would haue promised health by calling for the Elders if the gift had not beene generall in euery congregation Ans. 2. Neither is remission of sinnes annexed to the element but to the generall doctrine of prayer made in fayth The prayer of fayth saith the Apostle shall heale the sicke The Protestants EXtreme Vnction is no conuenient ceremonie at all to be vsed in the Church as tending to superstition and breeding a vayne confidence in terrene elements much lesse is it to be holden for a sacrament Argum. 1. It hath no institution from Christ For they themselues confesse that Mark 6.13 there is but a preparatiue to the sacrament of extreme Vnction Rhemist the promulgation and publishing thereof is set forth by the Apostle Iam. 5. But this is not to be admitted that Christ was a preparer of sacraments onely and that they were perfited and finished by his Apostles Nay they were not to adde any thing to the institution of sacraments but to take them as Christ deliuered them 1. Cor. 11.23 Agayne the place in Iames maketh nothing for their popish aneeling for the Apostle would haue al the Elders called but one priest is sufficient to bring your oyntment box Secondly if any man be sick sayth Saint Iames though it be not deadly or mortall sicknes but whensoeuer he is sicke But your Vnction is neuer ministred before the poynt of death Thirdly here health is certainely promised But not one amongst tenne recouereth after your popish aneeling Argum. 2. Christ vsed sometime clay and spittle sometime other elements in healing the diseased as the Apostles vsed oyle why I pray you then may not they be sacraments as well as this For they were signes of healing but for a time no more was the anoynting with oyle Augustine sayth De latere Christi in cruce sacramenta ecclesiae profluxerunt The sacraments of the Church issued out of Christs side vpon the Crosse There gushed out â—â—is side water and blood but wee reade not that any oyle was shedde from 〈◊〉 therefore by Augustines argument Vnction is no sacrament THE SECOND PART OF THE effect and vertue of extreme Vnction The Papists error 53 FIrst it giueth health of body Secondly it wipeth away the reliques of sinne And therefore the priest thus sayth Per istam sanctam Vnctionem suam pijssimam misericordiam indulgeat tibi Deus quicquid deliquisti per visum c. By the vertue of this holy oyntment and the most merciful fauour of God the Lord forgiue thee what thou hast offended by thy sight hearing c. Bellarm. cap. 7.8 The Protestants 1 YOur popish aneeling is not able to heale the bodie as wee see by daylie experience for more die then liue after your anoynting And they that doe recouer should doe as well without your aneeling Wherefore this anoynting of oyle is not like to that vsed by the Apostles for then health certainly followed Iam. 5.14 2 It is also a great blasphemie to ascribe remission of sinnes to a terrene and beggerly element The Apostle saith not the oyle but the Prayer of fayth shall saue the sicke The scripture also testifieth that the Iust shall liue by fayth Rom. 1.17 And we walke by faith not by sight 2. Corinth 5.7 But he that ascribeth remission of sinnes to oyle or any other externall element walketh by sight not by fayth THE THIRD PART OF THE MINISTER of extreme Vnction and the ceremonies The Papists FIrst they giue power only vnto their anoynted Masse priests to aneele the sicke with oyle Lay men haue no authoritie to doe it nor whosoeuer are error 54 no Priests Concil Trident. sess 14. can 4. Secondly for the rite and ceremonie the Priest comming to the sicke must anoynt his fiue senses his eyes eares nostrels mouth and hands also the reines which is the seate of concupiscence and his feete which are the instruments of execution Bellarmin cap. 10. The Protestants 1 THis anoynting which Saint Iames speaketh of was done by the whole company of Elders in euery congregation which were not all the Pastors of the Church Yea and it appeareth by their own Canons Innocent 1. Epist. 1. cap. 8. that it was lawfull for lay men and all Christians to vse this anoynting see Fulk annot Iam. 5. sect 5. 2 What neede the body be anoynted in so many places It is meere superstition of the like minde was Peter sometime when he sayd to Christ who would wash his feete Lord not my feete onely but my hands and my head To whom Christ answered He that is washed neede not saue to wash his feete but is cleane all Iohn 13.9 Where although the words of Christ haue a spirituall meaning yet we see the euident and playne practise of them in Baptisme In the which sacrament we doubt not but that infants are thorougly baptized though euery part be not touched with water And euen so if your aneeling were a sacrament why might it not suffice in some one part of the bodie to be anoynted and not in so many This we are sure of that nowe you speake without booke For the Apostle maketh no mention of anoynting eyes hands or mouth but onely generally of anoynting the sick And thus it appeareth that your extreme Vnction is no sacrament nor any of the other foure which you haue inuented THE CONCLVSION OF THIS treatise concerning the sacrament THus I trust we haue made it pliane by scripture and euidence of argument that there are but two sacraments onely Baptisme and the Supper of the Lord left and enioyned to the people of God by our Sauiour Christ for foure things are required to make a sacrament First the authority of Christ in commanding it Secondly the element or external signe as the matter Thirdly the word of institution as the forme Fourthly the end and vse to be a seale of our fayth for remission of sinnes 1 Concerning the efficient cause we finde that two sacraments onely in the new testament are commanded by Christ to be vsed for euer in the Church Baptisme and the Lords Supper which both by his owne example and presence as also his precept and commandement were established 2 There must be an outward visible elementall signe as is water in Baptisme bread and wine in the Lords Supper But so is there not in the fiue popish sacrameÌ„ts For in some there is no signe at all as in Matrimonie where they are driuen to say that the parties that are maried are the signes In some there is a signe but not visible as in absolution the audible voyce of the priest ponouncing the words of absolution is they say the outward signe But in all the sacraments of Christs institution we finde a visible signe In some there is an outward signe but it is an action or gesture only no material element which is not sufficient so is the imposition of hands in giuing of Orders In some there is a materiall signe as Chrisme in Confirmation oyle in extreme Vnction
QVESTION OF THE NATVRE and definition of a Sacrament WE thus define a Sacrament to be an outward sensible signe representing an holy inward and spirituall grace instituted of Christ to be vsed in that manner he hath appoynted to seale vnto vs the promises of God and to assure vs of the remission of sinnes by the righteousnes of faith in Christ Rom. 4.11 Some things there be in this definition that are agreed vpon betweene vs and our aduersaries as that the Sacraments are outward signes of spirituall and holy graces and that there must be a conueniencie and agreement betweene the signe and the thing signified that not euery thing may be represented by a Sacrament but an holy and spirituall grace that a Sacrament ought to be instituted by a diuine not an humane authoritie Bellar. de Sacram. in gener lib. 1. cap. 9 The seuerall poynts then wherein we dissent from them and which they mislike in this definition are these First concerning the authoritie of instiâ—uting a Sacrament which we affirme to be deriued onely from Christ and manifestly to be proued out of the scriptures Secondly of the forme and manner of celebrating the Sacraments Thirdly of the instrumental or ministerial cause which is the Minister Fourthly of the vse and end of a Sacrament whether it be a scale of the promises of God and instituted for that end THE FIRST PART OF THE EFFICIENT CAVSE that is the author or institutor of a Sacrament The Papists THey doe willingly grant that neither the Apostles then had nor the Church error 87 now hath authoritie to institute Sacraments but that this power is onely in Christ and that the Apostles did but declare and deliuer that which they receiued of Christ yet for the triall of this they refuse to be iudged by the expresse word of God but flie vnto their traditions which they call the word of God not written Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sacram. cap. 14. 23. Argum. The sacrament of Baptisme and of the Eucharist were instituted without expresse warrant of scripture for at that time the newe testament was not written when Christ ordained those mysteries Ergo for the other Sacraments we need not the expresse coÌ„mandement of scripture Bellar. lib. 1. cap. 14. Ans. First the traditions of our Sauiour giuen vnto the Apostles concerning those two Sacraments were afterward written by the Apostles and expressely set downe in scripture therefore we doubt not but that they were of Christs institution But your traditions being not committed to writing concerning your other forged sacraments are iustly suspected seeing the Apostles should haue as well been charged with all the sacraments if Christ had instituted theÌ„ as with only two Secondly how then followeth it the word of God was sometime vnwritten therefore it is so still or Christ who was the author of the word written might institute sacraments without expresse scripture Ergo the testimonie of scripture is not necessarie now The Protestants WE hold no sacraments to be of Christs institution but those onely which the scripture testifieth to haue been commanded by Christ as Baptisme Math. 28.19 the Lords Supper Luk. 23.19 The other which haue no testimonie of scripture were not appoynted by Christ. Argum. 1. S. Paul saith That the scriptures are able to make the man of God absolute and perfect to euery good worke 1. Timoth. 3.17 But how can the Minister of God be perfectly furnished and prepared for the worke of the ministerie if he haue not sufficient direction out of the scriptures concerning the sacraments of the Church for how can he absolutely execute euery part of his office if he faile in the right vse of the sacraments Ergo seeing the scriptures are able to make him perfect from thence he receiueth sufficient instruction for the sacraments Argum. 2. Augustine saith Christus sacramentis numero paucissimis obseruatione facilimis c. Christ hath ioyned his people together by the sacrameÌ„ts few in number easie in obseruation such are Baptisme and the partaking of his bodie and blood then it followeth Et si quid aliud in scripturis canonicis commendatur And if any other sacrament be commanded in the canonicall scripture Epistol 118. Ergo we must attend vpon the scripture and written word of God if we will be instructed aright concerning the Sacraments THE SECOND PART OF THE FORME OF A Sacrament and the manner of consecration The Papists THe Sacrament is not consecrated say they by al the words of the institution error 88 but by a certain forme of speech to be vsed ouer the elemeÌ„ts as these words to be said ouer the bread This is my body the like ouer the wine This cup is the new testament c. And in Baptisme these In the name of the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost These are the formes of the Sacrament and very words of consecration though spoken in a strange tongue without further inuocation of the name of God or giuing of thankes or without a Sermon which we require as they say as necessarie to the essence of a sacrament Rhemist 1. Corinth 11 sect 11.15 Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sacrament cap. 19. Argum. S. Paul sayth The cup of blessing which we blesse 1. Corinth 10.16 The Apostle referreth the benediction or blessing to the cup or Chalice which is nothing els but the consecration thereof Rhemist ibid. Ans. First wee denie not but that to blesse here doth signifie to sanctifie or consecrate but that is not done by a magicall murmuration of words ouer the Sacrament but by the whole action according to Christs institution in distributing receiuing giuing of thankes Secondly as for the words which Christ vttered in the institution we rehearse them not as a magicall charme to be sayd ouer the bread and wine to conuert their substance but to declare what they are made to vs by force of Christs institution namely his bodie and blood The Protestants WE doe not hold that it is an essentiall part of the Sacrament alwayes to haue a sermon before it as they vnderstand a sermon which notwithstanding were most conuenient and alwaies to bee wished but this wee affirme that the Sacrament cannot be rightly ministred vnlesse there be a declaration and shewing forth of the Lords death not only in the visible action of breaking distributing the elements but also in setting forth the end of the Lords death out of the word of God with an exhortation to thankfulnes which is alwaies obserued amongst vs in the dayly celebration and receiuing of the Sacrament Concerning the words of the institution we also grant that they are necessarily to be vsed in the celebration of the Sacrament but not as the Papists vse them For first they make them not all of one value but out of the whole institution picke out certaine consecratorie words as they call them as This is my bodie This is the cup whereas the other words Take ye eate ye drinke ye doe this in remembrance
Pastors and of the election of the Pope pag. 197 3 Of Ecclesiasticall degrees and orders 3. parts 1 Of the seuen degrees of popish priesthood p. 199 2 Of the difference of Bishops and other Ministers pag. 201 3 Of the office of Cardinals pag. 205 4 Of the keyes of the Church 4. parts 1 Wherein the authoritie of the keyes consisteth pag. 206 2 To whom the authoritie of the keyes â—s committed p. 208 3 Whether the Pastors of the Church haue absolute power to remit sinnes pag. 210 4 Of the effect of binding and loosing pag. 212 5 Of the marriage of Ministers three parts 1 The marriage of Ministers lawfull pag. 214 2 Men may be admitted to Orders after second marriage pag. 219 3 Whether perpetuall abstinence be required in married Ministers pag. 221 6 Of the maintenance of Ministers by tithes two parts 1 Whether the paiment of tithes bee necessarie pag. 228 2 By what right tithes are due pag. 229 The sixt controuersie of Monkes and Friers sixe questions 1. quest Of the originall of Monkes and of their diuers sects pag. 232 2 Of the difference betweene Euangelicall Counsels and precepts pag. 236 3 Of vowes in generall three parts 1 Whether it be lawfull for Christians to vow pag. 239 2 Wherein lawfull vowes consist pag. 241 3 Whether voluntarie vowes properly be any part properly of the worship of God pag. 242 4 Of Monasticall vowes 3. parts 1 Of the vow of voluntarie pouertie pag. 244 2 The vow of Monasticall obedience p. 246 3 Of the vow of chastitie pag. 247 5 Of Monasticall persons foure parts 1 Whether the younger sort ought to professe Monkerie pag. 251 2 Whether children may be made Monkes without their parents consent pag. 253 3 Whether married persons may with mutuall consent become votaries pag. 254 4 Whether marriage not consummate may without consent bee broken for the vow of continencie pag. 256 6 Of the rules and discipline of Monasticall life foure parts 1 Of the solitarie austere life of Monks pag. 257 2 Of the habite and shauing of Monkes pag. 259 3 Of their Canonicall houres pag. 261 4 Of the maintenance of Monkes pag. 262 The seuenth generall controuersie of the Ciuill Magistrate foure questions 1 Of the authoritie of the Prince in Ecclesiasticall matters foure parts 1 His authoritie ouer Ecclesiasticall persons pag. 266 2 Ouer Ecclesiasticall goods pag. 267 3 In causes Ecclesiasticall pag. 268 4 Whether the Prince may be sayd to bee the head of the Church in his kingdome pag. 271 2 The authoritie of the Prince in punishing heretikes 1 Whether the iudgement of heresie any way belongeth to the Prince pag. 274 2 How an heretike is to be tried pag. 275 3 How heretikes are to be examined and punished Ibid. 3 Whether the positiue lawes of Princes doe binde in conscience 4 Whether the Prince may be excommunicate of the Pope THE SECOND BOOKE CONTAINETH SIXE CONTROVERSIES The first controuersie which is the eight in the whole is concerning Angels three questions 1. quest Of the hierarchie of Angels 2. parts 1 Of the degrees of Angels p. 291 2 Whether Michael be the Prince of the Angels pag. 292 2 Of the ministerie of Angels three parts 1 Of their externall ministerie in the protection of the Church pag. 293 2 Of their spirituall office about our prayers pag. 295 3 Whether Angels know our hearts pag. 296 3 Of the worship of Angels 2 parts 1 Of their worship in generall pag. 299 2 Of the inuocation of Angels pag. 300 The ninth generall controuersie concerning Saints departed two parts 1. part Of those that suffer punishment being departed two questions 1 Of Limbus Patrum and of the apparition of Samuel pag. 302.305 2 Of Purgatorie foure parts 1 Whether there be any Purgatorie pag. 307 2 Of the circumstances of Purgatorie pag. 310 3 Of prayer for the dead p. 312 4 Of burials funerals p. 315 2. part Of the Saints that are in ioy and blisse after their departure 9. quest 1. quest Of the blessed estate of the Saints and of Canonizing of Saints pag. 320 2 Of the adoration of Saints 3. parts 1 Whether they are to bee adored and of othes vowes made to Saints pag. 325 2 Of the diuers kindes of worship pag. 330 3 Of the kissing of holy mens feete pag. 331 3 Of the inuocation of Saints three parts 1 Whether prayers are to be made vnto them pag. 332 2 Whether they pray for vs pag. 334 3 Whether they vnderstand our praiers p. 335 4 Of the reliques of Martyrs foure parts 1 Of the worshipping of Reliques pag. 338. 2 Translation of Reliques pag. 340. 3 Preseruing of Reliques pag. 342. 4 Miracles of Reliques pag. 343. 5. question 1. Of Images foure parts 1 Of the difference of Idols Images p. 347 2 Whether it bee lawfull to haue Images pag. 348 3 Whether to be worshipped pag. 350 4 What manner of worship it should be p. 353 2. Of the signe of the Crosse 4. parts 1 Of the Crosse whereon Christ suffered p. 355 2 Of the image of the Crosse. pag. 357 3 Of the signe of the Crosse. pag. 359 4 Of the power or efficacie of the Crosse. p. 360 5 An appendix concerning the name of Iesus pag. 361 6. quest Of Temples and Churches fiue parts 1 Of the situation and forme of Churches pag. 3â—2 2 Of the ende and vse of Churches three parts pag. 365 1 Whether they are built for sacrifice pag. 365 2 Whether they be holy places in theÌ„selues pag. 367 3 Whether they may be dedicate to saints pag. 368 3 Of the adorning of Churches pag. 370 4 Of the dedication of Churches pag. 372. 5 Of thinges hallowed for Churches pag. 373 7 Of Pilgrimages and Processions and of the holy land pag. 375 8 Of holy and festiuall daies fiue parts 1 Of holy dayes in generall 378 2 Of the Lords day 379 3 Of the festiuall dayes of Christ and the holy Ghost pag. 386 4 Of the festiuities of Saints 1 The number of them 2 The manner of keeping them pag. 388 3 Of their vigils p. 391 5 Of Lent and Imber daies pag. 392 9 Of the Virgin Mary 1 Whether she were conceiued without sinne pag. 398 2 Whether she vowed virginitie pag. 400 3 Of her assumption into heauen pag. 401 4 Of the worship due vnto her pag. 402 5 Of the merites of the virgine and of the Aue Maria. pag. 404 The tenth controuersie hath but one question concerning the mediation and intercession of Christ. pag. 406. The eleuenth controuersie concerning the Sacraments in generall three questions 1. quest Of the definition and nature of a Sacrament 1 Of the efficient cause or institutor of the sacrament pag. 408 2 Of the forme manner of consecration pag. 409 3 Of the instrumentall cause which is the Minister pag. 413 4 Of the vse whether the Sacraments be seales pag. 414 2. quest Of the efficacie and vertue of the Sacraments 1 Whether the SacrameÌ„ts
suffered both in bodie and soule for if there were no vse of the humane soule in the worke of our redemption you might as wel say with the Appollinarists that Christ had no soule at all Thus Augustine reasoneth Si totus homo perijt totus beneficio saluatoris indiguit sitotut beneficio saluatoris indigebat totum Christus veniendo saluabit If the whole man both in bodie and soule were lost he wholly had need of a Sauiour and if he wholly needed a Sauiour Christ by his comming did wholly saue him Ergo it followeth that Christ must wholly haue died suffred in bodie soule to redeeme man that was wholly lost in bodie soule The Anthropomorphites did imagine that God was in shape and proportion like a man Heres 50. Doe not our Rhemists sauour strongly of this heresie which allow the image of God to be pictured like an old man with gray haires in their Churches Annot Act. cap 17. v. 29. The heretikes Abeliani thought it not lawfull for their sort to liue without wiues and yet they neuer vsed nor kept companie with their wiues Heres 87. Do not the Papists come neere them which hold that their priests which were married before orders ought not afterward to haue accesse to their wiues yet are they their wiues still neither is the marriage knot dissolued betweene them Rhemist Act. 21. sect 1. The Pelagian heretikes did hold three pernicious opinions First that a man may be perfect in this life and keepe all the Commandements Heres 88. So the Rhemists say it is possible to keepe all the precepts of the law Annot. Ioan. â—4 sect 1. Secondly the Pelagians say that grace is giuen vnto men onely to this end that they may more easily doe those things which they are commanded to doe by their owne free will Heres 88. So the Rhemists say that man was neuer without free will but hauing the grace of Christ it is truely made free Annot. Ioan. 8. sect 2. What is this els but that his free will is made more free and that grace helpeth him not whollie to worke but more easily onely Thirdly the Pelagians hold Gratiam Dei non ad singulos actus dari That the grace of God is not needfull to be giuen at euery assay but that their free will in most things is sufficient August Epist. 106. So the Rhemists say that though the Gentiles beleeued specially by Gods grace yet they beleeued also of their owne free will Act. 13. sect 2. What say they els but that a man may beleeue by his owne free will without grace The Manichees condemned the eating of flesh as being vncleane and impure Heres 46. So the Papists also forbid at certaine times the eating of flesh And herein they perhaps differ from the Manichees They held that flesh was vncleane by creation The Papists by reason of the curse for God cursed the earth and not the waters say they and therefore vpon fasting daies fish is preferred before flesh Durand lib. 6. capit de alijs ieiunijs So they both agree in this that flesh is a thing impure and vncleane for if they had not so thought why did not that popish Bishop of London Stokeslie rather suffer the pigge to be eaten which was found in one Frebarnes house in Lent time his wife being great with child longing for a peece thereof then command it as an vncleane thing to be buried in Finsburie fields and so the good creature of God to be spoyled and lost There was also another most blasphemous opinion of the Manichees for they held that the parts and members of Christ were dispersed euery where and that in their meates drinkes they did deliuer the members of Christ which were tyed and bound in the creatures Tales saith Augustine â—unt electi eorum vt non sint saluandi à Deo sed saluatores Dei liberant enim membra Christi cum manducant The elect amongst them for so they call their principals do make themselues the sauiours and redeemers of God for they doe set at libertie as they imagine the members of Christ he is not their sauiour Compare now the opinion of the Papists with these heretikes see if they be not cosin germanes for as they made themselues saluatores Christi sauiours of Christ so is it a saying amoÌ„g the Papists that Sacerdos est creator createris sui the Priest at Masse which by fiue words speaking maketh the body of Christ is a maker say they of his maker a creator of his creator Ex Iuell lib. artic p. 615. But herein the Papists go beyond the Manichees for they deliuered the bodie members of Christ froÌ„ the prison of the creatures and sent them vp to heauen the Papists bring them downe from heauen and close them in the creature vnder the shape of bread and wine Thus farre we thought good to shew how neere the Papists come to the heretikes of olde time that it might appeare to the world that we doe not vniustly charge them with heresie and that we haue good cause to shunne and abhorre their poysoned doctrine Many other heresies I could haue produced which are reuiued by our aduersaries raked againe as it were out of their graues where they did quietly rest But that I am not of purpose now to deale in this matter which may in a seuerall Treatise God willing hereafter as time and opportunitie shall serue be handled more at large I haue onely by the way giuen a tast of the bitter and sower doctrine of Poperie that our countrymen which haue been any thing that way infected may take warning that if they haue sipped of the whore of Babylons cup of fornicatioÌ„ they should leaue of before they haue drunke more deepely lest they in the end be constrained to draw out the very dregges thereof and to be drunken with their intoxicate cup. If they will in time be warned they may a word to a wise man is sufficient and if they be wise they will also take heed in time I say vnto them as Augustine did sometime to the Donatists Si sapitis bene rectè si autem non sapitis nos vestri curam gessisse non poenitebit quia et si cor vestrum ad pacem non conuertitur pax nostra tamen ad nos reuertitur If you will be learned it is well and as we wish but if you will not it repenteth vs not that we haue had some care of you for although your hart be not conuerted to the peace of the Gospell yet our peace returneth to vs againe Here by the way I must remember my selfe of one thing which I had almost ouerslipped Euery where both in this Preface and in this whole booke speaking of our aduersaries I call them Papists as we are knowne by the name of Protestants I suppose our English Romanists will take no offence or griefe hereby so to be called although I haue heard that some
Councel for that function as Cardinal Arelatensis was chosen in the Councell of Basile by the fathers to be moderator First that it belongeth to the Prince to haue this prerogatiue it is hence prooued because he is the chiefe iudge in all matters and causes both ciuil and eccesiasticall And it appeareth by the auncient practise of the godly kings in Israel and Iuda Dauid gathered a Councel together when hee brought the Arke to Ierusalem 1. Chronicl 15.3 where he was the chiefe doer and director for he appoynted the Leuites their courses and set forth a certayne fourme of thanksgiuing to be vsed 1. Chronicl 16.4.7 Hezekiah assembled a Councel 2. Chronicl 30.2 where it was decreed that the passeouer should be solemnly kept the postes were sent forth with the kings writ or commission In Iosiah his raigne there was a great assembly at Ierusalem of the Princes the people priests and Leuites and al from the greatest to the smallest where the king him selfe was president and chiefe agent reading the law before the people 2. Chronicl 34.30.31 Secondly we finde that the Emperours themselues haue beene present at Councels As in the Nicene Constantine the great was present in the Councel of Chalcedon Martianus in the Constantinopolitane 3. Constantinus the Emperour in the Constantinopl 4. Basilius the Emperour was present Is it to bee thought that these noble Emperours were at the Councels as inferiors or vnderlings or had they not the chiefe places then sure they were presidents for in the Councell the chiefe place belongeth to the president They might appoynt a speaker or prolocutor for them as in the parliament house though the prince be present yet the Lord Chauncellour speaketh but the chiefe power and Soueraigntie in the Councell was in the Emperours Thirdly not to heape vp many reasons in so playne a cause I will alleadge one example most manifest out of Augustine who writeth that in that great Councel at Carthage where the matter was discussed between the Catholicks the Donatists there being present more then 500. Bishops of both sides Marcellinus was appointed to be moderator of that disputatiō who diuers times putteth in his sentence in the disputation and last of all bidding both parts to go aside he writeth the sentence definitiue and concludeth against the Donatists approuing the actes of the Catholike Bishops haec August breuicul collation THE FIFTE QVESTION WHETHER Councels may erre or not The Papists error 33 THey are not all agreed what to determine of this matter some affirme that Generall Councels can in no wise erre although the consent of the Pope bee wanting thus the fathers in Basile concluded who is it say they that will preferre a sinfull man before an vndefiled Church But Bellarmine more the Popes friend then so holdeth that euen generall Councels may erre vnlesse they follow the instructions and directions of the Pope Yea that it is not sufficient for the pope to call a Councel and sende his Legate thither but hee must write continually for aduertisement from his maister before any thing be concluded and therefore they doubt not to say that the Councell of Basile erred though it had the consent of the Popes Legate in defining that the Councell is aboue the Pope because he had no such direction from the Pope Bellarmine de concil lib. 2. cap. 11. Nay the Iesuite goeth further that particular Councels being approoued by the Pope cannot erre cap. 5. So they holde that the holy fathers of the cruell Inquisition cannot erre Yea Panormitane was not ashamed to say openly in the Councell of Basile that he would prefer the iudgement of the Cardinals of Rome before all the world This then is the Iesuites opinion that no Councels by the pope confirmed can erre that a particular Councel hauing his allowance is to be preferred before a generall without Let vs see some of their reasons 1. They abuse certaine places of scripture for their purpose as that Act. 15. It seemed good to vs and the holy Ghost I am with you to the end of the world He that heareth you heareth me Bellarmine cap. 2. Rhemist in Act. 15.8.10 so then thus they argue Councels are neuer without the spirite of God therefore can they not erre A silly argument as though the spirite of God were at their commaundement or were tyed to places or persons They must first performe the condition before they can chalenge the promise that is to followe the rule of Gods word and obediently to submit themselues thereunto then will God vouchsafe to be present The Gospell sayth that wheresoeuer two or three are gathered together in my name I will be present euen in the midst of them Here promise is made not to thousands or hundreds but to two or three and therefore by this place an assemblie of few persons may as well be exempted from error as Councels but there is a condition In nomine meo in my name and then followeth in medio illorum in the midst of them if then they are not met in the Lords name they cannot looke for the presence of Christ. I pray you where was the holy Ghost present in that Councel at Rome vnder Iohn 23. when there appeared a great Oule which stared and out faced the pope who blushing at the matter and fuming rose vp and departed At the sight of which Owle they whispered one in anothers eare that the spirit appeared in the likenes of an Owle and after that in an other session the same Owle appeared and could not be driuen away vntill by throwing bats and cudgels at her shee fell downe dead before them ex Nichol. Clemang In the beginning of the Councel of Constāce after the accustomed hymne song veni sancte spiritus a bil was set vp with these wordes alijs rebus occupati nunc adesse non possumus Wee are now otherwise occupied we cannot be present with you We see now how sure the Papists are of the holy Ghost in their popish Councels The Protestants WE doubt not to say that Councels haue erred and may erre presuming any thing besides the warrant of Gods worde and that neither vniuersall or particular Councels are priuiledged much lesse any one man no nor the Pope not to erre in matters of fayth otherwise then following the trueth of the Scriptures for in so doing they are sure not to be deceiued 1. We haue also examples in the scripture of Councels that erred as that assemblie in Achabs dayes of 400. Prophets who were al deceiued the Iesuite thus answereth that it was an assemblie of prophets not of priests as though priestes were more piuiledged from error than Prophets And these say they were false Prophets not Prophets of the Lord We graunt so and this withal that wheresoeuer the Lords Prophets and pastors and ministers assemble that there they will heare the Lords voyce which the Pope in his Councels doth not But he still supposeth that the Pope and his ministers
Prophet in the midst Euen thus with the like spirite of blasphemie doo the Iesuites crie out that the Pope is the chiefe shepheard steward husband and head of the Church vpon earth But we will leaue to charge them so deepely with blasphemie which notwithstanding they cannot auoyde Let vs heare what the fathers of Basile say to this poynt Bellarmine saith the Pope is the husband but they reason cleane contrarie the Church say they is the spouse of Christ the Pope make the best of him you can is but a Vicar but no man dooth so ordaine a Vicar that hee maketh his spouse subiect vnto him but that the spouse is alwaies thought to be of more authoritie then the Vicar forsomuch as she is one body with her husband but the Vicar is not so thus haue they to the full answered the Iesuite ex Aenea Syluio Better arguments they haue none for the Popes prerogatiue then we haue seene The Protestants THat the Pope is by right and ought to be subiect to generall Councels and that they haue authoritie to iudge examine suspend punish depose him if there be iust cause it is proued thus This matter was pithilie disputed vpon by the Fathers of Basile some of whose reasons it shall bee sufficient heere to followe 1 They proue this conclusion out of Scripture First whereas Panormitane had saide that the Pope was Lorde of the Church vnto him Segouius answered that it was the most honourable title of the Bishop of Rome to be called the seruant of the seruants of God and Peter saith hee forbiddeth pastors to behaue themselues as Lords ouer the Clergie 1. Pet. 5. And if Christ the sonne of God came not to be ministred vnto but to minister and serue how then can his Vicar haue any dominion So was Panormitane answered Againe the Diuines thus argued Christ saith to Peter dic Ecclesiae Peter is sent to the Church or Councell Ergo the veritie doth remit the Bishop of Rome to the Councell But to this the Iesuite saith that Peter was not yet entred into his office to bee chiefe Bishop but was as a priuate person So then belike this rule of our Sauiour Christ dic Ecclesiae tell it to the Church did but binde Peter till Christ were ascended and he receiued his Vicar-dome This cauillous answere the Fathers of Basile wisely foresaw and preuented it for they shew how Peter was subiect to Councels euen after the ascension as Act. 11. Peter is rebuked say they by the congregation because he went to Cornelius an heathen man as if it had not been lawfull for him to attempt any great matter without the knowledge of the congregation but that seemeth to make more for the purpose Galath 2. where Paule rebuked Peter to his face because contrarie to the decree of the Councell of the Apostles hee did cogere gentes Iudaizare hee would constraine the Gentiles to doe like the Iewes Ergo Peter was subiect vnto the Councell ex Aenea Syluio Other reasons many were alleaged by the Fathers of Basile First the Bishop of Burgen As in euery well ordered Kingdome the whole realme should be of more authoritie then the King so the Church ought to be of more authoritie then the Pope though he were Prince thereof The Diuines brought these argumēts the Church is the mother of the faithfull and so of the Pope if he be a faithfull man the Pope is then the Churches sonne as both Anacletus and Calixtus Bishops of Rome confessed Ergo how much the sonne is inferiour to his mother so much is the Church superiour to the Pope Secondly the Pope is inferiour to Angels he is not greater then Iohn Baptist of whom it is said that the least in the Kingdome of God is greater then he but the Angels doe reuerentlie accord vnto the doctrine of the Church Ephes. 3.10 Ergo the Pope is bound to doo the same who is lesse then the Angels These Fathers thought none so absurd to denie the Pope to be inferiour to Angels and therefore labour not to proue it Yet Antoninus an olde Papist saith Non minor honor datur Papae quà m Angelis there is no lesse honour due to the Pope then to the Angels Nay another saith I thinke it be Pope Paschalis Datur Episcopis quod ne Angelis vt Christi corpus crearent it is graunted to Bishops which is not giuen to the Angels to create the bodie of Christ. But the Fathers of Basile thought not these men worthie the answere no more doe we and so let thē passe Thirdly the Pope say they being the Vicar of the Church for he is more truely so called then the Vicar of Christ he may be deposed of the Church for a Lord may put out his Vicar at his pleasure Ergo the Pope is vnder Councels 4 If the Councels might not ouerrule the Pope there were no remedie left to resist a wicked Pope Shall we suffer all things say they to run into ruine and decay with him for it is not like that hee would congregate a Councell against himselfe To this the Iesuite answereth that there is no remedie left but to pray to God in such a case who will either confound or conuert such a Pope Here is goodly diuinitie we know that Antichrist shall at length be destroyed at the comming of Christ but if he should be let alone in the meane while and not be bridled he might doe much hurt as he hath done too much alreadie Yet the Iesuite confesseth that a wicked Pope may bee resisted by force and armes and why not I pray you as well by peaceable meanes these sayings are contrarie Bellarm. cap. 19. So then this is Popish diuinitie that be the Pope neuer so wicked doe he neuer so much harme hee is not to bee controuled of any mortall man Such doultish schoole poynts maintained especially by begging friers the fathers of Basile complained of As that they should say that no man ought to iudge the high and principall seate that it cannot be iudged either by Emperour Clergie King or people Other affirme that the Lord hath reserued to himselfe the depositions of the chiefe Bishop Others yet more mad are not ashamed to affirme that the Bishop of Rome though hee carrie soules in neuer so great number to hell yet is he not subiect to any correction or rebuke For all these straunge and blasphemous positions the fathers concluded as yee haue heard that the Pope ought to obey generall Councels 4 Lastly I will adioyne the iudgement of Augustine who writing in his 162. Epistle concerning the Donatists whose cause was heard and determined by the Emperours appoyntment at Rome before Miltiades then Bishop there and other Bishops assistants and yet for all this the Donatists would not bee quiet Thus he saith Putemus illos iudices qui Romae iudicauerunt non bonos iudices fuisse Restabat adhuc plenarium Concilium c. Put case saith hee that the Bishop of Rome
and the rest iudged corruptly there remayned yet another remedie A generall Councell might haue beene called where the iudges and the cause might further haue been tried and examined their iudgement if there were cause reuersed Whereby it appeareth say the fathers of Basile that not onely the sentence of the Pope alone but also the Pope with his Bishops ioyned with him might be made frustrate by a Councell Here the Iesuite paltreth saith that a matter determined by the Pope in a particular Councell may be called againe in question by the Pope in a general Councel First what neede that seeing that a particular Councel hauing the Popes authoritie as the Iesuite confesseth cannot erre Againe Augustine saith vbi cum ipsis iudicibus causa possit agitari In the which generall Councell the cause and the former iudges of the which Miltiades was one may bee tryed and examined so that the Pope himselfe might be adiudged by the Councell and not the cause onely Vpon the Premisses we truely and iustly conclude that the Pope is and of right ought to be subiect to generall Councels THE EIGHT QVESTION OF THE CONditions and qualitie of generall Councels The Papists THeir vnreasonable and vnequall conditions are these and such like as followe 1 That the Pope onely should haue authoritie to summon call proroge dissolue and confirme Councels and he onely to bee the iudge president and moderator in Councels or some at his appoyntment 2 They will haue none to giue voyces but Bishops and such as are bound by oath of alleageance to the Pope 3 That the Councell is not bound to determine according to Scripture but to follow their traditions and former decrees of Councels 4 That no Councell is in force without the Popes assent yea the Pope himselfe say they by his sole authotitie may abrogate and disanull the canons and decrees of Councels These and such other conditions the Papists require in their Councels So they wil be sure that nothing shall be concluded against them The Protestants OVr conditions which we would haue obserued and kept in generall Councells are these most iust and reasonable 1 That the Pope which is a party should be no iudge for it is vnreasonable that the same man should be both a partie and a iudge and therefore he ought not to meddle with calling and appoynting Councels with ruling or moderating them seeing it is like he would worke for his owne aduantage 2 That such a time and place be appointed as when and where the Churches of Christendome may most safely and conueniently meete together not at such a time as Paulus the third called a Councell when all Princes in Christendome were occupied in great affaires nor such a place as he thē appointed at Mantua in Italie whither Princes could not come without perill of iourney and danger of life being penned in by the Popes garrisons Thus Pope or Bishop Leo for then there were no Popes writ to Martianus the Emperour to haue the Councell remoued from Calchis to Italie but hee preuayled not So Pope Eugenius would haue dissolued the Councell at Basile and brought it vnder his owne nose 3 We would haue it a free Councell where euery man might fully vtter his minde and that there should be a safe conduct graunted to al to come and goe which the Pope for all his faire promises is vnwilling to doe as it was flatly denyed to Hierome of Prage in the Councell of Constance to whome it was answered that he should haue safe conduct to come but none to goe Neither if they should giue a safe conduct were they to bee trusted for it cannot bee forgotten to their perpetuall infamie that they brake the Emperour Sigismunds safe conduct graunted to Iohn Husse in the Councell of Constance saying that faith was not to be kept with Hereticks 4 That the matter should not bee left wholie to Bishops and Prelates but that the learned of the Clergie and Laitie besides should giue voices seeing the cause of religion is common and concerneth all But most of all that nothing bee carried with violence or popularitie against the Scriptures but euery matter determined according to the truth thereof Such a Councell wee refuse not nay wee much desire which is the true generall Councell that is not generall where all men cannot speake no freedome nor libertie graunted for men to vtter the trueth where all thinges are partially handled and are swayed by one mans authoritie Wherefore the Rhemists slander vs in saying wee raile vppon general Councels annot in Act. 15.10 and that we refuse them 2. Galath 2. Whether wee or they are enemies to true generall free holy indifferent Councels let all men iudge THE FOVRTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE BISHOP OF ROME COMMONLIE CALLED THE POPE THis great and waightie controuersie conteineth tenne seuerall questions 1 Whether the regiment of the Church be Monarchicall 2 Whether Peter were the Prince of the Apostles and by our Sauiour Christ made head of the Church 3 Whether Peter were at Rome and dyed Bishop there 4 Whether the Bishop of Rome be the true successor of Peter 5 Concerning the primacie of the Bishop of Rome sixe partes of the question First whether hee haue authoritie ouer other Bishops Secondly whether appeales are to be made to Rome Thirdly whether the Pope be subiect to the iudgemēt of any Fourthly whether he may be deposed Fiftly what primacy he hath ouer other Churches Sixtly of his titles and names 6 Whether the Bishop of Rome may erre and likewise whether the Church of Rome be subiect to error 7 Of the spiritual iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome two parts First whether he can make lawes to binde the conscience Secondly whether other Bishops doe receiue their iurisdiction from him 8 Of the Popes temporall iurisdiction two parts First whether hee haue authoritie aboue Kings and princes Secondly whether he be a temporal prince 9 Of the prerogatiues of the Pope 10 Concerning Antichrist nine parts First whether Antichrist shall be some one singular man Secondly of the time of his comming Thirdly of his name Fourthly of his nation and kinred Fiftly where his place and seate shall be Sixtly of his doctrine and manners Seuenthly of his miracles Eightly of his kingdome and warres Ninthly whether the Pope bee the very Antichrist of these in their order THE FIRST QVESTION WHETHER THE Regiment of the Church be Monarchicall error 36 WE are not ignorant that the Philosophers made three formes and states of gouernement in the commonwealth the Monarchical when as the principall and soueraigne power rested in one as in the King Queene or Emperor as Rome sometime was ruled by Kings and many yeares after by Emperors Secondly the Aristocratical when the commonwealth was gouerned by an assembly and Senate of nobles as the Romanes had a long time their Consuls and Senators Thirdly the Democratical which is the popular state when the people and multitude bare the greatest sway as
wrote for him to the Councel to be receiued agayne No maruayle then if licentious fellowes hoping to finde more fauour at Rome did appeale thither As also the ambition of the Bishops of Rome did somewhat helpe forward this matter who were as ready to receiue such appeales as others were to make them 2. Bishop Tunstal doth answere very fully to this poynt that although appeales were made to Rome yet was it not for any iurisdiction that the See had but this was the cause partly for that there were many deuisions and parts taking in the Oriental Churches as also because many were infected with heresies from the which the West Occidētal Churches were more free they were content to referre the cause many times to the Bishop of Rome as being a more indifferent iudge and not like to be partial being no partie in the cause Neither was their 〈◊〉 to the Bishop of Rome singularly but to the whole congregation of the Bishops of Italie and France or of the whole West as it appeareth by the epistles of Basile Tunstal apud Fox 1067. The Protestants That appeales ought not to be made to Rome but that all matters and controuersies may best be ended and determined at home where they doe arise It is thus confirmed 1. This matter was notably handled anno 420. in the sixt Councel of Carthage where Augustine was present with Prosper and Orosius To this Councel Pope Zozimus sent his Legate with certaine requests of the which this was one that it might be lawful for Bishops and priests to appeale from the sentence of their Metropolitanes and also of the Councel to Rome alleadging for him self a decree of the Nicene Councel The Councel of Carthage sent forthwith to the patriarkes of Cōstantinople Antioch Alexandria for a copie of the Coūcel of Nice wherein no such Canon was found that appeales should bee made to Rome but the contrary for in the sixt Canon of that Councel it was founde how all matters and all persons ecclesiasticall both Bishops and others were committed to their Metropolitanes vpon this decree the Councel of Carthage drew out certain reasons why appeales should not be made to Rome First it is not otherwise to be thought but that the grace of God is as ready at hande in one prouince as in another Secondly there is no neede to seeke any outlandish help for the partie grieued may appeale to a prouinciall or generall Councel Thirdly it were not equall nor right to appeale from the Councel to the Bishop of Rome for it is not like that God will inspire his truth vnto the Bishop and denie it to a multitude congregated in his name Fourthly no forraine or outlandish iudgement can be so vpright or iust because the witnesses cannot be present being hindered by infirmitie of sex age sicknes by whom the truth should be discussed Vpon these reasons the Councel concluded that neither any appeales should be made to Rome neither that Legates should be sent from Rome for deciding of matters And this answere they made to Zozimus first to Bonifacius and Celestinus that in short time one succeeded another And for all the B. of Rome his absolution Apiarius was againe called coram and brought to confesse his fault Fox p. 10. col 2. Now out of the Acts of this Councel and their reasons alleadged wee conclude that it is not fit conuenient nor reasonable that appeals should be made to Rome The Iesuite answereth that appeales were forbidden to be made by priests to Rome not by Bishops This is but a vaine shift for the reasons of the Councel are general against all appeales And Apiarius that appealed to Rome was a priest and no Bishop 2. We can bring the decrees of a latter Councell then this of Carthage for in the Councell of Basile it was decreed that no actions or controuersies should be brought from other countries to be pleaded at Rome which were more then foure daies iourney distant from the said court of Rome a few principall matters onely excepted apud Fox p. 697. 3. This also is flatly contrary to the rule of the Apostle that appellations should be made out of the Church a far off Is it so sayth hee that there is not a wise man amongst you no not one that can iudge amongst his brethren 1. Cor. 6.5 Ergo euery Church hath wise men sufficient in it whereby their controuersies may be ended 4. Augustine also thus writeth concerning this matter Miltiades Episcopus Romanus non sibi vsurpauit iudicium de causa Ceciliani sed rogatus imperator iudices misit Episcopos qui cum eo sederent epist. 162. Miltiades Bishop of Rome did not vsurpe or take vpon himselfe to iudge the cause of Cecilian but the Emperour being requested sent other bishops that should sit and determine the cause together with him Out of these words first we note that it had beene vsurpation and presumption for the Bishop of Rome to haue taken vpon him the iudgement of this matter not belonging vnto him vnlesse the Emperor had committed it Secondly that Miltiades did not suffer other Bishops to sitte with him as Bellarmine imagineth but he could not otherwise choyse for they were ioyned in commission by the Emperour to be iudges as well as he Thus we see what small shew or colour of title the Pope hath to heare or receiue appeales from other countries THE THIRD PART WHETHER THE Pope be subiect to the iudgement of anye The Papists error 43 THe Pope neither can nor ought to bee iudged either of the Emperour or anie other Seculare or ecclesiasticall Magistrate no not of any generall Councel Bellarmin cap. 26. Nay hee should doe iniurie vnto GOD to submit himselfe to the iudgement of any Iacobat ex Tilhemann de pontif rom err 34. Beside certayne blinde canons and constitutions and a fewe examples grounded vpon the insolent practises of Popes they haue no other arguments either out of scripture or drawen from reason to confirme this their hideous and monstrous opinion withal Bellarmine reasoneth thus the Prince is not to bee iudged by the commonwealth but is greater then his kingdome the Pope is the prince of the Church Ergo We answere First concerning the Princes high and Soueraigne authority we will not now dispute we make it not infinite the word of God must bee a rule and square both of ciuill and ecclesiasticall iudgement Secondly It is sufficient for vs here to answere that the Iesuite hath sayd nothing for this which he assumeth for a reason is the greatest matter in question between vs and so great an vntruth he hath vttered that he is constrained to leaue scripture and seeke helpe else-where But he shall neuer by any good reason or sufficient authority prooue that the Pope hath any such Princedome in the Church as he would beare vs in hand The Protestants THat the Pope as well as other ecclesiasticall persons ought to be and is by right subiect to the
chiefe citie in all the world this reason was rendered in the Councel of Chalcedon Can. 28. An other cause thereof was the ample priuiledges and immunities which the Emperours endued it withall as Constantine the great and Gratianus the Emperour made a lawe that all men should reteyne that religion which Damasus of Rome and Peter Bishop of Alexandria did hold A third cause was the vnquiet estate of the Greeke Church who often voluntarily referred their matters to the Bishop of Rome as being lesse partiall and a more indifferent Iudge they themselues being diuided and rent into sects And hereupon and other like causes it came about that the Bishop of Rome a little stepped aboue his fellowe Patriarkes but yet had no such preeminent authoritie as to commaund them Fourthly the Pope of Rome being thus tickled with vayne glorie because they were reuerenced of other Churches many matters were committed vnto them and their consent required vnto the decrees of Councels when they were absent Hereupon they laboured euery day more and more to aduance that See taking euery small occasion that might helpe forward their ambicious desire till Anno. 606. or somewhat after Boniface the 3. obtayned of wicked Phocas the Emperour who murthered his master the Emperour Mauritius and his children to come to the Empire and was after slaine himselfe of Heraclius that succeeded him of him I say Boniface for himselfe and his successors obtayned to bee called vniuersall Bishops ouer the whole Church and the See of Rome to haue the preeminence aboue all other Churches in the world Afterward in Pope Zacharie his time the proude and insolent iurisdiction of Rome was established by Pipinus King of France who aspired to the Crowne and obtayned it by the sayd Popes meanes first deposing Childericus the rightfull King and dispensing with the oath which the French men had made before to Childericus Calum Institut 4. cap. 7. sect 17. Thus then it sufficiently appeareth that the primacie of Rome which it now vniustly challengeth ouer other Churches is not of any such antiquitie as they would beare the world in hand neither that it had the beginning from Christ but both the time when and the authors by whom it began may bee easily assigned 2 Wee neede no better argument to proue that the primacie of Rome hath not his originall from Christ then the Iesuites owne confession First he sayth that it doth not depend of Christs institution but ex Petri facto of Peters fact that the Bishop of Rome should bee rather Peters successor then the Bishop of Antioch or any other It is not iure diuino saith he by Gods lawe neither is it ex prima institutione pontificatus quae in Euangelio legitur of the first institution whereof wee reade in the Gospell And agayne Romanum pontificem succedere Petro non habetur expresse in scripturis It is not expressely set downe in scripture that the Bishop of Rome should succeede Peter but it is grounded onely vpon the tradition of Peter Nay he saith further that Peter needed not to haue chosen any particular place for succession and he might as well haue chosen Antioch as Rome Ergo neither is the succession of Rome grounded vpon scripture neither any commandement of Christ for then Peter could not haue had free choyse to appoynt his successor where he would himselfe as the Iesuite saith if he had had any especiall direction or commaundement from Christ. So then marke I pray you they cannot proue out of scripture that the Bishop of Rome ought to succeede Peter in the chiefe Bishopricke but onely that Peter had the chiefe Bishopricke committed to him and his successors in generall whosoeuer they should appoynt Ergo the Bishops of Rome by their owne confession can alleadge no scripture institution or commandement of Christ for the primacie of the Church to bee annexed to the See of Rome and yet agaynst their knowledge they will alleadge scripture to colour the matter withall Bellarm. lib. 2. de pontif ca. 17. 3 Augustine saith Secundum honorum vocabula quae iam ecclesiae vsus obtinuit episcopatus presbyterio maior est The office of a Bishop is aboue the office of a Priest according to the names of honour which the Church by custome hath obtayned If then the difference of those two offices both named in scripture did arise rather and spring of the custome of the Church which thought it good to distinguish them for auoyding of schisme and is not grounded vpon the authoritie of scripture much lesse can the Pope whose neither name nor office is expressed in scripture fetch from thence any shew of proofe for his vsurped primacie THE SIXT PART OF THIS QVESTION CONCERning the proud names and vayne glorious titles of the Pope The Papists BEllarmine setteth downe to the number of fifteene glorious names which error 46 haue been of old giuen as he saith to the Bishop of Rome whereby his primacie ouer other Bishops is notoriously knowne but the principall are these He is called the Pope and chiefe Father the prince of Priests or high Bishop the Vicar of Christ the head of the Church the Prelate of the Apostolike See vniuersall Bishop These sixe names or titles they doe appropriate to the See of Rome Bellarm. de Roman pontif lib. 2. cap. 31. The Protestants WE will shewe by Gods grace that these sixe seuerall titles and names aforesayd are either such as ought not in their sense to be attributed to any Bishop nor any mortall man or els were common in ancient times as well to other Bishops as to him of Rome 1 For the first name of Pope it is deriued from the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in the Syracusane language is as much as Father which name was indifferently giuen to other Bishops which were famous in the Church for their vertue and learning As Cypriane Epiphanius Athanasius were called Papae Popes Augustine saluteth Aurelius President of the 6. Councel of Carthage by the name of Pope Epistol 77. Likewise those two epithetes of the Pope as to bee called Beatissim sanctissim pater most holy and blessed father were vsed in the stile of other Bisshops Prosper in his Epistle to Augustine twise calleth him Dominum beatissimum papam Lord most blessed Pope Tom. 7. Hierome calleth Epiphanius Beatum papam blessed Pope Ad Eustach Fabiol Augustine writing to Petrus the Presbyter or Priest being no Bishop yet thus saluteth him Ad sanctitatem tuam scripsit he hath written to your holines Nay in his booke dedicated to Renatus a lay man neither Priest nor Bishop thus he writeth Hinc angor quòd sanctitati tuae minus quà m vellem cognitus sum This grieueth me that I am not so well knowne to your holines as I desire If then these titles of holinesse and blessednesse were not onely giuen to Bishops but Priests also yea vnto lay men of vertuous and holy life what colour or
owne sonnes for to enrich the See of Rome as Augustine very well saith Qui vult exhaeredato filio ecclesiam haeredem facere quaerat alterum qui suscipiat non Augustinum immo deo propitio nullum inueniat He that would make the Church his heire and defeate his own children let him seeke some bodie else to accept of his gift surely Augustine wil not nor I trust any honest man beside The Protestants FIrst we willingly grant that the Church may inioy those teÌ„porall possessions which haue been of old granted vnto it for the better maintenance thereof so they bee not abused to riot and excesse as the Leuites beside their tithes had their cities and fieldes Numb 35. Secondly the iudgement of Ecclesiasticall matters doth of right appertaine to the Church as Amariah the Priest was the chiefe in all matters of the Lord 2. Chron. 19.11 Thirdly we doe not vtterly exclude spirituall persons from temporall causes but as the ciuill Magistrate hath his interest in ordaining of Ecclesiasticall lawes so spirituall persons ought not to be strangers from the ciuill state being meete men for their knowledge and conscience to be consulted withall and conferred with and to be ioyned in Councell with the Magistrate in difficult matters as wee reade Deuter. 17.8 How the high Priest and chiefe iudge did ioyne in mutuall helpe and assistance But that any spirituall person may bee a temporall prince and haue the chiefe gouernement of both states and handle both swordes we say it is contrarie to the word of God for in these three poyntes standeth chiefly the office of the prince in making and ordaining ciuill lawes in hauing power of life and death in proclaiming of warre and waging of battayle with none of these ought Ecclesiasticall persons to deale as we will now shew in order 1 Concerning the making of ciuill lawes and statutes though the Ecclesiasticall bodie according to the ancient custome of this land haue their suffrage and voyce and doe giue consent yet the chiefe stroke in alowing confirming and enacting of such lawes is in the prince and cannot agree or bee matched with any spirituall office Saint Paul saith Who is sufficient for these things that is for the work of the Ministerie 2. Cor. 2.16 If therefore spirituall persons suffice not to execute to the full their spirituall charge though they should bend all their studie and care that way much more insufficient shall they be if they be entangled in temporall affayres for the well guiding and ordering whereof a whole man likewise is scarce sufficient Againe saith he no man that warreth entangleth himselfe with the affaires of this life 2. Timoth. 2.4 By affaires seculare here are not onely vnderstoode as the Iesuite imagineth merchandise traffike buying selling and such like but the care and charge also of ciuill gouernement of making lawes and orders for the ciuill state which must needs bee a great let to the spirituall busines and require greater studie and labor then the other baser workes which are named To this Augustine agreeth Quo iure saith he defendis villas Vnde quisque possidet quod habet Iure humano iure imperatorum quare quia ipsa iura humana per imperatores reges seculi Deus distribuit generi humano tract in Ihoann 6. By what law doest thou defend thy possessions by the lawe of man the lawe of the Emperors for these humane lawes by Gods ordinance are giuen vnto men by the Emperors and Kings of the world See then ciuill lawes and humane constitutions are giuen and made not by the Pope Priest or any other Prelate but onely by Kings and Princes and the ciuill magistrates 2 It were a moÌ„strous an vnnatural thing that any Ecclesiastical gouernor should haue power of life death for he hath no better right to the ciuil sword then the prince to the Ecclesiasticall sword and if it be not lawfull for the ciuill Magistrate to excommunicate which is as the spiâ—tuall sword and the greatest censure of the Church no more is it to be suffered that by the authoritie or commaundement of any Ecclesiasticall person any man should bee put to death The high Priest was not to deale with matters of bloud which touched the life but the offenders were brought to the gates of the citie where the magistrates sate Deuter. 17.5 Not to the temple where the priest ministred Nay we see that in the most corrupt times of the Iewish common-wealth namelie when they put our blessed Sauiour to death the priests did not challenge any such power It is not lawful say they for vs to put any to death Iohn 18.31 But that power was in the temporall Magistrate as Pilate said to Christ Knowest thou not that I haue power to crucifie thee and power to loose thee Ioh. 19.10 Ergo the Pope cannot bee a temporall prince to haue power of life and death 3 If the Pope be a temporall prince then hee may wage battaile which although the Iesuite dare not plainely affirme yet it followeth necessarilie vpon his assertion for it is lawfull for any temporall prince to make warre And it hath been the common practise of Popes and popish prelates so to doe There were great bitter battailes fought betweene Vrbane the sixt and the Antipope Clement in the which on the one side there were 5000. slaine Fox pag. 434. Henry Spenser a lustie young bloud Bishop of Norwich was the Popes Captaine generall in France where he sacked the towne of Grauenidge and put man woman and childe to the sword So Pope Iulius cast his keyes into the Riuer Tybris and tooke himselfe to his sword waged many battailes and at the last was encountred withall by Lewes the French King vpon Easter day where there was of his army slaine to the nuÌ„ber of 16000. But these warlike affaires of the Pope misliked the Papists themselues for hee was therefore condemned in the Councell of Turone in France Anno. 1510. We may see how well these furious Popes doe followe the rule of Christ who coÌ„maunded Peter to put vp his sword into his sheath If it were not lawfull for Peter to strike with the sword how is it lawfull for the Popes that I am sure dare not challenge more to themselues then was lawfull for Peter Thus wee see how absurd a thing it is that the Pope should bee a temporall Prince THE NINTH QVESTION OF THE PRErogatiues of the Pope BEside these priuiledges and immunities of the See of Rome which hitherto we haue spoken of both in spirituall and temporall matters there are other prerogatiues which haue been in times past giuen to the Bishops of Rome most blasphemous wicked which the Papists of this age are ashamed of and therefore passe them ouer with silence for Bellarmine saith nothing of them Wee will therefore spare our labor in confuting of them they are so grosse and absurd but onely bring them forth that the godly reader may vnderstand the
is earned and deserued it is no almes The Protestants FIrst we say that no idle persons ought to be maintained in a Christian commonwealth but they that haue not any other necessary calling should labour with their hands and therefore Monkes that are fit for no other seruice in the Church ought to labour and worke 1 Saint Paul giueth a general rule He that will not worke let him not eate 2. Thessal 3.10 speaking of those that haue no necessarie calling in the Church Ergo Monkes must worke or els by S. Paules rule not eate The Rhemists answere that this is but a naturall admonition or counsel Nay it is a precept and commandement that all in their seuerall places and callings should labour none liue idlely for S. Paul saith not this I counselled you but this I warned you of or denounced vnto you and he calleth those that followed not this rule inordinate walkers 2 Againe if you will needes haue Monks let them be as they were in times past for then they were lay men and laboured with their hands till anno 606. when Boniface made a decree that Monkes might vse the office of preaching and Christening but before that Monks were forbidden by the generall Councel of Chalcedon not to entermeddle with matters Ecclesiasticall Fox pag. 154. But perhaps they will say as they doe that some of them work as their Nunnes And I pray you why not their Monkes too I thinke their great bellies hinder them Neither are their Monkes altogether idle for some of them in painting caruing grauing and garnishing their Idols are very cunning But according to the saying they might better be idle then ill occupied and as good neuer a whit as neuer the better 3. Neither is it to be permitted that Friers should get their liuing by begging for what are they els but valiant beggers First there ought to be no beggers in the common-wealth as Deuteron 15. Though the Lord say that they should neuer be without poore or beggers which should want their helpe vers 11. Yet vers 5. this charge is giuen that by them that is their default there should not be a begger in Israel they should so prouide for the poore that they neede not go a begging There are also positiue lawes to restraine the number of beggers and therefore there is no reason that by a number of idle vagrant persons belli-god Friers that begging order should be enlarged Secondly but seeing it can not bee chosen but there must needes be some beggers they ought not to bee young sturdie lubbers that are able to worke as most of the Friers were but such as are described Luk. 14.21 where the King saith to his seruants Goe out quickly and bring hither the poore the maimed the halt the blinde Ergo such lusty fellowes ought to liue by the sweate of their browes not to eate vp the bread of the poore Lastly in the sermons Ad fratres in eremo which are ascribed to Augustine thus we reade Eia fratres mei semper boni aliquid facite quem tadet orare vel psallere non desistat quem taedet orare vel psallere manibus laborare non desistat My brethren alwaies bee ye doing of some good if you bee wearie of praying sing if of singing then labour with your hands And in the same place old men onely of 80. yeere old are exempted from working And in another place Augustine sheweth that the Monkes in his time did so plye their worke Vsque adeo vt etiam naues oneratas in ea loca mittant qua inopes incolunt that they sent shippes laden with necessaries vnto those places where the poore inhabited De morib eccles cap. 32. Ergo in Augustines time Monkes liued not by begging but with labour of their hands Thus by Gods goodnes we haue finished this question and this whole Controuersie One other question remaineth whether the Monasticall life be meritorious or not which we haue referred to another place when we shall come to the question of Virginitie in generall and the priuiledges thereof THE SEVENTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE CIVIL MAGISTRATE MAny things which Bellarmine in this controuersie laboureth to proue are agreed vpon betweene vs and our aduersaries and therefore we will spend no time in them 1 We teach as well as they that there ought to bee Magistrates Princes and gouernours amongst Christians contrarie to that which the Anabaptists hold that there ought to bee equalitie among Christians The holy Ghost Iudg. 17.6 19.1 maketh this the cause of al disorder At that time in Israel there was no King amongst them but euery man did that which seemed good in his owne eyes 2 We doe hold that euen wicked Kings and Tyrants haue power ouer the goods and liues of men neither that it is lawfull to disobey them but in matters onely belonging to our conscience where it is better to obey God then men Ieremy 27.6 I haue giuen saith the Lord all these lands to Nabuchadnezzar 3 Concerning the power of Princes we grant that they may make lawes and ordinances to gouerne the people by Prou. 8.15 that they may punish the offenders of their lawes Rom. 13. They doe not beare the sword for nought That it is lawful for Christian Princes vpon iust occasion to wage battaile Luk. 3.14 Iohn Baptist doth not condemne the calling of Souldiers but teacheth them to vse it aright These things then being agreed vpon on both sides the seuerall questions wherein we differ from them and they from the truth are these 1 Concerning the authoritie of the Prince in Ecclesiasticall matters three parts of the question First whether he haue power ouer persons Ecclesiasticall Secondly whether ouer their goods Thirdly whether in Ecclesiasticall causes 2 Whether the ciuill Magistrate may prosecute heretikes to death and whether he ought to be the Iudge of heretikes with other like questions 3 Whether the positiue and ciuill lawes of Princes doe binde their subiects and oblige them simply in conscience This matter we haue discussed before Controuer 4. quaest 7. part 1. 4 Whether the Pope ought or may excommunicate the Prince or Emperour or otherwise hath any temporall iurisdiction aboue him this question also is handled before Controu 4. quaest 8. part 1. THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING THE AVthoritie of the Prince in Ecclesiasticall matters THis question hath three parts First whether he haue power ouer the persons Ecclesiasticall Secondly whether ouer their goods Thirdly whether the Prince be chiefe in causes Ecclesiasticall THE FIRST PART CONCERNING THE AVTHOritie of the ciuill Magistrate ouer Ecclesiasticall persons The Papists THe Clergie is not bound to keepe and obserue the ciuill and positiue lawes error 98 of Princes if they be contrarie to the Canons of the Church neither ought they for any cause to bee cited before the ciuill Magistrate or to be iudged by him Bellarm. de Clericis cap. 28. It is absurd saith the Iesuite that the sheepe should iudge the
shepheard Bellarm And the Apostle willeth all men to obey their Bishops and ouerseers Heb. 13.17 and to submit themselues vnto them from which rule neither Kings nor Emperours are exēpted Prelates must be obeyed Ergo not obey Rhemist ibid. Ans. First the obedience here required we acknowledge that it ought to be yeelded by Kings Emperours to those that haue the ouersight of their soules for the Prince is bound to receiue and beleeue all true doctrine which is taught by the Pastors and Bishops of the Church agreeable to the word of God vnder paine of damnation and the Pastors are bound vnder the like paine to obey the Princes lawes made according to the word of God Secondly wherefore the spirituall obedience of the ciuill Magistrate to the word of God taught by the Pastors of the Church is no exemption of them from their ciuill obedience for euery soule is subiect to the higher powers Rom. 13.1 Fulk annot 13. Heb. sect 9 The Protestants THat Ecclesiasticall persons are subiect to temporall gouernours and are to be iudged by their lawes the scriptures speake plainly 1 Rom. 13.1 Let euery soule be subiect to the higher powers Ergo Bishops yea the Pope himselfe if he haue a soule The like sayth S. Peter 1.2.13 Submit your selues to all manner ordinance Salomon remoued Abiathar from the Priesthood and put in Sadock Paul appealed and submitted himselfe to Caesar. Againe if Priests offend and commit any grieuous sinne as of murther theft who shall punish them The ciuill Magistrate onely beareth the sword They must either grant that priests are no euill doers which were to too grosse or if they be that they are vnder the ciuill Magistrates power for he is the Minister of God to take vengeance vpon euery euill doer Rom. 13.4 In Augustines time the controuersies betweene the Catholike and Donatist Bishops were committed to the iudgement of the Emperour Ait quidam saith he Non debuit Episcopus proconsulari iudicio purgari Quasi verò ipse sibi hoc comparauerit ac non Imperator ita quaeri iusserat ad cuius curam de qua rationem deo red liturus est res illa maximè pertinebat But saith one a Bishop ought not to haue been purged before the Proconsul or ciuill Magistrate As though sayth Augustine the Proconsul did of himselfe intermeddle in this matter and was not commanded rather of the Emperour so to doe vnto whose charge that matter principally appertained and whereof he shall make account vnto God Ergo by his sentence the cause of the Bishop principally was to be iudged by the Emperour THE SECOND PART WHETHER THE PRINCE haue power ouer Ecclesiasticall goods The Papists THe goods of the Clergie both secular and Ecclesiasticall are and ought to error 99 be exempted from paying tribute to Princes yet they haue not this libertie say they by the Lawe of God but by the grant of Princes themselues Rhemist annot Rom. 13. sect 5. Bellarm. de Clericis cap. 28. Genes 47.22 27. The lands of the Priests were exempted from paying tribute Ergo it seemeth that this custome is grounded vpon the law of nature Bellarm. Ans. First the Hebrew word signifieth rather Presidents such as were the Kings officers not Priests as Tremellius sheweth who were maintained by the Kings prouision being officers of his houshold for Genes 41.45 Ioseph is sayd to marrie the daughter of Potyphar prince not priest of On. The same word Cohen is there vsed for it is not like that Ioseph would match himselfe with an idolatrous priests daughter Secondly but be it granted this was but a politike constitution for that coūtrey other Princes are not bound to Pharao his law Thirdly they gaine nothing by this but that it is an humane constitution The Protestants THat Princes haue authoritie to punish Ecclesiasticall persons offending in their goods either by displacing them or by conuerting the Church possessions by them abused to better vses we haue shewed before Contr. 5. quest 6. part 1. And that their goods ought to pay tribute subsidie taxe vnto the prince thus now it is proued 1 Our Sauiour Christ paied poll money Math. 17.25 Rom. 13. Euery soule ought to be subiect to the higher powers and there vers 5. paying of tribute is made a part of subiection the argument therefore thus followeth Clergie men are subiect to Princes therefore they ought to pay tribute 2 Ex concessis we reason thus from their owne confession That which Princes gaue to the Church vpon good cause they may take away but this immunitie not to pay tribute was first granted as they confesse to the Church by Kings and Princes Ergo they haue the same right hauing iust occasion to take it from them againe What Augustines iudgement is we haue seene in the place before alleadged THE THIRD PART CONCERNING THE PRINCES authoritie in causes Ecclesiasticall The Papists error 100 THe Prince they say hath no authoritie to giue voyce deliberatiue or definitiue in Councels concerning matters of religion nor to make lawes Ecclesiasticall concerning the same Onely they giue them authoritie to execute the Ecclesiasticall lawes made by the Church Rhemist 1. Corinth 14.16 Bellarm. de pontif lib. 1. cap. 7. 1 Kings and Princes may in their owne persons execute if they will whatsoeuer their inferiour officers do as to heare and determine causes as the Iudges and other Magistrates doe but the Prince cannot execute any Ecclesiasticall function as to preach baptize Ergo he hath no authoritie in causes Ecclesiasticall for how can the Prince impart that to others whereof he is himselfe incapable as to giue Bishops and Pastors power to ordaine to preach and such like Bellarm. Rhemist ibid. Ans. First the authoritie of ciuill Magistrates doth not giue any thing to Ecclesiasticall Ministers which appertaineth to their office as to ordaine preach baptize neither is the Prince to deale in these offices yet may the ciuill Magistrates command them to execute their charge and dueties according to the word of God Wherefore it followeth not Princes cannot execute the pastoral dueties themselues Ergo they ought not to see them executed Dauid Salomon Iehosophat Ezechia commanded the Priests to execute their office according to the law of God though it was not lawfull for them neither did they execute any thing proper to the Priests office in their owne persons neither doth any Christian Prince challenge any such right in Ecclesiasticall functions wherefore it is an impudent slander of Bellarmine which he giueth forth of our Queene Iam re ipsa Caluinistis in Anglia mulier quaedam summus pontifex And now sayth he in England the Caluinists haue a certaine woman for their chiefe Bishop De notis eccles lib. 4. cap. 9. 2 It doth not followe that the Prince might as well execute Ecclesiasticall offices as he may ciuill in his owne person if he haue authoritie ouer both No more then it followeth that because Ecclesiasticall persons doe teach both ciuill Magistrates
not haue broken them Thirdly Pentecost whereof Saint Paul speaketh was the feast of the Iewes which with other solemnities of theirs the Apostles obserued not as a portion of Christian religion but taking occasion of the meeting of the Iewes in those festiuall dayes and so doe we obserue those holy dayes for order and edification of Gods people that vse to assemble at such times Fulk Matth. 15. sec. 3. Fourthly what cause is there why Easter and Whitsontide should be tied to the Lords daye and the Natiuitie of Christ which Bellarmine confesseth was vpon the Lords day should indifferently bee kept vpon any day but that hereby wee vnderstand that it is an indifferent matter whether they should bee kept vpon the Lords day or any other and whether vpon any certaine daye or to bee left to the discretion of the gouernors of the Church to be obserued as any other occasion shall be offered Fulk annot Apocalyps 1. sect 6. Lastly we shewed Augustines opinion in the first part of this question how hee vnderstandeth that saying Psalme 118. This is the day which the Lord hath made onely of the Sabboth thereby insinuating that other holy dayes either were not instituted of God at all or else not with the like necessitie THE FOVRTH PART OF THE solemnities of Saintes The Papists error 69 1. THey hold that holy dayes may be dedicated vnto Saints for their honor and worship as Christ promised that the charitable act of Marie Magdalene wrought vpon him should be recorded and remembred Matth. 26. vers 13. Hereby we learne that the good workes of Saintes may be recorded to the honor of Saints in the Church whereof arise their commemorations and holy dayes Rhemist annot Matth. 25. sect 1. The Protestants 1. THe good works of Saints may be remembred to the honor of God without their holy dayes and commemorations Christ instituted no holy day of Mary Magdalene nor commanded an image of her fact to be made but a memorie of her in preaching the Gospel Fulk ibid. Secondly we graunt that Christian solemnities may be kept as things indifferent which the Church may retaine or abrogate as it shall seeme best for edification not obserued of necessitie as a part of the worship of God nor consecrate to the honor of Saints seeing al diuine worship is wholly to be reserued to God not to be giuen to any other For times and seasons the scripture saith the Lord hath put onely in his owne power therefore he is onely to haue the honor of them Act. 1.7 Thirdly what honor is due vnto Saints Augustine sheweth Colimus martyres eo cultu dilectionis societatis quo in hac vita coluntur sancti homines Dei Wee doe honor Martyrs with the seruice of loue and fellowship as holy men are honored in this life But it is not lawful to consecrate times and dayes to holy men liuing therefore neither to Saints departed for one and the same kind of honor is due to them both The Papists error 70 2. THey maintaine that there may bee holy dayes and commemorations of all Saints as Christ promiseth there should bee of Mary Magdalene Rhemist Matth. 25. sect 1. The Protestants THis is another principal fault which we finde complaine of in their holy dayes that they haue pestred the Church with such a number of Saints and Saints dayes First as we haue partly shewed before they appointed a seuerall Saint almost for euery purpose as here we haue set it downe Saint Leonard for captiues Saint Rochus for the pestilence Saint George for warre Saint Anna giueth riches Saint Nicholas and Christopher for the sea Saint Apollonia for the toothake Saint Otilia for the eyes Saint Margaret for women in trauell Saint Laurence keepeth from the fire Saint Catherine giueth wit learning Saint Iohn against poyson Saint Quirine for the fistula Saint Protasius and Geruasius helpe to bewray theft And thus is it true of them as Ieremie complained of the Idolatrous Israelites that their gods were after the number of their cities Ierem. 2.28 In like manner also haue they multiplied their Saints dayes for beside the festiuals of Christ the holy Ghost and of the Apostles they haue added these besides Saint George his day Corpus Christi Assumption of Mary Natiuitie of Mary Conception of Mary The birth dayes of the Apostles Magdalenes Laurence The Dedication feast Martin their holy dayes Nicholas their holy dayes Catherine their holy dayes Anne their holy dayes Beside in the Dioces of Salisburge fifteene festiuals of Saint Rubert with many more whereof some of them are blasphemous as to keepe the Conception of Mary in remembrance that shee was conceiued without sinne some of them fabulous and forged as the Assumption of Mary in memorie of her Assumption in body to heauen which is a meere fable But all the rest are idolatrous and superstitious ordained for the honor and worship of creatures And thus haue they cumbred the people of God with their infinite obseruations So that the Lorde saith to them concerning their feastes as vnto the Israelites They are a burden vnto mee I am wearie to beare them Isai. 1.14 In Augustines time or who else it was that made those Sermons when there were nothing so many festiuals as now among Papists yet more then needed he writeth thus in a sermon vpon a festiuall Laetus sum hodierno die propter tantam festiuitatem sed aliquantulum tristis quia non video tantum populum congregatum quantus congregari debuit I am glad to daye because of this festiuall day and somewhat grieued withall that the people resorte not in such frequencie as they should We may see by this that euen then the people began to wax wearie of their many holy dayes The Papists THey enioyne sanctification and necessarie keeping of all their festiuities and holy dayes and so make no difference betweene the obseruation of error 71 holy dayes appointed of GOD and others ordained of men requiring the like strictnes in keeping of them all Rhemist Annot. Galat. 4. sect 5. The Protestants THere are no dayes necessarie to be kept but those that are of the Lords appointment the rest being voyde of superstition may be celebrated as indifferent and therefore not to be commaunded with the like strictnes as is the Lords daye There is greater libertie vpon holy dayes for bodilie labour then vppon the Sabboth for bodilie rest vppon the seauenth day is commaunded of GOD bodily labour vppon all other dayes permitted and may without offence of conscience bee vsed when it is not by the lawfull authoritie of the gouernors of the Church vppon iust occasion restrained as during the time of publike praiers and fastes hearing of the word and such like The rest of the Sabboth so far as it helpeth our preparation and fitnes to spirituall exercises and is a part of sanctifying the Lords day bindeth simplie in conscience because it is the commaundement of GOD but
festiuities of her Conception and Assumption be not kept she should haue none at all and so be thought worthie of lesse remembrance then any other Saint Galat. 4. sect 5. Rhemist The Protestants 1. WE doe not celebrate any festiuall daies in the honour of creatures neither of the Virgine Mary nor any other Saint but only to the honor of God and therefore the feasts of the Annuntiation and Purification may much better be receiued because they belong and are referred vnto Christ then the other festiuities of the assumption and conception of Mary the institution whereof was most superstitious the one for the fayned assumption of her bodie which your owne writers are vncertaine of the other to maintaine the heresie of the Franciscanes that she was conceiued and borne without sinne As for the memorie of the Virgine Mary it may better be kept then by such festiuities as our Sauiour Christ taught to keepe the remēbrance of Mary Magdalene by preaching the Gospell Math. 26.13 Fulk annot Act. 1.7 And if they only are Catholike generations that call her blessed in keeping these festiuities in her memoriall then there were no Catholike generations for many hundred yeeres after and so do you condemne the age of the Apostles for neither then nor many yeres after were these superstitious festiuities heard of But Mary saith in her song From henceforth euen from this time forward shall all generations call me blessed so that if her blessednesse had consisted in the memorie of those daies they should immediatly haue been kept especially the day of her natiuitie Fulk Galath 4. sect 5. 2. We doe allow all praise giuen vnto the Virgine without the dishonour of God and her Sonne and Sauiour Christ we doe acknowledge the honour that God vouchsafed her not to be a meritorious or principall efficient cause of our redemption but onely an holy vessell and instrumentall cause of the conception and birth of Christ by whose only merite and worthines our redemption is perfited as by a proper and principall and onely meritorious efficient cause thereof And therefore those are blasphemous titles which are giuen vnto her to call her the ladder of Heauen and gate of Paradise and such like and so in a manner to make her our redeemer Augustine saith She was more happie in that she conceiued the faith of Christ then in conceiuing the flesh of Christ. If then these titles be vnmeet for her in respect that she receiued the faith of Christ which is common to al the children of God then are they more vnfit in that she conceiued the flesh of Christ. 3. It is great presumption to thinke that the Virgine Mary may command her sonne in heauen seeing she had no authoritie to command him vpon earth in any thing pertaining to his office Ioh. 2.4 And now likewise that carnall respect of children to their parents ceaseth in the kingdome of God As for that superioritie higher kind of honour which she hath aboue al the Saints beside we finde no warrant out of scripture She is respected now in heauen not as she bare the flesh of Christ but as she liued by faith in Christ she also reioyced in God her Sauiour The scripture therefore maketh one condition and estate of all that shall be saued and sayth generally of all of others as well as the Virgine Christs mother That they shall be as the angels in heauen Matth. 22.30 Yea our Sauiour sheweth that Whosoeuer doth the wil of God is his sister brother and mother Math. 12.50 By the which we learne that other the faithfull seruants of GOD may by their faith in Christ be as well accepted of God as if they had borne Christ in the flesh Where then is that high dignitie which she hath as the mother of Christ aboue all Saints Augustine saith Tu concinis sine fine choris coniuncta Angelis Archangelis sociata Thou O Virgine doest reioyce being ioyned vnto the heauenly quire being associated to Angels and Archangels He maketh her not Ladie or Queene of heauen but onely a fellow companion of the Saints and Angels AN APPENDIX OR FIFT PART OF THE MErites of the Virgine and of the Aue Maria. The Papists 1. THey doe teach and hold that she onely amongst all women deserued to error 84 beare the redeemer of the world and so by her merites obtained that fauour to be the mother of Christ. Argum. The Angel saluteth her calleth her Full of grace which sheweth the prerogatiue that she had aboue other women and the worthines that was in her Rhemist Luk. 1. sect 12.15 The Protestants Ans. 1. Wee acknowledge that herein she was blessed aboue all other women in that she was chosen to be the mother of our Sauiour and that she was endued fully with the graces of the holy Ghost but those graces she had not of her selfe but of the free gift of God without her merites 2. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth freely beloued not full of grace as it is likewise taken Ephes. 1.6 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He hath made vs accepted in his beloued Sonne 3. She her selfe confesseth her selfe in her song to bee of a lowe degree poore in spirit and hungrie whom God in mercie looked vpon Luk. 1.50 whereas God sent away the proud and rich as the proud Pharisie that thought himselfe rich of good workes obtained nothing of God Luk. 18. Wherefore if she had stood vpon her owne deserts she had made her selfe rich not poore neither should she haue magnified the mercie of God but his iustice for when a reward is giuen according to desert it is of his iustice and not mercie Augustine thus commenteth vpon the words of her song Magnificet animae mea Dominum recordetur quomodo nullis suis praecedentibus meritis sed sola dei bonitate sit ab iniquitate saluata Let my soule praise the Lord and remember how that not by any merites going before but through the only gracious goodnes of God it is deliuered from sinne Ergo Mary not saued by her merites nor consequently the mother of Christ by her merites but onely by the meere fauour of God The Papists 2. THey much commend the often vsing of the Aue Mary which is done say error 85 they to the honour of Christ and our Ladie Argum. They be the very summe and abridgement of the whole Gospell and therefore to be vsed Rhemist Luk. 1. sect 11. The Protestants 1. You do shamefully abuse those words in making a praier of them which was but a forme of salutation vsed by the Angel neither can you say them in that sense they were vttered in by the Angel Also you offend in the vaine repetition of them vpon your beades as the heathen did Math. 6.7 and in committing idolatrie in the inuocating of the Virgine and praying vnto her in these words who is a creature and not a God to be called vpon 2. What mysterie soeuer be contained
how all men are iustified before God and what is the vse of the sacraments in all men and therefore it is no extraordinary or exempt case but the common case of all the faithfull that righteousnes saith the Apostle might be imputed to them also Rom. 4. 11. Secondly although Isaac with many other were first circumcised and after iustified yet this is perpetuall they were no more iustified by circumcision then Abraham who was iustified before he was circumcised but by faith onely and therefore the Sacraments are seales of the iustice of faith whether the iustice of faith goe before or follow after Argum. 2. Augustine saith In Isaac qui octauo die circumcisus fuit praecessit signaculū iustitiae fidei et quoniam patris fidem imitatus est secuta est in crescente ipsa iustitia cuius signaculum in infante praecesserat In Isaac who was circumcised the eight day the seale of the righteousnes of faith went before and because he did follow his fathers faith as he grew iustice it selfe followed the seale whereof went before in his infancy Ergo circumcision was a seale as well to Isaac as to Abraham and so consequently to all THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE efficacie and vertue of the Sacraments THis question also hath diuerse partes First whether the Sacraments do giue or conferre grace by the worke wrought Secondly of the difference of the Sacraments of the olde and new testament Thirdly whether the Sacraments of the new law doe imprint a signe or character in the soule that can neuer be put out Fourthly of the necessity of the Sacraments THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE SACRAMENTS of them selues doe giue or conferre grace The Papistes error 92 THe Sacraments giue grace ex opere operato by the worke wrought that is by force and vertue of the worke and word done and said in the sacrament Rhemist Act. 22. sect 1. So that not faith onely iustifieth but the Sacraments also and other workes of religion Rhemist Rom. 6. sect 5. The Sacraments then are immediate instruments and efficient causes of our iustification not mediately as they nourish and encrease our faith but properly and in themselues Faith in the receiuer giueth no efficacie to the Sacrament but onely taketh away the lets and impediments which might hinder the efficacie of the Sacrament as the drynes of the wood maketh it to burne the better yet is it no efficient cause of the burning which is the fire onely but onely a helpe Thus they compare the Sacrament working of it selfe to fire that burneth and faith is as the drying of the wood but a disposing and preparing of the hart Bellarm. lib. 2. de sacram cap. 1. Argum. 1. Be baptized and wash away thy sinnes Act. 22. ver 16. The Sacrament of Baptisme doth of it selfe wash away sinnes Rhemist And we see in S. Iames that remission of sinnes is annexed to the vnction with oyle Rhemist 1. Timoth. 4.14 Ergo the Sacraments giue and conferre grace Ans. 1. To the first we answer that the text ioyneth with the Sacrament the inuocation of the name of God to the which saluation is promised Rom. 10.13 to wash away sinnes wherefore that place maketh nothing for your purpose Secondly in the other place health of body is promised by the gift of miracles but remission of sinnes is said to be obtained by the praier of the Elders The praier of faith shall saue the sick Iam. 5.15 Argum. 2. S. Paul saith He hath cleansed his Church by the lauer of water in the word Ephes. 5.26 Ergo baptisme is an instrumental cause of our iustification Bellarm. Ans. 1. It is not vnusuall in the Scripture to call the signe or Sacrament by the thing signified as Exod. 12.11 the Paschall Lambe is called the Passeouer whereas it was but a signe and memoriall thereof So Baptisme is called The lauer of regeneration Tit. 3.5 because it is a sure signe of our regeneration by the holy Ghost Secondly the Apostle in this place expoundeth himselfe for he saith that We are washed by water in the word that is the outward element doth send and referre vs to the word and promise of God whereof it is a seale The Protestants THe sacraments haue no power to giue or conferre grace to the receiuer neither are they immediate instruments of our iustification instrumentall meanes they are to encrease and confirme our faith in the promises of God of themselues they haue no operation but as the spirit of God worketh by them our internall senses being moued and quickened by those externall obiects Neither doe we say that the sacraments are bare and naked signes of spirituall graces but they doe verily exhibite and represent Christ to as many as by faith are able and meete to apprehend him So to conclude looke how the word of God worketh being preached so doe the sacraments but the word doth no otherwise iustifie vs but by working faith at the hearing thereof So sacraments doe serue for the encrease of our faith faith is not a seruant and handmaide to the sacraments as the Iesuite declared by the homely similitude of the fire and drie wood but faith is the more principall and the sacraments haue no other vse or end then as they are helpes for the strengthening of our faith Grace of themselues they can giue or conferre none Argum. 1. Rom. 1.17 The iust shall liue by faith Ergo he liueth not that is he is not iustified by any worke wrought as by the sacraments but onely by faith faith therefore giueth life and efficacie to the sacramentes it is not contained absolutely in themselues Againe Saint Paul saith That faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnes before he was circumcised Rom. 4.10 Ergo he was not iustified by circumcision no more are we by the sacraments but both he and we are iustified onely by faith Argum. 2. Saint Peter sayth Baptisme saueth vs not the putting away of the filth of the flesh but in that a good conscience maketh request vnto God by the resurrection of Christ 1. Pet. 3.21 Ergo it is faith in the resurrection of Christ which worketh in vs peace of conscience and not the outward washing that saueth or iustifieth Kemnitij argum Augustine thus writeth Aliud est aqua sacramenti aliud aqua quae significat spiritum dei ista visibilis est abluit corpus significat quid fit in anima per illum spiritum anima mundatur saginatur The water of the Sacrament is one thing the water which signifieth the spirit is another the one is visible and washeth the flesh and signifieth what is done in the soule but by the spirit the soule is cleansed The Sacrament of Baptisme then by this fathers sentence and so all other sacraments doe not giue grace but signifie onely and represent grace THE SECOND PART OF THE difference of the olde and new Sacraments error 93 THe sacrifices and ceremonies of the olde law were so farre
the sacrament of the Lords bodie Baptisme is equiualent to the word of God by our aduersaries own confession Ergo also it is of equall value and dignitie with the other sacrament THE TWELFTH GENERALL CONTROVERSY OF THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISME THis controuersie standeth vpon diuers questions 1. Of the name and definition of Baptisme Secondly of the partes of Baptisme Thirdly of the necessitie of Baptisme Fourthly of the Minister of Baptisme Fiftly of the parties which are to be baptized Sixtly of the effects of Baptisme Seuenthly of the difference of Christs Baptisme and Iohns Eightly of the ceremonies of Baptisme THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE NAME and definition of Baptisme COncerning the name there is no question betweene vs for the name of Baptisme hath the originall and beginning from the scripture Saint Paul vseth this word Coloss. 2.12 We are buryed with him through Baptisme And againe Heb. 6.2 All the question is about the definition of Baptisme The Papists error 98 THey define Baptisme to bee a sacrament of regeneration by water in the worde that is not which signifieth and sealeth vnto vs our regeneration and assureth vs of remission of sinnes but actually iustifieth and regenerateth vs Bellarm. lib. 1. de Baptism cap. 1. The Protestants WE rather according to the scriptures define baptisme to be a signe or seale of our regeneration and new birth whereby wee are assured that as verily by fayth in the blood of Christ we are cleansed from our sinnes as our bodies are washed with water in the name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost So that Baptisme doth not actually bestow remission of sinnes by the work wrought but is a pledge and seale of the righteousnesse of fayth as Saint Paul sayth of Circumcision Rom. 4.11 for it is not the washing of the flesh by water but the establishing of the heart with fayth and grace that saueth vs 1. Pet. 3.21 See this poynt handled more at large Controuers 11. next before quest 2. part 1. Augustine saith Per fidem renascimur in baptismate by fayth wee are borne agayne in Baptisme De tempor serm 53. It is then the proper act of fayth to regenerate vs not of Baptisme the vse and end whereof is to strengthen and increase our fayth THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE PARTES which are the matter and forme of Baptisme AS touching the matter that is the externall element vsed in Baptisme there is no question betweene vs but that it ought to bee plaine and common water Act. 10.47 Saint Peter saith Can any man forbid water that these should not bee baptized Wherefore wee condemne the foolish and vngodly practises and inuentions of heretikes that either exclude water altogether as the Manichees with others or doe vse any other element as the Iacobites that in stead of water burned them that were to be baptized with a whot yron or as the Aethiopians which are called Abissines that vsed fire in stead of water misconstruing the words of the Gospell Matth. 2.11 That Christ should baptize with the holy Ghost and with fire which is not literally to bee vnderstoode but thereby is signified the internall and forceable working of the spirite which kindleth zeale and loue in our hearts as fire Concerning the forme of Baptisme we all agree that no other is to be vsed then that prescribed by our Sauiour Christ to baptize in the name of the Father the Sonne and holy Ghost that it is neither lawfull to change this forme in sense as many heretikes haue done nor yet in words as to leaue out any of the three persons in Trinitie and inclusiuely to vnderstand them by naming of one for whereas some alleadge that place Act. 2.38 Bee yee baptized in the name of Iesus Christ for remission of sinnes to proue that it is lawfull onely in the name of Christ to baptize wee are to vnderstand that the forme of Baptisme is not in that place expresly set downe but the scope onely and end of Baptisme which is to assure vs of remission of sinnes in the name of Christ as Beza very well noteth vpon that place The point of difference betweene vs concerning the forme of Baptisme is this The Papists THey are bold to affirme that this forme of Baptisme to baptize in the name error 99 of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost is not fully concluded out of Scripture but deliuered by tradition for say they the commandement of Christ to baptize in the name of the Trinitie Matth. 28. may bee vnderstoode thus to baptize them into the faith of the Trinitie or by the authoritie of the Trinitie And it were sufficient by those words to doe and performe it in act without saying the wordes were it not that wee haue otherwise learned by tradition that this very forme of wordes is to bee kept Bellarmine de baptism lib. 1. cap. 3. The Protestants WE neede no tradition for this matter the very forme which is to bee vsed in Baptisme is plainely proued out of the Scriptures for that commandement of Christ Goe and baptize c. doth necessarily imply a forme of speech to be vsed Wee grant that in the Scriptures this word name is taken for power vertue authoritie as Act. 3.6 In the name of Iesus arise and walke So also as there is a Baptisme with water there may be a baptizing with fire Matth. 3.11 Wherefore if part of the commandement bee to bee taken properlie and literally as this Goe and baptize why not the rest also In the name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost If then the whole commaundement bee properly and plainely vnderstoode how can they baptize in the name of the Trinitie vnlesse the Trinitie bee spoken and named Secondly it appeareth also out of other places of Scripture that this forme was vsed in the Apostles time As Act. 10.47 Can any man forbid water why these should not be baptized which haue receiued the holy Ghost as well as wee As if Saint Peter should haue reasoned thus these haue receiued the giftes of the holy Ghost Ergo they may be also baptized in the name of the holy Ghost Likewise Act. 19.2 When the brethren at Ephesus had answered Paul that they had not heard whether there were a holy Ghost he saith vnto them Vnto what then were you baptized By this interrogatorie it appeareth it was their manner to baptize in the name of the holy Ghost and so consequently of the whole Trinitie Wee haue no cause then to flie vnto tradition this matter being so plainely decided by the Scripture Augustin tract in Iohann 80. Vpon those wordes of our Sauiour Iohn 15.3 You are cleane thorough the word which I haue spoken vnto you Detrahe verbum quid est aqua nisi aqua Accedit verbum ad elementum fit sacramentum Take away the word and what remaineth in Baptisme but bare water let the word be ioyned to the element and it maketh a Sacrament The forme then of Baptisme is the word which Christ
in heauen and not vpon the earth 3. What a strange saying is this that Christ giueth his flesh to be eatē in the Sacrament yet hideth it vnder the formes of bread and wine lest men should abhorre to eate it for is it to be thought that Christ would command any vnseemely thing or contrary to humanitie How could the Apostles command the Gentiles to abstaine frō strangled blood Act. 15. whē as by your doctrine they did eate dayly in their assemblies the raw flesh and blood of Christ And how is it that Christ now forgetteth his owne rule He that doth the truth sayth he commeth to the light that his deedes may be made manifest Iohn 3.21 But Christ now flieth the light shrowdeth himselfe vnder the shape of bread and wine and wil not shew his flesh These therefore are but sillie causes which you haue rendered why Christ would haue the substance of bread onely changed and not the accidents The Protestants AS the name of transubstantiation is straunge and newly deuised so is the meaning thereof most vnreasonable that in the Sacrament the substance of bread should be conuerted into the bodie of Christ the formes onely remaining An opinion contrary to scripture reason and common sense Argum. 1. As Christ said Math. 26. pointing to the bread This is my body so he sayth Iohn 6.35 I am the bread but in this place he was not changed into bread why then in the other place should the bread be turned into his body for the speech is all one Argum. 2. The bread in the Eucharist after the consecration is subiect to diuers changes and alterations and so likewise the wine for they may be boyled and made hot they may be infected with poyson for it is certaine that Victor the 3. Pope and Henry the 7. Emperour were poysoned with the Sacrament the wine may waxe sower and turne to vineger the bread may putrifie and breed wormes Ergo the substance of bread and wine remaine still for the accidents cannot be subiect to such alterations and to say that Christs bodie may be thus handled it were great impietie Argum. Pet. Martyris Bellarmine answereth Materia substituitur à Deo in ipso instanti in quo desinunt esse illae species God supplieth some other matter in the very instant when the formes begin to be changed Cap. 24. argum 6. Ans. Is not here good geare thinke you that if a man should come to poyson the Sacrament that is the bread and wine which are alreadie consecrate and made the bodie of Christ God should supplie by a miracle some other matter for him to worke vpon and so God himselfe should be accessarie vnto that wicked act Or if a sillie mouse should be so bold as gnaw vpon a consecrate Host that then likewise some other matter and substance should for that instant be appoynted and so God shall make miracles for mice And why I pray you may not the substance of bread still remaine as well as another substance to be put in the stead thereof Arg. 3. When Christ spake these words Hoc est corpus meum the bread was transubstantiate before or after or while the words were spoken Before they will not say for the elements were not then consecrate nor after for thē Christs words This is my bodie had not been true in that instant when they were spoken Neither was the transubstantiation wrought in the while of speaking for then should it not haue been done all at once but successiuely and one part after another as the words were spoken one after another But this is also contrarie to the opinion of the Papists that would haue it done all together Argum. 4. It is against the nature and propertie of accidents and externall formes to be without a subiect or substance wherein they should rest such are the whitenes and roundnes of the bread the rednes and sweetnes of wine if bread be gone what is become of the roundnes and whitenes and so of the wine If a man aske what round or white thing is this or what red and sweete thing is this shewing the cup what shall be answered we cannot say it is bread or wine for there is none left And I am sure they will not say that the bodie of Christ is either round or white or such like and yet somewhat there must needes be that must take denomination of these accidents Argum. 5. You say the very flesh of Christ that did hang vpon the Crosse is in the Sacrament but that cannot be for that flesh Christ tooke of the Virgine Mary this sacramentall flesh is made of bread Ergo it is not the same flesh which was crucified vpon the Crosse. Bellarm. The bodie of Christ is made of bread but not as any matter or materiall cause thereof but as the wine was made of water by our Sauiour Christ. Ans. And I pray you how was the wine made of the water was not the water the very matter which was turned into wine for one of these three changes and mutations it must needes haue first either the water was annihilate and turned to nothing and so the wine was created of nothing which I am sure you will not graunt secondly or els there was a mixture of wine and water the one being mingled with the other which is likewise false for it was very good and perfect wine neither I thinke will you easily admit that the bodie of Christ and the bread are mingled together in the Sacrament Thirdly there remaineth but the third kind of change that is the conuersion of one substance into another as the water was changed into wine and so is the substance of bread conuerted into the substance of Christs bodie if you will haue any chaunge at all and thus Christ hath gotten by your helpe a breaden bodie another from that which he tooke of the flesh of the Virgine Lastly the diuersitie of opinions which this grosse conceit of the carnall presence of Christ hath hatched doe easily shew and demonstrate vnto vs what we are to thinke of this popish doctrine Some doe hold that the elements doe still remaine in their owne nature in the Sacrament and that together with them the bodie of Christ is carnally present Others doe teach that there remaineth no more bread and wine but onely the verie naturall bodie of Christ of each opinion there are three sorts First of them that hold the elements not to be chaunged 1. Some are of opinion that the bodie of Christ and the elements are locally ioyned together either for that instant onely or els because of the vbiquitie and omnipresence of Christs humanitie of which opinion are the Lutherans 2. Some there were that thought onely so much of the bread to be changed into the bodie of Christ as was receiued of the faithfull and that part which the wicked receiued to be bread still 3. Others taught that the bread was assumed in the Sacrament to the
plaine case that the vncle is no more to marrie his niece then the nephew his Aunt and this being by name prohibited Leuit. 18 14.20.2 the other also is necessarily included for the same rules for degrees of kinred doe proportionably hold both in men and women wherefore such marriage is vnlawfull neither to be contracted and if it be to be dissolued 2. Concerning the marriage of brothers and sisters children there is a greater question First it cannot be proued that Zelophehads fiue daughters married their vncles sonnes that is their Cosin germanes for the Hebrewes call the nephewes sonnes as Iethros daughters are called the daughters of Raguel their grandfather Exod. 2.17 So it is very like that their husbands were their vncles sonnes sonnes as in the 12. verse it may be gathered where the text sayth They were married into the families of the sonnes of Manasses therfore not into one familie But as touching the question in hand the marriage of Cosin germanes seemeth also by some analogie to be forbidden by Moses law for if the degrees of affinitie be limited to the fourth degree as it is not lawfull for a man to marrie his wiues daughters daughter Leuiticus 18.17 why should not the line of consanguinitie hold to the fourth degree likewise And so neither the sonne to marrie his fathers brothers daughter or the daughter the sonne for heere are also foure degrees the sonne one the father two the fathers brother three the brothers sonne foure Yet this we grant that this analogie or proportion is not so strong nor doth conclude so necessarily as the other Wherefore we thus determine of this matter that it is well that the marriages of Cosin germanes are restrained by humane lawe and so they ought to be which kind of marriages may lawfully be hindered and the contract loosed but the marriage being consummate and finished it is not for this cause to be dissolued Augustine also writeth very well of this matter Quis dubitet honestiùs hoc tempore consobrinarum prohibita esse coniugia etiamsi id diuina lex non prohibeat cuius enim debet causa propinquitatis verecundum honorem ab ea contineat quamuis generatricem libidinem Who doubteth but that the marriage of Cosin germanes is honestly forbidden though the diuine lawe doe not prohibite it for to whom a man oweth a shamefast reuerence for kinred sake he ought to refraine his lust The Papists error 37 2. IT is lawful for the Church to restraine other degrees of affinitie and consanguinitie besides those prescribed by Moses and that the decrees of the Church in such cases doe bind in conscience Concil Trident. sess 24. can 3. As to prohibite marriage vnto the seuenth degree in naturall kinred Also their Canons doe make a spirituall kinred that commeth in by Baptisme Confirmation and suffer not the godfather to marrie the godchild or the godfather the godmother Likewise they haue found out an affinitie that commeth in by espousals onely of Matrimonie which bindeth say they in the first degree by the Canon law which is the first and second by the Ciuill law as that it is not lawfull for the brother to marrie her which was espoused to his brother Also another kinred and affinitie by fornication vnlawfull fleshly knowledge which bindeth in the 2. degree Canonicall which is the 3. and 4. Ciuil as it is not lawfull for the sonne to marrie his fathers bastard Bellarm. cap. 24. cap. 30. The Protestants 1. TO forbid more degrees in marriage then are either directly or by necessarie consequence prohibited in the law is a meere Antichristian yoke layd vpon the people of God for the Lord the author of that lawe best did knowe both what persons were fit for marriage and how farre the line of marriage was to extend 2. The inuention of spirituall kinred is but a popish tricke to get the more monie for their dispensations for by this reason no Christians ought to marrie together because they are all of one spirituall kinred in Christ. 3. The new affinitie that commeth by espousals is also but an humane inuention for the law speaketh onely of the kinred of the flesh which ariseth of carnall knowledge and copulation not an intent or purpose onely of marriage Leuit. 18.6 4. The last we admit for the sonne of the father begotten out of marriage is of his fleshly kinred though not lawfully and therefore in marriage matters there is respect also to be had euen of this kinred of the flesh as Ruben is cursed of his father because he lay with his concubine Genes 49.4 which notwithstanding was not his fathers wife THE FOVRTH QVESTION OF OTHER impediments of marriage THere are some impediments which may hinder and dissolue the contract of marriage before it be consummate but not after some which both may error 38 hinder the contract and dissolue the matrimonie euen after carnall knowledge The Papists 1. BEllarmine reckoneth vp diuers impediments of both kinds which may disanull the contract of marriage and dissolue the matrimonie it selfe but he maketh no mention of the consent of the parents And indeed it is their opinion that it is not a necessarie thing to be respected in marriage neither that children are bound to require the consent of their parents Cap. 19. The Protestants FIrst we doe not say that the want of the parents consent may dissolue marriage consummate after mutuall coniunction but that it may breake off the contract and espousals Secondly neither haue the parents power to bestow their children in marriage without their consent Genes 24.57 Thirdly neither must the parents exercise a tyrannicall power ouer their children in forbidding them marriage but must alway haue respect vnto their neede And thus doing their consent is necessarie and without it the contract hath no validitie 1. Corin. 7.37.38 The parent hath power to giue in marriage or not to giue There are also other causes which may dissolue contracts and espousals made as if the honest and lawfull condition propounded in the contract be not kept or if there be an error in the person he heareth afterward of her dishonestie whom he tooke for an honest woman both these may make voyd the contract error 39 but not the marriage if they be once ioyned together The Papists 2. THey set downe many impediments which may make a nullitie of marriage it selfe after it be consummate some of them we acknowledge as afterward it shall appeare but these following we doe renounce First the vow of chastitie and entring into Orders doe loose the bond of marriage Secondly if one marrie with an Infidel the marriage is not onely vnlawfull but actually voyd Bellarm. cap. 23. Thirdly he that marrieth her with whom he committed adulterie before is loose euen after marriage and the matrimonie voyd Bellarm. cap. 22. The Protestants 1. COncerning the inualiditie of vowes to disanull marriage we haue declared the truth before Controu 6. de Monachis For
IVSTIFIcation onely by fayth The Papists error 94 FAyth is not the only cause of our iustificatiō but there are other also as hope charitie almes deedes and other vertues Rhemist Roman 8. sect 6. Yea workes are more principall then fayth in the matter of iustification Iam. 2. sect 7. Whosoeuer therefore sayth that a man is iustified onely by fayth and that nothing els is required to iustification we pronounce him accursed Trident. Concil sess 6. can 9. Argum. 1. Rom. 8.24 We are saued by hope Ergo not onely by fayth Rhemist Answ. 1. We are sayd to be saued by hope not because wee are thereby iustified but because by hope we do expect and waite for our saluation which is not yet accomplished as it followeth vers 25. If wee hope for that wee see not then doe we with patience abide for it Argum. 2. Galath 5.6 Fayth that worketh by charitie Fayth then hath her whole actiuitie and operation toward saluation of charitie It doth not therefore iustifie vs alone but fayth and charitie together of the which charitie is the more principall Rhemist ibid. Answ. We graunt that it is a working fayth that doth iustifie as the Apostle here sayth but not as it worketh but as it apprehendeth and beleeueth Charitie is a principall effect of fayth and followeth it how then can fayth receiue actiuitie from charitie the effect doth not giue life to the cause You know Augustine often sayth Opera non praecedunt iustificandum sed sequuntur iustificatum Workes goe not before vnto iustification but followe in him that is already iustified But if charitie should beget fayth then workes proceeding of charitie should goe before fayth by the which wee are iustified The Apostle sayth Without fayth it is impossible to please God Hebr. 11.6 Ergo neither doth charitie please God without fayth Fayth giueth actiuitie to charitie how then can it receiue that which it giueth Argum. 3. Iam. 2.24 We see how that of deedes a man is iustified and not of fayth onely Ergo we are not iustified by fayth onely Rhemist Answ. Saint Iames is not contrary to his fellow Apostle Saint Paul who concludeth Rom. 3.28 that We are iustified by fayth without workes that is as much to say as by fayth onely And he excludeth not onely workes of nature or of the law but euen workes of grace which God hath ordayned Ephes 2.10 Therefore S. Iames in saying we are not iustified by faith onely meaneth not that iustification whereby we are made iust before God for then he should impugne Saint Pauls principles But by iustifiyng or being iustified he vnderstandeth nothing els but to be declared iust as well before men as in the sight of God which declaration is testified and shewed forth by our workes proceeding of faith Thus the word iustified is taken Rom. 3.4 That thou maist be iustified in thy words that is knowne or declared to be iust Augustine also sayth Iustificabuntur id est iusti habebuntur They shall be iustified that is counted iust as we also say Sanctificetur nomen id est sanctum habeatur Let thy name bee sanctified that is reputed and acknowledged to be holy amongst men The Protestants WE are not enemies to good workes as our aduersaries falsely charge vs nay we preach good workes we exhort to good workes we establish good workes teaching the right vse of them out of the word of God which is not to concurre or be ioyned with faith in our iustification but to follow necessarily and issue out of faith as liuely testimonies thereof to the glorie of God the example of others and our comfort but faith it is onely which as a liuely instrument ordained of God doth assure vs of our iustification by grace in Christ. Argum. 1. Saluation is ascribed onely to beleefe Mark 16.16 Act. 16.31 But it is the propertie of faith onely to beleeue not of hope or charitie the effect of hope is by patience to abide Rom. 8.25 The operations also of loue are set forth 1. Corinth 13. Where amongst other Loue is sayd to beleeue all things that is mutuall loue amongst men is not mistrustfull but taketh all things in good part but to beleeue the things of God it is the propertie onely of faith as Augustine vpon those words of the Apostle How shall they call vpon him on whom they haue not beleeued In his duobus tria illa intuere fides credit spes charitas orant In these two behold those three faith beleeueth hope and charitie pray Faith therefore onely beleeueth and so consequently onely iustifieth Enchirid. cap. 7. Argum. 2. Our iustification and saluation is of the meere grace and mercie of God not at al of any merite or desert in vs Ergo we are iustified only through faith for it is of grace that we are saued through faith Ephes. 2.8 That all is to bee ascribed onely to the mercie and grace of God the Apostle euery where sheweth Rom. 9.12 It is not in him that willeth or runneth but in God that sheweth mercie We are iustified freely by grace Rom. 3.24 What hast thou that thou hast not receiued Augustine saith Intelligenda est gratia Dei per Iesum Christum dominum nostrum qua sola liberamur à malo We must vnderstand the grace of God by Iesus Christ by the which we are onely deliuered from euill Si quid boni est magni vel parui donum tuum est nostrum non est nisi malum si quid boni vnquam habui à te recepi If there bee any good in vs much or little it is thy gift nothing is ours but the euill in vs Ergo all good things are of God and onely of his grace and therefore our iustification Argum. 3. There are many euident places which doe attribute our iustification to faith without workes Rom. 3.28.11.8 Ephes. 2.8.9 In all these places in plaine termes We are sayd to bee iustified by faith without workes As for those friuolous euasions that the Apostle speaketh of the first iustification not of the second or of the workes of nature or of the lawe not of grace we haue answered before Quaest. 2. part 3. artic 3. If they will oppose that saying of S. Iames. 2.24 we answere with Augustine Nec Apostoli sunt inter se aduersi ille dicit Abrahae opus omnibus notum in filij immolatione magnum opus sed ex fide laudo fructum boni operis sed in fide agnosco radicem The Apostles are not contrarie one to the other he sayth Abrahams worke was knowne to all in offering vp his sonne a great worke but of faith I praise the fruite but it was rooted in faith His meaning then is this that Abraham was iustified that is declared to men to be iust by this worke HERE FOLLOW SVCH CONTROVERSIES AS doe arise betweene the Protestants and Papists about the natures of Christ. WE haue now through Gods gracious assistance entreated of all those