the catholike Church and there hath reckoned vp the consent of peoples and nations authoritie begun with miracles nourished with hope increased with charitie established with antiquitie succession of priests from Saint Peters seat and the name of Catholike he addeth that though these things bee great motiues to keepe him in the vnitie of the Church yet must the truth of the scriptures be preferred before them all In regard whereof he promiseth to giue more credit to Manichaeus than to the Church and to yeeld vnto his doctrine if he shal be able to prooue it out of the scripture In the meane while he must giue him leaue to preferre the credit of the catholike Church before his bare wordes especially seeing the Church but not Manichaeus was the outward meanes and externall helpe that brought him to the faith of the Gospell The second Obiection The baptisme of infants is a matter of faith but not conteined in the holy scriptures ergo not all things necessarie for mans saluation are therein to be found The Answere I answere that it is contained in the scriptures and I proue it by sundry reasons The first argument is drawne from the couenant For infants being within the couenant ought not to be debarred from the signe and seale thereof I will establish my couenant betweene me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an euerlasting couenant to be God to thee and to thy seed after thee Againe you are the children of the Prophets and of the couenant which God made to our fathers saying to Abraham euen in thy seede shall all the families of the earth be blessed Againe repent and be euery one of you bâ—ptised in the name of Iesus Christ for the remission of sinnes and ye shall receiue the gift of the holy Ghost For the promise was made to you and to your children and to all that are a farre off euen so many as the Lord our God shall call Againe if the first fruits be holy the whole lumpe also is holy And if the roote be holy the boughes also Againe suffer the yong children and stay them not from comming vnto me for to such belongeth the kingdome of heauen And where Saint Matthew hath little children then S. Luke hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 infants which can neither vnderstand nor come Againe your children are holy yong children therefore must be baptised The second argument is drawne from the analogie of the figure of the old testament For circumcision to which baptisme succeeded did pertaine to both ages as well to yoong as to old In whom also yee are circumcised with circumcisioÌ„ made without hands by putting off the body of the flesh subiect to sinne by the circumcision of Christ buried with him in baptisme in whom yee are also risen againe through the faith of the operation of God who raised him vp from the dead Thus saith Saint Paul by whose wordes we may learne sufficiently that baptisme did succeed to circumcision for the same end vse and purpose viz. that by it we may putting off the bodie of sinfull flesh be buried together with Christ and rise again with him through faith The third argument is drawne from the practise of the Church For the Apostles of our Lord Iesus were commaunded to baptise all sorts of people withour exception Goe therefore and teach all nations baptising them in the name of the father and of the sonne and of the holy Ghost Againe we read in the historie Apostolical that the whole house of Lydia was baptised neither yong nor old being excepted Againe we may find in the acts that the keeper of the prison at Philippos was baptised all they of his houshold incontinent Againe in another place we may read that the whole family of Stephaâ—â—s was baptised not one at all exempted The Obiection Infants haue no faith ergo they may not be baptised The Answere I denie the antecedent because their faith and profession is this to be borne of the faithfull in the vnitie of the Catholike Church Againe though they haue not actuall faith yet haue they faith fundamentallie and by inclination In which sense our Lord Iesus doth reckon them among the faithfull when he saith in this manner VVhosoeuer shall offend one of these little ones that beleeue in me it is better for him if a milstone were hanged about his neck and he were cast into the sea Infants therefore when they are baptized in the Church for faithfull are then deemed to beleeue after their manner VVho albeit they haue not faith in act yet haue they the spirit and vertue or foundation of faith by Gods operation in them Neither ought this thing to seeme strange vnto vs. For if the infants of the wicked ones haue infidelitie and impietie though not in act yet in inclinatioÌ„ by nature as writers graunt then truly may it be said that the infants of the faithfull haue faith and pietie though not in act yet in inclination by grace For grace cannot be of lesse force through Christ than nature through the fall of Adam for God saith plainely I will be thy God and the God of thy seed after thee The third Obiection VVee beleeue the trinitie of persons in vnitie of substance but this is not in the scripture Ergo. The answere I denie the assumption for the trinitie of persons is plainly auouched in the holy Gospel where it is thus written But the comforter which is the holy Ghost whom the Father will send in my name he shall teach you all things Thus saith our Lord Iesus In which words we see mention made of three distinct persons first of the Father which sendeth secondly of the holy Ghost which is sent thirdly of the Sonne in whose name he is sent Againe in another place it is thus written There are three which beare recorde in heauen the Father the VVord and the holy Ghost and these three are one Item Matth. 28. verse 19. The fourth Obiection It is not to be found in the holy scrpture that Christ is consubstantiall and of the same substance which the Father Ergo. The Answere The antecedent is false For first in the prophesie of Zacharias I find these wordes arise O sword vpon my shepheard and vpon the man that is my fellow saith the Lord of hostes Secondly in many places of the new testament First in these words I and my Father are one Secondly in these words If ye beleeue not me beleeue the works that ye may know and beleeue that the Father is in me and I in him Thirdly in these words VVho being in the forme of God thought it no robberie to be equall with God Fourthly in these words She shall bring foorth a sonne and thou shalt call his name Iesus for he shall saue his people from their sinnes For this respect saith holy
organicall bodie be there as popish faith auoucheth then must the papists beleeue euident contradictions contrarie to Iesuit Bellarmines resolution yea contrarie to all power all Logicke all reason All the papists in England are not able to solue this reason I challenge them all and aduise them to consult together and to craue helpe of their friends elswhere and then to let me haue their speedie answere hereunto Cardinall Caietane affirmeth boldly that no text in the whole Gospell doth prooue effectually and conuince the reader to vnderstand these words properly This is my bodie For which respect frier Ioseph aduiseth grauely to read their Cardinall caute warily Aquinas affirmeth constantly Corpus Christi non esse in pluribus locis simul secundū proprias dimensiones that Christs bodie is not in many places at once according to the proper dimensions thereof whose assertion is my flat position For Christs naturall bodie cannot be without those dimensions which naturally pertaine vnto it Durandus holdeth the very same opinion S. Austine saith plainely that Christs true bodie can be but in one onely place of heauen Vbi totum presentem esse non dubites tanquam deum in codem templo dei esse tanquam inhabitantem deum in loco aliquo coeli propter veri corporis modum Thou must not doubt saith S. Austen that Christ is wholly present euery where as God and in the same temple of God as God inhabiting it and in some one place of heauen for the manner of a true bodie Lo this graue father telleth vs that Christ as God is euery where but yet in respect of his true bodie he is onely in heauen and in some certaine place of heauen Only in heauen because the Scripture saith That he shall be there till the worlds end in some certaine place of heauen to declare the nature and veritie of a true bodie indeed So then if he were present as the papists would haue him his bodie should lose the nature and veritie of a true bodie indeed Againe in another place S. Austen hath these words Donec seculum finiatur sursum est dominus sed tamen etiam hic nobiscum est veritas domini corpus enim in quo resurrexit in vno loco esse oportet veritas autem eius vbique diffusa est Our Lord is aboue vntill the worlds end but yet his truth is with vs here for the bodie of our Lord wherein he rose againe must needs be in one place but this truth is diffused euery where Againe the same S. Austen writing against Faustus the Manichee hath these expresse words Secundum presentiam corporalem simul in Sole in Luna in cruce esse non posset According to his corporall presence it was not possible for him to be both in the Sunne and in the Moone and on the crosse at one and the same time O papists answere if you can if not recant for shame The second Member Of the Sacrifice of the Popish Masse THe Papists teach and beleeue as an article of Christian faith That in their masse Christs true and reall bodie is truly and really sacrificed to God the father vnder the forme of bread as also his true and reall bloud vnder the forme of wine Yet this implieth horrible impietie and brutish crueltie as shall be prooued and consequently popish Masse is to be abhorred First where the Apostle telleth vs that Christ rising againe from the dead henceforth dieth no more because death hath no more dominion ouer him the papists tell vs a contrarie tale that Christ dieth euery day nay a thousand times a day in the daily sacrifice of their masse for with them all priests the Pope Cardinals and some others excepted doe ordinarily say masse euery day and three masses vpon euery Christmas day VVhich being so and three hundred Iesuits and seminarie priests being this day in England and Scotland as the Iesuites tell vs an huge multitude of masses must be said daily in these realmes and many times must Christ be put to death so farre forth as in them lieth though they pretend to honour him thereby For as Cardinall Bellarmine graunteth freely a sacrifice implieth intrinsecally the consumption of the thing that is sacrificed I will not auouch any vntruth vpon any man gentle reader these are his owne words Sacrificium enim preter oblationem requirit mutationem consumptionem rei quae offertur For saith Bellarmine a sacrifice besides the oblation requires an alteration and a consumption of the thing which is offered Againe Bellarmine in another place telleth vs that the bodie and bloud of Christ are offered in the masse verè propriè truly and properly vnder the formes of bread and wine Againe Bellarmine saith in another place that flesh and bloud are not fit for meat nisi prius animal moriatur vnlesse the beast first die and be slaine Againe the same Bellarmine teacheth the same doctrin yet more plainely in another place Thus doth he write Sacrificium enim verum reale veram realem occisionem exigit quando in occisione ponitur essentia sacrificij For a true and reall sacrifice requireth a true and reall killing seeing that the essence of the sacrifice consisteth in the killing thereof And in very deed this is that constant doctrine which S. Paule doth inculcate to the Hebrewes So then we see it cleare and euident by popish faith and doctrine that Iesus Christ our sweet redeemer must first be killed then offered lastly torne and consumed by the teeth of the sacrificing masse-priest or els the popish masse cannot be perfect as their most perfect doctor telleth vs. For confirmation of this popish doctrine it is a constant position and generally receiued axiome in the popish church that by vertue of their consecratorie words Christs bodie is put apart from his bloud and his bloud apart from his bodie and so Christ is there slaine by force of their consecration though he still liue indeed because the priests words haue not so much force as they imagin You shall heare Bellarmines owne words Nam inprimis ideo in coena seorsim consecratur corpus seorsim sanguis vt intelligamus presentiam corporis sanguinis in coena esse ad modum occisi mortui corporis For first therfore is the bodie consecrate apart in the supper and the bloud asunder that we may vnderstand the presence of the bodie and bloud in the supper to be there after the manner of a bodie slaine and dead These are his words and this which he thus deliuereth is the constant doctrine of the Popish Church VVhereupon it followeth of necessitie that if any papist should haue said masse in triduo mortis Christi during Christs death then Christs bodie by vertue there of should haue been dead in one place and his bloud in another place for otherwise Christ should haue been both quicke and dead at
is there because the representation of his bodie is there And much more truly might Christ himselfe say This is my bodie when he gaue the signe and sacrament of his bodie I note fourthly that it is the constant doctrine of the church of England which also many other reformed churches approoue therein that Christs bodie is receiued broken torne and consumed with mouth and teeth figuratiuely significantly mystically sacramentally And consequently if the papists would be iudged by this doctrine which by the pen of the Iesuit Bellarmine they here deliuer the controuersie would soone be at an end But I must needs tell the reader what the Popes owne glosse teacheth vs it is singular and worthie to be noted these are the words Nisi sane intelligas verba Berengarij in maiorem incides haeresim quam ipse habuit ideo omnia referas species ipsas nam de corpore Christi partes non facimus Vnlesse thou vnderstand the words of Berengarius soundly thou shalt fall into a greater heresie than he had and therefore thou must referre all things to the formes for of Christs bodie we make no parts Marke these words gentle reader for they are important They teach vs plainly that it is a most dangerous thing to relie vpon popish decrees euen then when they pretend to reforme the church and to condemne heresies S. Austen confirmeth the doctrine which the Pope compelled Bellengarius to abiure and that in many places of his workes one onely assertion I will now set downe These are his words Illi manducabant panem dominum ille panem domini contra dominum They the other Apostles are the bread that was the Lord he Iudas ate not our Lord but the bread of our Lord against our Lord. Note these words gentle reader and marke them seriously S. Austen telleth vs that the bread which the other Apostles ate was our Lord yet that which Iudas receiued was but the bread of the Lord. This assertion confoundeth the papists For if our Lord and maker be present really in flesh bloud and bone vnder the accidents of bread and that so long as the same accidents remaine vncorrupt as the popish faith holdeth then doubtlesse Iudas should haue receiued his redeemer thē perforce Iudas should also haue receiued panē dominū thē Iudas could not by any possibilitie haue barely receiued panem domini which yet S. Austen affirmeth most constantly For first if it were true that after popish supposed consecration the substance of bread were transubstantiated into Christs naturall bodie as it truly consisteth of flesh bloud and bone and againe if it were also true that the selfesame bodie remained vnder the forme of bread vntill it were corrupted then let all the papists in England with the best aduise of all their adherents and brother papists elswhere in Europe tell me how Iudas could receiue panem domini the bread of our Lord and not panem dominum the bread which is the Lord as S. Austen plainely auoucheth that is how Iudas could receiue the forme with the flesh bloud and bones of Christs organicall and naturall bodie hidden vnder the same and for all that not receiue Christ himselfe and panem dominum as the other Apostles did Let them I say tell me this and I herewith promise to subscribe and neuer henceforth to write against them or any part of their popish doctrine If they will not this doe because they cannot for if they can doe it all the world must thinke they will doe it for their owne credit and the credit of their cause then doubtlesse if the feare of God be before their eyes they will acknowledge the truth and with open mouth confesse the same Corde enim creditur ad iustitiam ore confessio fit ad salutem The fourth Member Of the apparent contradictions in the Popish masse FIrst the papists tell vs that Christs bodie in their masse is the selfesame bodie that was nailed on the crosse And withall they tell vs that it is a figure of the same bodie That it is a flat contradiction their owne deare Cardinall Bellarmine shall tell them These are his words Figurae necessario inferiores esse debent rebus figuratis Figures of necessitie must be inferiour to the things figured by them And this doctrine is most true indeed as S. Paul discourseth to the Hebrewes Now would I know of the papists if they can say ought for the life of their masse how Christs bodie in the masse being the selfesame bodie numero as they teach and beleeue can be inferiour to Christs bodie on the crosse how it can be both inferiour and superiour to it selfe how it can be both of greater and lesser value than Christs body on the crosse being euer the selfesame bodie on the crosse Secondly the papists tell vs that Christs naturall bodie is contained in a little round cake or vnder the accidents and forme of bread Now would I know of the same papists how the bigger can be contained of the lesser how a bushell can be couched in a pecke how a great oxe can be closed vp in a little calues bellie For all these implie euident contradiction Thirdly the papists tell vs that Christs bodie is truly broken For these are the Iesuit Bellarmines words Denique in concilio Romano sub Nicolao 2. compulsus est Berengarius confiteri Christi corpus sensualiter sacerdotum manibus tangi frangi Finally in a councell at Rome vnder Pope Nicholas the second Berengarius was compelled to confesse that Christs bodie is sensuallie touched and broken with the priests hands Now would I know how it can be true that Christs bodie is broken and also true that it is not broken speaking of the same bodie at the same time Let all papists answere and tell me if they can how it implieth not contradiction For to say that not the bodie but the accident of bread is broken is too too childish and friuolous The reason is euident because Berengarius ô cruell impietie was compelled to confesse that Christs bodie was sensually broken Fourthly the papists tell vs that the pronouncing of these words by a priest This is my bodie do make Christs bodie present in their masse and also in other places insomuch marke well gentle reader what I say that if a popish priest come into a great market place where there is great store of wheat bread though a thousand or moe loaues in number and there looking on the bread shall pronounce the said words with intention to consecrate then forthwith euery loafe is God almightie and the people must adore the same Triall hereof was once made de facto in Italie as my selfe being in Rome heard from the mouth of a Iesuit For as the Iesuit reported a priest being degraded and designed to die as he passed in the street by a bakers house beheld a great quantitie of wheat bread and recited these words Hoc est corpus meum
giue licence to marrie a mans owne naturall sister Answere papists if ye can or els yeeld vnto the truth for shame The fourth Article Of originall concupiscence in the regenerat SAint Paule throughout the whole seuenth chapter to the Romans proueth originall concupiscence in the regenerate to be sinne But the papists cannot abide to heare this doctrine they stop their eares against the charmer though he charme neuer so wisely And why I pray you because forsooth it ouerthroweth their holy so supposed iustifications their inherent purities their mutuall satisfactions their condigne merites their pharisaicall supererogations And yet Petrus Lombardus their famous master of sentences whose book to this day is publickely read in their schooles of diuinitie vtterly condemneth their damnable doctrine in this point These are his expresse words Secundum animas vero iam redemptisumus ex parte non ex toto à culpa non à poena nec omnino à eulpa non enim ab ea sic redempti sumus vt non sit sed vt non dominetur But touching our soules we are redeemed in part not wholly from the sinne not from the paine neither wholly from the sinne or fault For we are not so redeemed from it that it be not in vs but that it rule not ouer vs. Thus writeth the worshipfull popish master our reuerend father Lombard out of whose words we may gather with facilitie so much as will serue our turne against the papists For first he saith we are redeemed in part but not in the whole Secondly that we are not wholly redeemed from sinne Thirdly he telleth vs how we are redeemed from sinne viz. that albeit sinne still remaine in vs yet hath it not such dominion ouer vs that it can enforce vs to consent thereunto Loe this doctrine is not mine but the flat doctrine of the papists which I learned of that great papist who for his learning was surnamed the master of sentences and to this day is publickly read in their diuinitie schooles Touching S. Paule he saith first in this manner I my selfe with the mind serue the law of God but with the flesh the law of sinne Out of these words I note first that the Apostle speaketh of the regenerate throughout this whole chapter because he nameth himselfe who was Gods chosen and elect vessell For which respect and the like expressed in the seuenth chapter to the Romanes S. Austen changed his opinion and graunted S. Paule to speake here of the regenerate I note secondly that the elect and regenerate doe serue the law of sinne I note thirdly that the best liuers are so farre from meriting ex condigno grace and glorie that they deserue in rigour of iustice eternall death because death is the reward of sin VVhich for that S. Austen could not well digest at the first he thought that S. Paules words were to be vnderstood of the reprobate and not of the elect and godly sort but when he had pondered the Apostles discourse and words more seriously he changed his opinion This is confirmed in the selfesame chapter in these words But I see another law in my members rebelling against the law of my mind and subduing me vnto the law of sinne which is in my members By these words it is euident that albeit S. Paule were the child of God yet could he not merite any thing in Gods sight but rather in rigour of iustice prouoke Gods heauie displeasure against him For where or what could be his merite who was prisoner to the law of sinne Againe the same is confirmed in these words For I do not the good which I would but the euill which I would not that doe I. Thus saith S. Paule And doubtlesse since he did the euill which he would not he sinned though he were regenerate and in that he sinned he was guiltie of damnation because death is the stipend of sinne For this cause grauely saith S. Austen Cum deus coronat merita nostra nihil aliud coronat quam munera sua VVhen God crowneth our merites he crowneth nothing els but his owne gifts Againe the same is confirmed in these words For the law is spirituall but I am carnall sold vnder sinne Thus saith S. Paule of himselfe And yet it is most true that one vnder the buthen of sinne can merite nothing saue hell fire and eternall paine Againe the same is confirmed in these words If I do that I would not then it is not I that doth it but sinne that dwelleth in me Loe S. Paule graunteth that to be sinne in himselfe which yet himself consenteth not vnto And that he speaketh of originall concupiscence which remaineth in the regenerate after baptisme it cannot be denied And it will not serue the turne to say as Bellarmine doth viz. that originall concupiscence remaineth after baptisme but is no sinne at all and that it is called sinne onely in this respect because it prouoketh a man to sinne as a mans writing is called his hand because it is written with his hand For first their owne master Petrus Lombardus graunteth it to be sinne euen as S. Paule doth Secondly it causeth man to serue the law of sinne which seruice can neuer be but sinne Thirdly S. Paule saith he doth that ill which he would not and that which he doth hate All which must needs be meant of sinne That concupiscence remaining after baptisme is truly called sinne the papists themselues confesse vnawares in a maine point of doctrine and setled ground of their religion Marke well gentle reader what I shall deliuer in this behalfe God chose all in Christ that shall be saued before the foundation of the world and likewise reprobated al both negatiuely and positiuely that I may vse their schoole-tearmes but positiuely for the foresight of original sinne For the proofe hereof it will suffice to alledge the words of our papists at Rhemes in their notes vpon the new testament Thus doe they write So likewise God seeing all mankind and euery one of the same in a generall condemnation and masse of sinne in and by Adam deliuereth some and not othersome These are their own words and that which they teach is the common doctrine of the Romish church Againe the same Rhemists in the chapter afore quoted haue these words by the same example of those twins it is euident also that neither nations nor particular persons be elected eternally or called temporally or preferred to Gods fauour before others by their owne merits because God when he made choise and first loued Iacob and refused Esau respected them both as ill and the one no lesse than the other guiltie of damnation for originall sinne which was alike in them both And therefore where iustly he might haue reprobated both he saued of mercie one This is that strong foundation whereon the papists thinke predestination to be built the which I willingly doe admit as which will make
negligence or of ignorance corrupt the innocencie of the law of Nature which we all receiue in the Protoplast Adam S. Ambrose in another place iumpeth with Bede in these words Non discreuit concupiscentiam hanc à peccato sed miscuit hoc significans quia cum nec suspicio quidem esset istud non licerè apud deum cognoui inquit esse peccatum Sub sua persona quasi generalem agit causam Lexitaque concupiscentiam prohibet quae propterea quod oblectamento est non putabatur esse peccatum He hath not discerned this concupiscence from sinne but hath coupled it with sinne signifying thereby that when there was not so much as any suspition that this thing was not lawfull before God I knew saith he that it is sinne Vnder his own person he pleadeth as it were the generall cause The law therefore forbiddeth concupiscence which because it delighteth seemeth not to be sinne Thus writeth S. Ambrose whose words cannot possibly be vnderstood of any other concupiscence than of that which is inuoluntarie and originall Thirdly that their owne vulgar Latine text which the late councell of Trent preferreth before both the Hebrew and the Greeke and commandeth all papists to vse it as authenticall and none other hath the word iniquitas in both places and doth call as well 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ininiquitie these are the expresse words omnis iniquitas peccatum est All iniquitie is sinne Loe their owne translation to which all papists are tied as a Beare to a stake doth flatlie confound them all and saith plainelie and expressely That euerie iniquitie is a sinne And yet the papists of Rhemes bluntishly and impudently defend the contrarie crying out with open mouthes That some iniquitie is not sinne The truth is this that they are driuen to a non plus and cannot tell in the world what to say against this doctrine of concupiscence in the regenerate For both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is truly and fitly tearmed iniquitas or iniquitie VVhich but that I studie to be briefe I could shew by a thousand testimonies out of S. Austen S. Ambrose and S. Bede Answere therefore ô papist if ye can or if ye dare not because ye cannot then reclaime your selues and yeeld vnto the truth for shame I challenge you and adiure you if your hearts faile you not and if your owne consciences condemne you not to send me an answere to this short challenge which I haue compiled very briefely so once to prouoke you to the open combat which I haue now many years expected at your hands and could neuer yet find so much courage in any of you all VVherefore to seale vp the veritie of this article as an vndoubted truth I will here adde for the complement as amost delicat post-past to satisfie the longing appetites of the Iesuit Parsons the arch priest Blackwell and all the traiterous crew of that Iesuited brotherhood the flat testimonie of their saint Thomas Aquinas whose doctrine they are bound to defend beleeue and approue and may not in any case refuse or denie the same these are his expresse words Dicendū quod illud quod homo facit sine deliberatione rationisnon perfectè ipse facit quia nihil operatur ibi id quod est principale in homine vnde non est perfectè actus humanus per consequens non potest esse perfectè actus virtutis vel peccati sed aliquid imperfectum ingenere horum Vnde talis motus sensualitatis rationem perueniens est peccatum veniale quod est quiddam imperfectum in genere peccati VVe must answere that that which man doth without the deliberation of reason he doth it not perfectly because that which is the chiefest in man worketh nothing there wherefore it is not perfectly mans act and consequently it cannot be perfectly the act of vertue or of sinne but some vnperfect thing in this kind VVhereupon it commeth that such a motion of sensualitie preuenting reason is a veniall sinne which is a certaine imperfect thing in the nature of sinne Thus writeth Aquinas out of whose words I note these important obseruations First that this Aquinas is a popish canonized saint Secondly that for his great learning he was surnamed Doctor Angelicus The Angelicall Doctor Thirdly that Pope Vrbanus the fourth and Pope Innocentius the fift did so admire and reuerence the excellent learning of this famous schoole-doctor who was a learned clarke indeed that they confirmed his doctrine for authenticall and gaue it the first place after the canonicall Scripture Fourthly that this great doctor so highly renowned in the Romish church that no papist may denie or gainesay that which he hath written graunteeth freely teacheth plainely and auoucheth constantly that the inordinate motion of sensualitie which goeth before reason is properly a sinne though but a veniall sinne as he tearmeth it For it is one thing to be a sinne perfectly another thing to be a sinne properly A veniall and little sinne is as well and as truly a sinne as a mortall and great sinne as the papists tearme them For he is as truly and properly a theefe that stealeth a lambe or a goose as he that stealeth an oxe or a horse though not a theefe in so high degree For mortall and veniall sinnes as the papists tearm them doe onely differ Secundum magis minus according to more and lesse But in truth euery sinne is mortall as I haue alreadie proued in my booke of Motiues Answer ô papists if ye can if not repent for shame The fift Article Of the condigne so supposed merite of workes THe papists either of ignorance or of malice doe most vnchristianlie slander the professors of Christs Gospell as though they were enemies to good workes when in deed they both thinke preach and write more Christianly more religiously and more sincerely than the papists doe of and concerning godlie actions and good workes In regard hereof before I come to the maine point of that which I purpose to oppugne in this article I graunt first of all that though good workes neither doe nor can goe before iustification yet they euer follow as the fruits follow the tree the persons that are freely iustified by Gods mercie in Christ Iesus for his merits and condigne deserts I graunt secondly that though good workes goe not before iustification yet doe they so necessarilie goe before saluation that no man without them can attaine eternall life when possibilitie is graunted to doe them I graunt thirdly that good workes are the true effects of predestination by which the children of God make their saluation sure vnto themselues and manifest vnto the world Yet this notwithstanding I hold constantlie beleeue stedfastly and affirme Christianlie that albeit good workes are the effects of predestination and necessarie fruits of faith and iustification yet neither are they the cause of predestination nor of iustification neither
doe they or can they merit ex condigno eternall life or glorie I say merit ex condigno because I willingly graunt with the auntient writers and holie fathers that good workes in a godly sense may be said to merit that is to say to impetrate fauour and reward at Gods hands for his mercie and promise sake who hath promised not to leaue vnrewarded so much as one cup of cold water giuen in his name but they can neuer truly be said to merite for any worthinesse or condigne desert of the works that are done Against which last part I contend with the papists at this present and namely against the late decree of the late Romish Counsell of Trent whose expresse wordes are these Si quis dixerit hominis iustificati bona opera ita esse dona Dei vt non sint etiam bona ipsius iustificati merita aut ipsum iustificatum bonis operibus quae ab eo per Dei gratiam Iesu Christi meritum cuius membrum viuum est fiunt non verè mereri augmentum gratiae vitam aeternam ipsius vitae aeternae si tamen in gratia decesserit consecutionem atque etiam gloriae augmentum anathema sit If any shall say that the good workes of the iustified man are so the gifts of God that they be not also the good merites of him that is iustified or that the iustified man by his good workes which he doth by the grace of God and merit of Christ Iesus whose liuely member he is doth not truly merit the increase of grace eternall life and the consequution of the same eternall life if he shal depart hence in grace and also the augment of glory let him be accursed Here we see the flat doctrine of the Romish Church which whosoeuer will not beleeue stedfastly must bee damned euerlastingly and with fire and faggot bee sent packing speedily Yet that this doctrine is most absurd in it selfe most blaphemous against the free mercie of God and most iniurious to the inestimable merits of our Lord Iesus I vndertake by Gods assistance to prooue by such cleere and euident demonstrations as shal be able to satisfie all indifferent readers and to put the papists to silence for euer in this behalfe The first reason drawne from the holy Scriptures THe first place of holy scripture is conteined in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the gift of God is life euerlasting in Christ Iesus our Lord. This text of scripture doth plainely conuince that life eternall cannot be condignely atchieued by the workes of man for being the free gift of God it can no way be due to the merite of mans worke The Rhemists to extenuate the cleerenesse of this text and as it were to hide and conceale the euidencie thereof doe translate for the Gift of God the Grace of God following their old vulgar Latin edition VVhich translation though in this place it mae be admitted yet doth it not sufficiently expresse the efficacie of the originall word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a gift freely bestowed for which respect their owne famous linguist Arias Montanus who was the onely man chosen as most sufficient for the translation of the old testament out of the Hebrew and of the new out of Greeke and imployed by the king of Spaine for that onlie end did not translate gratia but donatio not grace but donation or free gift Now let vs see and view the iudgement of the holy fathers vpon this portion of holy writ Saint Theodoret hath these wordes Hic non dicit mercedem sed gratiam est enim Dei donum vita aeterna si quis enim summam absolutam iustitiam praestiterit temporalibus laboribus aeterna in aequilibrio non respondent He saith no there reward but grace for eternal life is the gift of God For although one could performe the highest and absolute iustice yet eternall ioyes being weighed with temporall labours are nothing answerable Saint Chrysostome hath these wordes Non eundem seruat oppositorum ordinem Non enim dicit merces benefactorum vestrorum vita aeterna sed donum Dei vita aeterna vt ostenderet quod non proprijs viribus liberati sint neque debitum aut merces aut laborum sit retributio sed omnia illa ex diuino munere gratuitò acceperint He doth not obserue the same order of opposites For he saith not eternall life is the reward of your good workes but eternall life is the gift of God that he might shew that they are not deliuered by their owne strength or vertues and that it is not a debt or a wages or a retribution of labours but that they haue receiued all those things freely of the gift of God Origen writeth thus vpon the same wordes Deum verò non erat dignum militibus suis stipendia quasi debitum alique dare sed donum gratiam quae est vita aeterna in Christo Iesu domino nostro But it was not a thing worthy beseeming God to giue stipends to his souldiers as a due debt or wage but to bestow on them a gift or free grace which is eternall life in Christ Iesus our Lord. Saint Ambrose hath these wordes Sicut enim sequentes peccatum acquirunt mortem ita sequentes gratium Dei id est fidem Christi quae donat peccata babebunt vitam aeternam For as they that follow sinne gaine death so they that follow the grace of Christ that is the faith of Christ which forgiueth sinnes shall haue eternall life Theophilact hath these wordes Gratiam autem non mercedem dixit à Deo futurum perinde ac si inquiat non enim laborum accipitis premia sed per gratiam fiunt haec omnia in Christo Iesu qui haec operatur factitat He said grace not wages was to come from God as if he should say for ye receiue not rewards of labours but all these things are done by grace in Christ Iesus who worketh and doth them Anselmus and Photius haue the same wordes in effect which I omit in regard of breuitie By these manifold testimonies of the holy fathers the doctrine which I defend is cleere and euident viz. that eternall life is the free gift of God and is not merited or purchased by desert of man that eternall life is not a due debt a deserued wages or retribution of mans labours but proceedeth wholy and solie of the free mercy and grace of God that mans workes waighed in the ballance with the ioyes of heauen are nothing at all answerable vnto them To which fathers I will add the verdict of Paulus Burgensis a verie famous popish Spanish Bishop These are his wordes Noluit ergo dicere stipendium iustitiae vita aeterna sed maluit dicere gratia Dei vita aeterna quia eadem merita quibus redditur non a nobis sunt sed in nobis à Deo facta sunt
may not onely truly but also iustly require reward at Gods hands in regard of his promise freely made vnto vs. But I euer denie withall that any reward is due to our best workes for any condigne merit or desert of or in our workes Gods free acceptation mercie and promise set apart For as Saint Austen grauely saith Vae etiam laudabili vitae hominum si remota misericordia discutias eam Woe euen to the best liuer vpon earth if thou examine his life thy mercy set apart Answere ô papists if ye can and if ye cannot then repent and yeeld vnto the truth for shame I challenge you I prouoke you to the combat I adiure you all ioyntlie and euery one of you seuerally for the credite of your cause for the honour of your Pope and the life of popish doctrine which now lieth bleeding and wil shortly yeeld vp the Ghost if some soueraigne remedie bee not speedily prouided for the same The sixt Article Of the Popish distinction of mortall and veniall sinnes ALthough it be true that all sinnes are not equall but one greater than another and although it be also true that in a good and godly sence some sinne may be tearmed mortall and some veniall which yet may more fitly be called sinnes regnant and not regnant neuerthelesse most true it is to the euerlasting confusion of all impenitent papists that euery sinne is mortall of it owne nature and onely veniall by way of Gods free acceptation and mercie for his owne name sake and merits of his deare sonne our Lord Iesus I prooue it first both briefely and euidently For Christ himselfe telleth vs in his holy Gospell that we must giue a straight account of euery idle word in the generall day of iudgement And for no other end doubtlesse must this account be made but onely because euery idle word is flatly against the law of God This the papists can neuer denie it is euident to euery child And yet must they likewise confesse that idle words be those sinnes which they call venials And consequently they must confesse against their wils and against their professed Romish doctrine that all sinnes are mortall that is to say against the law of God This doctrine of our Sauiour Christ Iesus is confirmed by the testimonie of S. Iohn his beloued Apostle where he telleth vs that euery sinne is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the transgression of Gods law as is alreadie prooued at large in the fourth article of concupiscence And the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a declining from the right way doth plainely confirme the same Secondly because our popish Rhemists confesse in plaine tearms that euery sinne is a swaruing from the law of God For doubtlesse that which swarueth from the law is truly said to be against the law but not agreeable to the law Thirdly because the famous popish Frier and Romish bishop Iosephus Angles teacheth the same doctrine in his booke dedicated to the Pope himselfe These are his own expresse words Omne peccatum veniale est alicuius legis transgressio Patet quia omne veniale est contra rectam rationem agere contra rectam rationeÌ„ est agere contra legem naturalem precipientem non esse à regula rectae rationis deuiandum Euery sinne veniall is the transgression of some law This is cleere because euery veniall sinne is against right reason and to doe against right reason is to doe against the law of nature which commaundeth vs not to depart or swarue from the rule of right reason Loe euery veniall sinne is against right reason and against the law of nature which is giuen to euery one in his creation in his birth or natiuitie Fourthly because Durandus another famous papist confuteth the late receiued popish opinion of Thomas Aquinas which the Pope and his Iesuits hold to wit that veniall sinnes are preter legem non contra Besides the law but not against the law These are Duâ—ands owne words Ad argumentum dicendum quod omne peccatum est contra legem dei naturalem vel inspiratam vel ab eis deriuatam To the argument answere must be made that euery sinne is against the law of God either naturall or inspired or deriued from them And this opinion of M. Durand is this day commonly defended in the popish vniuersities and schooles So saith Frier Ioseph these are his words D. Thomas eius sectatores tenent peccatum veniale non tam esse contra legem quam preter legem Sequitur Durandus tamen alij permulti hanc sententiam impugnant affirmantes peccata venialia esse contra mandata Et haec opinio modo in scbolis videtur communior S. Thomas and his followers hold that a veniall sinne is not so much against the law as besides the law But Durand and many others impugne this opinion auouching veniall sinnes to be against the commaundements And this opinion seemeth now adaies to be more common in the schooles Here I wish the reader to note by the way out of the word modo now adaies the mutabilitie of Romish religion For in that he saith modo now adaies he giueth vs to vnderstand that their doctrine is now otherwise than it was of old and in former ages A note worthie to be remembred For the old Romane religion was catholicke pure and sound and with it doe not I contend but I impugne late Romish faith and doctrine which the Pope and his Romish Schoole-men haue brought into the Church Fiftly because their canonized martyr Iohn Fisher the late bishop of Rochester teacheth the same doctrine so plainely as euery child must needs perceiue the truth in that behalfe These are his expresse words Quod peccatum veniale solum ex dei misericordia veniale sit in hoc tecum sentio That a veniall sinne is onely veniall through the mercie of God and not of it owne nature therein doe I agree vnto you Thus saith our bishop And as he telleth me that he agreeth with Luther therein so doe I tell our Iesuites that I agree with him with Durand Almaine and the other papists that teach the same doctrine Sixtly because Gerson another famous popish writer holdeth the same opinion These are his expresse words Nulla offensa dei est venialis de se nisi tantum modo per respectum ad diuinam misericordiam qui non vult de facto quamlibet offensam imputare ad mortem cum illud posset iustissimè Et ita concluditur quod peccatum mortale veniale in esse tali non distinguuntur intrinsecè essentialiter sed solum per respectum ad diuinam gratiam quae peccatum istud imputat ad poenam mortis aliud non No offence of God is veniall of it owne nature but onely in respect of Gods mercie who will not de facto imputa euery offence to death though he might doe it most iustly And
enim fere de illis obscurit atibus eruitnr quod non planissime dictum alibi reperiatur For almost nothing is contained in obscure places which is not most plainely vttered in some other place The same father in an other place hath these wordes Nec solum vobis sufficiat quod in ecclesia diuinas lectiones auditis sed etiam in domibus vestris aut ipsi legite aut alios legentes requirite libenter audite Let it not be enough for you onely to heare Gods word in the Church but also read it your selues in your houses or else procure others to read it and heare you them willing Out of these wordes of this holy writer and antient father we may learne many godly lessons First that all things needfull for our saluation are plainely set downe in the scriptures Secondly that things which are obscurely touched in some places are plainelie handled in other places Thirdly that the scriptures are obscure in some places to exercise our wits and to cleanse the loathsomenesse of our stomackes Fourthly that we must read the scriptures at home in our houses not heare them read in the Churches Fiftly that if we cannot read them our selues then must we procure others to read them to vs and marke diligently what they read and heare them with desire and alacritie of mind Saint Hierome is consonant to Saint Austen and Saint Chysostome affirming that in his time which was about 1200 yeeres agoe both monkes men and women did contend who could learne moe scriptures without book These are his expresse wordes Solent viri solent monachi solent mulierculae hoc inter se habere certamen vt plures ediscant scripturas in eose putant esse meliores si plures edidicerint Men women and monkes vse to contend one with another who can learne moe scriptures and herein they thinke themselues better if they can learne more The same Saint Hierome in an other place speaking of the education of a yoong maid of seuen yeeres old hath these wordes Matris nutum pro verbis ac monitis pro imperio habeat Amet vt parentem subijciatur vt dominae timeat vt magistram Cum autem virgunculam rudem edentulam septimus aetatis annus exceperit caeperit erubescere scire quid taceat dubitare quid dicat discat memoriter psalterium vsque ad annos pubertatis libros Salomonis euangelia Apostolos prophetas sui cordis thesaurum faciat Let her mothers beck to her be in steed of wordes admonitions and commaunds Let her loue her as her parent obey her as her ladie and feare her as her mistris And when the rude and toothlesse girle shall bee seuen yeere old and shall begin to be bashfull to know when to be silent and when to speake then let her learne the Psames by heart and without booke and till she be twelue yeeres of age or marriageable let her make the bookes of Salomon the Gospels Apostles and Prophets the treasure of her heart Thus writeth Saint Hierome out of whose golden words I note these golden obseruations First that both men and women in his dayes did studie and read the scriptures as diligently and painfully as the monkes Secondly that in his time they thought themselues the happiest people who could con by heart the most texts of holy scripture Wheras amongst the papists they are deemed most holy that can by heart no scripture at all but absteine from the reading thereof as from the poyson of their soules Thirdly that yong women being but seuen yeeres of age must be acquainted with the holy scriptures learne by heart the booke of Psalmes Fourthly that from seuen yeeres vpward vntill puberty that is to say vntill the twelft yere of their age they must read seriously the bookes of Salomon the Gospels Apostles and Prophets and set their whole delite therein And the same holy father in his Epistle to the godly matrone Celantia doth perswade her for the best course of her life to be continually conuersant in the holy scriptures These are his wordes Sint ergo diuinae scipturae semper in manibus tuis iugiter mente voluantur Let therefore the holy scriptures be alwayes in thy hands and let them be vncessantly tossed or rolled in thy mind Saint Theodoretus telleth vs with good liking thereof that in his time the scriptures were translated into all maner of languages that they were not onely vnderstood of doctors masters of the Church but euen of the lay-people and common artificers His expresse wordes I will alledge which are these Hebraici vero libri non modo in Graecum idioma conuersi sunt sed in Romanam quoque linguam Aegyptiam Persicam Indicam Armenicaque Scythicam atque adeo Sauromaticam semelque vt dicam in linguas omnes quibus ad hanc diem nationes vtuntur Sequitur paulò inferius fossoresque adeo ac bubulcos inuenias plant arumque consitores de diuina trinitate rerumque omnium creatione discertantes The Hebrew bookes are turned not onely into the Greeke tongue but also into the Roman language also into the Aegyptian Persian Indians Armenian and Scythian as also into the Sauromatick tongue to speake all in a word into all tongues which this day are in vse amongst nations And after hee hath told vs that the church-Church-doctrine is knowne to all maner artizans of both sexes he addeth that we may find ditchers deluers neatheards and gardiners disputing euen of the blessed trinitie and of the creation of all things VVhereupon it is euident that in the auncient Church and in the time of old religion as the sillie foolish papists call their Romish inuentions which is in deed a newly inuented religion as I haue proued in my Suruey of poperie euery nation had the holy scriptures in their vulgar language and that in those dayes all the Christians did read the holy scriptures so seriously that both men and women of all trades and conditions were able to dispute of the holy trinitie and of the creation of the world VVhich two points doubtlesse are the most difficult obscure hard and intricate articles in the whole course of theologie The Iesuit Bellarmine a wonderfull thing to be heard and a most incredible sauing that the truth must needes in time haue the vpper hand confesseth so much vnawares as is able sufficiently to prooue and conclude my intended scope and proposition These are his expresse wordes His notatis dico illa omnia scripta esse ab apostolis quae sunt omnibus necessariae quaeipsipalam omnibus vulgo praedicauerant alia autem non omnia scripta esse These obseruations being marked I answere that all those things were written by the Apostles which are necessarie for all men and which the Apostles preached openly to all the vulgar people but that all other things were not written Thus writeth our skilfull Iesuit who
so this tradition is not excepted but virtually implied in our affirmation Fiftly the scriptures canonicall are discerned from not canonicall euen of themselues like as light is discerned from darkenesse hardnesse from softnesse and sweetnesse from bitternesse Thy word ô Lord saith the Prophet is a lanterne to my feet and a light vnto my pathes VVe haue a right sure word of prophesie saith S. Peter whereunto if ye take heed as vnto a light that shineth in a darke place ye doe well vntill the day dawne and the day-starre arise in your hearts Yet most true it is that the faithfull onely can discerne it For as the Apostle saith If Christs gospell be hid it is hid in them that perish in whom the God of this world hath blinded the minds of them which beleeue not least the light of the Gospell of the glorie of Christ should shine vnto them And the same Apostle elswhere teacheth vs that the spirituall man iudgeth all things VVhich text two famous papists Lyranus and Carthusianus doe expound of things partaining to our saluation S. Iohn is consonant to S. Paule affirming that the vnction which the faithfull haue receiued doth teach them all things Yea Christ himselfe saith That his sheepe doe heare his voice And he addeth that they follow him because they know his voyce But doubtlesse if Christs sheepe that is the faithfull and Gods elect people doe know his voice and therefore doe follow him then by a necessarie consequence they can know Christ speaking to them in the holy scripture and so can discerne holy writ from prophane fables or stories Melchior Canus a famous papist maketh this case cleere his words are set downe in my Golden ballance Sixtly the formall obiect of our faith is veritas prima the first veritie or God himselfe as Dionysius Areopagita telleth vs. Yea Aquinas that famous papist surnamed their angelicall doctor teacheth the selfe same doctrine Non enim fides inquit diuina alicui assentitur nisi quia est à Deo reuelatum For diuine faith saith Aquinas will not yeeld assent to any thing vnlesse it be reuealed of God VVhich truth of doctrine Saint Austen confirmeth in these golden wordes Iam hic videte magnum sacramentum fratres sonus verborum nostrorum aures percutit magister intus est Nolite putare quenquam hominem aliquid discere ab homine Ad monere possumus per strepitum vocis nostra si non sit intus qui doceat inanis fit strepitus noster Quam multi hine indocti exituri sunt quantum ad 〈◊〉 pertinet omnibus locutus sum sed quibus vnctio illa intus non loquitur quos spiritus sanstus intus non docet indocti redeunt Magisteria forinsecus adiutoria quaedam sunt admonitiones Cathedram in coelo habet qui corda docet Sequitur interior Magister est qui docet Christus docet inspiratio ipsius docet Vbi illius inspiratio illius vnctio non est forinsecus inanitâ—r perstrepunt verba Now brethren behold here a great sacrament the sound of our wordes pierceth your eares but the master that teacheth you is within Thinke not that man learneth any thing of man we preachers may admonish by the sound of wordes but if he be not within that teacheth in vaine is our sound how many will goe hence vntaught For mine owne part I haue spoken to all but to whom that vnction speaketh not inwardly whom the holy Ghost teacheth not within they goe home vntaught as they came The outward teachings are some helpes and admonitions but he sitteth in his chaire in heauen that teacheth the heart The master is within that teacheth it is Christ that teacheth it is his inspiration that instructeth VVhere his inspiration and his vnction is not there the outward noise of words is in vaine Thus writeth this auntient and learned father with many moe wordes to the like effect By whose doctrine we may learne sufficiently if nothing else were said that howsoeuer men teach how soeuer Paul plant or Apollo water yet will no increase follow vnlesse God giue the same I therefore conclude that we doe not beleeue this booke or that booke to be canonicall because this man or that man or the Church saith soe but that the scripture is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that it hath in it selfe that dignity which is worthy to haue credite that the declaration of the Church doth not make vs beleeue the scripture but is only an outward helpe to bring vs thereunto and that wee therefore indeed beleeue the scripture and this or that booke to be canonicall because God doth inwardly teach vs and persuade our hearts so to beleeue For certes if wee should beleeue that this or that booke is canonicall scripture because the Church saith so then should the formall obiect of our faith and the vltimate tearme into which our faith is resolued be man and not prima veritas or God himselfe as Areopagita and Aquinas teach vs. And it will not helpe the papists to replie out of Saint Augustine That he would not haue beleeued the Gospell vnlesse the authoritie of the Church had mooued him thereunto For S. Austens wordes are these Nisi authoritas ecclesiae me commoueret I would not haue beleeued the Gospell if the authoritie of the Church had not iointly mooued me therunto For wee must note that there is a great difference betweene mouere and commouere Mouere is to moue absolutely and a part by it selfe but commouere is to moue respectiuely and together with another thing So Saint Austens meaning is nothing else indeed but that the authoritie of the Church did outwardly concurre with the inward motion of the holy Ghost to bring him to the faith of the Gospel Now Saint Austens meaning is this and and none other viz. that he maketh much more account of the vniuersall Church than of Manichaeus and his complices because the Church did first moue him to heare the Gospel preached and to giue some credit to the same I say some credit because the Churches authoritie did onely moue him to beleeue the Gospell fide humana non fide diuina with humane faith not with faith diuine For this diuine faith with which we Christians doe beleeue the Gospell proceedeth not from the outward teaching of man but from the inward instruction of the holy Ghost as I haue out of the same Austen already prooued Yea the selfe same father declareth in the same chapter that he speaketh of himselfe as being a Manichee not as being a Christian. What faith Saint Austen wouldest thou say to him that should answere thee I doe not beleeue it but for the authority of the Church And this sense is confirmed because S. Austen coÌ„fesseth in the very same chapter that the authoritie of the Gospel is aboue the authoritie of the Church And in the chapter aforegoing after he hath told vs what kept him in