Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	justification_n	remission_n	sin_n	2,805	5	5.4403	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A15431	Tetrastylon papisticum, that is, The foure principal pillers of papistrie the first conteyning their raylings, slanders, forgeries, vntruthes: the second their blasphemies, flat contradictions to scripture, heresies, absurdities: the third their loose arguments, weake solutions, subtill distinctions: the fourth and last the repugnant opinions of new papistes with the old; of the new one with an other; of the same writers with themselues: yea of popish religion with and in it selfe. Compiled as a necessarie supplement or fit appertinance to the authors former worke, intituled Synopsis papismi: to the glorie of God for the dissuading of light-minded men from trusting to the sandie foundation of poperie, and to exhort good Christians stedfastlie to hold the rockie foundation of faith in the Gospell.	Willet, Andrew, 1562-1621.	1593 (1593)	STC 25701; ESTC S119967	179,229	213

Soto Petrus a Soto Caietanus Durandus with others Bellarmine with the rest of the Iesuites hold the contrary that it is a sacrament De sacram ordinis lib. 1. cap. 4. Durandus denieth matrimonie to be a sacrament vnlesse Equiuocè Equiuocallie and improperlie Bellarmine and generally the papistes holde it properly to be a sacrament Lib. 1. de Matrimon cap. 1. Some of them againe do thinke that matrimonie is not a proper sacramēt of the new testament Sic Alphons castro Petrus a Soto Bonauentur cum alijs But that it was cofirmed rather then instituted of Christ Bellarmine with the rest hold the contrarie Lib. 1. de Matrim cap. 5. Some hold that matrimonie which they affirme to be a sacrament giueth no grace Sic Magister sententiar lib. 4. distinct 2. Bellarmine with the rest hold the contrarie ibid. Some affirme that they which being maried are afterward conuerted to the faith and baptized should after their baptisme contract matrimonie againe and so then it becommeth a sacrament Sic Paludanus Capreolus Eckius Others thinke that there need no new contract but that matrimonie by the very act of baptisme is confirmed Sic Thom. de Argentin Bellarmine that a new contract is not necessarie but that the parties after baptisme by some signe should expresse their consent Bellarm. lib. 1. de sacram cap. 5. Melchior Canus affirmeth that the parties themselues cannot be the ministers of the sacrament of matrimonie but of the cōtract only but that it must be necessarily done by an ecclesiasticall minister Bellarmine with the reste teach the contrarie that the parties them selues are the ministers of the sacrament Some againe say that the mutual consent of the parties contracted in due forme of wordes expressed are the matter and forme of the sacrament of matrimonie Others that the persons themselues are the matter Bellarmine thinketh both that in the contract while the wordes are the matter expressing their consent afterward the parties themselues Bellarm. cap. 6. The times prohibited and interdict for mariage were in times past three in the yeare from the Aduent to the Epiphanie from Septuagesima to the octaues of Easter from three daies afore the assension to the octaues of Penticost Ruard Tapp●r The practise among them now is otherwise for with the interdict time at Pentecost they haue dispensed and the prohibited time at Easter is butte shorter to beginne not from ●eptuagesima but from Ash weddensday So was it decreed in the late chapter of Trent sess 24. cap. 10. Concerning the popish sacrament of penance there arise many doubtes and differences among them Some hold the sinnes which are absolued to be the matter of the sacrament others the sinner himselfe that maketh confession some the priest that absolueth ex Bellar. de poenitent lib. 1. cap. 16. Some that the whole sacrament doth not conferre grace but absolution onely by the priest Sic Thom. Aqum Bonauent Vega Franciscus Ferrariens Others that absolution did not giue grace alone but the action of the penitent person was ioyned and did concur with it in that case Bellarmine enclineth to the first opinion Depoenitent lib. 1. cap. 16. Some thinke that the act of penance is but a disposition onely vnto remission of sinnes no merite at all whereby remission is deserued Sic Iohan Capreolus Dominicus a Soto Others that it is not a disposition onely vnto iustification but a meriting cause thereof of congruitie sic Albertus Bonauent Scotus Durandus Gabriel to this also Bellarmine subscribeth lib. 2. de poenitent cap. 12. But the Iesuite is here grosly deceiued for before iustification it is impossible to please God without faith therefore there is no place for merite Some that perfect contrition is not sufficient to attaine remission of sinnes without the sacrament of penance and absolution by the priest but onely at the point of death Others that it is sufficiēt to be truely contrite if the partie haue a vow purpose afterward to receiue the sacramēt of penance sic Bellar. cū alijs lib. 2. cap. 13. But the trueth is that true repentance before God is sufficient with satisfactiō to the Church in publike offences without either sacramental penance or the vow therof for such sacramēt we acknowledge none Some hold that men may satisfie God by their penal workes both for the fault and for eternall punishment due thereunto Sic Ruard Tapper Andreas Vega. Others that they can satisfie God for neither of these but onely for temporall punishment Sic Bellarm. cum Iesuitis lib. 4. cap. 1. But the trueth is that Christ hath satisfied fully and wholly in our behalfe both for sinne and whatsoeuer punishment due as we haue shewed before so that no parte or kinde of satisfaction remaineth to be done by vs. Some holde that Auricular confession is necessarie to saluation and that by the institution of Christ Harding pag. 186. Others hold that confession is not necessarie for secret sinnes but that they may be forgiuen without Sic Gratian. Holcott Thom. Aquin. ex Iewel defens apol pag. 190. Some hold that the virgin Mary was conceiued without Originall sin friers Franciscane Others that she was conceiued as all other children of Adam be Do minike friers And Bernard thinketh it vnlawfull therefore to keepe a festiuall day of her conception Fox pag. 800. The most part of them hold that it is not meete or conuenient that the people should receiue in both kindes Others more truely hold the contrarie Bartholomaeus Latomus confesseth that our request is reasonable to haue the holy sacrament administred in both kindes Gerardus Lorichius calleth them Pseudocathol●co● false catholikes that hinder the reformation of the Church in that point And he calleth the wilfull maintaining of receiuing in one kinde Haeresis blasphemia pestilens execrabilis An heresie and blasphemie cursed and pestilent Ex Iuel defens Apolog. 28. pag. Lastly because it were infinite to shew all their contradictions they do foully disagree about the bodie of Christ in the sacrament what should become of it after consecration Some say that Christes bodie passeth down into the stomacke other that it entreth onely into the mouth An other that as soone as the formes of bread and wine be grated of the teeth the body of Christ is caught vp into heauen One saith a mouse may eate the bodie of Christ An other that a mouse cannot eate it yea the maister of the sentences himselfe is to seeke Deus nouit saith he after much discussing of the matter he resolueth it thus Godknoweth saith he what is become of it Ex citation Iuel pag. 289. Thus much shall suffice concerning the contradictions of the papistes of former times with our newe vpstart pope-catholike doctors And I hope by this it may appeare that their domestical dissensions are not as they beare vs in hand in the smaller pointes onely but in the verie ground and substance of popish Religion as about the sacramentes the Real presence iustification authoritie

thereof That wee affirme the Church may faile in faith Annot. Luk 18. Sect. 8. Wee say onely that the Church may erre in some points of doctrine but not finally fall away from the faith Fulk ibid. That we pretend that God draweth vs against our wil without any respect to our consent Iohn 6. 2. God of vnwilling maketh vs willing by changing our will to embrace Christ gladly and otherwise we teach not That wee affirme the Holie Ghost to be none other but the gift of wisedome in the Apostles and a fewe other for gouernment Annot. Act. 8. Sect. 7. But none of vs sayth so It is a meere slaunder That wee allow no fasting but morall temperance and spirituall fasting from sinne Act. 13. Sect. 5. Whereas we do acknowledge a Christian vse of fasting and abstinence from all meates and drinkes for the taming of the flesh and making vs more fit to pray not an abstinence from flesh onely as they do superstitiously imagine That wee should saye that the preaching of the lawe and iudgement to come maketh men hypocrites Act. 24. Sect. 2. Whereas wee hold the preaching of the lawe to be necessarie to bring men to repentance But iustificatiō by keeping the law which they teach we vtterly condemne That wee would haue all men to be present and giue voice in Councels Act. 19. Sect. 5. We say not so for that were impossible But we hold against our aduersaries that as wel the learned and discreete amongst the lay men as the Clergie ought to be admitted to consult of religion And that not only Bishops but other Pastors also and Ministers ought to haue deciding voices in Councels That wee condemne good woorkes as sinfull Pharisaicall hypocriticall Rom. 2. Sect. 3. Whereas we acknowledge them to be the good gifts of God the fruits of iustification the way wherein all Christians must walke to saluation We onely exclude them from being any cause of our iustification before God Annot. Rom. 2. Sect. 4. That wee affirme that God iustifieth man that is to saye imputeth to him the iustice of Christ though hee bee not indeede iust or of fauour reputeth him as iust when in deed he is wicked impious and vniust And that we thinke it is more to Gods glorie and more to the commendation of Christes iustice merites and mercie to call and count an ill man so continuing for iust than of his grace and mercie to make him of an ill one iust in deede and so truely to iustifie him This is a great slaunder For wee thinke and saie that God of a wicked man by his grace and mercie doth make him iust in deede by the iustice of Christ neither calling no● accounting him iust that continueth wicked as he was before but giuing him also the spirite of sanctification whereby after he is made iust by grace he doth the workes of iustice and keepeth Gods commaundements though not perfectly in this life Fulk ibid. That wee gather of those termes vsed by the Apostle Rom. 4. couered v. 7. not imputed v. 8. That the sinnes of men be neuer truely forgiuen but hidden onely Annot. Rom. 4. Sect. 7. Wee say that our sinnes are truelie forgiuen vs for Christes sake and our conscience freely discharged of them Christ hauing satisfied the iustice of God perfitly for them That wee teach that the Sacramentes of the Church giue not grace and iustice of faith but that they be notes markes badges onely of our remission of sinnes Rom. 4. Sect. 8. Wee say not that they are only markes and badges but as the Apostle saith seales of God to assure our faith of iustification by remission of sinnes And yet it followeth not that the sacraments should giue or conferre grace That to establish our fiction of confidence as they not without blasphemie call it wee make no account of the Articles of the Faith the beleeuing whereof onely iustifieth they say Annot. Rom. 4. Sect. 9. Wheras wee affirme that we are iustified by none other faith but that which is declared in those Articles not by a bare knowledge or beleefe of them that they are true which the diuel hath many reprobates but by stedfast beleeuing of them with a sure trust and confidence in Christ whereby we are made partakers of his precious merites and assured of the remission of our sinnes That we should say Man hath no more free will than a piece of clay Rom. 9. Sect. 7. Whereas we onely saie that our free will hath no power or strength at all to will or doe the thing that is good without the grace of God That we say the faithfull be sure they shall neuer sinne Rom. 8. Sect. 9. We saie onely that they are sure to be preserued from that sinne which is irremissible which is the sinne against the Holie Ghost That where the Apostle saith It is better to marrie than to burne that the Protestants thinke to burne is nothing else but to be tempted because they would easilie picke quarrels to marrie 1. Corinth 7. Sect. 8. Wee do not so thinke that to burne is onely to be tempted but to be so continually inflamed with lust that the will doth consent desire quenching Fulk ibid. That wee will not haue men woorke well in respect of rewarde at Gods hande 1. Corinth 9. Sect. 7. Wee say not so but that men ought not to worke well onely as hirelings for hope of rewarde but chiefely and principally of louing obedience and duetie as of children to their father That wee seeme by abandoning other names of the Communion sauing this calling it supper to haue it at night and after meate 1. Corinth 11. Sect. 8. Wee retaine other names of this Sacrament beside as the Communion the Sacrament of the bodie and bloud of Christ the Eucharist and such like and it is but a vaine conceit that wee encline it to haue it at night when they see our vsuall and dailie practise to the contrarie They say wee professe that wee make no consecration benediction or sanctification of the bread and wine at all in the Sacrament but let the bread and wine stande aloofe and that wee occupie Christes wordes by way of report onely and narration applying them not at all to the Elements proposed to be occupied 1. Corinth 11. Sect. 9. All this is vtterly false for wee professe that by praise and thankes-giuing for the death of Christ and by prayer vnto God that we may be partakers of the bodie and bloud of Christ we consecrate blesse and sanctifie the bread and wine to be the holy blessed Sacraments of the bodie and bloud of Christ. And wee doe also apply the wordes of institution to the Elements though not after their Magicall fantasie praying thus That wee receiuing the secreatures of bread and wine according to Christes holie iustitution which is rehearsed out of the Gospell in remembrance of his passion may be partakers of his most blessed bodie and bloud This is who seeth

now in England saith he a certaine woman is the Caluinistes chiefe bishop speaking thus in contempt of our gracious Soueraigne Ans. 1. Luther is belied by the Iesuite he saith onely that where a priest cannot be had there a Christian man or womā may stand in as good steed but he maketh no mention of boies Fox pag. 1281. articul 13. condemned by Leo the x. By this we may see what small credit is to be giuen vnto the Iesuite in citing quoting the opinions or sayings of protestants 2. We acknowledge no sacrament of penance and therefore whatsoeuer Luther thought of that sacrament it is no matter to vs. But the other is a foule lie and a monsterous slaunder vttered of our Prince for her Maiesty doth not take vpon her any part of the pastoral office of Bishops or other ministers She neither handleth the word nor sacramentes nor exerciseth ecclesiastical discipline nor ordaineth ministers neither doth any thing else properlie incident to the office of ecclesiasticall persons The Church of England doth giue vnto her that lawfull power that Christian princes alwaies had as to ordaine constitute ecclesiasticall lawes to see that ecclesiasticall persons do faithfully execute their office and charge and to prouide for the encrease and establishment of true religion 3. They might here haue remembred them selues how that sometime indeede a woman was their chiefe Bishop Dame Ione by name that sat 2. yeares in the popes chaire at Rome though for shame and yet with out shame they denie so manifest and plaine a storie 4. yea they them selues are the heretikes that allow women to execute the office of Ministers for in a case of necessitie as they call it they hold it lawfull for lay men and women yea heretikes and infidels to baptize and consequentlie in Baptisme to giue remission of sinnes wherein they goe further then euer Luther did who alloweth Christians onely and faithfull men or women to supplie the want and absence of the priest or minister not heretikes or infidels the Iesuite therefore might heere haue plucked himselfe by the nose who so affirmeth and not haue twitted or cast an other in the teeth with that heresie which hee himselfe mayntayneth Bellarm de baptis lib. 1. cap. 7. In the fift place hee obiecteth the heresie of Proclus who affirmed that concupiscence verily was sinne and that sinne did raigne in those that were borne anew Ans. First that sinne reigneth in the faithful that are regenerate we vtterly denie being so taught by S. Paul Rom. 6. 12. Secondly that sinne notwithstanding remaineth in the regenerate that the cōcupiscence or lust of the flesh euen in them is sinne wee learne out of the same Apostle who doubteth not to call Lust sinne I knew not sinne but by the law and presently he sheweth what sinne hee speaketh of I had not knowen lust except the law had said thou shalt not lust Rom. 7. 7. likewise ver 14. 17. 20. of the same chapter he giueth it the name of sinne So Augustine calleth concupiscence Per peccatum accidens malum an euill brought in by sinne Hypognost articul 4. And againe Aduersus libidinem si certas malum est this is a signe that concupiscence is euill because we striue against it cont Iulian. lib. 3. chap. 21. To affirme then that concupiscence is sinne and properly euill of it selfe is by Saint Pauls rule no heresie In the next place hee compareth vs to the Nouatians who denied that the Church had any power to reconcile men vnto God but onely by baptisme Such are wee he saith because wee take away the Sacrament of penance Answ. First the Nouatians denied recouerie or forgiuenesse of sinnes to those that fell after baptisme But wee affirme no such thing holding no sinne to be irremissible but blasphemie against the spirite according to the scripture and that it is neuer too late for men while they liue here vpon earth to repent them of their sinne and returne vnto God all this wee graunt and yet acknowledge no sacrament of penance Secondly if we are therefore heretikes because we refuse the popish sacraments of confirmation and penance receiuing onely two the sacraments of Baptisme and the Lords supper let Augustine beare vs companie who acknowledgeth no more Dormiente Adam fit Eua de latere sic de Christi latere effluebant aqua sanguis sacramenta quib firmatur ecclesia While Adam slept Eua was made out of his side so out of Christes side issued water blood the sacraments whereby the Church is established In the 7. place Bellarmine obiecteth the heresie of the Sabellianes which affirme one person onely to be in God and not three of this opinion was Michael Seruetus saith he Answ. True it is that this impious wretch Seruetns for this and such like heresies was worthily put to death at Geneua Is it not then great impudencie for the Iesuite to vpbrayde vs with those heresies which he himselfe knoweth are condemned by vs and iudged worthie of death So diuerse amongest them haue bene discried of heresie yea diuerse of their pope-holy fathers Marcellinus sacrificed to Idols Liberius subscribed to the Arians Honorius 2. was a Monothelite Siluester the 2. a Magitian and Necromancer Iohannes the 22. affirmed that the soules of the dead see not God before the resurrection These and diuerse heresies haue bene found euen in the popes chaire Woulde they now thinke them selues wel dealt withal if we should charge their whole Church with these heresies that haue bene maintained by some amongst them yet this hard measure they offer vs in blaming our whole Church for Seruetus heresie and such other Eightlie the Iesuite chargeth vs with the damnable heresies of the Manichees First they did not ascribe the beginning or cause of sin vnto free will but vnto the prince or God of darknes But wee saith the foule mouthed Iesuite are worse then the Manichees for we make God the author of sinne Ans. Here this malicious man doth shamefully belie vs for which of vs euer said that God is the author of sinne or who euer denied that mans free will was the cause of sinne A free will we confesse in man to doe euill without constraint or enforcing but not free at all to make choice of good as Augustine confesseth Liberum arbitrium non est idoneum quae ad Deum pertinent sine Deo aut inchoare aut peragere cont Pelag. hypognost articul 3. Mans free wil is not fit in diuine matters to beginne or finish any thing without God Secondlie saith the Iesuite the Manichees did accuse the fathers and patriarkes of the olde testament so saith he doth Caluine and the rest Ans. The Manichees did not onely condemne the patriarkes but reiected also the olde testament But wee both receiue the law the prophets as the oracles of God neither dowe condemne those holy persons as wicked men though wee excuse not all their infirmities but say with Augustine Sic

itaque regis Dauid legimus peccata sed legimus etiam rectè facta cont Faust. lib. 22. cap. 66. As we read of Dauids sinnes so wee also reade of his wel doing and againe Nos scripturas sanctas non hominum peccata defendimus We maintaine and defend the holy scriptures and not the sinnes of men cont Faust. lib. 22. cap. 45. We aunswere them further as Augustine doth the Manichees Be it saith he that the patriarkes prophets were such euil men as the Manichees slaunder them to be Etiam sic non dico electis eorū sed ipso etiam deo illorum demonstrarentur meliores Yet in that case being we can easely shew that they are much better not onely thē their chiefe doctors ringleaders whom they cal elect but then their God whom they imagine to be polluted defiled with mixing him selfe with the kingdome of darkenes c. Ibid. cap. 98. So we say to our aduersaries that if we should yeelde that the patriarkes had greater infirmities then in deede they had yet confessing that their soules after death were presently receiued vp to heauen we should more honor them then the papistes who howsoeuer they magnifie their holy and vertuous liues yet allow them no place in heauen till the comming of Christ but thrust them downe into a place of darkenes which they affirme to bee a part and member of hell Wherein they doe offer the vilest disgrace to those holy men that can bee Ninthly Bellarmine accuseth vs of Donatisme The Donatists denied that the Church consisteth of good and bad and so saith hee doe wee Answ. Wee confesse that the visible Church vppon earth hath not onely good but bad therein and therefore is compared to a house wherein are vessels of al sorts to a barne floore which hath both chaffe corne to a nette that conteyneth both good and bad fishe But the holy inuisible Catholike Church consisteth only of the elect such as shal be saued for which Church Christ gaue himself to sanctifie it make it vnto himselfe a glorious Church That it should be holy without blame as Saint Paul saith Ephes. 5. 25. 27. And Augustine being taught by the Apostle saith Illa Columba vnica pudica casta sine macula ruga non intelligitur nisi in bonis iustis sanctis That Doue which is but one chast vndefiled vnspotted without wrinkle is not vnderstood but of the good righteous holie De baptism lib. 6. cap. 3. Bernard also saith Sponsa est ecclesia electorum congregatio iustorum The spouse is the Church of the elect and the congregation of the iust Cantic 68. Yet neither Augustine nor Bernard were for so saying counted Donatistes 10 Bellarmine layeth Arrianisme to our charge because they in no wise receiued vnwritten traditions Answ. If this be a point of Arrianisme then Augustine was an Arrian who writteth thus of a certaine booke that treated of saint Thomas Cui scripturae licet non credere non est enim in catholico canone Which booke it is lawfull for vs not to beleeue because it is not in the catholike Canon of the scripture Therfore we are not bound to beleeue more then is contained in scripture and so consequently no vnwritten and vncertaine traditions Our kinde countrimen of Rhemes doe charge vs with a deeper point of Arrianisme because wee affirme that Christ was our priest and mediator both as God and man for this were say they to make Christ his fathers priest and not his sonne and so inferior vnto him Heb. 5. sect 4. Answ. In the office of the priesthood of Christ. 2. thinges must bee considered a ministerie and authoritie the ministeriall part of his priesthood as his obedience his sufferinges and sacrifice Christ executed as he was man but the authoritie of reconciling vs to God he wrought both as God and man So saint Paut sayth that Christ through his eternall spirit offered himselfe Heb. 9. 14. Therefore not as man onely And Augustine Diuina humanitas humana diuinitas mediatrix The diuine humanitie and humane diuinitie is our me diatrix Homil. de ouib cap. 12. Bernard also though a writer in a corrupt time might easily haue resolued them in this point Sicut mediator noster duas naturas humanitatem scilicet diuinitatem coniunxit in vnapersona ita singula eius opera ad hanc siue illam necesse est pertinere naturam quicquid ergo miseriae passus est ex homine contraxit quicquid potenter operatus est a patre habuit As our mediatour hath ioyned two natures the humanitie and diuinitie in one person so all his workes must necessarily be referred to either one of them whatsoeuer he suffered in weaknesse he tooke of his manhood what soeuer he wrought in power hee receiued of his father Serm. de verb. sapient 11 Bellarmine thrusteth vpon vs as an heresie that opinion of Aerius that no prayer or oblation is to bee made for the dead which was saith hee in time past in the auncient Church condemned for an heresie Ans. Wee denie not but that diuerse of the auncient writers did incline too much this waye to maintaine and commende prayer for the dead yea and Augustine seemeth somewhat to bee infected with this errour though sometime his speech soundeth to the contrarie as where he saith Pompa funeris agmina exequiarum viuorum sunt qualiacunque solatia non adiutoria mortuorum impleant ergò homines ista erga suos postremi muneris officia The pompe of funerals the rites and solemnities of buriall are comfortes of the liuing no helpe to the dead let men therefore perfourme this last duetie to their friends De verb. Apost serm 34. But prayer and supplication pertaineth to the rite of buriall ergo it auaileth not the dead And if the honest buriall of our friendes be the last duetie wee owe vnto them the duetie of praying for them afterward is cut off But whatsoeuer some auncient writers thought of this point wee do rather credite the Apostles wordes who saith That euerie man shall receiue according to the things done in his bodie 2. Corinth 5. 10. Therefore it is in vaine to praye for the dead seeing they cannot vndoe that which was done in their flesh or do what was left vndone If Aerius then held no woorse opinion than this wee see no cause why they shoulde condemne him for an heretike 12 Now followe the heresies of Iouinian which the Iesuite with open mouth casteth vpon vs. The first of Iouinians heresies was this Hee affirmed that a man once endued with faith can no more sinne And so Caluin saith hee affirmeth that faith once had cannot be lost Ans. First who seeth not the Iesuites bad dealing as though it were all one to saie The faithfull cannot sinne which Iouiuian affirmed but wee instantly denie and to holde that the faithfull cannot loose their faith Secondly that true faith whereby wee are iustified once graft in a faithfull mans heart

all sinnes and make the offender guiltie much or little Otherwise there should not haue needed any sacrifices to be prouided in the law for sinnes done of ignorance Leuit. 4. Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne Rom. 14. 23. He sayth not whatsoeuer is done of malice or wilfulnes but whatsoeuer is not of faith that is of a sure ground done with certaine knowledge and perswasion and according to a good conscience as Bernard expoundeth the place De fide vera non falsaputo dixisse Apostolum omne quod non ex fide peccatum quia fides falsa fides non est Non autem ex fide vera bonum creditur quod malum est I thinke the Apostle spake of a true not a false faith in that place Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne because a false faith is no faith and by a true faith a man can not beleeue that to be good which is euill lib. de Dispensat Therefore all sinnes done ignorantly and simply though the intent be neuer so good do make the partie that sinneth guiltie and faultie Distinct. 57. There is a double certaintie of saluation Certitudo infallibilis an infallible certitude which a man cannot haue in this life certitudo humana moralis a morall and humane certitude and this is sufficient for a man to rest himselfe vpon Bellarm. de Sacram. lib. 1. cap. 28. Contra. First they speake contraries for how can there be a certitude not vnfallible for that that is certaine is vnfallible and what is fallible is vncertaine Secondly The Apostle saith otherwise Giue diligence to make your calling and election sure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sure without staggering or wauering For if ye do these things ye shall neuer fall 2. Peter 1. 10. Is not this an vnfallible certitude whereby a man shall be assured neuer to fall If this might not be attained vnto in this life S. Peter would not exhort vnto it Distinct. 58. I let passe here their idle fansies and fonde schoole distinctions not fit to bee vsed by boy Sophisters much lesse by men that would be counted graue diuines As how there are causae morales iustificationis aliae causae Physicae Morall causes of our iustification and Physical or naturall causes Bellarm. de effect sacram lib. 2. cap. 11. Contra. This distinction is repugnant to the Iesuites own doctrine for faith is no Morall but a Theologicall vertue as he distinguisheth them but it is faith that iustifieth Rom. 5. 1. Ergo no morall vertue Themselues also exclude the workes of nature from being any cause of iustification how then can there be any Physicall causes for in deede our iustification is no Physicall or naturall but a metaphysicall and supernaturall worke Distinct. 59. Not much vnlike to this is that distinctiō of dolor summus intensiuè appretiatiuè Our sorrow is greatest intensiuely when it is in the highest degree It is the greatest appretiatiuely or in estimation when as wee sorrow not for a thing as much as wee can yet wee had rather loose other things than loose that As a godly man may mourne intensiuelie for the death of his children more than for his sinnes yet hee had rather loose his children than the fauour of God True contrition then requireth sorrow in the highest degree appretiatiuè but not intensiuè Bellarm. lib. 1. de poenitent cap. 11. Contra. It is not possible that a man should weepe more for that which hee lesse esteemeth And if a man mourne more for a temporall losse than for his sinnes hee mourneth not a right Therefore sorrow for our sinnes ought to be the greatest in the highest degree intensiuè And thus true sorrow is described in the Scriptures Wee roare like Beares and mourne like Doues Esay 59. 10. Beholde O Lorde how I am troubled my bowels swell my Liuer is powred out vpon the earth Ierem. Lament 1. 20. O that my head were as the waters and mine eies as fountaines of teares Ierem. 9. 1. Cut off thine haire O Ierusalem and cast it away and take vp a complaint Ierem. 7. 29. They shall mourne like Doues smiting vpon their breastes Nahum 2. 7. In that day shall there be great mourning in Ierusalem as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddo Zachar 12. 11. Thus the Prophets did vse to describe true sorrow for sinne than the which none could be greater as Moses saith Seeke the Lorde with all thine heart and all thy soule Deut. 4. 29. Wherfore sorrow for sinne ought to be the greatest and chiefest of all other euen intensiuè as wee haue said Distinct. 60. Many such goodly distinctions they haue as to shewe that two bodies may be in one place they haue inuented this distinction there is duplex diuisio extrinseca respectu locs intrinseca ratione subiecti There are two kindes of diuision of one thing from another the externall diuision in respect of place the internall in respect of the subiect And so when two bodies are in one place they are internallie distinct from themselues though they be not distinct and diuided in place the first diuision is taken away not the second Bellarm. lib. 3. de Eucharist cap. 3. See what iugling here is and all to breede an impossible conclusion for seeing euery bodie hath his proper place yea spirites haue their proper definite places much more bodies two bodies then must haue two places vnlesse they be mingled and incorporate together and so make but one bodie Thus they distinguish of the being and subsistence of the accidents of bread and wine in the Eucharist without their subiects sunt in se negatiue non positiuè they haue a being in themselues negatiuely not positiuely Bellarm. lib. 3. de Eucharist cap. 24. Is not this good stuffe I pray you what is esse negatiue to be with a negatiue that is put the negatiue non to esse and so non esse by this skilfull Philosophie shall be esse not to be is all one with to be Such toyes these vaine men do traine vp their schollers in and thinke by them to deceiue the worlde I will trouble the Reader at this time with no more of their stuffe by these examples alreadie set foorth wee may giue our iudgement of the rest That their distinctions are lewd sophisticall and vaine inuentions to obscure the truth withall and not woorth a rush all distinctions wee condemne not wee knowe they haue their profitable vse for the finding out of truth and discouering of falshood but such distinctions as serue to countenance errour superstition against the manifest truth of Gods worde such as are these Popish distinctions wee vtterly abhorre condemne Of such distinctions we may say as one of their owne fellowes said of that distinction of Simonie There were Simoniaca de sui natura there were Simoniacall things by nature forbidden by the worde of God as to buy or sell Sacraments Simoniaca iure positiuo Simoniacall things by the positiue lawe and constitutions of

punishment in purgatorie exceedeth the greatest torment in this life Bonauenture denyeth that and saith that the greatest paine of purgatorie onely exceedeth the greatest of this life And so thinketh Bellar. lib. 2. ca. 15. But this is a needelesse question to dispute of the paines of purgatorie for there is no such place as we haue elsewhere shewed That the Saints know our prayers though it be not agreable to scripture yet it is agreed vpon among papists yet about the maner how they come by the knowledge of our praiers it is not amongst them agreed Some thinke that mens praiers are at that instant reuealed to Saints when they are made Others that in the beginning of their happines so soone as they are receiued into heauen they beholde all things in God as in a glasse which appertaine to them And this Bellarmine taketh to be the more probable opinion ca. 20. yet it is but a prophane speculation for God himselfe onely knoweth the heart neither will he giue his honour to another Caietanus Cardinall confoundeth images idols taking them for all one Bellar. and the rest make great difference betweene them Images they say they haue but no Idols Bellarm. de imaginib sanctor lib. 2. cap. 7. Some papistes hold opinion that the Images of the Trinitie ought not to be made Abulens Durand Peresius Caranza who beside alloweth not the Image of Christ to be made Others hold the contrary that they may safely bee made and adored Caietanus Catharinus Sanderus and Bellarmine who for the most part holdeth with the worst opinion Concerning the worshippe of Images it is agreed amongest papistes to be lawfull and commendable though it bee flat contrarie to the second commaundement yet they disagree about the manner of worship Some holde that the Image in it selfe is not at all to bee worshipped but before the Image that onely whose Image it is Sic Durandus Alphonsus de castro Others that the Image is to be worshipped and adored with the same kinde of worship that the exemplar is whose Image it is and so the Image of Christ to bee worshipped as Christ himselfe Sic Caietanus Bonauentur Capreolus and others There is a third opinion that Images properly in themselues may bee worshipped yet with an inferior kinde of worship then that which is due to the Saint resembled by the Image Peresius Catharinus Sanderus to these consenteth Bellarmine de Imaginib sanctor lib. 2. cap. 20. The Papistes make two kindes of Religious worship the higher and more excellent kinde which is due onely vnto God they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the inferiour kinde which may bee giuen vnto Saintes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sic Bellarminus Yet Martinus Peresius a learned papist sayth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot signifie the worship of Sayntes for the worde is translated ser●itude or seruice but we are not seruants to the Saints but their fellow-seruants Bellarm. lib. 1. de beatitud Sanctor cap. 12 Now concerning the sacraments Some of them thinke that the same definition of a sacrament cannot agree vnto the sacraments both of the old and new testament but improperly Sic Magister sententiar Albertus Bonauenture Others thinke that this definition of a sacrament est sacrae rei signum It is a signe of an holy thing may properly comprehende both the olde and new sacrament because it is not of the essence of a sacrament to bee a cause of sanctification but a signe onely Sic. Thom. Dominicus a Soto Martinus Ledesinius and this is the truer opinion But Bellarmine fully liketh neither lib. 1. de sacram cap. 12. Nowe whether the sacramentes doe consist ex verbis rebus of the wordes and the things or elementes as their matter forme it is a great question among papistes Some holde that they doe not but that any thing sensible whether it be the element or the word is the matter and the fourme to bee the signification Sic Dominicus a Soto Caietanus Others thinke that all Sacramentes consiste not of the worde and elementes but some onely Sic Durandus A thirde opinion is that the sacraments onely of the New Testament do consist of these parts not the sacramēts of the old Sic alexand Alensis and others thinke that al sacraments doe consist of these parts either in themselues or some what instead or place of them Sic dominicus a Soto Bellarmine taketh somewhat from all these opinions Lib. 1. de sacram cap. 1 8. But to put the matter out of doubt there must be in euery sacrament both the word and element the word sanctifieth 1. Timoth. 4. 5. and therefore must needs be there nothing can serue insteed of it there must be also an elemēt beside the word to be sanctified and therefore the word cannot be the element The Iesuites do hold that the intention of the minister is necessarie to make a sacrament he must haue a purpose and intentiō Faciendi quod facit ecclesia to do that which the Church doth that is to make a sacrament Sic Bellar. cum alijs Catharinus a papist saith it is not necessary to haue such an intention but that a sacrament may be without it wherein he thinketh aright for the sacrament no more dependeth of the ministers intention thē the preaching of the word doth Concerning the efficacie of the sacraments they do all hold that they are causes of sanctification but not alike Some holde that the minister is the efficient and working cause of iustification the sacrament but the instrument Sic Caietanus Sotus Ledesinius Some contrariwise that the sacrament is the efficient cause the Minister but the instrument Ita Tho. Aquinas ex Bellarm. lib. 1. c. 27. and of these there are two sorts some thinke that the sacraments are but causes Sine quibus non without the which wee are not iustified Sic Bonauentur Scotus Durandus Others thinke that there is verily an effectuall power giuen to the sacraments to iustifie Sic Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 11. What adoe is here about nothing the sacramentes are no instrumentall or efficient causes of our iustification but seales onely of the righteousnes of faith Rom. 4. 11. And it is faith whereby we are iustified Rom. 5. 1. As touching the sacraments of the law some deny that they did iustifie ex opere operantis that is by the faith and deuotion of the receiuer Sic Magister others thought they did And for Circumcision some held it did iustifie ex opere operato by the very worke wrought Sic Alexander Bonauenture Scotus Gabriel Others were of opinion that it did not iustifie of it self but as it was a protestation and application of faith Sic Tho. Capreolus Scotus to this Bellarmine enclineth lib. 2. ca. 13. But if these fellows would haue contented themselues with iustification by faith as the scriptures teach vs they needed not to haue made so many doubtes Concerning the Indeleble character which they say is imprinted in the soule by the sacramentes and can