straitly that that which is once iudged in a Synode and rightly disposed let no man call it againe in question seeking thereby occasion of tumult or of falshood for it is wicked and sacrilegious after the iudgement of so many Priests to leaue any thing to his owne opinion to be discussed Emperours nor Kings nor no lay-men are admitted in generall counsels to defyne matters of faith Morouer neyther are Emperours nor any lay-men howsoeuer learned in holy Scriptures admitted in a generall counsell to defyne matters of faith or at any tyme haue been admitted as the Byshops be who assist the Pope not only as counsellers but also as iudges and for that cause they say so the holy Synode hath decreed For what is more contrary to reason then wher is treated of saluation damnation of good and euill and in defyning of the wholsome doctrin from errour Byshops are both counsellers iudges It is contrary to reason that in matters of saluation damnation lay-meÌ„ should be iudges to commit the iudgmeÌ„t of these things to lay-men which appertaine to the dutie of the Pastor according to Hier. saying cap. 3. I shall giue you Pastors according to my hart and they shall feede you with science and doctrine and S. Paul sayes Eph. 4. He hath giuen some to be Pastors and Doctores But the Emperours from the beginning of the Church vsed to followe and heare the iudgement of the Apostolicall seat and the generall counsells and not to argue or to giue verdâ—cte or pronuÌ„ce sentence with the Byshops of the Church whereupon S. August apud possid in vita eius cap. 18. sayes That the Byshops of the Apostolicall seat Innocent and Zozimus accursed the Pelagians cut theÌ„ of from being members of the Church and wrot letters to the Affrican Churches of the Orient and Occident signifying theÌ„ to be accursed and to be eschewed of all Catholickes Also the most godly Emperor Honorius hearing Pelagius and his fellowers accursed decreed them also by his owne law damned adiudged for Heretickes Emperors and Kings haue made concurrence to the counsels for obedience haue made lawes for obedience to be done for receauing their decrees Lykewise S. August epist 166. maketh mention of the decrees of Constantine the Great to haue the lyk strength against Hereticks So that these godly Emperours neuer medled themselues to be examiners of the counsell farreles iudges but what was decreed in the counsel we read them to haue made lawes for the execution of the counsell Popes verdict and sentence and euer haue shewed themselues as nourses in the Church of God rendering all reuerence and submitting themselues to the Churches authorities as witnesse Ruff. lih 10. Eccl. Hist cap. 2. Valentin Emper. ad Synod Chalc. Martianus Act. 3. Concil Chalced S. Ambros epist. 32. S. Aug. hom de Paschal in ps cont part donat epist 48. Philo. libro de Victimis Athanasius in Epistol ad Solit. vitam agente Epistol idem Suâ—idas in vita Leontij Theodor. lib. 4. cap. 17.18 lib. 4. cap. 5. But contrarywise it is proper to all Heretickes The germanes contemned the counsell of Trent to their great ignominie to contemne all generall counsels of the Church as did most filthyly the ProtestaÌ„ts of Germanie the last of Febu 1537. with ignominy to their nation for dispysing the counsell set and appointed by the Pope whom they will not acknowledge to haue power to iudge nor yet the Byshopes with him but the vniuersall Church But more plainly they may say it doth appertaine also to barbers taylors coblers bakers brewers wolspynners botchers cookes apotecharies and euery mechanicall and all trashkynde of people to whome God neuer gaue authority to iudge neyther were admitted to come in the place of iudgement to hear what was iudged in matters of faith but only to Prelates is committed the authority of feeding as S. Pet. saies 1. Pet. cap. 5. v. 2. Feed the stock of God which is amongst you No Emperour may call a generall counsell lawfully neyther doth his power extend in all partes to be obeyed and depending vpon you thus he Moreouer neyther Emperours of themselues may command a counsell the reason is euident because it is not sayd to the Emperor feed my sheepe but only to Peter and his successors neyther is the Emperor or King head of the Church neyther haue they commandement ouer all Byshopes seing many Byshops remaine out of their iurisdiction and commandement But a generall counsell should be commaunded of him who may coÌ„maund that they assemble otherwise the indictioÌ„ and command shal be of no value or effect and seing the Emperour or King is only a generall defender of the Church to whome for that cause that iurisdiction to commaund a counsell was neuer lawfull neyther at any tyme hath been instituted of the Emperors by authority of theÌ„selues And albeit some de facto haue indicted couÌ„sels notwithstaÌ„ding no otherwayes Whatsoeuer Emperours hath done was by consent of the Pope of Rome theÌ„ with the authority and consent of the Byshop of Rome neyther did the first Byshops in those tymes indicte any counsell without the helpe of the Emperors so that euer the authority of the Pope was ioyned with the Emperor as for example that great couÌ„sell of Nyce was not only gathered of Constantyne Emperor but also of Siluester Pope as it is sayd in the sixt Synod Act. 8. to whome agreeth Ruff. lib. 10. Hist. cap. 1. saying Constantine to haue gathered that great counsell by iudgment of the Pope and Priestes of the Church and not of his owne authority and commandement Moreouer this authority of the Emperor was very necessary for the Byshops to be gathered at one counsell First The authority of the Emperour is necessary for diuers respectes that the Prelates of the Church might by their authority be defended from paganes in the way Secondly that they might be transported with publique charges for then they were poore and might not beare so great chardges of themselues Thirdly because in that tyme the old lawes of the Emperors did rule and were in effect obserued which inhibited all great meetings and couentions without the authority of the Emperor for fear of sedition and coniurations leg conuent cod de epist. cop presb which lawes haue now ceased OBIECTION IT is sayd Iohn 5. search the Scriptures therefore the certaine way to compose controuersies of religion is by the searching of the Scriptures and not by decition and senteÌ„ce of counsell ANSVVER THe Scripture kept the place of a witnes and not of a iudge For Christ hath not sayd search the Scriptures because they bear iudgemeÌ„t of me but he sayth search the scriptures by the indicatiue word because they beare witnes of me for it is not the office of a witnes to giue sentence but only to giue testimonie but it is the iudges part to hear search and examine the witnes
through sanctification of his spirit All the holy Sainctes were Papists and were ordinarily called but God wrought in them extraordinary gifts and holynes of lyfe And that these blessed Sainctes first laborers in Christ vinyarde in our country intruded not themselues but were sent ordinarily and with this ordinary mission God vvrought in them extraordinary gyftes and as the grace of God cooperated with them vnto all holynesse of lyfe and to liue vnspotted of the world trewe friendes to God in keeping his commandemeÌ„tes and good exemples to otheres but also were indewed with the giftes of prophesie and singular learning for the defence of the verity with vertue from God to worke myracles vvhat in the curing of deseases in casting out of diuels in raysing of the dead that not only these thinges was acted in their lyfe but also after their departure at their sepultures and by their relyckes the power of God and the vertues of his Sainctes was made manifest How renoumed was Scotland and what blessing of God abounded in that country when these holy Sanctes lyued in hir Many hundrith yeares Scotland was renoumed for their Sainctes and vertue florished in the land what grace of God religion faith honesty and other morall vertues abouÌ„ded If S. Columbane S. Deicola S. Fintane S. Brandin S. Margret S. Canitius S. Mahut S. Bean. The starres of that nation and many other whom I omit for breuities causes whose lyf and myracles are knowne in all the partes of Schotland God bearing witnes to their myracles in whom God was honored and his name magnified were now in this mortality to be hold the infidelity that reignes for religion For vertue that raygned in the Papistes tymes what vyces rigne with the new Ghospell The Schotish Sanctes conuerted diuers other nations and the Ghospellers byd at home at ease to peruert Catholyckes the publican maneres for honesty I doubt not but God would approue them true Sainctès for the conuersion of that nation both in doctrine and myracles to the confusion of heresy by whose intercessioÌ„ now reygning with God we liue vnder hope for the second conuersioÌ„ vvho not only at home in Scotland liued holy Sainctes but also through feruour of the spirit zeale of the glory of God and of the conuersion of Soules went out departed their natiue countrey accounting all regions their natyue soile for the glory of God conuersion of Soules as not only a fewe we may rehearse for the present whose number at more large is annexed to the end of this booke to the gaeat prayse and honour of Scotland being a region so farre remote froÌ„ the Apostles Seates that not only she is illuminated of them by the glorious profession of the Catholyck religion but also hath sent beames of hir glory to shyne abroad for the conuersioÌ„ of other regions for the ouerthrow of superstion vvith such holynes in behauiour and perfection of lyfe with deuotion and pietie vvith admirable sanctitie angelicall conuersation that as yet vvhen vve remeÌ„ber them they are to vs amazement of nature and in admiration aboue nature glorified by God vvorshiped of men and to day in them the power of God is declared their names and immortall lyfe is recorded of all holy writters they professed the Catholicke faâ—â—â— with vs and lyued therin and in the same faiâ—â— wrought myracles whose remeÌ„brance is for ablessinge to all their posterity vvhat country and kingdome hath not known and had experience of the fruites of the holynes religion fayth and myracles of the Scottish Sainctes Is not their actes and monoments registred in all Catholyck writers as Molaenus Haereseus Surrius Barronius and other ecclesiasticall historiographers Is not their names and nation made plaine and manifested to be only Scotts as Furseus Viron Kilian Fiarce Vinocus Liuinus Columbanus Vltanus Foilanus Hemelinus Forranus VVironus Calestinus Rumoldus Guthagan Etton Plechelmus Fredegando Abell Egbertus Ierom Ogerus Vasnusphus Gislenus Mornonus Vulganus VVinocus Odda These and many blessed Sainctes in diuerse countries are testimonies of the Catholyck religion true faith true lawfull mission vvhich florished in Scotland from whence they came imparted the giftes of God freely for the conuersion of other couÌ„tries that all toÌ„gues might praise the Lord. Therefore for conclusion let the iudicious Reader obserue and diligentely examine his owne coÌ„science whether they were trew Saincts of God An exhortatioÌ„ to the reader to iudg with equitie whether the preists and holy men were trewer Sainctes by whome God wrought so many miracles or the ministers whose lyues ye are eye witnesses of whose vocatioÌ„ profession is coÌ„firmed approued with holynes of lyse and myracles from God or whether Luther Calu Knox c. whose lyues and workes vvith their myracles are extant in Scotland Who would remeÌ„ber their entrance to be with sedition and commotion of all estates with ruyne of all ecclesiasticall policy it is a sufficient argument to know vvhat spirit they vvere of as for their profession and religion it is new and neuer knowne to Scotland before their lyues are euident to all inhabitantes in the country their workes no wayes to the glorie of God vtility of any man or honour of the natioÌ„ If Sorcery Wichcraft and Magick Heresie Paganisme and infidelity if false-hoode flattery and hypocrisie if blood oppression and vsurie if Whordome Sodomy and Buggery may confirme there Ghospel it aboundes and are most frequent with the profession of this newe Ghospell And such are the myracles of the professors of the new Ghospell OBIECTION TRue myracles confirmes the Euangely and doth not ouerthrow it but the Papists myracles doth confirme the Idolatry of the masse and honour of the Sainctes c. Therefore impertinent to the confirmation of the faith ANSVVER I Graunt good frend the myracles of the Papists Church euertes and ouerthrowes the Euangely of Luther Caluin and the reste but not the EuaÌ„gelly of Christ and therefore very pertinent to the confirmation of the Faith and true Religion QVAESTIO VI. Of the verity of myracles in the Catholyck Church WHerefore doe ye Papists esteeme and make so much account of your myracles seing they are plaine illusioÌ„s and inchantmentes of the diuells Calu. in praef instit cent 1. lib. 2. cap. 4. ANSVVER I Say the diuell can vvork no myracle transcending surpassing any maner of way the vsuall The Diuel can work no true myracle aboue nature and accoustumed power of nature but very well he can make such things appeare maruelous in applying actiues with passiues Of the which such we may perceaue him to haue power to do as we may learne in the 13. of the Apoc. and such lyk S. Aug. reportes him to haue done as in his 13. Tract in Iohn Tertul. in Apoiog cap. 22. Corn. tacit lib. 4. Hist Therefore the diuel cannot doe trewe myracles because trew myracles ar done only by the power of God of whome it is written myracles are only
coÌ„pelled to swear him supream iudg in all ecclesiasticall causes as well as in temporall causes Would to God that his Maiesties eyes were illuminated and that God would giue his maiestie a vvyse hart that deeply he might consider how his maiesties good nature vvisdome learning and heauenly gyftes The office of a King is with great vexatioÌ„ His maiesties good nature is euill abused by priuat men for their own particular with the counsell of perticular men is abused laying on his Maiesties shoulders such a heauy burden which his Maiestie is not able to vndergoe For if the temporall gouernement and office of a King be excellent notwithstanding that office is so intricated with inumerable cares and disquietnes of body and mynd by the account making to the lyuing God with vvhom there is no acception of persones who giues to euery man according to his workes if in a Kingdome be great enormityes wrongs which are to be corrected amended by the authority of the Prince yet notwithstanding this dignity is intricated for peace and quietnes in his country with vexation of his body disquietnes of mynd heauines of soule anxiety of spirit with solicitude and care night and day and with fear with mand debate without which euidently declare the greatnes of the charge what I pray thee gentle Reader is the charge of the Church of God and the gouernment of the soules of men in comparison of the common estate Is it lesse in effect do not murther fyre robbery witchcraft sodomy buggery theift c. and these and such lyke vexe and molest the wyselt Prince that euer was or shal be to redresse and mend in haste Lykwyse vvhat enormities are in the Church of God No charge more chargable then the charge of soules vvhat leudnesse and wickednesse in the lyues of men vvhat heresie in religion what erroneous opinions what profession of Mahematisme what inclination to Paganisme what Atheisme in conuersation Is this charge easily performed As for the proofe of the temporall gouernment I hope his Maiesty hath sufficient experience vvhill his Maiesty reygned King in Scotland vvhat day lie complaintes of wrongs vvhat iniquity vvas done in the land to no small griefe and vexation of his Maiesties mynd and body And as for the proofe since his Maiesty hath bene King of great Brittany and head of the Church the Oath sworne to his Maiesty to be supreame iudge in all ecclesiasticall causes vvhat Heresies in religion is falne out in Ingland and Scotland vvhat sectes what opinions betwixt the Protestants and Puritans vvith vvhat disquietnes of mynd hath his Maiestie laboured to accord and agree religion amongst them what muny ficeÌ„cy What paynes without be efiâ— hath us maiesty vsed to compâ—se the erâ—ticks among themselues A head ought to be obeyed and giftes had h s Maiesty bestowed on the mynisteres to accord them to h s Maiesties will And pitiarrs and emulat on s remaines yet If his Maiestie be head why is he not obeyed if obedience how is â—here controuersie and sectes should not the members be obedient to the head and all the members dispose their actions to the wit and gouernment of the head that the head and the meÌ„bers may do one thing conformably for wher the head hath his pure vigent power the meÌ„bres should follow his will and conforme their actioÌ„s to his iudgment Therefore all the Sectaries as the Caluinistes Brunistes Puritaues Protestantes should conforme themselues to the vnity of the head his iudgment And yet notvvithstanding all these sectes allovve and condiscende his Maiesty to be head of the Church All the sects in Britane allowe the king for head and yet they will lyue in their owne opinioÌ„ wherby they would make the King a monster and yet they themselues wil be disordered mebers and beleeue their owne erroneous opinions in erecting Altare against Altare in making Schisme and Heresy But more lyckly that they would make and absurdly belieue his Maiesty to be some monster for whilst they acknowledge his Maiestie head of the Church vvhat is this confession els but that they make his Maiestie head of ech heresie and of all dogmaticall doctrine which is maintained permitted or professed in the land and in his maiesties dominions It importes no small charge vnto his Maiesties soule and body to presume and clame to him Presumption a great synne is not left vnpunished the primacy of the Church and her authority which appertayn not to lay-men of whatsoeuer quality they be of for the history of Achaz and others punished for their presumption is doctrine sufficient to all men of whatsoeuer condition not to presume in the office of the Church for Priest and Kings are of sundrie povvers and distinct preheminence for Kings haue power of the body Priests are ouer the soule Kings haue the sword and Priests the Keyes Diuerse are the conditioÌ„s of Kings and Priests Kings are called nurses but Priests are called parentes Kings are to hear and Priests are to teach Kings at the voyce of the Church are to be obedient and not to coÌ„maund but Priestes are Pastors of the Church and the cheif members of it to whom Kings should be obedient as vnto Christ As they are in dignity discrepant so are they in offices and lyckewyse are discrepant in charge the one ouer the body and the other ouer the soule the one caryeth the temporall sword and the other the spirituall What glory can his Maiesty reape by this spirituall gouernmeÌ„t in claming it To be head of the Church the King can get no honour but rather dishonour And what ignominy hereafter may blot his Maiesties fame and eternallize his name for an other presuptuous Achaz which Ipray God auert from his Maiesty and that God of his diuyne goodnes vvould grant him an vnderstading hart to execute the office of a King dutifully and leaue vnto Priestes what belongeth to Priests so shall his Maiesty eternallize his fame name with the rest of his Maiesties Catholyck progenitores As concerning that the Protestants say the Pope is Antichrist That the Pope is Antichrist it agreeth nether with the law of God nor morall reason their assertion standes neyther with the law of God nor with naturall reason For Antichrist doth properly signify an aduersary and an enemy to Christ As S. Aug. sayes with all kynd of malyce and hatred and as LucÌ„ifer was the Captayne and first of all cursed rebelles and for that was named Sathan that is to say an aduersary euen so is Antichrist named by thss proper name as an euemy to Christ and as a chief captayne of all rebellious and accursed Christians For as God of his goodnes was not content to send his Prophets Priests to teach and guyde men to lyfe eternall but at least sent his owne sonne in mans-flesh thereby to work more effectually our saluation Lykewyse on the otherside Sathan shall procure what lyeth
Hier. de scrip Eccl in Pet. sayes that Peter after the Byshoprick of the Church of Antioch and the preaching of the dispersed of them who had belieued of the circumcision in Pontus Gallatia Cappadocia Asia and Bithinia In the second yeare of the Emperour Claudius he went to Rome He came to Rome in the second yeare of Claudius to expunge Simon Magus there twenty-fyue-yeares kept the cathedral Priesthood vnto the last yeare of Nero. Now that Peter came to Rome was by prouidence of God that he might saue his flock from the raging fury of SimoÌ„ Magus the captayn of all Hereticks as Euseb sayth lib 2. cap. 13.14.15 who was worshipped for a God at Rome whom by his prayers The cause why Peter came to rome was to saue Christs flock from heresy he caused the Diuell who carried him in the ayre who would imitat Christes ascention to let him fall who brake all his bones by that fall whereupon his death shortly insued after But Nero who tooke delyke in his Sorcery being sore offended with S. Peter for this cause sought by all meanes his apprehension and distrâ—ction as witnes Egesipp lib. 3. cap. 2. At what tyme the Christians being very lothe to be depriued of so good a Pastor with much intreating and many teares prayed him to remoue a litle out of the way at whose request although vnwilling he began to take his journey out of the city but when he came to the port he sawe Christ coming towards him whoÌ„ he worshiped sayd Lord whether goest thow who answered I go to Rome to be crucifyed againe Peter vnderstanding thereby Christ appeareth in the way to S. Peter and telles him that he was going to rome to be crucified againe as S. Ambros epist 32. lib. 5. That Christ would suffer in him at Rome who suffers in euery one of his Sainctes not by payne of body but by compassion of pity vpon this vision Peter returned and being taken was put to death on the crosse with his head downward So that as Egesipp lib. 3. cap. 2. sayes Christ himself appointed Rome to be the place wher he should rest Lykewise Orig. Tom. 3 com in gen Peter at last whyl he remained at Rome is made a lyk to the suffering of our Lord with his head downward for so he desyred to suffer Also Eus lib. 2. cap. 5. alledgeth Dionysius the corinthian who liued in the hundrith yeare after the death of the Apostle Dionisius the corinthians report of S. Peter and reportes him to haue sayd when I was in this towne of Rome sayes he both Peter and Paul togeather teaching at one tyme were crowned with Martyrdome Lykewise for the verification of the same purpose Tertul. writeth Haeret. Hâ—pp apud pruden in peristeph Cyp. de vnit Eccl. Arnob. aduers gent. Bar. ann tom 1. anno Christi 44. num 25. By which testimonies we learne that Christ had a special regard that Peter and his fellow Apostle Paul might die at Rome for diuerse causes alleadged of the Fathers Peter and Paul suffering was for their greater glory The causes of the two Apostles suffering aâ— Rome And first as S. Aug de sanctis sermon 27. was for the glory of the Apostles that Rome might not lack eyther of theÌ„ aâ— dear bretheren Secondly for the distruction of superstition Aug. ibid. That where the head of superstition was there might be the head of holynes where the Prince of the gentiles dwelt there the Princes of the Church might be Thirdly for the honour of the west Church for as S. Aug. ibib sayes VVher as our Lord hath made the cast partes glorious with his owne passion he â—ouchsased in his stead that it might be no lesse to giue light to the west partes by the blood of his Apostles And albeit out Lords passion suffiseth vs for our saluation yet their martyr-dome also hath done vs good for an example Fourthly for the spreading abroad of the holy euangely as sayes Leo serm de nat Pet. Paul That the light of the truth VVhich was reuealed for the saluation of all nations might spread it self more effectually from the very head throughout the whole body Now therefore seing God hath vsed the city of Rome as a most speciall meane to enlarge and spread his faith through all the world it came to pase also that the same city as Leo sayes ibid. Is made the head of the world through the holy-see of S. Peter that it may rule more lardgely by Gods religion then by earthely dominion OBIECTION PAul writting to the Romans salutes not Peter neyther the writters of the tyme whem he come to Rome agree amongst themselses but disagree and vary Ergo Peter was neuer at Rome ANSVVER Certayne reasons why Peter was not alwayes at Rome THe reason of the not finding Peter at Rome or that by salutation he is not mentioned in S. Pauls epistle is his frequent peregrination in diuerse prouinces for the preaching of the faith by which reason it was a cause sufficient to writers to vary of the tyme of his comming to Rome yet notwithstaÌ„ding it followeth not to conclude that he was not in Rome except some would conclude by the lyk argument that Christ hath not suffered because that all writers doe not agree amongst themselues of the tyme. For S. Ignatius S. Iohns disciple writting to the Trallianes doth affirme Christ to haue preached in the thirthy three-yeare of his age If we belieue the variety of wryrers we may doubt of Christs sufferings Some other coÌ„tendes Christ to be liuing and to haue preached in the 40. and 46. yeares of his age And therefore because this variety is amongst the wryters doth it follow that Christ hath not suffered or that he was neuer in Ierusalem neyther to haue been crucifyed in Golgotha And consequently if they doubt of S. Peters being in Rome euen so also may they iustly doubt Christ not to haue been in Ierusalem neyther suffered in Golgotha Therefore for conclusion it is not to be doubted but that S. Luke would haue made mention of their saluting one another and the tyme of his comming to Rome and of the apparition of Christ to S. Peter as he writ the appearing of Christ to S. Paul if he had gone forward in his history of the actes of the Apostles but seing he continued not his narration vntill the death of S. Peter and S. Paul we must needes credit these faithfull ancient wryters who were neerer the tyme of the Apostles then your negatiue denyall without any warrant but euer denying as men without reason with clamorous voyces lyk frogges in the pudle in the nyght tyme euer crying babling nothing prouing QVESTIO X. Of Ioane the eight Pope a woman VVHerefore doe the Papists euer affirme and say the Pope to receaue the Primacy of the whole Church from Christ immediatly who of the Church by lawfull way is receaued in the chayr of
Christ according to his persone should not be God or at least there should not equality of good-head be belieued And moreouer in his Comment in cap. 14. Gen. v. 18. and in 6. Ioh. v. 57 he sayes Christ our Lord to be but a second King next to God and a second cause of lyfe Hath this Arch-Rabbi had any respect to S. Paul Phil. 2. who iustifieth his equality with his Father to rob him so easily Moreouer the very deity it self could not retayne Caluin frō this abominable blasphemy Lykewyse Caluin affirmes That the word of the creation was imperfect for somuch that in Heauen he is not dutifully and sincerely serued without sinne committed euen by the Angells them selues Calu. in c. 1. col vers 20. Which doctrine is contrary to the Scriptures that witnes that in that Heauenly Citty is no vnclean thing or sinne Apoc. 21 Seing that all power and gouernement belongs to the Father all wisdome knowledge and doctrine belongs to the sonne all begnity liberaltty plenitude and sanctification is appropriated and imputed to the holy Ghost all good thinges are ascrybed to the three persones not excluding any good from any of them as being all three equall God and consequently not vnequally fountaynes of all good things as well in particular as in generall Morouer concerning this article which sayes and in Iesus Christ his only Sonne our Lord Against the 2. Article How the Protestants deny Christ in the Creed 16.17.18.19 many of the Protestant Professors appeare to be against this article For some affirme that Christ is not the Messias others saye that the name of Christ is a filthy name Some other that he was a deceauer of the world and that he was not God Some other sayd that he had but a meane measure of Godhead Some lykewyse sayd that he was ignorant and his discourse absurde and himself no more God then Socrates and Trismegistus c. All these blaspemies are extant in the first and second article of the family of loue as wryteth Rogerus against the sect of the family of loue printed at Lōdon an 1579. Lykewyse Cartwright discentes nothing from his former false bretheren whyll he sayes in his 2. replic pag. 191. That he could not be persuaded that the Israelites was so madde as to belieue him to be the liuing God whom with their eyes they did behold to be a miserable and simple man And therefore all the world may see of themselues what distrust they haue of Ghrist to be God and our Lord. Morouer they impugne this Article who equal themselues in Gods fauour in right to Heauen vnto Iesus Christ the only begotten consubstantiall Sonne our Lord. Lykewyse they belieue not in Iesus Christ our Lord who distrust any part of his doctrine whether it be of the Sacramēts or whatsoeuer other point because they conceaue it not in their vnderstanding as Caluin affirmes in cap. 6. 7. Iob when the reason of any thing doth not appeare vnto vs such is our great Pryde that we esteeme it nothing Lykewyse they misbelieue this article who thereby haue made God the Father sometymes not to vnderstand which is his begetting For sayes Caluin it is foolishnes to think that God the Father doth continually begett his Sonne And so the sonne is abolished who is not otherwayes actually the Sonne of the Father but by determinating actualy the relation of the Father to himself Wherupon Luther disp de deo Thes 18. Tom. 2. VVittemb lat It is no marueil saies he if Arius if a Iew if Mahomet and all the wold denie Christ to be the Sonne of God And farlesse marueil if the Protestant be also thus persuaded to deny Christ cōsidering their principall Euangelistes teach the same Against the 3. Article Moreouer as concerning that Article Who was cōceaued of the holy Ghost borne of the Virgin Marie How the Protestants deny Christ to be conceaued of the holy Ghost and borne of the Virgin Mary in the creed It is impugned misbelieued by those who blasphemously affirme the holy Ghost to haue been Father to Christ in manner of other Fathers towards their children as reportes Maldonat in cap. 1. Mat. Lykewyse others misbelieue this Article who belieue Christ to haue byn only cōceaued but not borne of a Virgin Caluino-Turc pag. 530. 531. Greg. de Valent. de Virg. S. Mariae To which assertiō Caluin condiscendes saying That the blessed Virgin was in manner weakenned in trauail vpon Christ as other women in their trauail Lyckewyse they misbelieue this Article who equal or prefer themselues to be the B. V. M. and such are the Houling-Puritā-typling Sisters with Rachel Arnot the maistresse of the congregation with Smythes doughters besides these ring-leaders there is not a dyrtie hussy or drabbe in the I le of Britane but will auouch the same which the poore people would not so ignorantly doe if they were not teached of their high diuynes soe to say and belieue against the true grounds of Scripture that pronunceth her prerogatiue to be blessed aboue all women and to conceaue and beare a child and he to be the God of Heauen earth which no other women euer had or did Moreouer they misbelieue this Article who make Christs body as much in Abrahams tyme as when it was conceaued and borne by the Virgin Mary not only in efficacy but also in essence nature as Beza did lib. cont Hesbusium fol. 284. On this sam subiect is the colloq mompel gart saying Christs body was extant euen in the tyme of Abrahā Wherupon these absurdities followes that Christ was true man in essence and in existence before his conception birth so consequently the Angel sayd not true to the sheephearders that this day is borne to you a Sauiour and that the Blessed Virgin Marie was not his Mother c. Moreouer they make Christ to haue two bodies one deliuered in the supper another borne of the Virgin Mary because they forge another Christ thē was her Sōne as witnes aucto diallactici vide Bellarm. 5. Euang. pag. 98. Colon. 1595. Moreouer they misbelieue this Article who affirme that Christ was not eternally but began only at the tyme of his birth Symler in praef lib. de aeterno dei filio Against the 4. Article How the Protestants deny this article that he suffered and how they euacuate his passion Moreouer as concerning that Article That he suffered vnder Pontius Pilat was crucifyed dead and buryed many Protestants deny this Article by euacuating the Passion of Christ and that by saying that the blood is putrifyed in the earth and for that cause which is putrifyed and corrupt cānot redeeme vs but the Apostle defendes the contrary 1. Pet. 1. who sayes VVe were not redeemed by any corruptible pryce Morouer they euacuate the passion of Christ according to all other partes who with Molineus in Harm Euang. makes the merits of Christs of no effect saying they profit vs
of S. Iames for Apochripha to conuince him of this error it cannot be done by the Scripture neyther of himself because he is iudge in his own cause neyther is he to be belieued by the reuelation of his priuat spirit for all do make for confirmation of his opinion therefâ—re to conuince him rightly they must haue recourse to the tradition of the Church as sayes S. Aug. Serm. 191. de temp We receaue the new and ould testament in the nomber of bookes the which by authority of the Catholik Church is delyuered to vs. Moreouer this other argument is to be obserued for the Church from the beginning of the world till Moyses two thowsand yeares was without Scripture only ruled by traditions and rites of the sacrifice In the new testameÌ„nt Christ hath written nothing neyther commaunded to wryte but well he sayth Marc. 16. vers 15. Preach you the Euangely to all creatures in which mission no precept is giuen of writing for saluation depends vpon the word of God and not vpon books neyther the written Scripture nor reuelation or prophesie c. For that cause Iraen lib. 3. cap. 4. wryteth that some nations in his tyme had the fayth of Christ and yet no Scripture Where is it found in the Scripture to reiect traditions But this is the cause why you withstand all traditioÌ„s for these being banished easily you may peruert and glosse the Scriptures and apply them to your own myndes which traditions of the holy Church staÌ„d out against you for the clearing of the verity and will not suffer the Scriptures to be corrupted with your fansies which corrupt interpretations permitted and suffered we shall see you follow traditions and consequently your owne inuentions to be for holy Scripture for the first part is probable for Caluin himself approueth the traditions of the Iewes commenting in the 104 Psal sec 18. Many things remayned amoÌ„gst them by successiue tradition which were godly and necessary for them of the which no mention is made in the Scriptures Out of which place it followeth that Caluin willingly would Iudaize and as concerning the following of their owne senses in reiecting the traditioÌ„s of the holy Ghost to erect their own traditions contrary to the written word I would most willingly be satiefyed by what reason eyther spirituall or morall why you Puritans vphold and set vp traditions as the pillar of repentance denigrate and made black and sinners to stand there to the spectacle of the whole Church with the showing of their heades at the crosse bound with yron chaynes in tyme of Market your sackcloth at the Church doore and carting of poor women thorow the city of whom haue you learned to punish fornicators by this ignominious punishement Others by the purse and to pardon some who are fatt and to execute rigor vpon the poor From whence haue you receaued that tradition in your prayers to hould your noses in others tailes and to ly groaning on the ground after the manner of the Iewes From vvhence is that tradition to fast on sondayes and feast on frydayes and to work on Christmas day and other Sainctes dayes and to obserue monday suter sonday for holy day These a thowsand more are the Puritanes traditions of their owne inuentioÌ„ vvithout any Scripture or vvritteÌ„ word and yet not vvithstanding they vvill abolishe and condemne all traditions and yet vvill set vp and authorize traditions of their owne authority contrary to the law of God and all Scripture and tradition of any age before passed OBIECTION THe Lord sayth Deut. 12. vers 32. What I coÌ„mand thee do thow that vnto the Lord only neyther shalt thou add any thing neyther diminish Therefore traditions are superfluous and in vaine ANSVVER IF this argument were auaileable neyther the Prophets nor the Apostles ought to haue writteÌ„ any thing after Moyses for vvhat the Prophets haue vvritten are not conteyned in Moyses neyther vvhat the Euangelists Apostles haue wryten are contayeed in the old testament but generally and implicite In lyke sorte traditions are contayned in the Scripture implicite vvheÌ„ Christ sayd Luc. 10 v. 16. Who heareth you heareth me Therfore the sense of these vvordes vvhich sayth that thou shall add nothing nor diminish is that thou shalt add nothing repugnaÌ„t vnto those things vvhich are commaunded in the Scripture In this same sense sayth S. Paul Gal. 1. v. 8. Whether we or an Angel froÌ„ Heauen euangelise to you otherwise then that which we haue euangelized let him be accursed For that praeposition praeter is asmuch to say as coÌ„trary for otherwaies should he be contrary to himself who added many things as his epistles witnes And lykewyse S. Iohn after he had written the Apocalyps and Euangely who threateneth the same curse should fall in the same sentenceÌ„ in adding to his Epistles in which are many precepts traditions which are not contayned in the Apocalyps and Euangely c. OBIECTION THE Scripture is a Rule to belieue therefore it ought to contayne all things which are to be belieued ANSVVER THe Scripture is a Rule to belieue but not adequat and a right Rule because the right Rule is the word of God whether written or delyuered by Tradition OBIECTION THese things are written that you may belieue that Iesus is the Sonne of God and that belieuing you may haue lyfe in his name But all things writen serue to belieue in Christ therefore all beliefe is written ANSVVER SAinct Paul sayes that Abel Enoch Noe Abraham Isac Iacob Heb. 11. had vndoubtedly true fayth yet they had no Scripture writen Againe the primitiue Church at least tenne yeares after Christ had no Scripture written who will say but that they had true faith Againe these are not conteyned in the written word to vvit the consubstantiality of the Trinity the procession of the holy Ghost the virginity of the most blessed Virgin Mary the baptising of children and the not rebaptising of them who are baptised of Heretickes the breaking of the Sabaoth keeping of Sonday the obseruing of Easter the receauing of the Sacraments fasting the eating of blood strangled meares prohibeted in the Law and EuaÌ„gely Act. 15 But I would know of the ProtestaÌ„tes what Scripture they haue for women to singe Psalmes and to glosse on the Scriptures in the Church at home and in the tauernes What Scripture haue you for your pillary crosse steeple repeÌ„tance seat carting and showing of poore women for the sinne of fornication for these things you haue no Scripture but must build vpon traditioÌ„s eyther true or false QVAESTIO XVIII Of the certitude of Hope WHerefore doe the Papists deny that our Hope is with certitude seing it is written that Hope maketh vs not ashamed but bringeth with it certitude and confidence Luth art 10 11. Caluin lib. 3. instit cap 2. § 16. ANSVVER WHat certitude assured hope can the Protestants haue in our Sauiour if they defend and abyde in the principall poincts of their
if we read our seruice prayer in latin the vulgar people vnderstand it not and so there is no more fruit of the hearing of it then if a man should speake to the wall ANSVVER THE Apostles saying contaynes a threefold prayer to wit the prayer of the mouth of the spirit and mynd to which these three concurre the tongue the will and vnderstanding therefore if any pray with his mouth in an vnknowne tongue he prayeth with mouth and wil if he do it for Gods cause but his mynd is without fruit to wit that he vnderstandes not because what he prayeth he vnderstandes not in the meane tyme his prayer is not without fruit for it is meritorious to him that prayeth and acceptable to God albeit it be destitute of that fruit which men conceaue by vnderstanding And therefore S. Paul striueth to declare the gift of Prophesie which is the gift of the exposition of holy Scriptures of the wordes of prayer to be more excellent then the gift of the tongue For seing dayly the nomber of the faithful increased both amōgst Ethnicks Iewes to the fayth of Christ it was not requisit to the faithfull to speake before them with many tongues but then it was their part to speak with interpretation of the Scriptures without which they vnderstood not the Scriptures But now when men are taught in the faith of Christ and with continuall preaching of the word what seruice or prayers are in the Church that men are ignorant of Therefore to what end should diuyne seruice be done in a vulgar tongue seing it is not vnknowne to the vulgar what is done in the Masse or songes of the Church whilst they cōforme their gestures to the wordes of the Priest now to stand now to bowe their kne now to left vp their handes and eyes now to knok on their briests c But to the argument which the heretick propoundeth against the Masse and Church mattens we answere that S. Paul speakes of a Prophet Preacher or Doctor to interprete the Scriptures as Hierome Austen witnes in this place Secondly that albeit the lay-men vnderstād not the wordes yet notwithstanding they vnderstād all the mysteries by preaching Therfore the hearing of masse and matines and euen songe is not vnprofitable c. howbeit they vnderstand not the wordes for these reasons Because in the diuyne seruice of the Church vsually is read the holy Scripture by which the holy Ghost speaketh to vs and powreth some grace in our hartes tongues to expresse our affection and loue towardes God Thirdely the Priest in the masse or collect is comon minister of the whole Church and therfore all hearers of Gods seruice should repose in the faith of the Catholick Church for she more pleaseth God is more acceptable to him as a most beloued spouse to her husband then the fayth of any priuat men Fourthly the end of masse and diuyne seruice is common to all whether he vnderstand or no for the end of the masse the Churches intentiō is knowne to all to wit that the sacrifice is offered for the liuing and the dead in remembrance of the death and passion of Christ to the honour of God and edification of his Church and to the honour of the Blessed Virgin Marie all his Saincts and therefore it sufficeth that we haue diuyne seruice in Latin seing it is one of the three chiefe tongues which Christ sanctifyed on the Crosse and that we appertayne to the latin Church c. QVAESTIO XX. Of the Aue Maria. HOw doth the simple Papists think that they pray when they rehearse the Angelicall salutation saying Aue Maria Aue Maria. Caluin in Harm Euang. c. ANSVVER THe Catholick Papists commit no foolishnes while they repeat the Angelical salutation as a true prayer The reason is because prayer consisteth in two partes the on is in giuing of thanks and the other in prayer therefore it is not affected folly or superstition The maior is euident because there are many Psalmes of Dauid that are only actions of thankes and yet are nombered amongst Ecclesiasticall prayers also they are nōbred by their owne iudgement in the Psalmists in this manner were Paul and Sylas at midnyght praysing and praying our Lord. Act. 16. v. 25. For the petitions desyres are included in the prayer it self Moreouer the minor is euident first because while we repeat that prayer we commemorat the benefit of our redemption by the incarnation of the sonne of God by way of thankes giuing therfore it is to be thought and adiudged for a prayer Secondly it is a prayer implicit by way of insinuation as was the prayer of the leprous-man to Christ saying Lord if thou wilt thou canst make me cleane Matth. 8 v 2. To whom Christ answered condiscending to his inward desyre and priuat prayer saying I will be thou clean Euen so in lyke manner whyl we repeat this salutation we pray-the Mother of God to haue a care of vs implicitly Thirdely the holy Church hath put to this a formall and expresse prayer in the end of the Salutation saying holy Mother of God pray for vs now and in the houre of our death Therefore it is a true prayer howsoeuer the ennemies of God and of his blessed Mother whisper and murmure against her OBIECTION YF the Angelicall Salutation be allowed of the Catholickes for a prayer Ergo when the Angell saluted the Virgin he prayed to her ANSVVER THe sequel is absurd for altough he saluted her it followes not that he prayed to her as whē the action of a thing is of a diuerse intentiō end it acquires a diuerse name and action according to philosophicall axiomes saying Actus accepit speciē ab obiecto that is to say the deede taketh his forme of the obiect As for example when any man shal giue an almes for the succour of his nyghbour this intention and end of his worke is obserued of the forme of the obiect in that he is his nyghbour poore and in the other when any man shall giue an almes to deceaue his nyghbour the first is meritorious but in the second he demerites Euen so the intention and end of the Angels salutation it was congratulatory in that she was chosen to be the Mother of Christ And therefore he is not cōuinced in this to haue prayed to her but by the same axiom to haue saluted her OBIECTION THe Papists vsurpe an others office which is wronge whyle they salut the Blessed Virgin Mary they vsurpe the office of the Angell therefore they sinne in making this salutation which is not proper for them to do but the Angell ANSVVER I Deny the vsurping of an others office this is inuented of Caluins owne head But Athan. in Euāgel de dei para sayth that all the Spirits of the celestiall Hierarchies doe incessantly sing in Heauen this glorious and vnspeakable hymne and for this cause it followeth that not only this
without freewill and so to conclude we are sayd to be Clay and he our former respectiue OBIECTION FRewill in good things cannot fall in euill euen so to aryse to good or euill it can be without an excitant and mouing helpe therefore will is not free ANSVVER VVHo easily hath fallne in a pit cannot easily go out of the same euen so grace been taken from a man he cannot worke good workes so much is the imbecillity of nature in the working of good without grace whereupon it concludes that the grace of God cōcurreth with free will and freewill with the grace of God so that it is neuer alone QVAESTIO XXV Of Prescience Predestination and Freevvill VVHerefore doth the Papists affirme that the will of man is free seing in the prescience of God in so much as it is infallible and necessary takes away this liberty for the diuyne will of God from eternity hath predefynit and predestinat all things in perticular before the forseen determination of second causes sometyme in tyme to come Wicl art 27. Calu. lib. de aetern de prou lib. 1. inst cap. 18. § 1. lib. 3. cap. 23. § 2.4 7.8.9 ANSVVER I Say the infallible eternal prescience of God taketh not away neyther preiudges the liberty of humane freewill or eyther is tyed to the chanches of tyme because the prescience worketh nothing in the future actions of humane will therefore it bringeth not to man any necessity The Sequell is plaine seing necessity is an intrinsecall cōdition of the thing which forces or necessitates The antecedent also is probable because prescience presupposes things to be future and to depēd on ther obiects the which S. Augustin induces w th a similitude lib. 3. de lib. arb cap. 3.4 saying For as thou with thy memory forceth not to be done which hath passed euen so God by his presciēce forceth nothing to be done which are to come to passe thus he Because memorie maketh not but presupposes things to be passed as for exāple my sight by which I see Iohn to Runne is not the cause of his course euen so the prescience of God of future things maketh them not to be future but presuposes things to be futurs so that these things should not be frō eternity of God the foreknower of al the actiōs of our wil except such things somtyme were in tyme to come neyther it is because God hath for known that to com therfor it is come but the contrary because God forseeth it to come of their owne causes therefore God knoweth things to come Which grounds are sufficient to agree the prescience of God with frewill and fortune and this hath been the common opinion of the Fathers so that now no lesse is the liberty of freewill or the fortunne of things then if there should be no prescience about future effectes absolutly But it is to be obserued this distinction betwene prescience and freewill first I say by a familiar similitude in sensu composito it is necessary the Runner to moue as it is impossible the rūner not to moue for it implicates a contradiction to agree these two any to runne and not to moue euen so in sensu composito is it necessary that Iohn who is forseen of God to sinne sinne for it is impossible to remayne in the prescience of God that Iohn shall sinne and not sinne because these two cannot subsiste and consist in God that he is to forseee a man to sinne and not sinne togeather But in the contrary it followeth that in sensu diuiso that he who is Running may absolutly not moue because he may not Rune euen Iohn who is forseen of God to sinne may absolutly not sinne because if he may not sinne he was not to sinne neyther hath he stand praeexistant in Gods prescience that he is to sinne How vngodly is the mynd of Caluin and Beza who say sinne and all euill not only to be forseen of God but also in particular before all forseen determination of created frewill to haue been decreed willed and predestinat of God as reporteth Calu. lib. 1. inst cap. 23. § 7. saying it was decreed of God that Adam should sinne and a litie after he sayth it is a horrible decreet truely I must confesse notwithstanding no man can iustify this but that God hath forseen what euent man was to haue before he made him and therefore what he hath forseen by his decreet so hath he ordayned To iustify this villanous assertion he induceth S. Austen to fauour his erroneous opinion saying I doubt not with S. Austen simplicitly to cōfesse that the will of God is the necessity of things and that necessity is also necessary to be futur what he hath willed Moreouer in the 9. § he sayth that the reprobat would be thought excusable in sinning because they cānot eshewe the necessity seing it is the ordination of God and cast on them by way of necessitie but we deny them to be rightly excused for somuch as the ordination of God of which they cōplayne them to be destinat to punishement and damnation it standes with his equity In which Caluin concludes God to be the author of sinne and of the damnation of man for of this paradox followeth that God not only willeth sinne but efficaciterly doth procure sinne instigateth and forceth them to sinne and therefore it followeth that God hath not from eternity definit and in perticular to haue ordayned any thing before forseen determination of the second causes neyther the electiō of the predestinat to glorie to be without preuision of second causes vse of freewill and the grace of God OBIECTION FRom a necessary cause must proceed a necessary effect but the prescience and knowledge of God is the cause of all things and first of Free-will as a necessary effect because that God can not want it Therefore all things for knowne of God are of necessary effectes and commeth to passe necessarily ANSVVER OF a necessary cause necessarly working necessarly and not freely the effect followeth such is not the knowledg and prescience of God for prescience is not the cause of future things but supposes them to be futures but of naturall causes as science learning are necessary to a necessary effect yet notwithstanding not so necessary but are of Gods diuyne will independently of free election of humane will if we speake of the effectes which depend of created freewill OBIECTION SAinct Peter speaking of the death of Christ act 2. v. 23. sayth that Iesus of Nazareth was delyuered by definit counsell and for knowledge of God whom they killed and Crucifyed by the handes of the wicked and in cap. 4. v. 27. They truly cōueynned in that City against thy holy child Iesus whome thow anointed Herode and Pontius Pilate with the Gentills and people of Israel to do which thy hand and counsell hath decreed to be done Therefore the crucifying of Christ and consequently the sinne of the crucifyers
saying 2. Tim. 2. v. 21. If any man therefore shall cleange himselfe of these he shall be an veshell sanctifyed in honour and profitable to the Lord and prepared to euery good worke Therefore when he sayes profitable the Apostle meanes that both he is for the honour of God and for perfection disposing him self to all good workes And therefore for that cause it is sayd behould good seruands and faithfull c. Matth. 25. v. 21. For a good and faithfull seruand is profitable when their vvorkes are done by the grace of God OBIECTION THe Apostle sayth that the sufferings of this tyme are not worthy to the futur glory which shal be reuealed vnto vs Rom. 8 v. 18. but oâ—r workes hath not that dignity with that reward of glory And therefore as Bern. serm de annunciat sayth neyther are the merits of man such that for them lyfe eternall is due of right neyther God doth iniury if he giue not the same vnto vs. ANSVVER I Confesse that our good workes is not worthy so much glory be Phisicall equallity for the rewarde is much more excellent nor the workes are if we consider them according to their substance trauails and continuance Yet notwihstanding they bring vvith them eternall glory as the Apostle sayth 2. cor 4. v. 17. For our light afflictions which is but for a moment causeth vnto vs a farre more excellent weight of glory Which workes as thy proceed from grace and the spirit of Christ is worthy of eternall lyfe with proportioned excellency of glory as such is betwixt the midst and the end the fight and the victory the race the vining for the workes of the righteous which truly we call worthy of eternall lyfe are midst and are most fitly ordayned to that end and of that same right ruell measured to wit in Gods diuine and supernaturall grace to which end such rewardes answers according to the right ruell of his prouidence Moreouer Bern saying That our merites according to themselue is not such that by them God by right is debter of lyfe eternall but to haue lyfe eternal through vvorkes is of his good grace and diuine promise therefore God hath obliged himself to recompense these good works done in grace if we consider togeather his ordination to worke good vvorkes and the promise of recompensation for good workes concludes that he is obliged himselfe to this recompensatioÌ„ to giue life eternal for ye working of good works and consequently man merites lyfe eternall and his vvorkes are such that doth merite and also receaues great iniury if God effectuat not his owne promisse in remuneration of his good workes OBIECTION YF we may merite any thing it redoundes to the iniury of Christs merites as thought it were not sufficient except they be helped of ours which is false And therefore vve reformed are scrupulous to graunt any merit and satisfactions to the Papists lest vve should seeme to doe iniury to Christ ANSVVER THe assumptioÌ„ is false because our merites absolutly hath power and vertue from the infinit merites of Christ and doth proceed come from him vvhich makes our merite acceptable yee also our merites are the workes of Christ which he himself vvorketh in vs by his spirit and according to the measure of his giftes giuen vs as teache S. Aug. Epist 105. And for that cause all their prayse worth redoundeth to the greater glory of Christ for that we affirme the merites of Christ to be of so great efficacy that not only they purchesse remission of sinnes and eternal lyfe but they haue merited vertue for vs to promerit and this promeriting maketh a place and redoundes to the prayse of Gods diuyne power vvho not oÌ„ly hath created all things and worketh in all things but also in all thing created hath giuen povver of vvorking how much more by the rest of his creatures hath he giuen power and frewill to man to merit eternall lyfe which is the end of his creation And therefore God requyres our merites for he would not apply to vs the merites of Christ yt by them vve might obtayne beatitude immediate of themselues for in so doing they shoul make vs slouthfull idle and the merites of Christ lesse famous and out of reputation but so they are applyed to vs that vve may obtayne immediate vertue to merit vvhich except vve vse the merites of Christ they should profite vs nothing to eternall lyfe As for your scruppels in the conclusion of this subiect they shal be discouered QVAESTIO XXXII Of Good workes done in respect of an eternall rewarde WHerefore doe the Papists teach that a man may doe and exhibet some good workes in respect of eternall reward seing this forme of doing is mercenary and â—â—le Calu lib. 3. inst cap. 18. § 2. ANSVVER TO work good workes in respect of an eternall revvard it is both leesome honest and acceptable vnto God as is proued of the Psal 118. v. 112 saying I haue inclyned my hart to doe thy iustifications for euer for a revvard Therefore it is euident that Dauid in respect of a revvard had inclyned his hart to doe iustifications and to keepe the Lavv of God For the first principall cause of it selfe vvherefore the mynd of man is applyed and inclyned to follovv the commandenients of God is God and his will because God so willeth and commandes and this obedience and obseruance is due to his owne Maiesty but notwithstanding the second and lesse principall cause why they followed keeped the coÌ„maÌ„dements is the hope of a reward or remuneration And albeit that Hereticks would make this subterfuge to turne ly for a reward vnto the end and to say for euer but this helpeth them not because immediatly ly goeth before whyle the Prophet sayth in aeternum for so in S. Hierome translation it is sayd inclinaui cor meum ad faciendas iustificationes tuas in aeternum propter reeributionem Moreouer Iohn Baptist and our Blessed Sauiour with his Apostles by his command for hope of eternall lyfe with this proposition beganne their preachings saying Doe pennance for the Kingdome of Heauen hath approced Matth. 3. vers 2. Lykewyse the Enuches are praysed of Christ Matth 19 vers 12. Who hath gelded themselues for the Kingdome of Heauen In which wordes most plainely Christ commendes pennance and purity of lyfe in respect of a more easy obteyning of beatitude for the end truely vnto which God hath created vs is eternall lyfe to which end as a mediat he hath commanded destinat and willed good workes to be done but who except he be more blockish nor a blocke and more stuped nor a stock will deny mediates which rightly Rulleth and directes his owne end that chiefly when a man is greatumly loued of God he will giue diligence in doing the same which he commandes for whome he vndergoeth his labours and paines cannot be frustrat of eternall lyfe for a merite and therefore to worke meritorious workes for
is out of a malignaÌ„t spirit and a synne against the holy Ghost to attribute the myracles wrought by the Saincts of God vnto the power of the Diuell OBIECTIO IN Belzebub in the power of the Diuels the Papists cast out Diuels worke myracles Ergo their myracles are of the Diuell and not of God ANSVVER THE proposition is false for if at the touching of the relyckes of Sainctes or in visiting their Sepulturs Chapells or to goe pilgrimagie to their relycks and places or make prayers and inuocations to them or applications of the Sacraments in honour and deuotion towards them the myracles wrought and done in the Catholycke Church are to be attributed and ascrybed to the power and vertue of the Diuell Of this proposition should followe two great absurdities First that the Diuell with all power and force should honour Christ and his Sainctes which is most contrary by the absurditie for then the Diuell should distroy himself and his kingdome in promoting the worshipe and honour of God and his Sainctes vnto whome he will giue none nor acknovvledge any due eyther to God or his Sainctes Secondly that the name of Christ his Saincts should serue for the working the workes of the Diuell and the diuyne power and vertue of God should serue to the obsequie of the Diuell Which assertion by the absurditie is horrible blasphemy against the holy Ghost OBIECTIO WHen those and such lyck myracles fall out they are not to be attributed and ascrybed to come of the Sainctes or of their merytes or by their intercessions or praeyers but because it fortuned so ANSVVER IT is an open blasphemy eyther to speake or thinke to straine the bodyes and soules of men to the course of the planets and to the hid influences of the heauens so that Leo affirmes Epistol ad Astoricensem VVho followeth these there is no more place left for him in the Church of God because sayth he who once haue giuen themselues vnto the constellations and persuade themselues after their owne opinion departe and cut themselues from the bodye of Christ Vnto this the counsell of Braccar cap. 1. If any belieue that the souls and bodyes of men are astricted and gouerned of the fatall signes with the Priscilianists let him be accursed Moreouer myracles and prodigious thinges oft fal out and are wrought when the relyckes of the Sainctes are of the people reuerenced and applyed and when these Sainctes are inuocated by their ernest deuotion and to beare witnes of their reuerence and honour to Gods Saincts they receaue the holy Sacraments euen then especially myracles are done rather then any other tyme therefore seing at the deuotion of the people the application of the relykes of the Sainctes myracles are done they cannot be attributed to come of fortune or influeÌ„ces of the planets but of God the author of all goodnes and the gouernour of this world for if the fishe-poole Probatica in Ierusalem had vertue giuen to it to cure diseases at a certayne season of the year by the descending of an Angell mouing the water which vertue and working of myracles in the Probatica of IerusaleÌ„ cannot be attributed to the influences of the planets neyther to fortune but to God and mediatly to the ministery of the Angell euen so myracles done by the relyques of his Sainctes or at their Sepultures or Alters cannot be attributed to fortune or any fatall starâ—e but to God and by the mediat miniâ—tery intercession of his Sainctes by whose ministery God is honoured QVAESTIO VII The Pope is taken of the reformed for Antichrist WHerefore doe the simple and ignorant Papists obey the Pope in maâ—ters of religâ—on seing he is but a man anâ—â—â—uely Antichrist Luther ass art 27. Smalchald de pot paâ—ae Caluin in 2 Thes cap. 2. Illir de primat papae ANSVVER VPon this proposition I demaunde and aske wherefore doe your mynisteres of your Churches in spirituall things in vvhatsoeuer Kingdome The Protestants minysters are subiect in matters of faith to lay-men or Comonwealth they are in obey men and that lay-men of no ecclesiasticall function neyther of ecclesiasticall authority Is not this euident and known to all Europe how the Caluinistes of Ingland gaue their homage sure obedience in matters of faith vnto Queene Elizabeth and instituted hir head of their reformed Synagogue lykwyse by hir ordinances and statutes we know and vnderstand that these mynisters were compelled The minysters made Queen Elysabeth head of the Church swore obedience in maters of fayth contrary to their owne conscience The scripture forbyds wemen in church matters The hereticks wrytes against the lawfull temporall gouernment of wemen and bound to diuerse ecclesiasticall ceremonies repugnant to their iudgments and yet of necessity must rest contented and also must subiect themselues obedient to her statutes What absurditie what basenes what indignity and what madnes of mynd to giue to a woman the primacy of the Church whom the Apostle 1. Timoth. cap. 2. v. n. 12. commaundes to learne with silence with all subiection who is neyther permitted to teach neyther to rule ouer a man How much more preposterous to rule the charge of the Church For if Buchanan and Knox writ books against the regiment of a woman in which bookes they excluded his maiesties mother of happy memory from the temporall gouernment and as a thing most vnworthy that a woman should haue any temporall gouernment ouer man How much more indecent to rule ouer Preists in the Church of God In the begynning of this heresie both in Ingland and Scotland so long as the two most Catholyck Maryes Princesses liued the Heretickes opposed wrot against their gouernement in temporall things vvhich was by the law of God Hereticks doe allowe the gouernement of wemen for their purpose and nature lavvfull for them Notvvithstanding when Queen Elizabeth obteined the crowne then it vvas lawfull for her to rule not only in temporall thinges but also in ecclesiasticall causes as head of the Church Therfore it is farr lesse strange It is not against the law of God or reason to obey a man neyther contrary to the tenor of reason neyther to holy Scripture to be subiect to a man then to a vvoman howbeit in lay-men this prehemineÌ„ce was neuer giuen of our Lord neyther was it euer permitted to them to haue the primacy of his Church For if as the Protestants sayes Christ neuer commited the iuriâ—diction of his Church to lay men vvhy are the Papists so simple and ignorant to obey a man in matters of religion May it not be ansvvered with the lyke humanity vvhat is his Maiesty King of great Britany a man or no I hope they will not call him a Prophet neyther Euangelist The King of Britanie is not a prophet nor an apostle nor an angel but a man neyther Patriarch nor Angell yea a man and head of the Church vnto whom all his good dutifull subiects are