of a woman which was a sinner and more setteth foorth his power then otherwise lest he should be thought to haue deriued his puritie from his mother 2 They holde that there was no actuall sinne in the Virgin Marie no not the lest and smallest sinnes which they call venial Rhemist 1. Iohn 1. sect 5. She was especially protected and preserued from sinning by the grace of God Ans. That God is able clearely to rid his children from sinne to preserue them from falling thereinto we denie not but seeing you haue no scripture for this priuiledge that should be bestowed onely vpon Marie to be free from sin but rather the contrary is proued out of scripture That all haue sinned Rom. 3.23 it is too rash and bolde an assertion contrary to the will of God to ascribe any thing to his power He is as able to exempt all from sinning as one vnlesse therefore you can shew some especiall warrant out of Gods word for Maries freedome by your reason all the children of God shall bee freed from sinne as wel as Marie because God is able to doe it The Protestants THat the Virgin Marie was both conceiued in sinne and was also subiect to actuall sinnes in her life as other of the children of God thus out of the scripture we doe declare it 1 How els can the word of God be true that sayth All haue sinned Rom. 3.23 5.12 They will answere that Marie had an especiall priuiledge then let them shew it out of the word of God and we will beleeue otherwise the general conclusion must stand that all haue sinned Againe Marie her self in her song calleth Christ her Sauiour Luk. 1.47 Ergo she was a sinner for how els could she be saued from her sinnes which she had not If they answere as they doe that Christ was her Sauiour onely because hee preserued her from sinne Wee doe thus replie First that a Sauiour in scripture is defined to be he that saueth the people from their sinnes Math. 1.21 not that preserueth onely Secondly if Marie were free from originall sinne as they say she was she needed not a Sauiour to keep her from sinne for she might haue preserued herselfe Arg. 2 Marie dyed Ergo she was a sinner for sinne brought death into the world Rom. 1.5 If she had had no sinne she had not dyed Christ indeede though he were no sinner yet he bare our sinnes and therefore dyed for vs. Christ checked and rebuked his mother Iohn 2.4 Woman what haue I to doe with thee Ergo it seemeth she was not without fault Rhemist answere It was rather a doctrine to others to teach them not to do any thing for respect of kinred against reason then a reprehension to Mary Wee replie But I pray you how could the Apostles learne to beware of that fault if it had beene no fault in Marie How could they be admonished in her if she were not first her selfe admonished And the maner of speech sheweth it was a rebuke Christ saluting her by no other name then if he had spoken to any other woman Argum. 3. The Papists themselues are in a stagger and dare not constantly affirme that Marie was conceiued without sinne but put in this clause as many godly deuout men iudge Rhemist Rom. 5. sect 9. And Bellarmine sayth in maiori parte Ecclesiae piè credi that the greater part of the Church doth so godly beleeue yet he dare not determine vpon it himselfe de cult sanctor lib. 3. cap. 16. But why are they afrayd to holde it as an vndoubted trueth seeing Pope Sixtus hath clearely determined that it was so forbidding the Dominick Friers to preach the contrary and hereupon erected a new holy day of her conception Here then they are driuen to a great straight for either they must abolutely hold that she was not conceiued in sin agaynst the Master of sentences and Thom. Aquinas with other schoolemen or els holde the contrary and so confesse the Pope to haue been in error Augustine sayth beatior Maria percipiendo fidem Christi quà m concipiendo carnem Christi Materna propinquitas nihil Mariae profuisset nisi foeliciùs Christum corde quà m carne gestasset Marie was more happy in perceiuing the fayth of Christ then in conceiuing the flesh of Christ neither had it profited her to be the mother of Christ if she had not more happily borne him in her heart then she did in her wombe But what neede had Marie to beleeue in Christ if she had been pure from her natiuity and had no sinnes to be forgiuen her Augustine yet more playnly sayth Maria ex Adam mortua propter peccatum Adae Adam mortuus est propter peccatum caro domini ex Maria mortua est propter delenda peccata Marie dyed being borne of Adam because of the sinne of Adam Adam dyed because of his owne sinne Christ dyed in the flesh to take away our sinnes Ergo Marie by his sentence was borne in the sinne of Adam THE SECOND PART WHETHER Marie vowed Virginitie before the Annuntiation The Papists error 81 THey would gather and conclude so much out of the answere of Marie to the Angell who told her she should conceaue and beare a sonne How can this be sayth she seeing I know no man That is she plainly declareth she could haue no childe by knowing a man because of her vow for otherwise she needed not haue asked such a question how a woman might haue a sonne promised her if she had maried to haue carnal copulation Rhemist Luk. 1. sect 13. Bellarmin de Monachis cap. 22. Ans. First Ambrose maketh this to be the cause why Marie so answered she had read the prophesie of Esay that a virgin should conceiue bring forth a sonne and therefore knew very wel that this holy childe should be otherwise conceiued then by the knowledge or helpe of man Fulk ibid. Secondly as also the Angel deliuering at once his whole message and shewing what maner of childe it should be euen the Sonne of the most high who should sit on the throne of Dauid and of his kingdome there should be no end that is that the childe should be the Sonne of God she straightwayes conceiued that such a holy seede could not be borne of man and therefore asketh how without man he might be borne Sic Caluin Beza The Protestants THat Marie as she was an entire Virgin before the birth of Christ so that she continued also a Virgin all her life after we doe verily think and condemne their opinion that holde the contrarie but that she vowed or purposed Virginitie before the message of the Angel was brought vnto her it is rashly without scripture nay rather agaynst it affirmed Argum. 1. The text is playne that they had a purpose to consummate their mariage When as Marie was betrothed to Ioseph before they came together Math. 1.18 Ergo there was a meaning to come together if she
are Christs Disciples which is an vnreasonable supposition seeing we hold him to be Antichrist and that the Iesuite knoweth Such a Councell was that of the Iewes Iohn 9. where all they were excommunicate that confessed Christ Mark. 14 Christ himselfe was by the Councel condemned It cannot be denied that this Councell erred Let vs heare the papists goodly answeres some say that the Councel erred in a matter of fact de facto non de iure not in a case of right as whether Christ should be put to death as though in condemning him they denied not that he was the Messiah other that they erred in their owne opinion not in the sentence giuen for Christ indeede was guilty of death say they because he did beare our sinnes the Iesuite findeth not much fault with this answere yet it is an open blasphemie as is that also of the papists that the Iewes had sinned mortally if they had not put Christ to death Some of them say the Councel erred not in that which was done but in the maner of iudgement because it was tumultuous disorderly done by suborning of false witnesses and this sayth the Iesuite is probabilis responsio a probable answere sayth hee being most impious and blasphemous But he dare not rest in this answere but findeth out a fourth of his owne that the chiefe priestes and Councels of the Iewes could not erre before the comming of Christ but after he was come they might A blinde popish answere for doth not Christ euery where impugne the traditions and decrees of the Elders as Mark. 7. which our Sauiour should not haue done belike seeing the Elders before his comming could not erre or will they say that those traditions were right and good before and afterward erronious I know not els what they should say 3. We see by experience that many councels haue erred we let pas those which the Iesuite himself cōfesseth to haue erred as the third Coūcel of Antioch where Athanasius was condemned and the Arrian heresie approoued the Councel of Arimine where the same heresie was furthered the fourth Ephesine approuing Eutiches heresie These Councels though they were generall the papists confesse to haue erred and they haue a trick to shift it off but a silly one God knoweth They were not approoued by the Pope saye they As though all verity knowledge in the whole earth were locked vp in the Popes breast But wee will bring an instance of such Councels as the Pope allowed and yet by the papists owne confession erred In the Councell of Naeo-Caesarea confirmed by Leo 4. in the 7. canon second marriage is forbidden In the Councel Toletan 1. the 17. canon it is thus written that one may be admitted to the communion though he haue a concubine modò non sit vxoratus so hee be not wiued the Iesuites poore shift is this that a concubine is here vnderstoode for a wife without a dowrie and further sayth that Agar was Abrahams wife and not his concubine agaynst the scripture for Abraham should haue done euill in sending of her away as he did if she were his wife and the scripture calleth Sara by the name onely of Abrahams wife the other by the name of a bond woman Gen. 21.8.12 In the sixt Synod confirmed by Adrian the 1. canon 72. the mariages betweene Catholikes and hereticks are adiudged to be voyde In the second Councel of Nice act 5. it was concluded that Angels and mens souls are bodily and circumscriptible In the Councel of Rome vnder Pope Stephan the 7. all the acts of Formosus his predecessor were reuoked And in the Councel of Rauenna vnder Iohn 9. Pope Formosus actes were established and Stephans decrees abrogate Lastly in the Councel of Constance they are excommunicate that receiue the sacrament in both kinds the Councel of Basile on the contrary side permitteth and giueth leaue to the Bohemians to vse both kindes One of these Councels must needs erre both of them were confirmed by the Popes the Councel of Constance by Martin the 5. the Councel of Basile by Foelix 5. By this induction of many particulars we inferre and conclude that Councels euen approued by the Pope may and haue erred 4. Lastly Augustines opinion is this that prouincial Councels ought to giue place to general Et ipsa plenaria priora posteriorib emendari and the former general Councels must be amended by the latter The Rhemists haue found out this shift that in matters indifferent which are to be chāged according to time and place Councels may be altered Act. 15. sect 8. But to that it is aunswered that the word emendare signifieth not onely a change but a correcting of that which is amisse And that clause of Augustines must bee put in why Councels must be amended si a veritate deuiatum fit if they swarue from the truth de baptism lib 2. cap. 3. Wherfore we conclude that Councels may erre THE SIXT QVESTION CONCERNING THE AVthority of general Councels whether they may absolutely determine without scripture and necessarily binde all men to the obedience of their Canons The Papists IN words they would seem to magnifie the scripture aboue Councels for error 34 they say that the authority of the scripture depēdeth not in himself of Church Pope or Councels but in respect of vs the word of God is the word of God say they though there be no determination of the Church but we doe not know it so to be but because the Church hath so defined Bellarmine lib. 2. de con cap. 12. Here is a goodly glosse but nothing to the purpose for in that they say the Church hath absolute authoritie to declare and pronounce which is the word which indeed it hath not without testimonie and warrant of the word it selfe by this meanes it commeth about that much is taken for the worde of GOD which is not and so the Church doth not onely declare the worde but maketh that the word which is not First beside the Apocrypha which they make part of the word as we haue shewed afore they hold that their traditions are also the word of God Bellarmine cap. 12. Secondly Gratian is so bolde to affirme that the decretall Epistles of the Popes are to be counted amongst the Canonical scriptures dist 19. can in canonicis that the Canons of Councels are of the same authority dist 20. can decretales And Greg. 1. epist. 24. saith he doth reuerēce the 4. general Councels as the foure Euangelists Thirdly they shamefully affirme that whatsoeuer the pastors and priests do teach in the vnity of the Church is the word of God Rhemens 1. Thes. 2. v. 12. First then they conclude that Councels are not bound to determine according to the scriptures but as iudges may determine of their own authority Secondly that al men are bound of necessity to receiue the decrees of Councels without any further triall or examination They reason thus out of the
not that vpon the miraculous workes of Christ we should build the ordinarie dueties of Christians Augustine would haue told you that Christ is not to be imitated in such workes Non hoc tibi dicit non eris discipulus meus nisi ambulaueris supra mare aut nisi suscitaueris quatriduanum mortuum He saith not vnto thee Thou shalt not be my disciple vnlesse thou walke vpon the sea raise one that hath been dead foure daies But Learne of me for I am humble and meeke Secondly if prayer for the dead be vnto vs as the raising of the dead was to Christ then as all the dead are to be praied for so Christ should haue raised againe all that went then to Purgatorie or els by your conclusion he failed in charitie as we doe now if we pray not for the dead as you beare vs in hand Thirdly though the Saints departed and the faithfull liuing are members of the same bodie and so are bound in loue one to the other yet it followeth not that one should pray for the other They with vs and we with them doe wish and long to see the redemption of the sonnes of God accomplished Reuel 6.10.22.20 But charitie bindeth vs not one to pray for another because we knowe not one the particular needes of another Nay to pray for any departed is against the rule of charitie for loue beleeueth all things and hopeth all things 1. Corinthians 13.7 Wee ought to hope the best of the dead that they are at rest but in praying for them wee presuppose they are in miserie and so neede our prayers therefore wee hope not the best of them as charitie willeth vs. Argum. 2. Iohn 5. vers 16. The Apostle sayth There is a sinne vnto death for the which a man ought not to pray that is deadly sinne wherein a man dyeth without repentance but for other sinnes not vnto death whereof men repent themselues it is lawfull to pray Ergo we may pray for those that are departed not in deadly sinne for this place is properly to be vnderstood of praying or not praying for the dead because so long as a man liueth he may be prayed for because all sinnes are pardonable in this life Rhemist ibid. Ans. First a sinne vnto death is not onely finall impenitencie but sinne also against the holy Ghost such as was the sinne of Iudas and of the Pharisees Secondly though we should vnderstand it of finall impenitencie yet it is but a soâ—y argument some of the dead ought not to be praied for Ergo the rest may Thirdly the text cannot be vnderstood of praying for the dead for the text sayth not If any man see that his brother hath sinned not vnto death but If he see him sinning but the dead doe neither sinne nor are seene to sinne Fourthly whereas you say that all sinnes are pardonable in this life our Sauiour Christ saith contrary that the sinne against the holy Ghost can neuer be forgiuen neither in this world nor in the world to come Plura apud Fulk ibid. The Protestants TO pray for the dead is a worke neither pleasing before God because he hath no where commanded it nor auailable for them that are departed because they haue their iudgement alreadie While we liue let vs one pray for another but when we are gone the praiers of the liuing helpe vs not Argum. 1. The ground of this popish opinion of prayer for the dead is their superstitious deuise of Purgatorie for none els doe they hold it lawfull to pray for but for the soules onely in Purgatorie But there is no Purgatorie as we haue shewed before after this life our purging is onely in this life Christ hath by him selfe purged our sinnes Hebr. 1.3 Christ his bloud is the chiefe and onely purgation of our sinnes there are also other inferiour and ministeriall purgings whereby that onely soueraigne purging is made beneficiall and applied vnto vs as the inward operation and worke of the spirit is compared to fire Math. 3.11 1. Corinth 3.13 There is also a purging fire of affliction compared by the Prophet to fullers sope Malach. 3.3 There also shall be a third purging fire in the day of the Lord 1. Pet. 3.7 when as the corruption and mortalitie of our bodies shall be purged away and then shall our mortalitie put on immortalitie 1. Corinth 15.53 Other Purgatorie after this life we acknowledge none Seeing then that there are no soules in Purgatorie and for none els it is lawfull to pray but for the soules tormented in Purgatorie it followeth that we are to pray for none at all that are dead Argum. 2. No prayer is acceptable to God without faith We must pray without wauering and doubting Iames. 1.6 But so can we not pray for the dead for we cannot tell in what case they are for whom we pray whether they be in heauen hell or purgatorie and therefore we cannot assure our selues that our prayers are heard but must needes pray with great doubting and wauering of the mind Ergo such praiers are in vaine Iames 1.7 Argum. 3. Our praiers profite not the dead because there is no place after this life for repentance or remission of sinnes for this should be the end and intendment of our praier that they might be released of their sinnes and eased of their paine There is no remission of sinnes after death because there is no true repentance repentance there is none because there can be no amendment of life which alwaies followeth repentance for Iohn Baptist that was a preacher of repentance bid not onely the people to repent but to bring forth fruites worthie repentance Math. 3.2.8 So saith the Prophet Ezechiel If the wicked will returne from his sinnes and doe the thing that is lawfull he shall liue and not dye 18.21 There are two parts then of repentance as Isay sayth Cease to doe euill learne to doe well 1. Isay. 16.17 But there is no place of working out of the bodie Ergo then no repentance To this Augustine agreeth Non est apud inferos poenitentia ad salutem proficiens ecce nunc tempus est salutis nunc tempus remissionis In hac vita poenitentiae tantum patet libertas post mortem nulla correctionis est licentia De tempor serm 66. In hell or among the dead there is no repentance vnto saluation behold now is the time of saluation the time of forgiuenes In this life onely haue men libertie to repent after death there is no place for amendment What is become now I pray you of your Purgatorie repentance after this life there is no saluation to be had because there is no remission of sinnes no remission of sinnes because there is no repentance there is no repentance because there is no amendement Rhemist Our Sauiour saith Math. 12.32 that blasphemie against the spirit shal neither be forgiuen in this world nor the world to come Ergo some sinnes may be forgiuen in the world
water and purge my selfe most clean yet mine owne clothes shal make me filthy Iob 9.30 that is though he should alleadge for himselfe the best workes that euer he did yet euen in those the Lord could finde out matter against him Yea S. Paul saith That he knew nothing by himselfe his owne conscience did not accuse him yet was he not thereby iustified 1. Corinth 4.4 The reason is giuen by S. Iohn that Although a mans hart condemne him not yet God is greater then our hart 1.3.20 Wherefore there is no worke of any man so perfect but before the Lord it may be found faulty for All our righteousnes is as a stained clout Augustine vpon those words of Iob. 29.14 I put on iustice as a robe Vestis ista belli magis solet esse quā pacis vbi adhuc expugnatur concupiscentia non vbi erit plena sine aliquo prorsus hoste iustitiae This garment that is a cloke or mantle is rather for warre then peace for here we doe dayly fight against concupiscence and there is no perfect righteousnes without some enemie But if so be any work of ours could be perfect without sinne righteousnes somtimes might be without an enemie which Augustine denieth The Papists 2. MOrtall sinne they say cannot consist together with the grace of God and error 69 cannot be committed by a man continuing the Sonne of God for he that is borne of God saith the Apostle sinneth not that is falleth into no mortall sinne Rhemist 1. Iohn 3. sect 5. The Protestants FIrst vnderstanding mortall sinne as they doe for euery sinne that deserueth death as are adulterie theft murder their exposition is hereticall for then Dauid should not haue beene the Sonne of God when he committed adultery and consequently should haue bene none of the predestinate he that is once the Sonne of God is alwaies euen to the end For whom God loueth he loueth to the end Iohn 13.1 Secondly the Apostles meaning when he saith He that is borne of God sinneth not is no other then that which S. Paul hath Rom. 6.12 That sinne should not raigne in our body that is the children of God though they fal into sinne continue not in it nor delight therein neither are wholly ouercome of it for it is true of them that it is not they that doe it but sinne that dwelleth in them Rom. 7.20 Augustine Quicunque in Dei prouidentiss dispositione praedestinati sunt non dico nondum renati sed etiam nondum nati filij Dei sunt perire non possunt Whosoeuer in the most wise counsell of God are predestinate to saluation not onely before they are regenerate and borne againe but euen before they are borne at all are the Children of God and cannot perish If then the elect not yet called or regenerate are the Children of God much more are they that are called and regenerate though after their calling they doe fall into some sinne for the time THE THIRD PART OF THE WORKES of Supererogation The Papists THey teach that it is not onely possible for men to keep the Lawe of God in error 70 this life but to doe more then is prescribed or commanded and that men of their abundance may allotte vnto others such workes of supererogation Rhemist 1. Cor. 9. sect 6. ex Tileman loc 3. er 16. Argu. 2. Cor. 8. sect 3. As your abundance now supplyeth their want their abundance also may supply your want that there may be equality Saints or other vertuous persons may in measure and proportion of other mens deseruings allot vnto them as well the supererogation of their spirituall works as these that abound in worldly goods may giue almes of their superfluities to them which are in necessitie Rhemist totid verbi◠Ans. 1. This place prooueth no communication of merites of one to another but that as euery one aboundeth in the gifts and graces of God so they ought to communicate the vse thereof one to anothers benefite for no man meriteth himselfe by any worke of his therefore he cannot communicate that to another which he hath not himselfe Here also mention is made of mutuall communication for one to supply anothers want but he that doth supererogate to another of the abundance of his good workes hath no need to haue his wants supplied by another mans deseruings therefore there is no mutuall communicating betwene them which is the thing whereof the Apostle speaketh in this place Argum. That no man is holpen by another mans deseruings but all that a man can doe is little enough and not sufficient for him selfe it is plaine in the Gospell where our Sauiour saith That when we haue done all that is commanded we are vnprofitable seruants and did no more thē was our dutie Luke 17.10 Ergo a man can not doe more then his dutie We may also remember the parable of the Virgins Math. 25. where the fiue wise refuse to giue of their oyle to the fiue foolish least say they there will not be enough for vs and you No man therefore hath attained to such a perfection of goodnes that he is able to spare ought for his brother but shal haue need thereof himselfe Augustine writing vpon this parable saith Vnusquisque pro se rationem reddet nec alieno testimonio quicquam adiuuatur apud Deum et vix sibi quisque sufficit vt sibi testimonium per hibeat conscientia sua Euery man shall giue account for himselfe neither is a man relieued by anothers testimonie before God the testimonie of a mans conscience is hardly sufficient for himselfe See more of this matter Controu 14. quest 7. part 4. quest 8. part 3. articul 2. THE FOVRTH PART WHETHER GOD be to be serued for hope of reward or feare of punishment The Papists error 71 1. MEn ought to doe good in respect and for reward and recompence in heauen for their good workes the Apostle saith of Moses Heb. 11. He had respect to the recompence of reward Rhemist ibid. The Protestants Ans. FIrst we deny that we ought to make account of heauen to be giuen as a iust recompence deserued by our workes for Life eternall as the Apostle saith is the free gift of God Rom. 6.23 2. We graunt that men in their wel doing ought to haue respect to the reward but not chiefely or principally but the respect of Gods glory and their owne dutie ought to moue them more Argum. Psal. 34.8 Taste and see how gratious the Lord is We ought as dutifull children to yeeld obedience to the Lord and delight in him euen because of that pleasant taste comfort and ioy which we feele in his goodnes toward vs. Augustine saith well Deus non propterea se amari vult quia dat aliquid praeter se sed quia dat se God would not be beloued of vs because he giueth or promiseth any thing beside him selfe but because he giueth himselfe The Papistes 2. EVen in right Christian
from heauen Sic Bullinger serm 60. in Apocalips Thirdly the Dragon is sayd Apocalips 12.4 with his tayle to drawe many starres from heauen that is many excellent men as starres in giftes and knowledge shall bee deceiued by the Pope and be wonne vnto him yea the Pope himselfe is a Starre fallen from heauen to the earth from heauenly doctrine to earthly tradition Apocalips 9.1 thus Antichrist also may be sayd to fetch fire from heauen 2. The second miracle hee shall cause the Image of the beast to speake which the Iesuite vnderstandeth literally that is grossely Answere First Bellarmine and our Iesuites doe not here agree for Bellarmine sayth that these two miracles shall be wrought by Antichrist himselfe to fetch fire from heauen and to cause the Image to speake But the Rhemists saye this other beast is another false Prophet inferiour to Antichrist which shall also worke wonders such an one as Caluine say they where they shew their malice more then learning for Caluine they know tooke not vpon him to worke myracles annot Apocal. 13. sect 3. 2 This causing the image to speake hath a better meaning The image of the beast is the shadow of the olde stately Empire of Rome which was erected by the Pope for the west partes wanted an Emperour the space of three hundred yeeres from Augustulus time till Pope Leo the third who made Charles the great king of France Emperour And at this day is there nothing in the Empire but onely a name title and image for neither hath the Emperour the Imperiall authoritie which is in the Pope nor the Imperiall kingdomes vnlesse he haue them of his owne And the Pope onely maketh this Image to speake for vnlesse he doe confirme the election of the king of the Romanes he is not thought worthy the name of Emperour Bullinger ibid. 3 And yet we denie not but that they both haue and may make images speake either by the helpe of the diuell as Dunstane caused a roode to speake or by iugling as the Roode of grace by gimmals was made to roule the eyes mooue the lippes and such like in king Henries dayes 3 The third myracle that Antichrist shall work is to fayne himselfe dead and to rise againe Apocalyps 13.3 Answere There can bee no such thing gathered out of the text First the wordes will not beare it the text is that one of the heads was wounded to death and the wound was healed which cannot be so meant as though hee fayned himselfe dead but he receiued a wound indeede 2 The sence is mysticall as thorough the whole chapter First it is sayd that the seuenth head was wounded to death but reuiued agayne that is the seuenth gouernement of the Romanes in the Popedome for the papacie had many times deadly blowes and yet was healed agayne especially when there were three Popes together at Rome in France and the third in Spaine but this wound was cunningly healed vp in Pope Martin the fift in the Councell of Constance the other three beeing deposed Sic Bullinger Serm. 59. Secondly it is said vers 14. that the beast whose image remained had the wound of a sworde and yet liued which is vnderstoode of the Romane Empire reuiued and quickned by the Pope The Protestants IT is true that Antichrist shall worke signes and wonders by the power of Sathan 2. Thessal 2. but lying signes both because they shall bee done to confirme lyes neither shall they bee such as the Prophets wrought but many of them but cunning and cousening sleights of iuglers And for such wonders wee neede not to search farre the Popish Church is full of them Where else then should wee looke for Antichrist 1 There haue beene of the Popes themselues Sorcerers and Coniurers such an one Antichrist shall bee sayth Bellarmine Siluester the second came vp to the papacie by the helpe of the diuell as wee haue before shewed Gregorie the seuenth was condemned in the Councell of Brixia for a Coniurer And Benno a Cardinall in those dayes thus writeth of him that on a time hee sending two of his seruants for a certaine Sathanicall booke charging them not to looke into it they notwithstanding looked into it and presently a great multitude of diuelish spirites were round about them who were instant vpon them to knowe why they were called for the seruants beeing at the first astonished yet comming to themselues enioyned them to plucke downe certayne high walles neere to Rome and so they came to their master Fox page 176. What other Antichrist now neede wee looke for If hee must bee a Coniurer wee may heere make our choyce 2 Wee are not ignorant what lyes and fables are reported by the papists of the myraculous actes of their popish Saints of the which wee haue spoken before As howe Dunstane appeared to a cripple that came to his Tombe to bee helped of his lamenesse How Plegildus a priest sawe and handled the shape of a childe vpon the altaâ— which after hee had kissed returned agayne to the likenesse of bread How a certaine Iewes boy tolde his father that hee saw a childe broken in peeces vpon the altar and distributed among the Christians and the boy for that was cast into a furnace of fire and was preserued from the fire by the Virgin Marie which appeared to him and spred her garment ouer him Many such either lyes and fables or workes of diuels the popish Church hath many What neede wee therefore doubt but that it is the Antichristian Church 3 Augustine sayth Saint Paul calleth them lying wonders either because Antichrist shall deceiue men per phantasmata with iugling sleights or because ad mendacia per trahet credituros by his wonders he shall make them beleeue lies But in which sense they are so called it shall appeare when Antichrist is come sayth hee and indeede it is now apparant for our aduersaries haue plenty of both kindes both myracles wrought indeede by the diuell and many prety iugling feates beside THE EIGHTH PARTE OF THE QVEstion concerning the warres and kingdome of Antichrist The Papists BEllarmine sayth that Antichrist shall make great battayles agaynst the error 64 Saynts and shall conquere the whole worlde first by crafte he shall aspire to the kingdome of the Iewes secondly he shall fight with three kings of Lybia Aegypt Aethiopia Thirdly with a great armie he shall persecute the Christians throughout the world and this shall be the battaile of Gog and Magog Bellarm. cap. 16. 1 That he shall craftily aspire to the kingdome he proueth it out of Daniel 11.21 where it is prophecied of one that he shall obtayne the kingdome by flatteries Ans. This prophecie of Daniel as likewise the whole chapter was historically accomplished in Antiochus Epiphanes who defrauded Seleucus his brothers sonne of the kingdome and circumuented his elder brother Demetrius so that it being once fulfilled it cannot be wrested to any other sense of Antichrist it cannot be
yet after another maner For he is in heauen according to the naturall existence of his body in the sacrament he is really present in his flesh yet sacramentally by his omnipotent power Concil Trid. sess 13. can 1. Argum. 1. The figures must be inferior to the things that are figured and represented the sacraments of the law were figures of the sacraments in the Gospel therfore they ought to be inferior But vnles the bread wine should be the very blood flesh of Christ in the sacrament their sacraments in the law should not only not be inferior but far superior to ours As for example the Paschal Lambe is in nature to be preferred before bread and the slaying of the Lamb did more liuely represent the death of Christ then the breaking of bread the eating of flesh doth also better set forth the spirituall nourishing then the eating of bread Wherefore vnlesse we beleeue a reall presence in the sacrament their sacrifices in dignitie and excellencie should farre exceed and excel ours Bellarm. lib. 1. de sacram Eucharist ca. 3. Ans. 1. It is not true that their sacraments were figures of ours But S. Paul sheweth that both their sacraments and ours doe figure out and represent the same thing as the spiritual eating and drinking of Christ 1. Corint 10.2.3 Our sacraments are indeed figures correspondent and answerable to theirs and theirs also had a certaine reference and relation to ours but they were not types of ours for then our sacraments should bee the body of theirs whereas Christ is the bodie both of their sacraments and ours Saint Peter sayth that Baptisme is an antitypon a figure answerable to the sauing of the eight persons in the flood 1. Pet. 3.21 They are correspondent one to the other and had mutuall relation and respect one to the other But that was not properly a type of Baptisme but both Baptisme and that are figures and signes and liuely representations of our saluation in Christ. 2. If the reall presence of Christ onely commendeth the sacrament and aduanceth it before the rytes of the law which in all other respects are better by this argument Baptisme still remayneth inferior to the sacramēts of the law for you affirme no reall presence in Baptisme as you do in the Eucharist and in all other respects it must needes giue place to Circumcision for the cutting of the flesh is a more liuely representatiō of regeneratiō thē is the washing by water and the flesh of man is in nature more precious then water So by this reason though you haue wonne credite for the Eucharist yet you haue lost it for Baptisme 3 We answere therefore that although the reall presence bee set aparte yet our sacraments are more excellent then theirs First the price and woorth of thinges in their nature are not to be weighed in a sacrament but they must bee considered in respect of the vse to the which they are ordayned by the institution Flesh you say is better then bread so is wine and milke better then water in their nature but in Baptisme water is better then they because Christ hath now set it apart for a more holy vse Secondly the slaying of the Lambe doth more liuely represent say you the death of Christ then the breaking of bread Answ. We graunt that if breaking of bread had beene vsed in the law it had not been then so significant as the slaying of beasts but the breaking of bread now in the light of the Gospell in this abundance of knowledge and instruction being a signe of a thing already done and finished must needes be more pregnant and liuely in representation then the killing of sacrifices in the law which were types of things to come the mystery of the Gospel being not yet opened to the world Wherefore our sacraments are more excellent then theirs in respect of the more cleare light and fuller signification which they haue by the word of God the preaching of the Gospel ioyned vnto thē We neede not deuise any other way of excellencie for our sacraments then this which we haue sayd agreeable to the scriptures 2. Cor. 4.3 Galat. 3.1 The Papists ARgum. 2. Iohn 6.55 Christ sayth My flesh is meate indeed and my blood is drinke in deede he that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me and I in him First this place must be vnderstoode not of any spirituall eating or drinking of Christ without the sacrament but is properly meant of the manducation and eating of him in the sacrament First Vers. 51. The bread sayth Christ that I will giue he speaketh of a thing to come for the sacrament was afterward instituted but if this bread were to be taken for his word and the eating thereof for beleeuing in him in this sense the bread was giuen already Answ. Christ also speaketh in the present tense vers 32. My father giueth you the true bread from heauen I am the liuing bread that came down from heauen if any man eate of this bread he shall liue for euer vers 51. Hee sayth not he that shall eate but he that euen now eateth And afterward he speaketh of the time to come The bread that I shall giue because his death and passion was not yet finished therefore he sayth The bread that I shal giue is my flesh which I will giue for the life of the worlde But he speaketh euery where of the eating of his flesh in the present tense vers 35.50.51.53 which cannot bee vnderstoode of the sacramentall eating the sacrament being not yet instituted but of a spirituall manducation The Papists SEcondly those words being applyed to the sacrament must needes also bee vnderstood properly and literally for the very eating of the flesh of Christ drinking his blood not tropically or figuratiuely 1. The flesh of Christ which Christ promiseth to giue them to be eaten he preferreth before the Manna which their fathers did eate in the wildernes the true bread which he giueth them is more excellent then the bread of Manna But if the bread in the sacrament doe but signifie the flesh of Christ and be not it in very deede it should be no better then Manna which also did signifie and shew foorth Christ Bellarm. cap. 6. Ans. Christ compareth not the spirituall substance of Manna with his flesh and blood but the corporall foode which being receiued into the belly and not receiued into the heart by fayth hath no power to giue eternall life For vers 32. Christ sayth that Moses gaue them not Manna from heauen Ergo he meaneth the corporall foode not the spirituall substance of Manna for as it was a sacrament of Christ it was heauenly bread Againe vers 49. Your fathers did eate Manna in the wildernes and dyed He speaketh of the materiall foode for they that did Manna spiritually by fayth died not in soule Ans. Now on the contrary side we will prooue that this place contayned in the sixt