much Chapter 9. Proouing That true Merite and condigne Merite is all one That the regenerate doe Good works and receiue reward aboue their desertes That Good workes doe follow Iustification but goe not before the same That the best Workes of the regenerate are stayned with sinne and in rigour of Iustice deserue eternall death That Good workes are so necessarie to attaine eternall life as the way and meanes by which God hath decreed to bring his chosen to it but not as the cause thereof as without them it can not be had That Good workes are the effectes of Predestination depending vpon it not it vpon them That Good workes in a godly sense may be called Meritorious that is they so please God that of mercie he rewardeth them That without the mercie and promise of God they doe not merite Heauen That Charitie is not the forme of Fayth That Fayth as a worker doth not iustifie but respectiuely as an instrument apprehending Christes merites and applying them vnto vs. That Good workes though they be neither the efficient nor the formall nor the finall cause of Iustification which euer goeth before them yet are they the materiall cause and cause sine qua non as the Schooles tearme it the cause or condition without which Iustification shall not haue effect That Good workes must be done for three respectes That Gods Promise doth not make Good workes to be condignely worthy of the reward That condigne merite of Workes was not an Article of Popish fayth for more then 1540. yeares after Christ. Chapter 10. Proouing That Transubstantiation is a Monster lately begotten in Germanie and borne in Rome Chapter 11. Proouing That popish Inuocation doth not onely make Saintes the mediatours of Intercession but also of Redemption That it maketh Saintes ioynt purchasers of saluation with Christes most sacred blood so it be not in the same degree That it was not hatched for more then 1160 yeares after Christ. Chapter 12. Of the popish Communion vnder one kind Chapter 13. Of popish priuate Masse Chapter 14. Of Pope Martins Dispensation Chapter 15 Of worshipping of Images Chapter 16. Of Church-seruice in the vulgar tongue Chapter 17. Of the peeces of popish Masse Chapter 18. Of the mysteries of the popish Masse Chapter 19. Of kissing the Popes feete Chapter 20. Of praying vpon Beedes Chapter 21. Of changing the Popes name Chapter 22. Of the Paschal Torch Chapter 23. Of the popish Pax and the mysterie thereof Chapter 24. Of the Popes Bulles Chapter 25. Of the popish Agnus-dei Chapter 26. Of Candelmas-day Chapter 27. Of the dolefull Oath which popish Byshops make to the Pope Chapter 28. Of the popish Lent-fast Chapter 29. Of the annulling of popish Wedlocke Chapter 30. Of the Popes falsely pretended Superioritie ouer and aboue a generall Councell Chapter 31. Proouing That the Fayth and Doctrine of the Church of England is the old Romane Religion The Iesuites Proeme B. C. INtending to note the principall vntruethes of Bels Pamphlet I haue thought good first to salute his Epistle and see what holsome stuffe hee presenteth in that to his Patrons T. B. I Answere First that If I should stand vpon euery falsehood slaunder and coozening tricke which the Iesuite hath published and handsomely paint him out in his best beseeming colours time would sooner fayle me then matter whereof to speake Howbeit as I meane for the most part to let passe his slaunders his rayling wordes his fooleries his absurdities his contradictions and his impertinent trifles so will I by Gods holy assistance confute all the partes and parcels of his foolish and ridiculous Pamphlet not omitting any thing of any moment in the same Secondly that our Iesuite hath passed ouer in deepe silence my principall and chiefest groundes argumentes authorities reasons as not able to say any thing against them which the iuditious and honest Reader will soone perceiue with all facilitie Thirdly that our Fryer doth but snatch at peeces heere there with the which he thought he might best deale at the least in some colourable shew of wordes But let vs hearken I pray you to that attentiuely which he saith he found in my dedicatorie Epistle B. C. The Minister falleth roundly to the matter presenting his Patrons with a tricke of his occupation in his very first entraunce his wordes be these The visible Church sayth Bell as writeth Egesippus remayned a Virgin free from all heresies and corruptions during the life of the Apostles that is to say about one hundred yeares after Christ to which time S. Iohn the Euangelist was liuing but after the death of the Apostles sayth hee errours by litle and litle crept into the Church as into a voyde and desart House This Collection which Bell hath made is powdred with lies and iugling trickes thicke and threefold Bell belyeth both Egesippus and also Eusebius whom be quoteth in the third Booke of his Historie in the two and thirtie Chapter as the relator of those wordes of Egesippus Read the place he that please no such thing shall there be found nor the name of Egesippus so much as once mentioned The Minister both abuseth his Patrons and others with a notorious vntrueth of his owne fathering that vpon Eusebius which is not there to be found Neither can this dealing of his proceed from other roote then meere malice as whose braines are employed about nothing more then the hammering of lyes cauils and corruptions against the Catholicke fayth T. B. I answere First that the Jesuites accusation which here he maketh against mee is too too grieuous and more then intollerable vnto godly eares For he chargeth mee first to haue powdred mine assertion with lyes and iugling trickes Then to haue done the same thicke and threefold Thirdly to haue belyed both Egesippus Eusebius Fourthly he impudently affirmeth that no such thing can possibly be found as I haue alleadged out of Eusebius Fiftly that my position is so false and so farre from the trueth that the name of Egesippus is not so much as once mentioned Sixtly that I haue of meere malice slaundered Egesippus and Eusebius being men of great learning Secondly that seeing the Diuell is the Father of Lyers the Jesuite may very well be thought to be his only Sonne But how shal this be prooued All that shal read his booke must needes thinke he sayth the trueth because he affirmeth it so impudently confidently I would say This text of Christes holy Ghospell may well be verified in the Jesuites their accursed Iesuited crew They loued the prayâ—e of men more then the glory of God The truth is neuer ashamed she will shew her selfe to the confusion of the newly hatched sect of Jesuites of the late start-vp Romish fayth and religion These are the expresse wordes of Eusebius as Ruffinus a very learned Father who liued aboue 1200. yeares agoe hath translated them Post haec idem scriptor
condignitie of their Workes And the Fryers answere is childish and friuolous when he denieth the loane of the Cloake to haue such virtuall and proportionate equalitie to an Hundred poundes as mans Merites haue to Glory For first the Promise is equall and holdeth in both alike Secondly the Promise doth not adde any Worthines to the worke and consequently there is still as great inequalitie after the Promise as was before the same Thirdly there is infinite distance betweene God and Man the Worke and the Reward as their Angelicall Doctor hath well obserued But the distance and inequalitie betweene the Loane of the Cloake and the Hundred poundes is finite and limited in them both Thus much for this Conclusion If any desire a larger Discourse he may peruse my Suruey and the Downe-fall of Poperie where he shall find soundly answered what possibly can be obiected against the same Note well the eleuenth Conclusion following The 8. Conclusion The doctrine of the Popish Schoole-doctors in which they affirme Charitie to be the forme of Fayth is friuolous ridiculous false erroneous and absurd I prooue it first because in thinges distinguished intrinsecally one can not be the forme of another If our Fryer deny this he will prooue him selfe an Asse Si non actu at saltem in potentia For an Asse by this graunt may be his forme and so giue him the denomination of that worthy Beast Now that Fayth and Charitie are distinct Theologicall virtues S. Paul affirmeth it so plainely as no deniall can be made thereof Secondly because of thinges in perfect essence and nature the latter can not possiblely be the forme of the former and consequently seeing Fayth goeth before Charitie Charitie cannot possiblely be the forme thereof The antecedent is euident because whatsoeuer commeth to a thing after the essentiall constitution thereof is meerely extrinsecall accidentall to the same The consequent is likewise euident because we can neither please God nor yet come to God but by Fayth in him It is the flat and constant Doctrine of the chosen vessell of our Lord Iesus Thirdly because Charitie is the effect and worke of Fayth S. Augustine prooueth it in these golden wordes Oâ—us autem fidej iâ—sa dilectinest But Charitie it selfe is the worke of Fayth This testimonie striketh dead it plainely conuinceth it is vnanswerable The 9. Conclusion Fayth though it be a worke as the Papistes truly obiect yet doth it not iustifie as a worke or qualitie neither yet for any worthinesse or condignitie in the same Explico When we teach hold and defend according to the vniforme consent of the holy Fathers and constant doctrine of the Apostle That man is iustified by Fayth onely without Workes wee neither denie Fayth to be a worke nor yet affirme it to iustifie as a worke For Fayth being taken two wayes properly according to the nature of Fayth and respectiuely as it apprehendeth his obiect it is sayd to iustifie the latter way not the former not as it is an habite in vs but as it apprehendeth Christ without vs. Wee neither make Fayth a part nor yet a cause of our iustification either efficient or formall or finall albeit I willingly graunt hold defend and beleeue that it is the materiall cause that is as the Schooles tearme it Causa sine qua non the cause without which iustification shall not haue effect Which our sauiour Christ sheweth euidently when hee telleth vs That God so loued the World that hee gaue his onely Sonne that none beleeuing in him should perish but haue eternall life And in an other place That whosoeuer beleeue not shal be condemned To which the holy Apostle is consonant when he affirmeth it impossible to please God without Fayth I graunt yet further that when there be many graduall effectes of one and the same cause then the former may fitly be teaâ—med the Materiall cause of the latter and consequently although Good workes can not be any cause of Iustification which goeth before them yet may they be the Materiall cause and causa sine qua non of Saluation which followeth them For Good workes are in sort necessarie to Saluation as is already prooued in the fourth Conclusion For as Vocation Iustification Regeneration and Glorification are the effectes of Predestination euen so by Gods holy ordinaunce being Predestinate we are called by the hearing of his Word vnto Fayth which apprehending the righteousnesse of Christ Iesus is the cause of our Iustification After we be Iustified of our Iustification proceedes Regeneration as who hauing remission of our sinnes and being ingraffed in Christ by Fayth are indewed with more aboundant Grace of his holy spirite through which we are dayly more and more Regenerate and made new creatures in Christ. After we be Regenerate out of our Regeneration spring Good workes both internall and externall as who being made Good trees begin to bring foorth Good fruits and so continuing are brought at the length of Gods free Mercie to the perpetuall possession of Eternall life For the proofe of IustificatioÌ„ by Faith without Workes I referre the Reader to my Suruay which Booke if he once peruse and ponder it seriously he can not but be fully satisfied in this behalfe The 10. Conclusion Good workes though they neither be partes nor causes of Iustification nor merite eternall Glorie condignely as is alreadie prooued yet must wee doe them for these three respectes Gods Ours our Neighbours In respect of God for these three endes First because God hath so commaunded vs This is my Commaundement that ye loue one an other as I haue loued you Againe in these words If ye loue me keepe my coÌ„mandementes Againe thus Bring foorth fruites worthy of repentance Euery Tree that bringeth not foorth good fruite shal be cut downe cast into the fire Againe thus Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thine heart with all thy soule and with all thy minde Againe in these words Bee yee therefore perfect as your heauenly Father is perfect Againe thus He chose vs in Christ that we should be holy in his sight Againe thus Wee are his workemanship created in Christ Iesus vnto good works which he hath prepared for vs to walke in Secondly for the Glory of God Let your Light so shine before men that they may see your good workes and glorifie your Father which is in Heauen Thirdly to shew our gratitude and thankfulnesse to God for which respect S Paul exhorteth the Râ—manes To offer vp their bodyes a liuely holy and acceptable Sacrifice vnto God Yea the Scriptures teach vs euery where to shew our thankefulnesse vnto God by our holy and godly liues In respect of our selues for sundry endes First to assure vs of our Election Saluation For thus is the Latine vulgar text extolled preferred before all other by the Popish Councell of Trent Quapropter
thus viz. That about the yeare of our Lord God 1529. the Duke of Saxonie with others protested publiquely and constantly against the decree of Ferdinando the Emperour that they could not with safe conscience obey and yeeld vnto the same Whereupon the aduersaries did euer since that time malitiously call all reformed Catholikes and sound Christians by the name of Protestants But as I haue prooued in the Jesuites Antepast wee are the Legitimate and reformed Catholiques and the Papistes are Bastardes and deformed Catholiques and consequently the thing truly implyed in the name Protestant is as old as the Religion deliuered by S. Peter and S. Paul to the Church of Rome Which mine Assertion shall by the power of God be made most euident before the end of this Discourse See and note well the end of the 16. Chapter and the 17. Chapter with it as also the 29.30 and 31. Chapters being the three last of this present Booke The Second Chapter of the Popes Superroyall power B. C. TO season the beginning of his Chapter with a little of his mendatious powder be writeth thus Bonifacious Byshoppe of c. T. B. To this before I answere in particular and plaine tearmes it shal not be amisse to lay open to the indifferent Reader the Popes falsely challenged Superroyall power Which I hope in God to performe most plentiously by these Conclusions following The first Conclusion The Popes owne Decrees teach vs that though he be most wicked and carry with him thousandes vpon thousandes to the chiese Diuell of Hell yet may no mortall man reproue him for his such detestable and cursed dealing These are the expresse wordes of the Popes owne Canon Si Papa c. innumerabiles populos cateruatim secum ducit primo mancipio gehennae cum ipso plagis multis inaeternum vapulaturus huius culpas istic redarguere praesumit mortalium nullus quia cunctos ipse iudicaturus a nemine est indicandus nisi deprehendatur a fide deuius These are the wordes of Pope Bonifacius as Gratianus who compiled the Booke of Decrees hath related them I heartily wish the Reader to ponder seriously what I write protesting vpon my saluation that in all mine Assertions Authorities Allegations I deale faythfully euer citing the expresse wordes as I finde them in mine Authors their authorities and reasons The second Conclusion The Popes Power is so sacred so eminent and so surpassing great as it is become flat Sacriledge to dispute of the same Victoria a most famous and learned popish schoole-Doctor who was the first man that brought Scholasticall doctrine into Spaine deliuereth this poynt of doctrine in these expresse wordes Non spectat ad subditos determinare aut examinare quid possit Papa aut quid non possit et quomodo teneantur parere vel non quia sacrilegium est disputare de potentia principis et praecipuè Papae It pertaineth not to popish vassals to determine or examine what the Pope may doe or what he may not doe and how they are bound to obey or not because it is Sacriledge to dispute of the Power of the Prince especially of the Pope Loe we may not dispute of the Popes Power no not to know and learne how and wherein wee ought to obey him This is it indeed that maketh so many sillie Papistes euery where For Papistes must beleeue all thinges but examine nothing that the Pope doth And why I pray you Forsooth least his coozening trickes and the newnesse of late Poperie should be knowne and so both the Pope and all his Iesuited Popelings be vtterly ouerthrowne The third Conclusion The Pope can deliuer if he list all men in this world from the paine due to their sinnes in this world and not this onely but also bring all soules out of Purgatorie if that be done for them which he requireth Three verie learned and famous Popish Doctors Syluester Pryeras Bartholomaeus Fumus and Vigâ—erius doe constantly resolutely affirme this conclusion Sylmester hath these expresse words Sicut potest Papa liberare a paena peccatorum debita in hoc mundo omnes qui sunt in mundo si faciant quod mandat etiamsi essent millies plures quam sunt itae liberare potest omnes qui sunt in purgatorio si quis pro ets facial quod iubet As the Pope can deliuer all in this world from paine due for sinne in this world if they doe what hee commaundeth though they were thousandes more then they bee euen so can hee deliuer all that are in Purgatorie if any doe that for them which he commaundeth And least any man should thinke that impossible which the Pope requireth to be done the same learned Writer telleth vs in an other place that it is a thing very easily done these be his wordes Indulgentiae simpliciter tantum valent quantum praedicantur modo ex parte dantis sit authoritas ex parte recipientis charitas et ex parte causae piet as Pardones are simply worth so much as they are payed so there be authoritie in the giuer charitie in the receiuer and pietie in the cause or motiue But so it is no Papist dare or can deny the same that the soules in Purgatorie be in charitie by popish fayth doctrine for otherwise they could not be out of Hell And doubtlesse that the Pope hath authoritie to giue Pardons as also that he graunteth them for good godly causes viz. for saying Masses Trentals Diriges for murdering of noble Princes for blowing vp with Gunpowder Townes Cities Common-weales and the like I suppose no Papist will denie If they do my argument is the stronger and my selfe shall very willingly agree thereunto Bartholomaus Fumus hath these expresse wordes Papa posset liberare omnes animas purgatorij etiamsi plures essent si quis faceret pro eis quod iuberet peccaret tamen indiscretè concedendo The Pope could set at libertie all the soules in Purgatorie though neuer so many if any would doe that for them which hee commaundeth mary hee should sinne by his vndiscreet pardoning But Viguerius proceedeth further and is bold to tell vs that it is neither inconuenient nor against the iustice of God these are his expresse wordes Nec est inconueniens quod Papa purgatoriuÌ„ posset euacuare non enim per hoc aliquid detraheretur diuinae iustitiae Neither is it inconuenient that the Pope can harrow Hell for that doth derogate nothing from the iustice of God Antoninus that famous popish Arch-byshop iumpeth with the rest in these expresse wordes Quia Ecclesia hoc facit et seruat credencuÌ„ est it a esse Because the Church this doth and obserueth we must beleeue it to be so Now to say that the Pope can deliuer al soules out of Purgatorie but doth it not to keepe himselfe from sinne is altogeather vaine friuolous For first hee should no more sinne in deliuering
Reges Domino seruiunt in timore nisi ea quae contra iussa Domini fiunt religiosa seueritate prohibendo atque plectendo Aliter N. seruit quia homo est aliter quia etiam et rex est Quia homo est ei seruit viuendo fideliter quia vero etiam Rex est seruit leges iusta praecipientes et contraria prohibentes conuenienti vigore sanctiendo sicut seruiuit Ezechias Lucos et Templa Idolorū et illa excelsa quae contra praecepta Dei fuerant constructa destruendo sicut seruiuit Iosias talia et ipse faciendo sicut seruiuit rex Niniuitarum vniuersam Ciuitatem ad placandum Dominum compellendo sicut seruiuit Darius Idolum frangendum in potestatem Danieli dando et inimicos eius Leonibus ingerendo sicut seruiuit Nabuchodonosor omnes in regno suo positos a blasphemando Deo lege terribili prohibendo In hoc ergo seruiunt Domino Reges in quantum sunt Keges cum ea faciunt ad seruiendum illi quae non possunt facere nisi Reges How doe Kinges serue God in feare but by punishing with religious seueritie such thinges as are against Gods lawes For the King serueth God one way as he is man an other way as he is King As he is man he serues God in lyuing as becommeth an honest Christian as he is King he serues God in making sharpe Lawes to the furtheraunce of Vertue and to the suppressing of Vice As Ezechias serued God while he destroyed the Groues and Temples of Idols and those Hie places which were erected against Gods lawes As Josias serued God while he performed the same or like dueties As the King of the Niniuites serued God in compelling the whole Citie to serue God As Nabuchodonosor serued God while he with very sharpe Lawes terrified all his subiectes from blaspheming the euerliuing God In this therefore Kings serue God as they are Kinges when they doe that for the seruice of God which none but Kinges can doe Thus writeth S. Austin that auncient Father that holy Writer that learned Doctor that strong Piller that worthy Champion of Christes Church Out of whose Discourse I obserue many thinges well worthy to be engrauen in Marble with Golden letters in perpetuam rei memoriam First that Kinges serue God when they religiously punish sinne Secondly that Kinges serue God as they be men when they liue as it becommeth faythfull and honest Christians Thirdly that Kinges serue God as they be Kinges when they make Godly lawes to aduance Vertue and to suppresse Vice Fourthly that it belongeth to the office dutie and charge of Kings to purge the Church and House of God from Heresies Errours Superstition and Idolatrie Fiftly that it appertaineth to the charge and office of Kinges to punish Blasphemie and to cause their Subiectes to liue religiously and in the feare of God Sixtly that this holy Father and great learned Doctor vtterly condemneth the Popes Fayth and Doctrine while he denyeth all authoritie to Kinges in Church causes and Ecclesiasticall affaires and maketh them onely executors of his Lawes Will and good Pleasure For which respect the same holy Father soone after addeth these expresse wordes Quis mente sobrius Regibus dicat Nolite curare in regno vestro a quo teneatur vel oppugnetur Ecclesia Domini vestri non ad vos pertineat in regno vestro quis velit esse siue religiosus siue sacrilegus Who well in his Wittes will say thus to Kinges Haue no regard neither take any care who within your Kingdome either protect or oppugne the Church of God you haue no charge neither doth it pertaine to your office who in your Kingdome be Religious or who be Sacrilegious Seuenthly that Kinges haue charge not onely of the bodyes of their Subiectes but much more of their soules Which not onely S. Austen fayth but the whole course of Scripture teacheth the same For the godly Kinges as well in time of the Law of Moyses as in the time of the New Testament and law of Grace did manage all matters both of Church and Common-weale For which cause the Ciuill Magistrate was commaunded to read the whole Booke of the Law as well of the first as of the second Table and to studie the same night and day For which cause the Ciuill Magistrate was commaunded to goe out and in before the people and to lead them out and in that the congregation of the Lord should not be as Sheepe without a Shepheard For which cause the Booke of the Law was deliuered into the Kings handes at such time as he receiued the Crowne and was annoynted King Lastly and this striketh dead that Kings as Kings serue God when they doe those things which none but Kinges can doe If this golden Periode were soundly vnderstood and perfectly kept in memorie it alone would be enough to trample Pope and Poperie vnder foote For I pray you sir Frier did not Constantinus surnamed the great Theodesius the elder Theodosius the younger and Martianus gather the foure first generall Councels of Nice Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon which Pope Gregorie did reuerence as the foure Ghospels did they not call the same Synodes as they were Emperours Kinges and Monarches I wote they did it is already prooued it can not be denyed What Did not Reccaredus as King commaunde all the Byshops of Spaine and Gallicia to assemble themselues before him at Toledo there to decide and determine causes ecclesiasticall did he not tell them the cause why he sent for them did he not sit downe among them did he not define with them did he not subscribe before all the Byshops did he not confirme the Decrees and Canons of the Councell with his royall edict we haue already seene it wee haue viewed the very wordes it is prooued most manifestly Now let vs duely ponder and throughly vnderstand what of necessitie must be inferred heereupon S. Austin affirmeth constantly that when Kinges serue God as Kings then doe they that which none but Kings can doe But so it is that Reccaredus and the other Kings both called confirmed Councels as they were Kings for it is already prooued ergo Kinges and none but Kings can call and confirme holy Councels and sacred Synodes The reason is S. Austens when he resolutely auoucheth that while Kinges serue God as Kinges they doe that which none but Kinges can doe for if Kinges as Kinges call and confirme Councels none doubtlesse which are no Kinges can doe the same And consequently no Byshop no not the Pope of Rome hath authoritie to gather Councels or to confirme the same Two thinges onely the Pope may in shew of wordes seeme to obiect for himselfe obiection 1 Th' one that Kinges doe not call or confirme Councels as they be Kinges but rather as the Seruantes or Deputies of the Pope obiection 2 Th' other that the Pope is not onely a Byshoppe but a King also To
and place be correspondent thereunto I prooue it first because Christ himselfe saith That euery Tree which bringeth not foorth Good fruite shal be cut downe and cast into the fire Secondly because Christ sayth in an other place That whosoeuer loue him will keepe his Commaundementes Thirdly because S. Paul telleth vs in one place That God chose vs in Christ before the world was made that we should be holy in his sight And in an other place That we are Gods workmanship created in Christ Jesu vnto good workes which he hath prepared that we may walke in them The 5. Conclusion Good workes are the effectes of Predestination depending vpon it not it vpon them S. Paul prooueth it in these plaine golden and pithy wordes Whom he hath Predestinate them hath he Called and whom he hath Called them hath he Iustified and whom he hath Iustified those hath he also Glorified By this golden Chaine we may euidently perceiue that Glorification Iustification Vocation and consequently Good workes are the effectes of Predestination especially if we ioyne this with the other Conclusions afore going For if it be true as it is most true else th'Apostle should be a lyer that we were elected to be Holy and to doe Good workes it is also true it can not be denyed that Holy life and Good workes are the effectes of our Election and Predestination in Christ Iesus For this cause sayth that famous Papist Nicholaus de Lyra in this manner Dicendum quod predestinatio diuina est preparatio gratiae in presenti et gloriae in futuro Et ideo cum sit aeterna sicut ab aeterno predestinauit aliquem ad beatitudinem ita praeordinauit modum quo daret sibi illam beatitudinem I answere sayth this great learned Popish Doctor that Gods Predestination is the preparation of Grace in this world and of Glory in the world to come And therefore seeing it is Eternall as he hath predestinated any one from eternitie to endlesse Blisse or Beatitude so hath he also fore-ordayned the meane by which he would bring him to the same For this cause sayth the Popish Angelicall Doctor Aquinas whose doctrine sundry Popes haue confirmed for Authenticall that Predestination includeth Gods will of bestowing both Grace and Glorie And this Doctor so famous and authenticall addeth these wordes Nam predestinatio est causa et eius quod expectatur in futura vita a predestinatis scz gloriae et eius quod percipitur in presenti scz gratiae For Predestination is the cause both of that which is expected in the life to come that is to say of Glorie and also of that which the predestinate receiue in this life that is to say of Grace For this cause saith our Jesuiticall Cardinall Bellarminus that Good workes follow Predestination as effectes follow their causes These are his expresse wordes Itaque sunt opera bona effectus Predestinationis Therefore Good workes are the effect of Predestination Againe in other place the same Jesuite hath these wordes Itaque illa propositio Deus ab aeterno predestinauit hominibus dare regnum per opera bona praeuisa potest et vera esse et falsa Nam si illud per opera praeuisa referatur ad verbum predestinauit falsa erit Significabit enim Deum predestinasse homines quia opera illorum bona praeuiderat si referatur ad verbum dare vera erit Quia significabit executionem futuram esse per opera bona siue quod est idem glorificationem effectum esse iustificationis et operum bonorum sicut ipsa iustificatio effectus est vocationis et vocatio praedestinationis Therefore that proposition God fore-ordayned from eternitie to giue to men the Kingdome of heauen by their fore-seene Workes may both be true and false For if those wordes by their workes fore-seene be referred to the word Predestinauâ—t hee predestinated or fore-ordayned the sense and meaning is false For it will signifie God to haue Predestinated Men because he fore-saw their Good workes but if the same wordes be referred to the worde Dare to giue and bestow the sense and meaning will be true For it will signifie that the execution must be done by Good works or which is all one that Glorification is the effect of Iustification and Good workes euen as Iustification is the effect of Vocation and Vocation the effect of Predestination Againe in an othor place hee hath these wordes Non ideo pendet praedestinatio ab operibus sed opera a praedestinatione Therefore Predestination doth not depend of Workes but Workes depend of Predestination Againe in an other place he sayth thus Alia ratio est pradestinationis alia executionis Constituit N. in praedestinatione regnum caelorum dare certis hominihus quos absque vlla operum praeuisione dilexit tamen simul constituit vt quo ad executionem via perueniendi ad regnum essent bona opera There is one reason of Predestination an other of Execution For in Predestination God decreed to giue the Kingdome of Heauen to certaine men whom he loued without any fore-sight of Workes howbeit he decreed withall that in respect of the execution Good workes should be the way to come vnto the same For this cause doe our Râ—emistes tell vs that our first Iustification is of Gods Grace and not of our deseruinges because none of all our actions that were before our Iustification could merit or iustly procure the Grace of iustification Thus discourse these famous and great learned Popish Writers to whose Doctrine I subscribe with all my heart For as I haue often sayd else where I highly reuerence the Old Romane religion and to the vttermost of my small talent skill I both haue done doe and will defende the same Yea and iustifie the Doctrine of the Church of England to be the Old Romane Catholike and Apostolike religion which S Peter and S. Paul deliuered to the auncient and first Church of Rome Out of the Doctrine heere deliuered by these famous Papistes Lyranus Aquinas and Bellarminus I gather many excellent Notes First that the Grace Fayth and Good workes which we haue in this world and the Glory which we expect in the world to come doe all wholly proceed from Gods Predestination euen without all desertes of Man Secondly that as God prepared the Kingdome of heauen for his Elect euen before they were borne or had done any Good workes so did he also prepare the way and meanes by which he would bring them to the same Thirdly that no Workes done or fore-seene to be done did mooue God to predestinate any man to the ioyes of Heauen Fourthly that Good workes are not the Cause but the Effect of Predestination Fiftly that Good workes are the way and meanes which God ordayned for the execution of Predestination and for the accomplishment of Glorification Sixtly that not onely Predestination but also Iustification proceedes of
punire et damnare popoteram non simpliciter assumpsi sed elegi vos multis alijs neglectis ex massa corruptionis Sequitur docet igitur Christus hoc verbo quod ipse sit author nostrae salutis Deinde quod gratia est quicquid habemus siue sint dona illa iustificantia Fides Spes Charitas Spiritus sanctus c. Siue externa illa dona quae alio nomine dicuntur gratiae gratis datae I saith hee haue chosen you This Text may bee vnderstood either of Election to the Apostleship or of eternall Election to Saluation For in both there is grace but no merit and both are wrought by Christ for in him and through him did God chose vs euen before the world was made I saith he who am God and therefore stand in need of nothing I who can punish and condemne haue not simply taken you but reiecting many others haue chosen you out of the masse of corruption Christ therefore doth by these words teach vs that hee is the authour of our saluation Then that whatsoeuer we haue the same is grace whether they be those iustifying gifts faith hope charity the holy Spirit the like or other externall gifts which by another name are called graces freely giuen That which our Sauiour sayth of Marie Magdalene that many sinnes were forgiuen her because shee loued much doth serue well to illustrate that which is here obiected of the kingdome of heauen For Christes Argument is not drawne from the cause but from the effect as if Christ had sayd we may know by her great loue that great gifts are bestowed on her that many sinnes are forgiuen her for that not remission of her sinnes proceeded from her loue but her loue from the forgiuenesse of her sinnes the similitude of the debtors doth plainly insinuate the same vnto vs. Christ told Peter of two debters whereof the one owed fiue hundred pence the other fiftie and that when they had not wherewith to pay the creditour forgaue them both he therefore demaunded of Peter whether of the debtours loued the creditour more Peter answered that he to whom more was forgiuen Christ approoued Peters answere and concluded thereupon that seeing Marie Magdalene loued more he might know that shee had more forgiuen her Because saith Christ to whom little is forgiuen the same loueth little neither is it possible to draw any other meaning out of Christs wordes The reason is euident because Christ saith plainely that the debts were freely forgiuen the debters who were not able to pay the debts For otherwise Maries forgiuenesse could haue no coherence with the similitude of the debters Out of this discourse these points are euidently deduced First that wee are the sonnes of God not by nature for so wee are his enemies and the children of wrath but by grace and adoption in Iesus Christ. Secondly that God chose vs to be his children before wee were borne Thirdly that he chose vs not because wee were holy but that we might bee holy and immaculate in his sight Fourthly that he predestinated vs to be his children by adoption not for any good workes which we either had done or could doe but for his owne good pleasure to the glorie of his grace for as to doe any workes at all before we be borne is altogether impossible so to doe good workes when we are borne seeing we are conceiued in sinne borne in sinne and by nature the children of warth is impossible in like manner Fiftly that all our good Workes are the effects and fruites of our predestination For if it be true as it is most true els the Apostle were a lyer that we were elected to be holy and to doe good Workes it is also true it can neuer be denyed that holy life and good Workes are the effects of our Election and Predestination in Christ Iesus For this cause saith the Apostle that Predestination proceedes freely of Gods eternall purpose Iustification of Predestination and Glorification of Iustification For first he choseth vs in Christ then he iustifieth vs in Christ thirdly and lastly he glorifieth vs for his owne Names sake B. C. And beside in the same place Damnation is giuen to had Workes Get ye away from me ye cursed saith Christ into euerlasting fire which was prepared for the deuill and his angels For I was an hungry and you gaue mee not to eate Seeing then the Scripture declareth plainely that bad workes deserue damnation and hee the cause thereof as plainly doth it also signifie that good Workes merit heauen and be the cause thereof T. B. I answer that there is great disparitie between saluation damnation therefore that good works can not merit saluation though euil works be enough for damnation The reason hereof is euident both in Phylosophy and Diuinitie because as S. Dionysius Areopagita sayth and the popish angelicall doctour Aquinas approueth the same Bonum ex integra causa existet malum ex quolibet defectu Good is of an intire and whole cause but euill comes of euery defect Yea that more is required to good then to euill dayly experience teacheth vs for one may soone doe that hurt to his neighbour which can not without great cost and long time bee cured againe For euery childe can tell our Iesuite that one stroake is able to kill a man but twentie potions and twentie chirurgicall actions can not restore him to life againe So one leape is enough to cast one into the bottome of a pitte or deepe gulfe but twentie hops skippes or leapes will not bring him vp againe This Saint Austen well obserued when hee left in Writing to all posteritie That it is a greater thing to iustifie the Wicked man then to make Heauen and Earth Free-will of it selfe is able to doe euill in the highest degree but of it selfe it hath no power at all either to doe well or to will well For it is God that worketh in you saith the Apostle both the will the deed euen of his good pleasure Againe in an other place thus To will is present with me but I find no meanes to performe that which is good Againe in an other place thus No man can say that Iesus is the Lord but by the holy Ghost Againe in an other place thus we are not sufficient of our selues to thinke any thing as of our selues but our sufficiencie is of God All which and much more our sweete Sauiour compriseth in these few pethy and most golden wordes For without me yee can doe nothing Much more I could say to the same effect but I refraine for two respectes First because I haue regard to breuitie Secondly for that this matter is disputed at large and soundly prooued in the Conclusions afore-going especially in the first sixt and seuenth B. C. Wee find also in Scripture that men are sayd worthy of Reward That you may be counted worthy of
potestatem excellentiae quam Christus alligatam sacramentis minimè habebat panem in suum corpus conuertisse deinde verò dedisse illud Apostolis dicendo hoc est c. Secunda opinio affirmat consecrasse quibusdam verbis nobis ignotis quando benedixit panem et non quando dixit hoc est c. Tertia opinio tuetur illa forma Christum consecrasse verum occultè scilicet quando benedixit panem deinde publicè illa vsum fuisse vt alios formam consecrandi doceret Quarta opinio tenet quando verba haec hoc est c. protulit simulque factam fuisse benedictionem Pope Innocentius holdeth the first opinion that Christ by the power of excellencie which in him was not tied to the Sacraments conuerted the Bread into his body and then gaue it to his Apostles saying This is my Body c. The second OpinioÌ„ holdeth that Christ Consecrated the Bread with certaine words to vs vnknowen when he blessed the Bread not when he sayd This is my Body The third Opinion affirmeth that Christ did Consecrate with that forme of Wordes but secretly when he blessed the Bread and after vsed the same forme of wordes to instruct others The fourth OpinioÌ„ holdeth that Christ did Consecrate when he spake these wordes This is my Body and that the blessing was done at the same time Behold here the mistery of profound Popish diuinitie I would not pittie his case who being in the middest of a great Fire would not come out to heare it But I pittie the case of silly ignoraunt Papistes who hazard aduenture their saluation in beleeuing such a fond and vncertaine Religion Secondly because by popish Religion when the Priest holdeth the Host ouer his head then the silly Papistes must adore the same as the euerliuing God And for all that euen by popish Fayth and Doctrine the popish so tearmed Host may onely be a peece of meere Bakers bread I prooue it sundry wayes First because Sotus that great learned popish Schoole-man surnamed for his deepe Learning Doctor Subtilis holdeth and constantly defendeth that it is vncertaine whether the Bread be transubstantiated into Christes body or no by these wordes of popish Consecration This is my Body Secondly because by popish Fayth the Bread is not made Christes body vnlesse the Priest haue intention so to make it But doubtlesse sundry cases and causes may fall out to take away the Priestes intention and so the silly people shall commit Idolatrie while they adore a peece of Bread for the lyuing GOD. Thirdly because Caietanus that famous Cardinall and learned popish Schoole-doctor affirmeth resolutely and boldly that no Text in the whole Ghospell prooueth effectually that these wordes This is my Body must be vnderstoode properly But doubtlesse if this be true which the learned Cardinall of Rome auoucheth to be most true the silly Papists must perforce be Idolaters while they adore the popish Host in the popish Masse And therfore doth the popish Byshop Angles giue his Reader this graue aduise Cautâ— legendum esse Caietanum Caietane must be read warily For indeed by Caietanes opinion the adoring of the popish Bread-god is flat Idolatrie Fourthly because in the consecration of the Wine the Priest as Josephus Angles telleth vs may haue Perueâ—sam intentionem a peruerse intention and so not consecrate at all For the Papistes agree about their Reall presence in their popish Masse like Dogges girning and fighting for a Bone albeit it be the most essentiall part of their Masse and consequently of all popish Religion Fiftly because they haue added one word of their owne forge and inuention to the words of Christes sacred Institution to weet the word enim which signifieth for S. Mathew S. Marke S. Luke and S. Paul haue all foure deliuered the expresse wordes of Christes sacred Institution and for all that not one of them doth so much as once name the word enim Fourthly that albeit there be some apparant colour of trueth in that which our Iesuite saith of the Pater noster yet will the same after due examination thereof tende wholly to the confusion of the Pope and all his popish Vassals I therefore answere that though the Pater noster in it selfe and according to Christes Institution be most holy pure and religious yet is the same by superstitious abuse in popish Masse become morally prophane impure and irreligious I prooue it by three seuerall and irrefragable reasons First because in the popish Masse it is mangled maimed and bereaued of a chiefe part of the integritie thereof For as hee that clippeth the Kinges Coyne is thereby a Traytor to an earthly King euen so hee that clippeth or curtalleth Gods sacred Word is thereby a Traytor to God the King of Heauen And consequently seeing the Pope in his idolatrous Masse hath curtalled the Pater noster taking from God his Kingdome his Power and his Glorie which three are plainely comprised in that originall Pater noster which Christ did institute it followeth by an ineuitable illation and necessarie consequence that the Pater noster as it is prophaned in the popish Masse is become a Ragge of the New religion Secondly because in the popish Masse it is vsed in a Tongue to the people vnknowne contrary to Apostolicall doctrine Thirdly because the Pater noster in the popish Masse marke well my wordes is made as it were a slaue to Satan and to serue Idolatrie euen against the euerliuing God to waite and attend vpon the popish Bread-God And so the Pater noster which afore was pure and Euangelicall is now by popish Superstition become impure and Diabolicall But some will here demaund how the Pater noster doth serue Idolatrie To whom I answere that euery thing in popish Masse is meere accidentall as the Jesuite hath freely graunted the popish Reall presence onely excepted to weet the popish so supposed Dagon or Bread-god And consequently al the rest in popish Masse must perforce be designed for the furtheraunce honour and seruice of the said popish Dagon or Bread-god Which seruice I haue elsewhere soundly prooued and plainely conuinced to be very flatte Idolatrie Neither ought this to seeme strange to the Reader for as holy Wordes in Coniurations Theftes Robberies Treasons and the like are by the abuse prophaned and morally become vnholy euen so the holy wordes of the Pater noster are in the popish Masse prophaned and become vnholy They are referred to a wicked and idolatrous end from whence all morall actes receiue their specification as all learned Papistes graunt But the euerliuing God is and ought to be the end of all and consequently whatsoeuer is referred to any other end the same is thereby prophaned ipso facto B. C. The Protestantes obiect how we make the Masse the Sacrifice of the New testament to haue been ordayned by Christ himselfe when as Durandus and others note at what