Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n work_v world_n year_n 47 3 4.7086 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A00728 Of the Church fiue bookes. By Richard Field Doctor of Diuinity and sometimes Deane of Glocester. Field, Richard, 1561-1616.; Field, Nathaniel, 1598 or 9-1666. 1628 (1628) STC 10858; ESTC S121344 1,446,859 942

There are 12 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

detestable Beast of pride hath crept vp euen to the seate of Peter Prouide alwayes well for the peace of the Church and fare you alwayes well Thus wee see how the popes not contenting themselues with the fulnesse of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction though they had no just title vnto it proceeded yet further partly by the fauour of Christian princes and partly by fraud and violence got to be great princes in the world stayed not till they made challēge to be ouer the mightiest Emperors to dispose of their crowns dignities So shewing thēselues to haue the perfect marke and character of him of whom the Apostle speaketh Who sitteth in the temple of God as God and is lifted vp aboue all that is called God Yet could they not so prevaile in these their hellish practises nor so carry away the truth of GOD and the liberty of his Church into captiuity but that there were euer found both Christian Emperours and learned Diuines to resist them in their vniust claimes CHAP. 48. Of generall Councels and of the end vse and necessity of them HAuing examined what may be said for proofe of the Vniuersality of the Bishop of Romes power and iurisdiction first we finde that the Sonne of GOD gaue him no power in the common-wealth but a Father-hood onely in the Church Secondly that in the Church hee neither gaue him an illimited power of commaunding nor infallible iudgement in discerning but that the greatest thing that either hee canne challenge or wee yeeld vnto him is to be the prime Bishop in order and honour the first and not of himselfe alone or out of the fulnesse of his owne power but with the joynt concurrence of others equall in commission with him to manage the great affaires of Almighty God and to gouerne the Christian Church so that the fulnesse of Ecclesiasticall power and iurisdiction is in the companies assemblies and Synodes of Bishoppes and Pastors and not in any one man alone I shewed before that in the churches founded and established by the Apostles contayning whole Citties and places adjoyning though there were many ministers of the word and sacraments yet one was so the Pastour of each of these Churches that the rest were but his assistants and might doe nothing without him and that therefore there was an inequality established euen from the beginning not of order onely but of degree also betweene such as are Pastours of Churches are named Bishops and such as are but their assistants named by the common name of Presbyters yet is the power of him that excelleth the rest in degree in each Church fatherly not Princely for things were so ordered in the beginning that as the Presbyters could do nothing without the Bishoppe so the Bishop in matters of moment might doe nothing without his Presbyters and thereupon the Councell of Carthage decreeth that the Bishoppe shall not presume to heare and sententiate any mans cause without the presence of his Clergie And though it bee said that the Bishop alone may heare and determine the causes of such Cleargy men as are below the degree of Presbyters Deacons yet that alone excludeth not his Cleargy but the concurrence of other Bishops which in the causes of Presbyters Deacons is necessarily required For without the presence and concurrence of his Cleargy the Bishop may proceede to no sentence at all If any difference grew betweene the Bishop and his Cleargy or if consenting any one found himselfe grieued with their proceedings there was a prouinciall Synode holdentwise euery yeare in which the acts of Episcopall Synodes might be re-ëxamined These prouinciall Synodes were subordinate to Nationall Patriarchicall Synodes wherein the Primate of a Nation or Kingdome or one of the Patriarches sat as President And in these Nationall or Patriarchicall Synodes the acts of prouinciall Synodes might bee re-ëxamined and reuersed Of all which I haue spoken before in due place and vpon fit occasion haue shewed at large of whom these Synodes doe consist So that it is euident that the power of Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction resteth not in Bishoppes alone but in Presbyters also beeing admitted to Prouinciall and Nationall Synodes and hauing decisiue voyces in them as well as Bishops nor in any one Metropolitane Primate or Patriarch within their seuerall precincts and diuisions but in these and their fellow Bishops joyntly and that much lesse there is any one in whom the fulnesse of all Ecclesiasticall power and the right to command the whole Church doth rest So that this fulnesse of power is found only in the generall assembly of Pastors called a generall Councell Wherefore now it remaineth that wee speake of Generall Councels Wherein first wee are to consider the vtility and necessity of such Synodall assemblies and meetings Secondly of whom they must consist Thirdly what assurance they haue of diuine assistance direction and Fourthly who must call them Toucing the first the causes why generall Councels are called are three The first is the suppressing of new heresies formerly not condemned The second a generall vniforme reformation of abuses crept into the Church The third the taking away of Schismes growing in Patriarchicall Churches about the election of their Pastors the reiecting of intruders violently and disorderly possessing themselues of those Patriarchicall Thrones And so wee finde that the Councell of Nice was called by Constantine for the suppressing of the damnable heresie of the Arrians the eight generall Councell by Basilius for the ending of the difference that was growne in the Church of Constantinople about Ignatius and Photius contending for the Episcopall chaire and that all Generall Councels intended and sought the reformation of abuses there being scarce any one wherein Canons were not made for the reformation of disorders in so much that the Fathers of the sixth Generall Councell hauing only condemned the Heresie of the Monothelites and made no Canons met afterwards againe many of them and made those Canons that are now extant and are the chiefe directiō of the Greeke Church vnto this day These being the causes for which Councels are called it is euident that the holding of them is not absolutely and simply necessary but in a sort onely For Heresies may bee suppressed by the concurrence of Prouinciall Synodes holden in the seuerall parts of the world as they were in the first 300. yeares when there were no Generall Councells But one part of the Christian Church seeking the helpe of another in common dangers and one part readily concurring with another as for the extinguishing of a dangerous fire threatning all or the repressing repelling of a common enemy by mutuall intelligence passing from one to another they abandoned Heresies newly springing vp and preserued the vnity of the common faith Neither was this course holden onely in the time of persecution during the first 300. yeares but afterwards also in the time of the Churches peace wee finde the same course to
what is yet wanting to the faithfull departed or to such as are aliue at the suite supplication of the holy Patriarches Prophets Apostles c. For seeing it is confessed by vs that the Saints in heauen doe pray for vs in a generality we may desire of God the graunting of such things as we or others need not only vpon our own suite but much more for that there are so many supplyants to him for vs not in earth alone but in heauen also though without sence or knowledge of our particular wantes So that there is nothing found in Chrysostome either touching prayer for the dead or invocation of Saints that maketh any thing for the confirmation of popish errours For neither doth Chrysostome in that Liturgie pray for the ease of men in Purgatorie neither doth he inuocate any Saint but calleth vpon God onely though not without hope of being heard the rather for that not onely the faithfull on earth but the Saints in heauen also make petition for him But Master Higgons asketh why I concealed these things To whom I answere that I did not conceale any of them For howsoeuer citing some other parts of Chrysostomes Liturgie to another purpose I had no reason to bring in these passages being altogether impertinent to my purpose and the matter in hand yet in other places I haue shewed at large the ancient practise in all these things and therefore this seduced runnagate whom Sathan the tempter hath beguiled had no reason to compare me to the Tempter leauing out certaine wordes in the text he alleadged vnto Christ. §. 5. IN the next place he obiecteth to vs the heresie of Aerius condemned by Augustine amongst many other impious heresies and Augustines conclusion that whosoeuer maintaineth any of the hereticall opinions condemned by him is no Catholicke Christian and telleth vs that this censure toucheth vs very neere but that I demeane my selfe plausibly and artificially to avoid the pressure of that difficultie which is too heauy for me to beare Whereunto I briefly answer that I demeane not my self artificially to avoid the force of any trueth which I esteeme value aboue all treasures in the world but in all sincerity vnfold those thinges which Papists seeke to wrap vp in perplexed and intricate disputes to the entangling of the Readers For I shew that the naming of the names of the departed the offering of the sacrifice of praise for them the praying for their resurrection publike acquitall perfect consummation and blisse in the day of Christ yea the praying for their deliuerance from the hand of hel the mouth of the Lyon the vtter deletion remissiō of their sins respectiuely to their passage hence first entrance into the other world are not disliked by vs and that thus far the general intention of the Church extended but that to pray for the deliuerance of mē out of hel or for the mitigation or suspension of the punishments that are in hel was but the priuat deuotiō of some particular men doubtfully eroneously extending the publicke prayers of the Church farther then they were meant and intended by her and that in this particular they fell from the trueth which if M. Theophilus Higgons shall deny justifie such kind of prayers for the dead we will be bold to call him by his new name Theomisus But he is desirous to know of me or any other without lies obscurities and circuitions whether Cyrill of Hierusalem concurring absolutely with the Papists in this point of prayer for the dead and Augustine agreeing with him fell away from the truth or not That he professeth himselfe an enemy to lies obscurities and circuitions the best sanctuaries of their euill cause I greatly maruell feare that if he giue ouer the aduantage which he and his companions are wont to make thereof this his first booke will be his last But in that he saith Cyrill of Hierusalem concurreth absolutely with the Papists in the matter of prayer for the dead and Augustine with him hee doth as beseemeth him for he vttereth lies and vntruthes which before vnaduisedly he condemned For first it is most certaine that Cyrill maketh but two sortes of men departing out of this life sinners righteous and that he thinketh as Chrysostome also doth and after them Damascene many other that wicked and sinfull men in hell may find some ease be relieued by the prayers of the liuing but of Purgatory he speaketh not Touching Augustine he dissenteth altogether from this opinion of Chrysostome Cyrill and Damascene thinketh that the prayers of the Church for such as excelled in goodnes are thanksgiuings to God for such as died impenitently in grieuous sins comforts of the liuing but no helpes of the dead for those that were neith●… exceeding good nor exceeding euill propitiations and meanes to obtaine fauour and remission But whether they of this middle sort be in any penall estate after death or whether by the mercy of God and working of his grace the prayers of the liuing accompanying them they bee freed from sinne and the punishment of it in the first entrance into the other world he resolueth nothing and therfore there was no cause why this good man reflecting as he saith vpon my assertion should bee amazed to behold such a repugnancie betweene these things to wit Augustine ran doubtingly into the opinion of Purgatorie and yet he affirmeth there is no doubt but that some sinnes are remitted in the other world and t●…at some soules may be relieued by prayer For in the iudgement of wiser men then Mast●…r Higgons these thinges imply no contradiction and therefore the Grecians admit the latter of them and yet deny Purgatory Yea in their Apologie touching Purgatory they say if there be remission of sinnes after this life there is no enduring of the punishments due to sin it being one thing to haue remission of a sin or fault and another to suffer the extremity of punishment it deserueth That there is therefore remission of sinnes of a middle sort of men after this life in the entrance into the other world Augustine made no doubt and to that purpose he alleadged the saying of Christ concerning the sinne that is neither remitted in this world nor the other from thence to inferre that some sinnes are remitted after this life But whether there be any Purgatory-punishments after this life or not hee was euer doubtfull as appeareth by sundry places in his workes where he saith Perhaps there is some such thing it is not incredible that there is some such thing and whether there be or not it may be found out or it may be hid neither will it follow that because he maketh three estates of men dying whereof some are so good that wee haue rather cause to giue God thankes for them then to pray others so ill that they cannot be relieued and a third sort that need our
that should bee in the will but is not when it faileth to bring forth that action that in duty it is bound to doe But some man will say this must not be granted for if wee admitte not the distinction of that which is formall that which is materiall in the sin of commission the difformity the substance of the act that the one is positiue and the other priuatiue God hauing a true efficiency in respect of the substance of the act that which is positiue in it we must acknowledg that he hath a true efficiency in respect of the whole euen the difformity aswell as the substance consequently make him the author of sin They who make this objection seeme to say some thing but indeed they say nothing for this distinction will not cleere the doubt they moue touching Gods efficiency working in the sinful actions of men Whensoeuer sayth Durandus two things are inseperably ioyned together whosoeuer knowing them both that they are so inseperably ioyned together chooseth the one chooseth the other also because though happily he would not choose it absolutly as being evill yet in that it is ioyned to that which he doth will neither can be seperated frō it it is of necessity that he must will both As it appeareth in those voluntary actions that are mixt as when a man casteth into the sea those rich commodities which he hath dearly bought brought from a farre to saue his owne life which he would not doe but in such a case Hence it followeth that the act of hating God sinfull difformity being so inseperably ioyned together that the one cannot bee diuided from the other for a man cannot hate God but he must sin damnably if God doth will the one he doth will the other also This of Durand is confirmed by Suarez who saith he shall neuer satisfie any man that doubteth how God may be cleared from being author of sin if hee haue an efficiency in the sinfull actions of men that shall answere that all that is sayd touching Gods efficiency concurrence is true in respect of the euill motions actions of mens wills materially considered not formally in that they are evill sinfull For the one of these is consequent vpon another For a free and deliberate act of a created will about such an obiect with such circumstances cannot be produced but it must haue difformity annexed to it There are some operations or actions saith Cumel that are intrinsecally euill so that in them we cannot separate that which is materiall from that which is formall wherein the sinfulnes of sin consisteth as it appeareth in the hate of God in this act when a man shall say resolue I will do euill So that it implyeth a contradiction that God should effectually worke our will to bring forth such actions in respect of that which is materiall in them not in respect of that which is formall And this seemeth yet more impossible if wee admit their opinion who think that the formall nature being of the sin of commission consisteth in some thing that is positiue as in the manner of working freely so as to repugne to the rule of reason law of God So that it is cleare in the iudgment of these great diuines that if God haue a true reall efficiency in respect of the substance of these sinful actiōs he must in a sort produce the difformity or that which is formall in thē Wherefore for the clearing of this point we must obserue that there are 3 opiniōs touching Gods cōcurrence with 2d causes in producing their effects The 1st that God hath no immediate influence but mediate only in respect of volūtary agēts And according to this opiniō it is casie to cleare God frō the imputatiō of being author of sin yet to acknowledg his cōcurrence with 2d causes in producing their defectiue effects If the will of the creature saith Scotus were the totall and immediate cause of her action that God had no immediate efficiency but mediate only in respect thereof as some think it were easie according to that opinion to shew how God may bee freed from the imputation of being author of sin and yet to acknowledge his concurrence with second causes for the producing of their effects For whether we speake of that which is materiall or formall in sinne the will onely should be the totall cause of it and God should no way be a cause of it but mediatly in that hee caused and produced such a will that might at her pleasure doe what shee would Durandus seemeth to incline to this opinion supposing that 2d causes do bring forth their actions operations by of themselues that God no otherwise concurreth actiuely to the production of the same but in that he preserueth the 2d causes in that being power of working which at first he gaue them But they that are of sounder judgment resolue that as the light enlightneth the aire with the aire all other inferior things so god not only giueth being power of working to the 2d causes preserueth them in the same but together with them hath an immediate influence into the things that are to be effected by the God saith Caietan being the first cause worketh produceth the effects of all 2d causes immediatly tum immediatione virtutis tum immediatione suppositi that is not onely so as that the vertue power of God the first agent immediatly sheweth it self in the production of the effect but so also that he is an immediate agent between whom the effect produced no secondary agent intercedeth Yet are we not to conceiue that he is an immediate agent immediatione suppositi as he is immediatione virtutis for hee produceth immediatly euery effect of euery 2● cause in respect of all that is found in any such effect immediatly immediatione virtutis that is so as that his vertue and power more immediatly effectually sheweth it self in the production of euery such effect then the power and vertue of the 2d cause but hee produceth euery effect of euery 2d cause immediatly immediatione suppositi that is as an immediate agent betweene whom and the effect no secondary agent intercedeth not in respect of all that is found in such an effect but of some things only as existence and the last perfection of actuall being For to giue being is proper to God as to make fire is proper to fire So that between God the supreme agent and being communicated to the effects of 2d causes there is nothing that commeth betweene that by force and power of it owne can produce any such effect So that God as an immediate agent bringeth forth such effects and all 2 causes in respect thereof are but instruments only But in respect of those things found in the same effects into which the 2d causes haue an influence by
vertue of their owne proper for me Caietan confesseth that God doth not so produce them as an immediat agent but that the 2d causes doe mediate between him and them as secondary principal agents bring forth their effects Yet are not these that is the first the 2d causes partiall but totall causes of all those effects which they produce For the cleering whereof we must obserue that a cause may bee said to be totall either totalitate effectus that is because it bringeth forth the whole effect though some other cause haue such efficiencie also in respect of the same that without the helpe of it it cannot bring forth any such effect as when 2 men draw a ship either of them produceth the whole effect and moueth the whole ship but yet not so wholly but that either hath need of the others helpe and concurrence Or secondly a cause may bee said to bee totall totalitate causoe and that in 2 sorts either so as to produce the whole effect without any concurrence of any other cause in which sense neither God nor the creature neither the first nor the 2d cause must be said to be a totall cause or so as that though some other do concurre yet the being power of working and actuall cooperation of it is wholy from the agent with which it doth concurre and so God is a totall cause of all those effects that he produceth by and together with the 2d causes So that the opinion of them who thinke that God hath no immediat influence into the effects of 2d causes nor immediate concurrence with such causes in producing their effects is to be exploded out of all Christian schools Churches as profane heathnish Wherfore there are who finding that this first opiniō is not to be admitted flie to a 2d little better then the former For they acknowledge that God hath an immediate influence into the effects of all 2d causes but they think it to be general indefinit to be ●…ted determined by the different concurse of 2d causes It is true indeed that God worketh all things as an vniversall cause but this may bee vnderstood wayes For first a cause may be sayd to be vniuersall in the vniuersality of predication as opposit to speciall or particular as an artificer in respect of this that speciall kinde of artificers is generall and is an vniuersall cause of all workes of arte and they of such speciall workes as are incident to their seuerall kinds Secondly a cause may bee sayd to bee vniversall in that it extendeth it selfe to effects of all sorts in respect of something common to them all and not in respect of that which is proper to each of them vnlesse the working of it bee limited and directed by something else The fire warmeth the water with which poison is mingled in the same sorte that it doth any other water and without any difference of it own action And the actions of the sun fire are such as that men make vse of thē to vvhat purposes they please accordingly as their vvorking is differently applied bring forth differēt effects Thirdly a cause may be sayd to be vniversall because the efficiencie and vvorking of it extendeth it selfe to many things according to the seuerall differences of them without being limited and determined by any other thing These men suppose that God is an vniversall cause in the second sense and that his concurrence influence is indefinit generall and such as may be taken and applied by second causes in what sort they will So that the actions of free vvill the actions of euery other second cause haue from the freedome of the wil the particular quality of the second causes that they are of this or that sort good or bad not from the concurse or influence of the first cause which is finde●…init as is the concurse influence of the sun vvith other inferiour causes and as one man may make offer of his helpe concurrence to whatsoeuer another vvill make vse of it So they suppose that God offereth his concurse to second causes to be vsed by them to what purpose in what sort they will According to this conceipt they suppose they can easily cleere the doubt and free God from all imputation of being authour of sin though he concurre immediatly with second causes in to the producing of those actions that are sinfull For say they his concurse influence is indefinit and is by them applied in ill sorte to ill purposes But first this conceipt cleereth not God from being authour of sin And secondly it cannot stand with the grounds of Philosophie or diuinity That it cleereth not God from being authour of sin but rather layeth this imputation on him it is euident For if the concurse of God be generall indefinit indifferent and to be determined by the creature to the producing of good or euill it followeth that when the will of the creature determineth it selfe to the specificall act of sin God also determinately concurreth with it in particular to the producing of such an acte in kinde That this consequence is good it is evident because whosoeuer shall offer his help concurrence cooperation to another indifferently for the producing of good or euill the actes of sin or vertue as it shall please him he concurreth in trueth indeede to the producing of the acte of sin in particular as it is such an act if by the will of the other his concurrence cooperation bee determined to such an acte in particular Wherefore if God for his part offer onely a generall concurse such as is indifferent to the producing of actes of vertue or sinne accordingly as the will of the second cause shall determine it it will follow that God concurreth determinately or in particular to the producing of the acte of sin as being determined to the producing of such an act in particular by the will of the creature before he come to actuall cooperation or concurrence Secondly this conceipt cannot stand with the grounds of true Philosophie or diuinitie For if Gods concurse were onely generall and indefinit to bee determined by the will of the creature the will of the creature should bee before the will of God in respect of the particularity of things yea in respect of some reall acte as an acte it should be simply the first agent For according to this fancie because the creature inclineth to such an acte to put a thing in being therefore God cooperateth Whence it will follow that there are 2 beings of things that God is not simply the first cause of all those things that haue being 2ly It pertaineth to diuine prouidence determinately to will aforehand to appoint what afterwards shall be to moue second causes to certaine and determinate effects so to dispose all things that they may attaine the ends for which they were created But this could
not be if his concurse were indefinite generall only 3ly If it were as these men imagine the determination of the will of the creature should not bee within the compasse of things ordered by diuine prouidence and so God should not haue particular prouidence of euery particular thing That this is consequent vpon the fancie of indefinite concurse it is euident For if Gods concurse bee indefinite and in generall only then doth hee not truly and efficiently worke that the will of the creature shall in particular encline to and bring forth such an indiuiduall actiō And if he be not the cause that it so enclineth worketh his prouidence extēdeth not to such working seing his prouidence extēdeth to those things only wherein he hath a working So that if these things were soe as these men imagine Gods prouidence should extend it selfe to contingent things in a generality only in that he hath giuen to intellectual creatures a freedome to what whē how it pleaseth thē in particular in respect ofthings of this nature hee should haue a presidence onely and no prouidence Neither doth that which is alleaged by these men touching the indifferēt cōcurse of the Sunne or that of a man offering his concurrence in a generality only proue that Gods concurse is such For the Sunne is a finite and limited thing hauing something in act somthing in possibility so is man likewise therefore they may be determined to produce such such indiuiduall acts by the concurse of some other cause But God is a cause of infinite perfection and a pure act hauing nothing admixt of possibility so that his action and will cannot bee determined limited by any other Wherefore the resolution of the best diuines is that Gods concurse influence is not into the effects of 2d causes only but into the 2d causes thēselues So that he doth not only by an immediate concurse influence concurre with the 2d causes for the bringing forth of such effects as they determine themselues vnto but he hath an influence into the 2d causes thēselues mouing working thē to bring forth effects such effects as he thinketh good to worke thē vnto This is proued by sundry reasons First as we see 2d causes do not only produce some certaine effects operations as within some certaine kind but they giue vnto thē their last actuall perfection to bee But this they cānot giue vnlesse they be made cōpleate in vertue actiue by the first agent because an agent must be no lesse actuall then the effect or operation it bringeth forth But euery created agent is mixed compounded of actuall being possibility is not so actuall as an execution that is a 2d act therefore before it can bring forth any execution or effect it must be made cōpleate in vertue operatiue by the actuall motion of the first agent 2ly To bee is a most vniuersall act the proper effect of God onely therefore if wee will speak formally properly 2d causes in that they giue being to their own effects are but instruments of God whence it will follow that they must be moved by him in nature before they giue being to any of their effects For an instrument doth nothing towards the producing of the effect of the principall agent vnlesse it be actually moued by the principall agent 3ly Euery such thing as is somtimes an agent in act sometimes but potentially only must be moued by some mouer that is a pure act hath nothing mingled with it of possibility before it eā bring forth any actiō But the will of the creature is somtimes actually in actiō somtimes but potētially only therefore it must be moued by the first act before it can bring forth any action Which must bee granted for that otherwise the will of the creature in respect of some actions should bee the first mouer of it selfe and the first determiner That which is wrought by God in and vpon the second causes to make them actually to bee in action is a thing that hath a kinde of incompleate beeing in such sort as colours haue a being in the aire and the power of the act in the instrument of the artificer and so often as 2● causes whether of naturall or supernaturall order haue in respect of the forme inherent in them a sufficient actiue power in the nature of the first act to bring forth their effects the helpe or precedent motion of God whereby he moueth and applyeth the same actiue powers to operate is not a qualitie but is more properly named a powerfull motion whereby the first and most vniversall agent so worketh vpon them that the 2d causes are actually in action euery one in sort fitting to the nature condition of it And to this purpose it is that Tho Aquinas hath that habituall grace is a quality but the actuall help whereby God moueth vs to will a thing is not a quality but a certain motion of the mind And surely it will easily appeare that there is a great difference between these For the habite doth perfit the power of the soule as a forme or first act implying possibility in respect of actuall operation because the habite doth not determine the power actually to worke but fitteth it only for action inclineth it thereunto But this actuall helpe mouing putting forth the 2d causes into their actions doth not perfit the power of working but makes thē actually to be in action Lastly the habit in respect of the nature of it may be the cause of diuerse actions but that actuall help mouing whereof we speak determineth the will to one individuall action yet taketh not from it a power of dissenting and doing otherwise Alvarez a great learned Archbishop that hath lately written with good allowance of the Church of Rome layeth downe these propositions First that God by an effectuall will predetermined all such acts of men and Angels as are good and all such as are not euill ex obiecto though in individuo they be euill sins ex malâ circumstantiâ Which he proueth out of the 10th of Esay where Almighty God saith Assur is the rod of my wroth he is my staffe I will send him to a deceiptfull nation against the people of my fury will I giue him a command a litle after Shall the axe boast against him that cutteth with it or shall the saw bee lifted vp against him that draweth it as if a rod should be lifted vp against him that lifteth it the staff which is but wood Here it is evident that Assur sinned ex malâ circumstantiâ in subduing the nations and yet it is cleere that God predetermined that he should waste and destroy the nations that he sent him to that purpose and moued him so to doe His 2d proposition is this that whatsoeuer is positiue of being in an act of sin though intrinsecally
ex obiecto euill it hath God for the first mouing cause he doth primarily originally predetermine the will of the creature by an actuall motion to such an act in that it is an act in that it hath being and yet not to the difformity of it But Cumel disputeth strongly against this proposition in this sort There are certain acts saith he intrinsecally euill so that in them that which is materiall cannot bee separated à formali malitiâ peccati that is from the difformity or sinfulnesse of such an act So that it implyeth a contradiction that God should determine our wills freely to bring forth such an action in respect of that which is materiall in it and not to determine it to bring forth the same action in respect of that which is formall And this reason hath greater force against them that hold that the formality of sinne consisteth in some thing that is positiue as in the manner of working freely with positiue repugnance to the Law of reason and of God For if God predetermine and effectually moue to the producing of euill actions in respect of that which is materiall in them and the substance of the act hee must necessarily also predetermine the same actions in respect of all their positiue conditions and circumstances as the freedome of working and the positiue repugnance to the Law of God And if he determine the will to worke repugnantly to the Law he must needs moue and determine it to sinne seeing to sinne is nothing else but to repugne vnto the law So that it must not bee sayd that God is the originall cause that man hath any such action of will as is euill ex obiecto For if hee should originally and out of himselfe will any such acte he must bee the authour of sinne seeing such an acte is intrinsecally euill so that it cannot be separated from difformity but whosoeuer willeth the substance of such an acte must also will the difformity annexed therevnto in the same sorte as hee willeth the substance of it as is already proved Wherefore that wee may rightly conceiue how God may bee said to will actions of this kinde I will lay downe these propositions First that of the sinne of omission no higher cause needeth to be sought then the deficient will of the creature and that God no otherwise decreed the enterance of it but in that he decreed the deniall of that grace without which hee knew such omission would bee The second that the sinne of omission is in order before the sinne of commission The sinne of omission was first in the Angells sayth Wickliffe as it is also in every man that sinneth Omission saith Alexander of Hales in the order of sinnes so farre forth as wee may conceiue that there is any order amongst them is before commission The third that the sinner falling into the sinne of omission putteth himselfe not onely into an estate of aversion from God but of opposition also and being adverse vnto God and so into a necessitie of committing sinne so long as hee continueth in that state For hee that is opposite to God if he haue any action at all must of necessity haue such as are repugnant to the will and law of God The fourth that God the vniversall mouer who moueth and worketh all things to bring forth such actions as are fitting to their condition ceaseth not to worke and moue vpon men Angels after they are become averse but hee still moueth and impelleth them to doe things fitting to that condition wherein hee findeth them as he doth all other things and as hee worketh in and together with all second causes such effects as are fitting to their condition So hee bringeth forth in and with these thus auerse actions fitting to such an estate of aversion and adverse opposition that is such as are beside and contrary to the rule of righteousnes So that to conclude this point God neither worketh the creature to be evill for it becommeth euill of it selfe by falling into the sinne of omission nor simplie and absolutely moueth and determineth it to doe euill but hee moueth it to doe things fitting to the condition wherein it is even after by it owne fault it is become evill and produceth in and together with it such actions as are fitting to that estate that is such as are euill And his will being that nothing shall be without action nor without action fitting to the condition thereof hee hath setled it by an effectuall and positiue decree that hee that will be averse and evill shall not but doe euill so long as he is and will bee in such an estate and condition If wee speake saith Gregorius Ariminensis de prima mala voluntate non habuit causam efficientem quia nulla res fuit quae aliquid faciendo faceret illam malam sed ipsa desistendo à bona volitione facta est mala sed malae volitionis aliqua est causa That is If wee seeke out how the will of the creature at first became ill there is no efficient cause thereof to bee found for there was nothing that did any thing to make it euill but of it selfe by desisting to will that it should it became euill but of the acte of willing what it should not there is a positiue cause It is excellent to this purpose that Luther hath in his booke de servo arbitrio against Erasmus Reason yeeldeth sayth hee that God worketh all in all and that nothing can be done without him for hee is omnipotent and this pertayneth to his omnipotencie as Paul saith to the Ephesians Now Satan and man fallen from God and forsaken of him cannot will that which is good that is such things as please God or such as hee would haue to be done but being turned away to desire such other things as shall please themselues they cannot but seeke those things that are their owne This nature of men and Angels thus turned from God is not nothing neither is Satan and a wicked man nothing neither can wee say they haue no nature nor will though they haue a corrupt and auerse nature Therefore that which remaineth of nature in a wicked man and in Satan as a creature and the worke of God is no lesse subject to omnipotencie and the action of God then all other creatures and workes of God are Whereas therefore God moueth and worketh all in all hee moueth and worketh also in Satan and the wicked man and hee worketh in them in such sorte as is fitting to that they are and as hee findeth them that is so that being evill and averse yet carried on with the motion of diuine omnipotencie they cannot but doe such things as are averse euill As if a horseman shal driue a horse that goeth but on two or three feete hee maketh him goe so as hee must needs goe if hee goe at all so long as hee is thus lame that is haltingly But
velle perficere pro boná voluntate Soe that God doth not stirre and moue the will and soe stay to see whether it will consent or nor but worketh moueth and inclineth us to consent The good vse of grace proceedeth not from the meere liberty of our will but from God working by the effectuall helpe of preoperating grace and causing a man freely to consent and cooperate If not God were not the totall cause which as the first roote bringeth forth all that which discerneth the righteous from the sinner Quis te discernit Our consent and effect of predestination The will doth not first begin her determination and consent The influx of free will into a good action or the good vse of grace exciting is supernaturall as being about a supernaturall obiect therefore it must proceede from a supernaturall cause c God is a cause and the first eause in that a cause he hath reference to the effect in that the first to the second when therefore by his helping grace he worketh together with vs to will and performe his operation hath a double respect first to our will which it effectually moueth to worke this and secondly to our act of willing which it produceth together with our will for our will hath no operation but in one respect only that is of the act it bringeth forth but it hath no influence upon it selfe antecedently to the production of the act So then God is the first determiner of our will for i●… the created will originally begin her owne determination it will follow that it is the first free the first roote and the first cause of her owne determination which must not be granted for seeing a created thing that is free is free by participation it must of necessity be reduced to a first free as to a former cause otherwise duo prima principia Soe that God by his effectuall grace not onely morally but truly efficiently moueth and inclineth the will to the loue and liking of what hee will in such sort that it cannot but turne nor cannot dissent in sensu composito though it may in sensu diuiso The meaning of this is that the effectuall motion of Gods grace and an actuall dissenting resisting or not yeelding cannot stand together but the efficacy of Gods grace and a power of disenting do stand together For the efficacie of grace doth not take away the power but soe directeth the will as infallibly in such liberty to bring forth that he pleaseth Est simultas potentiae ad opposita non autem potentia simultatis ad opposita simul habenda there is in some created thing at the same time a possibility of hauing or doing things opposite as to sitte or walke but there is no possibility of hauing these together Soe there is in free will moued by effectuall grace a power to doe or not to do in sensu diuiso because the efficacy of grace and power of dissenting may stand together but not in sensu composito that is that the motion of grace and actuall dissenting should stand together This is the opinion of Aluarez and many other opposing the Iesuites neither had Caluin or Luther any other apprehension of these things So that the necessity efficacy power and working of Gods grace is rightly deliuered by sundry in the Roman Church euen till this day It is not to be maruelled therefore if it be sayd that the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died beleeued and taught as we now do Aloisius Lippomannus in catenâ ad lectorem hath these words Illud te admonitum esse volumus vt si in toto hoc opere Chrysostomum aliquando legeris dicentem homini quoties is sua attulerit conatum omnem fecerit abundè postea à Deo gratiam suppeditari caute prudenter pium doctorem legas ne in errorem illum decidas vt credas gratiam Dei dari propter merita nostra nam si ex meritis non est gratia cum nec istud ipsum sua afferre conatum omnem facere sine praeueniente Dei gratiâ possit esse juxta illud Psalmi misericordia ejus praeueniet me itemque misericordia ejus subsequetur me in omnibus diebus vitae meae ac illud sanctae Ecclesiae tua nos quaesumus domine gratia semper praeueniat sequatur cui nos quoque scrupulo prouidè occurrentes in duobus fortassis aut tribus locis paucula quaedam in Chrysostomum apposuimus Gocchianus de libertate christianâ l. 2. c. 23. Maria salutatur gratia plena vt quic quid in eâ per eam diuina dispositione fieri conspicitur totum ex dono dei nullis praecedentibus meritis designetur c. habes qualiter in exordio humanae reparationis praesumpsio humanae facultatis dejicitur In eo quod Maria plena gratiâ nunciatur praedicatur in eaplenitudo gratiae ut nihil proprii meriti sed totum quod in ea est gratia esse designetur August in enchirid Quid humana natura in homine Christo meruit ut in unitate personae unici filii Dei singulariter esset Quae bona voluntas cuius boni propositi studium quae bona praecesserunt quibus mereretur iste homo ut una fieret persona cum Deo nempè ex quo homo esse caepit non aliud caepit esse quam Dei filius idemque hominis filius c. Magna hic sola Dei gratia ostenditur ut intelligant homines per eandem gratiam eius se iustificari a peccatis per quam factum est ut homo Christus nullum habere posset peccatum Eccehabes in Mediatore Christo gratiam commendatam qui cum esset unicus Dei filius non gratiâ sed naturâ ob hoc plenus veritatis factus est hominis filius ut esset etiam gratiae plenus verbum caro factum est Cùm in Christo in quo omnia instauranda tanquam in fonte vnde totius humani generis derivatur salvatio nihil aliud invenitur quam gratia unde alicui aliquid aliud de proprio potest provenire per quod potest salvari Miranda quidem imò potius miseranda humanae praesumptio facultatis quae cùm per humilitatem gratis salvari possit propriâ impediente superbiâ salvari non velit Omnes inquit Esaias sitientes venite ad aquas qui non habetis argentum aurum properate emite comedite emite absque ullâ commutatione vinum lac Idem spiritus movet hominis voluntatem ut bonum velit quod prius noluit bonam voluntatem adiuvat ut bonum volitum ad effectum perducat nullâ cooperatione propriae voluntatis facultatis sed sanatae renovatae Aug. de patientia Gratia non solùm adiuvat iustum verum etiam iustificat impium ideo etiam cùm adiuvat iustum videtur eius meritis reddi nec sic
the more ancient for we intend not to accuse the just but to shew the infirmitie of man and the mercie of GOD vpon and towardes all Enoch as Ecclesiasticus testifieth pleased GOD and was translated into paradise but in that it is written in Genesis hee pleased GOD after he begat Methusalem Basil doth not without cause collect that hee formerly did not so please GOD and the same Basil saith that that great Father of the faithfull is found to haue beene some-where vnfaithfull and not without cause for when God first promised Isaak vnto him though he fell on his face yet he laughed in his heart saying thinkest thou that a sonne shall bee borne to him that is an hundred yeares old and that Sarah who is ninety yeares old shall bring forth Wherevpon Hierome speaketh of Sarah and him in this sort they are reproved for laughing and the very cogitation and thought is reprehended as a part of infidelity yet are they not condemned of infidelity in that they laughed but they receiued the garland of righteousnes in that afterwards they beleeued Besides these the Scripture giueth ample testimony to Noah Daniel Iob who onely in Ezechiel it saith may escape the anger of God ready to come on men yet Noah fell into dr●…nkennes which is a sinne and Daniel professeth he prayed vnto the Lord and confessed his owne sinne and the sin of his people Iob also is commended in the Scripture and of God himselfe as being a sincere man righteous fearing God and departing from euill and that not in an ordinary sort but so as that none of the most righteous then in the world might be compared vnto him as St Austine rightly collecteth out of the words of God vnto Satan This man though hee were a singular example of innocencie patience and all holines and though hee indured with admirable patience horrible tribulations and trials not for his sinnes but for the manifestation of the righteousnes of God yet as Augustine and Gregorie who as loud sounding trumpets set forth his prayses freely confesse hee was not without veniall sinne Which thing is strongly confirmed in that the same most sincere louer of righteousnes confesseth of himselfe saying I haue sinned what shall I doe vnto thee ô thou ●…eeper of men And being reproued by the Lord and in a most mild sort willed to say what hee could for himselfe hee answered without any circuition that he had spoken foolishly and therefore the Scripture as it were carefully declining the giuing occasion to any one to attribute so great innocencie to Iob as to make him sinles sayd not that he sinned not but that hee sinned not in all those things that hee suffered before that time when he answered his wife if wee haue receiued good things of the hand of the Lord why should we not patiently suffer the evils he bringeth vpon vs Moses beloued of God men and the most meeke of all the inhabitants of the earth doubted something of the promise of the Lord when hee stroke the rocke twise with the rodde to bring out water for the people being distressed for want of water and that his doubting displeased the Lord God and hee let him know so much both by reprouing him and punishing him and therefore presently he sayd to him Aaron because yee beleeued mee not to sanctifie mee before the children of Israel you shall not bring in this people into the land which I will giue them The Scripture also highly commendeth Samuell but as August noteth that neither hee nor Moses nor Aaron were without sin David sufficiently declared when he said thou wast mercifull vnto them and didst punish all their inventions for as August noteth he punisheth them that are appointed to condemnation in his wrath the children of grace in mercy but there is no punishment no correction nor no rod of God due but to sinne Zacharie and Elizabeth are renowmed for eminent righteousnes for they are both sayd to haue beene iust before God walking in all his commandements without reproofe but that Zacharie himselfe was not without fault sinne Gabriel shewed when hee sayd vnto him behold thou shalt be silent and not able to speake And the same may be proved out of Paul who sayth that Christ onely needed not daily as the priests of the law to offer sacrifice first for their owne sinnes and then for the sinnes of the people And it is one thing as the fathers of the councell of Mileuis haue well noted in their epistle to Innocentius to walke without sinne another thing to walke without reproofe for he that walketh so that no man can iustly complaine of him or reprehend him may bee said to walke without reproofe though sometimes thorough humane frailety some lighter sinnes doe seize vpon him because men doe not reproue nor complaine but onely of the more greivous sinnes And to what end should wee runne thorough other examples of the Saints Whereas the lights of the world and salt of the earth the Apostles of Christ that receiued the first fruits of the spirit confessed of themselues that in many things they offended and sinned And therefore the Church taught this euer with great consent Tertullian Quis hominum sine delicto Cyprian proveth by Iob Dauid and Iohn that no man is without sinne and defiling Hilarie vpon those words thou hast despised all them that depart from thy righteousnes If God should despise sinners he should despise all for there is none without sinne Hierome shewing that the Ninivites vpon good ground and for good cause commaunded all to fast both old and young writeth thus The elder age beginneth but the youngger also followeth in the same course for there is none without sinne whether he liue but one day or many yeares for if the starres be not cleane in the sight of God how much lesse a worme rottennes and they that are holden guilty of the sinne of Adam that offended against God And in another place wee follow the authority of the Scripture that no man is without sinne And Saint Augustine whosoeuer are commended in Scripture as hauing a good heart and doing righteously and whosoeuer such after them either now are or shall be hereafter they are all truely great iust and praise worthy but they are not without some sinne nor no one of them is so arrogantly mad as to thinke he hath no need to say the Lords prayer and to aske forgiuenes of his sinnes And in his 31 sermon de verbis Apostoli he hath these words Haehetici Pelagiani Coelestiani dicunt iustos in hac vitâ nullum habere peccatum redi haeretice ad orationem si obsurduisti contra veram fidei rationem Dimitte nobis debita nostra dicis an non dicis Si non dicis etsi praesens fueris corpore foris tamen es ab ecclesiâ Ecclesiae enim oratio est vox est de
Generall councell taketh order that the Patriarch shall haue power to convocate the Metropolitanes that are vnder him and that they shall not refuse to come when he calleth them vnlesse they be hindered by vrgent causes And to this purpose it was that the Bishops within the Patriarchship of Rome were once in the yeare to visite the Apostolicall thresholds which to do they take an oath still euen to this day as Cusanus noteth so that it is evident that there is a power in Bishoppes Metropolitanes Primates and Patriarchs to call Episcopall Provinciall Nationall and Patriarchicall Synodes and that neither so depending of nor subiect to the power of Princes but that when they are enemies to the Faith they may exercise the same without their consent and privity and subiect them that refuse to obey their summons to such punishments as the canons of the Church doe prescribe in cases of such contempt or wilfull negligence But that wee may see to whom the calling of Generall Councels doth pertaine in the times of persecution and when there are no Christian Princes we must obserue that among the Patriarches though one bee in order before another As the Patriarch of Alexandria is before the Patriarch of Antioch and the Patriarch of Rome before the Patriarch of Alexandria yet is not one of them superiour to another in degree as Bishops are to Presbyters nor so in order honour and place as Metropolitanes are to Bishops or Patriarches to Metropolitanes whom they are to ordaine or at the least to confirme And therefore no one of them singly and by himselfe alone hath power to call vnto him any Patriarch or any Bishop subiect to such Patriarch But as in case when there groweth a difference betweene the patriarches of one See and another or betweene any of the patriarches and the Metropolitanes and Bishops subiect to them the superiour patriarch not of himselfe alone but with his Metropolitanes and such particular Bishops as are interessed may judge and determine the differences between them if without danger of a further rent it may be done as in the case of Chrysostome and Theophilus it could not So if there be any matter of Faith or any thing concerning the whole state of the Christian church wherein a common deliberation of all the pastors of the church is necessary he that is in order the first among the patriarches with the Synodes of Bishops subiect to him may call the rest together as being the principall part of the church whence all actions of this nature doe take beginning And this is that which Iulius Bishop of Rome hath when writing to the Bishops of the East he telleth them that the manner and custome is that they should write to him and the Westerne Bishops first that from thence might be decreed the thing that is just and againe that they ought to haue written to them all that so that which is just might bee decreed by all And hence it is that Damasus Ambrose Brito Valerianus and the rest of the holy Bishops assembled in the great city of Rome out of their brotherly loue sent for the Bishops of the East as their owne members praying and desiring them to come vnto them that they might not raigne alone So that the power of calling Generall Councels when the church hath no princes to assist her is not in the Pope but in the Westerne Synode and yet hath not this Synode any power ouer all the other Churches as a supreme Commaunder but is onely as a principall part among the rest to beginne procure set forward as much as in her lyeth such things as pertain to the cōmon good neither may it by vertue of any canon custome or practise of the church excōmunicate the rest for refusing to hearken when it calleth as it appeareth by the former example in that they of the East came not when they were called and intreated to come to Rome by Damasus Ambrose and the rest but stayed at Constantinople did some things which they disliked and yet were forced to giue way vnto them and as being greater in authority then they bare the name of the generall Councell though they were assembled at Rome at the same time in a very great number But if the greater part concurre with them they may excommunicate those few that shall wilfully and causelesly refuse to obey them If it be said that hence it will follow that there is no certaine meanes of hauing a generall Councell at all times as there is of Prouinciall or Patriarchicall which may seeme absurde it will be answered that there is not the like necessitie of hauing Generall Councels as there is of hauing those more particular Synodes and that therefore it is not absurd to grant that the Church hath not at all times certaine and infallible meanes to haue a Generall Councell as it hath to haue the other Nay that it hath not it most plainely appeareth in that in the case of Chrysostome greatly distressed greiuously wronged Innocentius professed vnto him he knew no meanes to helpe him but a Generall Councell which to obtaine he became an humble futer to the Emperour but was so farre from preuailing that the messengers hee sent were returned backe againe vnto him with disgrace Thus wee see to whom the calling of Councels pertaineth when there is no Christian Magistrate to assist the Church but when there is a Christian Magistrate it pertaineth to him to see that these assemblies be duly holden accordingly as the necessity of the Church requireth and the Canons prescribe And therefor wee shall finde that though Christian Emperours Kings and Princes within their seuerall dominions oftentimes permitted Bishops Metropolitanes and Patriarches to hold Episcopall Prouinciall Nationall or Patriarchicall Councels without particular intermedling therein when they saw neither negligence in those of the Cleargy in omitting to hold such Councels when it was fit nor intrusion into their office yet soe often as they saw cause they tooke into their owne hands the power of calling these more particular Synodes And touching generall there was neuer any that was not called by the Emperour That Emperours Kings and Princes in their seuerall dominions respectiuely called particular Councels is proued by innumerable examples For Constantine the great called the first Councell of Arle as it appeareth by his Epistle to Crestus and Binnius confesseth it The Councell of Aquileia was called by the Emperours as it appeareth by the Epistle of the Councell to Gratian Valentinian and Theodosius the Emperours in the first Tome of the Councells The Councell of Burdegalis was called by the Emperour against Priscillian The Councell of Agatha by the permission of the King as as appeareth in the second Tome of the Councels The first of Orleans was called by Clodoueus The Epaunine Councell by Sigismund the sonne of Gundebald The second of Orleans by the command of Childebert the
The councell of Laodicea provideth in this sort touching them that marry the second time Concerning them that according to the Ecclesiasticall Rule are freely and lawfully joyned in the second mariage and haue not secretly so joyned them-selues It is fit that for some short time they giue them-selues to prayer and fasting which being past by a kinde of Indulgence they may be restored to the Communion The Author of the vnperfect worke that goeth vnder the name of Chrysostome proceedeth a little farther in this sort The Apostles saith he commanded to enter into the second mariage for the avoyding of fornication For according to the precept of the Apostle it is lawfull to take a second wife but according to the rule and prescription of Trueth it is indeed Fornication This conceipt grew so farre that the Councel of Nice was forced to make a Canon that the Catharists should not be receiued into the fellowship of the Church vnlesse they would communicate with such as fell in the time of persecution with such as had beene twice maryed whereby it appeareth that some rejected them as though they might not haue beene receiued into the Church no not after Penance So that to conclude this point touching Digamie it is not the hauing of more wiues than one successiuely that the Apostle condemneth but the hauing of more wiues at once Three reasons are brought by our Adversaries to proue the contrary but they will be found too weake if we examine them The first is that Polygamie or the hauing of many wiues at once was not in vse in the Apostles time that therfore the Apostle had no reason to forbid it but this may easily be refuted by good authorities Your Masters saith Iustine Martyr speaking to the Iewes euen to this day suffer euery one of you to haue foure or fiue wiues in his Apologie he vnderstandeth by Digamie the hauing of more wiues then one at one time not successiuely for hee saith they which according to mans Law doe enter into Digamie or second mariages are sinners according to the Doctrine of our Teacher and Master And Theodoret sayth In former times both Iewes and Gentiles tooke vnto them in mariage many wiues Their second reason is this The Apostle requireth that a widdow must haue beene the wife of one husband and his meaning must needes bee that she must not haue had more husbands then one successiuely Therefore when hee prescribeth that a Bishop must be the husband of one wife his meaning is that hee must not haue had more then one wife successiuely the forme of speach being the same That when he speaketh of widdowes hee meaneth that they must not haue had more husbands then one successiuely they proue because howsoeuer Men haue sometimes had more wiues then one at the same time yet Women neuer had more husbands and hereupon they charge vs with intollerable impudencie violent wresting of the Scriptures and bringing such an interpretation of the Apostles words as neuer came into any wisemans cogitation before when wee say hee repelleth such from entering into the order of widdowes as haue had two husbands at once and not such as haue beene twice maried But if it please them to giue vs leaue wee will shew them that they are too violent and say they know not what For wee thinke nay we know it hath bene heard of that a woman should haue two husbands at one time yea that both amongst Iewes and Gentiles in former times women forsaking their husbands or forsaken of them without iust cause haue married againe which the Apostle might iustly condemne and debarre such as had so done from entring into the order and ranke of sacred Widdowes Neither is it hard to shew that our interpretation hath beene thought of and approued more then a thousand yeares agoe by men of as great wisedome as our great maisters that thus insult ouer vs. For Theodoret vpon these very words of the Apostle writeth thus Hereof also it is manifest that he reiecteth not second mariages but decreeth that they liue chastly in matrimony for hee which before hath established the secōd mariage by law hath not here forbidden her which hath bin twice married to obtaine bodily reliefe And Theophilact likewise sayth The Apostle requireth Monogamie of her that is to be admitted into the company of widdowes that is that shee haue beene coupled but to one husband at once as a signe of honesty chastity and good manners Concerning these Widdowes two things are to be considered First hovv and in what sort they were imployed by the Church Secondly how farre fortth they were tyed not to leaue the Church-seruice and to marryagaine Touching their seruice it was first and principally about women that were to be baptized for their instruction and the addressing of them-selues to that Sacrament and the sacred Rites of the Church accompanying the same as appeareth by the Constitutions of Clemens it being more fitte for them to haue priuate and often accesse vnto them then for men Which thing also Epiphanius sheweth calling them by the name of Diaconesses Secondly the attending and taking care of the sicke and impotent Touching the second point wee suppose that these widdowes being of great Age destitute of all outward supportes seeking reliefe of the Church and dedicating themselues to the seruice thereof did by this very act professe and make knowne their purpose of continuing in that estate of Widdowhood and performing such seruice as to them any way appertained And therefore the Apostle condemneth them that after such profession made waxed wanton against Christ sought to put themselues out of the holy Ministery seruice they had dedicated themselues vnto to returne to Secular courses of life againe These according to the iudgment of Epiphanius were subiect to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is just dislike and blame and were to be condemned for their leuity and inconstancie but not to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to the condemnation of eternall death and destruction if declining adultery and other like vncleanenesse they choose rather to marrie then to defile themselues with such impurities And Augustine resolueth that their marriage notwithhanding any profession they seeme to haue made to the contrary is not to be condemned as euill or to be dissolued but that onely their breach of promise made to God and his Church and their falling from their purpose is to bee disliked and condemned Thus do these learned and holy Fathers resolue touching such widdowes as the Apostle speaketh of And Peter Lumbard vpon these words of the Apostle in like sort adding that they breake their first faith euen that they professed in baptisme in that violating so solemne a promise and turning away so scandalously from the calling they had voluntarily put themselues into they seeme to forget and cast from them the very faith and profession of Christians Soe
Pope sought to ouerthrow the order of the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchie to encroach vpon all Bishoppes and guides of the Church and to vsurpe such an illimited vniversall and absolute authority as no way pertained to him feared not to call him Antichrist to compare him and his Courtiers to that Behemoth that putteth his mouth to the Riuer of Iordan thinking he can drinke it vp to pronounce that it is most true that before his time was said of him and his execrable Court Eius avaritiae totus non sufficit orbis Eius luxuria meretrix non sufficit omnis That the Church was holden in Babylonicall captivity by this Antichrist and that her deliuerance would neuer be wrought but by the edge of the sword that must be bathed in blood This is the true report concerning Grosthead in all which there are neither fictions nor exaggerations as Higgons pretendeth by which it is evident that there was as little Communion between the Pope challenging as he did then and doth now infallibility of judgement vniversality of illimited and vncontrouleable power right to dispose the Kingdomes of the World as there is betweene light and darknesse the Temple of God and Idols CHRIST and Antichrist So that he was no Papist seeing he ouer-threw the Papacie and if in any thing he erred as liuing in corrupttimes it is not to be marvayled at neither did his errour in some particular thing so much prejudice his piety and sanctity as that he may not bee called a worthy and renowned Bishop seeing hee held the foundation and stroue for the truth as farre as hee knew it euen to death And therefore the exceptions of the Author of the booke of the Three Conversions against Master Foxe touching this Bishoppe and some other mentioned by him and recorded in the number of Martyrs and Confessors are little to be regarded for that men might be members of that true Church whereof we are holding the foundation and carefully seeking out and maintaining the truth as farre as they knew it though they were otherwise perswaded in some things then either Master Foxe or we are which need not to seeme strange to Master Higgons nor any other of that side seeing they thinke many to haue beene members of their Church and Catholiques that dissented from them in all the questions concerning the Pope to which all other as Master Higgons telleth vs are subordinate and besides in the questions of originall sin free-will justification merite satisfaction the number of the Sacraments and sundry other like things Thus wee see how zealously Grosthead the worthy renowned Bishop of Lincolne opposed himselfe against the tyrannicall vsurpations and incroachments of the Pope and feared not to call him Antichrist for the same Neither was he alone in this opposition but we shall finde that the whole state of England after many complaints against the Popes incroachments vsurpations and tyrannicall intermedling in things no way pertaining to him to the ouerthrow of the Hierarchy of the Church told him in the end that if these courses were continued they should bee forced to doe that which would make his heart to ake Thus faith Mathew Paris at last the poore Church of England that had bin long vsed as an Asse to carry the Popes burdens in the end grew weary opened her mouth as Balaams Asse did to reproue the folly of the Prophet that not without just cause in the judgement of all the world for howsoeuer the church of Rome challenged to be the Mother of all churches and the Popeto be the Father of all Christians yet the one proued a cruell stepmother the other an vnkind vnnaturall Father so that they both lost the hearts of all men But what did the Pope vpon the complaints of so great a church nation as this of England did he ease her burthens or any way listen to her most reasonable suits no verily but was so vnmercifull as the same Paris testifieth that hauing so sore beaten vs he beate vs againe in more cruel sort then euer before onely because we cryed therefore let him not be angry with vs because we haue kept our word with him that neuer kept any with vs haue indeed done that which maketh his heart to ake as our fore-fathers threatned him long before these groanes of our wrōged Mother her often renewed bitter complaints before any was found to worke her deliuerance doe iustifie that which we haue done to be no more then in duty we stood bound to do neither is there any better proofe of the goodnes of our cause then that that which we haue done in the reformation of the church was long before wished for expected fore-tolde by the best men that liued in former times in the corrupt state of the church But because Mr Higgons is pleased to tell vs that if there be no better proofe the cause is bad the patrons worse because these best men we speak of will not speake for vs I will take a litle paines to shevv the goodnes of this proof vvhich I doubt not but the Reader vvill find to be better then that Mr Higgons or any other of his Romanists shall euer be able to vveaken it All that vvhich vve haue done in the reformation of the church cōsisteth in 3 things the first is the condemning of certain erronious opiniōs in matters of doctrine the 2d the shaking off of the yoake of Papall tyranny the 3 the remouing of abuses superstitious observatiōs Novv then if it be proued that the best best learned in former times thought as vvee doe in matters doctrinall that they complained of the heauie yoake vvhich the Pope laide on them and desired the remoouing of such abuses as vvee haue remooued I thinke this proofe vvill bee found very strong and good I vvill therefore first beg●… vvith matters of doctrine and so proceede to the other points not intending to run through all the controversed points of doctrine but some onely for example and because the question is onely of the judgment of men liuing in latter times in the corrupt state of the Church vnder the Papacie I will passe by the Fathers and speake of such as liued since their time Touching the Canon of Scripture which is the rule of our faith wee deny the bookes of Tobit Iudith Ecelesiasticus Wisdome Machabees the song of the three Children and the story of Bell and the Dragon to bee Canonicall Scriptures So did Hugo de Sancto Victore Richardus de Sancto Victore Petrus Cluniacensis Lyranus Dionysius Carthusianus Hugo Cardinalis Thomas Aquinas Waldensis Richardus Armachanus Picus Mirandula Ockam Caietan and Driedo to say nothing of Melito Bishop of Sardis Origen Athanasius Hilarius Nazianzen Cyrill of Ierusalem Epiphanius Ruffinus Hierome Gregory and Damascen Here wee see a cloud of witnesses deposing for vs. And what better proofe of the goodnesse of our cause canne there be then that so
many worthies of the world in so diuerse places and at so diuerse times giue testimony to our opinion Touching the creation fall and state of originall sinne there were some and they excellently learned who thought as we doe that man must either be lifted aboue himselfe by grace or fall below himselfe by sinne that there is no middle estate of pure nature that originall righteousnesse was required to the integrity of nature and consequently that being lost nature is corrupted and depriued of all naturall and morall rectitude so that a man after the fall of Adam till grace restore him can do nothing morally good or that is not sin These men defined originall sin to be a priuation of originall righteousnesse that is of that grace without which a man can neither feare loue nor serue God aright And consequently do teach that after Adams fall without grace renewing vs wee cannot keepe the commaundements of God do the workes of morall vertue or any way dispose our selues to a true conuersion and turning vnto God This opinion is l●…rnedly defended by Thomas Bradwardin in his discourses against the Pelagians of his time and confirmed by him out of the Scriptures and Fathers and likewise by Gregorius Ariminensis as it was before them by Augustine and Prosper Many there were who thought otherwise whom Cardinall Contaren blameth as inclining too much to the Pelagian heresie but the best men concurred in judgment with these For proofe whereof Cassander citeth an excellent saying of Bonauentura Hoc inquit piarum mentium est vt nil sibi tribuant sed totum gratiae Dei vnde quantumcunque aliquis det gratiae dei a pietate non recedit etiamsi multa tribuendo gratiae Dei aliquid subtrahit potestati naturae vel liberi arbitrij cum vero aliquid gratiae dei subtrahitur naturae tribuitur quod gratiae est ibi potest periculum interuenire That is it is the property of pious and good mindes to attribute nothing to themselues but to ascribe all vnto the grace of God for how much soeuer a man giueth to the grace of God hee offendeth against no rule of piety noe though by giuing much to the grace of God he subtract something from the power of nature or free-will but when any thing that pertaineth to grace is denied vnto it and giuen to nature there may be some danger Concerning iustification there is a very maine difference betweene the Papists and vs for though we deny not but that there is a donation and giuing of the spirit to all them that are iustified changing and altering them in such sort as that they beginne to do the workes of righteousnesse yet we teach that iustification consisteth in such sort in the remission of sinnes and the imputation of Christs righteousnesse that the faithfull soule must trust to no other righteousnesse but that which is imputed the other beeing imperfect and not enduring the triall of GODS seuere judgement Now that this was the faith of the best and worthiest men in the Church in former times it will easily appeare vnto vs. The righteousnesse of another sayth Bernard is assigned to man because he had none of his owne and vppon the Canticles he sayth I also will sing the mercies of the Lord for euer Shall I sing of mine owne righteousnesse noe Lord I will remember thy righteousnesse onely for that is mine seeing thou art made vnto mee of God righteousnesse Is there any cause for mee to feare least it should not suffice vs both it is no short cloake which according to the Prophet cannot couer two With Bernard all other good men agreed who in respect of the imperfection of our inherent righteousnesse pronounced it to be as the polluted ragges of a menstruous woman Who is there saith Gerson that shall dare to boast that hee hath a cleane heart and who shall say I am innocent and I am cleane who is hee that will not quake for feare when he shall stand before God to bee iudged who is fearefull in his counsels Hence Iob in his affliction saith vnto God I feared all my workes knowing that thou sparest not the sinner and again if he will contend with me I cannot answere him one of a thousand Whereunto the prayer of the Prophet agreeth enter not into iudgement with thy seruant O Lord for no liuing man shall bee iustified in thy sight And againe if thou shalt obserue iniquities O Lord Lord who shall endure it Furthermore we reade that Esay wrapping vp himselfe with other and waxing vile in his owne eyes in all humility professed that all our righteousnesse is as the polluted ragges of a menstruous woman Who therefore in boasting sort shall dare to shew his righteousnesse to God more then a woman dareth shew the ragges of her confusion and shame to her husband There are two kindes of iustice to which faith leadeth vs saith Cardinall Contarenus the one inherent the other imputed it remaineth that wee enquire vpon which of them we are to stay our selues and by which wee are to thinke that wee are iustified before God that is accounted iust and holy as hauing that iustice that pleaseth God and answereth to that his law requireth I truely saith hee thinke that a man very piously Christianly may say that wee ought to stay to stay I say as vpon a firme and stable thing able vndoubtedly to sustaine vs vpon the iustice of Christ giuen and imputed to vs and not vpon the holinesse and grace that is inherent in vs. For this our righteousnesse is but imperfit and such as cannot defend vs seeing in many things we offend all c. But the iustice of Christ which is giuen vnto vs is true and perfect iustice which altogether pleaseth the eyes of God and in which there is nothing that offendeth God Vpon this therefore as most certaine and stable wee must stay our selues and beleeue that wee are iustified by it as the cause of our acceptation with God this is that precious treasure of Christians which whosoeuer findeth selleth all that he hath to buy it With Contarenus agree the Authors of the Enchiridion of Christian religion published in the prouinciall Synod of Collen in the yeare of our Lord 1536. Which as Cassander saith the more learned diuines in Italy and France approued the authours of the booke called Antididagma Coloniense Albertus Pighius and sundry other who if they were now a liue and should thus teach our Iesuited Papists would soone condemne them as Heretickes Touching merits I haue shewed else-where that Scotus Cameracensis Ariminensis and Waldensis doe thinke there is no merit properly so named With whom agreeth Adrian the Pope vpon the fourth of the sentences writing thus like a Protestant as I thinke Our merits are as a staffe of reed vpon which if a man stay himselfe it will breake and pierce the hand of him that