh not precisely of the present Church For it is that authority of the catholicke church hee vrgeth that was begun by miracles nourished by hope increased by charity confirmed strengthned by long continuance And of that Church he speaketh wherin there had bin a succession of Bishops from Peter till that present time So that he must needs meane the Church including not onely such faythfull ones as were then liuing when hee wrote but all that either then were or had bin from the Apostles times Wherefore let vs passe to the other construction of Augustines words which is that the authority of the present church was the ground reason of an acquisit fayth an introduction leading him to a more sure stay but not the reason or ground of that faith whereby principally he did beleeue This constructiō the Treatiser sayth cannot stand because Aug saith if the authority he speaketh of be weakned hee will beleeue no longer Whence it seemeth to be consequent that it was the cause of all thē perswasion of fayth that he had then when he wrote not only of an acquisit fayth preparing fitting him to a stronger more excellent farther degree or kind of faith For the clearing of this poynt we must note that there are 3. sorts of such mē as beleeue for there are some that beleeue out of piety onely not discerning by reason whether the things they beleeue be to be beleeued as true or not the 2d. haue a light of diuine reason shining in them causing an approbation of that they beleeue the 3d. sort hauing a pure heart conscience begin already inwardly to taste that which hereafter
or inducement to make vs beleeue things we know not but it must be the report of such an one as we know cannot be deceiued nor will not deceiue It must therefore be evident to euery one that firmely and without doubting beleeueth things not knowne vnto him vpon the report of another that he that reporteth them vnto him neither is deceiued nor can deceiue Whence it followeth necessarily that things are as he reporteth These things presupposed I demaund of this Treatiser whether he and his consorts assent to the Articles of the Christian Faith induced so to doe by the evidence of the things in thēselues or by the report of another That they assent not vnto thē induced so to do by the evidence of the things in thēselues they all professe but by the report of another I demand therefore who that other is whether God or man if man then haue they nothing but anhumane perswasion very weakly grounded wherein they may be deceiued for euery man is a lyar If God let them tel me whether it be evident in it self that God deliuereth these things vnto thē pronounceth them to be as they beleeue or not If not but beleeued only then as before by reasō of authority that either of God or man Not of God for it is not evident in it self that God deliuereth any thing vnto thē not of men for their report is not of such credit asthat we may certainly vndoubtedly stay vpon it seeing they may be deceiued deceiue other They answere therefore that it is no way evident vnto them in it selfe that God deliuereth the things they beleeue but that they perswade themselues hee deliuered such things vpōthe report of men but such men as are infallibly led into all truth See then if they doe not runne round in a circle finding no stay They beleeue the resurrection of the dead and the like things because God revealed it they beleeue that God revealed it because it is so contained in the Scripture and the Scripture because it is the Word of God and that it is the Word of God because the Church so delivereth and the Church because it is a multitude of men infallibly led into all truth and that there is a Church infallibly led into all truth because it is so contained in Scripture and the Scripture because it is the word of God and so round without euer finding any end Out of this circle they cannot get vnles they either groūd their Faith vpon the meere report of men as men humane probabilities or confesse that it is evident vnto them in it selfe that God speaketh in the Scripture and revealeth those things which they beleeue which if they doe it must bee in respect either of the manner matter there vttered or consequent effects In respect of the manner there being a certaine diuine vertue force and majesty in the very forme of the words of him that speaketh in the Scripture in respect of the matter which being suggested and proposed to vs findeth approbation of reason inlightned by the light of grace in respect of the consequent effects in that we finde a strange and wonderful change wrought in vs assuring vs the doctrine is of God that hath such effects which is that we say which they condemne in vs. The Treatiser would make vs beleeue that there are two opinions amongst them touching this point whereof the one is as he telleth vs that wee beleeue the Church because the Scripture teacheth vs that shee is to be beleeued the Scripture because the Church deliuereth it to vs to be the word of God And the other that by the assistance of God together with the concurrence of our naturall vnderstanding we produce an act of supernaturall Faith by which wee firmely beleeue the Articles of Christian Faith not for any humane inducements but for that they are revealed by Almighty God without seeking any further which if it be so it must be evident in it self to thē that follow this opiniō that God hath revealed deliuered the things they beleeue that by one of the 3 waies before mētioned thē they fal into our opiniō for if it be not evidēt to thē in it self that God speakes in the scriptures reveales the things they are to beleeue they must go further to be assured that he doth so speake and reueale the things that are to bee beleeued either to proofe of reason or authority For no man perswadeth himselfe of any thing but vpon some inducements Proofe of reason demonstratiue I thinke they will not seeke and probable inducements they may not rest in therefore they must proceede to some proofeby authority which can bee no other but that of the Church and then they ioyne with them that follow the other opinion and beleeue the articles of Christian faith conteyned in Scripture because God hath reuealed them and that God hath reuealed them because the Church telleth them so and the Church because the Scripture testifieth of it that it is led into all trueth which is a very grosse sophisticall circulation This the Treatiser did well perceiue and therefore to helpe the matter he distinguisheth the cause of beleeuing and the condition necessarily requisite that the cause may haue her working in shew making the Diuine Reuelation the reason or cause that we beleeue and the Churches proposing to vs the things to be beleeued a condition only and not a cause in sort as the fire alone is the cause of the burning of the wood but the putting of one of them to another is a necessary condition without which that cause can produce no such effect but this shift will not serue the turne For it is the fire onely that burneth the wood though it cannot burne vnlesse it be put vnto it so that in like sort if the comparison hold the Diuine Reuelation must of and by it selfe alone moue induce and incline vs to beleeue the things proposed by the Church as being euident vnto vs to be a Deuine Reuelation though without the Churches proposing we could take no notice of it Euen as in naturall knowledge it is the euidence of trueth appearing vnto vs originally found in the first principles and secondarily in the conclusions from thence deduced that is the sole and onely cause or reason of our assent to such principles and conclusions though without the helpe of some men of knowledge proposing them to vs and leading vs from the apprehension of one of them to another happily we should not at all attaine such knowledge But this euidence of the Diuine Reuelation in it selfe the Treatiser will not admit For it is no way euident in it selfe to him that God hath reuealed any of the things he beleeueth but the onely proofe besides humane motiues or reasons which are too weake to bee the ground of Fayth that he hath is the authority of the Church So that the Ministery of the Church is
proue he must reason thus The custome of praying to deliuer the soules of men out of the paines of Purgatory is the custome and practise which the Romane Church defendeth and Calvin impugneth but this custome Calvine confesseth to haue beene in vse more then a thousand and three hundred of yeares since therefore he acknowledgeth the doctrine and practise of the Romane Church to be most ancient and to haue beene receiued a thousand three hundred yeares agoe The Minor proposition of this reason is false and Calvin in the place cited by Bellarmine protesteth against it most constantly affirming that the Fathers knew nothing of Purgatorie and therefore much lesse of prayer to deliuer men from thence But Bellarmine will reply that the custome of praying for the dead was most auncient We answere The custome of remembring the departed naming their names at the holy Table in the time of the holy mysteries offering the Eucharist that is the sacrifice of praise for them was a most ancient and godly custome neither is it any way disliked by vs. And surely it appeares this was the cause that Aerius was condemned of hereticall rashnesse in that he durst condemne this laudable and auncient custome of the commemoration of the dead In this sort they did most religiously obserue and keepe at the Lords Table the commemoration of all the Patriarches Prophets Apostles Evangelists Martyrs confessours yea of Mary the Mother of our Lord to whom it cannot be conceiued that by prayer they did wish deliuerance out of Purgatorie sith no man euer thought them to be there but if they wished any thing it was the deliuerance from the power of death which as yet tyranniseth ouer one part of them the speedy destroying of the last enemy which is death the hastning of their resurrection and joyfull publique acquitall of them in that great day wherein they shall stand to bee judged before the Iudge of the quicke and dead This was the practise of the whole church and this the meaning of their commemorations and prayers which was good and no way to be disliked Notwithstanding it is most certaine that many particular men extended the meaning of these prayers farther and out of their owne private errours and fancies vsed such prayers for the dead as the Romanists themselues I thinke dare not justifie and so it is true that Calvin saith that many of the Fathers were led into errour in this matter of prayer for the dead and not that all as if the whole Church had fallen from the truth as Bellarmine falsely imputeth vnto Calvin who saith no such thing First therefore it was an opinion of many of the Fathers that there is no judgment to passe vpon men till the last day that all men are holden either in some place vnder the earth or else in some other place appointed for that purpose so that they come not into heauen nor receiue the reward of their labours till the generall iudgement Out of this conceipt grew that prayer in Iames his Liturgie that God would remember all the faithfull that are fallen asleepe in the sloepe of death since Abell the iust till this present day that he would place them in the land of the liuing c. And the like are found in the masse booke Of this opinion was Iustin Martyr Tertullian Clemens Romanus Lactantius Victorinus Martyr Ambrose Iohannes Romanus Pontifex and sundry other The second opinion was that men may be deliuered from the punishments of sinne after this life if they die in the profession of the true faith how vvickedly soeuer they liued or at least if the punishment of such bee eternall and cannot be ended yet it may be deferred or mitigated How many of the Fathers were in this errour and made prayers for the dead vpon this false perswasion that all Christians how wickedly soeuer they liued may find mercy at Gods hands in the world to come at the entreatie of the liuing they that haue read any thing can soone report Thirdly whereas there are three estates of the soules of men the first in the body the second when they are seuered from the body and stand before God immediately and instantly vpon the dissolution and the third after they haue receiued their particular iudgement the godly doe not onely recommend them vnto God while they are yet in their bodies but when departing thence they goe to stand before the iudgement seate of God they accompany them with their prayers and best good wishes euen to the presence of the Lord. Hence were all those prayers that were vsed on the dayes of the obites of the Saints conceiued respectiuely to their passage out of this world and the dangers they doe by the goodnesse of God escape in that fearefull houre of their dissolution which prayers were againe repeated in the anniuersarie remembrances of their obites Of this sorte was that prayer in the Masse booke Libera Domine animas omnium fidelium defunctorum de poenis inferni de profundo lacis libera eas de ore leonus ne absorbeat eas tartarus ne cadant in obscurum c. Deliuer O Lord the soules of all faithfull ones departed from the paines of hell and the deepe Lake deliuer them from the month of the Lion that hell swallow them not up and that they fall not into the dungeons of vtter darkenesse How hard this was to vse these prayers in a set course in the dayes wherein they did only commemorate and represent the dayes of mens departure hence and so to pray for them long after their death as if they were but euen then in the passage and so in daunger of falling into the hands of their ghostly enimies and not yet secure and assured of their eternall future state which yet Bellarmine confesseth is the best construction can be made of them I leaue to the consideration of the wise These are the seuerall kindes of praying for the dead all which I hope Bellarmine dareth not justifie but for the Romish manner of praying for the dead it hath no certaine testimony of Antiquitie no man euer thinking of Purgatorie till Augustine to avoide a worse errour did doubtingly run into it after whom many in the Latine Church embraced the same opinion but the Greeke Church neuer receiued it to this day Thus then we see how vniustly Calvin is traduced by Bellarmine in this matter of prayer for the dead and how weakely he prooues that it is confessed that their opinion and the doctrine of Antiquitie is the same His next challenge is scarce worth the mentioning much lesse the refuting Caluin saith the Fathers were farre from the popish errour touching merites and that yet they vsed the word whence men haue since taken occasion of errour Therefore hee dissenteth from all Antiquity and acknowledgeth the Romane faith to bee the auncient faith and religion Truely I am weary in following
are sinnes and decayes of natures integrity and consequently that concupiscence being a declining from that entire subiection to and conjunction with God is truely and properly sin whatsoeuer our adversaries teach to the contrary Fourthly that originall righteousnesse is said to bee a supernaturall quality because it groweth not out of nature and because it raiseth nature aboue it selfe But that it is naturall that is required to the integritie of nature Neither should it seeme strange to any man that a quality not growing out of nature should be required necessarily for the perfecting of natures integrity seeing the end and object of mans desires knowledge and action is an infinite thing and without the compasse bounds of nature And therefore the nature of man cannot as all other things doe by naturall force and things bred within her selfe attaine to her wished end but must either by supernaturall grace bee guided and directed to it or being left to her selfe faile of that perfection shee is capable of and fill her selfe with infinite euills defects and miseries This may suffice for refutation of the vaine and idle conceits of the Papists concerning three estates of man the one of grace the other of nature and the third of sinne Out of which we may obserue that howsoeuer they indeavour to make shew of the contrary yet indeede they thinke that concupiscence is not sinne neither in the regenerate nor vnregenerate Whereupon it is that Bellarmine speaking of the guilt of concupiscence which the Diuines say is taken away in Baptisme though the infirmity remaine saith it must be vnderstood of that guilt which causeth concupiscence not which is caused of it For saith he originall sinne maketh guilty and subjecteth men to concupiscence but concupiscence doth not make them guilty that haue it and therefore it is not sinne neither before nor after Baptisme But we say with Augustin Sicut caecitas cordis quam removet alluminator deus peccatū est quo in deum non creditur poena peccati qua cor superbū dignâ animadversione punitur causa peccati cùm mali aliquid caeci cordis errore cōmittitur ita concupiscentia carnis aduersus quam bonus concupiscit spiritus peccatum est quia inest ei inobedientia contra dominatum mentis poena peccati est quia reddita est meritis inobedientis causa peccati est defectione consentientis vel contagione nascentis As the blindnesse of heart which God remooueth when hee lightneth those that were formerly in darkenesse is a sinne in that by reason of it men beleeue not in GOD and a punishment of sinne wherewith the proude hearts of wicked men are iustly punished and a cause of sinne when erring by reason of this blindnesse of heart they doe those things that are euill so the concupiscence of the flesh against which the good spirit doth striue and couet is a sinne because there is in it disobedience against the dominion of the mind and a punishment of sinne in that it falleth out by the iust iudgment of God that they who are disobedient vnto God shall finde rebellious desires in themselues and it is a cause of sinne in that men either by wicked defection consent vnto it or by reason of the generall infection of humane nature are borne in it Wee thinke therefore there should be no question made of concupiscence and other like defects and euils found in the nature of man but that they are in their owne nature sinfull defects And hereof I am well assured none of the Fathers euer doubted but how farre they are washed away and remitted in Baptisme which is the matter about which Bellarmine wrangleth and taketh exception against vs let vs now consider Alexander of Hales the first and greatest of all the Schoolemen noteth diuers things most fitly to this purpose out of which wee may easily resolue what is to bee thought of this matter First therefore hee obserueth that there are two sortes of sinnes some naturall which are in the person from the generall condition of nature some personall that are acted by the person and so defile the nature as all actuall sinnes Secondly that concupiscence is of the first kind being an euill contracted and cleauing to nature not personally acted or wrought by vs. Thirdly that concupiscence may bee considered either as it hath full dominion and is a prevailing thing in them that haue it or as it is weakened and hath lost that strength dominion and command which formerly it had Fourthly that concupiscence while it hath dominion is a sinne defiling and making guilty both the nature person in which it commaundeth all But if it lose this dominion it cleaueth to the nature only and is not imputed to the person for sinne vnlesse hee some way yeelde vnto it bee drawen by it or suffer himselfe to be weakened in well doing by the force of it Fiftly that the benefits of grace are not generall but speciall of priuiledge not freeing the whole nature of man from sin and punishment as sin corrupted and defiled all but that they extend onely personally to some certaine Sixtly that when men are borne anew in baptisme they are freed from all that sin which maketh their persons guilty before God and consequently from all punishments due to them for any thing their persons were chargeable with But because they still remaine in that nature which is of the masse of malediction therefore sin cleaueth to their nature still and they are subject to the common punishment of hunger thirst death and the like Seauenthly that the dominion of that sin which is of nature is taken away by the benefit of regeneration in Baptisme Whence it commeth that the persons of men baptized are not chargeable with it though they remaine still in that nature wherein it is And consequently that the punishments which they are subject vnto because they remaine in the communion of that nature which is not generally free from sin cease to be vnto them in the nature of destroying euils serue to diverse good purposes and turne to their great benefit So then wee say with the Fathers and best learned of the Schoolemen that concupiscence in men not regenerate is a sinne corrupting and making guilty both the nature and the person wherein it is and that in the Regenerate it cleaueth to nature as a sinne still but hauing lost the dominion it had so that it cannot make the person guilty not prevailing with it nor commaunding ouer it Regnum amittit in terra perit in caelo It is driuen from the kingdome it formerly had in the Saints of God while they yet remaine on earth but it is not vtterly destroyed till they goe from hence to heauen Thus then I hope it appeareth that wee are far from the errour of the Messalians and doe fully accord with the Catholike Church of God and that the Romanists are not far from the heresie
earnestly to thirst after these waters when hee sayth Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousnes but the vngodly having tasted of the wine of mundane joy and temporall riches hate dislike and put from them this water and therefore the Lord sayth well of them by the Prophet Esay 8. Because this people haue refused the waters of Siloe that runne softly and without noyse and haue taken rather Rasin and the sonne of Romelia I will bring upon them the mighty waters of of the floud Siloe is interpreted sent and it signifieth the doctrine of the diuine Law sent vnto vs by Christ the Apostles and other faithfull ones which doctrine the Pastors of the Church are bound vnder the paine of damnation to know and teach whereupon Isidore saith de summo bono lib. 3. c. 46. The Priests shall bee damned for the iniquity of the people if either they neglect to teach them being ignorant or to reproue them when they offend the Lord hauing said by the Prophet I haue set thee as a watch-man ouer the house of Israel and if thou shalt not tell the wicked of his wickednes that hee forsake his euill way he shall dye in his iniquitie but I will require his bloud at thy hand Notwithstanding all this many of the moderne Priests cast from them this learning and say we will none of it because it is not de pane lucrando that is it serueth not to bring in gaine and profite and giue themselues to the study of humane lawes which are not so necessary for the sauing of soules as the law of God because as Odo saith here vpon the Gospell sermone 39. If Christ had knowne that we might more easily attaine saluation by the Lawes of Iustinian he would surely haue taught them vs with his own mouth and haue let that alone which he taught vs and deliuered vnto vs et in quâ continetur implicitè vel explicitè omnis scientia ad salutem necessario requisita and in which is contained expressely or implicitely all knowledge necessarily required to saluation according to that of S. Augustine 2. de doctrinâ Christianâ in fine Whatsoeuer a man learneth without and beside the holy Scripture if it be hurtfull it is there condemned if it bee profitable it may there be found But many Church-men leaue this learning and take vnto them Rasin and the sonne of Romelia Rasin signifieth a picture and Romelia high and mighty thunder so that by Rasin and the sonne of Romelia wee may vnderstand painted and glorious wordes and that wordy thunder of humane lawes which kindes of learning many Ecclesiastical persons assume that they may be by such profession exalted in the courts of great Lords and for this cause as the Prophet addeth the Lord shall bring vpon them the mighty and great waters of the floud that is infernall punishments so saith Odo Hitherto hee hath alleadged the words of Grosthead and Odo In another place he saith concerning them that so contemne the word of God that the Lord complaineth of such by the Prophet Ierem. 2. saying My people hath done two euils they haue forsaken me the fountaine of liuing water and haue digged to themselues broken cisterns to which as Gulielmus Parisiensis saith the decree or canon law may fitly be compared which is a broken cisterne that cannot hold water which though it haue water to day shall haue none to morrow because it shall bee abrogated whereas touching the Law of God it is otherwise and therefore the Psalmist saith thy righteousnesse O Lord is an euerlasting righteousnesse and thy law is trueth Yet is the holy Scripture much contemned by the profession of the Canonists so that the knowledge of holy Scripture and profession of Divinity may say to an ill Advocate or Lawyer as Sara said to Abraham in the 16 of Genesis Thou dealest ill with me I gaue thee my handmaid into thy bosome who seeing that she had conceiued despised me for as Gulielmus Parisiensis saith de vitiis part 4. cap. 6. The profession of Canonists contemneth the profession of Divines and science of holy Scripture because they are not so gainefull as it is When Ismael and Isaack played together Ismael mocked Isaack so that Sarâ—… was forced to intreate Abraham to cast out the bondwoman and her sonne So happily it were behoofefull and profitable for the Church that this Science in a great part should be cast out because it not only contemneth the diuine Science and Law of God but blasphemeth it and in so doing contemneth and blaspheameth God himselfe who is the lawgiuer Here wee haue the opinion of three worthy men touching the sufficiencie of the Scripture and the dangers confusions and horrible euils that followed vppon the multiplying of humane inuentions Many more might be alleadged to the same purpose but these may suffice to let us know what the doctrine of the Church was in the dayes of our Fathers for they deliuer not their priuate conceipts but tel vs what all good and iudicious men conceiued of these things in their times But some men will say wee find often mention of traditions in the writers of former ages soe that it seemeth they did not thinke the Scriptures to containe all things necessary to saluation For the clearing of this doubt wee must obserue that by the name of tradition sometimes all the doctrine of Christ and his blessed Apostles is meant that was first deliuered by liuely voice and afterwards written Sometimes the deliuering of the diuine and canonicall bookes from hand to hand as receiued from the Apostles is named a tradition Sometimes the summe of Christian religion contained in the Apostles creed which the Church receiueth as a rule of her faith is named a tradition but euery one of those articles is found in the Scripture as Waldensis rightly noteth though not together nor in the same forme so that this colection may rightly be named a tradition as hauing beene deliuered from hand to hand in this forme for the direction of the Churches children and yet the Scriptures be sufficient Sometimes by the name of traditions the Fathers vnderstand certaine rites and auncient obseruations And that the Apostles delivered some things in this kind by word and liuely voyce that they wrote not wee easily grant but which they were it can hardly now be knowne as Waldensis rightly noteth But this proueth not the insufficiencie of the Scripture for none of those Fathers speake of points of doctrine that are to be belieued without and besides the Scripture or that cannot be proued from thence though sometimes in a generall sort they name all those points of religion traditions that are not found expressely and in precise tearmes in Scripture and yet may necessarily be deduced from things there expressed Lastly by the name of tradition is vnderstood the sense and meaning of the Scripture receiued from the Apostles and deliuered from hand to hand together with the bookes There are
this body they would all crye out with a loud voice If we say we haue no sinne wee deceiue our selues and there is no trueth in vs. Gregorius Ariminensis noteth that Augustine speaketh not of originall sin but actuall and that this ample grace to ouercome sinne was not giuen her till the spirit ouer-shadowed her and the power of the most High came vpon her that shee might conceiue and beare him that neuer knew sinne so that before shee might commit sinne which yet hee will not affirme because the moderne Doctours for the most part thinke otherwise so intimating that all did not And surely the wordes of Augustin doe not import that shee had no sinne but that shee ouercame it which argueth a conflict neither doth hee say he will acknowledge shee was without sinne but that hee will not moue any question touching her in this dispute of sinnes and sinners So passing by the point and not willing to enter into this dispute with the Pelagian who conceiued it would be plausible for him to pleade for the puritie of the Mother of our Lord and disgracefull for any one to except against her By that which hath beene said it appeareth that the Church of God neuer resolued any thing touching the birth of the blessed Virgin without sinne nor whether shee were free from all actuall sinne or not If happily it bee alleadged that the Church celebrated the Feast of her nativitie and therefore beleeued that shee was borne without sinne First touching the celebration of this Feast it is evident that it was not auncient That it was not in the dayes of Saint Augustine as some imagine because on that day there is read in the Church a Sermon of Saint Augustines touching the solemnitie of that day it is proued out of Saint Augustine himselfe for in his 21 Sermon de sanctis he hath these wordes Wee celebrate this day the birth-day of Iohn the Baptist which honour wee neuer read to haue beene giuen to any of the Saints Solius enim Domini beati Ioannis dies nativitatis in universo mundo celebratur colitur That is For the birth-day of our Lord onely and of Iohn the Baptist is celelebrated kept holy throughout the whole world illum enim sterilis peperit illum virgo concepit in Elizabetha sterilitas vincitur in beatâ Mariâ conceptionis consuetudo mutatur That is A woman that was barren bare the one and a virgin the other in Elizabeth barrennes is ouercome in blessed Mary the ordinary course of conceiuing is changed And in his 20 â—h sermon hee hath these words Post illum sacrosanctum Domini natalis diem nullius hominum nativitatem legimus celebrari nisi solius beati Ioannis Baptistae In aliis sanctis electis Dei novimus illum diem coli quo illos post consummationem laborum devictum triumphatumque mundum in perpetuas aeternitates praesens haec vita parturit In aliis consummata vltimi diei merita celebrantur in hoc etiam prima dies ipsa etiam hominis initia consecrantur pro hac absque dubio causà quia per hunc Dominus adventum suum ne subito homines insperatum non agnoscerent voluit esse testatum That is After that most sacred day of the birth of our Lord wee reade not that the nativity of any one amongst men is celebrated but of Iohn the Baptist onely touching other Saints and other the chosen of God wee know that that day is celebrated in which after the consummation of their labours after their victories and triumphs ouer the world this present life bringeth them forth to begin to liue for euer In others the consummate vertues of the last day are celebrated in this the first day and the beginnings of the man are consecrated for this cause no doubt because the Lord would haue his comming made knowen to the world by him least if his comming had not beene expected and looked for it might happily not haue beene acknowledged Neither doth the reading of the sermon of Saint Augustine on that day pertayning to the solemnity of the day proue that this day was kept holy before his time for as Baronius sheweth the sermon was fitted originally to the solemnity of the feast of the Annunciation the words were these Let our land reioyce illustrated with the solemne day of so great a virgine which are altered and read in the breviarie in this sorte Let our land rejoyce illustrated by the birth day of so great a virgin And it is evident by the councell of Mentz holden in the time of Charles the great in the yeare 813 that this feast was not celebrated in the Church of Germany and France in those times As likewise it appeareth by the constitutions of Charles and Ludovicus Pius Secondly the celebrating of the birth-day of the blessed virgine will no more proue that shee was borne without all sinne then that Iohn the Baptist was so borne concerning whom Bernard sayth hee knoweth he was sanctified before he came out of the wombe but how farre this sanctification freed him from sinne hee dareth not say or define any thing Thus wee see that the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died was a Protestant Church in these poynts touching the conception birth of the blessed virgine aswell as in the former CHAP. 7. Of the punishment of originall sinne and of Limbus puerorum BEllarmine sheweth that there are foure opinions in the Roman Church touching the punishment of originall sinne and the state of infants dying vnregenerate for Ambrosius Catharinus in his booke of the state of children dying vnbaptized Albertus Pighius in his first controversie and Savanarola in hâ—…s booke of the triumph of the crosse doe teach that infants dying without baptisme shall after the iudgement enioy a kinde of naturall happinesse and liue happily for euer as it were in a certaine earthly paradise howsoeuer for the present they goe downe into those lower parts of the earth which are called Limbus puerorum These men suppose that infants incurre no staine or infection by Adams sinne but that for his offence being denyed the benefit of supernaturall grace which would haue made them capable of heauen happines they are found in a state of meere nature in which as they cannot come to heauen so they are subiect to no euili that may cause them to sorrow For though they see that happines in heaven whereof they had a possibility yet they no more greiue that they haue not attained it then innumerable men doe that they are not Kings and Emperours as well as others of which honours they were capable as well as they in that they were men The second opinion is that infants dying in the state of originall sinne not remitted are excluded from the sight of God and condemned to the prison house of the infernall dwellings for euer so that they suffer the punishment of losse but
originall sinne cease so to misincline nature as formerly it did and so as to haue the person at command to be swayed whether it will it maketh it not cease to misincline nature in some sort and so to be a sinne of nature it maketh it cease to be a sinne of the person freeing it from being subiect to it and putting it into an opposition against it so that it is no farther a sinne of the person then it is apt to be ledde by it to be hindred from good or drawne to euill The nature and person are freed from the guilt of condemnation the nature in respect of the sinne that remaineth in it is subiect to punishment the person is not free from those punishments which the remaining sinne of the nature it hath bringeth vpon it as death c The person is freed from being subiect to any punishment farther then it must needes be in respect of nature So that originall sinne or concupiscence remaineth in act in the regenerate mouing to desire things not to be desired and so a sinne of nature making it subiect to punishment but it doth not remaine in act illiciendo abstrahendo mentem eiusque consensu concipiendo pariendo peccata that is it doth not so remaine in act as to allure and draw the minde and to gaine the consent of it to conceiue and bring forth sinne and so remaineth not in the guilt of condemnation nor as a sinne of the person If therefore when the question is proposed whether concupiscence in the regenerate which grace restraineth and opposeth be sinne wee vnderstand by sinne a thing that is not good an euill that is not a pvnishment onely but a vice and fault and such an euill as positiuely and priuatiuely repugneth against the law which the spirit of God writeth in the harts of the beleeuers an iniquitie a thing that God hateth and which wee must hate and resist against by the spirit that it bring not forth euill acts if wee vnderstand by sinne such a disposition of nature as God by the law of creation at first forbad and ceaseth not still to forbidde to be in the nature of man it is undoubtedly sinne a sinne I say of nature though not of person And hereunto Stapleton agreeth for whereas it is obiected out of Augustine to proue that concupiscence in the regenerate is sinne that as blindnesse of hart is a sinne in that men by reason of it beleeue not in God and a punishment of sinne wherewith the proud hart of man is punished and a cause of sinne when men through errour of their blind hart do any euill thing So that concupiscence of the flesh against which the good spirit opposeth good desires is a sinne in that there is in it disobedience against the minde that should command and a punishment of sinne because it was iustly brought vppon him whose disobedience against God deserued so and a cause of sinne when it obtaineth a consent hee answereth setting aside all other answers as not sufficient that concupiscence in that place is sayd by Augustine not onely to be a punishment and cause of sinne but sinne also not as if it were truly and properly a sinne making God displeased with the regenerate in whom it is but that it is a sinne of nature respecting the first integrity of it and not of the person according to that of the Apostle It is not I that do it but the sinne that dwelleth in mee that is in my flesh For the reason which hee bringeth why it is sinne doth euidently shew this Because sayth hee there is in it disobedience against the dominion of the minde it is therefore a certaine sinne or fault contrary to the integrity of nature in which there was no disobedience of the flesh as it is a fault of the eye to be dimme and of the eare to heare imperfectly And though Sapleton say he had no author to follow in this interpretation yet hee might easily haue found that Alexander of Ales long since was of the same opinion making concupiscence in the regenerate a sinne of nature and not of the person as I haue else where shewed at large If this be soe what then will some man say is the difference betweene the Romanists and those of the reformed Churches surely it is very great for these teach that concupiscence was newly brought into the nature of man by Adams sinne that in the vnregenerate it is properly sinne that it maketh them guiltie and worthy of eternall condemnation that haue it But the Romanists say it was not newly brought in by Adams fall that it is a consequent of nature that it is more free and at liberty to produce the proper effects of it now then it would haue beene if grace had not been lost but not more then it would haue beene in nature simply considered without grace or sinne and that it never made them guilty that had it These say that in the regenerate it is so far weakened as that it hath no power to sway him that is so renewed to what it pleaseth that the guilt of condemnation which it drew vpon man before his regeneration is taken away that yet still it is a sinne of nature making guilty of punishment that yet still it is hated of God and must be hated of vs But the Romanists say the guilt that is taken away is not the guilt whereby concupiscence maketh guilty but out of which it came that man deserved to haue concupiscence free and at libertie And therefore Bellarmine sayth the guilt of concupiscence may be conceiued in three sortes First To be a guilt rising from it and founded in it making him guilty that hath it as the guilt of theft is that whereby he is guilty that hath committed theft Secondly That may bee sayd to bee the guilt of concupiscence not that floweth from it but from which it floweth as if a man should cut off his hand he might be said to be guilty of the hand that is cut off not because it is a sinne making guilty to haue a hand cut off but because he is guilty of the not hauing a hand that hath cut it off himselfe so wee are to vnderstand the guilt of concupiscence not as if the hauing of it did make a man guilty but because Adam by sinne made himselfe guilty of hauing concupiscence at libertie to sollicit him to ill that was formerly restrained Thirdly the guilt of concupiscence is that which it causeth if it obtaine consent to those motions it maketh not for that a man is guilty because he hath concupiscence but because he yeeldeth to it So that according to their opinion when there is a remission of the offence that set concupiscence at liberty it is no guilt to haue it for it is naturall Foure things therefore are to be proved by vs. First That concupiscence was no condition of nature Secondly That it maketh guilty of eternall
as if we had merited it and that to these purposes it is imputed to vs as if it were ours And farther he addeth that as God doth nothing in nature but by his sonne as God so he will do nothing pertaining to our iustification and restauration but for him as he is man and that there is no benefit bestowed on vs or good done vnto us but it presupposeth a newe application and imputation of the merits of Christ. Soe that euery one is newly made partaker of Christs merits and oweth newe thankes to him soe often as new gifts and benifittes are conferred and bestowed vpon him and he feareth not to pronounce that the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed vnto vs not only when wee are baptized as he sayth a man excellently learned vnaduisedly affirmeth but in other sacraments and as often as men receiue any newe gift from God yea that a new imputation of Christs righteousnesse is necessarily required for the remission of those veniall sinnes into which the iustified fall and the freeing of vs from temporall punishments Bernar Nemo leuia peccata contemnat impossibile est enim cum iis saluari impossibile est ea dilui nisi per Christum à Christo August tam de eo qui leuioribus peccatis obnoxius est quam de eo qui grauioribus pronunciat quod si sibi relinquerentur interirent All therefore acknowledge as he thinketh that the righteousnesse of Christ is imputed but there are as he telleth vs 2 opinions in the Church of Rome touching this point the one that Christs righteousnes is no otherwise communicated or imputed to us but in that for the merit of it wee are accepted all things necessary to fitte vs for iustification are giuen vnto us righteousnesse making vs formally iust that is inclining vs to decline euill do good is infused into vs and what soeuer is profitable to set vs forward and to make us continue in the same is bestowed on vs. Others renowned for learning and piety do thinke that for the attaining of heauen happinesse not only in a twofold righteousnesse is necessary the one inherent the other imputed as to the former but that this imputed righteousnes of Christ is twise offered and presented by Christ to God the Father First that we may be iustified that is that our sinnes may be remitted we accepted and renewing grace may be giuen vnto vs. And secondly that we may avoyd and decline the extremity and seuerity of Gods iudgment that he may accept our weake indeauours and admitte vs to heauen notwithstanding the imperfection and defects thereof that for his sake the imperfection impurity of our righteousnesse may be couered This opinion is clearely deliuered by Cardinall Contarenus he tellethus it was allowed in the conference at Ratisbon by the diuines of both sides his words are these Seeing we haue affirmed that we artaine a twofold righteousnesse by faith a righteousnesse inherent in vs as charity and that grace whereby we are made partakers of the diuine nature and the iustice of Christ giuen and imputed vnto vs as being graft into Christ and hauing put on Christ it remaineth that wee enquire vppon which of these wee must stay and relie and by which wee must thinke our selues iustified before GOD that is to be accepted as holy and just hauing that justice which it beseemeth the sonnes of God to haue I truely thinke that a man very piously and Christianly may say that wee ought to stay to stay I say as vpon a firme and stable thing able vndoubtedly to sustaine vs vpon the justice of Christ giuen imputed to vs and not vpon the holinesse and grace that is inherent in vs. For this our righteousnes is but imperfect and such as cannot defend vs seeing in many things we offend all c. But the justice of Christ which is giuen vnto vs is true perfect justice which altogether pleaseth the eyes of God in which there is nothing that offendeth God Vpon this therefore as most certaine stable wee must stay our selues beleeue that wee are justified by it as the cause of our acceptation with God this is that precious treasure of Christians which whosoeuer findeth selleth all that he hath to buy it Ruard Tapper followeth the other opinion and saith that whereas according to Bernard our righteousnesse is impure though sincere and true we must not conceiue that this impurity defileth our righteousnesse as if it selfe were stayned or any thing were wanting in it for so it should not bee true and right but that it is saide to bee impure because there are certaine staines and blemishes together with it in the operations of the soule for GOD onely is absolutely free from sinne and in many things wee sinne all our righteousnesse therefore according to his opinion is imperfect in vertue and efficacie because it cannot expell and keepe out all sinne out of the soule wherein it is by reason of the infirmity of the flesh but the good workes of the just doe abide the severity of Gods judgment neither can they bee blamed though tryed most exactly and discussed in all their circumstances yea though the divell should be permitted to say what he can against them for they haue no fault nor deformitie Here for the better clearing of this point it is to bee obserued that it is confessed by all that the most righteous liue not without sinne consequently that they haue need continually of remission of sinnes It is resolued amongst all Catholiques saith Andreas Vega that there was neuer any found amongst the Saints the blessed Virgin onely excepted that in the whole course of their liues avoided all veniall sinnes Iob asketh who shalll be cleane from filthinesse and answereth himselfe according to the translation which the ancient Doctors followed namely Cyprian Ambrose Augustine Gregory and others no one though he liue but one day vpon earth And Dauid saith generally no man liuing shall bee justified in thy sight and in another place for this impiety of sinne shall euery holy one pray vnto thee hee saith not euery sinner but euery holy one saith Saint Augustine for it is the voice of the Saints If we say wee haue no sinne we deceiue our selues there is no trueth in vs and Solomon saith there is no man righteous on earth that doth good and sinneth not and those sayings of the Apostles are well knowne in many things wee sinne all If wee say wee haue no sinne wee deceiue our selues c. And who is hee that neuer needed in his whole life to say that part of the Lords Prayer forgiue vs our trespasses And all this is strongly proued in that if wee looke on the liues of all the Saints which are marvailously commended in Scripture we shall finde none of them that had not some blemish as in the most beautifull body Let vs begin with
according to the Translation they follow there is first a speech directed to the Church concerning Christ then an Apostrophe to Christ and then thirdly a returne unto the Church againe Secondly if that were graunted which he vrgeth touching the supposed Apostrophe it would not proue that there is no probabilitie in our Interpretation For this consequence will neuer be made good in the Schooles Christ is prophesied of in the words immediatly going before in these words God speaketh vnto him by way of Apostrophe therefore they cannot be vnderstood of deliuerance out of Babylonicall captivitie seeing it is certaine that Christ deliuered the Israelites out of all the miseries out of which they escaped But saith Bellarmine if wee admit this Interpretation in what bloud of the couenant may wee vnderstand the Iewes to haue beene deliuered out of Babylonicall captivitie Surely this question is soone answered For their deliuerance out of the hands of their enemies and all other benefites were bestowed on them by vertue of the couenant betweene God and them which was to be established in the bloud of Christ in figure whereof all holy things among the Iewes were sprinkled with bloud as the Booke of the Covenant the Altar the Sanctuary and People Wherefore seeing this place maketh nothing for the confirmation of the Popish errour touching Limbus let vs come to the last place brought for proofe thereof which is that of S. Peter concerning Christs going in spirit and preaching to the spirits in prison see whether from thence it may be proued any better S. Augustine vnderstandeth the words of the Apostle as I noted before of Christs preaching in the dayes of Noe in his eternall Spirit of Deity not of preaching in Hell in his humane Soule after death but this interpretation of S. Augustine first Bellarmine rejecteth as contrarie to the Fathers secondly endeauoureth to improue it by weakening the reasons brought to confirme it and by opposing certaine reasons against it The first of the Fathers that he alledgeth is Clemens Alexandrinus who indeede vnderstandeth the words of S. Peter not as S. Augustine doth but of Christ preaching in Hell after his death in his humane Soule but not conceiuing to what purpose preaching should serue in Hell if there were not intended a conversion sauing of some there he runneth into a most grosse dangerous error cōdemned rejected as well by Bellarm. his companions as by vs so that his authority as contrary to Augustines interpretation needed not to haue beene alledged nor would not haue beene if Bellarmine had meant sincerely For Clemens Alexandrinus affirmeth as hee well knoweth that so many Infidels as beleeued in Christ and listened to the wordes of his preaching when hee came into Hell were deliuered thence and made partakers of euerlasting saluation against which errour himselfe being Iudge Saint Augustine not without good cause disputeth in his Epistle to Euodius The second auncient Writer that hee produceth for proofe of Christs preaching in Hell after his death is Athanasius who indeed doth expound the wordes of Peter of Christs going in Soule to preach in Hell after his death but no way expresseth in what sort to whom to what purpose or with what successe he preached Epiphanius whom he produceth in the third place doth not so interprete the words of Peter himselfe but onely vpon another occasion citeth the epistle of Athanasius to Epictetus wherein hee doth so interprete them So that the authority of Epiphanius might haue beene spared Ruffinus in his explication of the Creede interpreteth the words of Peter as Athanasius doth Cyrill in the place cited by Bellarmine speaketh of Christs preaching to the spirits in Hell but saith nothing in particular of this place of Peter S. Ambrose doth not speake of this place but that other of preaching the Gospell to the dead So that there are no moe Ancient writers cited by Bellarmine that doe precisely interprete this place of Peter of Christs preaching in Hell in his humane soule after death but onely Clemens Athanasius Ruffinus and Oecumenius On the other side we haue S. Augustine Beda the authors of the Ordinarie and Interlincall Glosses Lyra Hugo Cardinalis and other interpreting the words as wee doe so that our Aduersaries haue no great aduantage in respect of the number of Interpreters and yet if they had it would not helpe them for confirmation of their supposed Limbus seing some of the Fathers cited by him as namely Clemens Alexandrinus speake directly of preaching in the lowest Hell for the conuersion of Infidels which they dislike as much as wee Wherefore let vs proceede to examine the reasons that are brought either of the one side or the other to confirme their seuerall interpretations of these words and let vs see how Bellarmine weakneth the reasons brought by S. Augustine and improueth his interpretation by reasons brought against it The first reason whereby S. Augustine confirmeth his interpretation is for that mortification in the flesh and viuification in the Spirit mentioned by the Apostle cannot be vnderstood of the body Soule of Christ as they that follow the other interpretation doe vnderstand them seeing Christ neuer dying in soule could not be said to be quickned in it Besides that the very phrase of the Scripture opposing flesh and Spirit in Christ doth euer import the infirmity of his humane nature and the power of his Deitie and in other men that part that is renued by the sanctification of the Spirit and that which is not yet so renued Against the former part of this reason of S. Augustine Bellarmine opposeth himselfe saying that it is not good seeing a thing may be sayd to be quickned that was neuer dead if it be preserued from dying kept aliue But he should know that onely those thinges may be said to be quickned in that they were preserued from dying which otherwise if they had not beene so preserued might haue beene killed or dyed of themselues Which cannot be verified of the Soule of Christ that could neither die of it selfe nor be killed by any other and therefore the Soule of Christ cannot be said to bee quickned in this sense The place in the seauenth of the Acts brought by Bellarmine to proue that those things may bee said to bee quickned that were neuer dead besides that it is nothing to the purpose is strangely wrested For S. Stephen in that place speaketh nothing of viuification or quickning in that sense we now speake of it but of multiplying increasing saying that After the death of Ioseph there rose vp another King in Egypt that knew not Ioseph who euill intreated our Fathers and made them cast out their infants and new borne children 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is that they should not increase multiplie and therefore Bellarmine should not in reason so haue pressed the Latine word of viuification vsed by the Vulgar translatour seeing the
feare of death rising againe he might restore vnto vs the hope of glorification he would not goe any other way because we could not go any other way we would but could not he could but would not Quia sialiter iuisset pervenisset sed non subvenisset that is because if hee had gone any other way hee might haue entred in himselfe but could not haue brought vs in with him There is nothing therefore that Christ gained to himselfe by his passion but that hee was made an example of suffering to all that beleeue in him a cause of glorification to all them that suffer with him that they may bee glorified with him but what did this profite him He went before wee all follow him whose good is this I finde men out of the way I goe before them to shew them the way all follow mee what doth it profite me I knew the way and could haue gone it by my selfe alone Sed non esset causa pergendi nisi compassio esset subveniendi that is but there were no cause of my going if the compassionate consideration of such as know not the way did not moue me by going before them to be a guide vnto thē Thus then we say that Christ merited nothing for himself not because we would detract any thing frō him for he did things worthy of most ample rewards if there had beene any thing hee had not already that might haue been giuen added to him or that hee had not already a just claime vnto but because we admire his perfection which was so great from the beginning that nothing could be after added vnto it and praise his goodnesse that came into this world for our sakes onely and not for his owne good Wherefore let vs proceed to see how and in what sort he merited for vs. In the merit of Christ 2 things are to be considered The worth of those actions workes of vertue which hee performed the dignity of his Diuine Infinite Person performing them Touching the former though the actions of the best men that euer were done in the state of grace proceeding frō the working of Gods Spirit be not worthy of the glory that shall be revealed yet we constantly affirme teach that the actions of Christ done in his humane nature were worthy of that glory and therefore dare not deny that Christ merited for vs ex condigno as some of the Schoolemen doe But for the better clearing of this point touching the merite of Christ wee must obserue that to merite simply absolutely properly so named foure things concurre For first he that will merite or deserue any thing at anothers mans hand must do somthing that the other had no former claime vnto Secondly hee must doe something that may be beneficiall good vnto him of whom hee desireth to deserue something Thirdly he must doe something that may bee beneficiall in as high a degree vnto him as he looketh to be benefited by him againe And fourthly hee must not hurt wrong him as much one way as he benefiteth him another for if he doe so he loseth all merit of reward These being the things required to the nature of Merite strictly so named no creature can in this sort merit any thing at Gods hand seeing there is nothing that any creature can doe which God may not justly claime challenge as due in respect of good already done to it or whereby it may any way benefite or profite him according to that in Iob that Our righteousnesse reacheth not vnto God Yet such is the goodnesse of Almighty God towards his poore creatures that as if hee had no claime to their well doings in respect of benefits already bestowed on them and as if they were as good and beneficiall to him as they are good in them selues seeking in all his workes to communicate and not to receiue any good in the day he made them hee couenanted with them to giue them rewards answerable to the worth of their actions which gracious condescending of Almighty God to the condition of his creatures presupposed Adam in the state of his innocencie and before he fell might haue meritted and deserued good at Gods hands but the best men in the world since his fall are excluded from all possibility of meriting any thing especially heauen-happinesse properly of him first because they haue lost all that power of well doing which originally in the state of their creation they had and canne performe nothing that is good vnlesse it be giuen vnto them by a newe free gift for which they shall rather be indebted to God then any vvay binde him vnto them Secondly because they offend him as much one vvay as they please him another And thirdly because there is no equality betweene the good actions of vertue vvhich they performe and do and the revvards that are layd vp in heauen neither in totall perpetuall and constant doing of that they do nor in the manner quality and measure thereof the height of heauen-happinesse incomparably exceeding all other knowledge and desire according to that of the Apostle The eye hath not seene the eare hath not heard neither hath it entred into the heart of Man what things God hath prepared for them that loue him But none of these things exclude Christ from meriting in the nature of Man which he assumed for he brought the fulnesse of grace with himinto the world it was Naturall unto him He no way offended or displeased God his Father and there was a perfect equality betweene his actions and the rewards of Heauen in that he loued God with that kind degree and measure of loue wherewith men loue him in heauen ardently without defect entirely and totally without distraction perpetually without intermission and constantly without possibility of euer ceasing so to do Wherefore let vs passe from the worth and value of those workes of vertue that Christ performed to the consideration of the dignity of his diuine and infinite Person performing them Which dignity and infinity of the Person of Christ to which nothing could be added made the things he did to promerite and to procure good to others and to infinite other Christus sayth a learned Schoole-man meruit omnibus quantum fuit ex sufficientiâ sui pro eo quod in ipso fuit gratia non sicut in singulari homine sed sicut in capite totius Ecclesiae propter quod fructus passionis eius redundare potuit in omnia Ecclesiae membra quia vt dicit Damascenus ratione vnitatis Diuinitatis cum humanitate Christus operatur ea quae sunt hominis supra hominē operatio eius extendebat se ad totam naturam quod non potest operatio puri hominis Huius diuersitatis ratio reducenda est non in habitualem aliquam gratiam creatam sed increatam quod pro multis sufficit finita gratia haec sufficientia est ex
passed their sentence before his comming and therevpon without delay before he had put off his cloake or shaken off the dust from his feete as the storie saith assembling the Bishops subiect to him in a Synode deposed Cyrill and Memnon Bishop of Ephesus who were chiefe agents in the proceedings against Nestorius Which deposition of Cyrill and Memnon was something hastily confirmed by the Emperour Theodosius The Synode assembled vnder Cyrill in like sort gaue sentence against Iohn and signified to Caelestinus Bishop of Rome what they had done shewing how vnaduisedly a few had presumed to condemne a great many and the Bishop of the third See Bishops of greater Sees to wit Cyrill of Alexandria and Caelestinus of Rome who was present in the Councell by his Vicegerent yet referring the finall proceeding to his consideration also hee and his Bishops being as much interessed in this businesse as they that were assembled In the end by mediation of many great and worthy ones Iohn and his Bishops that formerly were misconceited of Cyrill were satisfied and he sent the confession of his faith vnto him which he approued and so they were reconciled and made friends without any farther intermedling of the Bishop of Rome Here is nothing to be found that any way argueth or importeth an vniuersality of power in the Bishop of Rome but onely his concurrence with the other Patriarches as prime Patriarch in the waighty and important businesses of the Church and therefore the Fathers of that Councell writing to the Vicars of the Bishop of Rome and other Bishops sent by them to the Emperour to informe him concerning the differences that had arisen in the Councell and their proceedings charge and require them to doe nothing but according to their direction assuring them that if they doe otherwise they will neither ratifie that they doe nor admit them to their communion Thereby shewing that though the Romane Bishop be to concurre with the Fathers assembled in Councells yet he is not absolutely there to commaund but to follow the directions of the Maior part So that he hath a joynt interest with others but not an absolute Soueraignty ouer all others God therefore hauing ordained the high toppes of Patriarchicall dignities as it is in the eighth generall Councell that they might iointly concurre to vphold the state of the Church and the truth of Religion and that if one fell the rest might restore settle and reestablish things againe Which course Cyrill in his Epistle to Iohn of Antioche sheweth to haue beene holden by him For when he obserued that Nestorius his fellow Patriarch erred from the faith he first admonished him and threatned to reiect him from the communion of his Churches Secondly he acquainted the Bishop of Rome and the Westerne Bishops with the impieties and blasphemies of Nestorius who thereupon reiected him professing that they would admitte none to their communion but such as would condemne him Thirdly he wrote to Iuvenall Bishop of Hierusalem and to Iohn Bishop of Antioche shewing his owne dislike of Nestorius and farther professing that for his part hee was fearefull to be cast out of the communion of the Westerne Bishoppes as hee saw he must be if he accursed not Nestorius The next allegation is out of the Councell of Chalcedon where Theodorus and Ischiron Deacons in their bils of complaint exhibited to the Bishop of Rome as president and to the whole Councell call Leo the Bishop Most holy and most blessed vniuersall Arch-bishop and Patriarch of great Rome But they that presse the testimony of these two distressed Deacons flying to Leo for helpe should remember that in the Councell of Constantinople vnder Mennas not Deacons but Bishops they many are reported to haue written to the Bishop of Constantinople in this sort To our most holy Lord and most blessed Father of Fathers Iohn the Archbishop and vniuersall Patriarch and Mennas himselfe also is called Oecumenicall Patriarch Archbishop oftentimes in that Councell of Constantinople and yet I thinke they will not acknowledge the Bishops of Constantinople to haue had an vniuersall supreme commaunding power ouer the whole world Herevnto therefore they adde another proofe out of the relation of the Councell of Chalcedon made to Leo wherein the Fathers complaine of Dioscorus that as a wilde Boare he had violently entred into the vineyard of the Lord and wasted the same plucking vp the true fruitfull vines and planting vnfruitfull in their places and that hee stayed not there but reached out his hand against him to whom the keeping of the vineyard was committed by our Sauiour that is against the Bishop of Rome whom hee thought to excommunicate These words wee willingly confesse to bee words of iust complaint vpon great cause made by the Fathers of the Councell against Dioscorus but they proue not the thing in question For wee make no doubt but the keeping of the vineyard of the Lord of hosts was committed to the Bishop of Rome not onely as well as to other but in the first place as being in order and honour the chiefe But that he onely receiued from Christ this power authority charge and others from him not we onely but many learned amongst themselues doe denie as Bellarmine testifieth There are two other testimonies that may be alleaged out of the Councell of Chalcedon For Paschasinus one of the Vicegerents of the Bishop of Rome in that Councell calleth Rome the head of the churches and Leo the Bishop of Rome head of the vniuersall Church But they who presse so much the saying of the Popes Legate in fauour of the Pope must know that by head hee meant chiefe in order and honour and not one hauing all power originally in himselfe and absolutely commaunding ouer all as the Papists now teach For if he had meant so he had not been endured by the Fathers of that Councell who peremptorily pronounce that it was the greatnesse of the citie and not any power giuen by Christ or deriued to him from Peter that made the Bishop of Rome to be great that therefore they would equall the Bishop of Constantinople vnto him seeing Constantinople was now become equall vnto Rome The next testimony that they alleage is out of the Patriarchicall Councell of Constantinople vnder Mennas wherein the Fathers professe by Mennas their president that they follow and obey the Apostolique See that they communicate with them with whom that See communicateth and condemne all those it condemneth Surely this reason howsoeuer it may seeme to haue some force yet indeed hath none at all For there is no question but that the Bishop of Rome with his Westerne Synods all which according to the phrase of Antiquity are comprehended vnder the name of the Apostolique See was more to be esteemed then the particular Synode vnder Mennas and that therefore they might professe to follow it and obey the decrees of it and yet neither
though the times would be such as that many swords would not suffice to defend them yet that these two were enough because he meant to vse none at all but to suffer all that the malice of his enemies could doe vnto him This Maldonatus deliuereth to be the literall sense of Christs wordes sheweth a mysticall sense of them also out of Beda much more apt then that of Bonifacius Duo gladii saith Beda sufficiunt ad testimonium sponte passi Salvatoris Vnus qui Apostolis audaciam pro Domino certandi evulsà ictu eius auriculâ Domino etiam morituro pietatem virtutemque doceret inesse medicandi Alter quinequaquam vaginâ exemptus ostenderet eos nec totum quod potuere pro eius defensione facere permissos that is Two swords are sufficient to giue testimony vnto our Sauiour that he suffered willingly The one of which might shew that the Apostles wanted no courage to fight for their Master and by the eare that was cut off by the stroke thereof and healed againe by the Lord that he wanted neither piety to compassionate the miserable nor vertue and power to make him whole that was hurt though now hee were ready to dye And the other which neuer was drawne out of the sheath might shew that they were not permitted to doe all that they could haue done in his defence It is not to be denyed but that S. Bernard mystically expounding the words of Christ saith the Church hath two swords of authority But he thinketh it hath them in very different sort For it hath the vse of the one and the benefite of the other The one is to bee drawne by it the other for it So that this is all that hee saith that the sword of ciuill authority is to be vsed by the Souldiers hand at the commaund of the Emperour by the direction and at the suite of the Church From Bonifacius they passe to Innocentius the third who in the vacancy of the Empire willed those that were wronged in their rightfull causes to haue recourse either to some Bishop or to himselfe And Clemens the fifth who professeth to intermeddle with certaine secular businesses affaires and to determine certaine ciuill causes vpon three seuerall grounds Whereof the first is his greatnesse making him superiour to the Emperour The second his being in steed of the Emperour in the vacancy of the Empire And the third the fulnesse of power which Christ the King of Kings and Lord of Lords gaue vnto Peter and in him to his successours Whatsoeuer wee thinke of the former of these two Popes who seemeth to ground his intermedling in ciuill affaires vpon some law of the Empire and concession of ciuill Princes accordingly as we reade of Theodosius that he permitted any Lay-men hauing ciuill differences among themselues to referre the same to Ecclesiasticall Iudges if they listed Which concession proceeding ex pietate not ex debito that is out of piety and not out of any right or necessity that it must bee soe is long since growne out of vse the state of Church-men beeing much changed from that it was when hee granted them that priuiledge as Duarenus sheweth Yet Pope Clemens can by no meanes be excused from hereticall impiety affirming that which is most vntrue as may appeare by the many fold reasons brought before to proue the contrary nor from Antichristian pride in seeking to tread vnderneath his feete the crownes and dignities of Kings and Princes and to lift himselfe vp aboue all that is called God CHAP. 45. Of the Popes vnjust claime to intermeddle with the affaires of Princes and their states if not as soueraigne Lord ouer all yet at least in Ordine ad spiritualia and in case of Princes failing to do their duties THAT Christ was no earthly King that he left no Kingly power to Peter and that the Pope hath no meere temporall power in that he is Christs Vicar or Peters successor it is most euident out of the former discourse and the Cardinall Iesuite confesseth so much and yet he thinketh the Pope hath a supreme power to dispose of all temporall states and things in ordine ad bonum spirituale that is in a kinde of reference to the procuring and setting forward of the spirituall good But this fancy is most easily refuted by vnanswerable reasons presupposing his former concession For first no man can take away limit or restraine any power or the excercise of it but he in whom it is in eminent sort and from whom it was receiued But the ciuill power that is in Princes is not in the Pope neither did it proceede and come originally from him therefore it cannot be restrained limited or taken away by him The maior proposition is euident the assumption is proued because ciuill power is in heathen infidels who no way hold of the Pope Secondly because it is agreed by all Diuines of worth and learning that the ciuill power in the first originall of it is immediately from God or if not immediately by his owne deliuery thereof yet by no other mediation then that of the law of nature and nations The Emperours know saith Tertullian who gaue them the Empire they know that it was euen the same God who gaue vnto them to be men and to haue humane soules They well perceiue that he onely is God in whose onely power they are à quo sunt secundi post quem primi ante omnes super omnes Deos that is After whom they are in order the second but among all other the first before and aboue all Gods And againe Inde est Imperator vnde homo antequam Imperator inde potest as illi vnde spiritus that is From thence is the chiefe ruler and Emperor whence he was a man before hee was an Emperour from thence hath hee his power from whence he receiued the spirit of life The Author of the answer to the reports of a great and worthy Iudge among vs who hath lately written in the defence of the Popes ouerspreading greatnesse seemeth in part to agree with Tertullian and telleth vs that ciuill power is receiued from God not immediately by his owne deliuery thereof but mediately rather by the mediation of the law of nature and nations For by the law of nature God hath ordained that there should be politicke gouernment which the law of nations assuming hath transferred that gouernment to one or more according to the diuers formes thereof And Occam proueth at large that Imperiall power is not from the Pope and that it is hereticall to say that all lawfull ciuil power is from the Pope Our second reason is this Absolute soueraigne ciuill Princes while they were infidels had true dominion rule and authority holding it as immediatly from God not depending on any ruler of the church as hath beene shewed before But when they become Christians they still remaine in the
expresly We retaine it in our Colledges I obserued before that wee must carefully distinguish the generall practise and intention of the whole Church from priuate conceipts the whole Church commemorated the dead offered the sacrifice of praise for them prayed for them in the passage for their resurrection and consummation all which thinges we allow so that neither Doctor Humphrey nor we condemne the Vniuersall Church but thinke it were madnesse soe to doe but the priuate fancies of such as extended their prayers farther thinking they might ease mitigate suspend or wholy take away the paines of men damned in hell for of Purgatory no man thought in the Primitiue Church wee reject This erroneous conceipt and practise Aerius rightly condemned and Doctor Humphrey and wee all agree with him in the same dislike but he did ill to impute this errour to the whole Church and to condemne that which was good and laudable vppon soe weake a ground Of the difference which Maister Higgons would faine make betweene our commendation of the dead vsed in colledges and that vsed anciently whereof Saint Augustine speaketh I haue spoken before wherefore let vs come to his last exception against Doctor Humphrey which is that hee handleth the matter artificially to make a credulous reader beleeue that Saint Augustine himselfe doth conuell the vse of prayer for the dead by those sentences of the Apostle that we cannot reape if wee sowe not here and that wee must all stand before the iudgement seate of Christ that euery one may receiue according to the things hee hath done in his body whether good or euill This imputation is nothing else but a malitious and impudent charging of him with that he neuer thought of For the onely thing he sayth Augustine held proued by these sentences is that vnlesse we depart hence in a true faith wee canot be relieued by any deuotion of other men after we are gone Which is so vndoubtedly true that I thinke Higgons him-selfe dareth not deny it But that Augustine thought that men dying in the state of grace and faith of Christ may bee holpen by the prayers of the liuing hee neither made question himselfe nor euer sought to make his reader beleeue otherwise Neither doe wee dissent from Augustine in this point if the prayers hee speaketh of bee made respectiuely to the passage hence and entrance into the other world as I haue shewed before The onely thing that is questionable betweene Vs and our Aduersaries being whether prayers may releeue men in a state of temporall affliction after this life whereof Augustine neuer resolued any thing what-soeuer this pratling Apostata say to the contrary These things being soe let the reader judge whether the detection of falshood and ill dealing in Doctor Humphrey could possibly occasion Maister Higgons his change as hee would make the world beleeue there being nothing found in his whole discourse that is not most true and iustifiable by all course of learning But because hee is sufficiently chastised by others and knoweth too well the true cause of his running away to bee things of a farre other nature then those he pretendeth I will prosecute this matter no farther against him The Appendix §. 1. NOw it remaineth that I come to the Appendix which he addeth to his booke which hee deuideth into two partes whereof the first concerneth Mee the second D. Morton which hee hath answered already In that part which concerneth Me he vndertaketh to proue that I notoriously abuse the name and authority of Gerson Grosthead c. to defend the reformation made by Princes Prelats in our Churches Wherefore that the reader may perceiue I haue not abused these reuerend worthy men but that he wrōgeth both Them Me I will take the paines to examine his whole discourse though it will be very tedious soe to do by reason of the cōfused perplexed manner of handling of things in the same without all order method In the 1. chapter he doth but lay the foūdatiō of his intēded building therefore gathereth together a great nūber of positiōs sayings out of my book miserably māgled torne one frō another all which shall be defended whē he cōmeth to say any thing against them in such sort as that it shall evidently appeare that there is no falshood or collusion in any part of my Discourse as this false and treacherous Fugitiue is pleased to say there is Onely one thing there is heere that may not bee passed ouer because it hath no farther prosecution in that which followeth His wordes are these Whereas Bellarmine doth object the intestine divisions and conflicts of the pretensed Gospellers this Doctor turneth him off with this answer wee say that these diuersities are to bee imputed wholly to our Adversaries for when there was a reformation to be made of abuses and disorders in matters of practise and manyfold corruption in many points of Christian Doctrine and in a Councell by a Generall consent it could not bee hoped for as Gerson long before out of his experience saw and professed by reason of the prevailing faction of Popes flatterers it was not possible but that some diversity should grow while one knew not nor expected to know what another did This he saith is a very admirable devise For answere hereunto we must obserue that the divisions of this part of Christendome are of two sorts the first is from the faction of the Pope the second among them that haue abandoned the vsurped Authority of the Pope That the Pope and his adherents were the cause of the former of these divisions and the consequents of it is affirmed by better men then Master Higgons I will not deny saith Cassander a man highly esteemed for piety learning by the Emperours Ferdinand and Maximilian that many in the beginning were moued out of a Godly affection more sharply to reprehend certaine manifest abuses and that the chiefe cause of this calamitie and distraction or rent of the Church is to be attributed to them who puffed vp with the swelling conceipts of their Ecclesiasticall power proudly disdainfully contemned and repelled them that admonished them rightly of things amisse And therefore I do not thinke that any firme peace is euer to be hoped for vnlesse the beginning thereof be from them that gaue the cause of this diuision that is vnlesse they that haue the gouernment of the Church remit something of that their too great rigor listning to the desires of many godly ones correct manifest abuses according to the rule of sacred Scripture the ancient Church from which they are departed c. Touching that saith c Contarenus which the Lutherans say in the first last place of manifold and great abuses brought into the Church of Christ against which they so exclaime concerning which they haue made so many complaints to expresse their greiuances I haue nothing to say but first of all to
pray vnto almighty God the Father of our Lord Iesus Christ his only begotten Son who continually maketh intercession for vs the holy Spirit wherewith wee haue bin annoynted to be Christians by the grace of God the Sacrament of Baptisme that he will respect his Church now tottering in great danger and that he will moue the hearts of the Prelats of the Church that at last for a little while putting away this most pernitions selfe loue they may be perswaded to correct things manifestly amisse to reforme themselues There needeth no Councell there need no sillogismes there needeth no alledging of places of Scripture for the quieting of these stirres of the Lutherans but there is need of good minds of charity towards God our neighbour and of humility c. Touching the diuisions of thē that haue abandoned the tyrannical gouernment of the Bishoppe of Rome and imbraced the sincere profession of the heauenly truth whom this Lucian calleth pretensed Gospellers they are neither such nor so many as our Aduersaries would make the world beleeue as I haue shewed at large in the place cited by Master Higgons But be they what they may bee I haue truly sayd that the Romanists are the causes of them in that their obstinate resistance against all peaceable publicke proceeding in the worke of reformation in a Generall Councell forced men to take another course and to take this worke in hand seuerally in the seuerall Kingdomes of the world That there was no hope of reformation by a Generall Councell and that seuerall Kingdomes were to take care for the redressing of things amisse within their own compasse I haue shewed out of Gerson his words are these I see that the reformation of the Church will neuer bee brought to passe by a Councell without the presidencie of a well affected guide wise and constant let the members therefore prouide for themselues thorough all Kingdomes and Prouinces when they shall be able and know how to compasse this worke Now that this kinde of proceeding must needes bee accompanied with differences though not of moment nor reall yet in shew greater then were to bee wished euery man I thinke will confesse that hath the sence of a man Against all this M. Hig. hath nothing to say but as if he had gone out of his country passed the Seas of purpose to become a jester amongst our melancholy countrey-men that are abroad to make them merry maketh a jest of it as he doth of all other things and so passeth from it The second part § 1 BVT lette vs giue him leaue to sport himselfe a little we shall haue him in earnest by and by For in the next part of this chapter hee vndertaketh to proue that Gerson whom I bring in as a worthy guide of Gods Church in the time wherein hee liued and one that vvished the reformation of things amisse vtterly detested the reformation that hath beene transacted by Luther Zuinglius the rest But his proofes will be found too weake for though it were granted that he erred in the matter of transubstantiation inuocation of Saints and some such like things yet will it neuer be proued that hee erred heretically or that hee was not willing to yeelde to the trueth in these or any other thinges wherin hee was deceiued when it should be made to appeare vnto him Cyprian erred in the matter of rebaptization Lactantius and sundry other were carried into the errour of the Millenaries many Catholickes in Augustines time thought that all Oxthodoxe and right-beleeuing Christians shall be saued in the end how wickedly soeuer they liue here yet were they of one communion with them that thought otherwise If Master Higgons thinke that I produce Gerson as a man fully professing in euery point of Doctrine as wee doe he wholly mistaketh me for I was not so simple either to thinke so or to goe about to perswade others so but this is that which I said and still constantly affirme that God preserued his true Church in the midst of all the errors and confusions of the Papacy that the errours condemned by vs neuer found generall constant allowance in the daies of our Fathers and that there were many who held the foundation according to the light of knowledge which God vouchsafed them wished the reformatiō of such things as were amisse some of them discerning more of the errors abuses that were then found in the Church other fewer of which number I reckon Gerson to be one of eminent sort ranke For this worthy Diuine beleeued as we doe that all our inherent righteousnesse is imperfit yea that it is like the polluted ragges of a menstruous woman that it cannot endure the triall of Gods seuere iudgement that wee must trust in the only mercy and goodnesse of God if we desire to be surely established against all assaults that all sinnes are by nature mortall that indulgences reach not to the dead that they are but remissions of enjoyned penance that the Pope hath no power to dispose of the Kingdomes of the world that hee is like the Duke of Venice amongst the great Senators of that State greater then each one but inferiour to the whole companie of Bishoppes that hee is subiect to errour and that in case of errour or other scandalous misdemeanour hee may bee iudicially deposed that Christian perfection consisteth neither in pouerty nor riches but in a mind resolued to regard these thinges no farther then they stand with the loue of God and serue for the aduancement of his glory and the good of men So that sometimes it is a matter of more perfection to haue and possesse riches then to cast them from vs contrary to the false conceit of the Mendicantes who made extreame pouerty to bee the height of all perfection and thought that Christ himselfe did liue by begging which hee reiecteth as an absurd errour hee teacheth that the precept of Almighty GOD requireth all the actions of vertue in the best sort they canne bee performed and that therefore they do not rightly discerne betweene the matter of precepts and counsailes who imagine that the precept requireth the inferiour degrees of vertue and the counsaile the more high and excellent whereas counsailes vrge vs not to a higher degree of vertue or morall goodnesse but onely shew vs the meanes whereby most easily if all things bee answerable in the parties wee may attaine to the height of vertue the procept prescribeth so ouer-throwing the opinion of workes of supererogation hee teacheth that there is no more merit of single life then of marriage vnlesse the parties liuing in these different estates otherwise excell one another in the workes of vertue that virginity in that which it addeth aboue coniugal chastity is no vertue nor higher degree of vertue but a splendour of vertue only that the lawes of men binde not
flye all are friendes and all are enemies all are tyed vnto her in a bond of amity and yet all are her aduersaries all are of her houshold and yet none are at peace with her all are neighbours and yet all seeke their owne they are the Ministers of Christ and they serue Antichrist soe that nothing remaineth but that the diuell that feareth not to walke at noone day should be reuealed to seduce such as remaine in Christ still abiding in their simplicity for hee hath already swallowed vppe the riuers of the wise and the floudes of the mighty and hath hope to draw in Iordan into his mouth that is the simple and lowly in heart that are in the Church What is therefore the frandulency Maister Higgons so much complaineth of Surely hee sayth it was onely wickednesse of life Bernard complayneth of and I seeme to extend his complaint farther For answere whereunto first I say that I no way extend the wordes of Bernard to any particular kind of euill of life doctrine or violation of discipline but cite them in such generall sort as they are found in him Secondly I say it is vntrue that Higgons sayth that Bernard complained onely of the euill liues of men in his time for in his bookes of Consideration to Eugenius the Pope hee blameth him for medling with thinges more properly pertaining to men of another ranke and sort asking of him Quid fines alienos inuaditis quid falcem vestram ad alienam messem extenditis that is why doe you incroach vppon the bounds of other men and why doe you reach forth your sicle and thrust it into the haruest of other men adding that if the daies were not euill hee would speake many other things Likewise he complaineth of the confusion and abuse of appeales to Rome in this sort Praeter fas ius praeter morem ordinem fiunt non locus non modus non tempus non causa discernitur aut persona That is appeales are made and admitted besides law and right besides custome and order no difference is made of place manner time or cause so that the Bishoppes in all partes of the world are hindered that they cannot do their duties as also of the spoyling of the guides and gouernours of the Church of their authority by exemptions and priuiledges freeing such as are vnder them from their subiection Murmur loquor sayth hee querimoniam ecclesiarum truncari se clamitant demembrari vel nullae vel paucae admodum sunt quae plagam istam aut non doleant aut non timeant Quaeris quam Subtrahuntur Abbates Episcopis Episcopi Archiepiscopis Archiepiscopi Patriarchis siue Primatibus That is I vtter the murmuring complaint of the Churches they cry out that they are mangled and dismembred there are eyther none or very few which either feele not or feare not this plague if you aske what plague Abbots are exempted from the iurisdiction of their Bishoppes Bishoppes of their Arch-bishoppes they of their Primates But hee dissented not from the Papistes in matter of doctrine Surely this is no truer then the rest for it will be found that Bernard hath written that which will not please our Adversaries very well touching speciall faith imperfection impurity of inherent righteousnesse merites power of free-will the conception of the blessed Virgin and the keeping of the Feast of her Conception For I would willingly learne of them whether they will graunt that all our righteousnesse is as the polluted ragges of a menstruous woman that wee must beleeue particularly that our sins are remitted to vs that our workes are via regni not causa regnandi that is the way that leadeth to the Kingdome but not the cause why we raigne that the blessed Virgin was conceiued in sin and that the feast of her conception ought not to be kept In all these things doubtlesse Bernard dissented from the Papists at this day neither did he know or vnderstand any thing of their transubstantiation locall presence priuate masses halfe Communions indulgences the like which are matters of difference betweene vs our Adversaries at this day so that there might be good conformity in substance betweene Bernard and Wickliff his followers though many Articles falsely attributed to him are damned hereticall some things were vttered vnadvisedly by him therefore that which followeth of Falshood Inflexions Pretenses and subtilties is but the bewraying the distemper of Higgons hâ—…e braine who hauing confounded himself in his owne intricate conceipts woulâ—…â—…ke men beleeue other are like vnto him how orderly plainely and sincerely soeuer they handle things The Third Part. §. 1. IN the third part of this Chapter he reflecteth to vse his owne wordes vpon foure passages of mine and professeth that he will detect sundry vntrueths and vanities wilfully committed in the same Wherein the Reader shall finde him as false and as vaine a man as euer he met with The foure passages he speaketh of are these the first that Gerson reporteth that sundry lewd assertions preiudiciall to the states of Kings and Princes were brought into the Councell of Constance and that the Councell could not be induced to condemne them Secondly that they made no stay to condemne the positions of Wickliff and Hus. Thirdly that they condemned the positions of Wickliff Hus seeming to derogate from the state of the Cleargy Fourthly that they condemned the said positions though many of them might carry a good and Catholicke sense if they might haue found a fauourable construction In which of these passages is my falshood and vntruth Doth not Gerson report that sundry lewd positions prejudiciall to the state of Princes were brought to the Councell of Constance to bee condemned and that by no exhortations or entreaties by word or writing the Fathers assembled in it could be brought to condemne them Doth hee not say that they condemned the positions of Wickliff and Hus that they imprisoned some for those errours in the beginning of the Councell and burnt them afterwards Doth he not say the positions preiudiciall to the states of Princes which hee speaketh of were more pestiferous in the life and conversation of men and in the state of Common-weales then those they condemned Doth he not complaine of partialitie respect of persons and the Cleargies seeking their owne rather then that which is Christ Iesus Doth he not say many of the positions of Wickliff might haue had a good sense if they might haue beene fauourably construed Doth hee not protest that he hath no hope of reformation by a Generall Councell things standing as hee found them to doe if there be any vntruth in any of these passages let the Reader censure me as he pleaseth But if all these things be most vndoubtedly true let him accompt of Higgons as of an impudent young man that hath strangely hardened his fore-head as if he had beene a
not onely a condition but a cause of that perswasion of fayth which they haue yea the authority of the Church is the formall cause of all that faith seduced Papists haue And therefore the distinction of a cause and condition helpeth them not It is true indeed that the Ministerie of the Church proposing to men thinges to bee beleeued is onely a condition requisite to the producing of a supernaturall act of fayth in respect of them that haue some other thing to perswade them that that is true which the Church proposeth besides the authority of the Church but in respect of such as haue no other proofe of the trueth thereof it is a formall cause Now this is the condition of all Papists For let them tell Mee whether they beleeue the Scripture to be the Word of God without any motiue at all or not and if they doe not as it is most certaine they doe not whether besides such as are humane they haue any other then the authority of the Church if they haue not as doubtlesse they haue not they make the authority of the Church the formall cause of their faith and fall into that sophisticall circulation they are charged with For they beleeue the articles of religion because reuealed and that they were reuealed because it is so contayned in the Scripture and the Scripture because it is the Word of God that it is the Word of God because the Church telleth them it is and the Church because it is guided by the spirit and that it is so guided because it is so contayned in the Scripture this is such a maze as no wise man will willingly enter into and yet the Treatiser commendeth the treading of these intricate pathes and telleth vs that two causes may bee causes one of another That the cause may bee proued by the effect and the effect by the cause and that such a kinde of argumentation is not a circulation but a demonstratiue regresse that two causes may be causes either of other in diuerse respects we make no question For the end of each thing as it is desired setteth the efficient cause a worke and the efficient causeth the same to bee actually enjoyed Likewise we doubt not but that the cause may be proued by the effect and the effect by the cause in a demonstratiue regresse For the effect as better known vnto vs then the cause may make vs know the cause and the cause being found out by vs may make vs more perfitly and in a better sort to knowe the effect then before not onely that and what it is but why it is also So the death of little infants proueth them sinners and their being sinners proueth them mortall The bignesse of the footstep in the dust or sand sheweth the bignesse of his foote that made that impression And the bignesse of his foote will shew how bigge the impression is that he maketh but this maketh nothing for the justifying of the Romish circulations For heere the effect being knowne in a sort in itselfe maketh vs know the cause and the cause being found out and knowne maketh vs more perfectly to knowe the effect then at first wee did but the case is otherwise with the Papists for with them the Scripture which in it selfe hath no credit with them but such onely as it is to receiue from the Church giueth the Church credit and the Church which hath no credit but such as it is to receiue from the Scripture giueth the Scripture credit by her testimony And they endeauour to proue the infallibility of the Churches judgment out of the Scripture and the trueth of the Scripture out of the determination and judgement of the Church Much like as if when question is made touching the quality condition of two men vtterly vnknowne a man to commend them to such as doubt of them should bring no other testimony of their good and honest disposition but the testimony of each of them of the other It is true then which I haue said that to a man admitting the Old Testament and doubting of the New a man may vrge the authority of the Old and to a man doubting of the Old and admitting the New the authority of the New but to him that doubteth of both a man must alledge neither of them but must bring some other authority or proofe so likewise to him that admitteth the Scripture and doubteth of the Church a man may vrge the authority of the Scripture but to him that doubteth of both as all doe when they begin to beleeue a man must alledge some other proofe or else hee shall cause him to runne round in a Circle for euer and neuer to finde any way out Wherefore to conclude this poynt let our Aduersaries know that wee admitte and require humane motiues and inducements and amongst them a good opinion of them that teach vs as preparing fitting vs to fayth Secondly that wee require a supernaturall ayde light and habit for the producing of an act of faith Thirdly that we require some diuine motiue inducement Fourthly that this cannot be the authority of the Church seeing the authority of the Church is one of the things wee are to bee induced to beleeue Fiftly that wee require the ministery of the Church as a propounder of all heauenly trueth though her authority can be no proofe in generall of all such truth Sixtly that the Church though not as it includeth onely the beleeuers that are in the world at one time yet as it comprehendeth all that are or haue beene is an infallible propounder of heauenly truth and so acknowledged to bee by such as are assured of the trueth of the doctrine of Christianity in generall Seauenthly that the authority of this Church is a sufficient proofe of the trueth of particular things proposed by her to such as already are by other diuine motiues assured of her infallibility §. 7. FRom the authority of the Scripture which he would faine make to bee wholy dependant on the Church the Treatiser passeth to the fulnesse and sufficiency of it seeking amongst other his discourses to weaken those proofes which are brought by Mee for confirmation thereof Affirming that though I make shew as if it were a plaine matter that the Euangelists in their Gospels Saint Luke in the Actes of the Apostles and Saint Iohn in the Apocalyps meant to deliuer a perfect summe of Christian doctrine and direction of faith yet I bring no reason of any moment to proue it Whereas yet in the place cited by him I haue these wordes contayning in them as I suppose a strong proofe of the thing questioned Who seeth not that the Evangelists writing the history of CHRISTS life and death St Luke in the booke of the Acts of the Apostles describing the comming of the Holy Ghost the admirable gifts and graces powred vpon the Apostles and the churches founded and ordered by them and Saint Iohn writing the Revelations
heart that they may discerne see the light of heauenly truth it is evident that in Augustines judgment the authority of the Church serueth but as an introduction that the thing which right beleeuers rest vpon is of a higher nature to wit the discerning of heauenly truth Wherefore finding himselfe too weak to giue any substantiall answer he betaketh himselfe to a most silly exception pretending that I haue not truly translated these words of Augustin praesto est authoritas quā partim miraculis partim multitudine valere nemo ambigit authoritie is ready at handwhich standeth vpō 2 things the one the greatnes of miracles done the other multitude Is this a false translatiō hath the authority of the church that force which it hath to moue mē to beleeue partly by reasō of miracles partly by reasō of multitude may it not be truly said that it standeth partly vpon the greatnes of miracles wrought partly vpō multitudes but valere doth not signifie to stād vpō it is true it doth not yet what boy in the Grāmer School will not laugh at him for thus childishly demeaning himself for what man of vnderstāding would cal men to cōster euery word precisely as it importeth by it selfe without consideration of the coherence it hath with other in the same sentence Besides this place of Aug. there is another cited by Me out of Hugo where he maketh 3 sorts of beleeuers whereof the first are such as are moued out of piety to beleeue which yet discerne not by reason whether the things they beleeue are to bee beleeued or not The second such who by reason approue that which by faith they beleeue The third sort are such as by reason of the purity of their heart conscience begin inwardly to taste what by faith they beleeue This place maketh strongly for the confirmation of that I say that the evidence of sundry things in the light of faith and grace is that formall reason which assureth vs of the truth of them For heere Hugo affirmeth that the best sort of beleeuers doe approue by reason or by taste invvardly discerne the things they beleeue to be true So that such approbation or spiritual taste is the reason of their perswasion of the truth of these things To this authoritie the Treatiser hath nothing to say but that it maketh nothing to the purpose and that if I meant to translate the vvords of Hugo I haue not exactly translated thē Whether the saying of Hugo be to the purpose or not I vvill leaue it to the iudgment of the Reader but as for his other exception I vvould haue him knovv and any sensible Reader vvill very easilie discerne that I meant not exactlie to translate his vvordes but at large to set downe the intent driftes of them which I haue most truely performed and therefore hee doth Me wrong when hee saith I deale corruptly vntruly In the third place hee endeauoureth to make his Reader beleeue there is a contrariety betweene Me and Luther Brentius in that Luther with whom Brentius seemeth to agree maketh the Scripture to be of it self a most certaine most easie and most manifest interpreter of it selfe prouing judging and enlightning all things I acknowledge many difficulties in it But if the Treatiser had beene pleased to haue taken thinges aright he could not but haue seene that Luther also acknowledgeth manifold difficulties in the Scripture yea hee doth see it and acknowledge it and yet will not see it and therefore that he bee not contrary to himselfe when he affirmeth that the Scriptures are easie interpret themselues and judge and enlighten all thinges he must bee vnderstood to meane that notwithstanding some difficulties they are not so obscure and hard as that Heretiques may wrest and abuse them at their pleasure and noe man bee able to conuince them out of the euidence of those sacred writings as the Romanistes imagine but that wee may bee so assured out of the Scripture it selfe and the nature of the thinges therein contained that wee haue the true meaning of it that wee neede not altogether to rest in the authority of Church which explication of Luthers words the Treatiser might haue found in the place cited by him if hee had beene pleased and so haue omitted the vrging of this imagined contradiction §. 3. The 4. thing that he proposeth which cōcerneth me is that I mentiō a rule of faith according to which the Scriptures are to be interpreted which if we neglect al other considerations are insufficient the like he alleageth out of the Harmony of confessions whence he inferreth that we admit another guide in interpreting the Scripture besides the letter of the Scripture But hee should knowe that the rule of faith mentioned by me deliuered to vs from hand to hand by the guides of Gods Church containeth nothing in it but that which is found in Scripture either expressely or by necessary implication so that though wee admitte another guide in the interpretation of of Scripture besides the bare letter yet wee admitte noe other but that forme of Christian doctrine which all right beleeuing Christians taught by the Apostles and Apostolique men haue euer receiued as contained in the Scripture and thence collected To this hee addeth an excellent obseruation which is that I seeme to confesse that Saint Paul sometimes by the workes of the Law vnderstandeth the workes of the Law of Moses in that I say that that Apostle pronounceth that the Galathians were bewitched and that if they still persisted to joyne circumcision and the workes of the Law with Christ they were fallen from grace and Christ could profit them nothing But hee needed not thus to mince the matter for I willingly confesse that Paul not sometimes onely but euer vnderstandeth by the workes of the Lawe the workes of Moses Law Neither can there any thing be inferred thence for the Papists or against vs. For whereas by the workes of the Lawe some vnderstand those workes which the ceremoniall Lawe prescribed other such as the morall Lawe requireth and and a third sort such as by terror it worketh in men or causeth them to worke without any chaunge of the heart which cannot be wrought but only by grace the Papists think that whē the Apostle sayth we are iustified by faith without workes he excludeth not such works as the Morall Law requireth but such as the ceremoniall Law prescribeth and the morall Law worketh in men we teach that he excludeth all these So that a man repenting and beleeuing may bee saued though hauing neuer done any good worke he be taken out of this world before he can do any It is true indeede that good workes do necessarily follow iustification if time do serue and opportunity bee offered yet are they no meritorious causes of saluation But the Treatiser will proue out of that which I haue written that they are meritorious that