satisfaction for their sinnes M. The satisfaction which they maintained was an ecclesiasticall and publike mulct or penalty imposed vpon notorious offenders thereby to testifie their repentance and to satisfie the Church whom they had offended Perkins 1. V. 577 c 2 vol. 165. 2 D. 166. The efficient causâ— of our iustification is God alone It is God onely that forgiueth our sinnes Esa 43.25 Mar. 2.7 Ro. 8.33 They teach that the Pope can forgiue sinnes and we know that he giues pardons not only for the time past but also for the time to come yea they teach that priests haue right to remit sinnes and they alleadge these places to proue it Math. 16.19 Ioh. 20.23 Now we are to note this that as none can forgiue a debt but the party to whom the debt is due so none can forgiue sinnes but God onely against whom the sinne is committed Ps 51.4 The power of binding and loosing committed to the Apostles Ministers of the Word is by declaring the will and pleasure of GOD out of his Word both to pronounce forgiuenes of sinnes to all that are truely penitent and the retayning of them to the impenitent The Pope and his Clergie are neuer able to proue themselues to bee the true Ministers of Christ and they cannot so much as challenge this latter authoritie and power to themselues much lesse the former which is proper to God onely The motiue or impulsiue cause which moued God to iustifie vs was not any thing in vs but onely the grace of God that is the free good will and pleasure of God Rom. 3.24 Eph. 2.8 Tit. 3.5 7. They teach that wee are not iustified by grace onely but by workes also that is by the merit of our works And to this end they haue of late yeeres deuised a first second Iustification The first is when a sinner of an euill man is made a good man and this they say commeth onely of Gods mercy by the merit of Christ The second is when one of a good or iust man is made better and more iust and this proceedeth from workes But we are to know that there are not two kinds of iustification a first and second but one and the same iustification considered in different respects In respect of Gods actuall acceptation of a mans person iustification is absolute but in respect of the actuall application and manifestation of Gods acceptation vnto a mans conscience iustification is by parts and degrees M. Scudder on the Lords Prayer pag. 303. to 309. And further we are to note that the Papists second iustification is no other then sanctification which is an effect fruit of iustification the which is imperfect not able to iustifie vs before God The materiall cause of our iustification is the actiue and passiue righteousnesse and obedience of Iesus Christ his inherent holinesse his fulfilling of the Law his death sacrifice and full satisfaction The formall cause or the forme of iustification is the righteousnesse of Christ imputed of God vnto vs Rom. 5.19 Rom. 4 5 6 7 8. 1. Cor. 1.30 2. Cor. 5.19 21. Phil. 3.9 The Papists deride this doctrine that Men are iustified by the imputation of the righteousnesse of Christ which righteousnesse is not in vs but in Christ The Rhemists call it a new no-iustice a phantasticall apprehension of that which is not Rhem. on Ro. 3. Sect 7. They hold them accursed that so affirme and teach And they teach that the onely formall cause of our iustificaâ—ion is the iustice of God whereby wee are not reputed and â—ccounted iust but are made iust indeed and this iustice is â—hat which euery man hath within himselfe and is inherent â—n him Concil Trid. Sess 6. can 10 11. Rhem. on Phil. cha 3. Sect. 3. â—he instrumentall cause of iustification on our part is a true â—nd liuely faith whereby wee receiue and apply vnto our selues the mercy of God Christ Iesus and all his benefits resting vpon him alone for saluation They teach that faith doth not iustifie as an instrument in apprehending the righteousnesse of Christ but as a proper and true cause it actually iustifieth by the dignity worthinesse and meritorious worke thereof Bellar. l. 1. de iustificat cap. 17. They teach also that faith is not the onely cause of our iustification but that there are other also as hope charity almes-deeds and other vertues yea they say that workes are more principall then faith in the matter of iustification and pronounce him accursed that shall say a man is iustified onely by faith Rhem. on Rom. 8. Sect. 6. and on Iâ—m 2. Sect. 7. Bellar. l. 1 de iustif c. 13. Concil Trid. Sess 6 Can. 9. These and other such like things they teach contrary to the doctrine of iustification which is a maine ground of Religion And if there were no more points of difference betweene vs these were sufficient to keepe vs from vniting of our Religions for heereby the Church of Rome doth raze the very foundation C. You said before that we are iustified freely I would know how this can be if we be iustified by the righteousnes and for the merit of Christ M. Because the Decree of God the Father for our Redemption is free and we pay nothing againe to God of our owne And therefore by the word freely our merits are excluded but not Christs By which it appeareth that in respect of our selues we are iustified freely of Gods meere mercy and grace without any respect of our owne righteousneâ— or worthinesse but yet through Christ and for his righteouâ—nesse and obedience imputed to vs both which are signifieâ— by the Apostle Rom. 3.23 24. C. Shew me I pray you what is meant by Merit what the dectâ—â— of the Papists is concerning merit and whether that our workes be mâ—â—â—orious or no. M. By Merit wee vnderstand any thing or any workeâ— whereby Gods fauour and life euerlasting is procured 〈◊〉 that for the dignitie and excellency of the worke or thiâ— done Now the true merit whereby wee looke to attaine the fauour of God and life euerlasting is to be found in the person of Christ alone in whom God is well pleased The Papists make two kindes of merit the merit of the person and the merit of the worke The merit of the person is as they say a dignitie in the person whereby it is worthy of life euerlasting The merit of the worke is a dignitie or excellency in the worke whereby it is made fit and inabled to deserue life euerlasting for the doer of the worke See Rhem. on Rom. 8. Sect. 5. We now doe renounce our owne personall merits and all merit of our owne workes and rely onely vpon the merits of Christ and we hold that no workes of ours can merit That no man by any workes of his can merit may bee proued by the properties and conditions that must bee in a worke meritorious and they are fiue First the worke must be absolutely perfect
Trent This concupiscence which the Apostle sometime calleth sinne the holy Synod declareth that the Catholike Church did neuer vnderstand to be called sinne because it is truely properly sinne in the regenerate but because it commeth of sinne and inclineth vnto sinne If any man thinke the contrarie let him be accursed Sess 5. cap. 1. de pecc orig Wherein they both decree against the Apostle himselfe Rom. 7.23 and also they gaine say themselues for if this concupiscence boile out of originall sinne as out of a fountaine and that is damnable it followeth that concupiscence or lust is also sinne before God and doth deserue condemnation They say that in the regenerate it is veniall But this is an vndoubted principle that all sinnes in themselues and their owne nature are mortall And concerning this veniall sinne it was not knowne among the Fathers for 700. yeeres after Christ And thus you see what grosse things they both teach and practise contrary to the Commandements of God whereby it plainely appeareth that Popery cannot bee of God for thus I reason Whatsoeuer religion doth teach things contrary to the Commandements of God is not of God but Poperie doth so and therefore it is not of GOD and so by good consequence Papists cannot be good Catholikes DIALOGVE 13. C. Hitherto you haue shewed that the Papists teach many things contrary to the Creede the Sacraments and the ten Commandements now tell me I pray you whether they teach any thing contrary to the Lords Prayer M. They doe likewise teach practise many things contrarie thereunto I will but onely name some of them The Lords Prayer teacheth vs to call vpon God only They teach and practise prayer to Saints In the first Petition we pray for the hallowing of Gods Name They giue vnto Saints departed that which is proper to God and so dishonour Gods Name In the second petition we pray for the erecting of Gods Kingdome of grace in our hearts and also for the meanes thereof namely the preaching hearing of Gods Word They hinder the comming of Gods Kingdome in reiecting the Word of God and in persecuting such as will preach heare and reade it Contrary to the third petition is their doctrine of free-will Contrary to the fifth petition is their doctrine of satisfaction for sin In the sixth petition we pray for strength to withstand Satan his temptations They teach people to driue away the Diuell with holy-water and such like childish toyes These and other such like things they teach and practise contrary to the Lords Prayâ—r DIALOGVE 14. C. If Popery be so contrary to the grounds of Religion then we may â—ot ioyne with the Papists in their profession M. It is true indeede we must therefore doe as the Lord â—â—de Ieremy Chap. 15.19 Let them returne to thee but reâ—urne not thou to them We may ioyne with them in respect â—f ciuill societie but not in respect of Religion and yet eâ—en then we are to take heed left we be corrupted by them â—r he that toucheth Pitch shall be defiled therewith Some thinke that our Religion and the religion of the present Church of Rome are all one for substance and that they may be vnited but they are grosely deceiued for an vnion of these two Religions can neuer be made more then the vnion of light and darknesse and that because the Church of Rome as hath at large bin shewed hath strooke at the very foundation C. If Poperie bee so contrary to the very grounds of Religion then what is the cause that so many yea of the more wise and learned sort do embrace and cleaue to it M. One speciall cause of it is that because men will not receiue the loue of the Trueth therefore God will send them strong delusion that they should beleeue a lie 2. Thes 2.10 11. A second cause is ignorance of the Scriptures and of the grounds of Religion for if men would well acquaint themselues herewith they should easily see the grossenesse of Poperie A third cause is that Popery is very agreeable and pleasing to mans corrupt nature As for example to be iustified by our good works to haue images to worship God in to liue in ignorance to haue pardons for our sinnes to serue God in outward ceremonies as in choice of meate difference of dayes c. these are things very agreeable pleasing to our corrupt nature and therefore one especiall cause why so many embrace Popery A fourth cause is the tyranny of the Church of Rome whose chiefe meanes to vphold her religion is fire sword for were it not for this many thousands in a few yeers would vtterly renounce Popery A fifth cause why so many especially of the Learned dâ— embrace it is pompe and profit that is ambition and couetousnesse This was that which made the Scribes and Pharises eueâ— against their owne knowledge to withstand Christ and 〈◊〉 Gospell And this makes many learned Papists ro do the like They know no doubt that in some things they erre as it doth appeare by the words of Stephen Gardiner on his death bed The Bishop of Chichester seeing him to be in a desperate case comforteth him with the hope of remission of sinnes by the merits of Christ Gardiner hereunto answereth thus What will you open that gappe now you may speake it to me and to such as are in my case but if you teach it to the people then farewell all meaning our authority pompe and profit by absolutions Masses c. These are the speciall causes why so many embrace Popery C. There is one thing more that I would gladly know concerning the Papists and that is whether a Papist may be saued seeing that Popeâ—ie is so contrary to the grounds of Religion M. You are then to marke what a Papist is A Papist as the Rhemists on Acts 11. Sect. 4. doe describe him is one that cleaueth to the Pope in Religion and is obedient to him in all things Euery one now that is vnder the iurisdictioÌ„ of the Pope is not to be counted a Papist for there are some euen in Italy â—paine c. that hold the Grounds of Religion doe sigh and â—rone vnder the Romish yoke and desire to be free'd from 〈◊〉 yea would reioyce to see it Againe there may be some that for want of knowledge â—nd the meanes thereof are entangled with some points of â—opery but yet they hold the foundation which is CHRIST â—ESVS and looke to be saued by his merits and not by their â—wne or any others Such we account not Papists but the â—â—e Church and children of GOD. But by Papists wee meane such as cleaue fast to the Pope in Religion are in all â—â—ings obedient to him will not be reclaimed from their erâ—â—urs refuse to heare the Word of God to read the Scripâ—â—res or any other good bookes Of such we may boldly say â—â—t if they thus continue to the end they cannot be saued DIALOGVE 15. C. I
determined as a publike Law in the Councell of Constance about the yeere 1114. Perk. 2. Vol. 554.2 b. Secondly they reserue the Bread in boxes pixes other vessels of the Church for dayes weekes and moneths They shew it to the people the Priest lifting it ouer his head anâ— going with it in procession All this is contrary to the Sacrament for it is no Sacrament vnlesse there be a giuing receiuing eating and drinking M. Attersoll on the Sacraments 386 387. The reseruation of the Sacrament was not allowed of but rather found fault withall by the Fathers Perk. 2. vol. 557. Thirdly they adore fall downe and honour the Sacrament with diuine worship calling it their Lord and God A thing neuer heard of among the heathen Idolaters namely to worship a piece of bread or rather a thin Wafer The adoration in the Sacrament belongeth vnto Christ sitting in heauen and is an inward worship of the heart or lifting vp of the minde being stirred vp with the outward signes Pope Honorius the third in the yeere 1220. was the first that euer instituted the adoration of the Sacrament And after him Vrban the fourth ordained a feast in honour of the body of Christ Perk. 2. Vol. 564. Attersoll on the Sacraments 388 389. Fourthly they turne the Sacrament into a sacrifice for the quick the dead abolishing the fruit remembrance of the death of Christ disannulling his Priesthood giuing him to his Father whereas the Father hath giuen him to vs c. ibid. page 390. Fiftly they maintaine Transubstantiation These are their very words If any man shall say that there remaineth the substance of Bread and Wine in the Sacrament after the words of consecration or shal deny that the whole substance of Bread and Wine is changed and conuerted into the bodie and bloud of Christ the formes and shewes onely of Bread and Wine remaining which singular and miraculous conuersion the Church calleth Transubstantiation let him be accursed Con. Trid. Sess 13. Can. 2. This their doctrine of Transubstantiation is a very fable to mock fooles withall and it ouerturneth both the nature and vse of the Sacrament Attersoll on the Sacraments page 45. 46. page 365. to 369. If there were a miraculous conuersion as they say there is of the Bread and Wine it would appeare to the outward senses For al true miracles are wrought openly cleerely euidently to mens senses Ioh. 6.26 But the Bread and Wine by the iudgement of all the senses remaineth and appeareth to be the same in substance which it was before of the same quality quantitie colour taste handling smelling vertue and nourishment there is not any one sense or all the senses together that can iudge otherwise of it then it did before If a man should bee called in when the Bread and Wine is set on the Table and bidden to consider well what he there seeth smelleth tasteth and then is willed to goe forth and to come in againe after the Consecration is ended by the Priest and to do the like and then is asked what he thinketh of it he no doubt will answere vnlesse feare of persecution make him to conceale the truth I see feele smell and taste the same wafer-cake and wine that I did before I can perceiue no naturall and substantiall change therein And therefore it followeth that there is no miracle wrought and consequently no transubstantiation at all The difference that is is in the end vse onely Before consecration it was common bread and wine ordained for the nourishing of our bodies After consecration it becommeth holy Bread and Wine sanctified by the Lord not so much to feede the body as the soule C. Did not the ancient Fathers hold this doctrine of Transubstantiation M. They knew nothing hereof for at least 800. yeeres after Christ Afterwards begun the disputations of Transubstantiation but not approued as an Article of faith The Church for a whole thousand yeeres taught no other then spirituall receiuing of Christ In the yeere 1215. Transubstantiation was decreed and determined in the Councell of Lateran vnder Pope Innocent the Third and made a maine matter of faith Perk. 2. vol. 558 559. C. What say you then of their Transubstantiated or consecrated host as it is called or the bread in the boxe carried in processiâ—n worshipped M. Surely it is nothing else but a wheaten or breaden god or rather an Idol nothing inferiour to Aarons Calfe or Ierohoams Calues or the Nehustan and piece of brasse that Ezechias brake in pieces nay as vile and detestable as an Idoll among the Heathen And for a conclusion of their doctrine of Transubstantiation I will heere set downe a wittie conceit which one shewed me not long since I haue kept the matter but changed the meeter to make it sound somewhat the sweeter The Priests doe make Christs body and bloud Hereof none must once doubt They eate they drinke they box him vp They beare him all about DIALOGVE 7. C. I am satisfied touching the first point namely that the Papists are not of sound faith but how doe you proue that they are not of good life seeing they doe so many good workes M. I proue it thus Where the Doctrine is corrupt the life cannot be good but their doctrine as you haue heard is most corrupt therefore their life cannot bee good A true faith is the ground of a good life and without which it is impossible to please God Heb. 11.6 yea whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne Rom. 14.23 A true faith they haue not and therefore their workes cannot be good and such as may please God That they haue not a true and sound faith hath bin shewed in many particulars and it further appeareth also in this that they do euen wilfully reiect the meanes whereby it is wrought namely the preaching hearing and reading the Word of God They haue not neither will they haue the Scriptures to be soundly preached read and heard in their owne tongue That they cannot abide to haue them in their owne language appeareth by this one example One Pauier a Towne-Clarke of London in the time of King Henry the Eighth hearing that the Scriptures should be put into English he spake to this effect and confirmed it with an oath viz. that if he knew that the Scriptures should bee put into English and that the King would haue them to be read in the Church rather then he would lâ—ue so long to see it he â—ould cut his owne throat But as Hall saith who heard him speake it he was not so good as his word for instead of cutting his throat he hanged himselfe C. What is the cause that they cannot abide to haue the Scriptures in their owne language M. S. John giues the reason For euery one that doth euill hateth the light neither coÌ„meth to it left his deeds should be reproued discouered Ioh. 3.20 If the Owle flieth abroad by day the birds by by discerne him