that faith was requisite to make a true member of the church here he saith that without faith a mēber cā not be knowen much lesse therfore made 3 The Rhemistes confesse in these very words that in the raigne of their imagined and supposed Antichrist the externall state of the Romane church and publike entercourse of the faithfull with the same shall cease and that there shal be onely a communion in hart with it and practise in secret Annot. in 2. Thess. 2. Sect. 10. Where then I pray you shal be your tabernaculum in sole ciuitas in monte candela splendens in domo your tabernacle in the sunne your Citie in a mountaine your candle shining in the house that is say you in the world Math. 5. Sect. 3. Ergo out of their owne wordes we conclude that the church shall not alwayes be visible and notoriously knowen in the world Lastly we will conclude with Augustine Aliquando in sola domo Noah Ecclesia erat in solo Abraham Ecclesia erat in solo Loth domo eius Ecclesia erat in solo Henoch Ecclesia erat Sometime the church was onely in Henochs house sometime onely in Noah some time in Abraham alone in Loth his house How then hath the church bene alwayes so visible and notoriously knowē to the world when it hath layen hidden some time in one house yea in one man THE SECOND QVESTION whether the Church may erre THis questiō is deuided into two parts First whether the catholike church may erre at all or not Secondly whether the visible church vpon earth may fall away from God into Idolatrie and apostasie THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE Catholike Church may erre in doctrine The Papistes THey do teach that the catholike church can not possiblie erre not onely in matters absolutely necessarie to saluation but not in any thing which error 16 it imposeth and commaundeth whether it be conteined in the word of God or not yea that it can not erre in these things which beside the word of God are commaunded And by the church here they do meane not onely the Pastors and Bishops but the whole companie of the faithfull so that neither that which all the pastors of the church do teach can be erronious nor what is receiued generally of the whole church Bellarm. de Eccles. lib. 3. cap. 14. Rhemist annot an Iohan. 14. ver 16. 1 The church say they is the pillar of truth 1. Tim. 3. Ergo it can not erre We answere First it is no otherwise the pillar of truth then a virgin without spot and wrincle Ephe. 5.27 As that place doth not priuiledge the church frō all sinne and imperfection of life so neither doth this place exempt her from all error in doctrine Secondly she is called the pillar of truth in respect of vs because the truth is preserued in the true church and is not els where to be found not because the truth dependeth vpon the church for S. Paule sendeth not Timothie in this place to learne of the church as though it could not possiblie be deceiued but saith he these things haue I written that thou mayst know how to behaue thy selfe in the house of God ver 14.15 Ergo the word of God is the rule of truth and the church hath no warrant to be kept from error but as she is lead and gouerned by the word of God Thirdly the argument foloweth not for Peter was a pillar and yet erred Gallat 2.9.11 2 They heape many arguments together The church hath the spirite of God to lead it into all truth the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it Math. 16. God hath geuen it Apostles teachers Euangelistes to keepe it in the truth Ephe. 4. Christ hath prayed for the church that it may be sanctified in the veritie Iohn 17. Christ prayed that Peters faith should not faile Ergo the church can not erre Rhemens annot 1. Timoth. 3.15 We answere euery one of the elect hath the spirite of God neither shall the gates of hell preuaile against the faith of any one of the elect to ouerthrow it Christ prayeth for euery one of his Disciples that they may be sanctified in the truth Iohn 17.20 wherefore it foloweth as well by these arguments that no one faithfull man can fall into error The pastors and teachers so long as they folow the Apostles doctrine may keepe the church from error but it is not gathered out of that place Ephe. 4. that the pastors if they swarue from Gods word can not erre Concerning Peter Christ prayed for him that his faith should not faile in that greeuous tentation which he fell into Secondly he prayed not for him as gouernour of the church but as he prayeth for euery faithfull man Iohn 17.23 Thirdly for all this prayer Peter erred Gallat 2. 3 This argument was vsed in the Councell of Basill the Church is without spot and wrincle Ephe. 5.27 Ergo without error We aunswere First S. Paule speaketh there of a glorious church such as it shal be in the kingdome of heauen not of the church as it is vpon earth so Reuel 7.14 The elders which sat round about the throne which are the Saintes in heauen were seene in long white robes which they had washed white in the bloud of the Lambe 2 It foloweth out of this place that the church is as well without sinne as free from error which the diuines in the Councell did also graunt But seeing by their owne confession euery member of the church being clothed in this mortall flesh sinneth how can the church be without sinne If the church consist of men and all men are sinners how is the church free If all the partes and members be sinnefull how is not the whole also polluted with sinne If all the partes of the body be sicke and diseased how can the whole be sound The church also is not ashamed to confesse her selfe to be blacke Cant. 1.5 she shal be made bewtifull and glorious without all spot blemish in the kingdome of God and euen now also is made righteous and iust before God through Christ not because she hath no sinne but because it is remitted and although some errors and imperfections remaine yet shall they be no hinderaunce to her saluation The Protestantes WE doubt not to say that the church of God may erre in some points not necessarie to saluation but can not fall cleane away from God into any dānable error Fulk annot in Ephe. 5. ver 29. That the church may erre as we say we do shew it thus and by the Church we vnderstand the whole companie and congregation the pastors with the people 1 When our Sauiour Christ suffred the church erred in faith Ergo it may erre the proposition is thus proued The church was either in the Scribes and Pharisies or els in the Apostles but both of them erred they in putting Christ to death the other in their incredulitie not beleeuing rightlie in the
resurrection of Christ. Bellarmine aunswereth first that the Pharisies were priuiledged not to erre onely till the cōming of Christ. We replie againe First after Christ was come they sate in Moses chaire and Christ biddeth they should be heard Math. 23.2 if they erred not afore neither could they now for they were not displaced out of Moses chaire but the truth is they neuer had any such priuiledge not to erre Secondly if the Pharisies were now prone to error then by our aduersaries owne confession they ceased to be the church Ergo the church was not now visible for in them it was not and the Apostles fled from Christ and shifted for them selues how could then the church be visible to the world Secondly the Iesuite aunswereth concerning the Apostles First the Apostles were not yet entred into their office and Bishoprike but onely appointed to it and therefore they might erre We replie againe First they were not onely appointed Apostles but partly already they had exercised their Apostleship for they were sent forth to preach the Gospell and had power and commission to worke miracles and heale diseases Math. 10 how then is not the Iesuite ashamed to say that they were not yet Pastors nor Apostles Secondly if the Pharisies erred and the Apostles erred then all the world was in error Ergo by their saying at this instant there was no church vpon the earth which is a great absurditie for the church erreth not they say Secondly saith the Iesuite the Apostles erred not in faith they were reproued for not beleeuing the resurrection which beliefe because they had not yet receiued they could not loose it We reply First though they had not erred in any materiall point yet if there were any error at all in them it is sufficient for our purpose that they erred it is manifest for they fled away from Christ. Secondly he excuseth them for their infidelitie concerning the resurrection because this faith they had not yet receiued But had not Christ I pray you often instructed them of this matter and if this were no such error in them then Christ was to sharpe in reprouing them for their infidelitie Thirdly it appeareth that they wholly were deceiued concerning the Messiah Luke 24.21 the two Disciples say they trusted that it had bene he that should haue deliuered Israell see then what weake aunswers these are did these felowes thinke that their gloses should not be examined or that their dreames should be taken for oracles 2 The church of the Iewes erred before our Sauiour Christes comming Ergo the true church may erre The proposition is proued In the time of the raigne of good kings they did offer sacrifice vpon hill altars but onely to the Lord which was an error 2. Kings 12.3.14.4 The feast of the Passeouer was not kept so precisely according to Gods word at any time before no not in the raigne of the best kings as it was in the 18. yeare of Iosias raigne 2. King 23.22 The feast of Tabernacles had not bene so solemnly and truly kept from the dayes of Iosua as it was in Nehemiahs time Nehem. 8.18 Ergo all this while the church of the Iewes erred somewhat in the externall worship of God Fulk Ephes. cap. 5. Sect. 4. 3 Augustine saith Quomodo erit Ecclesia in isto tempore perfecta sine macula ruga cuius mēbra non mendaciter confitentur se habere peccata How can the church be perfect in this life without spot or wrincle whose members do truly confesse that they are not without sinne Ergo the church sinneth and is imperfect and why not subiect to error But in the Councell of Basill it was denied as ye heard that the church could sinne THE SECOND PART WHETHER THE visible Church may fayle vpon the earth The Papistes error 17 THey hold that it is impossible that the visible church should vtterly fayle vpon the earth and fall from God but that there shall alwayes be a visible and knowen church vpon the earth hauing a perpetuall succession of Pastors and Doctors where the true worship of God shal be preserued and kept Bellarmin lib. 3. de Eccles. cap. 13. 1 These and such places of Scripture they stand vpon Math. 16. the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it Math. 28. I wil be with you to the end of the world Psal. 88. his throne shal be as the Sunne and endure as the Moone Ergo the visible church shall not fayle vpon earth Bellarmin We aunswere that these places must be vnderstood of the catholike and vniuersall church whereof we denie not but euery true particular church is a part This church is the spouse of Christ this church shall not perish this is the kingdome of Christ with this church will he alway be present to the end of the world we denie not but that the inuisible church shall continue vpon the earth so long as the world endureth Secondly those places are vnproperly vnderstood of the visible church for therein are both good and bad how thē can that be the spouse of Christ where there are many infidels and wicked ones which haue not espoused themselues vnto him how can it be called his kingdome whereas it is not of all acknowledged But in the true catholike church all and euery one are espoused to Christ all and euery one haue the kingdome of God within them as it is Luke 17. ver 21. 2 They do abuse that place of S. Paule Ephe. 4.11 he gaue some to be Apostles some Euangelistes some pastors and teachers for the gathering together of the Saints Ergo the church shall alwayes be visible till all the Saintes are gathered together Bellarmin cap. 13. Rhemistes Ephes. 4. Sect. 5. We aunswere this place proueth that the church hath neuer wanted pastors and teachers for the continuance of the truth neither shall euer be without them as the Lord said by the Prophet Isay. 59. ver 21. My spirite which is vpō thee my words which I haue put into thy mouth shall not depart out of thy mouth nor the mouth of thy seede for euer We therfore denie not but that in all ages yea in the most ignoraunt times of Poperie God raised vp faithfull teachers vnto his church although they were not mitred and croziard Bishops neither could shew any outward pompe or boast of any glorious successiō Such were Gulielmus de S. Amore Arnoldus de noua villa an 1240. Berengarius Ioachim Abbas in the time of Innocentius 3. Wikclef Bruto Swinderby Badby and others about anno 1400. with many which were not knowen to the world for the truth neuer in any age wanted witnesses By the continuance of the truth and right faith we gather that there haue bene alwayes faithfull teachers though not notorious to the world and shal be but who they were and where they liued what pompe what authoritie they were of it is not materiall to know wherefore an outward visible succession
India America the vnknowen parts of the world Bellarmin cap. 7. nota 4. We aunswere First the truth is not alwayes to be measured by the iudgement or opinion of the multitude folow not a multitude saith the Scripture to do euill the greatest part is not the best Christ calleth his flocke pusillum gregem a litle flocke feare not litle flocke saith he Secondly you haue nothing to do with the Church which was propagated in the Apostles time nor for the space of fiue or six hundred yeares after Christ it was not your Church for the most of your heresies are more lately sprong vp then so And you need not bragge of your vniuersalitie now for the Turke I trow hath a larger dominion then the Pope and Mahometisme is as largely spread as Papistrie and further to And for Europe I hope you neede not make your boast the Pope had neuer lesse iurisdiction then he hath now and I trust euery day shall haue lesse But many you say in the new found countryes haue bene cōuerted to your religiō In deed if you had had grace such an opportunitie being offered as the Spaniards had you might haue won that simple people to Christ. But you thirsted more for their gold then for their soules health it is notoriously knowen to the world what extreme crueltie hath bene wrought vpon that innocent people Was that a Catholike part of the Spaniardes to keepe dogges of purpose to werry and destroy the inhabitants to vse them as horse and beastes to plough to carry to digge Thus by your crueltie there were out of one small Iland called Hispaniola which was well peopled and inhabited destroyed and rooted out in short time two milions of men and women the storie of Benzo an Italian is abroad to be seene of this matter you haue none or few of your Popish Catholikes in those countryes but of your owne brood that haue bene sent thither but enough of this 3 We nothing doubt but that our faith the truth of the Gospell hath bene long since knowen and published to the whole world Those two cōditions which the Iesuite putteth in to make the Church vniuersall do helpe vs very well the first is that it is not necessarie that all coūtryes wholly should professe the Christiā faith but it suffiseth if there be some of the church in euery country the second it is not requisite that this vniuersalitie of the Church should be all at one time but if it be done successiue that is in diuerse ages one country to be ioyned to the Church after another it is enough Now keeping these two conditions we shall easily proue our Church to be vniuersall for there are no countryes in Europe and few in the whole world wherein there are not some of our faith namely that abhorre worshipping of Images do onely hope to be saued by faith in Christ without merite and beleeue in the rest as we do And againe taking one age after another we shall easily make it good that our faith at times hath spread it selfe ouer the whole world The third Note of Succession THey make great boast of the long and perpetuall successiō of their Popes error 20 from the Apostles for the space of these 1500. yeares and more condemning all Churches which can not shew the like order of succession Bellarmin cap. 8. Rhemist annot in Ephe. 4. ver 13. We aunswer First they can not shew such an entier and perpetuall successiō without any interruptiō or discontinuance for so many yeares for sometime there were two sometime three Popes together and this schisme continued 29. yeares till the Councell of Constance where three Popes were deposed at once Benedict 13. the Spanish Pope Gregorie 12. the French Pope and Iohn 23. the Italian Pope 2 If succession be so sure a note of the Church it is found also in other Churches besides as in Cōstātinople where hath bene a perpetuall succession as Nicephorus saith from S. Andrew the Apostle in Antioch from S. Peter and in other Churches in Grecia The Iesuite here is driuen to his shiftes and hath nothing to say but this that the argument foloweth negatiuely that where there is no succession there is no Church not affirmatiuely that where any succession can be shewed there straightwayes it should folow there is a true Church so by the Iesuites owne confession he hath made but a bad argument for the Church of Rome we haue a perpetuall succession of Popes from the Apostles time Ergo we are the Church It foloweth not saith the Iesuite we graunt it Why then a litle before did he call it insolubile argumentum an insosoluble and vnanswerable argument 3 Thirdly we say that a succession of persons in the same place without succession of doctrine which they can not shew is nothing worth A succession of the Apostolike faith and doctrine proueth a continuance of pastors and teachers and not contrariwise We haue the Apostolike faith and therefore we doubt not but that there haue bene continually in the Church faithfull teachers by whom that doctrine hath bene preserued and kept though they were not famous nor carried a glorious shew in the world For that outward succession is not necessarie neither so much to be stood vpon Augustine whē he had alledged succession against heretikes concludeth thus Quanquam non tantū nos de istis documentis praesumamus quā de Scripturis sanctis although saith he we presume not so much vpon these documēts as of holy Scripture The fourth Note of Vnitie error 21 OVr aduersaries do stand much vpon vnitie which they thinke is the glorie of their Church they doe embrace vnitie amongest them selues and all ioyne in obedience to their head Their vnitie also is seene say they in the wonderfull consent of all their writers in matters of Religion and the notable agreement and concord in the decrees of their Popes and Councels But as for vs and our Church they say it is full of rents schismes and diuisions Bellarm. First of the vnitie of their church and then of the vnitie of ours Their vnitie they say is partly seene in their obedience and louing societie and felowship partly in their Religion and doctrine First for their concord and loue one toward another we will take some paynes a litle to decypher it About the yeare of the Lord 900. there was pretie sport amongest the Popes nine of them one after another Stephen the sixth abrogated all his predecessor Formosus decrees and not content with that he tooke vp his body which was buried and cut two fingers of his right hād off and commaunded his body to be buried againe After him succeeded Pope Rhomanus Theodorus the second Iohn the tenth who ratified and confirmed the doings of Formosus After them folowed Pope Sergius who disanulling all their actes tooke vp againe the body of Formosus cut of his head and commaunded his body to be throwen into Tiber the great riuer in Rome
his Priesthood in setting vp another sacrifice Ergo your spirit is not of God 3 The Catholike Church is so called because it embraceth the whole and onely doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles Ephes. 2. vers 20. But the Romane Church receiueth many things contrary to scripture and addeth many things vnto it as it shall appeare throughout this whole discourse Ergo. 4 The Catholike Church hath the name because it is dispersed ouer the whole earth Acts 1. vers 8. But so was neuer the Romane faith which is now professed as we haue shewed before Quaest. 3. de Eccles. Not. 2. Ergo ex Amand. Polan THE SECOND PART THE CHVRCH OF Rome is not a true visible Church The Papists THeir arguments are as wee haue heard Quaest. 3. of the notes of the Church error 28 grounded vpon their succession miracles gift of prophesiyng answered sufficiently afore Not. 4.5.6 Wee neede not nor must not for breuities sake repeate the same things often Protestants WE denie vtterly that they are a true visible Church of Christ but an Antichristian Church and an assembly of heretickes and enemies to the Gospell of Iesus Christ. 1 That cannot bee a true Church where the word of God is not truely preached nor the Sacraments rightly administred according to Christs institution So are they not in the Popes Church For the word is not sincerely taught but they haue added many inuentions of their owne and doe preach contrarie Doctrines to the Scripture the Sacraments also they haue not kept for first they haue augmented the number they haue made fiue more of confirmation orders penance Matrimonie extreame vnction beside the Sacraments of Christ they haue corrupted In baptisme beside water they vse spittle salt oyle Chrisme contrarie to the institution and they lay such a necessitie vpon this Sacrament that al which die without it say they are damned In the Lordes Supper they haue turned the Sacrament to a sacrifice made an Idol of bread chaunged the Communion into priuate masses taken the cup from the lay people and many other abhominations are committed by them Ergo neither hauing the word nor Sacraments according to the institution they are no true Church 2 They which are enemies to the true Church and doe persecute the members thereof are no true visible Church they cannot be of that Church which they persecute as Bellarmine saith of Paul how could he bee of that Church which he with al his force oppressed de eccles lib. 3. cap. 7. But they persecute the Saints of God are most cruel towards them as their consciences beare them record Ergo. 3 The habitation of Antichrist cannot be the Church of Christ so is theirs the Pope himselfe is Antichrist for who else but hee sitteth in the temple being an enemie to Christ. 2. Thes. 2. Where haue you a citie in the world built vpon seauen hilles but Rome Apocalyps 17.9 But of this matter we shall of purpose intreate afterward Ergo. they are not a true visible Church THE THIRD CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING COVNCELS A Councel is nothing else but an assembly and gathering together of the people of God about the affaires and businesse of the Church and they are of two sortes either vniuersall in the name of the whole Church or particular which are either National when the learned of a whole Realme are called together or Prouincial when as the Churches of one Prouince doo assemble into one place to consult of Religion There may be two especiall occasions of Councels the one for resisting and rooting out of heresies as the Apostles and elders met together Act. 15. against those which would haue imposed the Iewish ceremonies vppon the beleeuing Gentiles So the Councell of Nice was celebrated the yeare of the Lorde 327. to confound the heresie of Arrius who denied Christ as he was God to be equall to his Father In the Councel of Constantinople Anno 383. or there aboute the heresie of Macedonius was condemned which denied the holy Ghost to bee God In the Ephesine Councel the first Nestorius heresie was ouerthrowne which affirmed Christ to haue two persons Anno 434. The Councel of Chalcedon was collected Anno 454. about the heresie of Eutiches which held that there was in Christ but one nature after his incarnation so confounding his humanitie and diuinitie together The other cause of the calling of Councels is to prouide establish holsome Lawes decrees and constitutions for the gouernement of the Church so the Apostles called the brethren together Act. 6. to take order for the poore And in the Councell of Nice an vniforme order was established for the celebration of Easter which before had much troubled the Church The questions betweene vs and the Papists concerning Councels are these First whether generall Councels be absolutely necessarie Secondly by whome they ought to be called Thirdly of what persons they ought to cōsist Fourthly who should bee the president of the Councel Fiftly concerning the authoritie of them Sixtly whether they may erre or not Seauenthly whether they are aboue the Pope Eightly of the conditions to be obserued in generall Councels of these in order THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING the necessitie of Councels The assertion of the Papists THey seeme in wordes to affirme that Generall Councels are not absolutelie error 29 necessarie for the Primitiue Church was without any Councel for the space of 300. yeares and more yet they hold that some Councels either generall or particular are of necessitie to be had Bellarmine de concil lib. 1. cap. 11. And yet this is to be maruelled at that they should so much stand for Councels seeing they might vse a farre more compendious way in referring all to the determination of the Pope whome they boldly but very fondly affirme that hee cannot erre Although they seeme not to lay a necessitie vpon Generall Councels yet in truth they doo contrarie for they allowe no Councels at all without the Popes consent and authoritie neither thinke it lawfull for any Nation or Prouince to make within themselues any innouation or change of Religion So in the assembly at Zuricke Anno 1523. For the reformation of Religion Faber tooke exception against that meeting affirming that it was no conuenient place nor fit time for the discussing of such matter but rather the cognition and tractation thereof belonged to a generall Councel Sleid. lib. 3. And further they hold that what hath beene decreed in a Councel cānot be dissolued but by the like Councel as if the Councel of Trent were to bee disanulled it must be done by the like Synod Bellarmine de cōcil lib. 3. ca. 21. Which Councel they affirme to haue been general therefore another general Councel must by their opinion necessarily be expected before it can be reuoked The confession of the Protestants WE doe hold that generall Councels are an holesome meanes for the repressing and reforming both of errors in Religion and corruption in manners and that true generall Councels ought to
and the rest iudged corruptly there remayned yet another remedie A generall Councell might haue beene called where the iudges and the cause might further haue been tried and examined their iudgement if there were cause reuersed Whereby it appeareth say the fathers of Basile that not onely the sentence of the Pope alone but also the Pope with his Bishops ioyned with him might be made frustrate by a Councell Here the Iesuite paltreth saith that a matter determined by the Pope in a particular Councell may be called againe in question by the Pope in a general Councel First what neede that seeing that a particular Councel hauing the Popes authoritie as the Iesuite confesseth cannot erre Againe Augustine saith vbi cum ipsis iudicibus causa possit agitari In the which generall Councell the cause and the former iudges of the which Miltiades was one may bee tryed and examined so that the Pope himselfe might be adiudged by the Councell and not the cause onely Vpon the Premisses we truely and iustly conclude that the Pope is and of right ought to be subiect to generall Councels THE EIGHT QVESTION OF THE CONditions and qualitie of generall Councels The Papists THeir vnreasonable and vnequall conditions are these and such like as followe 1 That the Pope onely should haue authoritie to summon call proroge dissolue and confirme Councels and he onely to bee the iudge president and moderator in Councels or some at his appoyntment 2 They will haue none to giue voyces but Bishops and such as are bound by oath of alleageance to the Pope 3 That the Councell is not bound to determine according to Scripture but to follow their traditions and former decrees of Councels 4 That no Councell is in force without the Popes assent yea the Pope himselfe say they by his sole authotitie may abrogate and disanull the canons and decrees of Councels These and such other conditions the Papists require in their Councels So they wil be sure that nothing shall be concluded against them The Protestants OVr conditions which we would haue obserued and kept in generall Councells are these most iust and reasonable 1 That the Pope which is a party should be no iudge for it is vnreasonable that the same man should be both a partie and a iudge and therefore he ought not to meddle with calling and appoynting Councels with ruling or moderating them seeing it is like he would worke for his owne aduantage 2 That such a time and place be appointed as when and where the Churches of Christendome may most safely and conueniently meete together not at such a time as Paulus the third called a Councell when all Princes in Christendome were occupied in great affaires nor such a place as he thē appointed at Mantua in Italie whither Princes could not come without perill of iourney and danger of life being penned in by the Popes garrisons Thus Pope or Bishop Leo for then there were no Popes writ to Martianus the Emperour to haue the Councell remoued from Calchis to Italie but hee preuayled not So Pope Eugenius would haue dissolued the Councell at Basile and brought it vnder his owne nose 3 We would haue it a free Councell where euery man might fully vtter his minde and that there should be a safe conduct graunted to al to come and goe which the Pope for all his faire promises is vnwilling to doe as it was flatly denyed to Hierome of Prage in the Councell of Constance to whome it was answered that he should haue safe conduct to come but none to goe Neither if they should giue a safe conduct were they to bee trusted for it cannot bee forgotten to their perpetuall infamie that they brake the Emperour Sigismunds safe conduct graunted to Iohn Husse in the Councell of Constance saying that faith was not to be kept with Hereticks 4 That the matter should not bee left wholie to Bishops and Prelates but that the learned of the Clergie and Laitie besides should giue voices seeing the cause of religion is common and concerneth all But most of all that nothing bee carried with violence or popularitie against the Scriptures but euery matter determined according to the truth thereof Such a Councell wee refuse not nay wee much desire which is the true generall Councell that is not generall where all men cannot speake no freedome nor libertie graunted for men to vtter the trueth where all thinges are partially handled and are swayed by one mans authoritie Wherefore the Rhemists slander vs in saying wee raile vppon general Councels annot in Act. 15.10 and that we refuse them 2. Galath 2. Whether wee or they are enemies to true generall free holy indifferent Councels let all men iudge THE FOVRTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE BISHOP OF ROME COMMONLIE CALLED THE POPE THis great and waightie controuersie conteineth tenne seuerall questions 1 Whether the regiment of the Church be Monarchicall 2 Whether Peter were the Prince of the Apostles and by our Sauiour Christ made head of the Church 3 Whether Peter were at Rome and dyed Bishop there 4 Whether the Bishop of Rome be the true successor of Peter 5 Concerning the primacie of the Bishop of Rome sixe partes of the question First whether hee haue authoritie ouer other Bishops Secondly whether appeales are to be made to Rome Thirdly whether the Pope be subiect to the iudgemēt of any Fourthly whether he may be deposed Fiftly what primacy he hath ouer other Churches Sixtly of his titles and names 6 Whether the Bishop of Rome may erre and likewise whether the Church of Rome be subiect to error 7 Of the spiritual iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome two parts First whether he can make lawes to binde the conscience Secondly whether other Bishops doe receiue their iurisdiction from him 8 Of the Popes temporall iurisdiction two parts First whether hee haue authoritie aboue Kings and princes Secondly whether he be a temporal prince 9 Of the prerogatiues of the Pope 10 Concerning Antichrist nine parts First whether Antichrist shall be some one singular man Secondly of the time of his comming Thirdly of his name Fourthly of his nation and kinred Fiftly where his place and seate shall be Sixtly of his doctrine and manners Seuenthly of his miracles Eightly of his kingdome and warres Ninthly whether the Pope bee the very Antichrist of these in their order THE FIRST QVESTION WHETHER THE Regiment of the Church be Monarchicall error 36 WE are not ignorant that the Philosophers made three formes and states of gouernement in the commonwealth the Monarchical when as the principall and soueraigne power rested in one as in the King Queene or Emperor as Rome sometime was ruled by Kings and many yeares after by Emperors Secondly the Aristocratical when the commonwealth was gouerned by an assembly and Senate of nobles as the Romanes had a long time their Consuls and Senators Thirdly the Democratical which is the popular state when the people and multitude bare the greatest sway as
the Pope or any else bee the head the Church is his bodie which Bellarmine is a shamed to graunt yet Pope Athanasius doubted not to call populos mundi partes corporis sui the people of the Worlde the partes of his bodie Againe if he be the head hee must doe the duetie of an head which is to knit and ioyne the parts together and to giue effectuall power to euery part Ephes. 4.16 Where the Apostle alludeth to the gouernement of mans bodie in the which the parts receiue a double benefite from the head the knitting and ioyning together by sinewes which come from the head and sense and motion also giuen to euery part from the head but it were blasphemie to thinke this of the Pope that he giueth any influence to the Church If they answer he is but a ministeriall head Christ is the principall We say againe that although these things are principallie wrought by the principall head yet they must bee done instrumentally or Ministerially by the Ministeriall head or else it is but a rotten head such an one as the Wolfe found in a caruers shop as you knowe the fable is a goodly head saith hee but without wit or braine If Christ performe all the duetie of the head himselfe then is there no other head if the Pope doe somewhat that belongeth to the head tell vs what is it If hee will bee an head and doe nothing surely hee must needes bee a brainelesse and witlesse head 2 It is a daungerous and impossible thing to haue the charge of all Churches committed to one man GOD alone is sufficient to beare that burthen Saint Paule saith who is sufficient for these things No pastor or minister that is but set ouer one flocke or parish is sufficient to preach the worde much lesse is any one man sufficient to gouerne the whole Church Bellarmine answereth first Saint Paul saith of himselfe that hee had the care of all Churches 2. Corinth 11.28 We replie againe first then belike Saint Paul was vniuersall pastor and not Peter Secondly wee must consider that the Apostles were sent to all the world their calling was not limited when they had planted the Gospell in one place they did take care also for other places but now there is no such Apostolicall calling Thirdly Paul did not beare this burthen alone but the Apostles and Euangelists were his coadiutors and fellow-helpers Secondly sayth he why may not the care of the whole Church bee committed to one man as well as the gouernment almost of the whole world was appointed by God to Nabuchadnezzar Cyrus Augustus seeing the gouernement of the Church is easier then the ciuill and politike regiment We replie First wee neuer reade of any that had dominion ouer the whole world as the Pope chalengeth to haue ouer the whole Church which is dispersed throughout the world Secondly these great and large Monarches are saide to haue been giuen of God Dan. 2.37 Not that this large dominion and vsurpation ouer other countries so much pleased God for the people of God the Israelites in their most flourishing estate neuer had such soueraigntie ouer other countries but by voluntarie subiection as in Solomons dayes 1. King 4.21 the Kings round about brought presents vnto him But because the Lord turned and vsed this their large and mightie dominion to the good of his Church for Cyrus was a defender of the Church against all that bare euill will thereat and the large Empire of the Romans serued very commodiously for the propagation of the Gospell Thirdly the Iesuite sheweth his skill when he saith that the regiment of the Church is easier then the gouernement of the common-wealth Whereas there is no greater and waightier burthen vpon earth then is the charge of soules It seemeth the Pope taketh his ease finding the care of the Church to be so easie and pleasant a thing in deede as he vseth it it is no great matter for hee preacheth not but giueth himselfe to ease and idlenes and all princely pleasures But England hath found by experience and so did that worthie and famous Prince King Henry the eight that there was neuer matter so hardlie compassed as was the reformation of the Church and the suppression of idolatrie and superstition in this lande Augustine saith Nemo nostrum se episcopum episcoporum constituit aut quasi tyrannico terrore ad obsequēdi necessitatem collegas suos adigit de Baptis 2.2 None of vs doth count himselfe a Bishop ouer other Bishops or taketh vpon him after a commaunding manner as tyrants vse to enforce his fellowes to obey Ergo by his iudgement all Bishops are of like and equall authoritie THE SECOND QVESTION WHETHER PETER were the chiefe and Prince of the Apostles and assigned by Christ to bee head of the Church The Papists THis our aduersaries doe stiffelie maintaine that he was not only head of the error 37 Church but of the Apostles also Bellarmi lib. 1. de pontif cap. 11. And the Rhemists doubt not to call him the chiefe and Prince of the Apostles 1. Corinth 9. ver 5. 1 Wee will omitte manie of their waightie arguments as out of these and such like places I haue prayed for thee Peter that thy faith should not fayle cast forth thy net into the deepe I will make thee a Fisher of men Peter payed toll for Christ and himselfe Peter drew the net to the land full of great fish Peter onely drew out his sword in the defence of Christ. Ergo Peter was the Prince of the Apostles and head of the Church ex concil Basilien Fox pag. 673. Such other goodlie arguments our Rhemists doe make Peter did excommunicate Ananias and Sapphira he healed the sicke by his shadow Ergo he was the head of the Church Annot. 5. Acts se. 5.8 Againe Peters person was garded with foure quaternions of Souldiours Act. 12.4 the Church prayed for him Ibid. sect 4. Paul nameth Cephas 1. Cor. 9.5 Ergo hee was chiefe of the Apostles Are not here goodlie arguments thinke you To these reasons I neede make no other answere then that which our learned countrie man dooth in his Annotations You must saith he bring better arguments or else children will laugh you to scorne Fulk Annot. Act. 5. sect 5. Let vs see therefore if they haue any better arguments 2 They take that to be a maine inuincible place for them Matth. 16.18 Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I builde my Church Ergo the Church is built vpon Peter To make this argument the more strong they set vnder it diuerse props First why did Christ giue Peter this name more then to any other of the Apostles to call him Peter of Petra a Rocke but to shew that hee was appointed to be the foundation of the Church Bellarmine cap. 17. Wee answer Christ hereby signified that Peter should bee a principall piller of his Church as the rest of the Apostles Ephes. 2. He chaunged also the
names of some other Apostles as Iames and Iohn were called Boanerges the sonnes of thunder Mark 3. Therefore this was no such preeminence to Peter neither is it true that Peter was almost called by no other name for he is oftē in the Gospel after this called by his old name Simon Mat. 16.17 17 25. Fulk Annot. in Ioh. 1. sec. 7. Secondly againe saith Bellarmine the text is aedificabo I will build my Church but if Christ be here taken for the rocke his Church was built alreadie for many beleeued in him But Peter was not made the foundation of his Church till afterward after his resurrection and therefore hee saith I will build Wee answere First it is a corrupt glosse to say the Church of Christ was not builded till after the resurrection for seeing that many beleeued before in Christ and made a Church either they must graunt that the Church was without a foundation or else that the foundation was changed from Christ to Peter Secondlie it is taken therefore for the enlarging and increasing of the Church of GOD. It followeth not because Christ saith I will build and his Church was begun to bee built alreadie that therefore another kinde of building must bee excogitate no more then because Christ gaue his spirite to the Apostles Matth. 10.1 and againe Iohn 20.22 and yet biddeth them stay at Ierusalem till they should receiue the holie Ghost Acts. 1.7 that therefore they should looke for another holy Ghost or as though they had not receiued the holy Ghost before But as the sending of the holy Ghost is meant for the increase and more plentifull measure thereof so is the building of the Church here taken for the increase of the building Wee yet further answere with Augustine super hanc petram quam confessus es aedificabo ecclesiam vppon this rocke which thou hast confessed will I build my Church so that in this place is meant not Peter to bee the rocke but either Christ whome he confessed or his saith whereby he confessed him which commeth all to one effect There is no great difference whether wee say the Church is builded vppon Christ or faith is the foundation of the Church for faith is an apprehension of Christ but of the person of Peter it can no more bee vnderstoode then of the rest of the Apostles who in some sence are called the foundation of the Church namely in respect of their holy Apostolick doctrine vpon the which the Church is built Ephes. 2.20 Bellarmine and the Iesuites denie not but here is relation also to the faith of Peter but faith considered in his person We answere if they meane Peters particular faith which was a proper adiunct to himselfe the vniuersall Church cannot be built vpon that faith seeing when Peter dyed his faith also as a proper accident to his person ceased if they vnderstand that generall faith whereby Peter in the name of all the rest made this confession then they all are as well made pillars and foundations of the Church as he because it was their generall confession Fulk annot in 16. Matth. sect 8. 3 Another place which our aduersaries mightely vrge are those words which follow verse 19. I will giue vnto thee the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen whatsoeuer thou shalt binde in earth shal be bound in Heauen Ergo Peter had especiall iurisdiction giuen him more then any of the rest Bellarmine cap. 12. Wee answere First as Peter confessed in the name of all the rest so this power is geuen him not onelie for the rest as the Rhemists falslie charge vs that we make Peter a proctor for others but together with the rest Peters person must be excluded for immediately after he deserued for a certaine slip of his person to bee called Sathan it were an vnfit match the same person at the same time to be honoured with the glorious title of the rock of Christ and to sustaine so great a rebuke as to bee called Sathan Secondlie here is no more promised to Peter then vnto all the rest of the Apostles Matth. 18.18 They likewise haue authoritie giuen them to binde and loose and it is performed to them all alike Iohn 20.23 2 By the keyes here cannot be vnderstoode that large iurisdiction which the Papists dreame of as not onely the authoritie and chaire of doctrine iudgement knoweledge discretion betweene true and false doctrine all which we graunt together with Peter to haue been giuen to al the Apostles besides But say they hereby is signified the height of gouernement the power of making lawes of calling Councels and confirming them of ordeyning Bishops and Pastors finally to dispense the goods of the Church spirituall and temporall all this is added without ground neither had either Peter or any of the Apostles this ample authoritie no nor the Bishops of Rome for many hundred yeares after Christ. For this plenarie power of the keyes when they signifie a soueraigne and chiefe and surpassing power are so onely giuen vnto Christ and to no mortall creature He is saide to haue the keye of Dauid who openeth and no man shutteth who shutteth and no man openeth Apocalip 3.7 Fulk Annot. 16. Matth. sect 13. Lastly I will oppose the iudgement of the Fathers of the Church who alleadge out of Augustine that Peter receiued the keyes for the whole Church and out of Ambrose that when Christ said to Peter pasce oues the blessed Apostle toke not charge of them alone saith he but together with vs and we together with him Fax pag. 675. 4 Other arguments they alleadge for the primacie and preeminence of Peter as Matthew 10. Hee is named in the first place Bellarmine cap. 18. Wee answere this mought bee because Peter was the most auncient in yeeres or one of the first that was called But howsoeuer it was it is no great matter for this order is not alwaie kept as Galath 2. Paul nameth Iames first Iames Cephas Iohn saith hee verse 9. the Iesuits best shift is heere to denie the text saying it should bee read Cephas Iames Iohn vnlesse Iames bee named first because he was Bishop of Ierusalem Marke I pray you Ergo at Ierusalem Peter was not before Iames but next vnto him therfore not prince of the Apostles Bellarm. cap. 18. Againe say they Peter standeth vp in the election of Matthias Acts 1. preacheth the first Sermon Acts 2. Acts. 15. Peter speaketh first Wee answere to the first Wee denie not a primacie of order to haue been in Peter but it followeth not that hee which speaketh first or giueth the first voyce should bee the head and commaunder of the rest to the second wee also graunt that Peter in zeale promptnes and forwardnes was not behinde any of the Apostles but euen with the first for in him was that saying of Christ verified vppon the woman Shee loued much because much was forgiuen her Luk 7 So was it with Peter to whome Christ forgaue much
they were of the Gentiles and part of his charge and vnlesse they can proue that Paul resigned ouer his lot vnto Peter that he also should be the chiefe Apostle of the Gentiles as he was of the Iewes Peter should haue intruded himselfe into Paules charge not in preaching to the Gentiles for both Paul might preach to the Iewes and Peter to the Gentiles but in taking vpon him to be the chiefe Apostle of the Gentiles which was giuen before to S. Paul 2 The Rhemists themselues graunt that the Church of Rome was founded both by Peter and Paul annot in 2. Gal. sect 6. B. Tunstal a strong champion of theirs but varying from them in this opinion shewed in a letter of his to Cardinall Poole how in times past both Peter and Paul were counted Patrones of the Church of Rome and principes apostolorum the chiefe of the Apostles Eusebius sayth that Clement was the third Bishop after Peter and Paul Alexander succeeded in the fift place after Peter and Paul If therefore the Bishops of Rome challenge any preeminence of authoritie from Peter they may doe it as well from Paul for they both founded that Church preached there and both there suffered Fox pag. 1066. 3 No Apostles were Bishops for they were diuers offices Eph. 4.11 he gaue some to be Apostles some to be Pastors Doctors Ergo they were diuers offices and the same were not Apostles and Pastors or Bishops for both are all one The offices were much different Apostles were immediatly called of God Bishops and Pastors were ordayned by the Apostles the Apostles calling was general ouer the whole world the Pastors were obliged to their dioces parishes particular Churches the office of the Apostles was extraordinarie but for a time the calling of Pastors was to endure euer in the Church Wherfore it can in no wise be that the Apostles were Bishops of any certaine places Irenaeus saith that Fundata ecclesia beati apostoli Lino officiū episcopatus iniungunt the Church of Rome once founded the holy Apostles layd the charge of the Bishopricke vpon Linus Whereby it appeareth that they onely reteyned their Apostleship inioyned them of Christ Tunstal ex Fox pag. 1066. It had therefore been contrarie to the commaundement of Christ who sayd Ite in vniuersum mundum goe into all the world if they should haue left their calling and bound themselues to any peculiar Church Ergo we conclude that neither Peter nor Paul were Bishops of Rome THE FOVRTH QVESTION WHETHER THE Bishop of Rome be the true successor of S. Peter The Papists error 40 THey doe generally hold that the Bishops of Rome being lineally descended by succession from Peter they haue the same primacie apostolike authoritie iurisdiction ouer the whole Church which Peter had Bellar. lib. 2. de pont c. 12. They are very barren and scant of arguments in this place to maintaine and vphold this succession by and in the end the Iesuite runneth to tradition and at the length he thus concludeth that it is not de iure diuino it is not necessarie by the lawe of God that the Romane Bishop should be Peters successor but it dependeth onely vpon the ordinance of Peter and is proued by tradition not diduced out of scripture That it was necessarie for Peter to haue a successor they say it is proued out of scripture which we also graunt that all faithfull Pastors and Ministers are the Apostles successors though they haue not their plenarie and Apostolike power but that the Pope ought to bee and is his successor it standeth vpon tradition We see then the grounds of their opinion scripture they haue none but blind tradition vnlesse therefore they could bring better stuffe for the Papall succession we will not spend any time in confuting nothing The Protestants THat the Pope or Bishop of Rome neither can is or ought to be S. Peters successor in his high and Apostolike authoritie primacie and iurisdiction ouer the whole Church which Peter himselfe neuer had thus we declare it 1 The Pope though hee were Peters successor yet can hee not receiue that from him which he neuer had but Peter had neuer any such primacie of power as we haue shewed before Quaest. 1.2 Ergo he is not here in his successor 2 That primacie which Peter had could not bee conueyed to any other namely his primacie of confession which he first of all the Apostles did vtter concerning Christ proceeding from faith did adhere so to his person that it could not bee deriued to any successor of his for Peters faith was a proper adiunct to himselfe Argument Tonstalli Fox pag. 1066. Agayne how can he haue the Apostolike authoritie being not an Apostle But an Apostle he is not for Christ onely made Apostles the Apostles did not ordayne other Apostles Argum. Nili 3 He succeedeth not Peter rightly in place for seeing Peter sate at Antioch why may not that Church challenge succession as well as Rome Why might not also other Churches haue Apostolike succession as Alexandria from Peter and Marke Herusalem from Iames Constantinople from Andrew Further they haue no certaine succession from Peter Tertullian maketh Clement the next successor to Peter Optatus first nameth Linus then Clement Irenaeus after Peter placeth Linus and Cletus and Clement in the fourth What certaintie therefore can they haue of so vncertaine succession Fulk annot in Rom. 16. sect 4. 4 It skilleth not who commeth in the place roome of the Apostles They that will be their true successors must followe their example and walke in their steps teaching their doctrine and embracing their holie vertues Wherfore the Pope is not Peters right successor swaruing both from his doctrine example Non sanctorum filij sunt qui tenent loca sanctorum sed qui exercent opera eorū They are not the children of the Saints which occupie the same places but they which doe their workes Lambert So Bernard writing to Eugenius chargeth him that in respect of his pompe and pride he did rather succeede Constantine then Peter Iohann Huss pag. 610. 5 All good Bishops and Pastors are as well the Apostles successors as the Pope nay rather then he being a wicked man Iohn Huss articul 4. Fox pag. 590. Lambert pag. 1120. Nay they haue greater and more excellent titles then to be called the Apostles successors for those that walke in obedience vnto Gods commandements our Sauiour calleth them his sisters kinsfolkes and brethren Math. 12.50 Ergo the Pope is not the right successor of Peter Lastly of this matter Augustine thus writeth Cathedra tibi quid fecit ecclesiae Romanae in qua Petrus sedit in qua hodie Anastasius sedet vel ecclesiae Hyerosolymitanae in qua Iacobus sedit in qua hodie Iohannes sedet What hath the Sea of Rome done vnto thee wherein sometime Peter sate where Anastasius now sitteth or what hath the Church or chaire of Ierusalem committed where
shewe of reason can our aduersaries haue to make them proper to the Bishop of Rome 2 The second name is prince of Priests or high and chiefe Bishop which title if it be taken for a chiefe power dominion and soueraigntie is proper only to Christ the chiefe shepheard 1. Pet. 5.4 and cannot in that sense agree to any man If it bee vsed onely as a title of excellencie and commendation so was it in times past ascribed to other excellent and famous Bishops as Ruffinus lib. 2. cap. 26. calleth Athanasius Pontificem maximum chiefe Bishop yea it was in common giuen to all Bishops as Anacletus Bishop of Rome in his second Epistle writeth thus Summi sacerdotes id est Episcopi a deo iudicandi sunt The high Priests that is Bishops saith he are to bee iudged of God If it be taken further for the excellencie of the ministerie of the Gospell and the worthie calling of Christians in this sense the title of summum sacerdotium of the high Priesthood is attributed to all ministers Ecclesiasticall both Bishops and others so Fabianus Bishop of Rome vseth this name Yea the holy Apostle calleth all the people of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a princely royall or chiefe priesthood Ergo the Bishop of Rome hath no especiall or proper interest in this name 3 The third name is to bee called the Vicar of Christ vpon earth Where we are to vnderstand that in respect of the spirituall regiment and kingdome of Christ he needeth no Vicegerent vpon earth for I am with you saith he to the end of the world he himselfe is alway present in power and needeth not in that respect that any man should supplie his roume Petrus scriba martyr Fox pag. 906. If we doe take it for a word of office and publike administration so the Magistrate may bee called the Vicar of Christ in gouerning the people according to the word of God In which sense Eleutherius Bishop of Rome writing to Lucius King of the Britaines calleth him the Vicar of Christ and therfore in his owne kingdome had power out of the word of God to establish lawes for the gouernment of the people So all Bishops Pastors and Ministers in ancient time were called the Vicars of Christ in preaching praying binding and loosing in the name and power of Christ. So Augustine saith or whose worke els it is that Omnis antistes est Christi vicarius Euery pastor and prelate and not the Pope onely is the Vicar of Christ. And this is confessed by our Rhemists annot in 2. Cor. 5.18 that the Bishops and priests of the Church are for Christ and as his ministers that is his Vicars Nay Augustine maketh yet a more generall vse of this word he saith that Homo imperium Dei habens quasi vicarius eius est That man by creation being made Lord of the creatures doth therein represent God and is as his Vicar vpon earth So then all ministers are the Vicars of Christ the ciuill Magistrate likewise in some good sense may bee so called yea in respect of the creatures man generallie is vpon earth in Gods steade Ergo this name cannot be appropriate to the Pope of Rome 4 It is also too huge a name for the Pope or any mortall man to beare to be called the head of the vniuersall Church this is a name only due vnto Christ neither doe the scriptures acknowledge any other head but him Ephes. 1.22.4.15 But say they wee doe not make the Pope such an head as Christ is but only a ministeriall head ouer the militant Church vpon earth We answere First Ergo the Pope by your owne confession is not head of the vniuersall Church whereof the triumphant Church in heauen is a part Secondly the Rhemists confesse that the Church in no sense can bee called the bodie of the Pope Ergo the Pope cannot be any wayes the head of the vniuersall Church Annot. in 1. Ephes. 22. Thirdly the Fathers of Basile vsed this argument The head of the bodie being dead the whole bodie also dyeth but the whole Church doth not perish with the Pope Ergo he is not properly the head of the Church Fox pag. 675. If it shall bee further obiected that the Bishop of Rome hath been called in times past caput Episcoporum the head of all other Bishops we answere that it was but a title of excellencie and commendation not of dominion and power as London is called the head or chiefe citie of England yet are not other cities of the land subiect vnto it or vnder the iurisdiction thereof But we shall haue occasion more fully to discusse this matter afterward 5 They would haue the Pope called the Prelate of the Apostolike See the Rhemists say further that the Papall dignitie is a continuall Apostleship Annot. 4. Ephes. sect 4. We answere First if they call those Churches Apostolicall whose first founders were the Apostles then the See of Antioch Alexandria Constantinople are as well Apostolicall as Rome and this the Iesuite denyeth not Lib. 2. de pontific cap. 31. Secondly those Churches are Apostolicall which hold the Apostolike faith so is not the See of Rome Apostolicall being departed and gone backe from the ancient Catholike faith but those Churches where the Gospell of Iesus Christ is truely preached are indeede Apostolike Thirdly how can the Pope be an Apostle or haue Apostolike authoritie seeing hee preacheth not at all much lesse to the whole world wherein consisted the office of an Apostle Neither can he shewe his immediate calling from Christ as all the Apostles could for seeing he challengeth the Apostolike office by tradition from S. Peter and not by commandement from Christ he can in no wise be counted an Apostle or his office an Apostleship for the Apostles ordayned onely Euangelists and Pastors they had not authoritie to consecrate and constitute new Apostles Our aduersaries for this their Apostleship can finde nothing in scripture nor for a thousand yeeres after Christ in the ancient writers Fulk annot in Ephes. 4. sect 4. 6 Concerning the title of vniuersall Bishop it was thus decreed in the sixt Councel of Carthage as it is alleadged by Gratian Vniuersalis autem nec Romanus pontifex appelletur No not the Bishop of Rome is to be called vniuersall In Gregorie the first his time Iohn Patriarke of Constantinople obtayned of the Emperour Mauritius to be called vniuersall Patriarke but Gregorie would not agree thereunto calling him the forerunner of Antichrist that would challenge so proude a name Bellarmine and other of that sect doe answere that Gregorie found fault with this title because Iohn of Constantinople would haue been Bishop alone and none other to bee beside him but all other onely to bee his deputies and vicars To this wee replie First Iohn did onely challenge a superioritie ouer other Bishops not to be Bishop alone for this had been a thing impossible Secondly if Iohn had sought any such thing
and Elders as it shall be shewed afterward Secondly neither is it a good reason to condemne our Ministerie because it hath not the Popes allowance for euery Church hath a lawfull calling within it selfe without sending to forrayne Prelates for their approbation And if you aske vs by whom our Ministers were first called seeing there were none but popish Bishops in euery Church wee answere that some had their calling in the Popish Church which afterward being more effectually called of GOD became profitable teachers of the Gospell Neither is it necessarie that the Church should alwayes be bound to an ordinarie calling when as the state of the Church is so corrupted and the gouernment thereof that no good calling can bee obtayned for then the Lord raiseth vp some extraordinarily for the reformation of the Church such as we doubt not but Luther was In which and the like cases the ordinarie imposition of hands by the Pastors of the Church being heretikes and idolaters as it was in time of Poperie is not to be expected or stayed for Plura apud Fulk annot Rom. 10. sect 5. The Protestants COncerning election or choise to be made by the people we are to put three cases First meere popular elections wherein the people by multitude of voyce should carrie all away are in no case nor at any time to be allowed Secondly for the people to giue their voyce in elections which are moderated and gouerned by the graue and wise Pastors and Elders it hath been vsed in times past and may bee agayne and is in some places where the state of the Church the condition and qualitie of the people will beare it Thirdly though the people neither beare sway in the election nor giue their suffrages and voyces yet it is conuenient and requisite that their consent should be had and publike testimonie for the Ministers should bee such as haue a good report of all 1. Timoth. 3.7 Fulk Act. 14. sect 3. But as for the Pope let him keepe himselfe as a Bishop in his owne Dioces he hath nothing to doe with ordayning or electing of Ministers in other Churches 1 Numb 20.27 Eleazar was made Priest in Aarons place in the sight of all the congregation Ergo Ministers ought to be ordayned publikely in the sight of the congregation not in corners or priuate places as they vsed to doe in time of Poperie yea it is recorded of Pope Iohn the 13. that he ordayned Deacons in a stable And herein they offended manifestly agaynst their owne rules for their decree is Nullus inuitis detur Episcopus sed Cleri plebis consensus desideriū requiratur Let no Bishop be thrust vpon any against their wils but let the consent and desire of the people and Clergie be knowne 2 We haue the example of the Apostles Act. 1. 6. 14.23 When Matthias was elected the whole multitude was called together and Act. 6. the Deacons were chosen by the whole multitude Ergo the people had an interest in times past in the election of Church officers and this example of the Apostles may safely and lawfully bee followed of the Church when time and place serueth Bellarmine answereth First the election of Deacons and Pastors is not all one neither is there the like reason Ans. They are both publike officers for the good of the Church and therfore if the people haue any interest in the one why not in the other Secondly this was done by the grant and sufferance of the Apostles Ans. Yea the Apostles called them together but by the direction of the holy Ghost as Act. 15. when the Church was assembled together vpon another occasion it is sayd It seemed good to vs and the holy Ghost Agayne in the election beside imposition of hands prayer was vsed which was a chiefe part of that action but the people had their interest in publike prayers as being part of the congregation and were not admitted thereunto at the pleasure and will of men wherefore it is not true that it was a meere grant of men that the people might be present at elections but it so seemed good to the Apostles thereto directed by the spirit of God 3 But as for the right of elections in the Pope it hath no shewe of reason for bee it that Peter had onely the right of consecration amongst the Apostles you doe but flatter your selues in thinking that whatsoeuer right was in Peter it must needes be in the Pope for he is not Peters successor as we haue shewed before at large But we will hold you rather to this poynt that all the Apostles had as full right to ordayne and consecrate by laying on of hands as Peter had Looke Act. 6.6 Act. 13.3 Act. 14.23 And if the Pope cannot haue all that which Peter had much lesse can he bee capable of that which Peter neuer had 4 We haue had good experience in England of the Popes great discretion and wisedome in collation of spirituall preferments and ordayning of Bishops About anno 1253. the Pope wrote a very imperious and commanding letter to the good Bishop of Lincolne Robert Grostede to bestowe a Canonship in Lincolne vpon his nephewe a boy for so Popes call their bastards but he suffered the repulse for that time In the time of Edward the 3. and Richard the 2. a certificate was sent vp into the Chauncerie of such Ecclesiasticall dignities as were possessed by strangers not inhabiting the land and there were found aboue fourtie Deaneries Archdeaconries and Prebends and those not the worst some worth one hundred some two hundred nay some foure hundred pound by the yeere the Archdeaconrie of Canturburie was valued at seuen hundred Florences by the yeere which a Cardinall of Rome had And there were aboue a dosen Cardinals resiant at Rome that had at once the best and richest dignities in the land beside a great sort of Italian priests and others that were beneficed in England By this it may appeare what good choise the Pope-holy father of Rome was wont to make in bestowing Church dignities and it were pitie but he should haue the ordering of them still he did so well dispose of them when he had them 5 Let Augustine speake who growing now old was desirous to knowe his successor while he liued he went not to Rome for the matter but assembling the Church together at Hippo where he was Bishop in the presence of two Bishops beside and seuen Presbyters or Elders Astante clero frequenti populo the whole Clergie and a great sort of people standing by Augustine himselfe began first and sayd Presbyterum Eradium mihi successorem volo I would haue Eradius presbyter to be my successor Afterward hearing how the people did approue and like of his motion he desired them to subscribe to that which was done Rogo vt dignemini gestis subscribere qui potestis And when they held their peace he vrged them further saying Hic
Spirit was not giuen him by measure Ioh. 3.34 and that the holy Ghost dwelleth in him bodily but it were great blasphemie so to say of any man Apostle or Minister beside which haue receiued of the same grace but not in the like measure that Christ hath but the spirit is giuen to euery one in measure as they haue neede in their seuerall places and callings Secondly though we should grant that the Apostles had the full authoritie of Christ actually to remit sinnes which they shall neuer proue yet it may be doubted whether al Ministers whom they call Priests which name we refuse not if it be taken according to the sense of the originall word Presbyter and not for a sacrificing priesthood haue as full power in this case as the Apostles had nay it is plaine they haue not for the Apostles and other in the Primitiue Church had power to discerne spirits 1. Cor. 12.10 and to giue actually the bodies of the excommunicate to bee vexed and possessed of the diuell 1. Cor. 5.5 and after a strange manner to exercise power ouer their bodily life as Peter did vpon Ananias and Sapphira Act. 5 Yet we rather stand vpon this poynt that neither the Apostles nor any other Ministers haue power actually to remit sinnes then onely as dispensers and stewards in the name of Christ. The Protestants AL the power of binding and loosing committed to the Apostles and to the Ministers of the word and Sacraments is by declaring the will and pleasure of God out of his word both to pronounce forgiuenes of sinnes to all that are truely penitent the reteining of them to the obstinate and impenitent Fulk annot Iohn 20. sect 3. So that Ministers are not made iudges in this case but only as the Lords ambassadors to declare the will of God out of his word 1 There is a notable place for this purpose 2. Corinth 5.18 God hath reconciled vs vnto himselfe through Iesus Christ and hath giuen vs the ministerie of reconciliation So then Christ is the onely author of reconciliation the Apostles are but ministers how then say the Rhemists that Christ himselfe is but a minister also of our reconciliation yet a chiefe minister whereas the Apostle maketh him the author God was in Christ reconciling the world to himselfe vers 19. Wee are but ambassadors for Christ and pray you in Christs stead to bee reconciled vnto God this then is the office of Ministers not to reconcile men vnto God but to pray them to bee reconciled through Christ Christ onely is the reconciler they but ministers of reconciliation They are but messengers and ambassadors onely to declare their Princes pleasure their commission is certaine beyond that they cannot goe Wherefore that is a blasphemous decretal and cleane contrarie to the scripture which is ascribed but falsely to Pontianus Bishop of Rome which sayth that God hath Priests so familiar that by them he forgiueth the sinnes of others and reconcileth them vnto him Fox pag. 59. But S. Paul sayth that God onely by Christ reconcileth vs vnto himselfe 2 Augustine doth very freely vtter his minde concerning this matter who putteth this obiection If men doe not forgiue sinnes then it should seeme to be false which Christ sayth Whatsoeuer you bind in earth is bound in heauen He answereth Daturus erat dominus hominibus spiritum sanctum c. God was to giue vnto men the holy Ghost by whom their sinnes should be forgiuen them Spiritus dimittit non vos spiritus autem Deus est Deus ergo dimittit non vos the spirit therefore remitteth sinne and not you the spirit is God God forgiueth sinnes and not you Here is one argument God onely forgiueth sinnes Ergo not man Againe Quides homo nisi aeger sanandus vis mihi esse medicus mecum quaere medicum O man what art thou that takest away my sinnes but a sicke man thy selfe wouldest thou be my phisition nay let vs both together goe seeke a phisition that may heale vs. Lo another argument He cannot be a phisition to others that needeth a phisition himselfe he cannot reconcile others to God who hath himselfe neede of a reconciler Further he sayth Qui dimittit per hominem potest dimittere praeter hominem non enim minus est idoneus per se dare qui potest per alium dare He that can forgiue sinnes by man can forgiue also without man for he may as well forgiue by himselfe as he can doe it by another Here is then the third argument If man doe actually forgiue sinnes then Christ should not forgiue sinnes without man for the whole power is committed to man Yea the Rhemists affirme the same that it is necessarie we should submit our selues to the iudgement of the Priest for release of our sinnes if it bee necessarie then sinnes cannot be remitted without the Priest then is Christs power limited he cannot forgiue without man which is contrarie to that Augustine affirmeth here THE FOVRTH PART WHETHER STRAIGHT waies whatsoeuer be loosed or bound by the ministerie of men vpon earth be so in heauen The Papists AN expresse power say they is giuen vnto Priests to remit and reteyne error 76 sinnes And Christ promiseth that whose sinnes soeuer they forgiue they are forgiuen of God and whose sinnes soeuer they retaine they are retained of God Rhemist annot Iohn 20. sect 5. Whereby it appeareth it is their opinion which is manifest also by the practise of their Church that at the will and pleasure of euerie priest exercising the keyes vpon earth men are bound and loosed in heauen They ground this their opinion vpon the generalitie of the wordes Whosoeuers sinnes you remit they are remitted Iohn 20.23 and Math. 18.18 Whatsoeuer you binde in earth shall be bound in heauen Answere These places are not so to be vnderstood as though God were bound to ratifie euery decree of men vpon earth for first this power is giuen to all lawfull pastors which doe holde the Apostolike fayth not to Idolatrous ignorant and blasphemous priests such as most if not all of the popish sorte are Secondly they must decree in the earth according to Gods wil Wherefore Iohn 20.22 first Christ breatheth his spirite vpon his Apostles and then giueth them their commission signifiyng hereby that they must execute this power as they shall be directed by Gods spirite and Matth. 18.20 it followeth that they must be assembled in the name of Christ that is according to Christs rule and the direction of his word they must binde and loose and not at their owne discretion The Protestants THat no sentence or decree of men bindeth or looseth before God in heauen but that which is pronounced according to the will and pleasure of GOD and by the warrant of his worde the scripture euery where teacheth vs. 1 Prouer. 26.2 As the sparrow by flying escapeth so the curse that is causelesse shall not come Isay 5.20 Woe vnto them that speake good
Apostle calleth their feasts of loue which they were wont to make after the receiuing of the Sacrament the Lords Supper coenas dominicas because they were made in the Lords houses which were called Dominicae he meaneth not the Sacrament Ans. First there were then no such distinct places as Churches and Oratories for the seruice of God which began to be built many yeeres after but they assembled together in their owne houses Secondly if their loue-feasts were called the Lords Suppers it would followe that they neuer had them but at night and that then also the Sacrament was celebrated about the time of their feasts which must be at the eeuentide But this I think they dare not affirme that they celebrated the Sacrament at night wherefore the Apostle cannot meane any other Supper but that which was instituted by Christ as it followeth vers 23. Augustine calleth it the Lords Supper Coenam manibus suis consecratam discipulis suis dedit His Supper being consecrated he gaue with his owne hands to his Disciples And although we sate not downe at that feast Ipsam coenam tamē fide quotidie manducamus Yet we eate that Supper daily by faith 2. The name Communion the Apostle also himselfe vseth he calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The communion of the bodie of Christ 1. Corinth 10.16 so doth Augustine name it Communionem corporis Christi de ciuit Det. 20. cap. 9. 3. As for the names of Eucharist and Leiturgie we mislike them not being vnderstood in their own sense but because they are Greeke and not vnderstood of the people we vse them not The horrible sacrilege of the Masse is the cause also why we vse not that terme THE SIXT QVESTION OF THE MANNER OF saying and celebrating Masse The Papists IT is not necessiarie that the Masse or as we call it the Sacrament should be sayd or done in the vulgar and familiar speech but for the greater reuerence to be kept in the Latine tongue they say it is more conuenient and that the words of consecration should not be vttered in a loud and audible but in a soft and low voyce Bellarm. cap. 11.12 Argum. Christ for the space of three houres being so long vpon the Crosse vttered nothing in the hearing of the standers by but 7. short sentences Ergo in the sacrifice of the Masse it is not necessarie to vtter all in the hearing of the people Ibid. Ans. First they haue not proued by this example that the Priest should mutter and mumble to himselfe but the contrarie rather that either he must altogether hold his peace or els speake aloude vnlesse they can shew that Christ spake some words secretly to himselfe Secondly we must not fetch the right vse of the Sacrament of our owne heads from the example of Christs sacrifice vpon the Crosse but we are commanded to resort for direction to the institution in his last Supper 1. Corinth 11.23 The Protestants FIrst for the Sacrament or any other part of the seruice of God to be ministred in an vnknowne tongue is contrary to S. Pauls rule who would haue al things to be done in the Church to edifying and in such sort that the vnlearned might say Amen 1. Corinth 14.16 But the people cannot be edified by a language which they vnderstand not nor yet can say Amen vnto strange prayers But of this matter we haue alreadie elsewhere entreated more at large Secondly it is also contrarie to S. Pauls rule that the Priest should mutter to himselfe and not speake aloud in the hearing of the people for he saith Ye doe shew forth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 annuntiatis preach or declare the death of Christ so often as ye receiue it 1. Corinth 11.26 But they doe not annuntiare that is preach set forth and declare the death of Christ that speake onely to themselues Augustine sayth Populus cum episcopo orat quasi ad eius verba subscribens respondet Amen The people prayeth with their pastor and subscribing to his words say Amen But how can the people say Amen where nothing is heard or subscribe in their hearts vnto it THE SEVENTH QVESTION OF THE CEREMOnies which they vse in the idolatrous sacrifice of the Masse The Papists error 138 SOme ceremonies goe before the celebration of the Masse and they are of such things as they haue alwaies in a readines for that impious seruice such are the vestiments and apparel of the priest the Albe Chesil Stole Dalmatike with such other Altars Altarclothes Corporasses Pixes Paxes Dishes Candlestickes Platters Censers water-pots all these and the like trumperie ought of right to be vsed in the sacrifice of the Masse the better to discerne the bodie of Christ Rhemist 1. Corinth 11. sect 18. The Protestants FIrst for diuers causes we doe condemne and reiect these superstitious vsages of the Papists 1. Because of the superfluous vnnecessarie number of them fewer by a great deale may serue for the Communion to be kept after Christs institution neither doe we reade that Christ at his last Supper vsed any such who notwithstanding would not haue left out any thing requisite and needfull for the Sacrament 2. The superfluous and excessiue cost in making so many Church vessels of gold and siluer so many Masse garments of silke fine linnen embrodered with gold pearle precious stones was both an intolerable burthen to the Church at whose charge such things were prouided and a great deale more costly then became the simplicitie of the Gospell 3. Conuenient vessels and instruments which are necessarie for the administration of the Sacrament with other seemely ornaments as a decent couering for the Communion table a cleane and hansome vessell to keepe the wine a cup of siluer for the distribution cleane linnen napkins for the bread such instruments and ornaments of the Lords table we condemne not but vse them our selues yet none of them for such ends or purposes as they pretend to discerne the bodie of the Lord by them as though they were ordained to waite and attend vpon the bodily presence of Christ which they haue falsely imagined but we vse them for decencie and order sake and due reuerence which is to be yeelded to so great mysteries In the Apostles time they had no consecrated Altars but Communion tables 1. Cor. 10.21 neither is it like that they vsed vessels of gold or siluer in the Lords Supper when they had neither siluer nor gold in their purses Math. 10.9 Wherfore such things are not necessarie for the discerning of the Lords bodie The Papists 2. THere are other ceremonies which they obserue and vse in the very action it selfe and celebration of the Masse as the diuers gestures of the Priest to lift vp his eyes and cast them downe againe and to lift them vp the second the third time sometime to cast abroad his hands to close them againe to warble with his fingers to bow to bend to ducke to turne on
the prosecuting whereof if sometime I chance to misse I say with Augustine Nunquam errari tutius existimo quà m cum in amore nimio veritatis reiectione nimia falsitatis erratur I thinke a man can neuer more safely erre then when he erreth in the too much loue of the truth and the reiecting of falsehoode I haue labored in this worke to set downe not onely the chiefe and principall but euen the most and in a manner all the controuersies of religion betweene vs and the Papists maintained this day If any thing bee missing I say againe with Augustine Tale esse arbitratus sum cui mea responsio necessaria non fuisset siue quia ad rem de qua agitur non pertinet siue quod tam leue esset vt à quolibet redargui facillimè posset I thought it to be such as vnto the which mine answere was not needefull either because it was not pertinent to the matter in hand or else of so small moment that euery man might easilie answer vnto it I haue no more to say but this If thou findest thy selfe any thing profited or helped good Christian Reader by these simple labouâ—s of mine giue God the praise and I will praise him with thee but one thing let mee pray thee Quisquis legis nihil reprehendas nisi cum totum perlegeris atque ita forte minus reprehendes Whosoeuer readest in this booke reprehend nothing before thou hast read the whole and so perhaps thou wilt be more sparing in rephending The Lorde giue vs all grace to loue the truth that they which knowe it may liue thereafter and they which as yet knowe it not may seeke for it and wee all may embrace the Counsell of the wise man to Buy the trueth but in no wise to sell it that is by all possible meanes to labour for it and hauing attained thereunto for no earthly respect for feare or fauour to depart from it The Lord God Iesus Christ Iehouah Emmanuel our blessed Sauiour and Redeemer who is the way the truth and the life giue vs of his heauenlie grace that wee may walke obediently in his waies and constantly professe his truth that in the end he may bring vs to eternall life Amen Soli Deo immortali patri Filio cum Spiritu sancto sit omnis honor gloria A PARTICVLAR INDEX OR TABLE OF ALL THE CONTROVERSIES WITH THEIR SEVERAL questions contained in this treatise The contents of the first Booke This Booke containeth seuen Controuersies The first Controuersie of the Scriptures hath seuen questions 1. quest Of the number of the Canonicall bookes of Scripture pag. 2. 2. Of the authenticall edition of Scripture pag. 12. 3. Of the vulgar translation of Scripture and of publique prayers in the vulgar tongue pag. 16. 4. Of the authoritie of Scripture pag. 20. 5. Of the perspicuitie and plainnes of Scripture pag. 23. 6. Of the interpretation of Scripture 3. parts 1. Of the diuers senses of Scripture pag. 26. 2. Who ought to expound Scripture pag. 28. 3. Of the manner of expounding Scripture pag. 30. 7. Of the perfection of Scripture 3. parts 1. Whether the Scripture be absolutely necessarie p. 33. 2. Whether they be sufficient pag. 35. 3. Of vnwritten traditions beside Scripture pag. 38. The second generall Controuersie concerning the Church containeth fiue questions 1. quest Of the definition of the Church 2. parts 1. Whether wicked men be members of the Church pag. 43. 2. Whether the Church be inuisible pag. 46. 2. Whether the Church may erre 2. parts 1. Whether the Catholike Church may erre at all or not pag. 49. 2. Whether the visible Church vpon earth may fall into Idolatrie or Apostasie pag. 52. 3. Of the notes and markes of the Church 1. Antiquitie pag. 55 2. Vniuersalitie pag. 57 3. Succession pag. 59 4. Vnitie pag. 60 5. Miracles pag. 63 6. The gift of prophecying pag. 66 4. Of the authoritie of the Church 2. parts 1. What authoritie it hath in matters of faith and whether wee are to beleeue in the Church pag. 73 2. Of the ceremonies of the Church pag. 76 5. Of the Church of Rome two parts 1. Whether it be the Catholike Church pag. 78 2. Whether it be a true visible Church pag. 79 The third controuersie of generall Councels containeth eight questions 1. quest Whether Councels be absolutely necessarie pag. 81 2. By whom generall Councels ought to be summoned pag. 83 3. Of what persons Councels ought to consist pag. 84 4. Who ought to be the president in Councels pag. 88 5. Whether Councels may erre or not pag. 90 6. Of the authoritie of Councels pag. 93 7. Whether they be aboue the Pope pag. 95 8 Of the conditions requisite in generall Councels pag. 98 The fourth controuersie of the Bishop of Rome called the Pope ten questions 1. Whether the regiment of the Church be Monarchicall pag. 100 2. Whether Peter were Prince of the Apostles and assigned by Christ to be the head of the Church pag. 105 3. Of Peters being at Rome two parts 1. Whether Peter were at Rome pag. 112 2. Whether Peter were Bishop of Rome pag. 116 4. Whether the Bishop of Rome be the true successor of Peter pag. 118 5 Of the primacie of the See of Rome sixe parts 1. Whether the Bishop of Rome be aboue other Bishops pag. 120 2. Concerning appeales made to Rome pag. 122 3. Whether the Pope bee subiect to the iudgement of any pag. 124 4. Whether the Pope may be deposed from his Papacie pag. 125 5. The originall of the primacie of Rome p. 128 6. Of the names and titles of the Bishop of Rome pag. 131 6. quest Whether the Pope of Rome as likewise whether the Church of Rome may erre pag. 134 7. quest Of the spirituall iurisdiction of the Pope two parts 1. Whether hee may make lawes to binde the conscience pag. 141 2. Whether all Bishops do receiue their Ecclesiastical iurisdiction from the Pope p. 145 8 Of the temporal iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome two parts 1 Whether the Pope be aboue Kings and Emperours pag. 148 2 Whether he be a temporall prince pag. 151 9 Of the Popes prerogatiue 3. parts 1 Of his power dispensatiue pag. 154 2 Of his power exemptiue Ibid. 3 Of his power transcendent Ibid. 10. Of Antichrist 9. parts 1 Whether Antichrist shal be one particular man pag. 155 2 Whether Antichrist be yet come and how long he shall raigne pag. 157 3 Concerning the name character of Antichrist p. 162 4 Of the generation of Antichrist pag. 168 5 Of the seate and place of Antichrist pag. 169 6 Of the doctrine of Antichrist pag. 172 7 The miracles of Antichrist pag. 176 8 The warres and kingdome of Antichrist pag. 179 9 Whether the Pope be Antichrist pag. 182 The fift controuersie of the Clergie sixe questions 1. quest Of the name of Clerkes or Clergie men pag. 190 2 Of the election of Bishops and
abridgeth the story of one Iason a Syrenean Lib. 2. cap. 2. v. 23. Who was an Heathen but the spirite of God vseth not neither needeth to borow of prophane writers He saith that this worke was not easie but paineful to him but required sweating and watching v. 26. But to the holy writers of Scripture though their own labour and diligence was not wanting yet was not the worke hard or molestious vnto them Lastly the author faith he writeth for pleasure recreation of the Reader and craueth pardon if he haue not done well Lib. 2.15.39 But to read for pleasure is no end of Scripture neither doth the spirit of God vse any excuse either for matter or manner Our aduersaries say that S. Paule likewise confesseth that he was rude in speaking 1. Cor. 11.6 We aunswere he so saith because the false Apostles so gaue out of him not that he was so indeed and yet in that place S. Paule doth not excuse him selfe for his not sufficieÌ„t haÌ„dling of his matter as this author doth neither is that speach of S. Luke any thing like for there the Euangelist doubteth not to say that he had attained to an exact knowledge of all things Vpon these premises we conclude that these bookes of the Machabees are not Canonicall nor to be taken for any part of holy Scripture though we denie not but that there may be some profitable vse of them for the storie AVGVSTINES IVDGEMENT OF the bookes called Apocrypha FIrst generally of them all thus he writeth Quas itaque Scripturas dicimus nisi Canonicas legis Prophetarum de vnit Eccle. 16. We acknowledge no Canonicall Scripture of the old Testament but the law and the Prophetes but none of the Apocrypha were writteÌ„ by any of the Prophets Againe he saith Omnes literae quib Christus Prophetatus est apud Iudaeos sunt Psal. 56. All the bookes which do Prophesie of Christ were kept amoÌ„gest the Iewes but none of the Apocrypha were written in Hebrue Ergo. Concerning the story of Bel and the Dragon he calleth it a fable de mirabilib lib. 2. cap. 32. Of the same credite is the storie of Susanna The booke of Iudith was not saith he receiued in the Canon of the Iewes De Ciuit. Dei 18.26 The two bookes of Ecclesiasticus and the wisedome of Solomon are onely said to be Solomons propter eloquij nonnullam similitudinem because of some affinitie and likenesse of the stile De Ciuit. Dei 17.20 So he thinketh that Solomon was not indeed the author of them how then can that booke be Canonicall which geueth it selfe a false title being called the wisedome of SolomoÌ„ and was neuer compiled by Solomon THE SECOND QVESTION CONCERning the authenticall and most approued Edition of the Scriptures The Papistes WHereas it is confessed that the Hebrue Edition of the old TestameÌ„t error 2 is the most auncient in the which toung the Scriptures were compiled by the Prophets that the new TestameÌ„t was writteÌ„ in Greeke by the Apostles and the Euangelistes yet our aduersaries do generally hold as it was decreed in the TrideÌ„tine Chapter Sess. 4. Decret 2. That in all sermoÌ„s readings disputations controuersies the vulgare Latine traÌ„slation should be taken for authentike before the Hebrue or Greeke and that no man should presume vpon any occasion to reiect it or appeale from it The Protestantes WE do truly affirme that although there are diuerse EditioÌ„s of the old Testament besides the Hebrue and some of them verie auncient as the translation of the Septuagints compiled by 72. auncieÌ„ts of the Iewes at the instigation of Ptolomeus Philadelphus king of Egypt 300. yeares before Christ and after Christ there were other translations in Greeke made by Aquila Synomachus Theodotion and others also a Chalde Paraphrase compiled by the Iewes last of all diuerse Latin translations the which as Augustine saith in his time were so many that they could not be nuÌ„bred yet of al the rest the Hebrue being the most auncient and the mother of the rest and freest from corruptions ought to be receiued as most authentike And for the new Testament though there be a Syriacke translation verie auncient yet the Greeke ought to be preferred being the same toung wherein the Apostles and the Euangelistes wrote to be the onely authentike copie As for the Latin translation of the Bible we are able to proue it to be verie corrupt and faultie and therefore not authentike The Papistes Argumentes 1 THe Latin Church hath vsed the vulgare Latin translation for the space of 800. or 900. yeares and it is not like that the Church all this while was without the true Edition of the Scriptures Ergo it is onely authenticall We aunswere First by this Argument it foloweth that this vulgar Latin being generally vsed was preferred before other Latin translations which were at the first in great number not that therefore it is more authentike then the Hebrue in the old and the Geeeke in the new Testaments Secondly there were other Churches besides the Latin all this while as amongest the Greekes famous congregations and Churches that be it in the Latin Church the vulgar translation was reteined being erroneous yet the whole Church continued not in that errour which were not so tyed and bound to the Latin translation Thirdly if men all this while knowledge decreasing and a way being in preparing for Antichrist were negligent in correcting and amendiâ—â— the common translation this is no good Argument to make it authenticall â— As the Hebrues had an authentike translation in their own toung and 〈…〉 in theirs why should not the Latin Church haue it also authenticall in Latin We aunswere First it is no good reason because the Lord did consecrate the Hebrue and Greeke toung and therein would haue his word written that therefore he would or should also haue made the Latin as well authenticall as they Secondly if the Latin Church must haue an authentike translation why should not other countrys likewise haue their authenticals The Armenians had the Scriptures of old translated by Chrisostome the Sclauonians by Hierome the Gothes by Vlphilas why should not these also as well be authenticall and so looke into how many toungs the Scriptures should be translated so many authenticall translations should there be 3 They say that all other translations which are come forth since are erronious and much differ amoÌ„gest them selues Aunswere First this is no reason to prefere it before the Hebrue and Greeke though it were better theÌ„ all other traÌ„slations Secondly they charge vs falsly that our traÌ„slations are dissonant and erronious for their disagreement is not in such substantiall points where any of them do swarue from the originall we allow them not and yet there is not the meanest of them but may iustly compare with theirs yea and be preferred before it Thirdly if their traÌ„slation were so pure as they say Beza him selfe maketh it he would not haue set forth a
it hath nothing to do to iudge of Scripture being the seate of Antichrist neither is the authoritie of that Church to be credited but rather suspected and mistrusted 2 There are certaine writings of the Prophetes not canonicall and other writings of some that were no Prophetes made canonicall Ergo the Church hath authoritie to iudge of Scripture sic Stapleton For the first where he obiecteth that there are many writings of the Prophetes as of Solomon Nathan Ahiia Ieedo 2. Chronic. 9.29 that are lost and if they were extant should not be receiued We aunswere First it is not to be doubted of but some part of the canonicall Scripture is lost Secōdly how proueth he that if they were extant they were not to be acknowledged for Scripture To the second that bookes not made by Prophets are iudged canonicall as of Tobie Iudith We aunswere that these bookes ought not to be canonicall neither that euer they were so taken till of late it was decreed by Councels of no great antiquitie for in the Laodicene Councell and other auncient Councels they were deemed not to be canonicall 3 Certaine bookes of the new Testament before doubted of as the Epistle to the Hebrues the Apocalipse the 2. Epistle of Peter the second of Iohn are receiued into authoritie by the Church and other bookes as the Gospell of Thomas Mathias Andrew Peter were reiected by the authoritie of the Church We answere First we deny not but that the Church is to discerne betweene the true Scriptures forged bookes but this she doth not of her own authoritie but folowing the direction of Gods spirite speaking in those writings for the Church looking into the sacred and diuine matter of the Apostles writings was moued to acknowledge them for the word of God though of some they were doubted of finding the other to be fabulous bookes did by the direction of the same spirite reiect them Secondly Augustine and Hierome thinke that the Canon of Scripture might be confirmed in the Apostles time Iohn being the suruiuer of thē all who both acknowledged the true writings of the Apostles and condemned the contrarie If it be so the spirite of God in the Apostles hauing determined this question already concerning the canonicall Scripture the Church hath no authoritie to alter or chaunge that decree Plura apud Whitacher quaest 3. de Scriptur cap. 5. The Protestantes WE do not despise the sentence of the Church as our aduersaries doe falsely charge vs but we confesse that it is the duetie of the Church to geue testimony to the Scriptures as the Goldsmith doth trie the gold Fulk annot 2. Gal. 2. But the Church ought not to set the Lordes stampe vpon false coyne as the Papistes do in making Apocryphall bookes canonicall Neither doe we onely beleeue the Scripture because of the Churches testimonie nor chiefly but because the spirit of God doth so teach vs and the Scriptures them selues do testifie for them selues so that euerie man is bound to acknowledge the Scripture though there were no publike approbation of the Church Fulk 2. Galat. 6. Whitacher quaest 3. cap. 1. de Scripturis We do reason thus 1 The Iesuite doth reason strongly for vs he bringeth fiue arguments to proue the Scripture to be the word of God veritas vaticiniorum the constant and perpetuall truth of the Prophecies incredibilis scriptorum conspiratio the wonderfull harmonie and consent of holy writers of the Scripture testis est Deus ipse the spirite of God is a principall witnesse vnto vs testis est ipsa Scriptura the Scripture it selfe beareth witnesse as 2. Tim. 3. all Scripture is geuen by inspiration testis est diuinorum numerus infinitus miraculorum lastly the many and great miracles wrought by the Prophetes and Apostles do testifie for the truth thereof He maketh no mention at all of the testimonie of the Church but saith the same that we hold that the spirit of God inwardly working in our harts by the Scriptures them selues which we find to be most perfect consonant true of singular maiestie doth teach vs which is the word of God Bellarmin de verbo Dei lib. 1. cap. 2. 2 The Scripture geueth authoritie to the Church Ergo the Church geueth not authoritie to the Scripture the first we proue by our aduersaries own confession for being asked how they know that the Church erreth not they alledge such places of Scripture as Math. 28.20 I am with you to the end of the world and the like how then doth the Church geue authoritie to Scripture seeing it taketh her warrant and authoritie from thence the Iesuite him selfe saith that nihil est certius vel notius Scripturis nothing is more certaine or notoriously knowen then Scripture and againe sacra Scriptura est regula credendi certissima the holy Scripture is the most certaine rule of faith Bellarm. de verbo 1.2 If the authoritie of Scripture then be most certaine what reason is it that they should depend vpon the iudgement of the Church which is nothing so certaine the lesse certaine ought rather and so doth indeed depend of the more certaine the Church vpon the Scripture not contrariwise for the Scriptures are the foundation of the Church Ephe. 2.20 3 To beleeue the Scripture is a worke of faith the Church can not infuse faith into vs but the spirite of God Ergo the spirite of God not the Church teacheth vs to beleeue Scripture argum Whitach 18. 4 If the Scriptures depend vpon the approbation of the Church then the promises of saluation and eternall life conteined in the Scriptures do so likewise but it is absurde to thinke that the promises of God do stand vpō the allowance of men Ergo neither the Scriptures argum Caluini 5 The Scripture is the chief iudge and ought so to be in all cōtrouersies we may appeale from the Church to the Scripture not from the Scripture to the Church the Church is subiect to the Scriptures the rule of faith is in the scriptures not in the Church for the cōpanie of faithful which is the Church are ruled by faith they do not ouerrule faith neither are a rule thereof the Church is a point of beliefe as in the Creede not a rule or measure thereof Ergo the Church is not the chief iudge of Scripture but it selfe to be iudged by scripture Whitach argum 16. 6 We haue euident places of scripture Iohn 5.34 saith Christ I receiue no witnes of men but the scripture is the voyce of Christ and of the same authoritie Ergo. Ver. 36. I haue a greater testimonie thē of Iohn the scriptures do testifie of me Ver. 39. The testimony of the scriptures is greater thē the record of Iohn Ergo then of the Church 1. Iohn 5.6 the spirite beareth witnesse that the spirite that is the doctrine of the spirit is the truth And. ver 9. if we receiue the witnesse of man the witnesse of God is greater Ergo not the iudgement of the Church
lawfull for any to inuent allegories of scripture as it seemeth good to them selues THE SECOND PART OF THE SIXTH QVEtion to whom the chief authoritie to expound Scripture is committed The Papistes error 9 IT was decreed in the Councell of Trent that scripture should be expoūded as the Church expoundeth it and according to the common and consonant cōsent of the fathers Sect. 4. The Rhemistes say that the sense of the scriptures must be learned of the fathers and pastors of the Church Praefat. Sect. 18. If the fathers agree not the matter is referred to a generall Councell if there it be not determined we must haue recourse to the Pope and his Cardinals The Iesuite dare not referre the matter to the Pope alone to expound scripture but ioyneth the Colledge of Cardinals with him Bellarm. lib. 3. de script cap. 3. 1 They obiect that place Deut. 17.9 where the people are commaunded to resorte vnto the Priest or Iudge in doubtfull matters Ergo there ought to be a chief and supreme iudge in Ecclesiasticall matters Bellarm. We aunswere First here the ciuill Magistrate and the Iudge are ioyned together as ver 12. Wherefore if they will gather hereby that the Pope must be supreme Iudge in all Ecclesiasticall matters then the Emperour ought to be as well in ciuill Secōdly the text saith they shal come to the Priests ver 9. assigning many not to one onely Priest Thirdly they must iudge according to the law v. 11. not as they list thē selues Fourthly here is no mentiō made of doubts in interpreting scripture but of controuersies that may fall out betweene man and man either Ecclesiasticall to be decided by the Priest or ciuill by the Magistrate Fiftly we graunt that in euery country there ought be a supreme and high seate of iudgement for determining of controuersiall matters betweene men but it foloweth not that there should be a supreme iudge ouer the whole Church especially in such matters as this concerning the sense of the scriptures which i◠not commited to the iudgement of men neither is any such controuersie named in that palce ver 8. 2 Ecclesiastes 12.11 The wisemā cōpareth the wordes of the wise to nayles which are fastned geuen by one pastor Ergo the Pope is supreme iudge We aunswere the wise men are here vnderstood to be the Pastors and Ministers of Gods word but this one pastor signifieth neither the high Priest in the old law nor the Pope in the new but Iesus Christ the high shepheard for our soules What great boldnesse is this to attribute that to the Pope which is onely proper to Christ 3 They also picke out some places in the new Testament as Math. 16.19 to thee will I geue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen Christ saith so to Peter Ergo the Pope hath authoritie to expound scripture We aunswere First by the keyes here is meant commission to preach the Gospell not onely to expound doubtes Secōdly they were geuen to all the Apostles not to Peter onely Math. 28. v. 18.19 Thirdly the Pope is not successor of Peter no more then any other godly Bishop nor so much vnlesse he folow Peters steps So they abuse that place Math. 18.17 he that will not heare the Church c. Ergo the Bishops and chief pastors must expound the doubt in scriptures Aunswere First our Sauiour speaketh here of the discipline of the Church of correctiōs and admonitions not of interpreting scripture which dependeth not vpō the will fantacie of Pope Cardinals or Popish Councels but must be tryed by the scriptures them selues Secondly we must geue eare to the Church but with a double condition we must be sure it is the Church of God secōdly we must not heare them cōtrary to the scriptures but so long as they do teach the doctrine of Christ. The Protestants WE haue a more compendious way to come to the vnderstanding of the scripture It were to lōg whē we doubt of any place to stay till we haue the generall consent of the pastors of the Church or to expect a generall Councell or go vp to Rome And it were to much to trouble the Popes grauitie with euery questiō The Lord hath shewed vs a more easie and ready way see that we neede not ascend to heauen or cōpasse the earth or passe the Alpes but the word of God is amongest vs the scriptures them selues and the spirite of God opening our harts do teach vs how to vnderstand them the interpretation of Scripture is not assigned to any succession of pastors or tryed to any place or persons Our arguments folow some few of them 1 That onely hath power to geue the sense of Scripture which doth beget vs faith the spirite onely by the Scriptures begetteth faith Rom. 10.17 faith commeth of hearing the word Ergo the spirit of God is the onely interpreter of scripture The proposition also is cleare for seeing the Scripture is the true sense and meaning therof if any should geue the sense of the scripture but that which worketh faith then vpon him should our faith be grounded If the Pope therefore geue the sense of Scripture and our faith ariseth of the Scripture vnderstood then our faith is builded vpon the Popes sense argum Whitach 2. 9. 2 The Scriptures cā not be interpreted but by the same spirit wherewith they were writtē but that spirite is found no where but in the Scriptures Ergo. The first part the Papistes them selues graunt the second is thus proued the spirite of the Apostles is not geuen by secret inspiration that sauoureth of Anabaptisme where is it thē to be found whether is it like that S. Peters spirite should be found in the Popes chaire or in his Epistles or if they haue S. Peters spirite where is S. Paules found but in his writings Yet it is all one spirite appeareth not els where but in the Scriptures where euery man may finde it as wel as the Pope the spirituall man iudgeth all things 1. Cor. 2.15 you haue an oyntment from him that is holy and you haue knowen all things and ver 27. you need not that any mā teach you By these places it is euident that euery faithfull man by the spirite of God may vnderstand the scriptures 3 The doctrine of the Church must be examined by the Scriptures Ergo the scriptures are not to stand to the iudgement of the Church The former part is proued by the example of the Berrheans Act. 17.11 If they did well in examining Paules doctrine much more may the decrees of the Pope Church Coūcels be examined by the scriptures But they knew not whether Paule was an Apostle or not therefore they might examine his doctrine saith the Iesuite Answere it is no matter for the person of Paule they examined his doctrine which dependeth not vpon the person Secondly they could not be ignoraunt of his Apostleship who was famous throughout the Churches Thirdly they doubted onely whether Paul was an
which is contrarie We aunswere whatsoeuer is imposed as necessarie to saluation beside the Scripture praeter Scripturas is also contra Scripturas contrarie to Scripture as are all Popish traditions which they lay a necessitie vpon both beside and contrarie to Scripture Neither did those false Apostles against whom S. Paule writeth so much bring in another or cōtrary Gospell as the Apostle saith ver 7. as they did labour to corrupt and peruert that Gospel which S. Paul taught Therfore all traditiōs whether praeter or cōtra beside or contrarie to Scripture are notablie by this place ouerthrowen 2 Iohn 20.31 these things are written that ye might beleeue that Iesus Christ is the sonne of God that in beleeuing ye might haue life through his name Ergo the Scriptures conteine all things necessarie to saluation for they suffise to worke in vs faith and faith bringeth vs to eternall life First Bellarmine aunswereth that Iohn speaketh onely of that which he had written Aunswere If this one Apostles writings were able to worke faith the whole body of Scripture much more but he rather speaketh of all other holy writings of the Apostles for he was the suruiuer of them all acknowledged their writings and approued them Secōdly saith he the Apostle saith not that those writings onely suffise but they are profitable and referred to this end to worke faith Aunswere The Scripture is not one of the meanes but the sole whole and onely meanes for if they perfectly worke faith what neede any other helpes but the first is true for they doe beget in vs a perfect faith which shall bring vs to eternall life Ergo they are the onely meanes of faith 3 The whole Scripture saith S. Paule is profitable to teach to improue to correct and instruct in righteousnesse 2. Tim. 3.16 Ergo it conteineth all things necessarie for what els is requisite besides these foure to teach the right faith improue error to instruct in righteousnes and vertue to correct vice First they aunswere the Apostle meaneth as well euery booke of Scripture as the whole euery part therfore hath this perfection as well as the whole But you will not say that euery booke conteineth all things necessarie to saluation therefore this perfection is not so to be taken We aunswere First S. Paule vnderstandeth the body of Scripture as ver 15. thou hast knowen the Scriptures he speaketh of them all Secondly if euery part had these vtilities you might as well conclude that euery word and sillable hath them for they are parts of Scripture Thirdly it appeareth by these foure great vtilities here set downe that the Apostle meaneth not any part or partes of Scripture but the whole for euery part of Scripture is not profitable for all these endes but the whole Secōdly they say it foloweth not the Scripture is profitable therfore sufficient they also graunt it is profitable Aunswere but we conclude out of S. Paule that the Scripture is not onely profitable but sufficient as it foloweth v. 17. that the man of God may be absolute perfectly instructed to euery good worke If then the scriptures are able perfectly to instruct vs then are they sufficient then neede we no other helpes 4 Lastly Augustine thus writeth in Psal. 66. Ne putetis saith he ex alijs Scripturis petendum quod forte hic deest Thinke not saith he that it is to be found in any other writings if it be not in Scripture And in another place In Euangelio quaeramus nam si ibi non inuenimus vbi inueniemus Let vs saith he seeke to be resolued in the Gospell if we finde not there where shall we find it Ergo by the iudgemēt of Augustine there is no truth necessary to be knowen which is not to be found in the Scripture THE THIRD PART OF THE SEVENTH question whether there be any traditions beside Scripture concerning faith and manners The Papistes error 13 THey vnderstand by this word tradition doctrine preceptes and ceremonies with other vsages of the Church which are not written in the scriptures They do not say that all their traditiōs are necessary but they make diuerse kindes of them some are vniuersall obserued in the whole Church some particular some are free some necessarie some are Apostolicall inuented by the Apostles some Ecclesiasticall by the Church so thus they conclude all traditions decreed in Councels and iudged Apostolicall whatsoeuer the Church of Rome receiueth as Apostolicall are not to be doubted but to be Apostolicall indeed Secondly all Apostolicall traditions are of equall authoritie with the writings of the Apostles Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 2. 9. and they are that part of the word of God which is vnwritten as well as the scriptures are that part which is written Let vs see what arguments they bring for these traditions 1 They geue an instance of certaine traditiōs as the Baptisme of infants and the not rebaptising of those which were before Baptised by heretikes We aunswere these two customes of the Church are grounded vpon scripture for as childrē were in the time of the law Circūcised so are they now vnder the Gospell Baptised and that promise Gene. 17. I will be thy God and the God of thy seede as it belonged to them and their children so doth it appertaine to vs and our children Concerning the other point that they whom heretikes haue once Baptised ought not to be Baptised againe S. Augustine doth proue it out of the scripture Ephe. 4. there is one Faith one Baptisme Ergo not to be repeated But now they come in with other traditions as the Lenton fast which they vse most fondly and superstitiously the eight Ecclesiasticall orders Bishops Prists Deacōs Subdeacons Acolythistes Readers Exorcistes Doore-keepers the worshipping of Images with many other these they would face vs out to be Apostolical traditions and to haue bene vniuersally obserued which are but their vayne brags and Thrasonicall crakes they shall neuer proue them vniuersall much lesse Apostolicall And because they finde no scripture to establish these their superstitious fantasies by they flye vnto tradition which is their onely hauen where they hope to finde succour but all in vayne Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 9. Consul Whitacher quaest 6. cap. 4. 2 They proceede and alledge scripture for their traditions as that place Iohn 16.12 I haue many things to say but you can not beare them now Ergo say they there are many traditions not written We aunswere First it foloweth not because Christ declared not all things at that time that therefore he kept them from his Apostles all together Nay whatsoeuer afterwardes the Apostles learned of the spirite of God they had heard before of Christ for it was the office of the spirite but to put them in remembrance of Christes sayings Iohn 14.26 which they had heard before but vnderstood them not and so forgat them Wherefore these things which Christ forbeareth to speake are the same things which are cōteined in
the Apostles writings Secondly if there were other matters which Christ vttered not how foloweth it nay what great presumptiō is it to say that those trifles and apish toyes which the Papistes vse in their Idolatrous sacrifice and their other beggarly ceremonies which boyes may well laugh at are those profoūd matters which the Apostles were not then able to conceiue 3 That of all other they take to be an inuincible place 2. Thess. 2.15 keepe the instructions or traditions which ye haue bene taught either by word or by Epistle Ergo there are traditions besides scripture We aunswere when S. Paule wrote this Epistle all the scriptures were not writtē wherefore besides these two short Epistles which do not conteine the summe of the Gospell nor all necessarie preceptes he by his preaching supplied what was wanting and so declared vnto them the whole mysterie of the Gospell as he saith 1. Thess. 2.2 these he calleth his traditions because yet he had not written his other Epistles wherein those instructions and traditions are conteined This then is but a weake argument the Thessalonians had other instructiōs and traditions beside the two Epistles writtē vnto them Ergo they had other traditiōs beside all the writings of S. Paule and the other Apostles this is their mayne and waightie argument The Protestantes FIrst we graunt that all things are not written which our Sauiour Christ and the Apostles taught and that it was the Gospell which they preached as well as this which is written yet in substance they preached the same Gospell which now is expressed in the scripture neither was there any necessarie precept deliuered in their Sermons which is not now to be found in the scriptures Secondly we denie not but there were certaine rites and orders ordained by the Apostles in diuerse churches which were not cōmitted to writing because they were not to continue and endure for euer in the Church as that precept Act. 16. that the Gentiles should abstaine from strangled and from bloud Thirdly we also graunt that the Church may vse externall rites and orders either left by tradition or ordained by the Church for decencie and comelynesse and tending to edification But we constantly affirme that there are no traditions in the Church of God necessarie to saluation beside scripture wherein all things are conteined necessarie to saluation both concerning faith and manners 1 It is not lawfull as to take ought from the word of God so to adde any thing vnto it Deut. 12.32 Apocal. 22.18 But they which bring in traditiōs necessarie beside the scriptures do adde vnto them Ergo. To the proposition the Iesuite aunswereth that all addition to the word of God is not forbidden for the Prophets did write after Moses the Apostles after the Euangelistes We aunswere that those holy men had authoritie from God to compile scripture if the Papistes haue the like Apostolike authoritie for their traditions let them shew it and we will beleeue them Secondly the Prophetes did but explane Moses and expound the law and the Apostles did as it were set forth their Commentaries vpon the Gospell this therefore was no addition because they did not derogate from the perfection of the scriptures any way To the assumptiō they aunswere that their traditions are but expositiōs of Scripture We aunswere their traditions are cleane contrarie to Scripture as the worshipping of Images and the sacrifice of their Masse and they adde to Scripture making it vnperfect saying it doth not conteine all things necessarie to saluation Wherefore they can not escape that curse which they runne into that adde to the word of God 2 All traditions among the Iewes besides the law were condemned Math. 15.3 Ergo all vnwritten traditions now must be abolished The Iesuite aunswereth First Christ condemned not the auncient traditions of Moses but those which were newly and lately inuented Aunswere first the Scripture maketh no mention of any such traditions of Moses Christ biddeth them search the Scriptures not runne vnto traditions Secondly these seemed to be auncient traditions bearing the name of Elders traditions and they were in great authoritie amongest the Iewes most like because of some long continuance Secondly saith he Christ findeth fault with wicked and impious traditions Aunswere First their traditions were not openly and plainly euill and pernicious but had some shew of holynesse as the washing of pots and tables and beds I would the Papists did not here take thē selues by the nose whose traditions come nearer to open impietie and blasphemie then theirs did Secondly Christ in opposing the Scripture against traditions therein condemneth all traditions not written besides the Scripture 3 If Paule preaching the whole Gospell Act. 20.27 did say none other things then Moses and the Prophetes then all things necessarie to saluation are conteined in the Scriptures For it can not be said to be a whole and perfite Gospell if any thing necessarie to saluation be wanting But Paule preached nothing but out of Moses and the Prophetes Act. 26.22 Ergo much more now is the Scripture a perfect rule of faith we hauing beside Moses and the Prophetes the holy writings of the Euangelistes and Apostles 4 Last of all although we might multiplie many arguments but these I trust strongly concluding out of Scripture may serue as a sufficient bulwarke against all Popish paper bullets Let vs heare in the knitting vp the iudgement of Augustine In his rebus inquit in quib nihil certi statuit Scriptura mos populi Dei vel instituta maiorum pro lege tenenda Epist. 86. In all those things saith he speaking of externall rules and ceremonies of the which we haue no certaine rule out of Scripture the custome of the people of God and the godly constitutions of our forefathers must stand for a law but concerning matters of faith and good maners the Scriptures do giue certaine rules as in another place In ijs quae aperte in Scriptura posita sunt inueniuntur illa omnia quae continent fidem moresque viuendi De doctrin Christian. 2.9 all things appertaining to faith and the rule of life are plainlie expressed in the Scripture Ergo by the sentence of Augustine traditions besides scripture haue nothing to do with the doctrine of faith and manners but do consist onely in externall rites and customes of the Church THE SECOND GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE CHVRCH HAuing now finished the questions betweene our aduersaries and vs concerning the Scriptures and word of God which all do belong to the Propheticall office of Christ in the next place such controuersies are to be handled as do concerne the Kingly office of Christ. And seeing the Church of Christ is his kingdome where he ruleth and raigneth we must intreat of the Church and first in generall of the whole and in speciall of the partes and members This present controuersie concerning the Church in generall standeth vpon fiue principall questions 1 Of the definition of the Catholike Church two partes
of the question First whether wicked men and infidels be true members of the Church Secondly whether the Catholike Church be inuisible 2 Whether the Catholike Church may erre and whether the visible Church may fayle vpon earth 3 Concerning the true notes and markes of the Church 4 Of the authoritie of the Church two partes First whether the Church haue authoritie in matters of faith beside the Scriptures and whether we ought to beleeue in the Church Secondly concerning the ceremonies of the Church 5 Whether the Church of Rome be the true Church two partes First whether it be the Catholike Church Secondly whether the Church of Rome be a true visible Church of these now in their place and order THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE definition of the Catholike Church The Papistes THe Catholike Church say they is a visible companie of men professing the same faith and Religion and acknowledging the Bishop of Rome to be their chief pastor and the Vicare of Christ vpon earth Bellarmin de Eccles. Lib. 3. cap. 2. Canisius capit de praecept Eccles. articul 9. Lindanus lib. 4. cap. 84. The Protestantes THe Catholike and vniuersall Church is the inuisible cōpanie of the faithfull elected and chosen to eternall life Iohn 10.16 A particular Church is a member of the vniuersall and Catholike Church and it is a visible companie and congregation of men amongest whom the pure word of God is preached and the Sacramentes rightly administred in the which visible congregation there may be and are many hypocrites euill and vnfaithfull men found and shal be to the end of the world Ex Amand. Polano So then betweene the vniuersall and particular Church there is a treble difference First the one is dispersed ouer all the world the other in some one country citie or any certaine place Secondly the vniuersall consisteth onely of the elect the particular both of good and bad Thirdly the Catholike is inuisible the other is visible and to be seene The question betweene vs and our aduersaries is about the vniuersall Catholike Church which they do falsly define in three points First they hold that wicked men are true members of the Catholike Church Secondly they allow not this distinctiō of the Church visible and inuisible but do affirme that the Catholike Church is visible Thirdly they make the Catholike Church to be in subiection to the Bishop of Rome Concerning this last point it belongeth to the controuersie of the Bishop of Rome and therefore we will not touch it in this place The other two are now to be handled in this question as two partes thereof THE FIRST PART OF THIS FIRST question whether wicked men and infidels may be true members of the Church The Papistes THey affirme that not onely the predestinate but euē reprobates also may belong vnto the Church and be true members thereof Bellarmin Lib. 3. de error 14 Eccles. cap. 7. Nay they denie that the elect which are vnborne and not yet called do appertaine to the Church of Christ. Rhemistes annot in 1. Tim. 3. Sect. 10. This then is generally their opinion that there is no internal grace or vertue required in the mēbers of the Church but onely the externall and publike outward profession Bellarmin cap. 2. And therefore they doubt not to say that euen wicked men and reprobates remaining in the publike profession of the Church are true members of the body of Christ. Rhemistes annot in Iohan. 15. Sect. 1. 1 They first alledge certaine places of Scripture as Math. 3. the Church is compared to a barne floore where there is both chaff and corne Math. 13. to a net cast into the sea where all manner of fish are gathered together 2. Tim. 2. to a house wherein there be vessels of honor and dishonor Ergo both good bad are members of the Church Bellarmin cap. 7. lib. 3. We aunswere All these places must be vnderstood of the visible Church which is knowen by the publike preaching of the word and therefore Math. 3. compared to a fanne and Math. 13. to a draw net the Apostles pastors and teachers are the fisher men Wherefore we denie not but that wicked men may be in the Church but not of it yea they may be members of the visible Church for a time but can not be truly ingraffed into the body of Christ. Fulk annot Iohan. 15. Sect. 1. 2 The Church say they is compared to a body 1. Cor. 12. as in the body there are some partes which haue neither sense nor life so in the Church there are some mēbers which haue neither faith nor charitie which is the life of the Church Ergo wicked men may be right members of the Church Bellarm. cap. 10. there may be also some fruitlesse braūches in the vine and so euill men may be members of Christ. Rhemist annot 15. Iohan. 1. euery braunch not bearing fruit in me shal be cast forth Ergo there may be fruitlesse braūches in Christ. We answere to the first who would haue said as the Iesuite doth that there are partes in the body that receiue neither life nor sense of the body doth he meane the nayles and heares as he seemeth to geue instance in the end of the Chapter but they are no partes of the body but excrements he is so deepe in his sophistrie that he hath forgotten Philosophie and yet they receiue some gift from the body for they grow encrease but the wicked receiue no grace at all from the Church The Rhemistes yet are more reasonable that say the wicked in the church are as ill humors and superfluous excrements in the body rather then liuely partes therof 1. Iohan. 2. Sect. 10. To the second is a dead bow or a braunch I pray you any part of the tree I thinke not the tree can not conueniently spare any one of the partes therof but the dead partes are hurtfull and combersome and it doth the tree good to cut them of But that they haue preuented vs we would haue vsed no better argument against them then this drawen from the resemblance of a mans body for as what is in the body receiuing no life nor power from the body is not properly a part of the body howsoeuer it seeme to be ioyned to the body so the wicked although they be in the outward face of the Church yet because they are not partakers of the spirituall life thereof by Christ are not truly to be iudged members of it 3 If wicked men should not be right members of the Church but the faithfull and predestinate we should be vncertaine which is the true Church which is not to be admitted because the whole doctrine and all the principles of Religion do depend of the testimonie of the Church Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 10. We aunswere First although it is necessarie that the true Church should be certainly knowen yet not for that cause which the Iesuite pretendeth for the Religion of Christians is grounded vpon the Scriptures
Church Actes 15. when they came to Ierusalem they were receiued of the Church Philip. 3.6 Paule persecuted the Church how could the church be persecuted how could it receiue the Apostles if it were not visible Bellarmin cap. 12. We answere what goodly reasons here be a particular church such as was at Ierusalem may be seene Ergo the catholike and vniuersall Secondly a particular church may be sometime visible Ergo alwayes Thirdly the church is visible vnto the faithfull as in time of persecution for to Paule it was not knowen when he persecuted it but onely to the brethren Ergo it is visible to the world For these three points they must proue that the catholike church not a particular is visible that the Church is not sometime but alway visible yea and to the world or else they say nothing for shame masters make better arguments 3 He hath set his tabernacle in the sunne Psal. 19. The Church is as a Citie vpon an hill Math. 5. Ergo it is alwayes visible Bellarmin ibid. Rhemist Math. 5. Sect. 3. We answere First the Apostles them selues euen at this time when Christ spake these wordes vnto them were not so in sole or in monte in the sunne or vpon the hill that they were seene of the world nay they were not seene nor acknowledged of the Scribes and Pharisies in Iewrie the Church is seene of the faithfull it is visible to them that search for her out of the Scriptures they that caÌ„ see the mountaine shal see the Citie the mountaine is Christ the Citie is the Church No marueile if the Church be not alwayes visible to the world for they see not neither do they know Christ. Secondly the church is said to be on a hill because the truth seeketh no corners heretikes and false tâ—achers flye into the desert and into secret places Math. 24. ver 26. But the truth is not ashamed the Apostles confessed Christ eueÌ„ before Kings and Princes Marke 13.19 so Augustine expoundeth it Cont. Faustum lib. 13. cap. 13. The Protestantes COncerning the catholike church we hold that because it is an article of our faith it is alwayes vnto the world inuisible and not to be espyed but by the eyes of faith Fulk Math. 5. Sect. 5. Concerning particular churches if by visible they vnderstand that which may be seene so we graunt they are alwayes visible Fulk Act. 11. v. 24. If for that which is actually visible we say it is not so alwayes visible to the world nay it may sometimes be so hid and secret that the members know not one another Fulk in Math. 5. Sect. 3. 1 To the Hebrues it is thus written cap. 13. v. 18.23.24 you are not come to the mouÌ„taine which might be touched but to the Citie of the liuing God the celestiall Ierusalem c. Ergo the church is inuisible and here opposed to the visible hill of Sinay Bellarmine answereth that this is vnderstood of the triumphant church in heauen not of the militant vpon earth To this we make answere the Apostle vnderstandeth the whole vniuersall church in heauen and earth which both make but one familie Ephe. 3.15 for here he nameth not onely the spirites of iust men which are in heauen but the faithfull vpon earth whose names are written in heauen the congregatioÌ„ saith he of the first borne the wordes are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a gathering together collection or coÌ„gregation which must needes be vnderstood of men vpon earth Againe saith he ye are come not ye shall come they had now left the smoking mountaine Sinay and were come to Sion the church vnder the Gospell Wherefore this is a most firme and inuincible argument the catholike church is the vniuersall number of Gods chosen in heauen and in earth Ergo inuisible 2 We will giue an instance In the dayes of Elias the church was not visible for he camplaineth and saith that he was onely left alone 1. King 19.10 Ergo the church is not alway visible The Rhemistes answere First at that time the church was visible in Iudaea the souldiers were numbred to 1000. thousand 2. Chron. 17. We aunswere againe First belike they haue taken a more exact account of them then the Lord him selfe for he saith he had reserued 7000 1. King 19.18 that had not bowed their knees to Baall they say there were ten huÌ„dred thousand Againe Elias if he had knowen such a number could not haue bene left so comfortlesse as in grief of hart to desire to dye But be it graunted that the church was visible in Iudaea at this time though it were not so to Elias yet where was that visible church in the dayes of Achaz and Manasseh when Iudaea fell also to Idolatrie Thirdly to beleeue that there is an holy catholike church is an article of our faith Ergo it is inuisible Bellarmin answereth First the holinesse of the church is inuisible We reply so the church is partly visible partly inuisible by his confession First why theÌ„ do ye define the catholike church to be a visible coÌ„gregatioÌ„ if it be not wholly altogether visible they know that difinitio must coÌ„uenire definito the definitioÌ„ must agree wholly to that which is defined but now it is not for they say the catholike holy church is partly visible as it is a church partly inuisible as it is holy Secondly do we not say in the Creede Credo Catholicam as well as Credo Sanctam I beleeue a catholike church as well as I beleeue the holy church then it is also inuisible as it is catholike because this also is part of the article see I pray you what shifting is here Secondly he answereth that some thing is seene in the church some thing beleeued for we see that visible companie of men which make the church but whether that companie be the true church we do not see it but beleeue it We reply againe First the Iesuite hath not yet proued that some thing is seene in the church some thing beleeued but one thing is seene namely the congregation as they are men another thing is beleeued that they are the church the sight and beliefe now by his owne confession are not both in the church Secondly we denie that the vniuersall coÌ„panie of the catholike church which is the number of the predestinate can be seene therefore all is beleeued and nothing seene Thirdly he saith that by faith we know which is the true church Ergo by faith we know which are the members of the church Ergo by faith the meÌ„bers do know them selues to be of the Church therefore faith is requisite in the true members of the church theÌ„ vnfaithfull men can not be true members of the church which point the Iesuite strongly before maintained against vs. Mendacem oportet esse memorem a lyar had need haue a good memorie lest he tell contrarie tales and so hath the Iesuite here for before he denied
of Bishops and Pastors is not necessarie for the continuance of the truth neither can it be concluded out of this place 3 Thus they reason there haue bene alwayes some faithfull men which haue outwardly professed their faith for if they dissembled or cloaked their profession then were they not faithfull Ergo the church hath bene alwayes visible as in the time of persecution Bellarmine We aunswere First the Iesuite doth cleane peruert and chaunge the state of the question for he defineth a visible church to be multitudo congregata in qua sint praelati subditi a multitude or companie gathered together where there are both Prelates and Bishops and people obediēt vnto them And now he geueth an instance of persecution wherein some faithfull Christians may geue an outward profession of their faith where is now that multitude congregate together where is that iurisdiction of Prelates where is that visible and glorious succession We denie not but that in time of persecution the faithfull may be knowen to them selues and yet some time they are not for in Israell there were seuen thousand faithfull beside Elias yet he knew none of them But it foloweth not that therefore the church is then visible to the world and notoriously knowen to men for so the Rhemistes say in Math. 5. Sect. 3. Act. 11. Sect. 3. Thus they flye manifestly from the question The Protestantes WE denie not but that the catholike vniuersall church as it hath hitherto continued since the beginning of the world so shall it endure to the end the Lord shall neuer want vpon earth a companie of faithfull men which shall truly serue him though it be not necessarie neither hath alwayes bene seene that they should be in any one place A visible church we define to be a congregation of men amongest whom the word is truly preached and the Sacraments administred such a Church hath not alwayes bene neither can we be assured that it shall alway be found vpon the earth wherein the worship of God publikely and visibly is practised 1 In the raigne of Ahaz king of Iuda there was no visible church where the pure worship of God was practised for both Israell vnder Pekah and Iuda vnder Ahaz fell to Idolatrie and folowed the custome of the Gētiles 2. Kings 16.3 yea Vriah the high Priest consented with the king to set vp Idolatrie Likewise in the dayes of Manasseh who did euill after the abhomination of the heathen 2. Kings 21.2 there was no place where God was publikely worshipped for Iudah was corrupted Israell was carried away captiue Ergo there was a time when there was no visible Church 2 In the Passion of our Sauiour there was no visible church such a church we still meane as where there are Prelati subditi pastores oues Prelates and people pastors and sheepe We proue it thus The visible Church was not amongest the Pharisies and Priests for they shamefully and wickedly erred Bellarmin 17. It was not among the Apostles for they also erred therfore after the Papists opiniō they were not the Church for the Church say they erreth not Secondly he saith they were yet but materiall partes not formall that is not Bishops or Pastors how then could there be a visible Church which was without the formal and principall parts that is Pastors and Bishops Ergo there was then no visible Church 3 When the abhominatiō of desolation shall stand in the temple there shal be a generall defection and apostasie from the faith then shall the visible church fayle vpon earth But the first is true Math. 24.15 2. Thess. 2.3 Ergo. To the first place the Iesuite aunswereth that it must be vnderstood of the destruction of the temple cap. 16. But the Rhemistes more liberall then so affirme that it shal be especially accomplished in Antichristes time when as the sacrifice of the Masse shall vtterly be abolished annot in Math. 24. ver 15. To the next place cōcerning that defectiō apostasie which S. Paul speaketh of first he saith that it shal be a defection from the Romane Empire but the Rhemistes say it shal be a defection frō most points of Christian Religion Secondly the Iesuite aunswereth that though it be a defection from the Romane faith yet it shall not be generall but particular but the Rhemistes better aduised graunt it shal be a reuolt of kingdomes peoples prouinces the publike entercourse of the faithfull with the church of Rome shall cease they shall onely communicate with it in hart annot in 2. Thess. 2. Sect. 6. Now out of their owne wordes we conclude there shal be a time whē as the publike seruice of God shall cease there shal be desolation in the Churches and temples of Christians there shal be then no publike entercourse with the Church but a priuat communicating in hart Ergo there shal be a time when there shal be no outward visible Church notoriously and famously knowen Ergo our aduersaries are in an error are condemned by their owne mouth THE THIRD QVESTION OF THE notes and markes whereby the true Church may be discerned and knowen FIRST OF THE FALSE AND ERROneous notes of the Church OVr aduersaries do deuise many notes whereby their Church is discryed as Bellarmine reckoneth vp 15. in order to many certaine to be found in a good Church but there are six principall which they doe most stand vpon antiquitie vniuersalitie succession vnitie the power of miracles the gift of prophesie We must first touch these in order and then come to the true and infallible notes of the Church Of antiquitie Note 1. THe Papists make great bragges of the long continuance of their Church yea that they can shew the discent of their Church from Adam Rhemistes error 18 annot in Act. 28. Sect. 5. But alacke sillie men they must come short of our Sauiuiour Christs and the Apostles time by fiue or six hundred yeares for the most of the opinions which they now hold Let vs examine their reasons In any great chaunge of Religion say they the authors of the Sect the time when it began the persons that oppugned it may be knowen but no such thing can be shewed of our Church say they as we can shew of yours we can tell them the yeare the places and ringleaders of their reuolt say our English Rhemistes annot in 1. Iohan. 2. Sect. 9. Bellarmin lib. 4. de Eccles. cap. 5. We aunswere First no meruaile if Papistrie herein do much differ from other heresies they as the heresies of the Arrians Pelagians Donatistes because they were not long to continue sodainly brake out and sodainly againe were extinguished But Papistrie being the prop and pillar of Antichrists kingdome by whom the world must be deluded many yeares was at the beginning to worke closely and secretly not breaking out at once into open impietie and blasphemie but vnder pretense of holynesse to set a broach her deadly poyson therefore S. Paule calleth it a
mysterie of antiquitie which began euen to worke in his dayes 2. Thess. 2.7 Secondly we also aunswere that all these things the authors of their sectes the time the persons that withstood them may manifestly be detected first concerning the time we haue a manifest Prophesie Apocal. 20. that Sathan should be bound a thousand yeares and afterward let loose when no doubt Antichrist should begin to shew him selfe to the world Cōcerning this space of a thousand yeares there are two probable opinions some thinke they are to begin immediatly after our Sauiour Christes time and so counting a thousand yeares all which time Sathan must be bound then Antichrist should begin to appeare Thus Iohn Wicliffe expoundeth it Others say the thousand yeares ought to begin after the three hundred yeares expired of persecution for all that while it is most like Sathan was let loose when he raged with opē mouth like a Lion against the Church and Saints of God of this opinion was Walter Brute somewhat after Wicliffes time who by this meanes maketh the Prophesie of Daniell of 1290. dayes and that in the Apocalipse 12. of 1260. dayes to agree with the thousand yeares of Sathans binding for taking euery day for a yeare we shall come to .1290 yeares after Christ when the thousand yeares must be expired beginning from the three hundred yeares of persecution If we count the thousand yeares from Christ we shall come to the time of Hildebrand the seuenth who was Pope of Rome a thousand yeares after Christ and vpward by whom the mariage of Ministers is thought first to haue bene forbidden if we begin after the ceasing of persecution which continued three hundred yeares we shall fall into the yeare .1300 about the time of Iohn Wicliffe whē the great rabble of Monkes and Friers began to swarme and superstition to encrease But we will take a litle payne briefly to touch the authors of many superstitions in Poperie and of their erronious and hereticall opinions Anno. 420. Zosimus Bishop of Rome did chalenge a prerogatiue aboue other Churches that it might be lawfull to make appeales frō other Churches to that sea and to set the better colour vpon it he falsely alledged a decree of the Nicene Coūcell but there was no such thing found there wherefore it was decreed in the Councell of Carthage at that time that none should appeale ouer the seas to Rome Bonifice the third purchased of the wicked Emperour Phocas the title of vniuersall Bishop Transubstantiation was first concluded against Berengarius anno 1062. vnder Leo the ninth but not publikely enacted before anno 1216. vnder Innocentius the third The Dominicke Friers brought in the same time and their Sect established by Innocentius the third Auricular confession also was brought in anno 1215. vnder the same Pope Mariage first prohibited by Nicholas the secōd Alexander the second Gregorie the seuenth about the yeare 1070. The Communion in one kinde forged and inuented and decreed in the Councell of Constance not aboue two hūdred yeares ago By these few examples it may appeare that it is false which the Iesuite saith that the authors of their sectes and heresies cā not be shewed Now we will briefly declare what oppugners and gainsayers they haue had in all ages since their grossest opinions began to be receiued Such were Bertramus and Berēgarius about pope Hildebrands time that mightily impugned the grosse opinion of Trāsubstantiatiō Robertus Gallus 1291. Robert Grosthead Bishop of Lincolne who was called malleus Romanorū the mallet or hammar of the Romanes anno 1250. Franciscus Petrarcha 1350. Iohannes de rupe Scissa who Prophesied against the Pope 1340. with many other which ceased not to crye out against the abhominable vices and erronious opinions of the Church of Rome Wherefore it is a great vntruth which the Iesuite doth so stifly auouch that we can not set down the pedegree discent of their church and faith and how it hath continually bene resisted 3 Now whereas they say that they can name the ringleaders of our sect we haue none other maisters and authors of our faith then our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles by whose holy writings we refuse not to be tryed But you flye from the light you disgrace the Scriptures making them imperfect and insufficient this the true Disciples of Christ would not do you are the Disciples of Christ as the Pharisies bragged that they were the Disciples of Moses And as then the true church was not in those that sat in Moses chaire though they could alledge great antiquitie but in Christ and his Apostles so is not now the true Church to be discerned by custome or number of yeares but by that truth which was taught and preached by our blessed Sauiour and his Apostles Of Vniuersalitie Note 2. OVr Church is vniuersall say they both in respect of time person place error 19 it hath alwayes bene in the world in all countrys and nations it hath florished Ergo it is the true Church That it is vniuersall they first proue by the name of Catholike which is say they by Gods prouidence appropriat to them which name they affirme without ground to haue bene imposed by the Apostles vpon true beleeuers Rhem. in Act. cap. 11. Sect. 4. We aunswere First the name of Christians is a more honorable title then the name of Catholikes for it is manifest Act. 11.26 that this name was vsed in the Apostles time and by the Apostles them selues allowed but it is not certaine that the name Catholike came from the Apostles Againe many heretikes chalenged this name to be called Catholikes who did not so easily obtaine to be called Christians which ancient and honorable name the Papistes do despise for in Italie and at Rome it is vsed as a name of reproch to signifie a dolt or a foole Fulk in Acts. 11.26 2 We say that you doe vsurpe this name as the Donatistes in Augustines time would be called Catholikes for what is the name of Catholike without the Catholike doctrine They are the true Catholikes that professe the auncient and Apostolike faith to vs therefore be it knowen to you this name of better right appertaineth then to you ô ye Papists yet we haue better argumentes to proue our Church by then by sillables and titles Quasi nos saith Augustine huius nominis testimonio nitamur ad demonstrandam Ecclesiam non promissis Dei As though we saith he do leane vpon this name to proue our Church by and not rather vpon the promises of God Secondly they proue their vniuersalitie by the multitude of people that haue receiued the Romish faith and their Church say they hath replenished the greatest part of the world They would proue this by the propagation of the Church in the Apostles time in Tertulian Irenaeus Hierome Augustine yea and afterward in Gregories dayes yea and now also besides many great countryes in Europe they haue of their church in
Was not here great amitie and loue thinke you amongest the Popes Another notable example of their vnitie we haue in Pope Vrbanus time the 6. against whom stood vp a contrarie Pope in Fraunce named Clement it is worth the noting what coyle these two popes kept between whō many battailes were fought many thousands slaine Pope Vrbane beheaded fiue Cardinals together after long torments Bishop Aquilonensis because he did ride no faster was had in suspition and slayne and cut in peeces by Vrbans souldiers at his commaundement behold here I pray you the vnitie of these Catholikes We will adioyne one other example no longer since then in king Henry the eights time The Duke of Bourbon being the leader of the Emperors armie layd siege to Rome and sacked it the souldiers brake in vpon the Pope which was Clement the seuenth being at Masse slew diuerse of the Priests and one Cardinall called Sanctorum quatuor they layd siege to the Castle of S. Angell so long till the Pope yeelded him selfe The souldiers dayly that lay at the siege made iestes of the Pope sometime they had one riding like the Pope with a whore behind him sometimes he blessed sometime he cursed sometime with one voyce they would call him Antichrist See here is their Catholike obedience to their chief Bishop Thus much concerning their vnitie and concord in life Let vs likewise take a view of their vnitie in doctrine We heard before how Pope Stephen and Sergius abolished the decrees of Formosus how then saith the Iesuite that the decrees of Popes do consent together The Councell of Basile and Constance before that decreed that the Pope should be subiect to generall Councels but this Canon was afterward reuersed and now generally the Papists hold the contrary that the Pope is aboue Councels Let vs see the consent of their writers Bellarmin lib. 1. de verbo cap. 12. maintaineth against Lyranus Driedo Genebrard and others that Iudith was in Manasses time Against Alphonsus de Castro that heretikes are no members of the Church Lib. 3. de Eccles. cap. 4. Against Iohannes de turre cremata that faith is not necessarie to make one a member of the Church Lib. 3. de Eccles. cap. 10. And euery where the Iesuite taketh great libertie to confute and controll other his felow Papistes belike hauing found out some starting holes that they either knew not or were ashamed to creepe into as the Iesuite doth But saith he we denie not but that we haue dissentions but they are not in materiall points but in such things as appertaine not to faith I meruaile he blusheth not thus to say him selfe knowing the contrary Is it not a substantiall point and belōging to faith to know which bookes are canonicall Scripture which are not But in this question they do much disagree Caietanus the Cardinall saith that we must acknowledge no Scripture but that which was either written or approued by the Apostles But Catharinus a Papist doth reiect that opinion Hugo Cardinalis Arias Montanus do hold no bookes of the old Testament to be canonicall which are written onely in Greeke the Papistes now generally hold the contrary Ex Whitacher 1. contr c. quaest cap. 6. Bellarmin saith that all those opinions which the Church holdeth as articles or preceptes of faith were deliuered by the Apostles that the Church must not now seeke for new reuelations but content her selfe with the Apostolike traditions and doctrine de Scriptur lib. 4. cap. 9. Out of the which words it doth necessarily folow that the church is not now to foūd any new article of faith but this generally is denied by the Papistes and Stapleton an English Papist is not ashamed to say that the Church may adde more bookes to the canonicall Scripture by her absolute authoritie Further to beleeue that the virgine Marie was without sinne yea conceiued without originall sinne is now amongest the Papistes receiued for an article of faith and therefore in Paris none are admitted to be Doctors of Diuinitie which doe not first confirme this article by their oth Yet this was a great question betweene the Scotistes and Thomistes and a great and hote contention arose about this controuersie anno 1476. betweene the Dominicke Friers who affirmed that she was conceiued in sinne and the Franciscanes that held the contrary But these Franciscanes had the vpper hand and foure of the other order were condemned and burned for it at Berne and yet for all this our aduersaries will say still that they varie not in matters of faith Thus we haue seene what is to be thought of Popish vnitie Now to answere briefly to their false accusation whereby they charge vs with manifold schismes and dissentions yea Bellarmin is not ashamed to say that an hundred seuerall sectes are sprong amongest vs. cap. 10. lib. 4. de Eccles. 1 We say with S. Paule oportet haereses esse 1. Cor. 11. there must be heresies and diuisions in the Church And it is a signe we haue the truth when the deuill goeth about by schismes and contentions to hinder the preaching thereof We answere to you as Augustine did to the paganes Non proferant nobis quasi concordiam suam hostem quippe quem patimur illi non patiuntur Let them not boast of their concord and cast in our teeth the dissention of Christians the enemie assaulteth not them as he doth vs Quid ibi luchri est quia litigant vel damni si litigant the deuill shall get nothing if they should disagree nor lose any thing by their agreement for he hath sure hold enough of them already consenting all in Idolatrie But amongest Christians he laboureth to hinder the truth by discord because he can not otherwise withdraw them frō the true Religion Hearken now ô ye Papistes if you consent together it is in euill so long it pleaseth the deuill well enough he should destroy his owne kingdome in sowing dissention amongest you for you fight for him He vseth to cast fire brands amongest good Christians to withstand by this meanes the proceeding of the Gospell 2 It is a great sclaunder that there are so many diuisions amongest vs an hundred saith the Iesuite but he shall neuer proue ten He might haue bethought him selfe of a full hundred of sectes amongest his owne darlings the Monkes and Friers as M. Fox hath faithfully gathered the number pag. 260. 3 Those few schismes and dissentions which we haue and yet to many we must needes confesse are not about points of faith and articles of Religion but concerning some things belonging to discipline and Church gouernement which matters we denie not but haue bene somewhat to hotely and egerlie folowed of some amongest vs but God be thanked this contention hath not bene pursued by fire or death as the Franciscanes did persecute the poore Dominickes nor yet to the pronouncing of ech other heretikes as Eugenius your Pope was condemned as an hereticke in the Councell of
Basile The fift Note of the power of working miracles THis they affirme both to be necessarie in the Church to haue power to work error 22 miracles for the confirmation of the faith when there is any extraordinarie chaunge or innouation of religion and that it is a sufficient note to describe the Church for it cannot bee say they but that wheresoeuer this power is found there should be the true Church And hereupon they take occasion to extoll the miracles of their Church beginning at the Apostles time and so in euerie age they take vpon them to shew that their Church neuer wanted those that were endued with this power Bellar. cap. 14. We answere First the gift of miracles doth no more prooue that to bee the true Church where they are wrought then they to be holie men and elected of God that doe them The Magicians wrought many straunge things in Aegypt cōtending a great while with Moses Antichrist shal come working with signes and wonders 2. Thessal 2. Therefore this proueth not a Church But heere they haue a double euasion these were false miracles wrought by the diuell as those of the Magicians or els but forged and onely to the eye and in outward appearance as Antichrist is sayd to come with lying wonders We replye First they are called lying wonders not that they are done in shewe onely and haue no such thing indeede but because they are wrought to confirme lyes and discredite the trueth Secondly your miracles are very like to be such both wrought by the power of the diuell and some of them but iugling feates of cousoners Thirdly yet a wicked man may haue power to worke miracles not in shewe but verily and indeed as to cast out diuels and to doe it in the name and power of Christ and yet be none of Christs disciples Matth. 7.22 2 Concerning your miracles wee answere that they are either fables and old wiues tales and no credite to bee giuen vnto them or els they are one of those two sorts whereof Augustine speaketh Remoueantur ista vel mendacia fallacium hominum vel portenta mēdacium spirituum Away with those miracles which are either cousoning trickes of deceitfull men or wonders of lying spirits First Monkish fables are not a whit daintie with our Romish Catholikes their Legendes are full of them As that of Berinus how being in the middest of the sea sayling into France hauing forgotten somewhat at home went back walking vpon the sea and came to them againe hauing not one thred of his garment wet Many like tales are reported of Aldelmus Abbot of Malmesburie as how he caused an infant at Rome of nine daies olde to speake to cleare Sergius the Pope who was thought to be his father how he drew along a great piece of timber that went to the making of the Church at Malmesburie Such good stuffe also they haue of Iohn of Beuerley of Egwine Abbot of Euesham who when he had locked his feete in fetters and cast the key into the sea afterward a fish brought the key againe into the ship where he was sayling Reade M. Foxe pag. 125. All these and a thousand more are but Monkish fables and dreames whatsoeuer the Iesuite maketh of them Secondly it is out of doubt that some of them were well practised with the diuell and through his helpe could doe much We will begin with Dunstane who caused a Roode to speake which was more strange then that of Balaams asse for the asse had life though she had no reason but this image had neither Polidore Virgil thinketh little better of Dunstane for this deede doing but that he was a sorcerer Fox pag. 158. It is famous in histories how Siluester the 2. was aduaunced to the Papacie by the diuell and gaue himselfe vnto him and how hauing some remorse before his death he confessed the fact before the people and willed that his bodie should be drawne of wilde horse when he was dead and there be buried where the horse left it of their owne accord How much such diabolicall practises are fauoured by the sea of Rome may appeare by this one example which we will now touch In Pope Adrians dayes not many yeares agoe there was a most abhominable thing practised in Rome euen vnder the Popes nose and by his permission and sufferance The citie of Rome being at that time grieuouslie scourged and punished of God with the pestilence there was one Demetrius a Grecian who with the good liking of the whole citie to appease the wrath of their gods tooke a wild Bull whom with magicall enchantments he made so tame that he led him with a twine thred and so sacrificed him And this being done the sicknes somewhat slaked Call ye this the Church of God that suffreth such heathenish and abhominable superstitions to be done in it Or shall I take these men for Christians that doe allow the idolatrous and diuellish sacrifices of the heathen Thirdly let vs see what pretie fine iugling casts haue been wrought by the Papists to deceiue the people In King Henries dayes there was a monstrous Idoll called the Rood of grace which was made so with wiers and ingins that one standing within could make euery part of the Idoll to moue the hands the eyes the mouth if a man brought but a small piece of siluer it would hang downe the lippe if it were a good piece then should his iawes goe merilie This abhominable Idoll by the Lord Cromwels meanes was broken downe and the engines and parts thereof shewed at Paules Crosse. Such a like thing was the bloud of Hales which they made the people beleeue was some of Christs bloud but in the ende it was found to be but the bloud of a drake and shewed likewise at Paules Crosse. Fox pag. 1188. At Calis in the Sepulchre it was said there were three hostes besprinkled with bloud as it was put in writing vnder Bull and Pardon but the place being searched at King Henries commaundement they found three white counters sodred in the stone with the top-bone of a sheepes tayle pag. 1223. A thousand such forged deuises the Papists had which they are not ashamed to maintaine for straunge and holy miracles By this that hath been shewed it is euident I hope to the indifferent reader what small cause our aduersaries haue to boast of their miracles 3 Now to adde somewhat concerning the miracles of our Church First we truely say that our doctrine is not newe nor straunge and therefore they are not to call for miracles at our hands The miracles of Christ and his Apostles are also our miracles seeing we professe the same doctrine which was confirmed by those miracles Secondly yet the Lord be thanked we are not destitute of miracles as Augustine saith Modò caro caeci non aperit oculos miraculo domini at cor caecum aperit oculos sermone domini Now saith he the blind doth not receiue his bodily sight
by the power of Christ but the blind heart is lightened and illuminate through the Gospell of Christ Such miracles the Lord be blessed we can shewe sinners are conuerted afflicted consciences are comforted the ignorant are instructed many are called by the preaching of the Gospell Thirdly if this will not content them but they still crye with open mouth and say where are your miracles Behold to stop their wide and clamorous mouth we will shewe them also such miracles as they looke for like to which they haue none Was not that a miracle which Oecolampadius reporteth to haue been done at the Martyrdome of Master Hugh Spengler who being cast into the water and so drowned presently all the water was coloured with bloud he hauing receiued no wound nor hurt in his bodie before at the which all the people were greatly amazed But what thinke you of that straunge signe which George Scherrer shewed at his death who being beheaded the bodie lay a pretie space vpon the bellie till one might haue eaten an egge and then turned it selfe vpon the backe crossed the right hand ouer the left and the right legge ouer the left the Magistrates seeing it hauing condemned his bodie to be burned before being moued at the sight hereof caused it to be buried Fox ex Math. Illyrico It is worth the remembring that is reported in the French stories of Petrus Burgerius a blessed Martyr who was cast into a filthie dungeon where a theefe had lien the space of eight moneths being almost eaten vp with lice and in such miserie that he cursed his parents that bare him This man through the teaching and the prayers of the Martyr felt such comfort in the Gospell that he became very patient in his affliction and after his conuersion this straunge thing was wrought vpon him that whereas before he was so full of lice that he might haue plucked out twelue at once betweene two of his fingers the next day he had not one Now because the Iesuite hath such a spite at Luther he is a great eye sore to him we will in a word or two declare what straunge things were wrought by Luther It is credible reported of him that a certaine young man had bound himselfe by obligation to the diuell sealed with his bloud to giue him his soule so he might haue his wish and desire satisfied with money In short time hee grewe to great wealth the matter being disclosed with much adoe to Luther he calleth the congregation together and ioyneth in prayer for this yong man and as they prayed the obligation was cast in at the windowe A notable and straunge miracle which is crediblie reported of Luther He was a man feruent in prayer one might haue seen the teares falling from his eyes as he prayed And as he was earnest in prayer so his prayers wanted not effect for as he himselfe confessed he had obtayned of God that so long as he liued the Pope should not preuayle in his countrey And is not this also a thing to be wondred at that for all the Pope and Emperour ioyned together bent their forces against this silly poore man yet the Lord defended him from the Lyons teeth and graunted him to end his dayes in peace Thus it is apparant and manifest that the Lorde sheweth his miraculous power manie times in his Saints to astonish the wicked The great miracles which haue been declared in their holy martyrdomes would fil a large volume And by the grace of God hereafter we may haue occasion in an other treatise of purpose more at large to publish them But these arguments wee doe not chiefly stand vpon Yet thus much was not amisse by the way to be put in to requite our aduersaries withall who doe so greatly magnifie and extoll their Antichristian Church for their lying and fayned miracles The sixte Note of the gift of Prophecying error 23 THis also our aduersaries holde to be a perpetuall marke whereby to knowe the Church for they say that the true Church of GOD wanteth not those which are endewed with the spirit of prophecie And so they beare vs in hand that in euery age there hath flourished some Prophet in their Church the first that the Church shall alwayes haue Prophets they would prooue out of Ioel 2. I will power of my spirit vpon all flesh The second that they haue had such prophets they do infer vppon a few forged examples of Saint Barnard and S. Frauncis a popish Saint and the founder of the superstitious order of the Franciscanes To the first we aunswere 1. The prophecie of Ioel was accomplished in the Apostles time Act. 2. as S. Peter expoundeth it and therefore we need not looke further for the fulfilling of it 2. The Church of the Iewes wanted Prophets for the space of 4. hundred years and more before the comming of Christ for we read of no Prophet after Malachy and the Church complayneth of this want Psalm 74. verse 9. that they had Prophets no more wherefore the Church of God after the comming of Christ may better spare this extraordinary function of prophecying seeing both Christ is already come who was the very subiect and matter of all the auncient prophecies And wee haue also most euident prophecies of the Apostles Rom. 11. cōcerning the calling of the Iewes 2. Thes. 2. of Antichrist in the Apocalipse of the general estate conditiō of the Church to the end of the world Som of which are already accomplished som to be fulfilled in their seasō In these prophecies we must rest cōtent our selues not looking for new reuelations 3. There haue been Prophets amongst the heathen out of the Church of God they also can bring foorth diuers olde prophecies so that if the issue lay in this poynt they might as well contend to be the Church of God Astiages dreamed that hee sawe a Vine growing out of his daughter that couered all Asia which came to passe in Cyrus Augustine reporteth a prophecie of Hermes Trismegistus how that all the Images and Idols of the heathen should be broken downe through all Aegypt The Indians were foretolde of the Spaniards comming many a yeare before their arriuall in those places Their Zemes that is their diuels which they worshipped as Gods told them that there should come a people with long beards fierce and cruell that at one stroke should strike men off by the middle And all these thinges fell out afterwards to that nation accordingly But they wil answere that these were not true prophecies inspired of God but vncertaine predictions of the diuell What will they say then to Balaam that prophecied of Christ there shall come a starre of Iacob saith he Numb 24.17 and in the same place he sayth he heard the words of God The prophecies also of Sibill are wonderfull which many yeares before the comming of Christ prophecied of his incarnation and of his passion with the circumstances
come after him which should preach the same fayth that hee had taught and should conuert many from their errors And many such examples wee haue of holy martyrs and worthy Prophets But we hereby doe not proue our Church Yet this I hope hath not been out of the way to haue aunswered a little to our aduersaries vaine and vntrue bragges Hitherto we haue touched the principall notes and markes whereby the Papists doe decipher out their Church vnto vs Now it followeth that we declare the right and certaine signes of the true Church Of the true and infallible Notes of the Church of Christ. THe outward tokens whereby the true visible Church is discerned are not many in number as our aduersaries doe reckon vp many the Iesuite no lesse than 15. supplying belike in number that which they want in waight Neither in this place doe we speake of the vniuersal Catholike inuisible Church which is beleeued and not seen being an article of our faith but of particular visible Churches which are discerned and knowen by these two essentiall markes the true preaching of the word and right vse of the sacraments Some also doe adde a third namely ecclesiasticall discipline Beza confess de eccles art 7. Hooper vpon the Creede articul 72. But this partly is comprehended in the 2. former for there cannot be hearing preaching of the worde the frequenting of the sacraments vnlesse there bee an exercise of Church discipline partly also we say that it is not so essential a note as the other are for the absence of the other make a nullity of the Church If the word or sacramēts in substance be corrupted the Church also is defaced but if there be not an exact forme of discipline it doth not straightway cease to be a Church Wherfore we conclude that the true preaching of the word and right vse of the sacraments are the only necessary and essentiall notes of the Church Where these two are rightly vsed according to Gods worde there is a right Church as here in England God be blessed Where they are falsely and impurely handled there is a false and corrupt Church as among the Papists where they are not at all in vse there is no Church as amongst the Turkes Iewes and Infidels First we will examine our aduersaries arguments and then bring foorth our owne The Papistes 1. BEllarmine thus argueth the true notes of the Church ought to be proper and particular not common and generall as these are for euery sect of hereticks doe chalenge to themselues the right preaching of the word and vsage of the sacraments Ergo they are no true notes We answere 1. It skilleth not how many do lay clayme to those notes the word of God it self is a manifest iudge where pure doctrine is taught and the sacraments rightly kept according to the institution It is no matter howsoeuer Papists and other heretickes doe make their bragges the scriptures themselues can soone decide this question 2. I maruaile they are not ashamed to obiect that our notes are common seeing theirs are most common for not only assemblies of hereticks but euen the heathen and Idolatrous Gentiles might as well prooue themselues to be the Church by those popish notes of vniuersalitie for Idolatrie had ouer-spread the whole world of vnitie they all consented to persecute the Church of Christ of antiquitie for the worship of Idols continued aboue two thousand yeares of succession for the monarch of the Assyrians endured 1300. yeares their kings all this while one succeeding another They had also Prophets and such as wrought miracles Our aduersaries may be now ashamed to cast vs in the teeth that our notes are common when as theirs doe well agree to the Synagogues of Sathan and assemblies of Infidels 2. Sayth he the note or the marke must be better knowen and more notorious then the thing marked or notified by it so are not these for we know not which is the worde of God nor what bookes are canonicall and to be taken for scripture but by the Church We answere the Iesuite still beggeth that which is in question a foule fault in a professed disputer for haue we not largely prooued before 1. contr quaest 4. that the Church dependeth vpon the authoritie of the scripture and not contrariwise and that there is no more certaine and euident and vndoubted thing in the whole world vpon the which a man may bee bolde to builde and ground his faith then vpon the scriptures This sure is a childish and ridiculous argument to take that as graunted which is most of all in controuersie 3 The true notes sayth hee are inseparable from the Church it is neuer without them But many true Churches haue wanted these The Church of the Corinthians was a true Church and yet they beleeued not the resurrection cap. 15. The Galathians were a true Church and yet they held that Moses lawe was to bee obserued together with the Gospell And the Corinthians likewise did not sincerely obserue the Sacraments 1. Corinth 11. Ergo they are no true signes We answere First this argument may with better right bee returned vpon their owne head for many true Churches haue wanted their markes Christ and his Apostles had neither succession from Aaron nor vniuersalitie and yet they made the true Church The Church of the Iewes after Malachies time had no Prophets nor miracles for the space of 400. yeares before Christ yet were they the true Church and so of the rest of your notes the Church of Christ hath many times wanted them Secondly It was not the whole Church of Corinthus that doubted of the resurrection but certaine false Apostles that laboured to seduce others 1. Corinth 15.34 Some of you sayth the Apostle haue not the knowledge of God he saith not all So likewise amongst the Galathians there were false teachers that stood for the lawe of Moses Galath 5.9 a little leauen doth marre the whole lumpe It was not therefore a publike doctrine in the Church but secretly taught by false Apostles Thirdly there may be some error in the Church but being not fundamental such an one as destroyeth faith it doth not dissolue the Church as there was some abuse amongst the Corinthians in receiuing the Sacrament but the forme and institution and substance of the Sacrament was kept Nay yet to graunt a little more though the error bee daungerous and of great waight and moment and such an one as being stifely maintained would destroye the faith and Church too yet if they haue fallen into it rather of ignorance then any other cause and doe not continue in it but doe submit themselues to bee reformed by the word it ceaseth not for all that to be a Church So the Corinthians referred themselues wholly and their opinions to the iudgement and determination of the Apostle Hetherto our aduersaries haue sayd nothing agaynst vs now wee will say somewhat for our selues The Protestants 1 FOr the sufficiencie of these
Notes we would desire no better arguments then those which our aduersaries alleadged against vs for first our notes are proper onely to the Church and cannot bee found in any place where the Church of God is not Secondly they are most notorious markes and a man by the Scriptures may more easely knowe what true doctrine is and which are the right Sacraments then which is the true Church Thirdly these markes can not be absent from the Church but doe alwayes accompanie it and it is no longer a true Church then it hath those markes 2 We are able out of the Scriptures to proue these marks which may stand in stead of many reasons Iohn 10. my sheepe heare my voyce Ephes. 5. clensing it by the washing of water through the word Ergo the Word and Sacraments are true notes of the Church Bellarmine answereth to the first place that the hearing of the word is not a visible note of the Church but a signe vnto euery man whereby he may knowe his election Wee replie agayne looke which way a man is knowne to bee a member of the Church by the same way the Church also it selfe is discerned if the hearing of the word doe make one a sheep of Christ then doth it also shew which is the flocke and fould of Christ As I knowe my hand or foote to bee a part of my bodie because it hath life and motion of the bodie euen so the bodie is discerned from a carkas because it moueth and liueth To the second place he answereth very simply that the Apostle there sheweth not which is the Church but what good Christ hath wrought for his Church We replie againe But the Church is best knowne by the benefites that Christ hath bestowed vpon it amongst the which the Word and the Sacraments are not the least Ergo by these the Church is knowne and in that place by the Apostle described And let the reader iudge whether that place of the Apostle where there is direct mention made of the word and sacraments be not fitly applied to our purpose concerning the description of the Church 3 Let Augustine speake In scripturis didicimus Christum in scripturis didicimus ecclesiam epistol 166. In the scripture we doe learne Christ in the scripture let vs likewise learne the Church His argument is this Looke how Christ is knowne so is his Church but Christ is onely knowne by his word Ergo so is his Church The fourth question of the authoritie of the Church THe Papists affirme that the authoritie of the Church consisteth in these fiue poynts First in authorising the scriptures and defining which are Canonicall Secondly in giuing the sense of the scripture Thirdly in determining matters besides scripture Fourthly in making lawes constitutions for the Church Fiftly in exercising of discipline Concerning the two last we doe not greatly stand with them We acknowledge the Church hath authoritie to make decrees and constitutions but so as the Apostles did Visum est nobis spiritui sancto It seemed good to vs and the holy Ghost the Church must be directed by the wisedome of the spirit speaking in the scriptures We also acknowledge the holesome power of the Church in exercising of holy discipline but it must be done in the name and power of Christ. 1. Cor. 5.4 not according to the will of men Concerning the two first we haue alreadie shewed that neither the Church doth giue authoritie to the word of God but doth take her authoritie from thē for the scriptures are of sufficient credite of themselues 1. controu quaest 4. Neither that the sense of scripture dependeth vpon the interpretation of the scripture but that the word expoundeth it selfe 1. controu quaest 6. There remaineth therefore onely one poynt to be discussed of the authoritie of the Church namely in deciding of matters beside the scriptures which are of two sorts either necessarie appertayning to faith or indifferent concerning ceremonies of both these in their order THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE CHVRCH hath authoritie in matters of faith beside the scriptures The Papists WE ought to take our faith and al necessarie things of saluation at the hands error 24 of our superiours Rhemist Act. 10. sect 8. In poynts not decided by scripture wee must aske counsaile of the Church Praefat. sect 25. The Church is the onely piller and stay to leane vnto in all doubts of doctrine without the which there can be no certaintie nor securitie we must therefore beleeue it and trust it in all things annot 1. Timoth. cap. 3. sect 9. Yea it hath authoritie say they to make newe Articles of faith as in the Councell of Constance it was decreed to be necessarie to saluation to beleeue the Pope to be head of the Church In the Councell of Basile it was made an Article of the faith to beleeue that the Councell was aboue the Pope and therfore Pope Eugenius in not obeying the Councell was adiudged to be an heretike 1 Vpon these words in the Gospel Iohn 15.27 the spirit shall testifie of me and you shall beare witnesse also they conclude thus Ergo the testimonie of the trueth ioyntly consisteth in the holy Ghost and Prelates of the Church Rhemist Iohn 15. sect 8. We answere The witnesse of the spirit and of the Apostles is all one witnesse for the spirit first testifieth the trueth to the Apostles inwardly and the Apostles inspired by the spirite did witnesse it outwardly so the Pastors of the Church witnessing with the spirit which is not now inspired by reuelation but onely found in the scriptures are to bee heard but if the spirit testifie one thing in the word and they testifie another there we must leaue them 2 The Church erreth not Ergo we must heare her in all things Rhem. 1. Timoth 3. sect 9. We answere First the Church may erre if she followe not the scriptures Proued before 2. controu quaest 2. Secondly so long as the Church heareth Christs voyce we are likewise to heare hers and so long as she is preserued from error she will not swarue from Christs precepts neither impose any thing vpon her children without the warrant of her spouse The Protestantes THat the Church hath no such power to ordaine articles of faith or impose matters to be beleeued necessarie to saluation not contayned or prescribed in the holy scriptures We prooue it thus and wee are sure that the true Church of Christ will neuer chalenge any such prerogatiue 1. All truthes and verities in the scriptures are not so necessary to saluation that the ignorance thereof should bring perill of damnation Ergo much lesse are any verities out of scripture of any such necessitie the first is manifest for to know the iust chronologie of time or space of yeares from the beginning of the world to Christ is a veritie in scripture yet not necessary so to beleeue that Marie continued a virgin euer after the birth of our Lord was thought by
Basile to be no necessarie poynt to saluation if wee did hold her to haue beene a virgin afore and many such other poyntes there are in scriptures which a man may be ignorant of without perill of saluation Ergo much more may we be ignorant of vnwritten verities or rather Popish fables 2. The Church hath no more authoritie then the Apostles nor yet in all things so much But they had no power to make articles of faith for Saint Paul deliuereth that which he had receiued concerning the sacrament he durst not adde vnto it as the Papists haue been bolde to doe since 1. Cor. 11. Ergo the Church may explane and open articles of fayth out of the scriptures but not make new 3. We prooue it by the confession of our aduersaries The fathers of Basile that concluded it was an article of the Christian fayth to beleeue the superioritie of the councel did gather it out of the saying of Christ dic ecclesiae and therfore enforced it as an article Whereby wee gather that they helde that the Church could establish no article of fayth without scripture Bellarmine likewise sayth that the Church is not now gouerned by newe reuelations but wee ought to be contented with those decrees which wee haue receiued from the Apostles Ergo as D. Whitakers doth strongly conclude the Church cannot coyne new articles of faith 4. Lastly we haue before prooued at large out of the worde of God that the scriptures containe all things necessary to saluation and therefore all articles of fayth must be deriued from thence 1. controu quaest 7. And so we conclude with Augustine Linguae sonos quibus inter se homines sua seusa communicēt pacto quodā societatis sibi instituere possunt Quib. autē sacris diuinitati congruerent voluntatem dei sequuti sunt qui rectè sapuerunt Quae omnino nunquam defuit ad salutem iustitiae pietatique hominum Men sayth he may deuise among themselues what language they will vse to expresse their minde But howe to serue God wise men euer followed the will and commaundement of GOD which neuer hath failed men in all necessary matters concerning righteousnes and godlines By this fathers sentence the scriptures which containe the will of God containe all necessary things Ergo we neede not seeke elswhere AN APPENDIX OR MEMBER OF THIS part of the question whether we are to beleeue in the Church The Papists WE ought to beleeue and trust the Church in all things yea to beleeue in the Church Rhemist 1. Tim. 3. sect 9. the scripture also vseth this speech error 25 to beleeue in men annot in 10. Rom. sect 41. 1. Exod. 14.31 they beleeued in God and Moses Ergo. We answere your owne vulgar text hath it crediderunt deo Mosi seruo eius they beleeued God and his seruant Moses that is hauing seene the great power of God in the destruction of the Aegyptians in the red sea according to the word of Moses they gaue credite vnto Moses which spake vnto them from God 2. Philem. v. 5. Hearing of thy loue and fayth which thou hast toward the Lord Iesus and vnto all the saints See say they here is faith toward the saints Wee answere there is no man that is not peruersly disposed but may easily distinguish the Apostles wordes to attribute fayth to Iesus Christ and loue to the saynts Which may appeare by the altering of the preposition as they themselues read in their owne translation loue and fayth in Iesus Christ and toward the sayntes so it must needes bee thus vnderstoode fayth in Christ and loue toward the sayntes this therefore is but a sophisticall cauill The Protestants THis word Credo beleeue is taken three wayes for there is credere deo to beleeue God that is to trust him in all things credere deum to beleeue God to be credere in deum to beleeue in God as our creator Lord and redeemer So we doe credere ecclesiam we beleeue there is one holy Catholicke Church credere ecclesiae we doe also beleeue and giue credence to the Church following the word of God But we do not in any wise credere in ecclesiam beleeue in the Church 1. We must not beleeue or put any confidence in a creature the Church is but a creature Ergo for to beleeue in God is onely proper to the Godhead and therefore Iohn 14.1 where Christ sayth ye beleeue in God beleeue also in me we doe necessarylie out of these words inferre that Christ is God because we are commaunded to beleeue in him 2. Fayth is of things that are absent and not seene but the Church is present alwayes vpon earth and alwayes visible as our aduersaryes hold how then can it bee an obiect of our fayth We can not beleeue in that which is visible seene for it is agaynst the nature of fayth 3. Augustine sayth sciendum est quòd ecclesiam credere non tamen in ecclesiam credere debemus quia ecclesia non est deus sed domus dei De tēpore serm 131. We must know that we are to beleeue there is a Church not in the Church for the Church is not God but onely the house of God THE SECOND PARTE OF THE QVESTION concerning the ceremonies of the Church The Papists THey doe holde that the Church of God may vse and blesse diuers elements error 26 and creatures for the seruice of God as holy water to driue away diuels the hallowing of salt waxe fire palmes ashes oyle creame milke honey Rhemist 1. tim 4. sect 12. 13. Yea that the Church may borrow rites and ceremonies of the Iewes ibid. sect 18. Yea by the creatures thus blessed or rather coniured they say remission of sinnes is obtayned sect 14. 2. Remission of sinnes was annexed to the oyle wherewith the sicke were annoynted Iames 5. Ergo remissions of sinnes may be applied by the like consecrated elements Rhemist 1. Tim. 4. sect 14. We answere First it followeth not because the creature of oyle was vsed in the miraculous gift of healing which ceremonie was no longer to continue than that miraculous gift indured it followeth not that other elements may be vsed so now there being not the like occasion seeing all such myraculous giftes are now ceased Secondly it was not the oyle whereby their sinnes were forgiuen them neither was it applied to that ende it was onely a pledge vnto them of their bodily health but the prayer of fayth shall saue the sick sayth the Apostle v. 15. for God hath promised to heare the faythfull prayers of his children both for themselues and others 3. Saint Paul vsed imposition of hands which was a ceremonie of the law vsed in consecrating of Priestes Ergo it is lawfull to borrowe ceremonies of the Iewes We answere It followeth not because Christ and the Apostles by the spirite of God retayned some decent actions vsed in the lawe therefore now the Church at her libertie may take of
the Iewish ceremonies this is great presumption to thinke it is lawfull for the Church to doe whatsoeuer Christ and his Apostles did Fulk 1. Tim. 4. sect 18. The Protestants ALthough there be great moderation to bee vsed in the ceremonies of the Church and there is also some limitation for them yet hath the Church greater libertie in the rites and ceremonies which are appoynted for order and comelinesse sake then in the doctrine of fayth and religion The doctrine of saluation is alwayes the same and cannot be changed and toucheth the conscience But rites and ceremonies are externall and commanded for order sake and neither are they vniuersall the same in euery Church nor perpetuall but are changed according to times and as there is occasion Againe the precepts of Christianitie are either directly expressed or necessarilie concluded out of the scriptures but externall rites and ceremonies are not particularlie declared in the word there are onely certaine generall rules set downe according to the which all ceremonies brought into the Church are to bee examined as for the Sacraments of the Church they cannot bee altered hauing a perpetuall commandement from Christ Therefore the Church cannot appoynt what how many ceremonies soeuer she shall thinke good but according to these foure rules and conditions which followe here in order 1 All things ought to bee done to the glorie of God euen in ciuill actions much more in things appertayning to the seruice of God 1. Cor. 10.31 Our aduersaries offend agaynst this rule applying and annexing remission of sinnes to their owne inuentions and superstitious ceremonies as vnto penance and extreame vnction which they also make Sacraments for this is greatly derogatorie to Christs institution who hath only appoynted the hearing of his word and vse of the Sacraments for the begetting and encreasing of faith and by this faith only is the death of Christ applied vnto vs for the remission of sinnes 2 All things ought to be done orderly and decently 1. Cor. 14.40 Wherefore al ridiculous light vnprofitable ceremonies are to be abolished such our aduersaries haue many as knocking kneeling creeping to the Crosse lighting candles at noone day turning ouer of beades and many phantasticall gestures they haue in their idolatrous Masse as turning returning looking to the East to the West crossing lifting quaffing and shewing the emptie cup with many such toyes 3 All things ought to bee done without offence 1. Corinth 10.32 But to whom that hath but a little feeling of religion is not the abhominable sacrifice of the Masse offensiue What good conscience doth it not grieue that the Priest should create his maker as they say should offer vp the bodie of Christ in sacrifice and be an intercessor as it were for his mediatour desiring God to accept the sacrifice of his sonnes bodie As also to make it a propitiatorie sacrifice for the quicke and the dead But of these matters we shall haue fitter occasion to entreate afterward when we come to the seuerall controuersies 4 All things ought to bee done to edifying 1. Corinth 14. vers 12. But the popish ceremonies are so farre from edifying that by reason of their infinite rabble and number they are a clogge vnto Christians and more burdensome then were the obseruations of the Iewes They haue hallowed fire water bread ashes oyle waxe flowers braunches clay spittle salt incense balme chalices paxes pixes altars corporals superaltars altarclothes rings swords and an infinite companie besides doe these tend thinke you to the edification of the minde Nay they doe cleane destroy and extinguish all spirituall and internall motions drawing the heart from the spiritual worship of God to externall beggerlie and ragged reliques and ceremonies Fulk 1. Timoth. 4. sect 1. Beza lib. confess de eccles articul 18.19.20 The fift question whether the Church of Rome be the true Church THis question hath two parts First whether the Romane Church be the Catholike Church or not Secondly whether the Church of Rome be a true visible Church THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE ROMANE Church be the Catholike Church The Papists BEllarmine defining the Church maketh this one part of the definition to be error 27 subiect vnto the Bishop of Romes iurisdiction Lib. 3. de eccles cap. 2. And therefore they conclude that they are out of the Church and no better then heretikes that doe not acknowledge the Pope to be their chiefe Pastor Canis de praecept eccles cap. 9. So they make the Romane faith and Catholike to bee all one Rhemist annot in 1. Rom. sect 5. Their reasons are none other then we haue seene before taken from vniuersalitie antiquitie vnitie vnto the which wee haue alreadie answered quaest 3. of this controuersie Not. 1 2 3. The Protestants WHile the Church of Rome continued in the doctrine of the Apostles it was a notable and famous visible Church and a principall part and member of the vniuersall Catholike but now since it is degenerate and fallen away from the Apostolike faith from being the house of God to be a synagogue for Antichrist we take it not to be so much as a true visible Church But neuer was it to be counted the Catholike Church as though all other Churches were parts and members of it but it selfe onely was a part as others and Catholike too while it continued in the right faith but not Catholike as hauing iurisdiction ouer the rest and all to receiue this name of her 1 The vniuersall Catholike Church is so called because it conteyneth the whole number of the elect and first borne of God Heb. 12.23 Whereof manie are now saints in heauen many liuing in the earth many yet vnborne But all these were not neither are of the Romane faith the holie men departed knewe not of these superstitious and prodigious vsages which now doe raigne in the Church of Rome nay many of them neuer heard in their life so much as of the name of Rome Ergo. 2 It is called Catholike and vniuersall because they that are to be saued must belong vnto this companie and be of this Church for without the Church there is no saluation for Christ onely gaue himselfe for his Church to sanctifie it and cleanse it Ephes. 5.25 But all that dye out of the faith of the Romane Church do not perish Nay verely we doubt not to say but that all which depart this life in the communion thereof without repentance are barred from saluation and dye out of grace We are in the right faith neither will we be our owne iudges the scriptures shall iudge vs Euery spirit that confesseth that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God 1. Iohn 4.2 We beleeue aright in both the natures and all the offices of Christ which you doe not which doe greatly deface his prophetical office in not reuerencing his word but making it imperfect his kingdom in appointing him a Vicar and Vicegerent vpon earth as though he of himselfe were not sufficient to gouerne
commaundement of Christ who inioyned them not to depart from Ierusalem The second Act. 6. congregate by the twelue not Peter onely for the election of Deacons The third which was holden as touching the taking away of circumcision and other ceremonies of the lawe was gathered together by a generall inspiration Act. 15.6 The fourth wherein certaine things contained in the lawe are permitted seemeth to be gathered by Iames. Act. 21.18 Vpon these reasons the Councel thus concludeth that if the Pope would resist and haue no Councel congregate yet if the greater part of the Church doe iudge it necessarie to haue a Councel the Councel may bee congregate whether the Pope will or not Ex Aenea Syluio Fox pag. 676. Col. 2. 5 Augustine saith Catholicos Episcopos partis Donati iussu imperatoris disputando inter se contulisse Breuicul collation lib. 1. cap. 1. That the Catholike Bishops and the Donatists did meete together to dispute at the commaundement of the Emperour There were in that Councel which was at Carthage of the Catholike Bishops 286. and of the Donatists 279. THE THIRD QVESTION OF WHAT PERSONS the Councel ought to consist The Papists WHereas there are foure sorts of men vsually present at Councels the Princes error 31 and Magistrates Bishops and inferiour Ministers and Priests and other lay people of all these Bishops they say onely must haue a deciding or determining voyce Priests and other learned may dispute and haue a consultatiue voyce Princes are there to defend the Councel and see order kept other of the Laitie may be there as officers and ministers as Scribes and Notaries but the suffrages and voyces must onely be giuen by Bishops Eckius loc de concil Bellarm. de concil lib. 1. cap. 15. Let vs see some of their reasons First to teach and to feede is proper for the Pastors only and to establish and decree in Councel is nothing els but to feede and teach Ergo Pastors onely must rule in Councel which none are but Bishops Soli Episcopi pastores sunt sayth the Iesuite neque laici neque ecclesiastici quicunque Onely Bishops are pastors and none other of the Clergie besides and to them onely he sayth that is to bee applyed Act. 20. Take heede to your selues and the flocke ouer the which God hath made you ouerseers I answere First what an absurd saying is this and voyde of sense that the Bishop is the onely pastor of his Diocesse and that euery Minister is not pastor in his owne parish Nay if the Iesuite would speake trueth he shall finde that popish Bishops are neither Pastors nor Doctors for the most of them neither feede nor teach And they be not ashamed to professe it Ann. 1540. or thereabout Thomas Forret Martyr being found fault withall by the Bishop of Dunkelden in Scotland because he preached so oft exhorted the Bishop agayne and wished that he did preach The Bishop answered nay nay let that bee we are not ordayned to preach and in further talke the blind blockish Bishop bewrayed his owne ignorance I thanke God sayth he that I neuer knewe what the olde and newe Testament was Thereupon rose a common prouerbe in Scotland you are like the Bishop of Dunkelden that knewe neither the old nor new lawe Fox Martyrol pag. 1266. With this blind saying of the popish Bishop our countrey men of Rhemes also doe agree which doubt not to say that many which haue no gift to preach yet for their wisedome and gouernment are not vnmeete to be Pastors and Bishops Annot. in 1. Timoth. 5. sect 13. 2 I answere the Iesuite bewrayeth his ignorance in making no difference betweene communis and propria politia ecclesiae the common and speciall policie and office of the Church for there are proper offices and dueties some of Pastors some of gouernours some of other Ministers but this office to be performed in general Councels is not proper to Pastors but common to the whole Church whereupon wee denye that it is Proprium pastorum munus suffragia ferre in concilijs It is not the proper duetie of Pastors to giue voyces and make decrees in Councels 3 By the Iesuites argument the fathers of Basile doe conclude cleane contrarie out of that place 4. Ephes. That because Christ instituted not onely Apostles and Prophets but pastors and teachers for the work of the Ministerie who doubteth say they but that the gouernance also of the Church is committed vnto others together with the Apostles And hence they inferre because the worke of the Ministerie is layd vpon the rest of the Clergie that therefore they ought not to be excluded from Councels Secondly Panormitane in the Councel of Basile thus reasoneth for Bishops that they were the pillars and keyes of heauen and therefore had onely deciding voyces Vnto him answered at that time the wise and couragious Cardinall Arelatensis shewing Augustines iudgement vpon those words I will giue thee the keyes of heauen that the iudiciall power was giuen not onely to Peter but also to the other Apostles to the whole Church the Bishops the Priests Whereupon he inferreth that if the Priests haue a iudicial power in the Church they also ought to haue a determining voyce in Councels Thirdly Lodouicus the Prothonotarie in the same Councel thus argued Albeit sayth hee Christ chose twelue Apostles and 70. Disciples notwithstanding in the setting forth of the Creede onely the Apostles were present thereby giuing example that matters of faith did pertaine onely to the Apostles and so consequently to Bishops To him Arelatensis made this answere First it followed not because the Apostles onely are named that they therefore only were present at the setting forth of the Creede for wee see that Princes beare the name and commendation of many actions which are done notwithstanding by their helpers 2. Lodouicus cannot be ignorant sayth he that there be some articles in the Creede which were not put to by the Apostles but afterward by generall Councels as that part wherein mention is made of the holy Ghost which the Councel of Lions did adde Thus much out of the Councel of Basile The Protestants confession OVr opinion grounded vpon trueth and scripture is this that not onely Bishops but all other pastors admitted to the Councel and the learned and discreete amongst the Lay men ought to haue concluding voyces in Councel and that rather the discussing and consulting of matters pertayneth to the learned Diuines the deciding to all then contrariwise First that inferiour pastors are to bee ioyned with Bishops and Prelates it was amplie proued in the Councel of Basile of the which I haue so often made mention as noble Arelatensis reasoneth thus The dignities of the fathers is not to be respected but the trueth neither will I preferre a lye of any Bishop be he neuer so rich before a veritie or a trueth of a poore Priest this is his first reason that the trueth ought to bee receiued at any mans mouth bee
he neuer so simple and therefore Priests as well as Bishops are to bee admitted to the Councel 2 He declareth the ancient practise of the Church In the Councel of Nice where there were assembled 322. Bishops Athanasius being then onely a Priest withstood the Arrians and infringed their arguments In the Synode of Chalcedon there were present sixe hundred Priests which name is common both to Bishops and Priests When Paul Bishoppe of Antioch preached that Christ was a man of common nature the Councell assembled against him at Antioch where the sayde Paul was condemned neither was there any man which did more confound the sayd Paul then one Malchion Priest of Antioch which taught Rhetorick there Concerning the second part that laye men also with Priests ought to bee admitted first we haue testimonie out of the word of God for it Tit. 3.13 for this cause Zenas the lawyer is ioyned as fellow in commission with Apollos But we haue a more euident place Act. 15.22 It seemed good to the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church here we see that not onely the Elders but the whole multitude were admitted into consultation with the Apostles To this place our aduersaries doe thus aunswere Lodouicus the Prothonotarie first thus rashly and fondly gaue his verdicte in the Councell of Basile that there was no argument to be gathered of the Acts of the Apostles whose examples were more to be maruayled at then to be followed But to this Arelatensis replied that he would stay himself most vpon the Apostles doings for what sayth he is more comely for vs to followe then the doctrine and customes of the primitiue Church And Aeneas Siluius reporteth who writeth of the actes of that Councell that all men impugned this saying of Lodouicus that the Apostles were not to be followed as a blasphemie Wherefore the Iesuite hath found out another aunswere he sayth that none but the Apostles gaue sentence the rest onely gaue consent and inwarde liking and approbation this cauill Arelatensis met withall long before the Iesuite was borne in the forenamed Councell Neither this worde sayth hee It seemed good signifieth in this place consultation but decision and determination And so it doth indeede for seeing there is one worde applyed to them all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 placuit it seemed good to the Apostles Elders and the whole multitude why should it not be taken in the one and selfe same sence and after the same manner vnderstood of them all 2. Seeing the Councel doth represent the whole Church there ought to be present and to giue sentence of all sorts and callings of men and the tather because the matter of fayth and religion is a common cause and as well appertayneth to lay-men as to Bishops it behooueth them also to bee present And further it were more reasonable that princes and temporall Magistrates should binde their subiects to their lawes without their consent then that ecclesiastical persons should lay yokes vpon Christians against their willes for ciuill matters are more indifferent and left to our choyce then spirituall are Yet we see there are no lawes enacted in our Realme but by the high court of Parliament where alwayes some are appoynted for the commons euen the whole neather house without whose consent no acte can passe So it were very reasonable that no law should be layd vpon the Church without the generall consent thereof 3. Lastly Augustines iudgement we heard before alleadged by Arelatensis that seeing the iudicial power of the keies is committed to the whole Church to Bishops to Priests they all ought to bee entertayned in generall Councels THE FOVRTH QVESTION WHO OVGHT to be the president and chiefe moderator in Councels The Papists error 32 WIth one whole consent they all agree and holde that the Pope onelie ought to haue the chiefe place in Councels either himselfe in his owne person or else his Legates and deputies for him they reason thus 1. The Pope is the chiefe pastor of the vniuersall Church for vnto Peter onely it was sayd pasce oues meas feede my sheepe and he is called and saluted in Councels by the name of father and all other both Princes and Bishops are sheepe in respect of him Wee answere first in the Iesuites argument there is petitio principij a foule fault in a good Logician though it bee none in a Sophister still to begge that which is in question for yet he hath not prooued that the Pope is the vniuersall pastor 2. That place feede my sheepe prooueth it not Augustine saith redditur negationi trinae trina confessio ne minus amori lingua seruiat quà m timori in Iohan. tract 123. he recompenceth a threefold deniall with a threefold confession lest that his tongue should be lesse seruiceable to loue then it was to feare so then by this fathers iudgement it was no priuiledge to Peter to bee thrise admonished but he is thereby put in mind of his thrise deniall of Christ. Againe I maruaile the Iesuite can so soone forget himselfe for in the 15. chapter afore he prooued by these words feede my sheepe that Bishops onely were pastors and he can now turne the wordes to serue onely for the Pope 3. What great matter is it for the Pope to be called father seeing he is not ignorant that all Bishops assembled in Councell and other learned are called by that name Nay it is no rare matter for other Bishops to be saluted by the name of Pope as Prosper writing to Augustine twise in one Epistle calleth him beatissimum Papam most blessed Pope Tom. 7.4 Princes and Bishops to the Pope are sheepe sayth the Iesuite 1. For Bishops though he had a iurisdiction ouer all which will stick in his teeth to prooue yet shall they be no more his sheep then Priests are to Bishops and Bishops to their Metropolitanes who cannot be sayd to be their sheepe though they haue some preeminence ouer them for Augustines rule must stand nemo se nostrum episcopum episcoporum constituit De baptism 2.2 No man is a Bishop of Bishops nor shepheard of shepheards Secondly for Princes he hath nothing to doe with any but those in his owne Bishopricke and as they are his sheep one way as they are taught of him so he and his Cardinals are the Magistrates sheepe another way and in respect of the ciuil gouernement he is their shepheard And both he and they prince and priest are sheep-fellows vnder Iesus Christ the chiefe shepheard as Augustine sayth tanquam vobis pastores sumus sed sub illo pastore vobiscum oues sumus in Psal. 126. we are shepheards to you but both you and I are sheep vnder that great shepheard The Protestants WE doe truely affirme that the Soueraigne Maiestie of the Emperour and chiefe Magistrate or his legate if he either be present himselfe or sende ought to be president of the Councel Or else in their absence one to be chosen and elected by the
scripture 1. Deut. 17.12 He that harkeneth not vnto the priest that man shal die But mark I pray you what goeth before v. 11. according to the law which they shal teach thee according to the iudgement which they shall tell thee shalt thou do see then here is no absolute iudicial power giuen to the priest but according to the law of God 2. The example of the Apostles Act. 15. is as fōdly alleadged where it was decreed saith the Iesuite that the Gētiles shuld not be burthened with ceremonies which saith hee was not determined by the scriptures but by the absolute suffrages of the Apostles Again their decrees were absolutely imposed vpon the Churches without any further examination of the Disciples Ergo we are now also absolutely bound to obey all decrees of Councels Bellar. de concil 1.18 We answere first it is false that this matter was determined without scripture for Iames alleadgeth scripture Peter thus reasoneth we beleeue through the grace of God to be saued as wel as they v. 11. therfore what need this yoke of ceremonies 2. Though there had been no scripture who seeth not that the spirit of God so ruled the Apostles that their writings and holy actions should serue for scripture vnto the ages following Thirdly the Disciples needed not to examine their decrees knowing that they were gouerned by the spirit as they themselues write It seemed good to vs and the holy Ghost yet we see the brethren of Bereae searched the scripture for the trueth of those things which the Apostles preached Act. 17.11 When they can proue such a plenarie power fulnes of the spirit in their pastors and Councels as was in the Apostles we wil also beleeue them The Protestantes WE doe firmly beleeue that neither the Church nor Councels haue any such absolute power to determine without the holy scriptures either beside or agaynst them or to binde other men to obey such decrees Neither that the true Church of God dare or will arrogate such power vnto it self But that Councels are ordayned for the discussing deciding of doubtful matters according to the scriptures and word written 1. If the Apostles preachings might bee examined according to scripture much more the acts of all other Bishops and pastors But that was lawful in the Disciples of Berea Act. 17.11 which are commended for it therefore called noble couragious Christians because of this their promptnes diligence in searching out of the truth Ergo. 2. All things necessarie to saluation to be beleeued are articles of our fayth but al such articles must be grounded vpon the word of God therfore nothing can be imposed as necessary to saluation without the word of God Wherefore it is a blasphemous saying of the papists that the Church may make new articles of fayth Rhemens annot in 1. Tim. 3. sect 9. and Eckius maintained the same poynt agaynst Luther in the disputation at Lipsia and brought forth a new article of faith agreed of in the Councel of Constance that it is de necessitate salutis of the necessitie of saluation to beleeue that the Pope is the head of the Church The fathers of Basile more modest then so concluding that it was an article of fayth to beleeue that Councels were aboue the Pope doe vse this reason those things say they which we alleadge for the superioritie of general Councels are gathered out of the sayings of our Sauiour Christ. Ergo we are al bound to obey them Therefore we conclude that the word of God only written is the rule of fayth and al things necessary to be beleeued Rom. 10.10 Fayth commeth by hearing and hearing by the word Councels are to explane and declare articles of faith not to establish new 3 Lastly we will heare Augustine speake Nec tu debes Ariminense neque ego Nicaenū tanquā praeiudicaturus proferre concilium scripturarum authoritatibus c. Neither must I alleadge the Nicen Councel nor you the Arimine I am neither bound to the one nor you to the other let the matter be tried by Scripture cont Maximu Arrianum lib. 3. cap. 14. By this fathers sentence therefore no man is bound of necessitie to be tyed to Councels but the Scripture onely is absolutely to be beleeued THE SEAVENTH QVESTION WHETHER Councels be aboue the Pope or not The Papists THis is a matter yet not fully determined amongst the Papists Neither are error 35 they all of one opinion In the Councell of Constance and Basile it was fully concluded that the Councell is aboue the Pope Gerson of Paris that was also present in the Councell of Constance and a great dooer against Iohn Hus stifly maintaineth the authoritie of Councels aboue the Pope Other Papists more fauorable to their new God amight say that the Pope is by right aboue the Councell but he may if he wil submit himselfe to the Councell But now commeth in the stoute Iesuite and saith with the rest of the schoolemen that the Pope hath such a soueraigntie aboue the Councell that he cannot be subiect to their sentence though hee would Bellar. de concil lib. 2.14 Yet hee is in a mammering with himselfe for saith he in periculo schismatis when there is a schisme and it is not knowne who is the true Pope in such a case the Councell is aboue the Pope Let vs examine some of his best reasons 1 Now commeth in a great blasphemie All the names saith the Iesuite that are giuen to Christ in the Scriptures as head of the Church are ascribed to the Pope as he is called fidelis dispensator Luc. 12. a faithfull steward in the Lords house pastor gregis Iohn 10. the shepheard of the flocke Caput corporis ecclesiae Ephes. 4. the head of his bodie the Church vir seu sponsus Ephes. 5. the husband or spouse of the Church all these titles saith he are due to the Pope Ergo he is aboue the Church and so consequently aboue generall Councels Bellar. de concil lib. 2.17 O Lord what great blasphemie is here to appropriate the titles of Christ to a mortall man But goe to Bellarmine and the rest of that packe fil vp the measure of iniquitie of your forefathers say with Pope Athanasius that the people of the world are the partes of his bodie with Cornelius the Bishop in the Councell of Trent the Pope being the light came into the world and men loued darkenes rather then light with Pope Calixtus in the Councell of Rhemes who when hee saw the Councell would not consent to excommunicate the Emperour impiously cried out that they had forsaken him as Christ was left of his Disciples with Innocentius the third that all things in Heauen and earth and vnder the earth doe bowe the knee vnto him with Otho no Pope but a Cardinall that sitting amongst his Bishops blasphemously applied to himselfe the vision of Ezechiel cap. 1. resembling the Bishops to the sower faced beasts himselfe vnto God that approched to the
sometime in Rome also tribuni plebis the officers for the people had the chiefe authoritie Now of all these in common-wealth matters the first kinde is the best and safest the Monarchical or princely gouernement The question now is whether the same forme ought to bee reteyned in Church-gouernement and in this question certaine things are to bee obserued First that wee haue not to deale in this place with that part of Ecclesiasticall regiment wherein the prince hath interest as in ordayning Ecclesiasticall Lawes and seeing to the execution thereof but the question is onely of that regiment Ecclesiasticall which is proper to the gouernors of the Church which consisteth in the ministerie of the word and Sacraments in ordaining and electing of Church-ministers in the dispensing of the keyes of the Church in the Ecclesiasticall censures and discipline and such like whether in the Church there ought to bee one chiefe Bishop from whom all other receiue this power in the premisses Secondly the question is not of the spirituall gouernement of Christ who is the chiefe Monarch and King of his Church but of the outward and externall regiment vpon earth Thirdly wee speake not of the state of any particular Church either nationall prouinciall or oppidall but of the generall state of the Church whether ouer all Churches there ought to be one chiefe Bishop These things premised wee come now to the question The Papists THat there ought to bee one chiefe Monarch and high Bishop ouer all the Church in all Ecclesiasticall matters for the deciding of controuersies preseruing the vnitie of the Church from whom all other Ecclesiasticall Ministers doe receiue their power and authoritie they thus would proue 1 The militant Church is in all things answerable and correspondent to the triumphant companie in Heauen as Heb. 8.5 Moses was bid to make all things according to the paterne shewed in the Mount But in heauen there is beside God himselfe a Monarch and chiefe commaunder of the Angels euen Michael the Archangel Reuel 12.7 Michael and his Angels fought Ergo it ought to be so vpon earth We answer First the Church vpon earth neither is nor can be altogether like to the celestiall congregation for there is no temple Reuel 21.22 There shall enter no vncleane thing and many such like differences there are We are bid to follow them in holines and obedience so farre wee must imitate the Angels as in the Lords prayer 3. Petit. As for imitation and conformitie in other things we haue no such commaundement we are promised hereafter to be like them but that is not yet Neither doth that place proue any such thing Heb. 8. For how followeth it Moses was shewed a paterne to make the Tabernacle by Ergo the Church hath a paterne of her gouernement from Heauen When they can shew any such paterne reuealed in the word for their dreames and phantasies we wil not beleeue for the Church as Moses had for the Tabernacle then they shall say somewhat 2 It is a vaine controuersie so to descant of the Angels as to appoynt them a Captaine and commaunder and to make nine orders or bands of them as our Rhemist annot 1. Ephes. vers 21. These are but their dreames they haue not a worde in Scripture for it And concerning Michael they are much deceiued for in that place Apocal. 12.7 Christ is called Michael Michael and his Angels fought against the Dragon And who I pray you is the chiefe Captaine of the Church against the diuell and his hoast but Christ And so is it expounded verse 10. Now is saluation in Heauen and the strength and Kingdome of our God and the power of his Christ Here hee is called Christ who before is Michael In other places also Michael is vnderstood to be Christ as Dan. 10.21 there is none that holdeth with mee but Michael your Prince here Michael is the prince of the Church and not of the Angels And that Michael is not the prince of the Angels as our aduersaries meane taking Michael for an Angell it is proued out of the 13. verse Michael one of the chiefe princes the Angels are all called princes and not one to bee prince aboue them Likewise the nature and signification of the word Michael agreeth hereunto for it is compounded of three hebrue particles as much as to say one that is equall vnto GOD which name in that sense cannot bee giuen vnto any creature Further Epistle Iud. 9. there is mention made of Michael the Archangell who stroue against the diuell and saide the Lord rebuke thee Sathan where the Apostle alludeth to that place of Zacher 3.2 where the very same words are found but there the prophet calleth him Iehouah that spake those words and here the Apostle calleth him Michael so that in this place it must needes bee vnderstoode for Christ. But to conclude we denie not but that Michael may bee the name of some glorious Angell but out of these places it cannot bee proued And againe we will not stand with them but that there may be degrees of excellencie amongst the Angels as there shall be amongst the Saints but that any one hath any such soueraigne and commaunding authoritie ouer the rest it is a curious and presumptuous surmise 2 The Church of the olde Testament was a figure of the Church vnder the New but they had a high Priest aboue the rest Ergo there ought to be now We answere First we graunt the high Priest was a figure but neither of Peter nor Pope but onely of Christ for in two things did the high Priest resemble Christ in offering of sacrifice so hath Christ offered vp himselfe Heb. 7.27 and in entring into the sanctuarie to make attonement for the people so Christ is entred into the Heauens to appeare in sight for vs before God as the apostle saith Heb. 9.24 I trow in neither of these the high priest could be a type either of Peter or Pope 2 Neither doth it follow because there was an high priest in one countrey therefore there ought to bee one ouer the Churches in al countries as the Iesuite frameth an other argument by a comparison because a bishop is ouer his diocesse a Metropolitane ouer his prouince there may bee as well a Pope ouer the whole Church For by the same reason because a Lorde may bee the chiefe in his seignorie a Duke in his prouince a Prince in his Kingdome therefore there ought to bee an Emperour ouer all the world or as Master Caluine saith because one fielde is committed to one Husbandman to dresse and to till therefore the whole Worlde may which were a thing impossible The Protestants THat there ought not to be any one chiefe Bishop Pope or prelate to exercise iurisdiction ouer the whole Church wee doe thus make it good 1 We acknowledge no head of the Church but Christ neither doth the Scripture attribute this title of Maiestie ouer the whole Church but onely to Christ. If
and therefore hee loued much To the third wee answere that by the Iesuites owne confession Iames who was as they say Bishoppe of Ierusalem had the primacie there how then can they now giue it to Peter The Protestants THat Peter had no such iurisdiction ouer the Apostles as to bee called the head and Prince of them but that to them all indifferentlie were the keyes committed and did all faithfullie execute their Apostleship without any subiection of each to other but ioyned the right hands of fellowship together we thus confirme it out of the holy Scripture and necessarie arguments deriued out of the same 1 Ephes. 2.20 Apocalips 21.14 The Church is said to bee built vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Ergo no primacie of power amongst the Apostles they all founded the Church Bellarmine confesseth that in respect of their doctrine there was no difference betweene Peter and the rest for they all were first planters of Churches they all preached the Gospell by reuelation But in respect of gouernement they were not equall they had chiefe authoritie committed to them as Apostles and Embassadors of Christ But Peter as ordinarie pastor Wee answere First by his owne confession the Apostles had chiefe authoritie as Apostles but there was no higher authoritie or power then of the Apostleship but as they were Apostles they were equall saith the Iesuite Ergo there could be no superioritie for the calling of the Apostles was the highest in the Church 2 To preach the Gospell and to haue iurisdiction of gouernement do both belong to the power of the keyes but the keyes were equallie committed to all Ergo they had all equall power both to preach and to gouerne That they all had the power of the keyes equallie graunted vnto them wee haue proued before out of Matth. 18.18 2 Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that Iames was Bishop and ordinarie pastor at Ierusalem and saith with Anselme and Thomas Aquinas that therefore he is named first by Saint Paule Gal. 2. Bellarm. cap. 19. Therefore at Ierusalem Peter was to giue primacie to the ordinarie pastor there If they answere that Rome was then the chiefe citie and therefore Peter being Bishop of Rome was to haue the preeminence To this we replie that Ierusalem was rather to be preferred in respect of place which was chosen by the Lord himselfe to be the chiefe citie of his Church But Rome through the tyrannie and vsurpation of the Romans ouer other countries was aduanced to that dignitie not by the election of God But Bellarmine answereth that Peter was Bishop of the whole Church and so of Ierusalem too We answere he now saith lesse for Peter then if hee called him as he was the Apostle of the whole world for it was more to be an Apostle thā a Bishop Diuers were called in the Apostles times episcopi ouerseers or Bishops that were not Apostles as the pastors of Ephesus Act. 20.28 Wherefore now hee hath saide iust nothing in seeking to aduance Peter hee hath disgraced him in pulling him downe from his high Apostleship to the chaire of a Bishop 3 Peter had no superioritie ouer Paul for they ioyned right handes of fellowship and this allotment was made betweene them that Paule should bee the chiefe of the Gentiles and Peter of the circumcision Galath 2.9 Ergo. Bellarmine answereth First they were ioyned as fellow-laborers in the preaching of the Gospell but Peter might for all this bee greater in the office and power of gouerning Wee answere yea but the text saith that Paule onelie was not appointed to preach to the Gentiles but hee had the chiefe Apostleship Now to the Apostleship belongeth not onely the function of preaching but the whole vse of the keyes and power of iurisdiction Ergo in all respects Saint Paule ouer the Gentiles had the chiefe Apostleship But let any man say that this was a humane compact amongst themselues and Paul had his lotte at Peters assignement the text sheweth that the Lorde himselfe had made this distribution For when they sawe saith Saint Paul that the Gospell ouer the vncircumcision was committed to mee verse 7. So then the Apostles did but confirme by their consent that distribution which they sawe the Lord himselfe had appoynted Further saith the Iesuite the diuision was not so made but that it was lawfull for Peter also to preache to the Gentiles Wee answeare wee graunt it and for Paule to preache to the Iewes yet that distinction remayned still that Peter was chiefe of the circumcision Paule of the vncircumcision Againe saith hee but Peter had the more excellent lotte for Christ himselfe first preached to the Iewes Wee answere wee denie not but that hee had the first lotte in order for to the Iewes was the Gospell first offered but Paul had the larger and more glorious lotte the Church of the Iewes now decaying and the Gentiles beginning to be planted in their roome But howsoeuer it was it cannot bee denied but that Paule was chiefe towards the Gentiles And therefore the Church of Rome might with better right haue deriued their authoritie from S. Paul then from Peter Both of them they cannot make patrons of their See seeing by their owne rules the Pope cannot be successor to them both Further out of the same place Galath 2.11 an other thing commeth to bee obserued that Peter was rebuked of Paule and in such sort that it appeareth there was no great inequality between them for he doth it to his face openlie before all men and at Antioch in Peters owne Bishopricke as they say can it be now thought that Paul was any thing inferior to Peter Bellarmine and the Iesuits answere that the Pope may bee rebuked of an inferior and ought to take it patiently if it be done in zeale and loue Aunswere First wee doe not simplie thus conclude because Paul reprehended Peter therefore he was not his superior but because of the manner as we shewed it was done in such sorte so plainely so openly without any submission or crauing of pardon that there can appeare no inequalitie at all betweene them Secondly although they seeme heere to graunt that the Pope may be rebuked yet is it otherwise in their Canon lawe which saith that though the Pope doe leade innumerable soules to hell no mortall man may presume to reprooue his faultes part 1. distin 4. cap. Si Papa Fulk Annot. in Gala. 2. sect 8. 4 Lastlie what reason was there why Christ should giue the supremacie to Peter ouer the rest Christ was no acceptor of persons if hee had bene Iohn should haue bene preferred whom he loued most If deserts be weighed I think Peter deserued no more then the rest of his fellowes Nay I thinke the wisedome of the Spirit foreseeing the questions that should afterward arise in the Church about Peter hath so disposed that this Apostles infirmities both in number more and weight greater then any of the rest should be euidentlie set forth in
yeare after Christ and that being expelled the citie by Claudius with the rest of the Iewes he returned to Ierusalem and there spake with Paul and after that went to Rome agayne and there ended his life This answere we shewe to bee very insufficient First Act. 15.2 it appeareth that there was as it were a standing and set councel of the Apostles at Ierusalem of the which Peter was one for the Church thought good to send vp to the Apostles and Elders which were at Ierusalem Secondly till the 18. yeare when this Councel was held it seemeth that Peter had laboured onely or especially amongst the Iewes of whom there were then but fewe at Rome for saith the Apostle he that was mightie in Peter in the Apostleship ouer the circumcision was also mightie in me Gal. 2.8 Therfore Peter was not knowne to haue laboured vntill this time in the circumcision Thirdly afterward it is more like he went to Antiochia then to Rome for after this Paul rebuked Peter at Antioch Gal. 2. Fourthly these are but bare coniectures of our aduersaries and craftie euasion without scripture but seeing we appose them out of scripture it is great reason they should likewise answere vs out of scripture 3 We haue diuers other obections also out of the scriptures as first that if Peter were at Rome it is not like that Paul would leaue him out in his salutation in the end of his Epistle Rō 16. sent to the brethren Our aduersaries answere but very simplie that at that time when S. Paul wrote his Epistle either Peter was not at Rome or els Paul might write some especiall letters to him by himselfe and this Epistle enclosed in them such goodly coniectures they haue But I pray you what needed S. Paul to haue written vnto the Romanes if S. Peter so faithfull and vigilant a Pastor were continually amongst them Other places also of scripture we haue as Philipp 2.20 speaking of Timothy he saith I haue none like minded to him that will faithfully care for your matters Coloss. 4.11 These onely are my workfellowes 2. Timoth. 4.11 onely Luke is with me Ergo Peter all this while was not at Rome for Paul would not haue left him out of the number of his fellowe-helpers at the lest he would not haue commended Timothy though he were a worthie yong man before him That which Bellarmine answereth is iust nothing that S. Paul speaketh in those places onely of his domesticall helpers which did minister vnto him When S. Paul speaketh plainly of his fellowe labourers these onely are my workfellowes to the kingdome of God Coloss. 4.11 An other argumēt doth arise out of S. Pauls words 2. Timoth. 4.16 At my first answering no man assisted me Ergo it is like that Peter was not then at Rome for he would not haue forsaken Paul Bellarmine answereth that he speaketh onely of such fauourers as hee had in Caesars court that they would not make sute for him to the Emperour But this is a weake solution First it appeareth by that which followeth that they left him without helpe in his open Apologie or defence they did not assist me sayth he but the Lord assisted me that is gaue me strength to defend my cause so that the word assisting must bee taken in the same sense before that they fayled him in that wherein God assisted him that is in speaking boldly in the defence of the truth Secondly it is proued by the diuers successe that he had at his first and second answering at the first all left him but at the next many were emboldened through his bonds what to doe more frankly to speake the word Philipp 1.14 Ergo at the first they forsooke him because they were afrayd to speake the word THE SECOND PART WHETHER PETER were Bishop of Rome error 39 OVr aduersaries would gladly bring it about that Peter was Bishop of Rome there enthronised and sate in the Bishoplike chayre many yeares and after left it to his successors 1 The Romane faith was first planted by Peter for he first preached to the Gentiles Act. 15.7 Ergo he was the first Bishop Answere First that Peter first preached to the Gentiles it is contrarie to the storie of the Acts for Paul was conuerted before Peter sawe the vision from heauen Act. 10. before which time Peter made a great question whether it were lawfull to preach to the Gentiles But Paul immediatly after his conuersion preached to the Gentiles Galath 2. therefore before Peter Neither is there any thing to the contrarie Act. 15.7 the Gentiles beleeued by S. Peters mouth as he sayth but not first Secondly that Peter first preached not at Rome it is thus gathered because it is not like that the Christian faith being spread farre abroad could be kept from Rome the space of 12. yeares for so long it was by their account before Peter came to Rome Agayne there were diuers that dwelled at Rome which heard the Apostles speake diuers tongues Act. 2. being straungers then and soiourners at Ierusalem and Rom. 16.7 he maketh mention of Andronicus and Iunia which were in Christ before him By these it is most like that the Christian faith was first sowed at Rome Thirdly it is more like that Paul preached at Rome before Peter for when he came to Rome he called the Iewes together who sayd vnto him that they had heard nothing concerning him by letters or from the brethren out of Iudea Act. 28.22 But if Peter had beene there Paul no doubt should haue been knowne at the least by name The Iewes also say vnto him wee will heare of thee what thou thinkest and some of them were perswaded by Paul some beleeued not It seemeth by this place that the Iewes in Rome had not heard of the Gospell before But if Peter had been amongst them who had an especiall charge of the circumcision he would haue had the greatest care of the Iewes to winne them to Christ. Fourthly though Peter had first preached to the Romanes it would not followe that therefore he was Bishop there for Paul first founded the Church of Ephesus yet they say Iohn was first Bishop there wherefore they should gayne nothing by this argument if it were true but that Peter was the first preacher and conuerter of the Romanes to the faith The Protestants IF wee take the name of Bishop generally for that office which hath the publique cure and charge of soules in that sense we denye not but Peter and the rest of the Apostles may be called Episcopi Bishops as Christ is called the shepheard and Bishop of our soules 1. Pet. 2.23 But taking it strictly for a Bishop of this or that place which is called Episcopus intitulatus a Bishop entituled wee denie that either Peter or Paul were Bishops Fox pag. 15. 1 Paul was Apostolus Gentium the Apostle of the Gentiles and Peter of the circumcision therefore it is more like that Paul was chiefe Pastor of the Romanes because
sometime Iames sate and Iohn now sitteth In those words Augustine ascribeth as much to the succession of other Apostolicall Churches as he doth to the succession of the Bishops of Rome And therefore Canisius craftely leaueth out the one half of the sentence cōcerning the Church of Ierusalem Neither is it true which our aduersaries say that Peters Sea remaineth still at Rome when all other Apostolicall Sees are gone for euen to this day the See of Antioch standeth and hath a Patriark likewise the See of Alexandria The See of Constantinople neuer wanted successors to this day nor the Church of Ephesus In India and Aethiopia there hath been alwaies a succession in those Churches planted by the Apostles and is at this day Fulk 2. Thess. 2. sect 7. Wherefore they haue no cause to bragge of their succession which is found in other places as well as at Rome THE FIFT QVESTION CONCERNING THE primacie of the See of Rome THis question hath diuers partes which must be handled in their order First whether the Bishop of Rome haue authority ouer other Bishops Secondly whether appeales ought to be made to Rome from other countries Thirdly whether the Pope be subiect to the iudgemēt of any Fourthly whether he may be deposed Fiftly what primacie he hath ouer other Churches how it began Sixtly of the titles and names giuen to the Bishops of Rome THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE BISHOP of Rome hath authoritie ouer other Bishops The Papists error 41 THey doubt not to say that the Bishop of Rome hath authoritie and ought so to haue to ordaine and constitute Bishops to depriue and depose them to restore them likewise to their former dignities and this power hee exerciseth ouer the vniuersall Church The Iesuites principall only argument is drawen from certain examples how the Bishops of Rome haue in times past constituted deposed and restored some Bishops in the Greeke Church as in the patriarchal Seas of Constantinople Alexandria Antioch Ergo hee hath power ouer all Bishops We answere First It was not done by the absolute authority of the Roman Bishops any such constitution or deposition though perhappes their consent and allowance were required as Leo writeth thus to Martianus the Emperour about the ordayning of Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople Satis sit quod vestrae pietatis auxilio mei fauoris assensu episcopatum tantae vrbis obtinuit It is sufficient that by your godly helpe and my fauourable assent he hath obtained so famous a Bishoprick Whether was greater now the help and furtherance of the Emperor or the base assent of Leo Secondly wee denie not but that the Pope sometimes what by sufferance of others what by his owne intrusion hath vsurped this power ouer other Bishops by this ought not to make a law that which is once or twise done by a false title cannot prooue the iustnes of the title Thirdly that the Bishop of Rome hath no such authoritie it appeareth by this that he doth not neither of many yeares hath constituted or ordayned the patriarks of the Greeke Church they came not vp to Rome nor yet sent thither for their palls as other Archbishops here in the West parts haue done paied full dearely for them being made slaues to the beast of Rome The Protestants THat the Pope neither hath nor yet ought to haue any such authority ouer other Bishops but that euery one in his owne precinct and iurisdiction hath the chiefe charge It is thus proued 1. Peter was not chiefe neither did exercise iurisdiction ouer the twelue Ergo neither the Pope ought to doe ouer other Bishops The antecedent or first part is thus confirmed The heauenly Hierusalem which is the Church of God is described Apocal. 21. not with one foundation onely of Peter but with 12. foundations after the number of the Apostles argument Tunstalli To this purpose also hee alleadgeth in saying out of Hierome contra Iouinian All the Apostles receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and vpon them all indifferently and equally is the strength of the Church grounded and established Fox p. 1066. 2. Till the yeare of the Lord 340. there was no respect had to the Church of Rome but euery Church was ruled by their owne gouernment afterward followed the Councel of Nice wherein was decreed that the whole Church should be deuided into foure circuites or precincts ouer the which there were foure Metropolitanes or patriarkes set first the Bishop of Rome next the Bishop of Alexandria the third was the Bishop of Antioch the fourth the Bishop of Ierusalem and not long after came in the Bishop of Constantinople in the roume of the B. of Antioch All these had equall authoritie in their prouinces and one was not to deale within anothers charge Ergo the Bishop of Rome had not then the iurisdiction ouer the whole Church argument Nili plura Fox p. 9. 3. We will adioyne the testimonie of the fathers of Basile which were all of the Popish sect what haue the Bishops been in our daies say they but only shadowes might they not haue been called shepheards without sheepe what had they more then their Miters and their staffe when they could determine nothing ouer their subiects Verily in the primitiue Church the Bishops had the greatest power and authoritie but now it was come to that poynt that they exceeded the common sort of priests onely in their habite and reuenewes What plainer testimonie can we haue then from the papists themselues Augustine also agreeth to their sentence habet omnis episcopus saith he pro licētia libertatis potestatis suae arbitrium propriū tanquam iudicari ab alio nō possit quomodo nec ipse potest alium iudicare sed expectemus vniuersi iudiciū domini nostri Iesu Christi Euery Bishop is priuiledged by his own authoritie to follow his owne iudgement neither is subiect to the iudgement of other Bishops as he is not to iudge them but they all must be referred to the iudgement of Christ See then in this place Augustine setteth Bishops in the highest roume in the Church and sayth they haue no iudge aboue them but Christ. THE SECOND PART CONCERNING APpeales to bee made to Rome The Papists SVch say they is the preeminēt authority of the Bishop of Rome that appeals error 42 may be made vnto him from all Churches in the world and that all ought to stand to his sentence and determination For the proofe hereof they bring no scripture nor any sound argumēt but stand chiefly vpon certain odde examples of some that haue appealed to Rome which we denie not to haue been done but our answere more at large is this 1. One cause of these appeales was both for that they which were iustly cōdemned of other Churches found greater liberty and fauour at Rome as Apiarius did who being condemned in the 6. Aphricane Councel for his detestable conditions found fauour with Zosimus Bishop of Rome who
wrote for him to the Councel to be receiued agayne No maruayle then if licentious fellowes hoping to finde more fauour at Rome did appeale thither As also the ambition of the Bishops of Rome did somewhat helpe forward this matter who were as ready to receiue such appeales as others were to make them 2. Bishop Tunstal doth answere very fully to this poynt that although appeales were made to Rome yet was it not for any iurisdiction that the See had but this was the cause partly for that there were many deuisions and parts taking in the Oriental Churches as also because many were infected with heresies from the which the West Occidētal Churches were more free they were content to referre the cause many times to the Bishop of Rome as being a more indifferent iudge and not like to be partial being no partie in the cause Neither was their 〈◊〉 to the Bishop of Rome singularly but to the whole congregation of the Bishops of Italie and France or of the whole West as it appeareth by the epistles of Basile Tunstal apud Fox 1067. The Protestants That appeales ought not to be made to Rome but that all matters and controuersies may best be ended and determined at home where they doe arise It is thus confirmed 1. This matter was notably handled anno 420. in the sixt Councel of Carthage where Augustine was present with Prosper and Orosius To this Councel Pope Zozimus sent his Legate with certaine requests of the which this was one that it might be lawful for Bishops and priests to appeale from the sentence of their Metropolitanes and also of the Councel to Rome alleadging for him self a decree of the Nicene Councel The Councel of Carthage sent forthwith to the patriarkes of Cōstantinople Antioch Alexandria for a copie of the Coūcel of Nice wherein no such Canon was found that appeales should bee made to Rome but the contrary for in the sixt Canon of that Councel it was founde how all matters and all persons ecclesiasticall both Bishops and others were committed to their Metropolitanes vpon this decree the Councel of Carthage drew out certain reasons why appeales should not be made to Rome First it is not otherwise to be thought but that the grace of God is as ready at hande in one prouince as in another Secondly there is no neede to seeke any outlandish help for the partie grieued may appeale to a prouinciall or generall Councel Thirdly it were not equall nor right to appeale from the Councel to the Bishop of Rome for it is not like that God will inspire his truth vnto the Bishop and denie it to a multitude congregated in his name Fourthly no forraine or outlandish iudgement can be so vpright or iust because the witnesses cannot be present being hindered by infirmitie of sex age sicknes by whom the truth should be discussed Vpon these reasons the Councel concluded that neither any appeales should be made to Rome neither that Legates should be sent from Rome for deciding of matters And this answere they made to Zozimus first to Bonifacius and Celestinus that in short time one succeeded another And for all the B. of Rome his absolution Apiarius was againe called coram and brought to confesse his fault Fox p. 10. col 2. Now out of the Acts of this Councel and their reasons alleadged wee conclude that it is not fit conuenient nor reasonable that appeals should be made to Rome The Iesuite answereth that appeales were forbidden to be made by priests to Rome not by Bishops This is but a vaine shift for the reasons of the Councel are general against all appeales And Apiarius that appealed to Rome was a priest and no Bishop 2. We can bring the decrees of a latter Councell then this of Carthage for in the Councell of Basile it was decreed that no actions or controuersies should be brought from other countries to be pleaded at Rome which were more then foure daies iourney distant from the said court of Rome a few principall matters onely excepted apud Fox p. 697. 3. This also is flatly contrary to the rule of the Apostle that appellations should be made out of the Church a far off Is it so sayth hee that there is not a wise man amongst you no not one that can iudge amongst his brethren 1. Cor. 6.5 Ergo euery Church hath wise men sufficient in it whereby their controuersies may be ended 4. Augustine also thus writeth concerning this matter Miltiades Episcopus Romanus non sibi vsurpauit iudicium de causa Ceciliani sed rogatus imperator iudices misit Episcopos qui cum eo sederent epist. 162. Miltiades Bishop of Rome did not vsurpe or take vpon himselfe to iudge the cause of Cecilian but the Emperour being requested sent other bishops that should sit and determine the cause together with him Out of these words first we note that it had beene vsurpation and presumption for the Bishop of Rome to haue taken vpon him the iudgement of this matter not belonging vnto him vnlesse the Emperor had committed it Secondly that Miltiades did not suffer other Bishops to sitte with him as Bellarmine imagineth but he could not otherwise choyse for they were ioyned in commission by the Emperour to be iudges as well as he Thus we see what small shew or colour of title the Pope hath to heare or receiue appeales from other countries THE THIRD PART WHETHER THE Pope be subiect to the iudgement of anye The Papists error 43 THe Pope neither can nor ought to bee iudged either of the Emperour or anie other Seculare or ecclesiasticall Magistrate no not of any generall Councel Bellarmin cap. 26. Nay hee should doe iniurie vnto GOD to submit himselfe to the iudgement of any Iacobat ex Tilhemann de pontif rom err 34. Beside certayne blinde canons and constitutions and a fewe examples grounded vpon the insolent practises of Popes they haue no other arguments either out of scripture or drawen from reason to confirme this their hideous and monstrous opinion withal Bellarmine reasoneth thus the Prince is not to bee iudged by the commonwealth but is greater then his kingdome the Pope is the prince of the Church Ergo We answere First concerning the Princes high and Soueraigne authority we will not now dispute we make it not infinite the word of God must bee a rule and square both of ciuill and ecclesiasticall iudgement Secondly It is sufficient for vs here to answere that the Iesuite hath sayd nothing for this which he assumeth for a reason is the greatest matter in question between vs and so great an vntruth he hath vttered that he is constrained to leaue scripture and seeke helpe else-where But he shall neuer by any good reason or sufficient authority prooue that the Pope hath any such Princedome in the Church as he would beare vs in hand The Protestants THat the Pope as well as other ecclesiasticall persons ought to be and is by right subiect to the
that he defloured virgins that he lay with Stephana his fathers concubine likewise with Ramera and Anna and her Neece for these beastlie parts and such like he was deposed there was no heresie obiected agaynst him And thinke you not he was worthily vnpoped yet the Papists thinke no for they admit no cause of depriuation but heresie This deuillish Pope through the harlots of Rome for he was well beloued of them recouered his Popedome agayne but at the length the Lord himselfe displaced him for in the tenth yeere of his Popedome being founde without the citie with an other mans wife hee was so wounded of her husbande that within eight dayes after hee dyed Fox pag. 159. Boniface the 7. tooke Pope Iohn the 15. who was made Pope a little before and hee expelled yet recouering the Papacie by force hee tooke him put out his eyes and threwe him in prison where he was famished Likewise was Iohn the 18. serued by Gregorie the 5. his eyes were thrust out first and he afterward slayne I meruaile how our Catholikes can excuse these furious outrages of their ghostly fathers of Rome In the Councel of Brixia Gregorie the 7. was deposed not for heresie but for other abominable vices as maintayning of periurie and murthers for following Diuinations Dreames Sorcerie Necromancie Fox p. 181. Pope Iohn the 23. deposed in the Councel of Constance Eugenius in the Councel at Basile yet neither of them for heresie And yet our aduersaries would still make vs beleeue that Popes cannot be deposed for any crime but heresie 2 We can haue no better argument then from our aduersaries themselues It is a sport to see what diuers opinions they hold and doe runne as it were in a maze not knowing which way to get out Pighius thinketh that the Pope cannot possiblie fall into heresie and therefore for no cause may bee deposed Some other thinke that the Pope for secret and close heresie is actually deposed of GOD and may also bee deposed and iudged of the Church thus holdeth Iohann de turre cremat Caietanus is of opinion that for manifest and open heresie the Pope is both alreadie by right deposed and may also actually be deposed of the Church But Bellarmine confuteth all these There is a fourth opinion most grosse that the Pope neither for secret nor open heresie is either alreadie of right deposed or may be actually depriued of the Church Lastly commeth in the nice and daintie Iesuite with his quirkes and quiddities who sayth that the Pope in case of manifest heresie ceaseth to bee Pope and is euen now deposed and if after the Church proceede agaynst him they iudge not the Pope for now hee is no Pope Which opinion how absurd it is I haue declared before THE FIFT PART CONCERNING THE ORIGInall and beginning of the primacie of Rome The Papists THey doe boldly affirme without any ground that the primacie of that See error 45 hath his beginning from no other but Christ they are the Iesuites owne words Romani pontificis ecclesiasticum principatum authore Christo principium accepisse that the princely dignitie of the Bishop of Rome acknowledgeth no other author or beginner thereof but Christ Bellarm. cap. 7. lib. 2. 1 They would build the primacie of the Romane Church vpon certaine places of scripture as Math. 16. Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I build my Church Luk. 22. I haue prayed for thee Peter that thy faith should not faile Iohn 21. Christ sayd to Peter feede my sheepe Ergo Peter and Peters successors haue their primacie from Christ Bellarm. To these places Tunstal and Stokeslie two Popish Bishops yet in this poynt holding the truth did properly make answere in their Epistle sent to Cardinall Poole To the first They affirme out of the ancient expositors that it is ment of the faith which was then first confessed by the mouth of Peter and not of Peters person Further confirming out of S. Paul that neither Peter nor no creature beside could bee the foundation of the Church for no other foundation can any man lay sayth the Apostle besides that which is layd Iesus Christ 1. Cor. 3. To the second they answere that Christ speaketh onely of the fall of Peter which hee knewe in his godlie prescience giuing an inkling vnto him that after his fall hee should bee conuerted and strengthen his brethren for if it were ment also of Peters successors they must first faile in faith and after confirme their brethren To the third The whole flock of Christ was not committed to Peter to feede for he himselfe testifieth the contrarie exhorting all Pastors to feede the flocke of Christ which was giuen them in charge by Christ as it followeth in that place when the chiefe shepheard shall appeare ye shall receiue the incorruptible Crowne of eternall glorie He calleth not himselfe the chiefe shepheard but onely Christ. It is euident therefore say they that your 3. scriptures ment nothing lesse then such a primacie ouer all Fox pag. 1067. 2 There can bee no time assigned since Christ say they when this primacie should begin nor no author named that brought it in Ergo it must needes bee attributed to Christ he must of necessitie bee found the author thereof We answere the time may bee assigned the authors named when and by whom this pretensed and vsurped authoritie was brought in as euen now wee will shewe The Protestants THat the vsurped iurisdiction of Rome tooke not the beginning from Christ nor his Apostles neither was heard of for many yeres after we thus are able to proue it 1 Before the Nicene Councel which first deuided the regiment of the Church into foure Patriarchal seates Rome had small or no preeminence So Aeneas Syluius witnesseth who afterward was Pope of Rome and called Pius the 2. Ante Nicenum concilium sibi quisque viuebat ad Romanam ecclesiam paruus habebatur respectus Epist. 301. Before the Nicene Councel euery Bishop liued to himselfe there was no great respect had to the Church of Rome What more euident testimonie can wee haue then of a Pope himselfe Yet the Iesuite sayth that it is false in part which hee writeth He is somewhat mannerly in making him but halfe a lyer yet I wonder that he will confesse any vntruth at all in his ghostly fathers words Bellarm. cap. 17. lib. 2. Secondly in the Councel of Nice there was no primacie of power giuen to Rome ouer the whole Church but the other Patriarkes of Alexandria Antioch Ierusalem were priuiledged in like manner in their confines as the Bishop of Rome was in his They had all equall authoritie giuen them in their owne prouinces Sic Tonstall Stokesli ad Poolum Thirdly afterward there was a certayne primacie of order graunted vnto the Patriarke of Rome aboue other Patriarkes as to haue the first place to sit first to giue his sentence first One cause hereof was for that Rome was then the Emperiall and
the perfection and authority of the scriptures as also whether it be in the Pope to summone dissolue and confirme Councels which hath been sufficiently declared before in the controuersie concerning Councels Concerning other questions as the canonizing of Saints which they say appertaineth to the Pope the election and confirmation of Bishops pardons and indulgences we shall haue fitter occasion to deale in them in their seuerall places and controuersies At this time wee purpose onely to touch these two poynts aforesaide of the Popes Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE POPE may make lawes to binde the conscience and punish the transgressors thereof iudicially The Papists THat the Pope hath such authorie to make lawes for the whole Church error 49 which shall binde vnder paine of damnation as well as the lawes of God it is the general opinion of the papists Fox 981. articul 13. p. 1101. artic cont Lambert 29. But they put in this clause So they bee not vniust lawes nor contrarie to the diuine law Bellarm. cap. 15. And yet they say that the Pope may make lawes hauing not the authority nor warrant of scripture neither is it necessarie for these lawes to be expressed or diduced out of scripture And these lawes are not onely of externall rites and orders of the Church but euen of things necessary to saluation Bellarm. cap 15. in reprehens Caluini Yea he addeth further that in matters not necessary to saluation he can not be disobeyed without deadly sinne and offence of conscience cap. 16. loc 1. Bulla Leonis 10. aduersus Lutherum Fox p. 1283. col 1. 1. The Apostles prescribed a law concerning the abstaining from blood things strangled and offered to Idols concerning the which Christ gaue them no precept But this law did binde the people in conscience for euery where the Apostles gaue straight charge for the keeping of the decrees Bellarm. Answere First the Apostles commaunded no newe thing but the same which they themselues were taught of Christ that they should take heede of offence the Christians therefore were not bound in conscience any further to keepe the decrees concerning such things then for auoyding of scandal and offence Secondly for afterward the offence being taken away the law also ceased and Saint Paul giueth libertie notwithstanding this law to eate things offered to Idols if it might be done without offence Asking no question sayth he for conscience sake 1. Cor. 10.27 Ergo their consciences were not hereby obliged and bound 3. It is necessary to haue some lawes beside the diuine law for the gouernment of the Church for the word of God is too vniuersal neither is sufficient to direct euery particular action therefore other ecclesiasticall lawes must bee added but euery good and necessary law hath a coactiue and constraining power and bindeth the conscience to obedience Ergo the constitutions of the Popes and Councels which are the only ecclesiastical lawes doe binde the conscience Bellarmin cap. 16. lib. 4. Answere First the word of God contayneth all necessarie rules to saluation wherefore all lawes of the Church concerning matters of faith are but explanations and interpretations of the rules of fayth set forth in scripture if they be godly lawes and so are not the lawes of men but of God and doe bind the conscience to the obseruation thereof as the lawes of the Church which command Christians to resort to the congregation to heare Gods word and reuerently to receiue the sacraments are the very ordinances and commaundements of Christ who enioyned his Apostles to preach and baptize and his faythfull people to heare and to be baptized and therefore in conscience wee are bound to the obedience hereof Secondly there are other ecclesiasticall lawes appoynted for the publique order of the Church concerning externall rites and circumstances of persons and place as the houres of prayer the forme of the leâ—turgie publike seruice the times fittest for the celebration of the sacraments and such like These and such like constitutions do not binde in conscience absolutely in respect of the things themselues which are indifferent but in regarde of that contempt and offence which might followe in the not keeping of them contempt to our superiors whome wee ought in all lawfull things to obey offence in grieuing the conscience of our weake brethren So that euen these constitutions also which are made according to the rules of the Gospell that is vnto edification to the glorie of God and for auoyding of offence doe necessarilie binde vs in conscience not conscience of the thinges themselues which are but externall but conscience of obedience to our Christian Magistrates and conscience in taking heede of all iust offence sic Caluin Institut lib. 4. cap. 10.11 3 But we are not God be thanked driuen to any such straight that if there be neede of any such Ecclesiasticall lawes we should run for succor to the Popes beggerly decretals And yet such Canons as were in force amongst them agreeable to the rules of the Gospell we doe not refuse But if there bee want and penurie of good lawes euery Church hath as full authoritie to make decrees and ordinances for the peace and order and quiet gouernement thereof not as the Pope of Rome hath ouer the vniuersall Church for that by right is none or if it be it is but an vsurped power but as the Bishop of Rome hath in his owne Bishopricke and dioces The Protestants WHat our sentence is of this matter it doth partlie appeare by that which wee haue alreadie saide that the Pope hath no power ouer the whole Church and therefore can make no lawes to binde the conscience or otherwise for the same for it belongeth not to his charge Secondly we say that neither he nor any ecclesiasticall gouernement beside can make lawes of things necessarie to saluation other then those which are in Scripture conteined Thirdly all Ecclesiasticall lawes made concerning externall rites and publike order doe not otherwise binde the conscience then in regarde of our obedience due to Christian Magistrates in lawfull things and for auoyding of scandall and offence But in respect of the things commaunded such lawes doe not binde Caluin loc praedicto 1 Saint Iames saith there is one lawe-giuer which is able to saue and to destroy cap. 4.12 He therefore onely maketh lawes to binde the conscience that is able to saue and to destroy but that cannot the Pope doe Ergo Caluin argum Bellarmine answereth that the lawes of men doe binde vnder paine of damnation in as much as God is offended and displeased with their disobedience and so iudgeth them worthie of punishment cap. 20. All this wee graunt that the lawes of men being good lawes doe binde in conscience in respect of the contempt and disobedience to higher powers but not in respect of the thinges commaunded which in their nature are indiffereÌ„t The Iesuite should haue said that God is offended not onely for their disobedience but simplie
I pray you whether our merchants be admitted to traffick safely in Spaine if their religion be knowen The seruants of God amongst you can neither enioy houses lands libertie or life which yoke also was layd a long time vpon this land till it pleased God to haue mercie on vs for the which his name be blessed 3. Againe many yeares agoe euen in Augustines and Ambrose his time all Churches were ioyned to Rome before Antichrist was yet reuealed Ergo. This is not the Character of Antichrist Bellarmin ibid. Answere First they were ioyned then in common consent of religion not as subiects by compulsion but voluntarie because at that time Rome in the chiefest poynts of Religion was in the right fayth 2. But of late dayes in the Councel of Constance not yet 2. hundred yeares agoe it was made an article of faith to beleeue that the Pope was the head of the Vniuersal Church yea about the yeare 600. the title of Vniuersal Bishop first began to be appropriate to Rome whereby was insinuated that all Churches in the world should be vnder the obedience thereof Lastly we haue the testimonie of one of their Popes themselues who saith plainly that hee is the forerunner of Antichrist which would bee called Vniuersall Bishop lib. 4. epistol 32. See then by his testimony the title of Vniuersality and exacting of obedience of other Churches is the character marke of Antichrist THE FOVRTH PART CONCERNING the generation and original of Antichrist The Papists error 60 THey doe reiect those olde fancies concerning Antichrist as that hee should be borne of a Virgin by helpe of the diuel that hee should haue the diuell to his father that he should be a diuell incarnate or that hee should bee Nero raysed from the dead Refusing these fables they haue found out one as foolish Our Rhemists holde that Antichrist shal be borne of the tribe of Dan. Bellarm. dare not say so but he thinketh that he shall come of the Iewes stock and be circumcised and be taken of the Iewes for their Messiah cap. 12. 1. That he shall come of the tribe of Dan thus they would prooue it Genes 49.17 Dan shal be a serpent by the way biting the horse heeles Ierem. 8.16 The neying of his horses is heard from Dan. And Apocal. 7. where 12. thousand of euery tribe are reckoned onely Dan is left out because belike Antichrist should come of that tribe Rhemist 2. Thess. 2. sect 8. Answere Bellarmine confuteth all these reasons the first hee saith with Hierome to be vnderstood of Sampson who came of the tribe of Dan the second place is of Nabuchadnezzers comming to destroy Ierusalem as Hierome also expoundeth it to the third he sayth that Ephraim is left out as well as Dan yea and so is Manassâ—h too because the tribe of Ioseph is named for his two sonnes but Dan is left out because Leui is reckoned in his place Wee may see now how well they agree when one Iesuite confuteth another Bellarmin cap. 12. 2. Bellarmine standeth much vpon that place Iohn 5.43 If an other come in his name him will ye receiue But sayth he the Iewes will receiue none but of their owne kinred and whom they looke for to be their Messiah Ergo. Antichrist must come of the Iewes ibd Answere This place we haue shewed before part 1. of this question to be vnderstood of false prophets amongst the Iewes such as mention is made of Act. 5. as Theudas and Iudas and not of any one false prophet so Iohn 10. where Christ compareth himselfe which is the true shepheard with the hireling he vnderstandeth all hirelings though he speake in the singular number The Protestantes THat it is a very fable and cousoning deuice of heretikes to make men beleeue that Antichrist shall come of the tribe of Dan or of the stock of the Iewes thus we shew it 1. It is out of doubt that the nation of the Iewes shall bee conuerted vnto God and mercy shal be shewed againe to the remnant of Israel Rom. 11.25 confessed also by the papists But if one come which shall reedifie the temple and restore the sacrifices and circumcision such an one as the Iewes shall take for their Messiah who seeth not that by this meanes the Iewes will bee more hardned hauing now their owne hearts desire their temple Messiah circumcision and their conuersion would be greatly hindred nay quite and clean ouerthrowen 2. If Antichrist should come of the Iewes it is like that his seate should bee at Ierusalem and that the temple shall be built agayne by him but that cannot be for the temple as Daniel prophesieth shall lie desolate euen vnto the ende Dani. 9.27 Ergo. he shall not come of the Iewes More of this in the next parte THE FIFT PART CONCERNING THE seate and place of Antichrist The Papists BEllarmine holdeth opinion that Antichrist shall haue his imperiall seate at Ierusalem and reedifie and build againe the temple yea for a while commaund error 61 circumcision to be vsed and obserued Bellarm. cap. 13. lib. 3. de pontif Rhemist 2. Thessa. 2. sect 11. 1. Apocal. 11.8 the Citie of Antichrist is called the great Citie where our Lord was crucified But Christ was crucified at Ierusalem Ergo. Answere First it cannot be so vnderstood for ver 2. Ierusalem is called the holy Citie ver 8. This great Citie is called Sodome and Aegypt how can the same Citie be capable of such contrary names How can that be called an holy Citie where the abomination of desolation shall be and the seate of Antichrist Secondly Augustine in Apocal. homil 8. vnderstandeth by the great Citie and the streetes thereof the middest of the Church And by the great citie verie fitly is vnderstood the large iurisdiction of the Pope who sayth hee is head of the great citie and Catholike Church Whose seate we see is at Rome by authoritie of which citie Christ was put to death and by Antichrist the Pope Christ also is persecuted in his members Fulk annotat Apocalyps 11. sect 2. 2. Apocalips 17.16 the tenne hornes that is tenne kings amongst whom the Romane Empire shall bee deuided shall hate the scarlet whore that is Rome and burne it with fire how then shall it bee the seate of Antichrist Bellarm. Answere The text is plaine that the same kingdomes that before had giuen their power to the beast and were subiect to the whore of Babilon shall after make her desolate and eate her flesh which thing we see in part to be accomplished already that many princes haue redeemed their necks from Antichrist his yoke Fulk Apocal. 17. sect 3. It is not necessary therefore to bee done all at one time but one after another 3. 2. Thessal 2. he shall sit in the temple of God but at that time the Iewes onely had a temple the Christians yet had none and the Apostle speaking of the Church of God did of purpose refrayne this name lest the Church of Christians
world part 8. Which cannot agree to the Pope Ergo he is not Antichrist Answere To these eight arguments we haue before answered seuerally shewing how fabulous ridiculous and impossible our aduersaries assertions are without ground of scripture shewe of reason or colour of argument Wherefore we will not trouble the reader with needlesse repetitions desiring him to haue recourse to that which hath been alreadie sayd The Protestants THat the Pope of Rome is very Antichrist and that all the qualities and properties which the scripture describeth Antichrist by doe fitly agree vnto his person and that we are not therefore to expect or looke for any other Antichrist Thus by testimonie of scripture and sufficient reasons deduced out of the same we trust it shall appeare to all men 1 The first place of scripture is Daniel 11. where many notes and markes are declared proper to Antichrist yet especiallie set foorth to describe Antiochus Epiphanes who might be very well a type and figure of Antichrist who was then to come 1 vers 36. It is sayd He shall doe what him listeth This is most true of the Pope his will must stande for reason Distinct. 96. cap. satis If the Pope should drawe infinite soules to hell no man is to say vnto him Sir why doe you so Distinct. 40 Heere Bellarmine hath but this poore shift to say that it is meant onely of publike iudgement that no man is by authoritie to call the Pope to account but yet a brotherly admonition may bee vsed But who seeth not that the words are generall Nemo debet ei dicere No man ought to say vnto him neither Iudge nor other 2 Hee shall magnifie himselfe agaynst GOD and speake blasphemous things agaynst GOD hath not the Pope done so Of him it is sayd that GOD and the Pope haue but one Consistorie I am able to doe almost all that GOD can doe Fox pag. 785. articl 192. I am aboue all and in all Hostiens Nay that Dominion and Lordship which Christ had in earth but habitu in habite the Pope hath actu in act and in deede Agayne as we reade the earth is the Lordes and the fulnesse thereof and as Christ sayth all power is giuen mee in heauen and in earth so is it to bee affirmed that the Vicar of Christ hath power on things celestiall terrestriall infernall apud Fox pag. 791. col 1. Now let the discreet reader iudge whether this fellowe doe not magnifie himselfe and speake blasphemously agaynst God 3 Hee shall prosper till the wrath bee accomplished So hath the Pope had but too good successe hee hath subdued Emperours and made them his seruants trode vpon their neckes made them serue at his table crowned them with his feete made them hold his stirrup and leade his horse by the bridle But wee doe hope that his date is out and that hee shall prosper no longer 4 vers 37. He shall not care for the God of his fathers No more doth the Pope for he hath inuented and erected a newe breaden god which he worshippeth hangeth vp in Churches carrieth about in procession being but a peece of bread This breaden god a might his forefathers neuer knew 5 Hee shall not care for the desires of women So hee prohibiteth lawfull marriage permitteth adulteries and the vnnaturall lust of Sodomites Bellarmine first denyeth the text which is faithfully translated according to the Hebrew Secondly he sayth the place is meant literally and properly of Antiochus who was giuen to the pleasures of women Answere First if it be meant literallie of Antiochus then can it not be meant literallie of your Antichrist If Antiochus be but a type of Antichrist then can you not necessarilie conclude out of this place for types prooue not vnlesse they be diuine that is appoynted of God to be types which you can not shewe for this place see then the best arguments that you haue for your Antichrist out of the prophecies of Daniel and Ezechiel are proued nothing worth Secondly as Antiochus was giuen to vnlawfull desires of women so is the Pope yet might he be an enemie to chast and holy marriage and so is the Pope And by the way let it bee noted that the Iesuite picketh quarrels with scripture and maketh it false for the text sayth He that is Antiochus shall not care for the desires of women Yes sayth the Iesuite he shall be giuen to the pleasures of women cleane contrarie to the text Bellarm. cap. 21. 6 vers 38. He shall honor his god Mauzzim that is a god of power and riches with gold siluer precious stones Both of these are most true of the popish religion for their god hath brought them great riches lands treasure possession by their idolatrous Masses they haue greatly enriched themselues wherein their breaden god playeth the chiefe part and therefore they doe worship him agayne with gold siluer precious stones what rich Corporals and Altar-clothes Copes Vestiments of veluet silke wrought with gold are seene in their Churches what gilding of Roodes and Roodlofts garnishing of Idols what rich Crucifixes of siluer of gold beset with pearle and precious stones This description therefore of Daniel as you see doth in euery respect agree with the conditions and properties of Antichrist of Rome Argument Illyrici Secondly Saint Paules description in euery poynt also is verified in the Pope First He shall exalt himselfe aboue God and all that is called God 2. Thess. 2.4 So the Pope challengeth the full authoritie of Christ as wee haue shewed before and exalteth himselfe aboue Emperours which are called gods vpon earth yea they haue taken the iust proportion of inequalitie betweene the Pope and Emperour for the Pope is 47. degrees aboue the Emperour as the Sunne is 47. degrees bigger then the Moone Innocent 3. in decretalib 2 He shall sit in the temple that is in the Church so the Pope nameth himselfe head of the Church and hath the keyes as he braggeth both of heauen and hell Therefore the Turke cannot bee that Antichrist because he is out of the Church and so in truth is the Pope but yet he challengeth to him and his the name of the Church 3 The mysterie wrought in Paules time and afterward encreased so not long after the Apostles time the Bishops of Rome began to lift vp their heads aboue other Churches as Zozimus falsified the Councel of Nice and sent to the 6. Councel of Carthage to haue it there confirmed that it might be lawfull to send vp appeales to Rome 4 Antichrist shall come with lying signes So hath the Pope done as experience proueth and we haue shewed before 5 vers 11. God shall send strong delusions that they shall beleeue lyes And in time of Poperie men indeede were so strongly deluded that the father persecuted the sonne the sonnes set fire to their father yea the husband was made a witnesse agaynst the wife the wife agaynst her husband and seruants accused their masters These things are
but now they doe light them at noone day 3 These offices haue not been in vse these many yeares among the papists themselues for many times the Sexton or his boy doe execute the charge both of Acolites Ostiaries and Readers yea of Deacons and Subdeacons also when the Priest with his boy can dispatch a Masse Neither are these orders retayned amongst them for any especiall seruice or office but onely as praeparatories and steps and degrees to the priesthood Fulk annot 1. Timoth. 3. sect 7. THE SECOND PART OF THE DIFFErence of Bishops and other Ministers The Papists WE differ from them in two poynts First they say that Bishops are not onely in a higher degree of superioritie to other Ministers but they are as Princes of the Clergie and other Ministers as subiects and in all things to bee commaunded by them Secondly they affirme that Bishops are onely properly Pastors and that to them onely it doth appertaine to preach and that other Ministers haue no authoritie without their license or consent to preach at all and that not principally or chiefely but solie and wholie to them appertayneth the right of consecrating and giuing orders For the first for the princely authoritie of Bishops whom they would haue obeyed in all things they wrast these and such like places of scripture as 2. Cor. 1.9 I write vnto you to know whether you will be obedient in all things Ergo they must be absolutely obeyed Answere the Apostle challengeth only obedience in such things as he should commaund agreeable to Gods word for if I my selfe sayth he preach another Gospell holde me accursed Galat. 1. Fulk annot 1. Cor. 2. sect 3. 2 Against an Elder receiue no accusation vnder two or three witnesses 1. Tim. 5.19 Ergo the authority of Bishops is absolute and princelike Videmus Episcopum iudicem esse presbyterorum proinde verum principem wee see the Bishop is the iudge of the Elders Ergo a prince ouer them Bellarm cap. 14. Answere First it followeth not Bishops haue iurisdiction and authoritie ouer other Ministers Ergo they are princes ouer them Can there be no preeminence and superioritie in the Church but it must needes be princelike Is euery iudge a prince ouer those which are brought before him to be iudged 2. Timothie had no such princelike authority for here it is restrained limited a rule is set down by the Apostle which he must obserue Ergo his authoritie was not absolute Thirdly Saint Paul was so farre off from making Timothie a prince in the Church at Ephesus that he would rather haue him not to rebuke but to exhort the Elders as fathers the younger men as brethren cap. 5.1 Where now is his princely authoritie become whereas he maketh his subiects as our aduersaries call inferior Ministers his fathers and brethren For the second the Apostles properly had the preaching of the word committed vnto them Act. 6. For other were chosen to attend vpon tables the Apostles also onelie had the right of laying on of hands Act. 14.23 Ergo It is proper onely to Bishops to preach and to ordayne who are the Apostles successors Bellarmin Answere First Bellarmine denieth that Bishops doe properly succeed the Apostles de pontifice lib. 4.25 because he would magnifie the Pope his ghostly father aboue all Bishops but now forgetting himselfe hee sayth Episcopi propriè succedunt Apostolis Bishops doe properly succeede the Apostles cap. 14. so by this reason euery Bishop hath as ful authoritie as the Pope Secondly euery godly faithful Bishop is a successor to the Apostles we denie it not so are all faithfull and godly pastors Ministers for Christ prayeth for them all indifferently hauing first praied for his Apostles Iohn 17.20 I pray not for these alone sayth our Sauiour but for al them which shal beleeue in me through their word Thirdly at that time when the Deacons were elected the congregation was at Ierusalem neither were there as yet any other Pastors ordained therefore the Apostles only attēded vpon preaching of the word but afterward when they had ordayned Pastors in other Churches to them also fully was committed the word of reconciliation Ephes. 4.11 Christ hath giuen some to be Apostles some Prophets some Pastors and teachers So that Pastors teachers though ordained first by the Apostles yet had their calling of God and together in their calling authoritie and commission to preach neither being once ordayned needed they to expect anie further license from the Apostles And as for the right of ordayning and imposition of handes though it were chiefly in the Apostles yet the Pastors and Elders together with them layde on their handes Act. 13.4 Yea the Rhemists confesse as much that when a Priest is to be ordered the rest of the Priests together with the Bishop doe lay on their hands Annotat. 1. Timoth. 4.18 What doth this else signifie but that they haue some interest in ordayning together with the Bishop The law also must be changed Heb. 7.12 that is the manner and forme of the priesthood But we easily see your drift you would gladly haue vs like of this argument that in stead of a high Priest in the law you might bring a Pope into the Church The Protestantes FIrst though we doe admitte that for auoyding of schisme the Church hath thought it meete there should be difference in degree and a superioritie among Ministers yet your princely dominion which you doe vrge in no wise must be admitted 1 It is contrary to the rule of Christ. Luk. 22.25 the Kings of the nations are Lords ouer them and they that haue authoritie ouer them are called benefactors Here our Sauiour speaketh not of tyrannical dominion for how could tyrants be benefactors but forbiddeth that there should be any such princelike and pompous preeminence among ecclesiasticall persons as there is among secular and ciuill gouernours A superioritie may be graunted but not as the Prince is ouer his subiects it was so in time of popery that the people were halfe subiects to the Prince and halfe subiects to their spirituall gouernours But though we acknowledge other ecclesiasticall fathers and pastors yet we are subiects onely to our prince 2 Saint Peter also is flat against this princely rule and dominion Feede the flock sayth he not as Lords ouer Gods heritage but that you may bee ensamples 1. Pet. 5.3 But are not they I pray you Lords ouer the flock that challenge to be princes Secondly concerning the power of preaching we affirme that euery pastor once ordayned hath sufficient authoritie to preach in his owne flocke and charge as Iohn Husse notably prooued to their face out of a certayne glose in the fift booke of the decretals that when as the Bishop ordayneth anie Priest he giueth him also therewithall authoritie to preach Wee denie not but when there is iust occasion this authoritie maybe restrayned by the Church gouernours and so also may an euill Minister be suspended
from his whole ministerie But the power before spoken of hee hath at his first receiuing of orders We thus shew it Whatsoeuer belongeth to the office of a Minister set ouer a flocke or charge hee receiueth the power thereof when he is ordayned But to preach the word belongeth to the office of such for preaching is properly the feeding of the people But see the absurditie of the papists they say it is not proper to the priesthood to preach but onely to haue power to sacrifice the body of Christ But it is proper to the Bishop say they to preach We answere First then the Bishop is properly the pastor of euery flocke and congregation in his diocesse for hee that properly feedeth is properly the Pastor And hee that is properly the Pastor hath the charge of soules properly yea more then hath the particular Pastor for he is improperly their Pastor but as it were the Bishops substitute and Vicar But what Bishop in the worlde is able to beare so great a burthen to haue the especiall and proper charge of all the soules in his diocesse It is not to be denied but he hath a charge of their soules as a Christian Prince also hath in some respect of his subiects but to say hee is the proper Pastor and hath the proper principall charge of soules in teaching and feeding of them for the question is now of preaching not of gouerning who is able to abide it Secondly but our Rhemists tell vs another tale that many that are not able to preach are meete enough to bee Bishops 1. Timoth. 5. sect 13. Ergo it is not proper to Bishops neither to preach I pray you then for whom is it proper if neither for Bishops nor inferior Pastors then for none Thirdly they make but seuen orders of Ecclesiasticall Ministers and the priesthood is the chiefe for a Bishop and a priest make but one order as Bellarmin confesseth cap. 11. But to none of all these orders it is proper to preach for seeing it is not proper to the priest none of the inferior orders can challenge it See then what goodly orders these are which leaue the very chiefe parte of the ministery vndone which is the preaching of the word I thinke their meaning is that this preaching is not so necessary a dutie but may be well spared in the Church 2 That which a man is bound to doe vnder paine of the curse of GOD that he may lawfully performe in due order without the leaue of men but a woe is layd vpon them that preach not the Gospell where they are bound 1. Cor. 9.16 Ergo. Argum. Wicliffi 3 A man is bound to giue corporal almes to the poore the needie the hungry the thirstie neither is he to craue leaue of any Ergo much more to teach the ignorant to comfort the weake and doe other dueties appertayning to his charge Argum. Wicliffi Concerning the power of giuing orders As Saint Paul speaketh of the laying on of his handes 2. Timoth. 1.6 so he maketh mention of imposition of hands by the Eldership 1. Timoth 4.14 And the Rhemists vpō that place mislike not the practise of the Church that their Priests doe lay on their handes together with the Bishop vpon his head that is to be ordayned So that by this it is manifest that imposition of hands doth not wholly and folie belong vnto the Bishop seeing the rest of the Elders were wont to lay on their hands likewise or the Bishop in the name of the rest Fulk annot Tit. 1. sect 2. So that the Elders were not excluded THE THIRD PART CONCERNING THE office and title of Cardinals The Papists BEllarmine would faine haue the office of Cardinals as ancient as the Apostles error 72 times and the name to be worthilie appropriated to the See of Rome that as the Pope himselfe by his prudence and holines is tanquam cardo Ecclesiae to the Church as the hingell to the dore vpon the which it is turned and borne vp so his Counsellers and assistants should be called Cardinals hauing the care of the Vniuersall Church but the Iesuite beside some vaine shew of mothworne antiquitie hath not one good argument to proue the name and office of Cardinals to be either ancient or commendable Then especiall office as they are Cardinals is to elect and chuse the Pope and to be assistant vnto him in Counsell for the gouernement of the vniuersall Church Bellarm. cap. 16. The Protestants THat neither the name of Cardinals as proper to Rome is ancient nor their office or either of them lawfull or commendable but vsurped and Antichristian thus briefely it is shewed 1 In Augustines time it was a common name vsually applied both in the good and euill parte to chiefe and principall men of any place or sect as he calleth the ringleaders of the Donatists Cardinales Donatistas Cardinall or captaine Donatists de baptism lib. 1. cap. 6. Surely if it then had been onely due to the assistants of the Romane Bishop Augustine had been much to blame to applie the name to Heretikes 2 Augustine thus writeth to Hierome Quamues secundum honorum vocabula saith hee Episcopatus presbyterio maior sit tamen in multis rebus Augustin Hieronim minor est Though according to the custome of the Church a Bishop be greater then a Priest yet Augustine a Bishop in many things is inferior to Hierome a Priest Now Hierome was a Priest of Rome and a Cardinall as our aduersaries say and therefore they picture him commonly in a red gowne and habite of a Cardinall yet you see Augustine as a Bishop was before him though for his great learning he putteth himselfe behinde him 3 Augustine in another place complaineth of one Falcidius a Deacon of Rome qui duce stultitia saith hee diaconos presbyteris coaequare contendit who being led or carried away with follie did goe about to make Deacons equall vnto Priests Is not the same follie now generally practised in Rome or a greater for they doe not onely preferre Cardinall Deacons before Priests but euen before Bishops and Archbishops in Augustines time this was counted a great follie 4 Concerning the office of Cardinals in the electing of the Pope we haue shewed before quest 2. part 2. that it is of no great antiquitie and that it is iniurious to three estates to the Emperor who was wont to cōfirme the election to the Clergie of Rome who had in times past interest in the election and to the people whose consent was also in time past required But now all these are excluded and the matter is wholly referred to the Chapter of Cardinals THE FOVRTH QVESTION CONCERNING the Keyes of the Church committed for the execution to the pastors and gouernors thereof THis question hath foure partes First wherein the authoritie of the keyes consisteth secondly to whom they are committed thirdly whether there is absolute power of binding and loosing in the Church or ministerially onely fourthly
whether they that haue the dispensation of the Keyes doe alwaies necessarily bind and loose before God of these in order THE FIRST PART WHEREIN THE AVthoritie and power of the Keyes consisteth The Papists error 73 BY the Keyes and power of binding and loosing they chiefly and principally vnderstand the censures of the Church as Excommunications Anathematismes suspensiōs Degradations the whole Ecclesiastical iurisdictiō Rhemist Annot. Matt. 16. sect 14. Bel. lib. 1. de pontif cap. 13. Secondly they tye remission and retaining of sinnes to their imagined and deuised sacrament of penance saying that where Christ gaue authoritie to remit sinnes to his Apostles Iohn 20.23 he instituted the sacrament of penance Rhemist Iohn 20. sect 3. The sacrifice also and Sacraments of the Church say they are ministred for remission of sinnes Rhemist 2. Corinth 5. sect 3. Thirdly they seeme to grant in words that by preaching also of the Gospell sinnes are reteined and remitted ibid. but they make small account thereof for as we haue heard they make it not of the essence of their priesthood to preach neither doth it properly appertaine vnto that office yea say they absolutiō cānot be rightly sought for at the priests hands but by confession of our sins which is done in penance Rhem. Ioh. 20. sect 5. This then is their opinion that by their deuised ceremonie and Sacrament of penance sinnes are properly forgiuen and that the preaching of the word is not thereto necessarie Their chiefe argument is by abusing that place Iohn 20.23 where they say Christ instituted the Sacrament of penance when he gaue power to his Apostles to remit and reteine sinnes Ans. First your Sacrament of Penance is neither grounded vpon this nor any other place of scripture here in the wordes of Christ there is no institution of a sacrament because there is no visible element giuen whereunto the worde being added may make a sacrament Secondly here the commission is but renewed which was granted before to his Apostles and their successors Matth. 18.18 Fulk Annot. Iohn 20. sect 3. The Protestants THe Keyes of the Church that is the power to bind and loose sinners to open or shut vnto them the kingdome of God consisteth both in the externall discipline and gouernement of the Church lawfully executed according to the word of God as also in preaching of the Gospell by assuring in Christs name all faithfull and penitent persons remission and forgiuenes of their sinnes and in denouncing and threatning the wrath of God against the disobedient and impenitent also as the sacraments are ioyned to the word as seales and pledges of the promises thereof so by the right administration of the sacraments together with the preaching of the word sinnes are retained or remitted The Rhemists therefore doe vs great iniurie in falsely charging of vs that we should hold that the spiritual power of the Church standeth only vpon the preaching of the word whereas wee grant that it is exercised also in the Ecclesiasticall gouernement of the Church both in punishing excommunicating censuring of offenders which is the binding of them and in releasing and absoluing them againe which is the other power of loosing Rhemist 2. Corinth cap. 10. sect 1. Leauing now this part of spiritual power in Ecclesiasticall discipline which is not in this place in question betweene vs wee must touch that other part which is exercised in the word and sacraments 1 That the sacraments doe binde and loose it is proued out of the word of God they doe binde Whosoeuer eateth drinketh vnworthily eateth drinketh his own damnation 1. Cor. 11.29 they doe also loose As oft as ye shal eate this bread and drinke this cup you shewe the Lords death till he come vers 26. But here is a double caution and condition to be annexed First that all Sacraments worke not this effect but onely those of Christs institution which are but two baptisme and the supper of the Lord for Paul saith I haue receiued of the Lord that which I deliuered vnto you 1. Cor. 11.23 If the Apostles would not neither might deliuer any Sacraments but those which were instituted of Christ what great presumption is it in any other to doe it Secondly we must not think that remissiō of sinnes is necessarily tied to the Sacraments as though there could be no remissiō without thē for the grace of remission may be effectual in the name of Christ by the preaching of the word without a sacramēt Ioh. 20. sect 4. Ful. For the word may be preached without a sacramēt but the sacramēt cānot be ministred without the word for that were as though a man should deliuer a seale without a writing Neither is it our meaning that as the Rhemists cauil with vs the sacramēt cannot be administred without a sermon of the death of Christ for though that were alwaies to bee wished yet where it cannot bee had there must and ought to be a briefe shewing and declaration of the death of Christ out of the word so oft as the Sacrament is administred as it is obserued in our Church Fulk Annot. 1. Corinth 11. sect 15. 3 We must take heede we conceiue not thus as though the Sacrament gaue grace by the worke wrought and that by the very vse forme and externall act of the Sacrament wee obtaine remission of sinnes as the Rhemists would beare vs in hand 1. Corinth 11. sect 15. But the Sacraments are onely effectuall to the worthie receiuers and to the worthie receiuing faith is requisite as Saint Paul willeth all men to examine themselues 1. Corinth 11.28 which is as hee himselfe interpreteth it to proue whether they be in the faith 2. Corinth 13.5 These conditions then being obserued we denie not but that there is an exercise of the keyes euen in the Sacraments 2 But chiefely and principallie is this power dispensed by the preaching of the word as Saint Paul saith Wee are the sauour of death vnto death vnto some there is the binding and to other the sauour of life vnto life there is the loosing 1. Corinth 2.16 So our Sauiour Christ saith He that refuseth mee the word that I haue spoken shall iudge him in the last day Iohn 12.48 Here is the power of binding Againe the truth shall make you free Iohn 8.32 Here is the power of loosing Who therefore doubteth this that the preaching of the word is the most proper and principall way and meane for the exercising of this Ecclesiasticall power for seeing faith is the key of heauen thereby wee haue free accesse vnto the throne of grace Rom. 5.2 and faith commeth by hearing Rom. 10.17 and hearing by the word It remaineth that by the word the keyes are dispensed Augustine also subscribeth vnto this for speaking of reformation of life and repentance with remission of former sinnes thus he saith Quid empturus es vt facias quae emplastra quaesiturus ecce cùmloquor muta cor factum est quod tam
yet is it not best for euery man to be rich God seeth it good that some men should be poore So single life is the best for those that haue the gift of chastitie that can with a quiet conscience liue single otherwise matrimonie were much better for Saint Paul that wisheth that euery one would liue single as hee did yet afterward sayth It is better to marrie then to burne So that by the Apostles iudgement to marrie is best for him that hath not the gift of continencie Iewel pag. 232. defens Apolog. The Protestants THat it is not onely lawfull but conuenient that all men both Ministers and others that haue not receiued a proper gift of continencie should marrie and that it is agreeable and consonant to the word of God thus wee shew it 1 The scriptures are most playne for the mariage of Ministers 1. Timoth. 3.2 Saynt Paul sayth a Bishop and generally euery Minister may be the husband of one wife and verse 11. their wiues are described howe they ought to behaue themselues Let their wiues be honest Ergo it is lawfull for them to bee maried Bellarmine answereth that Saynt Paul speaketh of the wiues which they had before their calling and ordayning not those which they should marry after But there appeareth no such thing out of the text Nay Saint Paul say wee had libertie as well as others to leade about a sister a wife euen after hee was an Apostle 1. Corinth 9. Wherefore it is as lawfull afterward as afore Bellarmine answereth We must thus read a Sister a woman and it is like they were women that did minister vnto the Apostles and followed them We replie First the word Sister doth implie a woman and therefore it had been an improper and needlesse speech to say a sister a woman therefore we must rather read a sister a wife Secondly if they were other women which ministred of their substance what neede the Apostles to be mayntained of the Churches if they ministred but in their seruice and attendance who were more fit to doe it and to follow them from place to place then their wiues Thirdly the phrase of leading about a sister importeth a superioritie and authority such as the husband hath ouer his wife Another place we haue Hebr. 13.3 Mariage is honourable among all men Ergo amongst Ministers Bellarmin If it were meant of all mariages then to marrie within the degrees of consanguinitie were also honourable Answere This is a very childish cauill First hee might haue read further And the bedde vndefiled Saint Paul therefore speaketh of lawfull mariage and indeede the other ioyning and coupling of men and women together contrarie to GODS lawe is not to bee counted Matrimonie or Wedlocke but Incest rather and Fornication as the brother to marrie his brothers wife and such like Secondly Saint Paul sayth not all mariages are honourable but mariage is honourable for all men the generalitie is not of the thing but the persons Wherefore we doe fittly conclude out of this place that marriage is lawful and commendable euen among ministers argum Caluin Further Saint Paul saith For auoyding of fornication let euery man haue his owne wife 1. Corinth 7.2 Here is no restraint for Ministers Bellarm. this is to be vnderstoode of those that haue not made a vow of continency Answer First our Sauiour Christ commaundeth no such vowes it is a cruell Antichristian yoke laide vpon Ministers to binde them when they receiue orders to vowe single life therefore your Antichristian decree ought not to abridge the generall libertie granted by the Apostle Secondly the end of marriage is generall to auoyde fornication and therefore the remedie also is generall for euerie man hauing not a proper gift of continencie may be in danger of that inconuenience if he be denyed the ordinarie helpe Melancthon Againe 1. Timoth. 4. to forbid marriage is called a doctrine of diuels but the Popish Church forbiddeth marriage Bellarm. Wee doe not forbid marriage to any but we require single life of all that are entred into orders which it is at their owne choyce to receiue or to refuse Ans. First it is necessarie that some should receiue orders and be consecrate to the Church ministerie wherefore requiring this condition of all such to liue single though particularly you prohibite not this man or that to marrie yet generally you prohibite the whole calling which is worse Secondly if you say you doe not forbid marriage simplie to all no more did the Manichees for they suffered their scholars and auditors to marrie And Saint Augustines words are generall Ille prohibet matrimonium qui illud malum esse dicit he forbiddeth marriage that thinketh it is euil you therefore forbidding marriage must needs hold opinion that is wicked and euill 2 This restraint of the marriage of Ministers hath not been of ancient time in the Church but imposed vpon the Church of late 1000. yeere after Christ Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus anno 180. had seuen of his progenitors before him Bishops of the same See In the Nicene Councel Paphnutius stoode vp and stayed the decree that should haue past for restraining of the marriage of Ministers and it is saide Synodus landauit sententiam Paphnutij The Synod commended Paphnutius sentence Sozomen lib. 1. cap. 11. Gregorie the father of Gregorie was Bishop of Nazianzum The Greeke Church neuer yet receiued this popish decree of single life and their Bishops are married at this day Bellarmine saith that the Church of Rome hath dispenced with them cap. 18. Ergo if the Pope would dispence with the Latine Church it might be lawfull enough then for Ministers to marrie wherefore it is but a humane constitution Againe it is false that they haue dispenced with the Greeke Church they care not for their dispensations but vse their owne Christian libertie neither was the Greeke Church euer subiect to the Bishop of Rome Thus we see that in times past marriage was lawfull for all men vntill Pope Nicholas the second Alexander the second and Gregorie the seuenth that notable sorcerer and adulterer for these three comming together one not long after another began by publike decree to restraine Priests marriage not long after them Anselme began to play the Rex here in England anno 1104. who stoutely proceeded in his vngodly purpose and enacted that married Priests should either leaue their wiues or their benefices At which time 200. Priests at once came barefoote to the Kings palace to make complaint And for all Anselmes Popelike and outragious proceedings against married Priests yet they continued married well nie two hundred yeeres after Anselmes time doe what he could and thus it is manifest that the restraint of Ministers marriage is no ancient thing but then began most to be vrged when Antichrist fullie was reuealed to the world when as the orders of Friers came in and were confirmed and priuiledged vnder Boniface 8. about anno 1300. 3 What
to disclaime therefore the maintenance which he hath of the Church for the Leuites beside the allotment of the tythes had their proper houses which they might sell and redeeme agayne Leuitic 25.32 As also that place 1. Timot. 3.2 will beare it where the Apostle would haue a Bishop to be harberous and giuen to hospitalitie which he shall be much better able to performe hauing some helpe beside the Church liuing of his owne inheritance So then it is not to be doubted but that Ecclesiasticall persons may together with spirituall liuings retayne their owne proper inheritance referring them both to one and the selfe same end that is to countenance their Ministerie and to be the better able to performe the externall dueties thereof in releeuing the poore helping the needie and such like Thirdly as touching the proper maintenance and reuenew of the Church which is by tithes diuers poynts are agreed of and accorded betweene vs. First that tithes due onely to the Church and cannot be alienated to any other vse nor be turned to the maintenance of lay men for there must be where tithes are payed a matter of giuing and receiuing Philipp 4.15 We giue spirituall and receiue temporall which because lay men doe not performe they haue nothing to doe with the tithe for not keeping the condition they cannot claime the couenant 2 The people are bound in conscience to giue of their goods vnto their lawfull Pastors according to the determination of the Church and the positiue lawes of Princes made in that behalfe the which they are bound to obey and the tenth being the hire of the labourer and the wages of the Lords workeman Math. 10.10 it shall be as great a sinne to defraude the Minister of his portion as to keepe backe the meate or wages from the hireling and labourer Iam. 5.4 3 We vtterly denie also and herein consent with our aduersaries that tithes are not pure almes as some haue been of opinion in times past but are a plaine debt of the people to their Ministers First the wages or reward of the labourer is no almes but his due and of right belonging to him but tithes are so vnto Ministers who labour in the Lords haruest 1. Timoth. 5.16 Ergo no almes Secondly almes doe alway exceede the desert of the almesman they shewe the beneuolence and free heart of the giuer not any merite or worthines in the receiuer but tithes and all other temporall gifts are farre inferiour to the labours of Ministers for what are temporall things to spirituall 1. Cor. 9.11 Ergo no almes Thirdly the tenth is the Lords part and by him it is assigned to his faithfull Ministers which in Gods stead doe teach vs 2. Cor. 5.20 But almes cannot be giuen vnto God Agayne the tenth is as an inheritance to the Church and to bee counted as the corne of the barne or the abundance of the winepresse Numb 18. vers 26.27 It is vnto them as the fruite of the earth and encrease of the ground to the husbandman Therefore to be counted no almes from men but the blessing of God both vpon the pastor and the people 4 We also agree that it is not meete that the maintenance of Ministers should be voluntarie or left to the peoples choise but that it is conuenient iust equall requisite that both by lawes of Princes and constitutions of the Church prouision should be made as there is for the necessarie certayne and competent maintenance of the Church First the tenths in the lawe were established by a perpetuall ordinance Ergo the maintenance of Ministers ought now also to be confirmed by positiue lawes as then tithes were the argument followeth for if their Ministerie deserued such assurance of their maintenāce which did but serue at the Altar much more now doth the Ministerie of the Gospel deserue it And the Apostle also seemeth so to reason 1. Corint 9.14.15 that as they which wayted on the Altar were partakers of the Altar so God hath ordayned sayth he that they which preach the Gospell should liue of the Gospell That is as then the people did not onely giue tithes voluntarily but were bound by lawe to doe it euen so God hath ordayned that Ministers should liue of the people and by this ordinance of God the people may as well be bound vnto it now as they were then Secondly if Ministers bound in conscience to feed and instruct the people may also be enforced and vrged by the constitutions of the Church and lawes of Princes to do that which in conscience they are bound why may not the people likewise be constrayned by publike lawe to performe that dutie to their pastors which their owne conscience doth vrge them vnto Thirdly experience teacheth that men are hardly euen liuing vnder a law brought to pay their rights to the Church no not in those places where they can take no exception against their pastors how much more vnwilling would they be I speake of those which are not yet wonne to a through liking of the Gospel if they were left to their owne libertie 5 We also acknowledge as Bellarmine seemeth to grant cap. 25. that to pay precisely the tenth is not now commanded by the law of God as though that order could not be changed by any humane law as the Canonists hold but men necessarily were bound to pay tithes But thus farre forth we hold that it is groūded vpon Gods law first in respect of the equitie of the law in paying of tithes which is this that the Ministers ought to liue of the people and to haue sufficient competent maintenance by them which equitie and substance of the law is morall and ought alwaies to continue being grounded vpon the law of nature Thou shalt not musle the mouth of the oxe that treadeth out the corne Secondly in as much as the lawe of the land and of the Church doth confirme this ancient constitution of tithes which is left indifferent of itselfe we are bound to obey such lawes being agreeable to the word of God And in this sense also tithes may be sayd to be due by the lawe of God because Gods word commandeth obedience to our Magistrates in all lawfull ordinances 6 Though the lawe of tenths be not now necessarie as it was a ceremonious duetie but it is lawfull either to keepe that or any other constitution for the sufficient maintenance of the Church whether it bee more or lesse then the tenth part yet we doubt not to say that this prouision for the Church maintenance by paying of tithes is the most safe indifferent and surest way and no better can come in the place thereof First it is the most equall way to haue euery thing in the kinde according to the Apostles rule Let him that is taught make his teacher partaker of al his goods Galath 6.6 But this cannot be so conueniently done any other way as by erecting of a set stipend or such like as by
to make vowes Secondly in what things lawful vowes consist Thirdly whether voluntary vowes are any part of the worship of God 4 Concerning Monasticall vowes in particular three partes First of the vow of voluntary pouertie Secondly the vow of obedience Thirdly the vow of continencie 5 Concerning Monasticall persons First whether the younger sorte ought to be admitted to professe Monkerie Secondly whether children can professe without consent of their parents Thirdly whether maried persons may with mutuall consent Fourthly whether either of the parties the mariage not consummate may enter into profession 6 Concerning the rules and discipline of Monasticall life First of their solitarie and seuere kinde of life Secondly of their canonical houres Thirdly their habite and apparell Fourthly of their maintenance whether they ought to liue by begging or labour of their handes of these in order THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE BEGINning and originall of Monkes and of their diuers sects THis question hath tow partes First of their originall Secondly of the diuersitie of their sects THE FIRST PART OF THE ORIGInall of Monkes The Papists error 82 THey make this profession to be as ancient as the time of our Sauiour Christ and prooue the beginning thereof both out of the newe and olde Testament 1 Helias and Helizaeus were Eremites and liued without wiues neither possessed any riches Ergo this profession of life is most ancient Bellarm. cap. 5. Rhemist annot in Mark 9.3 Answere First the argument followeth not they had no wiues nor riches Ergo were Eremites for euen amongst the papists themselues many were kept from wiues as their priests and yet were neither Monkes nor Eremites Secondly though we reade not that Helisaeus was married yet the sonnes of the prophets were that liued as it were in the same Colledge with him 2. King 4.1 which Bellarmine maketh a Colledge of Monkes and Eremites and sayth very vntruely that they all liued without wiues cap. 5. Thirdly though Elias and Elisaeus were sometime in the wildernes yet they alwayes remained not neither liued there Fulk annot Mark 9.3 2 Iohn Baptist a perfect patterne of Eremitical life for liuing in the desert and wildernes for his rough apparell for abstaining from all delicate meate Rhemist annot Math. 3.1 Answere First Iohn Baptists calling was singular and extraordinary and therefore cannot be made an author of any ordinary profession Secondly wee denie not but his life was austere and that he made his abode in a solitarie place yet there were houses and villages not farre off his apparell also was course cloth made of the hard haires of Camels his foode was of locusts and wilde honie the vsuall and common meate of that countrey he was an extraordinary preacher of repentance and shewed in him selfe an example of austere life as it became the forerunner of Christ But being no minister of the Gospel but the last prophet of the law he cannot be a patterne of an ordinary profession vnder the Gospel Fulk annot Matth. 3. sect 1. 3 Nay Bellarm. fetcheth his monkish order from a more ancient beginning thē from Elias Iohn Baptist yea from before the flood for Enos saith he seemeth to haue brought in some stricter kinde of life and peculiar maner of worshipping God whereas the text sayth that he began to call vpon the name of God that is after another manner for Adam Seth Abel before this time called vpon the name of God cap. 5. Answere First who would haue thought that there had been Monks and Eremites before the flood if the Iesuite had not sayd it or that this text which he alleadgeth could haue proued it The argument followeth not Enos brought in a peculiar worship of God therefore was founder of the Eremiticall life for he brought in the true worship of God but the other is superstitious and erronious Secondly Tremellius readeth more agreeably to the Hebrue Tum nomē Dei coeptum est inuocando profanari then the name of God began to be prophaned in calling vpon that is his worship began to be corrupted for the Hebrue word signifieth both to inuocate and call vpon God as also to corrupt pollute or prophane Thirdly if we read as they doe The name of God beganne to be called vpon it onely sheweth a restoring and renewing of the true worship of God which was polluted by the posteritie of Cain whose stocke and familie is set downe in that chapter Gen. 4. The Protestants WE see then that this Monasticall and solitarie kinde of life hath no proofe nor ground out of the scriptures either by precept or example Nay this kinde of profession was not knowen in the Church for diuers hundred yeeres after Christ how could then the Apostles be the founders of this order And though the name of Monks be of some antiquitie in the Church yet they were farre vnlike vnto Popish Monkes that for these many yeres haue pestered the Church 1 It is certaine as Hierome witnesseth that Antonius and his disciples Amathas and Macarius were the first beginners of Monkish profession three hundred yeere after Christ Centur. 4. cap. 6. Fulk annot Mark 9.3 2 The beginning of Monkes was not for the more merite and to doe penance for their owne sinnes and the sinnes of the worlde for Antonius the first Monk confessed that Christ onely suffered for the sinnes of the world but the first occasion was giuen in the time of persecution when as men were not suffered to worship God aright publikely and therefore they fled into the wildernes Rhemist Math. 3. sect 3. But now seeing the Christian fayth is openly professed they haue no such causes to seeke solitarie and secret places 3 The popish Monkes are altogether vnlike theirs First they liued in solitarie places farre from resorte of people but the popish Mock-monkes liue in Cities and the frequencie of the people Fulk annot Math. 3. sect 3. Secondly the Monkes in times past laboured with their hands but the popish fatbellies pampered themselues in idlenes Thirdly they are altogether vnlike in life and doctrine as wee shall see more at large afterward Fulk ibid. THE SECOND PART CONCERNING the diuers sects of Monkes and Friers The Papists error 83 THey say that imitation of diuers holy men as of Saint Francis Saint Benet Saint Dominick which hath brought in diuers sects and orders of Religious men doe tend all to the imitation of Christ Rhemist annot Philip. cap. 3. sect 2.1 Thess. 1.2 This their assertion they would ground vpon the Apostles wordes Philip. 3.17 Be ye followers of me brethren Rhemist Answere First Saint Paul would haue them no otherwise to follow him then he did Christ 1. Cor. 11.1 Neither gaue any other rules to his followers then he had learned of Christ as the patrons of the Monkish sects haue done Secondly Neither did Saint Paul erect a new order of Paulians as Franciscus did of Franciscanes Dominick of Dominicans Thirdly Saint Paul was a perswader of vnitie not a maker of
obedience seing they are inioyned things not commanded by God nay contrary to his commandements The Protestants NO obedience to any ruler either spirituall or temporall is to be yelded vnto but for the Lords sake and in such matters wherein we haue the warrant of Gods word for our obedience 1 Coloss. 3.23 Seruants be obedient to your masters and whatsoeuer you do doe it heartily as to the Lord But if any thing be inioyned vs which is not warranted by the word of God we cannot with a good conscience obey as before the Lord. Agayne Saint Paul saith Coloss. 2.18 Let no man at his pleasure beare rule ouer you or beguile you or as the Rhemists translate seduce you wilfully Ergo no man must impose rules of life beside the Gospel for this were to rule ouer men at their pleasure 2 Augustine sayth Cum homo conster anima corpore oportet nos ex ea parte quae ad hanc vitam pertinet subditos esse potestatibuâ— ex illa parte qua credimus deo ad eius regnum vocamur non oportet nos cuiquaâ— esse subditos Seeing a man doth consist both of bodie and soule in regard of that parte which the affayres of this life concerne we ought to be subiect to the higher powers but in respect of that part whereby we beleeue and are called to the kingdome of God we must be obedient to none August in 13. ad Rom. Therefore no man may impose any new religion vpon vs which altogether toucheth the conscience THE THIRD PART CONCERNING THE vow of continencie or chastitie The Papistes THe vow of chast and continent life is commendable and meritorious they say in all that doe take it vpon them and after the vow made they are sure error 89 to receiue that high gift of continencie if they duely labour for it Rhemist annot 1. Corinth 7. ver 7. But whosoeuer marrieth after the vow made sinneth damnably and turneth back after Sathan Rhemist annot 1. Tim. 5. sect 12. 1 Math. 19.12 Some haue made themselues chaste or as the Rhemists doe very homely translate it haue gelded themselues for the kingdome of heauen this proueth the vowes of chastitie to be both lawfull and meritorious Rhemist in hunc locum Ans. This is meant onely of those that haue the gift of continencie who if they be sure they haue receiued it may vow and purpose single life but without such assurance no man can vow continencie lawfully Secondly but as for meriting it commeth neither by being maried or vnmaried but is the free gift of God through Christ. Fulk ibid. 2 1. Timoth. 5.12 Hauing damnation because they haue cast away their first fayth that is the vow of continencie which they made to Christ it cannot be meant of the first fayth in baptisme for that is not lost by mariage Rhemist And againe vers 15. They are turned back after sathan we may here learne for those to marrie which are professed is to turne back after Sathan Rhemist in eum locum Answer First Saint Paul speaketh not here of widowes alreadie chosen but to be chosen hee would haue younger widdowes to bee chosen because they woulde waxe wanton and marrie and therefore it is not like that by the first fayth heere is meant the vowe of chastitie seeing there is no cause that these younger widdowes shoulde make any vowe beeing excluded by the Apostle from Church seruices Secondly vers 14. Saint Paul himselfe Counselleth the younger widdowes to marrie therefore it is not like they were votaries Thirdly by the first fayth is vnderstood the Christian fayth which the younger widowes waxing wanton and lasciuious nor carying to match with Infidels were in danger to breake as the Apostle telleth them of some that had done so already and were turned backe after Sathan Fourthly we say not that the fayth of baptisme is broken by all mariage but with ioyning with Infidels Fiftly it appeareth what breach of faith Paul meaneth when he sayth They waxe wanton and idle and are busie-bodies goe from house to house and speake things vncomely verse 13. Which is a sliding back from the Christian fayth when our life iarreth with our profession not a breach of any vow of continencie Fulk 1. Timoth. 5. sect 10.12 The Protestants OVr sentence then appeareth to be this that the vow of continencie cannot lawfully be made of all neither is indifferently to be required of them seeing all are not indued with that gift Fulk Math. 19.6 And that it is better euen for vowed persons hauing rashly presumed beyond their strength to marrie rather then to burne Fulk 1. Cor. 7. sect 8. 1 The scripture euery where commaundeth such to vse the benefite of mariage that haue not the gift to liue single 1. Cor. 7.2 For auoyding of fornication let euery man haue his wife and ver 9. If they cannot abstaine let them marrie Wherefore they transgresse the commandement of God and presume rashly that hauing not this gift doe vow virginitie Bellarmin Answer First Saint Paul wisheth men to marrie not for euery temptation of lust but when they are ready to fall into externall workes of vncleannes as into fornication and therefore hee sayth For auoyding of fornication let euery one haue his wife For Saint Paul felt the pricke of the flesh that is the lust of concupiscence and was buffeted of it yet maried not for all that cap. 30. Rhemist annot 1. Corinth 7. sect 8. Answere First we say not that for euery light temptation which by resisting may be ouercome in those that haue the gift of continencie a man is to desire mariage but when he is continually enflamed with lust so that the will doth consent though he be not yet so ouercome that he fall in outward vncleannes and this is the Apostles meaning when hee sayth It is better to marrie then to burne that is with inward lust when his minde is disquieted And such a man as doth burne with secret concupiscence still wrastling with that fire and not being able to quench it if he refuse to vse the lawfull remedie of mariage is in danger also to fall into outward fornication 2 Concerning Pauls example First the place is not so to be vnderstoode of the lust of concupiscence for it is not like that the Apostle being kept vnder with hunger colde imprisonment should bee so greatly tempted that way But either it may be vnderstood of the particular temptation to pride and vainglorie as he him selfe expoundeth it vers 7. lest I should be exalted out of measure through the abundance of reuelations Or else generally Saint Paul vnderstandeth by flesh the whole masse of corruption and whatsoeuer was in him that resisted the spirite In this sense he crieth out Roman 7. Who shall deliuer me from this body of death Caluin 2 Though we yeeld that Saint Paul was tempted of his concupiscence yet he ouercame and subdued it obtayning from God after some striuing grace and power to quench
power for he was not quickned or restored to life by his humane soule but by his diuine power his soule was ioyned againe to his bodie Augustine also giueth another reason why he cannot be said to be quickned or made aliue in spirit that is in his soule for then he must haue died before in soule But Mors animae peccatum est à quo ille immunis fuit But the death of the soule is sinne from the which Christ was free 2 The Apostle speaketh onely of those which were incredulous and disobedient not of the faithfull such as the Patriarkes were and Prophets Yea sayth Bellarm. they might be vnbeleeuers at the first but after repented before they dyed Ans. Then the Apostles comparison could not hold if any were saued without the Arke for as then eight persons onely were saued all without the Arke perished so now without baptisme and faith of the Church for by baptisme he vnderstandeth not the washing of water but the inward grace of the spirit none can be saued If then any were saued out of the Arke there may now also be saluation out of the Church Augustine also sayth Ii modò qui non crediderunt Euangelio illis intelligantur esse similes qui tunc non crediderunt cum fabricaretur arca They which now beleeue not the Gospell are like to them which beleeued not then while the Arke was in making And they which doe now beleeue and are baptized are like to those which then were saued in the Arke Augustine thinketh therefore that they were incredulous persons and vtterly perished both bodie and soule And so is our opinion 3 The text saith not he went and deliuered but went and preached for Augustine calleth it an absurd thing to thinke that the Gospell was preached to them that were dead which in their life time were incredulous for if the Gospell bee preached in Hell sayth he it would followe that it is not necessarie it should be preached here in the world if men when they are dead may heare it and be conuerted And againe it would ensue sayth he that there should bee a Church in hell for where the word is preached there is a Church Wherefore he concludeth that it must needes be vnderstood of Noah his preaching in the spirit and power of Christ Arcae fabricatio praedicatio quaedam fuit The building of the Arke was a kinde of preaching Epistol 99. So also he expoundeth that 1. Pet. 4.6 The Gospell was preached to the dead Ex circumstantia loci apparet eum intelligere eos qui nunc mortui sunt sed olim in vita Euangelium audiuerunt Commentar in epistol ad Roman 4 The text is not that were in prison but doth better beare this sense that are So the Apostles meaning is this that they which were incredulous and disobedient in time past when Noah in the spirit of Christ or Christ by his spirit in Noah preached to the world were then destroyed in the flood now for their increduliti◠are punished in the prison of hell The Protestants THat the holy Patriarkes Fathers and Prophets dyed in the same faith before the comming of Christ which all true Christians doe now hold and were presently receiued into the ioyes of heauen and not kept in any infernall place or dungeon of darknes thus it is proued 1 They had all faith and beleeued in Christ yea the same faith that is now preached as it is defined by the Apostle Heb. 11.1 They also by this faith obtained remission of sinnes Rom. 4.7 Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen as it is alleadged out of the Psalme Ergo they were blessed but out of the kingdome of God there was no blessednesse to be found therefore they also went to heauen 2 If the heauens were not opened before Christs ascension as the Rhemists affirme then none went to heauen before Christ ascended But that is false Henoch and Elias by their owne confession were taken vp into Paradise so was the soule of the theefe vpon the Crosse. But Paradise is heauen yea the third and the highest heauen as S. Paul calleth it 2. Corinth 12.4 And so Augustine expoundeth that place Voluit Deus Apostolo demonstrare vitam in qua post hanc vitam viuendum est in aeternū The Lord would shew vnto the Apostle that life wherein after this life we shall liue and remaine for euer De Gene. lib. 12.28 These three therefore went to Paradise which is no infernall or place of darknesse but a Celestiall habitation of ioy light and felicitie They were not then in Limbo Patrum in the dungeon of the Fathers Wherefore we conclude there was accesse to heauen before the ascension of Christ. 3 The Fathers and Patriarkes before Christs comming were in Abrahams bosome but that was no infernall place or prison such as they imagine Limbus Patrum to be Augustine proueth that it could not be membrum or pars inferorum a member or part of Hell or any infernall place as the Iesuits hold First the text saith there is magnum chaos a great gulfe a great distance betweene Luk. 16.26 and vers 23. The rich man sawe Abraham a farre off wherefore it is not like that both those places should be infernall Secondly Abrahams bosome was quietis habitatio faelicitatis sinus a place of rest and blisse but so is not any infernall place where there is horror and darknesse Thirdly the place where the rich man was is called Hell or infernall there is no such thing sayd of Lazarus that he was in any lower place but aboue in some high and farre distant place for the rich man is sayd to lift vp his eyes Augustine then concludeth Ne ipsos quidem inferos vspiam scripturarum locis in bono appellatos reperire potui Epistol 99. I doe not finde that this word infernall is taken any where in the scriptures in the good part And therefore the bosome of Abraham being a place of rest sayth he cannot be any infernall place AN APPENDIX OR APPERTINANCE OF THIS question concerning the apparition of Samuel The Papists THey hold opinion that it was the very soule of Samuel that appeared at the error 10 witches house at Endor vnto Saul and vse it as an argument to proue that the soules of the Patriarkes were not in heauen but in some infernall place before Christs comming because Samuel ascended out of the earth Bellarm. De Christ. anim lib. 411. Argum. 1. Because he that appeared to Saul is called Samuel in the text Augustine answereth that the Images of things are called by the names of the things themselues as Genes 41. Pharao sayd he sawe eares of corne and fat and leane kine in his dreame when they were but the images of such things So the diuell because he appeared in the shape of Samuel Samuel himselfe is sayd to be seene Ad Simplicianum lib. 2. quaest 3. Argum. 2. Ecclesiastic 46 It is set downe as a commendation of Samuel
highest which they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 due vnto God the lowest religious worship which they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proper to Saints the middle or mean worship called by theÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as you would say Superseruice to be giuen onely to the virgine Mary And as these three Christ the Virgine the Saints doe differ say they in honour so their Images accordingly must be distinguished in their worship Thus it commeth about that a Roode of wood representing Christ is more to be honored then an Image of our Ladie of siluer and Her image if it be but of stone is more to be reuerenced then a Saints image of gold and thus the excellencie of nature which is giuen these things by creation is inuerted Againe whereas beside these three deuised worships which are properly due as they say to the Saints not to their â—mages the images also haue their proper worships they make three other inferiour kinds of worship which doe exceed in degree as the other superiour kinds doe so as Christ hath his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worship his image must haue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his vnder worship for wee must coyne newe names for strange deuises their Ladie Mary hath her 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 super-seruice her image must haue an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and vnder-ouer-seruice as the Saints haue their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seruice so their images must haue their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an vnder-seruice And thus haue we sixe kindes of religious worship as Bellarmine hath coyned them cap. 25. and yet before the Iesuite tolde vs but of two kinds of religious worship and the third a ciuill three in all Lib. 1. de Sanct. beatit cap. 12. But the scripture acknowledgeth one onely kind of religious worship and that due onely vnto the Lord Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serue Math. 4.10 And the Angel forbad Iohn to fall downe before him giuing a rule for all religious worship Worship God sayth he Apocal 22.9 Now if our aduersaries deale plainly with vs and tell vs in good sooth that they would not haue images to bee adored with diuine worship I aske them whether to offer incense be not a part of diuine worship They cannot denye it for Hezekiah therfore brake downe the brasen Serpent because the people burned incense to it 2. King 18.4 Seeing then the Iesuite alloweth censing burning of odors before Images Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sanctor beatitud cap. 13. they giue vnto them diuine honour The Iesuites simple shift that offering of incense was a sacrifice then an so parte of diuine worshippe but it is none now is not woorth the answer Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 17. THE SECOND PART OF THIS question concerning the signe of the Crosse. THis part also is deuided into certaine points or articles 1. Of the honour due to the true Crosse of Christ whereon he suffered 2. Of the Image of the Crosse. 3 Of the Signe of the Crosse in the forehead or made otherwise with the hand 4 Of the power and efficacie of the Crosse. THE FIRST ARTICLE OF THE TRVE Crosse whereon our Sauiour suffered The Papists THe wood of the Crosse both the whole and euery piece thereof say they is worthy of great worship and reuerence and therefore it hath bene worthily error 42 visited in pilgrimages honored with festiuall dayes reserued with all deuotioÌ„ in times past Rhemist annot Iohn 19. sect 2. Argum. 1. It is highly sanctified by the touching bearing and oblation of the sacred body of Christ the Altar of that supreame sacrifice instrumeÌ„t of our redemption Ergo to be worshipped Rhemist ibid. Bellarm. lib. 2. de imagin cap. 27. Ans. If therefore it was holy because it touched the body of Christ was an instrument of his death by the same reason the nayles that pearsed him the speare that goared his side the tormenters that crucified Iudas that betrayed and kissed him All these should also be honored and worshipped that handled and touched him and were instruments occasions and procurers of his death Argum. 2 The Crosse of Christ was found out say they in Constantines time the great by a straÌ„ge miracle for there were three crosses digged vp which had beene a long time buried in the earth the two crosses vpon the which the 2. theeues suffered the 3. whereon our Sauiour hung They brought them al three to a woman that then lay very sick they laid the two first to her and she remayned as she was then they applyed the third and she was presently made whole Bellarm. ex Ruffino Ergo the Crosse is holy and to be worshipped Ans. The inuention of the Crosse by Helena Constantines mother seemeth to be a forged and fabulous storie 1. Eusebius that writeth of the life of Constantine and the Actes of Helena and registreth diuerse matters of lesse importance yea hee sheweth howe the Mount Caluarie where the heathen had built Idolatrous Temples was purged and in that place say they the Crosse was found yet he maketh no mention at all of the inuentioÌ„ of the Crosse which it is very like he would not haue omitted if there had bene any such thing 2. The most auncient author that writeth of this matter is Ambrose deobitu Theodosii which oration Erasmus thinketh to be forged in Ambroses name 3. There is great disagreement amongst writers about this storie Ambrose sayeth the Crosse was knowen by the tytle that Pilate fastened to it Sozomenus and Nicephorus say the letters were worne out and it could not be discerned by the tytle Paulinus sayth the way to discerne it was reuealed to Helena Ruffinus ascribeth the deuise to Macarius Bishop of Ierusalem Paulinus saith it was knowen by raising vp a dead man to life Ruffinus by restoring a sick woman to health Fulk annot Iohn 19 sect 2. Thus we see of what small credit this storie is And be it graunted that there might be some such thing found yet they must bring better proofe for that miraculous inuention before we wil beleeue it The Protestants WE are not taught any where in the worde of God to giue any religious worship to any creature nor to adore stockes and stones no nor the very Crosse it selfe whereon Christ was crucified if it were nowe to bee seene or had Argum. 1. If there had belonged vnto the Church any religious care of it the Apostles would no doubt haue procured the safe keeping thereof and not haue suffered the Church to want it 300. yeeres and it had beene an easier sute for Ioseph and Nicodemus to begge the Crosse then the body of Iesus Argum. 2. If the Crosse were to be adored we are vncertaine which it is and where to be had and so might worship a common peece of wood for the wood of the Crosse for there is no doubt but this relique is forged and counterfeyted as the rest be Euegrius saith the Crosse was at Apamea
not to enter into that holy place and thus according to the places they deuided the congregation as though one part were more holy then the other The people also were made to beleeue that to be buried in the Chauncell but especially vnder the Altar was more auailable for the dead then to be buried in the Church But where learne they that our Churches ought to haue a sanctuary as the Iewish Temple had that was an euident type and is now accomplished in our Sauiour Christ who is now entred into the heauens as the high Priest then entred into the holy place to make atonement for the people Heb. 9.24 This therefore is very grosse to reuiue and renew again Iewish types and figures And if herein they wil imitate the building of Salomons Temple to haue a Sanctuary why doe they not also build toward the West as the Temple was why bring they not their Altar downe into the body of the Church for in their holy place there was no Altar And indeed Altar we acknowledge none as afterward shal be proued But we see no reason why the communion Table may not be set in the body of the Church as well as in the Chauncell if the place be more conuenient and fit to receiue the Communicants But I pray you why is your Altar rather set in your Sanctuary then the Fonte or Baptistery they are both Sacraments as well Baptisme as the Lords Supper why should one be preferred as holier then the other Secondly all things in the Church ought to be done vnto edifiyng and therefore we allow no such partitions as doe hinder the edifiyng of the people and exclude them from hearing as in popish Churches the Priest is pued or mued vp by himselfe a great way off that his voice can hardly be perceiued of the people The Minister is so to stand and turne himselfe as he may be best heard and vnderstood of the people as Ezra had a pulpit of wood to stand in when he read the Law Nehemiah 8. 4. Augustine thus writeth Cum Episcopus solus intus est populus orat eum illo et quasi subscribens ad eius verba respondet Amen While the Bishop or Pastor praieth within the people both praieth together with him and subscribing to his words answereth Amen By this it appeareth that though in Augustines time the Minister had a place for him selfe as it is meete he should yet he so disposed himselfe that his praier was heard of all the people for otherwise how could they pray with him and subscribe or giue assent to his wordes THE SECOND PART OF THE END and vse of Churches THis part hath 3. seuerall pointes First whether the Churches of Christians are built to offer sacrifice in Secondly whether they be in themselues places more holy then others Thirdly whether they may be dedicate to Saintes THE FIRST POYNT OR ARTICLE whether our Churches are for sacrifice The Papists THe principall end of Churches is for the sacrifice of Christians and in that error 49 respect they are truely called Temples they are not onely for prayer the preaching of the word and administration of the Sacraments but chiefely for the externall sacrifice of the Masse Bellarm. cap. 4. Argu. 1. The Churches of Christians haue altars therefore sacrifices that they haue altars he thus proueth First 1. Corinth 10.21 You can not be partakers of the Lords table and the table of Deuils by the table here is meant the altar for the table of the heathen was their altar wherein they sacrificed to their Idols Ans. 1. A table is one thing an altar an other and very vnproperlye is an altar called a table this place in any wise mans iudgement maketh more against them then with them Secondly S. Paule speaketh not here of the sacrifices of the heathen nor of their altars but of the feastes which they made in their idolatrous temples which was done vpon tables of such sacrifices as had bene offered to idoles vnto the which feastes S. Paul forbiddeth Christians to come as it appeareth in the rest of the Chapter and more plainely cap. 8.10 Argu. 2. Heb. 13.10 Wee haue an altar of which they haue no power to eate that serue at the Tabernacle that is the altar whereon Christs body is offred Bellarm. Rhemist in hunc locum Ans. The Apostle speaketh expressely of participation of the sacrifice of Christs death as it is manifest in the 2. verses next following which is by a Christian faith and not in the Sacrament onely whereof none can be partakers that remayne in the ceremonial obseruations of the Leuitical sacrifices For the Apostle speaketh manifestly verse 12. of the suffering of Christ without the gate Christ therefore is the altar yea our Priest and sacrifice too You abuse this place to proue your materiall popish altars which are many but the Apostle saith we haue an altar speaking of one The Protestants THe Churches of Christians are the houses of praier made to that end that they should come together to heare the word of God read and preached receiue the sacraments and offer vp their spiritual sacrifices of praise and thanksgiuing other externall sacrifices or altars we acknowledge none Argu. 1. The temple of the Iewes was called an house of praier that is principally for praier Marke â—1 17 Moses was read and preached in their synagogues Act. 15.21 Much more are the Churches of Christians appointed for preaching and praier Act. 20.7 The first day of the weeke which is the Lords day they came together to breake bread and Paul preached vnto them Ergo the administration of the word and sacrameÌ„ts with praier is the chiefe and only cause of the holy assemblies of Christians Argu. 2. Altars we haue none in our Churches S. Paul calleth it the Lords table 1. Corinth 10.21 where wee receiue the sacrament of the bodye and bloud of Christ. And he calleth it bread which is broken 1. Corinthians 11.20 But bread is set vpon Tables not sacrificed vpon Altars Augustine also calleth it Mensam Domini the Lords table Epist. 59. epist. 50. He sheweth howe cruelly the Donatistes handled Maximian a catholik Bishop beating him with Clubbes euen in the church lignis altaris effractis immaniter ceciderunt and wounded him with the wood of the Altar which they had broken downe Where though he improperly call it an Altar yet was it a communion table framed of wood and made to bee remoued not fastened to the wall as their popish Altars were THE SECOND ARTICLE WHETHER Churches are more holy places in them selues The Papists GOd they say rather dwelleth and is present in Churches then els where error 50 and therefore it is more auailable for a man euen to make his priuate prayer in the Church Argum. 1. The Temple of Salomon was ordained euen for the prayers of priuate men and Salomon prayeth vnto God that they might be heard 1. King 8.38 So Anna prayed in the Tabernacle 1. Sam. 1.
And the apostles went vp to the Temple to pray Act. 3.1 Ergo prayers made in the Temple are more auaileable Bellarm. cap. 4. Ans. 1. See what Iewish arguments here are because the Lord gaue an especiall blessing to his Temple amongst the Iewes that was the onely place for sacrifices and so also a peculiar priuiledged place for prayer therefore hee will binde and tye himselfe to some certaine place now But our Sauiour sayth cleane contrary vnto the woman of Samaria The houre coÌ„meth when ye shall neither in this mountaine nor in Ierusalem worship my Father Iohn 4.21 The prayers and sacrifices of Christians are now no more tied and limited to places That was but a type vnto the Iewes that as then God would be onely heard in his Temple so his name is now onely truely inuocated and called vpon in his Church 2. It is falsely alleadged that the Apostles went vp only to pray to the temple they went vp at the ninth hower of prayer when the people were accustomed to go vnto the Temple that they might preach the gospell vnto them The Protestants WE preferre publique prayers made by the Congregation in the Church before priuate prayers not because of the place but in respect of the congregation whose prayers ioyntly al together are more feruent effectuall then the prayer of one man But if we compare publique prayer with publique and priuate with priuate we doubt not but that the one and the other being made in faith may as well be heard out of the Church as in it Argum. 1. The promise of our Sauiour is generall Wheresoeuer two or three are gathered together I am in the middest amongst them Math. 18.20 So S. Paul I wil that men euerie where lift vp pure handes 1. Tim. 2. Ergo they may be heard praying in faith in any place Argum. 2. So our Sauiour saith When thou prayest enter into thy chamber he sayth not go to the church Bellarm. saith he entereth into his chamber that prayeth without vaine glorie whether hee doe pray secretly or openlie Ans. Our Sauiours words are plaine without allegorie for he speaketh of shutting the dore of the chamber and there is a manifest opposition betweene the Pharisies praying in the corners of the streets and the frequencie of people and the others praying in secret Augustine saith Quid supplicaturus Deo locum sanctum requiris volenâ— in Templo orare in te ora ita age semper vt Dei TempluÌ„ sis ibi enim Deus exaudit vbi habitat When thou art about to pray what needest thou goe to any sacred place wouldest thou pray in the Temple or Church see that thou be the Temple of God and there the Lord will soonest heare where he dwelleth THE THIRD ARTICLE WHEther Churches and Temples maybe dedicate to Saintes The Papistes error 51 THey nothing doubt but as Churches may be consecrated and dedicated to the honour of God so they may be also vnto saints Argum. 1. The Temple of Salomon was not only built for sacrifices and prayer but for the Arke of God also as Dauid sayeth to Nathan Now I dwell in an house of Cedar trees and the Arke of God remaineth within curtaines 2. Sam. 7.2 But there is as great honour yea and greater due to the reliques of Saintes Ergo it is lawfull to builde Temples vnto them Bellarmine cap. quarto Ans. 1. When you haue a commandement to build Churches for reliques as they had to build a Temple for the arke ye may be bolde to do it 2. To build a Temple for the arke was all one as to build an house for the Lord for it was the Mercieseate of God it pleased the Lord to dwell betweene the Cherubims there to shewe euident tokens of his presence And whereas Dauid consulted to build an house for the arke the Lord doeth thus answere him by his Prophet Shalt thou build me an house for my dwelling verse 5. So the Temple was made in the honour of God being made for the Arke It was all one for the Arke to dwell there and the Lord him selfe to dwell there This argument therefore maketh nothing for them The Protestants TO build Churches and religious houses in the name and honour of saintes and to make them Patrones and Protectoures of those places and there to call vpon them and make prayers vnto them all which is defended by our aduersaries we holde it vtterly vnlawfull as tending to manifest impietie and idolatrie Argum. 1. No diuine worship is to be giuen to Saints therefore no Churches to be made in their names For it is part of the diuine worshippe to haue Temples Augustine saith Nos non Martyribus Templa sacerdotia aut sacra constituimus quoniam non ipsi sed Deus â—orum nobis Deus est Wee doe not ordaine Temples Priesthoodes or sacrifices for Martyres for not they but their God is both their God and ours None therefore is to haue a Temple but God But marke I pray you their distinction They say that Religious houses as they are Temples are onely consecrated to God but as they are Basilica palaces sumptuous buildinges the selfe same Churches may be dedicate to Saintes Bellarm. ibid. Ans. If one and the same Church may be consecrate both to God and to some saint beside I pray you who is the principal patrone of that church God or the saint You will say I am sure God is But I will proue the contrary because it hath the name of the faint It is called by the name of S. Peter S. Paul or some other not by the name of God Thus they are not contented to make saintes Gods fellowes but will euen thrust him out of place giuing vnto saintes the honor of Gods house 2. How names are to be giuen to places wee can not better learne then of those auncient founders of names the holy Patriarches As Abraham Gen. 22.14 calleth the mountaine Iehouah-iireh The Lord hath seene So Iacob giueth holy names to the place where he met the Angelles Gen. 32.2 and where he wrestled with the Angell ver 31. They as we see gaue holy and reuerent names vnto places not made peculiar for Gods seruice but onely for ciuil vse for the places to be called and knowen by how much more ought churches and houses of God to be called by his name We therefore conclude that Churches ought not to bee erected in Saintes names to worship them thereby and make them our Patrones mediators and presenters of our prayers for this were great Idolatrie Euen like as the Heathen called their Temples by the names of their Idolles Venus Iupiter Diana and the lyke Yet wee refuse not to call our Churches by the names of Saintes as they haue beene called of olde because wee are not inuentors of names and termes inured by continuall custome can hardly be left Wee vse them only as ciuil termes to distinguish places by if any otherwise vse them for any Religious
God so the manner of celebrating and keeping it holy is to be learned out of the word and neither custome nor authority ought to giue liberty for such workes vpon the Lords day as are not warranted by the word First we graunt that we are not so necessarily tied to the rest of the Sabboth as the Iewes were for those things are abolished which appertained to the Iewish Sabboth First the prescript of the day Secondly the ceremonious exercises of the Sabboth in the sacrifices and other rites of the Law Thirdly the typicall shadowes and significations of their Sabboth as first it betokened their rest in Canaan then the rest and peace of the Church by Christ Hebre. 4.3 5. Fourthly the strickt and precise rest wherein Christians haue more liberty then the Iewes had and againe they obserued their rest as being properly and simply and in it selfe a sabboth daies duty but we doe consider it as being referred to a more principall end as making of vs more fit for spirituall exercises Secondly we allow these workes to be done First opera religiosa or pietatis the religious workes and conferring to piety as the Priestes did slaye the sacrifices vpon the Sabboth and yet brake not the rest of the Sabboth Math. 12.5 so the people may walke to their parish Church though somewhat farre off the Pastor Minister may goe forth to preach yea and preaching is of it selfe a labour of the body to study also and meditate of his Sermon to ring the bels to call the people to the Church all these are lawfull as being helpes for the exercises of religion Secondly opera charitatis the workes of mercy are permitted as to visite the sicke the Phisitian to resorte to his patient yea to shew compassion to brute beastes as to helpe the sheepe out of a pit Math. 12.11 Thirdly opera necessitatis the workes of necessitie as the dressing of meat and such like Math. 12.1.3 Our Sauiour excuseth his Apostles for plucking the eares of Corne when they were hungry As for opera voluntaria workes of pleasure and recreation we haue no other permission to vse them then as they shal be no le ts or impediments vnto spirituall exercises as the hearing of the word and meditating therein and such other Otherwise they are not to be vsed Augustine saith speaking of the Iewes who did greatly prophane their Sabboth in sporting and dalliance Melius toto die foderent quà m toto die saltarēt It were better for them to digge all day then to daunce all day euen so verily it were better for many poore ignorant people that vpon the Sabboth giue themselues to drinking and quaffing gaming if they should goe to plough or cart all the day But as for other seruile workes as to keepe Faires and Markets vpon the Lords day to trauell themselues their seruants and beastes vpon the Sabboth it is flat contrary to the commaundement of God and the practise of the Church Nehemiah 13.16 where there is no extream and vrgent necessitie so that it is not to be doubted but that as the keeping of the Lords day is a moral commaundement so also the manner of the obseruing thereof in sanctifying it and resting therein is morall the ceremonies of the rest being abolished that is the Iewish strictnes thereof and the opinion which they had of their rest as being simply a part of the sanctifying of the Sabboth But we doe consider it as referred vnto more principall duties and obserue it not as of it selfe pleasing God but as making vs more fit for spirituall exercises Contrary to these rules we acknowledge neither power in Ordinaries nor priuiledge in custome to dispence with the sanctification of the Sabboth The Papists THey affirme that the Apostles altered the sabboth day from the seaueth day to the eight counting from the creation and they did it without scripture error 62 or any commaundement of Christ such power say they hath God left to his Church This then they holde that the sabboth was changed by the ordinarie power and authoritie of the Church not by any especiall direction from Christ thereupon it followeth that the Church which they say cannot erre may also change the sabboth to any other day in the weeke Rhemist Apoca. 1. sect 6. The Protestants 1. THe Apostles did not abrogate the Iewish sabboth but Christ himselfe by his death as he did also other ceremonies of the Law and this the Apostles knew both by the scriptures the word of Christ his holy spirite 2. They did not appoint a new sabboth of their owne authoritie for first they knew by the scripture that one day of seauen was to be obserued for euer for the seruice of God and exercise of religion although the prescript day according to the Law were abrogate for the Lord before the morall law was written euen immediatly after the creation sanctified the seauenth day shewing thereby that one of the seauen must be obserued so long as the world endured Secōdly they knew there was the same reason of sanctifiyng the day of Christs resurrection and the restitution of the worlde thereby as of sanctifiyng the day of the Lords rest after the creation of the world Thirdly they did it by the direction of the spirite of God whereby they were so directed and gouerned that although they were fraile men by nature and subiect to error yet they could not decline in their writings and ordinances of the Church from the truth which assurance of Gods spirite in the like measure the Church hath not but so farre forth is promised to be led into all truth as she followeth the rule of truth expressed in the Scriptures Wherefore the Church hath no authority to change the Lords day and to keepe it vpon Munday or Tuesday or any other day seeing it is not a matter of indifferency but a necessary prescription of Christ himselfe deliuered by the Apostles for the Lords day began in the Apostles time and no doubt by their Apostolike authority directed by the spirite of Christ was instituted Act. 20.7 Apocal. 1. ver 10. Neither can there come so long as the world continueth so great a cause of changing the Sabboth as the Apostles had by the resurrection of Christ. Wherfore the law of the Sabboth as it is now kept and obserued is perpetuall The Papists errour 63 4. THey affirme that the keeping of the Lords day in stead of the Iewish Sabboth is a tradition of the Apostles and not warranted by Scripture Rhemist Math. 15. sect 3. The Protestants THe obseruation of the Lords day is not deliuered by blinde tradition but hath testimony of holy Scriptures 1. Corinth 16.2 Act. 20.7 Apocal. 1.10 and the obseruation thereof is according to Gods commaundement not after the doctrine of men Fulk ibid. The Papists errour 64 5. THey teach that the Lords day is commaunded and likewise kept for some mysticall signification not onely for the remembraunce of benefites already
est vt ieiunium Sabbati horribilius haberetur By the which sayth he it came to passe that the fast of the Sabboth was more abhorred Augustin ibid. But this reason now bindeth not vs because the name and heresie of the Manichees is now worne out and therefore there is no feare of any scandale to arise that way Thirdly we grant that the Lords day is not the fittest time for publique fasts first because it is a day of reioycing so we reade that the people in Nehemiah his time were forbidden to mourne and weepe after the lawe was read vnto them by Ezra because it was a day of ioy and mirth Nehem. 8.11 Secondly the day of solemne and publique fasting ought to be set a part from other dayes and to be proclaimed solemnely and to be spent wholly in spirituall exercises euen as the Sabboth with vacation and rest from other bodily labours as we may reade 2. Chronicl 20.3 Nehem. 9.1 And therefore any day is more fit then the Sabboth because that is a holy day alreadie vnto the Lord but when we will humble our selues before the Lord by fasting and prayer some day would onely for that purpose bee consecrate vnto GOD that may be as a voluntarie sacrifice whereas wee are bound of necessitie to keepe the Lords day But concerning priuate and particular fasts when men by themselues haue occasion to giue themselues to prayer whereof S. Paul speaketh 1. Corinth 7.5 Such priuate exercises may be better performed vpon the Sabboth because of the ordinarie exercises of the word which are notable meanes to kindle and stirre vp true deuotion in him which at that time will humble himselfe yea and publike fasts though not ordinarily yet wheÌ„ there is iust occasion may be kept vpon the Sabboth as we reade Act. 20.7 how that Paul continued his preaching till midnight whereof Augustine writeth thus Necessarius sermo resiciendi corporis causa interrumpendus esse non visus est profecturo Apostolo The necessary preaching of the Apostle he thought not good for the refreshing of their bodies to breake off being readie to depart We conclude therefore that it is lawfull to fast vpon the Lords day though it be not alwaies expedient And Augustine very well determineth this matter Ego in Euangelicis Apostolicis literis video praeceptum esse ieiunium quibus autem diebuâ—â—non oporteat ieiunare quibus oporteat praecepto domini vel Apostolorum non inuenâ—o de finitum I finde both in the Euangelicall and Apostolicall writings that fasting is commanded but vpon what dayes we ought to fast vpon what we ought not I doe not finde it defined Epistol 86. Wherefore to fast or not to fast vpon the Lords day or vpon any other being not determined in scripture is left as a thing indifferent to the Church of God The Papists error 67 8. THe name Sunday is an heathenish calling as al other weeke-daies in our language some imposed after the names of Planets as in the Romanes time some by the name of certaine Idols which the Saxons did worship which names the Church vseth not but hath appoynted to call the first day the Dominike after the Apostle Apocal. 1.10 the other by the name Feries vntill the last of the weeke which she calleth by the old name Sabboth because that was of God not by imposition of the heathen Rhemist annot Apocal. 1. sect 6. The Protestants Ans. FIrst as the name of Sunday and the rest is of the heathenish beginning and therefore were better to be otherwise termed as the first second or third from the Lords day as the Iewes called their daies from the Sabboth so your terme of feries is no lesse heathenish deriued from the word feria or feriae which were so called a feriendis victimis of striking the heathenish sacrifices as Sextus Pompeius sayth Fulk ibid. 2. We haue other names also that might bee reformed as of our moneths as March is so called of Mars Iune of Iuno Ianuary of Ianus which were heathen goddes Iuly and August doe beare the names of men yea and if wee might bee inuentors of newe names the termes of Christmas Michaelmas Candlemas should not stand in force nor any more be vsed which are as offensiue as the rest for as for the names of heathen Idols the most part are ignorant of them but the vulgar terme of Masse is to too well known too much loued of many of our countrey men Now for the name Sunday which is so great a mote in your eye if there were no more but that Augustine sheweth how it might be fauourably expounded Dies magni solis celebramus illius solis de quo dicit scriptura orietur vobis sol iustitiae We doe keepe Sunday holy namely of that great Sunne whereof the scripture speaketh the Sunne of righteousnesse shall arise 3. We wish that all these termes might be layd downe as Augustine sayth Nolumus vt dicant vtinam corrigantur vt non dicant We would not haue men so to speake and I wish they were reformed But seeing by continuall custome mens tongues are inured to such termes let them knowe that they are vsed onely as ciuill names to call things by not for any religion or mysterie in them contained or signified THE THIRD PART OF THE FESTIVAL daies of Christ and the holy Ghost The Papists THE feasts of Easter and Whitsontide and other solemnities of Christ were error 68 prescribed they say by the Apostles Rhemist Matth. 15. sect 2. to be kept vpon certaine dayes and that Peter did appoint that Easter should not be kept the 14. day of the first Moone as the Iewes obserued it but the Lordes day after And of the feast of Pentecost mention is made 1. Corinth 16.8 Ergo these feasts were instituted of the Apostles Bellarm. cap. 12.13 The Protestants Ans. FIrst wee graunt that it is expedient for the Church to keepe the memoriall of the Natiuitie Passion Resurrection Ascension of Christ and of the comming of the holy Ghost and the dayes instituted for the remembrance thereof no doubt ought to be had in greater account then any other holy dayes instituted by the Church Secondly it cannot be proued that they were prescribed by the Apostles or if they were but as indifferent ceremonies which are subiect to alteration and in the which the religion or worship of God dooth not consist Certaine it is that before the time of Constantine the great there were not many festiuall dayes kept in so much that the feasts of the Natiuitie of Christ Easter Pentecost were not vniformally obserued for many yeares after as appeareth by diuerse Councels And before Constantines time there was great contention betweene the Bishop of Rome and the Bishops of the East about the celebration of Easter they alleadging the constitution of Saint Iohn the other of Saint Peter wherefore it is like that the Apostles appointed no such certaine dayes for then the Church would
the rest vpon holy dayes doth not in it selfe binde vs no otherwise then by reason of offence that may arise by our contempt of the constitutions of the Church We finde that Simon Islip Archbishop of Canturburie directed his letters patents to all Parsons and Vicars wherein he straightly charged them and their parishioners vnder paine of excommunication not to absteine frō bodily labor vpon certaine Saints dayes which before were wont to be halowed and consecrated to vnthrifty idlenes Fox pag. 393. Ergo by their owne iudgement all the festiuities of their Church are not to be kept alike Augustine maketh three degrees of festiual dayes in the first and highest degree he placeth the Lordes day Quomodo Maria virgo mater domini principatum tenet inter omnes mulieres ita inter caeteros dies haec omnium dierum mater est As amongst women the Virgine Marie the mother of our Lord is the chiefe so this day is the mother and chiefe of al other dayes speaking of the Sabboth of Christians de tempore serm 36. In the next place or degree he putteth the festiuals of Christ and the holy Ghost as the commemorations of his Natiuitie Passion Resurrection Ascension as in his sermon vpon the Ascension day hee thus saith Conditoris basilica huius S. Leontij hodiè depositio est sed dignetur obscurari stella à sole To day wee haue the commemoration of the deposition or sepulture of Saint Leontius the founder of this Church But let not the starre thinke much to bee obscured of the Sunne So in the third ranke he counteth the commemorations of holy men which vnto the festiuities of Christ were but as the Starre to the Sunne Wee will adde a fourth place or degree distinguishing betweene the commemorations of the holy Apostles and other superstitious and popish Saintes dayes which our Church hath worthily thrust out at the dores AN APPENDIX TO THIS parte of the vigiles and night watches annexed to festiuall dayes The Papists 1. THey were wont vpon Saintes eeues to giue themselues to fasting and watching But their night vigiles or watches they doe not now so error 72 strictly obserue because of the great abuses which did growe thereupon Bellarm. cap. 17. Yet they haue not altogether left them for they haue their Nocturnes or midnight mattens and their prime houres in the morning Rhemist annot Act. 10. sect 6. The Protestants THe Christians in time of persecution had their antelucanos hymnos their early and timely songs and hymnes they met together to worship God before the Sunne rise because they could not safely neither were suffered to assemble in the daye time But that is no reason why now the Church should vse vigiles or nocturnes seeing we now haue free exercise of religion in the day time no more then Paules example is to bee vrged that prayed by the riuers side with the people and there preached vnto them because in Idolatrous cities they could haue no places of meeting That therefore wee now ought to doe the like hauing Churches and Oratories to assemble in Augustine if the sermon be his thus witnesseth Iubente Ambrosio cessabant vigiliae Mediolani quia cum vigilabant per noctem ad ecclesiam ludendo chorizando conueniebant At Millaine by Ambroses commaundement the vigiles ceased because the people when they watched did come by night daunsing and sporting and playing to the Church The Papists 2. THey haue also another superstitious custome to set vp wax candles and error 73 taper light before Images and vpon the altar to carrie them about in procession and euen at middaye and high noone And Bellarmine would authorise this custome by the continuall burning of the lampes daye and night as he saith in the tabernacle amongst the Iewes The Protestants Ans. FIrst wee say of this as we did of the vigiles of the Church before that Christians in those dayes in their night assemblies vsed candle light but it followeth not that the vigiles being now left we should burne candles at noone daye and that this was their custome to burne their lampes onely in the night Augustine sheweth where hee speaketh of those that did vowe ceram ad luminaria noctis waxe candles for the lights of the Church in the night Secondly it is vtterly vntrue that the lampes in the Tabernacle burned all day the contrarie is proued that they were lighted in the euening and so burned all night for those that kept the watch in the Temple 2. Chron. 13.11 and that in the morning againe they were put out 1. Sam. cap. 3. vers 3. The Priest shall set the lampes on fire inter duas vesperas betweene the two twilights that is the euening and morning Exod. 30.8 And hee shall dresse them to burne from the euening to the morning Leuitic 24.3 That therefore which the Iesuite made for an argument for himselfe wee will vrge against him that seeing the lampes amongst the Iewes who abounded in types and ceremonies were burnt onely in the night and not vpon the day it is shame for those that would bee counted Christians in superstitious customes to exceede and goe beyond them THE FIFT PART OF LENT and Imber dayes The Papists 1. THey holde that the holy time of Lent as they doe fondly call it as error 74 though any time in their sense were more holy then another is an Apostolike tradition warranted by the example of Moses Elias and our Sauiour Christ that fasted 40. dayes Rhemist Matth. 4 sect 2. The Protestants Ans. FIrst that fasting of our Sauiour Christ and the holy Prophets was miraculous and no more to bee imitated then Christs walking vpon the Sea or raising of the dead as Augustine saith Non tibi dicit Non eris discipulus meus hee saith not Thou shalt not bee my Disciple vnlesse thou walke vpon the sea or raise the dead but learne of mee because I am humble and meeke Yet if any of them can fast so many dayes as they did without eating any thing at all wee giue them good leaue Secondly that it was not an Apostolike tradition it appeareth because it was not vniformally kept of the Church a long time after them For as Irenaeus witnesseth some fasted one day some two dayes some fourtie houres day and night But if it had been necessarily enioyned and prescribed by the Apostles such varietie of custome could not haue sprung vp at the least not haue been suffered in the Church Thirdly Epiphanius saith that the Wednesdaies fast was an Apostolike tradition and to obserue the feast of the sixe dayes of Easter with bread salt and water which obseruations are not kept amongst the Papists themselues yet haue they as good testimonie of antiquitie to bee Apostolike traditions as the Lent fast Fourthly in Augustines time there was no necessarie enforcement for euery man to keepe Lent Si aliquis saith hee ieiunare non potest eleemosyna sine ieiunio bona est If
in these words yet the people vnderstand nothing at all And though we denie not but that the words are holy and mysticall yet it followeth not that they should be vsed for a prayer 3. What great account they make of the Aue Mary it may appeare by this that they thinke they may alter and change it and adde to it at their pleasure as by Pope Sixtus the 4. there was a clause more added vnto the common Aue Mary in this manner Haile Mary full of grace the Lord is with thee blessed art thou amongst women and blessed is the fruite of thy wombe Iesus Christ and blessed is Anna thy mother of whom thy virgines flesh hath proceeded without blot of originall sinne What a fearefull thing is this that they should thus dare to adde vnto the scriptures How can they now escape that iudgement that is threatned against all those that doe adde or take ought to or from the word of God Apocal. 22.18 Thus farre of such questions and controuersies as concerne the kingdome of Christ which is his Church of the which we haue now entreated at large first in generall of the whole and then of the seuerall parts and members thereof in order Now follow those controuersies which belong vnto the Priesthood of Christ the third excellent and glorious office of our Sauiour which his Priesthood is partly seene in his intercession and mediation for vs partly in his sacrifice where we are to handle the great and waightie controuersies of the Sacraments by the which the sacrifice of his death is applied vnto vs. THE TENTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE INTERCESSION AND MEDIAtion of Christ whether he be onely our Mediatour and Intercessor The Papists THey seeme in these very words to confesse that Christ is the onely singular error 86 aduocate and patrone of mankinde that by himselfe alone and by his owne merites procureth all grace and mercie none asking or obtaining either grace in this life or glorie in the next but by him But this letteth not but that there may be other inferiour mediatours though not in that singular sense Rhemist annot 1. Timoth. 2. sect 4. Argum. Christ is the only Sauiour and Redeemer of the world yet the name of Sauiour and Redeemer is giuen to men in the scriptures as Iud. 3.9 Othniel is called a Sauiour Act. 7.35 Moses a Deliuerer or Redeemer and all this without derogation to him that in more excellent manner is the onely Sauiour of the world Ergo there may be also many mediatours in an inferiour degree to that singular mediatour to offer vp our praiers Rhemist ibid. Ans. 1. If Christ be sufficient to procure all grace and mercie vnto vs what neede then the mediation or inuocation of Saints for wee must either doubt of his power in ioyning other helpers with him or make question of his good will and readines to helpe vs in making other mediatours vnto him 2. They make other mediatours and intercessors beside Christ euen in that high and singular degree for not onely Christ by their doctrine by his merites procureth grace but other Saints also by their merites are our mediatours as it is plaine to see in that popish praier Tu per Thomae sanguinem c. By the blood of Thomas which for thee he did spend make vs Christ to climbe whither Thomas did ascend In this blasphemous prayer and a thousand such they pray only to Christ as God not as mediatour men departed and many of them no Saints they make their onely mediatours by their owne proper merites See Fulk ibid. Againe their Saints are not onely intercessors for grace but conferrers of grace and helpe which is the highest degree of mediation They appoynt seuerall patrones amongst the Saints for all purposes S. Apollonia for the tooth-ach Saint Rooke for the pestilence Saint Petronill for the ague Saint Gregorie for Schollers Saint Morris for Souldiers Saint Luke for Painters Saint Crispin for Shoomakers Saint Nicholas for the sea Saint Iodocus for corne Saint Vrbane for wine And thus doe they not onely as they beare vs in hand pray for these graces and blessings but they haue power themselues to bestow them Ans. 3. Concerning the name and title of Sauiour and Redeemer we answere first men are called in the Scripture Deliuerers and Sauiours in respect of some temporal deliuerance not of the spiritual or eternal redemption which belongeth onely to Christ but you make your Saints mediators of eternall redemption Secondly they whom the Scripture calleth Redeemers and Sauiours were appoynted by God for such temporall deliuerance but you cannot shewe the like appoyntment for Saints to be mediators of eternall saluation though in an inferiour degree to Christ. Thirdly seeing the name of God and Christ is giuen to men in the scriptures as to Princes and Prophets why may you not as well say that there may be many Gods and Christs properly though in an inferiour degree to him which is only God and Christ as to appoynt other inferiour Redeemers Sauiours and Mediators The Protestants WE acknowledge but one onely Mediatour as well of intercession as redemption euen Iesus Christ our Lord to whom and through whom all our praiers supplications ought to be made to him we only pray as being one God with the Father and the holy Ghost by him and through him we only pray as being the only Mediatour betweene God and man Arg. 1. S. Paul saith There is one mediatour of God and men the man Iesus Christ 1. Tim. 2.5 Hence we doe frame this argument The mediator betweene God and men must himselfe be both God and man but so is none but Christ Ergo he is the onely Mediatour Arg. 2. He is onely the aduocate and mediatour for our sinnes that is the propitiation for our sinnes 1. Ioh. 2.1 Christ only is the propitiation for our sinnes Ergo the onely mediatour Augustine thus writeth vpon this place Si Apostolus ita diceret c. If the Apostle had sayd thus If any man sinne you haue me a mediatour with the father and I doe by my praier obtaine pardon for your sinnes as Parmenianus in a certaine place maketh the Bishop a mediatour betweene the people God Quis sicut Apostolum Christi non sicut Antichristum intueretur Who would behold him as an Apostle of Christ and not as Antichrist It is then Antichristian doctrine in Augustines iudgement to make any other mediators or intercessors beside Christ. HERE FOLLOW SVCH CONTROVERSIES as concerne the Sacraments of the Church OF the Sacraments then wee must first intreate in generall and afterward handle them in particular THE ELEVENTH GENERAL CONTROVERSIE OF THE SACRAMENTS IN GENERAL THis Controuersie containeth diuers questions first of the nature and definition of a Sacrament Secondly of the efficacie and vertue of the Sacraments Thirdly of the number and order of the Sacraments the difference and preeminence amongst them They thus follow in their order THE FIRST
QVESTION OF THE NATVRE and definition of a Sacrament WE thus define a Sacrament to be an outward sensible signe representing an holy inward and spirituall grace instituted of Christ to be vsed in that manner he hath appoynted to seale vnto vs the promises of God and to assure vs of the remission of sinnes by the righteousnes of faith in Christ Rom. 4.11 Some things there be in this definition that are agreed vpon betweene vs and our aduersaries as that the Sacraments are outward signes of spirituall and holy graces and that there must be a conueniencie and agreement betweene the signe and the thing signified that not euery thing may be represented by a Sacrament but an holy and spirituall grace that a Sacrament ought to be instituted by a diuine not an humane authoritie Bellar. de Sacram. in gener lib. 1. cap. 9 The seuerall poynts then wherein we dissent from them and which they mislike in this definition are these First concerning the authoritie of instiâ—uting a Sacrament which we affirme to be deriued onely from Christ and manifestly to be proued out of the scriptures Secondly of the forme and manner of celebrating the Sacraments Thirdly of the instrumental or ministerial cause which is the Minister Fourthly of the vse and end of a Sacrament whether it be a scale of the promises of God and instituted for that end THE FIRST PART OF THE EFFICIENT CAVSE that is the author or institutor of a Sacrament The Papists THey doe willingly grant that neither the Apostles then had nor the Church error 87 now hath authoritie to institute Sacraments but that this power is onely in Christ and that the Apostles did but declare and deliuer that which they receiued of Christ yet for the triall of this they refuse to be iudged by the expresse word of God but flie vnto their traditions which they call the word of God not written Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sacram. cap. 14. 23. Argum. The sacrament of Baptisme and of the Eucharist were instituted without expresse warrant of scripture for at that time the newe testament was not written when Christ ordained those mysteries Ergo for the other Sacraments we need not the expresse coÌ„mandement of scripture Bellar. lib. 1. cap. 14. Ans. First the traditions of our Sauiour giuen vnto the Apostles concerning those two Sacraments were afterward written by the Apostles and expressely set downe in scripture therefore we doubt not but that they were of Christs institution But your traditions being not committed to writing concerning your other forged sacraments are iustly suspected seeing the Apostles should haue as well been charged with all the sacraments if Christ had instituted theÌ„ as with only two Secondly how then followeth it the word of God was sometime vnwritten therefore it is so still or Christ who was the author of the word written might institute sacraments without expresse scripture Ergo the testimonie of scripture is not necessarie now The Protestants WE hold no sacraments to be of Christs institution but those onely which the scripture testifieth to haue been commanded by Christ as Baptisme Math. 28.19 the Lords Supper Luk. 23.19 The other which haue no testimonie of scripture were not appoynted by Christ. Argum. 1. S. Paul saith That the scriptures are able to make the man of God absolute and perfect to euery good worke 1. Timoth. 3.17 But how can the Minister of God be perfectly furnished and prepared for the worke of the ministerie if he haue not sufficient direction out of the scriptures concerning the sacraments of the Church for how can he absolutely execute euery part of his office if he faile in the right vse of the sacraments Ergo seeing the scriptures are able to make him perfect from thence he receiueth sufficient instruction for the sacraments Argum. 2. Augustine saith Christus sacramentis numero paucissimis obseruatione facilimis c. Christ hath ioyned his people together by the sacrameÌ„ts few in number easie in obseruation such are Baptisme and the partaking of his bodie and blood then it followeth Et si quid aliud in scripturis canonicis commendatur And if any other sacrament be commanded in the canonicall scripture Epistol 118. Ergo we must attend vpon the scripture and written word of God if we will be instructed aright concerning the Sacraments THE SECOND PART OF THE FORME OF A Sacrament and the manner of consecration The Papists THe Sacrament is not consecrated say they by al the words of the institution error 88 but by a certain forme of speech to be vsed ouer the elemeÌ„ts as these words to be said ouer the bread This is my body the like ouer the wine This cup is the new testament c. And in Baptisme these In the name of the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost These are the formes of the Sacrament and very words of consecration though spoken in a strange tongue without further inuocation of the name of God or giuing of thankes or without a Sermon which we require as they say as necessarie to the essence of a sacrament Rhemist 1. Corinth 11 sect 11.15 Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sacrament cap. 19. Argum. S. Paul sayth The cup of blessing which we blesse 1. Corinth 10.16 The Apostle referreth the benediction or blessing to the cup or Chalice which is nothing els but the consecration thereof Rhemist ibid. Ans. First wee denie not but that to blesse here doth signifie to sanctifie or consecrate but that is not done by a magicall murmuration of words ouer the Sacrament but by the whole action according to Christs institution in distributing receiuing giuing of thankes Secondly as for the words which Christ vttered in the institution we rehearse them not as a magicall charme to be sayd ouer the bread and wine to conuert their substance but to declare what they are made to vs by force of Christs institution namely his bodie and blood The Protestants WE doe not hold that it is an essentiall part of the Sacrament alwayes to haue a sermon before it as they vnderstand a sermon which notwithstanding were most conuenient and alwaies to bee wished but this wee affirme that the Sacrament cannot be rightly ministred vnlesse there be a declaration and shewing forth of the Lords death not only in the visible action of breaking distributing the elements but also in setting forth the end of the Lords death out of the word of God with an exhortation to thankfulnes which is alwaies obserued amongst vs in the dayly celebration and receiuing of the Sacrament Concerning the words of the institution we also grant that they are necessarily to be vsed in the celebration of the Sacrament but not as the Papists vse them For first they make them not all of one value but out of the whole institution picke out certaine consecratorie words as they call them as This is my bodie This is the cup whereas the other words Take ye eate ye drinke ye doe this in remembrance
doe as well belong to the institution as the other Secondly they say that the words of institution doe not serue any thing at all for the instruction of the people to shew them the right vse of the Sacrament but onely for benediction and consecration of the elements Bellarm. cap. 19. Thirdly they doe hold that only by the pronouncing of those words the elements are consecrated whereas by the whole action and cerebration of the Sacrament the giuing receiuing inuocation thankesgiuing according to Christs institution the consecration is performed vpon the elements Fulk 1. Corinth 10. sect 4. Arg. 1. That the words of institution rehearsed do helpe as well to admonish stirre vp the people to a thankful remēbrance of the death of Christ as to consecrate blesse the elemēts it is manifest whereas Christ saith as the words are vsually rehearsed Doe this in remembrance of me and S. Paul saith That by receiuing the sacrament we doe shew forth the Lords death 1. Corinth 11.26 Ergo the people are by the words pronounced instructed and admonished and taught the right vse of the sacrament Argum. 2. that the words of institution doe helpe toward the benediction or consecration of the Elements we deny not but not by them alone but praier also and thankesgiuing and the whole action beside of receiuing To the consecration or sanctifiyng of any creature two things are required the word of God and praier 1. Timoth. 4.5 Neither the word sanctifieth without praier nor praier without the word Ergo to the sanctifiyng cōsecrating of the sacrament the bare rehearsall of the institution sufficeth not without inuocation and praier Augustine saith Accedat verbum ad elementum et fiet Sacramentum Let the word be ioyned to the element and it is become a Sacrament And in an other place he sheweth what word he meaneth Faciente verbo non quia dicitur sed quia creditur hoc est verbum fidei quod praedicamus The word effecteth this not because it is spoken or vttered but because it is beleeued this is the word of faith saith the Apostle which we preach thus farre Augustine tract in Johan 80. Wherefore it is not the muttering of a few words in a strange toung after the manner of enchaunters that by any secret force giuen vnto them hath power to consecrate but the vnderstanding hearing and beleeuing the institution of Christ with calling vpon the name of God and thankesgiuing before him AN APPENDIX OF THIS PART WHETHER THE forme of wordes in the institution of the Sacraments may not be by some addition or other alteration changed The Papists THe words of institution may be changed two manner of wayes either substantially error 89 when the sence is also altered with the words or accidētally whē the elements or syllables are onely changed but the sence remaineth the same If there be a change in the substance of the words the sacrament is imperfect if the alteration be of the forme onely of words and not of the sence the sacramēt is not destroyed but he sinneth that doth so alter them Wherefore it is not lawfull any way at all to alter or change the forme of words Bellarmine cap. 21. li. 1. Argum. It is not lawfull to adde or take to or from the words of scripture much lesse to change the words appointed to be vsed in the Sacrament Bellarm ibid. Ans. To adde or detract to or from the word of God with a purpose and intent to wrest it to a contrary meaning and destroy the true sence thereof cannot be done without great impiety and such is the manner of all heretikes But to alleadge Scripture in keeping still the full sence though we misse of the wordes is not to be counted so heinous a sinne we see the holy Apostles in citing textes of Scripture doe not alwaies binde themselues to the very wordes as Act. 7.43 Heb. 10.5 The Apostle saith A body thou hast giuen me In the Psalme we read Mine eares hast thou opened diuerse wordes yet the same sense Augustine saith very well they that vnderstand the Scripture though they keepe not alwaies the wordes are better then they that read and vnderstand not Sed vtrisque ille melior qui et cum volet ea◠dicit et sicut oportet intelligit But he is better then both that both remembreth the wordes and keepeth the sense too yet he also deserueth praise that beareth the sense in minde though he cannot the words The Protestants NO substantiall change we confesse is to be admitted in the forme of Institution which may alter the sense neither is any particular man by himselfe to make any accidentall change and bring in a new forme of wordes but the publike and vniforme order of the church must be kept yea and the church likewise is bound both to reteyne the true sense and as neere as may be the very words but where occasion serueth to make some small accidentall change of the words the sence being nothing diminished it is not condemned as an vnlawfull and sinfull act Argum. 1. The Euangelists report not all the same forme of words which should be vttered by our Sauiour neither yet S. Paul fully accordeth with them in the precise and strict forme of institution as by comparing of them together it may be seene Mat. 26. ver 27. Take eat this is my body S. Luke cap. 22. This is my body which is giuen for you do this in remembrance of me ver 19. S. Paul Take eat this my body which is broken for you doe this in remēbrāce of me 1. Cor. 11.24 ver 28. This is my blood of the new testament that is shedde for many for the remission of sinnes This cup is the new testamēt in my blood which is shed for you This cup is the newe testament in my bloud this do as oft as you drink it in remēbrance of me If it had beene a sinne to haue missed in some termes and sillables no doubt the spirite of God would not haue suffered these holy writers to haue made the least scape Is it to be thought a sinne in the Church which in stead of Take ye eate ye in the plurall number hath appointed the Sacrament to be ministred particularly in the singular number to euery of the cōmunicants saying Take thou eat thou drinke thou Wherfore all accidentall change of words carieth not with it a guilt of sinne Augustine indeede saith Certa sunt verba euangelica c. The words of the gospell are certaine whereby Baptisme is consecrated But yet he saith else where In ipso verbo aliud est sonus transiens aliud virtus manēs In the word spoken the sound which passeth is one thing the vertue or sense of the words which abideth is an other It is then the sence of the words not the sound or sillables that is certaine and permanent THE THIRD PART OF THE INSTRVMENTALL cause of the Sacraments that is the lawfull
which is vsed in the Sacrament ought to be vnleauened because it is most agreeable to Christs institution who made the sacrament of vnleauened error 117 bread for he instituted his last Supper after he had eaten the Passeouer which was to be eaten with sweet and vnleauened bread according to the Lawa neither was there any leauen to be found in Israel for seuen daies together and not onely Christ but all the Iewes at that time did keepe the Passeouer and the next day after in the which Christ suffered was the first solemne festiuall day of the seuen being the fifteenth day of the moneth as it was commanded Leuiticus 23.5 Rhemist 1. Corinth 11. sect 10. Bellarm. lib. 4. de Eucharist cap. 7. The Protestants 1. WE deny not but that Christ vsed vnleauened bread at the institution of his last Supper hauing immediately before eaten the Paschall Lambe which we doubt not but he kept according to the Lawe with sweete bread yet in the time they are greatly deceiued affirming that all the Iewes eate the Passeouer like wise ouer eeuen and crucified Christ on the morrow which should haue beene and was vnto them as they say a chiefe festiuall day The truth is that Christ eate the Passeouer the 14 day at eeuen as it is appointed in the Law but the Iewes had a contrary tradition they would in no wise keepe two festiuall daies together and therefore because the sixteenth daie was their Sabboth they would not haue the feast of vnleauened bread vpon the fifteenth day though it were so appointed by the law to auoide the concurrence of two holy daies together but deferred it till the next day which was their Sabboth and eate the Passeouer the eeue before which was the 15. day at night whereas Christ reforming that abuse kept the Passeouer the eeue before according to the Law that is the 14. at night It appeareth then that the next day following which we call Friday wherein Christ was put to death was not kept of the Iewes as a holy day First the text saith they would not put Christ to death vpon the feast day fearing the tumult of the people Mark 14.2 Secondly if they had kept it holy as the Law commaunded they should haue done no seruile labour therein that is no work of the body Leuitic 23.7 But what could be a more seruile worke then to crucifie Christ to carry the Crosse and pitch it in the ground and such like which the Iewes would not haue done vpon that day which they were as straightly to keep as the Sabboth It is also called the preparation of the Sabboth Mark 15.43 Wherein they were wont to prepare against the Sabboth what was needfull but such workes of preparation could not haue bene done in that great festiual day Augustine also saith that the day of Christs suffering was not Pascha sed praeparatio Paschae It was not the Pasch but the preparation to it it is not therefore true that it was kept holy of the Iewes the day of Christs passion neither that they did eate the paschall Lambe the same eeue that Christ did but the night following If they shall obiect that place Mark 14.12 where the Euangelist saith It was the first day of vnleauened bread when Christ eat his passeouer and therefore all the Iewes began then to eate sweet bread We answere that the Euangelist hath relation vnto the right time of keeping the Passeouer as it was prescribed by the Law and obserued by Christ not to the corrupt custome of the Iewes Wherfore we graunt that Christ might eate vnleauened bread but not in such manner and order as they say Secondly it was not of the substance of the institution to eate vnleauened bread no more then to eat it at night and to receiue it sitting we are not more bound to the one then to the other Againe Christ vsed vnleauened bread because it was the vsuall bread at that time so we do vse that which is the vsuall bread in our time And S. Paul speaketh of such bread as was vsuall among the Gentiles when he saith The bread which we break 1. Cor. 10.17 Ergo ordinary bread and leauened to be vsed not vnleauened The Papists 2. COncerning the other element of wine which is vsed in the sacrament error 118 they say it is to be mixed with water and they impudently condemne all those Churches that doe not mixe water with wine in the Sacrament Argum. Water gushed out together with blood out of the side of Christ. Ergo wine and water is to be vsed together in the Eucharist Rhemist 1. Cor. 11. sect 10. Bellarm. lib. 4. de Eucharist cap. 10. The Protestants 1. WE deny not but that of ancient time in hot Countries especially where their wine was strong they vsed to mixe water with wine in their common drink and thereupon they so vsed it in the sacrament but it was neuer generally the practise of the East Countries so to do for the Armenians and Iberians vsed not of ancient time to put water in the Cup in the ministration Fulk nnot 1. Corinth 1â— sect 10. Secondly Be it that this mixture of wine were conuenient to be vsed you cannot make such a matter of necessitie of it as to charge them with heresie and denounce damnation against them that keepe not that custome especially seeing your Canonists and schoolemen do graunt that it is de honestate tantâ—m of decency onely not of necessitie And yet we are faine to drinke mingled wine many times against our willes for the Minister need put in no water it is mixed to his hands many times The Vintners craft standeth very well with popish profession Thirdly we holde it rather to be a superstitious custome and contrarie to Christs institution for he in his last supper gaue wine not water to be drunk for he calleth it the fruit of the Vine which is wine and not water Fourthly the water and bloud which issued out of Christs side signifie no such thing but rather as S. Iohn expoundeth them by water is betokened our washing from our sinnes whereof Baptisme is a pledge by blood the full satisfaction that Christ hath made for our sinnes whereof the other sacrament is a â—eale 1. Iohn 5.6 This is that Iesus Christ that came by water and blood not by water onely but by water and blood By the which words the Apostles meaning is not that by the water and blood which were shed vpon the crosse we should vnderstand the Sacraments of the Church but those spirituall graces whereof the Sacraments are liuely signes namely the satisfaction and ransome of our sinnes by Christs blood and our ablution and washing from the same Augustine picketh out no such fancie out of this mysterie as you doe for the mixture of wine and water but he doth more fitly apply it to the sacraments of the church E Christi latere dormientis in cruce promanarunt sacramenta ecclesiae in Psal.
olde blinde latine translation then the authenticall Greeke text the words in the originall are Euery spirite that confesseth not Iesus Christ not euery spirite that dissolueth And this may appeare to bee the true reading by the opposition in the former verse Euery spirite that confesseth Iesus is of GOD therefore this is the best reading Euery spirite that confesseth not Iesus as being set opposite and contrarie to the other verse Againe the Rhemists vnderstand this place after their owne reading of the dissoluing of the humanitie and diuinitie of Christ not of any such separation of the flesh and blood of Christ as Bellarm supposeth 3 This their deuice of concomitance ouerthwarteth the institution of Christ For he sayth the bread is his body the wine his blood but by their rule the bread is his blood and the wine his bodie And be it graunted that the blood of Christ is in the bread yet how can any man be sayd to drink it in bread We vse to eate bread not to drink bread his blood therefore cannot be there because it cannot be drunke there Argum. 2. Luk. 24.30 Christ brake bread to his disciples Act. 2.42 the Apostles brake bread Ergo to communicate in one kinde is grounded vpon the example of Christ and his Apostles Bellarmin lib. 4. de Eucharist 24. Rhemist Iohn 6.11 And Christ sayth Whosoeuer shall eate this bread shall liue for euer Iohn 6.58 Ergo it is sufficient to receiue in one kinde Answer 1. To the two first places we say that it is not necessary to vnderstand the breaking of bread in the sacrament but the vsuall bread rather which was accustomed in their daylie repasts and feasts after thankesgiuing to be broken Or if we take it for the sacrament the breaking of bread is by a Synecdoche taken for the whole mysterie as it is an vsuall phrase of speech in scripture for otherwise wee will conclude as well that Christ and the Apostles did but consecrate in one kinde which they holde for a great absurditie as that the other receiued but in one kinde But their opinion is that although the people must communicate in one kinde onely yet the Priest must consecrate both Rhemist annotat Iohn 6. sect 11. 2 To the second place wee answere First it is not vnderstoode of the sacramentall eating of Christ but of the spirituall manducation of him which may be done without a sacrament For whosoeuer eateth this bread shall liue for euer but whosoeuer eateth the sacrament shall not liue for euer Secondly seeing the eating and drinking of Christ are so often ioyned in this chapter as vers 53.55.56 they might well know that drinking is here to be vnderstoode though it be not expressed Argum. 3. In many countries there is no wine to bee had as in the cold Northerly countreies and therefore they cannot communicate according to the institution whereupon that there might be an vniformitie in all Churches it is most meete that where wine may bee had they should notwithstanding be content to receiue it in one kinde Bellarmin cap. 28. Also there may arise much inconuenience in graunting the cuppe to the people as in spilling and sheading the wine which after consecration is the blood of Christ Rhemist annot Iohn 6. sect 11. Answ. 1. As in some countries there is no wine to bee had so wee finde that in certaine places and regions of the world there is no bread such as Christ vsed made of wheate or the like grayne as in some places amongst the West Indians they haue a certaine kinde of bread made of rootes called Cazabi as Benzo witnesseth Wherefore by this reason of vniformitie wee should not communicate at all either in bread or wine seeing that as some countreyes are destitute of wine so other are of bread but all this not withstanding the sacrament may be duely administred in all places in both kindes and where they haue neither bread nor wine neither can possibly prouide them they may safely vse such other elements as doe stand them in the like stead as in the place of bread that which commeth nearest to the vse thereof and for wine some other precious liquor that is to be had as in Russia in stead of wine they vse a certaine drink like vnto that which we call Metheglen 2 As for the other reasons of the inconueniences in spilling the wine shaking the cuppe the hanging of it on mens beards other such friuolous allegations as they were no let or hinderance why Christ notwithstanding did not institute the sacrament in both kindes and the Church accordingly obserued it as we reade the Corinthians did communicate in both kindes so ought they to bee no reason why Christians should not receiue in both kindes nowe The Protestants WE holde it to be an Antichristian practise of the Church of Rome to take away from the people the cuppe in the sacrament for although they sometime minister the cuppe to the people yet they vse no consecration ouer it neither giue it as any parte of the sacrament Fulk annotat 1. Corinth 4.10 sect 4. They doe therefore offer great wrong to the people of God in depriuing them of the one halfe of the communion Argum. 1. Iohn 6.53 Christ sayth Except you eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drink his blood you haue no life in you Here wee see both eating and drinking are ioyned together Ergo Christians ought to doe both This place maketh strongly against our aduersaries who doe expound it of the sacramental eating and drinking of Christ. Argum. 2. Christ instituted the sacrament in both kinds giuing charge and commaundement to all Christians in the same manner to celebrate it for he sayth Drinke ye all of this If our aduersaries answere as they doe that this was spoken to the Apostles by the like reason they may say also that when Christ sayd Take eate he spake vnto his Apostles and so the people shoulde neither receiue bread and wine but the Ministers onely Agayne Saynt Paul the best expounder of our Sauiour Christ declareth the right vse of the Lords Supper in both kindes for all Christians for hee writeth to the whole congregation and Church of the Corinthians not to the Pastors and teachers onely and to euery Christian he sayth Let a man examine himselfe and so let him eate of this bread and drinke of this cuppe vers 28. Argum. 3. The Priest that saith Masse you allow to consecrate and receiue in both kindes because hee must expresse liuely the passion of Christ and the separation of his blood from his bodie in the same Rhemist annotat Iohn 6.58 By the same reason all the communicants ought to receiue in both kindes because they doe all shewe foorth the death of Christ and sheading of his blood in the sacrament 1. Corinthian 11.26 And seeing the cuppe is a signe of the blood of Christ shedde for remission of sinnes Math. 26.28 for as much as the thing signified that is
the Masse is auaileable The Papists error 132 FIrst they affirme that Masse may be fayd and offered for all the liuing yea for Pagans and infidels for men absent as well as present for Saint Paul willeth prayers and supplications to be made for all men 1. Timoth. 2.1 Bellarm. cap. 6. Secondly the sacrifice of the Masse is auaileable for the dead which are in error 133 Purgatorie Bellarm. cap. 7. Concil Trid. sess 22. can 3. error 134 Thirdly Masse may be rightly sayd in the remembrance and for the honour of Saints with inuocation of them also in the prayers of the Church Bellarm. cap. 8. Argum. The Apostles taught the Church to keepe a memorie or inuocation of the Saints in this sacrifice and that there should be speciall prayers for the dead for these and such like were the things no doubt that S. Paul sayth he would set in order when he came 1. Cor. 11.34 Rhemist ibid. Ans. 1. To the place out of Timothie we haue answered before that it is vnderstood generally of all prayers made by the faithfull neither doth it follow it is lawfull to pray for all men and therefore the Sacrament is auaileable for all men for these are two diuers things prayer is an effect of our faith the Sacrament is an instrumental or ministerial cause of our faith 2. It is too great boldnes for you without scripture to affirme that these superstitious rites of yours were those very orders which the Apostle promised at his comming to establish but either they were such as partained not to the administration of the Sacrament or were but accidentall orders meete for the Church of Corinth and not necessarie for all times and places The Protestants FIrst the Sacrament for sacrifice we acknowledge none is onely ordained for their comfort that doe receiue it neither can one receiue the Sacrament for another no more then he may be baptized in the stead of another Secondly neither doth the celebration of the Sacrament profite the dead as we haue shewed before that it is in vaine to pray for them Thirdly neither are the Saints either then or at any other time to be prayed vnto or either by this or any other religious worship to be honoured Argum. All these superstitious obseruances are cleane contrarie and repugnant to the institution of Christ. First he sayth Take ye eate ye doe this wherefore to their comfort onely the Sacrament worketh that doe receiue it and are doers in that action the benefite thereof then is not extended to the absent but onely to the partakers Secondly the dead can feele no comfort by it because they can neither eate nor drinke it nor be doers therein Thirdly Christ sayth Doe this in remembrance of me he sayth not in remembrance of Angels Apostles Saints but onely of me Therefore it is contrarie to the institution to vse any commemoration of Saints in the Sacrament Augustine sayth Quis offeret sacrificium corporis Christi nisi pro ijs qui sunt membra Christi Who will offer the sacrifice of the bodie of Christ but for the members of Christ Lib. 1. de origin anim cap. 9. Therefore the Sacrament can not be celebrated for Pagans and Infidels who are no members of Christ. Againe he sayth Nos Martyribus non constituimus templa sacerdotia sacra aut sacrificia We doe not erect either temples priests seruice or sacrifices to Martyrs De ciuitat dei lib. 8. cap. 27. Ergo it is not lawfull to vse the Sacrament for the honour of Saints THE FIFT QVESTION OF priuate Masses The Papists IF any man shall say that priuate Masses wherein the Priest alone by himselfe error 135 doth communicate are vnlawful and therefore to be abolished we pronounce him accursed Concil Tridentin sess 22. can 8. Argum. The sacrifices of the law were sacrifices before the people did eate thereof so the substance making of a medicine is one thing the ingredience or taking of it an other Ergo neither is receiuing part of the substāce or making of the sacrifice of Christs bodie but a consequence only therefore there may be a sacrifice and sacrament without it Rhemist 1. Corinth 11. sect 14. Ans. First we denie that there is any sacrifice in the Eucharist but a Sacrament onely and therefore the comparison holdeth not betweene a sacrifice which consisted both of oblation to God and the participation of the people that offered and the Sacrament which Christ in his institution offered not to God but to his Disciples Secondly neither doth the similitude of a medicine conclude for you cannot proue that the Sacrament not receiued hath vertue in it as a medicine hath for faith is requisite to the worthie receiuing of the Sacrament which is not necessarie in the applying of a medicine and yet it is not properly called a medicine vnlesse being made it be also applied and being receiued doth heale The Protestants WE vtterly condemne the superstitious practises of popish priests who doe vse to communicate alone in their Masses the people standing by gazing and looking vpon him yea you might haue seene many Masses sayd in one Church at once almost in euery corner one no person being present for the most part but the priest and his boy Argum. This priuate receiuing of the Sacrament is contrarie to the institution of Christ who sayth speaking to many Take ye eate ye and diuide this amongst you there must be then a diuision and distribution Saint Paul also sayth We that are many are one bread and one bodie in as much as we are partakers of one bread 1. Corinth 10.17 Ergo many must communicate together· For the Apostle speaketh not of the mysticall communion of the faithfull in this place which doe all make but one bodie in Christ for so we doe communicate with the Church by faith not onely in the Sacrament but without it but of the Sacramentall communion of as many as receiue together for how els can they be sayd to be partakers of one bread or loafe vnlesse they receiue together Augustine sayth that Sacramentum benedicitur sanctificatur ad distribuendum comminuitur That the Sacrament is blessed sanctified and broken to be distributed Ergo where there is distribution there must be many to receiue AN APPENDIX CONCERNING THE name of the Sacrament The Papists THey vtterly mislike these names of the Sacrament that it is called amongst vs the Lords Supper or Communion belike say they they will bring it againe to the Supper or euening seruice Rhemist 1. Corinth 11. sect 6. And the name Communion is as ignorantly vsed of them thereby making the people beleeue that many should communicate together 1. Cor. 11. sect 24. they should rather vse the names of the Eucharist Masse or Leiturgie The Protestants FIrst for the name of the Lords Supper we doe learne of S. Paul so to call it When ye come together sayth he this is not to eate the Lords Supper 1. Corinth 11.20 Rhemist The
redeeme his brother or giue a price to God for him Psalm 49.8 Augustine vpon those words Iohn 16.23 Whatsoeuer yee shall aske in my name he will giue it you Exaudiuntur quippe omnes sancti pro seipsis non autem exaudiuntur pro omnibus vel amicis vel inimicis c. The Saints are heard praying for themselues but they are not heard praying for all their friends or enemies because it is not said simplie He will giue but He will giue to you Ergo much lesse can they satisfie for others if their praiers bee not heard alwaies for others THE EIGHT QVESTION OF INDVLgences and penall iniunctions THE FIRST PART WHETHER PEnall and painefull workes are necessarie vnto repentance The Papists NOt onely amendement and ceasing to sinne or repentance in heart before error 21 God is alwaies enough to obteine full reconcilement but there must bee outward penaltie correction and chastisement beside Rhemist 2. Corinth 2. sect 2. Argum. The incestuous person was rebuked of many 2. Corinth 2.6 which word implieth beside his inward repentance outward correction and chastisement The Protestants Ans. WEe acknowledge that in notorious sinnes and offensiue to the Church as this of the young mans was inward repentance is not sufficient but that after sharpe discipline by the outward testification of sorrow and publike confession satisfaction must bee made to the Church but it followeth not that this course should be taken for all sinnes which a man repenteth him of And yet wee graunt that outward signes of our sorrowe are alwaies necessarie in true repentance not as satisfactorie meanes to redeeme our sins but onely as infallible tokens and effects of our repentance As Augustine saith Satis durus est cuius mentis dolorem oculi carnis nequeunt declarare Hee is hard harted the griefe of whose minde the eyes of his flesh doe not shew forth de poenitent cap. 9. Argum. There are but two essentiall partes of repentance and true conuersion vnto God To turne from our sinnes and leade an holy life So saith the Lord by the Prophet If the wicked will returne from his sinnes and keepe all my statutes Ezech. 18.21 This is all God requireth without any other penall workes wherefore ceasing from sinne and amendement of life which necessarilie include the true sorrow and conuersion of the heart are sufficient for repentance THE SECOND PART BY WHOM penall workes are to bee inflicted The Papists error 22 THe priests onely they say haue power to enioyne workes of penance as affliction of bodie mulct penaltie correction by almes-deedes fasting abstinence and such like Conc. Trid sess 14 can 15. Rhemist 2. Corinth 2. sect 2. Argum. To them is giuen authoritie to binde and loose Ergo to enioyne penance Bellarm. cap. 5. lib. 4. The Protestants Ans. 1. SOme kinde of mulctes Church discipline is not to deale withall as bodily punishment and pecuniarie fines which are to be imposed at the discretion of the magistrate Secondly we grant a wholsome vse of the keyes in Church discipline in punishing and clensing of notorious offenders in the open face of the congregation but priuately to enioyne men penance for their secret sinnes is an Antichristian yoke Argum. True repentance is a free worke not of compulsion or coaction Saint Paul exhorteth men to iudge themselues that they bee not iudged 1. Corinth 11.31 But now when penance is laid vpon a man and not voluntarilie taken of himselfe hee is iudged rather of another hee doth not iudge himselfe Augustine saith Quem poenitet punit seipsum prorsus aut punis aut punit Deus vt ille non puniat puni tu Hee that repenteth punisheth himselfe either thou punishest or God if thou wilt not haue God to doe it punish thy selfe A man therefore must punish himselfe he must not be punished of another in his repentance to Godward for of outward chastisement to the world now is not the question THE THIRD PART OF PARDONS and Indulgences The Papists 1. THe principall Magistrates of the Church are no lesse authorized to pardon then to punish to remit the temporall punishment due to sinners error 23 the offence being first forgiuen which wee call an Indulgence or pardon Rhemist 2. Corinth 2.4 Concil Trid sess 25. Argum. To whome you forgiue any thing I forgiue also 2. Corinth 2.10 Here the Apostle forgiueth the young man a peece of his punishment when he might haue kept him longer in penance for his offence Rhemist ibid. Ans. 1. Wee denie not but that the Church may release such publike exercise of humiliation which is enioyned offenders for triall of their repentance and some satisfaction of the Church when it seeth that they are sufficiently humbled But it followeth not that the Church therefore may dispence with any necessarie part of repentance towards God Secondly whereas you say the Apostle notwithstanding his rebuke was sufficient might haue kept the young man still in temporall punishment it is cleane contrarie to the Apostles owne rule who perswadeth the Corinthians to forgiue him least he should bee ouercome of too much heauines vers 7. The Apostle therefore would neither forgiue nor release him before they had forgiuen him and hee had satisfied the whole Church verse 10. Neither would hee keepe him longer in punishment hauing once sorrowed sufficiently verse 6. The Apostle therefore did neither binde nor release him at his owne pleasure but as hee sawe repentance to bee wrought in the offender The Protestants THe power which the Pope and popish Bishops doe challenge vnto themselues in giuing Pardons and Indulgences is most blasphemous 1 They doe take vpon them to release both the punishment of this life and the paines of purgatorie also and say that their pardons profite both the dead and the liuing Bull. Leon. 10. 2 They pardon not only the punishment but the sin both past and to come for dayes yeares hundreds thousands of yeeres how so euer the Rhemists would beare vs in hand that an indulgence is a release but of the punishment Such was the first Iubile pardon granted by Boniface 8. an 1300. And another by Leo the 10. an 1513. See also the Boston pardons graunted by Pope Innocent Pope Iuâ—ye Pope Clement which gaue them release of all their sinnes for fiue hundred yeares Fox pag. 1178. 3 And which filled vp the measure of iniquitie they set their pardons to sale as in Pope Leo his time his pardoners for ten shillings would giue to any man power to deliuer one soule at his pleasure out of purgatorie Argum. The scripture saith that God onely forgiueth sinnes Mark 2.7 And that Christ no otherwise then as God forgaue sinnes vers 10. His Apostles onely as his ministers and Ambassadors and in his name declare and pronounce remission of sinnes 2. Corinth 5.19 Wherefore there is no such power giuen vnto men at their pleasure to binde or loose Augustine saith Non secundum arbitrium hominum tenentur aut soluuntur peccata
to continue Wherefore it consisteth not in such laborious workes which if a man should long endure he should end his life sooner then repentance The Papists 3 THey measure their penance by number of yeares and dayes They haue error 28 their quadragenas fortie dayes penance septenas seuen yeares penance Ex Tileman Heshus loc 9. de poenitent Err. 83. And they lengthen or cut short the time of penance at their pleasure to continue three seuen or tenne yeares yea sometime more Bellarmin lib. 1. de poenitent 22. The Protestants THat true repentance is not to bee measured by the time but by the right sorrow and contrition of the offender Saynt Paul teacheth vs who writeth for the young man to be released because of his great and sufficient heauines for his fault 2. Corinth 2.7 Augustine also sayth Poenitentia vera non annorum numero sed amaritudine animicensetur poenitentia quamuis sit exigui temporis c. True repentance is not measured by number of yeares but by the bitternes of the soule though it be but for a short time yet it is not despised before that iudge which regardeth the heart THE FIFTEENTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE OF MATRIMONIE THe seuerall questions belonging to this Controuersie are these First whether Matrimonie bee a sacrament properly so called 2 Of the causes of diuorce and whether it bee lawfull to marry after diuorce 3 Of the degrees in mariage First the maner of supputation or accounting of degrees Secondly whether the degrees forbidden Leuit. 18. may bee dispensed with Thirdly whether any other degrees may bee by humane law prohibited 4 Of the impediments of mariage of two sortes First of those that may hinder the contract of mariage onely Secondly of such impediments as may both dissolue the contract and the mariage also consummate 5 The comparison of mariage and virginitie whether either bee preferred before the other before God Of these now in their order 6 Of the times of mariage prohibited 7 Of the ceremonies and rites of mariage THE FIRST QVESTION WHETHER Matrimonie be a sacrament The Papists error 28 THat it is properly and rightly a sacrament instituted of God and not deuised of men Concil Trid. sess 24. can 1. Argum. 1. Ephes. 5.32 This is a great sacrament Matrimonie is here a signe of an holy thing representing the coniunction of Christ and his Church Ergo a sacrament Answ. 1. The wordes are thus to be read rather This is a great mystery Or if we reade sacrament they haue no great aduantage seeing they are not ignorant that the originall word Mysterie which they translate sacrament is attributed to other things then sacraments as 1. Timoth. 3.16 Mysterie of godlinesse Apocal. 17.5 A mysterie great Babylon Neither doe they themselues much vrge this argument 2. The Apostle sayth not that Matrimonie is a mysterie but I speake of Christ and his Church vers 32.3 Matrimonie we confesse to be instituted of God and to be a signe of a holie thing yet no sacrament for so was the Sabboth ordayned of GOD and signified the rest in Christ Hebr. 4.8 yet was it no sacrament Wherfore al significatiue and mysticall signes are not sacraments Argum. 2. Matrimonie giueth grace of sanctification to the parties maried They shal be saued in bearing of children if they continue in faith and loue 1. Timoth. 2.15 These are the graces giuen by matrimonie Ergo a sacrament Answ. 1. We denie that any sacraments giue or conferre grace they are instruments only of grace 2. We also grant that by matrimonie God giueth to the faithfull this speciall grace to liue in holines purenes from the filthy pollution of the flesh but the sacraments are seales of spirituall graces and serue for the increase of fayth it is not sufficient to bee a meanes of any common gift but of the spirituall and iustifiyng grace to make a sacrament 3. Wherefore if by fayth and loue here they vnderstand only the fidelity and duety of wedlocke they are not those spirituall graces whereof sacraments are seales if wee take them for the true faith and loue which are the common graces of the faythfull as the very meaning is they are as well to be had out of wedlock as in it The Protestants THat matrimonie is no sacrament of the Gospell speaking now properly and vnderstanding a sacrament for the seale of the grace of God in the remission of our sinnes by Christ it is thus proued Argum. 1. Matrimony was instituted by GOD before sinne in Paradise therefore it can be no sacrament of the Gospell Argum. 2. Our aduersaries are contrary to themselues for they call matrimonie a prophanation of Orders Martin sect 15. cap. 11. And they say it is more tolerable for a Priest to keepe many concubines then to marrie Pighius ex Tileman Hesbus loc 21. Err. 2. Doe these fellowes meane in good sooth that matrimonie is a sacrament which they make so vile polluted and vncleane a thing 3 In euery sacrament there ought to be an external sensible element as the matter and a sanctifiyng word as the forme But in matrimony there is neither Ergo it is no sacrament Bellarm. The forme are the wordes pronounced by the parties themselues when they contract matrimonie I doe take thee c. They also themselues are the matter yea and the Ministers of the sacrament too For the Iesuite holdeth that it is a sacrament in the very contract and giuing of mutuall consent before it be solemnized in the Church De matrim cap. 6. Ans. 1. The sacrament is one thing and the receiuers another therefore the maried parties cannot be the sacramental matter being the receiuers 2. It is not euery word that sanctifieth but the word of God 1. Tim. 4.5 but these words I take thee are no parte of the word Ergo they want also the forme of a sacrament 3. The ministers of Christ preachers of the word are only the dispēsers of the mysteries and sacraments of the Church 1. Cor. 4.1 Wherefore the parties themselues could not be ministers of matrimonie if it were a sacrament Augustine thus writeth Ne quis istam magnitudinem sacramenti in singulis quibusque hominib vxores habētib intelligeret ego autē dico inquit c. Lest any man should think when the Apostle had said This is a great sacrament that this great Sacrament is to be vnderstood of all maried persons the Apostle addeth but I speake of Christ and his Church But if so be matrimony were a sacrament why is it not to be found in al maried folke THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE CAVSES of diuorse in mariage and whether it be lawfull to marrie after diuorse THE FIRST PART WHETHER THERE MAY BE more causes of diuorse then fornication onely The Papists DIuorse as Bellarm. defineth it is either from the dueties of mariage as from error 29 bed and boord as we say which is properly called diuortium or it is a dissoluing of the knot and
ground an ordinarie and perpetuall sacrament vpon an extraordinary example and that they were such visible graces of the spirite it appeareth because Simon Magu◠saw that the holy Ghost was giuen them by laying on of hands Secondly the holy Ghost was obtained by their praiers ver 15. and not by the very laying on of hands Thirdly to make a Sacrament it is not enough to haue a visible signe and to shew some spirituall grace therewith to be bestowed for then the spittle and clay that Christ vsed the napkins also and partlets which were carried to the sicke from the Apostles and they were healed presently all these should be sacraments for here are outward signes and some effect followed yet because there was no institution of a sacrament by Christ nor any commandement to vse them neither these nor the imposition of hands can be a Sacrament The Protestants WE graunt a ceremonie of imposition of hands vsed in the Apostles time and after so long as the miraculous gifts of the holy Ghost continued in the Church there is also another kinde of imposition of hands such as the Apostle speaketh of Heb. 6.2 which may haue perpetuall vse in the Church which is nothing else but a kinde of praier to be strengthened by the holy Ghost and for the encrease of grace But neither this nor the other doe we holde to be a sacrament Argum. 1. Euery sacrament must haue his appointment from Christ consisting both of an outward element and the word of institution but the popish sacrament of confirmation hath none of these the element they vse is oyle the word of consecration I signe thee with the signe of the Crosse and annoint thee with the Chrisme of health in the name of the Father the Sonne and holy Ghost but none of these haue their institution by Christ or his Apostles any where in the new testament Ergo it is no sacrament Augustine saith Manus impositio quid aliud est quà m oratio super hominem The imposition of the hands what els is it but praier ouer a man He saith not it is a Sacrament THE SECOND PART OF THE MATter and forme of Confirmation The Papists THe matter of this popish Sacrament they say is oyle mixed and tempered error 44 with balme Rhemist Act. 8. sect 6. First halowed and consecrated by the Minister thereof and striked in manner of a crosse vpon the forehead of him that is to be confirmed Bellarm. cap. 8. Argum. 2. Corinth 1.21 It is God which establisheth vs or confirmeth vs with you in Christ and hath annointed vs. Here the Apostle speaketh of confirmation and of the materiall part thereof which is holy vnction or anointing Bellarm. ibid. The Protestants Ans. FIrst the Apostle saith not Which hath confirmed but Which doth confirme which if it were meant of that external ceremony of confirmation see what iniury you offer to the Apostle that being a confirmer of others he had neede now to be catechized and confirmed himselfe Againe he speaketh not of confirmation wrought by the ministerie of men but God saith he confirmeth vs that is establisheth vs by his spirite 2. It is to too grosse to vnderstand by this anointing your greazie besmearing mens faces with your Chrisme seeing the Apostle expoundeth himselfe in the next verse He hath sealed vs and giuen the earnest of his spirite in our harts ver 22. Of this holy anointing of our harts by the spirite S. Iohn also maketh mention saying This Anointing teacheth you all things 1. epist. 2.27 But doth the anointing of the face I pray you giue men instruction Let vs heare Augustines exposition Christus sit in corde vnctio ipsius sit in corde inspiratio eius docet vnctio eius docet Let Christ be in your harts let his anointing be in your harts his inspiration is his anointing you may be ashamed therefore so grossely to abuse Scripture 3. As for your oyle therefore mixed with balme First the true balme you know is not to be had and therefore you abuse the people Secondly make the best of it you can it is but a Iewish ceremonie Thirdly your benediction of it is but a kinde of magicall inchantment seeing you haue no word of God to consecrate creatures in that sort for all things are sanctified by the word of God and praier Ergo without the warrant of God there is no such sanctifying of creatures The Papists 2. THe forme of Confirmation is in the words which are pronounced I signe thee with the signe of the crosse and confirme thee with the Chrisme of error 45 saluation or health in the name of the Father the Sonne and holy Ghost Bellarm cap. 10. The Protestants 1. THey must shew the institution of Christ out of the word for the forme of euery sacrament which they can not doe for this vnlesse they runne to their beggerly traditions which they blasphemously call the word of God vnwritten 2. Where haue they learned that men are confirmed and established with the externall anointing of oyle so said some amongst the Colossians Touch not taste not handle not to whom the Apostle answereth Which things perish with the vsing and are after the commandements of men Coloss. 2.21.22 So is this anointing with oyle a meere inuention of men and hath no longer vertue or force then in the naturall vse thereof THE THIRD PART OF THE EFFIcacie and vertue of confirmation The Papists THe holy Ghost is giuen in confirmation for force strength and corroboration against all our spirituall enemies and to stand constantly in the confession error 46 of our faith euen to death with great increase of grace Rhemist Act. 8. sect 7. And in this respect it giueth more abundant grace in strengthening of vs against the deuil then Baptisme doth Bellarm. cap. 11. The Protestants FIrst they doe offer great iniurie to the spirite of God tying him as it were to their beggerly elements which haue power as they say to conferre grace The Scripture saith The spirite bloweth where it listeth Ioh. 3. The spirite of God is free and is giuen without Sacraments as well as with them but this tradition of yours is no Sacrament if it were yet could it not conferre grace as we haue proued before Secondly they doe greatly deface the Sacrament of Baptisme making it imperfect without confirmation saying that he which is baptized shall neuer be a perfect Christian vnlesse he be confirmed with Chrisme Gerson And that it is to be reuerenced with greater reuerence then Baptisme See Fulk Act. 8. sect 7. Yea they depriue Baptisme of the proper effect and vse thereof which is a signe vnto vs of the assistance of Gods spirite to fight manfully against the Deuill for by baptisme we are buried into the death of Christ Rom. 6.3 But Christ by his death triumphed ouer the Deuill Coloss. 2.15 Ergo Baptisme is a signe of our victorie against the Deuil yet they rob Baptisme of this honor and giue it to
Confirmation And thus they preferre their owne inuentions before the ordinance of God no Sacrament before a Sacrament Augustine sheweth what the Sacrament of Vnction is Vnctionis sacramentum est virtus ipsa inuisibilis vnctio inuisibilis spiritus sanctus The sacrament of vnction is the inuisible vertue the inuisible anointing the holy spirite What is become now of your sacrament of vnction THE FOVRTH PART OF THE RITES and ceremonies of Confirmation The Papistes THe ceremonies which they commonly vse in Confirmation are these First error 47 the Bishop must breathe vpon the pot or cruze of Chrisme Seōcdly he saluteth it in these words Aue sanctum Chrisma Haile holy Chrisme Thirdly he giueth a kisse Fourthly he striketh him that is cōfirmed with his hand to teach him patience Fiftly his forehead is bound about least the Chrisme should run downe which teacheth him not to lose the grace of God Sixtly seuen daies together he must neither wash his head nor face And these with such like ridiculous toyes are practised amongst them Bellarm. cap. 13. lib. de confirmat The Protestants 1. SOme of these ceremonies we condemne as ridiculous as the breathing vpon the oyle the striking of the party confirmed which light gestures become not the grauity of the Ministers of the Gospell all things should be done in the Church in decent and comely order 1. Cor. 14.40 Secondly one of them is meerely Idolatrous to salute the oyle as the Angel saluted Mary to say Aue All haile vnto it making an Idoll of it being a thing without sense or life Thirdly all of them are superstitious hauing mysticall and typicall significations and shadowes which agreeth not with the nature of the Gospel for all shadows are now past the body being come Col. 2.17 Lastly they are superfluous cumbersome and burdenous as Augustine saith Ipsam religionem quam Deus paucissimis sacramentis liberam esse voluit onerib premunt They oppresse religion with the burden of ceremonies which God hath left free in few sacramēts Againe who seeth not how thus by their own traditions they doe euacuate the ordinance of God for in stead of catechizing and instructing of the youth in the principles and foundation of religion as of repentance from dead workes faith toward God of the resurrection and eternall iudgement Hebre. 6.2.3 they haue brought in nothing else but oyling greazing annointing of them breathing vpon them crossing and such like and whereas S. Paul giueth Parents a charge to bring vp their Children in the instruction of God Ephes. 6.4 They bid them bring their Children to be anointed crossed chrismated as they call it and they haue done enough THE SECOND QVESTION of Orders THe seuerall partes of this question are these First whether it be a Sacramēt Secondly of the efficacie and vertue thereof Thirdly of the ceremonies THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE receiuing of orders be a Sacrament The Papists THat holy Orders are a sacrament rightly and properly so called it was decreed in the Tridentine Councell sess 23. canon 3. And that not onely the error 48 three higher degrees of Priesthood Deaconship subdeaconship but the foure inferiour orders of Exorcistae Acoluthi Lectores Ostiarij doe belong vnto the same sacrament of Orders and are sacraments as well as the other Bellarm cap. 8. lib. de sacram ordinis Argum. 1. Timoth. 4.14 Despise not that gift which was giuen thee through prophesie with the laying on of hands Holy orders giue grace by an externall ceremonie and worke Ergo it is a Sacrament Rhemist in hunc locum Ans. 1. It cannot be proued out of this place that imposition of hands giueth grace for this was an extraordinary gift which S. Paul speaketh of and doth not alwaies follow imposition of hands Secondly this gift was not giuen by the very ceremony of imposition of hands but through prophesie and reuelation of the holy Ghost for it was reuealed vnto the Church by the spirite of prophecie that Timothie was a chosen vessell of God therefore S. Paul saith That worthie thing which is committed vnto thee keepe through the holy Ghost 2. Tim. 1.14 The holy ghost was both the conferrer of that grace and the preseruer of it Imposition thē of hands was but an outward signe of the presence of Gods spirit vpon those that were lawfully ordeined for al vpon whom hands were laid receiued not the holy ghost but such only as were appointed of God And therefore the Apostle chargeth Timothie to lay hands sodenly on no man 1. Timoth. 5.22 which caueat was not needfull if vpon whomsoeuer he had laid his hands they should immediately receiue the holy Ghost The Protestants YOur seuen popish orders we do not at all receiue into the church much lesse can we abide that they should be sacraments The lawfull ordeining of Pastors teachers and Deacons we doe acknowledge but no sacrificing Priesthoode nor no ministring Deaconship at the Altar such orders as we haue notwithstanding we doe not take to be Sacraments much lesse yours that are vtterly to be abolished Argum. 1. Sacraments must haue their institution from Christ so haue not your orders for Christ instituted onely Apostles and Disciples Presbyters and Deacons were founded by the Apostles who notwithstāding had no commission to constitute new Sacraments As for the other fiue orders of Subdeacons Readers Acoluthi Exorcistes doore keepers they are neither read in Scripture nor ordeined of the Apostles nor heard of for many yeeres after Secondly your Sacrament hath neither outward element nor word of institution if you say laying on of hands is the externall signe we answere that the visible signe in a Sacrament must not onely be an externall action but a materiall element as water in Baptisme and bread and wine in the Lords Supper The forme you say is in these wordes pronounced by the Bishop Accipite potestatem offerendi sacrificium Receiue ye power to offer sacrifice Bellarm. ca. 9. We answere againe that this sacrificing office hath no foundation in Scripture the Ministers of the Gospell are called dispensers of Gods Mysteries namely of the word and Sacraments 1. Corinth 4.1 Ministers for Christ not sacrificers of Christ wherefore neither haue ye any word of institution and consequently no Sacrament And I pray you tell me if you will make euery one of your orders a Sacrament then must you needes haue as many Sacraments as there are orders and so shall you haue sixe Sacraments more then you thought for you doe distinguish all the orders in office and forme of consecration one from another and therefore they cannot all make one Sacrament Augustine saith Christus Sacramentis numer◠paucissimis societatem populi colligauit Christ hath ioyned together his people with most fewe Sacraments and then he nameth Baptisme and the Communion Et si quid aliud in Scripturis canonicis commendatur and if any other be commended in Scripture Ergo there is no Sacrament of orders because it is not found in
would haue promised health by calling for the Elders if the gift had not beene generall in euery congregation Ans. 2. Neither is remission of sinnes annexed to the element but to the generall doctrine of prayer made in fayth The prayer of fayth saith the Apostle shall heale the sicke The Protestants EXtreme Vnction is no conuenient ceremonie at all to be vsed in the Church as tending to superstition and breeding a vayne confidence in terrene elements much lesse is it to be holden for a sacrament Argum. 1. It hath no institution from Christ For they themselues confesse that Mark 6.13 there is but a preparatiue to the sacrament of extreme Vnction Rhemist the promulgation and publishing thereof is set forth by the Apostle Iam. 5. But this is not to be admitted that Christ was a preparer of sacraments onely and that they were perfited and finished by his Apostles Nay they were not to adde any thing to the institution of sacraments but to take them as Christ deliuered them 1. Cor. 11.23 Agayne the place in Iames maketh nothing for their popish aneeling for the Apostle would haue al the Elders called but one priest is sufficient to bring your oyntment box Secondly if any man be sick sayth Saint Iames though it be not deadly or mortall sicknes but whensoeuer he is sicke But your Vnction is neuer ministred before the poynt of death Thirdly here health is certainely promised But not one amongst tenne recouereth after your popish aneeling Argum. 2. Christ vsed sometime clay and spittle sometime other elements in healing the diseased as the Apostles vsed oyle why I pray you then may not they be sacraments as well as this For they were signes of healing but for a time no more was the anoynting with oyle Augustine sayth De latere Christi in cruce sacramenta ecclesiae profluxerunt The sacraments of the Church issued out of Christs side vpon the Crosse There gushed out â—â—is side water and blood but wee reade not that any oyle was shedde from 〈◊〉 therefore by Augustines argument Vnction is no sacrament THE SECOND PART OF THE effect and vertue of extreme Vnction The Papists error 53 FIrst it giueth health of body Secondly it wipeth away the reliques of sinne And therefore the priest thus sayth Per istam sanctam Vnctionem suam pijssimam misericordiam indulgeat tibi Deus quicquid deliquisti per visum c. By the vertue of this holy oyntment and the most merciful fauour of God the Lord forgiue thee what thou hast offended by thy sight hearing c. Bellarm. cap. 7.8 The Protestants 1 YOur popish aneeling is not able to heale the bodie as wee see by daylie experience for more die then liue after your anoynting And they that doe recouer should doe as well without your aneeling Wherefore this anoynting of oyle is not like to that vsed by the Apostles for then health certainly followed Iam. 5.14 2 It is also a great blasphemie to ascribe remission of sinnes to a terrene and beggerly element The Apostle saith not the oyle but the Prayer of fayth shall saue the sicke The scripture also testifieth that the Iust shall liue by fayth Rom. 1.17 And we walke by faith not by sight 2. Corinth 5.7 But he that ascribeth remission of sinnes to oyle or any other externall element walketh by sight not by fayth THE THIRD PART OF THE MINISTER of extreme Vnction and the ceremonies The Papists FIrst they giue power only vnto their anoynted Masse priests to aneele the sicke with oyle Lay men haue no authoritie to doe it nor whosoeuer are error 54 no Priests Concil Trident. sess 14. can 4. Secondly for the rite and ceremonie the Priest comming to the sicke must anoynt his fiue senses his eyes eares nostrels mouth and hands also the reines which is the seate of concupiscence and his feete which are the instruments of execution Bellarmin cap. 10. The Protestants 1 THis anoynting which Saint Iames speaketh of was done by the whole company of Elders in euery congregation which were not all the Pastors of the Church Yea and it appeareth by their own Canons Innocent 1. Epist. 1. cap. 8. that it was lawfull for lay men and all Christians to vse this anoynting see Fulk annot Iam. 5. sect 5. 2 What neede the body be anoynted in so many places It is meere superstition of the like minde was Peter sometime when he sayd to Christ who would wash his feete Lord not my feete onely but my hands and my head To whom Christ answered He that is washed neede not saue to wash his feete but is cleane all Iohn 13.9 Where although the words of Christ haue a spirituall meaning yet we see the euident and playne practise of them in Baptisme In the which sacrament we doubt not but that infants are thorougly baptized though euery part be not touched with water And euen so if your aneeling were a sacrament why might it not suffice in some one part of the bodie to be anoynted and not in so many This we are sure of that nowe you speake without booke For the Apostle maketh no mention of anoynting eyes hands or mouth but onely generally of anoynting the sick And thus it appeareth that your extreme Vnction is no sacrament nor any of the other foure which you haue inuented THE CONCLVSION OF THIS treatise concerning the sacrament THus I trust we haue made it pliane by scripture and euidence of argument that there are but two sacraments onely Baptisme and the Supper of the Lord left and enioyned to the people of God by our Sauiour Christ for foure things are required to make a sacrament First the authority of Christ in commanding it Secondly the element or external signe as the matter Thirdly the word of institution as the forme Fourthly the end and vse to be a seale of our fayth for remission of sinnes 1 Concerning the efficient cause we finde that two sacraments onely in the new testament are commanded by Christ to be vsed for euer in the Church Baptisme and the Lords Supper which both by his owne example and presence as also his precept and commandement were established 2 There must be an outward visible elementall signe as is water in Baptisme bread and wine in the Lords Supper But so is there not in the fiue popish sacrameÌ„ts For in some there is no signe at all as in Matrimonie where they are driuen to say that the parties that are maried are the signes In some there is a signe but not visible as in absolution the audible voyce of the priest ponouncing the words of absolution is they say the outward signe But in all the sacraments of Christs institution we finde a visible signe In some there is an outward signe but it is an action or gesture only no material element which is not sufficient so is the imposition of hands in giuing of Orders In some there is a materiall signe as Chrisme in Confirmation oyle in extreme Vnction
men nor Apostolike giftes wee are not to doubt but that this promise and prophesie of the vniuersall preaching of the Gospell is performed already Argum. 2. It appeareth in Ecclesiasticall histories that the Apostles dispersed themselues into all partes of the worlde euery where preaching the Gospell Thomas preached to the Parthians Medes Persians also to the Germanes Simon Zelotes in Mauritania Africa and in Britania Iudas called Thaddaeus in Mesopotamia Mark in Aegypt Bartholomaeus to the Indians Andrew preached to the Scythians Sogdians Aethopians So that there were fewe or no knowen countreyes in the world which heard not of the fame of the Gospell But here two things must be obserued First that the Gospel was to bee preached in the habitable or knowen world the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Many countreyes are inhabited now that were not habitable then or at the least not inhabited wherefore it was sufficient that the people of the world heard of the Gospel howsoeuer afterward they were propagated into other vnknowen places Secondly as Augustine sayth Omnes gentes promissae sunt non omnes homines omnium gentium All nations were promised to heare of the Gospel not all the men and inhabitants of euery nation And so we doubt not but the Apostles did lay the foundation of fayth through the whole worlde and were first planters of the Churches in euery nation But their plantings were watered and encreased and continued by others Wherefore seeing the world hath once already beene generally lightened with the truth of the Gospell we are not to looke any more for a solemne legacie and ambassage to be sent from the Lord vnto all nations But those countreyes rather which somtime had the trueth and now haue lost it ought now to seeke vnto those places that haue it as the Queene of Saba went a long iourney to heare Salomons wisdome They therefore that yet doe expect an vniuersall preaching may sooner see Christ comming in the cloudes then haue their expectation satisfied THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE comming of Henoch and Elias before the day of iudgement The Papists error 107 THeir common and receiued opinion is that Henoch and Elias doe yet liue in their bodies in Paradise and shall come in person to oppose themselues against Antichrist and by their preaching to conuert the Iewes Rhemist Apocal. 11. sect 4. Argum. Malachie 4.5 I will send you Eliah the Prophet before the great and fearefull day of the Lorde These are also the two witnesses spoken of Apocal. 11.3 Which shall be slaine and rise vp againe the third day Ergo Eliah and Henoch shall come before the day of the Lorde Bellarm. de Roman pontif 3.6 Ans. First the prophesie of Malachie was fulfilled in Iohn Baptist who came in the spirite of Elias as it is thrise in the Gospell applied once by the Angel Luk. 1.16 twise by our Sauiour Christ Matth. 11.14 17.13 Bellarmine saith it is not properly vnderstoode of Iohn Baptist but onely in an allegorie First the Prophet speaketh of the great and fearefull day of the Lord but the comming of Christ was the acceptable time Ans. Here the Iesuite bewrayeth great ignorance As though the comming of Christ in the flesh as it brought comfort to the Elect to as many as were ordeined to saluation was not also hastening of the iudgement of God against the wicked and therefore Iohn saith The axe was laide to the roote of the tree Matth. 3.10 and that Christ came with his fanne in his hand verse 12. The Apostle Heb. 12.26 applieth that saying of the Prophet Once againe wil I shake not onely the heauens but the earth to the preaching of the Gospell wee see then in what sence the first comming of Christ is called a fearefull and terrible day Ans. Secondly by the two witnesses is vnderstood the small yet sufficient number of the true seruants of God which shall witnesse the truth euen in the whottest persecution of Antichrist there is no mention made of Henoch or Elias And if you will needs vnderstand that literally of their rising againe why not the rest also how fire shall proceede out of their mouthes to consume the wicked and they shall turne water into blood The meaning is nothing else but that God will alwaies haue faithfull witnesses in his Church which shall alwaies stand vp in the stead of the Prophets and holy men gone before The Protestants LIke as the Pharisies deceiued the Iewes with vaine expectation of Elias and so hindred their beliefe in Christ so the Papists would not haue men to acknowledge the manifestation of Antichrist vnder this false pretence that Henoch and Elias must first come before Antichrist bee reuealed which wee doe hold as a Iewish fable and popish dreame Argum. 1. The Prophesie of Elias comming is properly fulfilled in Iohn Baptist and therefore wee are not to looke for any other accomplishment thereof neither now is there any Paradise remaining but Heauen 2. Corinth 12.4 And to affirme that Henoch and Elias went vp to Heauen in their bodies before the ascension of Christ out of Scripture it cannot be proued it is euident that they were taken vp aliue into heauen but not that they continued aliue Argum. 2. The varietie of opinions concerning the personall appearance of Henoch and Elias declare that it is an vncertaine thing and but deuised of men Hilarye saith they shal be Moses and Elias Chrysostome granteth that Elias shall come but not Henoch Iustine thinketh that not onely Henoch and Elias are aliue but all those whose bodies rose at the resurrection of Christ Hippolytus is of opinion that Iohn the Diuine shall come with them and some say Ieremie also whose death is not read of Fulk Apocal. 11. sect 4. And thus it is no meruaile if men run mad as it were in their foolish conceites hauing no warrant for their opinions out of Scriptures The nation of the Iewes wee grant according to the manifest prophesie of Saint Paul shall in the end be conuerted but not in such sort by the personall preaching of Moses and Elias for the Apostle setting downe at large the mysterie of their calling would not haue left out so necessarie a thing Augustine by the two witnesses vnderstandeth the two testaments the Old and the new But hee denieth vtterly that any shall rise before the comming of Christ as the Apostle saith 1. Corinth 15.23 The first fruites is Christ Then they that are Christs at his comming but not before Vnde saith he excluditur omnis suspicio quorundam qui putant hos duos testes duos viros esse ante aduentum Christi coelum in nubibus ascendisse Their suspition therefore or opinion is vtterly excluded which thinke these two witnesses to bee two men which should ascend into heauen before the comming of Christ. Augustine we see is flat against them THE THIRD PART WHETHER THE most grieuous persecutions that euer were shall be toward the end
so exhorteth the superiour Pastors and Bishops to looke to their Clergie as the Rhemists would haue it for S. Peter speaketh of the whole flocke and congregation which cannot bee vnderstood properly of many Ministers dispersed into seuerall places 2 Neither shall wee finde this word Clerus the Clergie properly applied to the Ministers throughout the newe testament let our aduersaries brag neuer so much of scripture as they doe Galat. 6.6 S. Paul vseth these names of difference 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the teacher and he that is taught and 1. Corinth 14.16 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the speaker and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the priuate or vnlettered man So that all their names are giuen in respect of their outward ministerie and calling not in regard of any difference before God For before the Lord as there is neither Graecian nor Iewe bond nor free male nor female so neither is there Clerke or lay man 3 Augustine thus writeth concerning this name Cleros qui sunt in ecclesiastici ministerij gradibus ordinati sic dictos puto quia Matthias sorte electus est in Psal. 67. Clerkes which serue in the Ministerie I thinke were so called because Matthias was chosen by lot See then they are not called Clerkes because they are the Lords lot but because they are allotted and chosen out of the people for that seruice as the Leuites are called the peoples gift Numbers 18.6 and the Priests office an office of seruice not of more merite or holinesse or an office of Lordly preeminence but of ministerie and seruice Augustine therefore hath a notable saying Non nos digni qui pro vobis oremus vos indigni qui pro nobis oretis Psal. 68. We are not onely worthie to pray for you and you vnworthie to pray for vs Auditoribus suis quibus verbum praedicauit se commendauit Apostolus ibid. The Apostle commendeth himselfe to their deuout praiers to whom he preached By this their error is confuted that thinke the prayer of a Priest to be the rather heard for the merite and dignitie of his calling howsoeuer els he be affected in his prayer So the Rhemists say that a prayer not vnderstood profiteth by the vertue of the worke wrought and the office of the Priesthood Annot. 1. Corinth 14. sect 10. THE SECOND QVESTION CONCERNING the election and institution of Bishops and Pastors THis question hath two parts First of the election generally of Pastors and Ministers Secondly of the election of the Bishop of Rome THE FIRST PART CONCERNING THE ELEction generally of all Bishops and Pastors The Papists error 67 THey say that the election of Bishops neither belongeth to the Clergie nor the people but wholly appertayneth to the Bishop of Rome as for the people they haue they say nothing at all to doe in the election of their pastors or ordayning of them that neither their suffragium consilium or consensus suffrage counsell or consent is to be required Bellarm. de clericis lib. 1. cap. 7. 8. 1 That the people are to be vtterly excluded thus they would proue it Aaron was onely elected of Moses without consent of the people so were the Apostles by our Sauiour Ergo the peoples consent is not required Bellarm. Ans. Who seeth not that there is great difference betweene ordinary and extraordinary callings such as the calling of the Apostles was and Aarons at the first though the office of the high Priest afterward became ordinarie Also it followeth not the Apostles were chosen without consent of the people when there were yet no faithfull and Christian congregations and because they were pastors of the whole world Ergo as well the peoples consent may be wanting in the election of ordinarie Bishops and Pastors which haue their peculiar proper charges and there being now many faithfull and well instructed congregations It is one thing to appoynt Pastors for the Church not yet planted an other thing to constitute them in a Church alreadie reformed and instructed for we reade of nations that haue been conuerted to the faith by those that had no calling of the Church as a great nation of the Indians was by Aedesius and Frumentinus Ruffin lib. 1.9 and the Iberians by a captiue woman Ruffin 1.10 2 The people cannot iudge who are fit to be pastors and their elections are tumultuous as we may reade how in the election of Damasus there were 137. persons slaine and therefore it is not meete nor conuenient that the matter should be committed to the people either to elect or ordayne but whatsoeuer they did in times past it was either by sufferance or negligence of the Bishops Bellarmin cap. 7. Ans. First meere popular elections were neuer allowed in any well ordered Church neither was the allowāce of their pastors wholly referred to the people neither did they beare the chiefe stroke but the election was moderated by the wisedome and grauitie of the Clergie Fulk Tit. 1. sect 2. Secondly the question is not betweene vs concerning the ordayning of pastors for that belonged only to the Eldership and was done by laying on of their hands 1. Timoth. 4.14 but concerning the electing and choosing of them Thirdly neither doe we dispute whether it be conuenient and necessarie at al times but whether it be lawfull for neither doe we affirme that it is of the essence and substance of the calling of ministers to be chosen by the voyces of the people as though they were no ministers but vsurpers and intruders that are not so called but whether it hath been at any time may yet be lawfull to require the consent of the people Fourthly it is false that the people had this right by vsurpation or els sufferance of the Pastors for Cyprian sayth it did De diuina authoritate descendere lib. 1. Epistol 4. That this custome was grounded vpon diuine authoritie yea it was established by the lawes of Kings as there was a lawe made by Lodouicus Pius King of France that Bishops should bee ordayned by the free election of the Clergie and the people ex Ansigis lib. 1. cap. 20. 3 Therefore say they elections of Bishops ought to bee at the Popes assignement for vnto Peter was committed the care of the vniuersall Church when he bad Peter feede his sheepe Hereupon they are bold to affirme that we haue neither true Bishops nor Ministers because they are not lawfully sent that is as they interprete it from the See Apostolike Bellarm. lib. 1. cap. 3.8 Rhemist Rom. 10. sect 5. Answere First the charge giuen to Peter beareth no such sense that because Christ bad him feede his sheepe therefore he and his successors should onely haue authoritie to consecrate Ministers for if Peter had it by this grant other Elders and Pastors had it in like sort to whom it as well appertayned to feede the flocke of Christ 1. Peter 5.2 And agayne not Peter onely but the rest also of the Apostles did ordayne and consecrate Pastors