liue sanctification and not be sanctified righteousnes and not be righteous redemption and not be redeemed for all these is Christ made vnto vs Life Righteousnes Sanctification and Redemption as the Scripture testifieth Bellarmine spendeth one whole Chapter in this argument to proue that the wicked receiue Christ in the Sacrament and therevpon expresly affirmeth that though they receiue him yet they receiue not his iustifying grace nor his merits nor the fruit and effect of his death and passion together with him Of the same mind is Aquinas the rest of their Diuines Now this position is contrary both to Scripture Fathers and to their owne diuinity To Scripture for our Sauiour saith in expresse words Whosoeuer eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud hath eternall life and I will raise him vp at the last day And againe He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my bloud dwelleth in me and I in him But say they The wicked yea the reprobate eate the very flesh and drinke the very bloud of Christ Therefore conclude that they haue eternall life and dwell in Christ and Christ in them neither can they escape by saying that the spirituall eating of Christ by faith and not the eating in the Sacrament is here vnderstood seeing they doe all for the most part interpret this place of the Sacramentall eating and drinking but more plaine if it be possible is that of S. Iohn Ioh. 5. 12. He that hath the Sonne hath life and hee that hath not the Sonne of God hath not life From which place thus a man may reason He that hath Christ hath eternall life but hee that receiueth Christ verily truely as all the wicked do in the Sacrament by their doctrine hath Christ therefore the very reprobate euen Iudas himself hath eternal life is saued for either they must deny that they receiue Christ in the Sacrament or else they must grant being conuicted by these Scriptures that together with him they receiue eternall life 25. They reply to this two things first that the wicked receiue Christ onely Sacramentally and not Spiritually and therefore they haue no benefite by him and secondly because they receiue him vnworthily therefore they receiue their owne iudgement and not saluation not discerning the body and bloud of Christ To which I answere that though they receiue Sacramentally and vnworthily yet by their doctrine they receiue vâ—ry Christ and so by these Scriptures it must needs follow that they also receiue the fruite and effect of his death which is life and saluation Adde hereunto that the termes here vsed are generall both in respect of the persons that receiue and also the manner of receiuing without any such exception or distinction as they deuise and therfore I conclude that it is as impossible to make a separation betwixt Christ and his sauing grace as to separate the Sunne from light fire from heate or the soule from naturall life 26. Thus this position is an opposition to Scripture so it is also to the opinions of the Fathers To giue a taste of some two or three Origen saith That Christ is that true meat which whosoeuer eateth shall liue for euer which no wicked man can eat Augustine more effectually saith Hee that is in the vnity of Christs body that is a member of Christ he is truely said to eate Christs body and drinke his bloud Note hee saith truely to signifie that all other eate him falsly that is in shew and not in substance And in another place yet more plainely Hee which disagreeth from Christ doth neither eate his flesh nor drinke his bloud though he take the Sacrament of so great a thing to his iudgement Theodoret as plainely saith That Christ is meate for his owne sheepe onely that is his elect And Cyrill that as many as eate his flesh haue life in them being ioyned to him who is life it selfe And Basill saith that they which are fed with the foode of life to wit the bread that came downe from heauen haue an inward mouth of the minde whereby they eate that spirituall food Many more such like sayings might be heaped together to this purpose which for breuity sake I passe ouer all which are contrary to that Romish position that the wicked eate and drinke the very body and bloud of Christ which they must needs doe if the bread and wine after the words of consecration be changed into the very body and bloud of Christ 27. Lastly it is contrary to their owne diuinity for they hold that the parts of this Sacrament as of all others are two to wit the matter and the forme the forme in this Sacrament is to the whole word of consecration together with the sense thereof the matter is the whole element with the signification thereof As for example in the Eucharist the matter is the species of Bread and wine containing vnder them the body and bloud of Christ and the forme is for this is my bodie this is my bloud Now hence I thus reason The wicked either receiue the whole Sacrament or they receiue it not if they do then there is no difference betwixt the faithfull and them for they receiue no more and why should not they be saued then as well as they if they do not then either they receiue not Christ at all because we are sure they receiue the outward Elements and therfore if any thing be wanting it must needs be the thing signified or there are more parts then these two of the Sacrament Againe thus if the wicked receiue Christ in the Sacrament and yet not the vertue of Christ then they receiue not the whole Sacrament because the vertue of the Sacrament is in the Sacrament as the vertue of euery thing is in the thing it selfe And so it followeth that the wicked in the Sacrament receiue Christ and yet not Christ the whole Sacrament and yet but a part of the Sacrament and that there are but two parts of it and yet more then two Obserue gentle Reader these contradictions and wonder 28. Againe Transubstantiation is contradicted both by the doctrine of adoration of Images and by the Canon of the Masse by the doctrine of adoration of Images thus they teach that diuine adoration is to be giuen to the pictures of Christ and God the Father because they represent their most excellent and diuine persons and yet they would haue the very body and bloud of Christ to be in the Sacrament transubstantiated because some of the Fathers pretend â—o say that it is to be adored with diuine worship Now if it bee true that they say that Images of God the Father and of Christ our Sauiour ought to be adored with diuine worship because they represent their persons then it must bee false that therfeore the bodie and bloud of Christ are really and carnally in the Sacrament because it is to be worshipped for why may not those mysteries of bread and
that some sinnes cannot bee committed but a toto composite by the whole man And if the bodie doe not sinne as well as the soule I wonder why it is punished both in this life with corporall diseases and plagues and after death with putrefaction and depriuation of life and in the day of iudgement with eternall torment in hell fire Secondly if it were so that a dead carkasse had no relique of sinne in it yet in that it was an instrument of sinne it is lyable to temporall punishment which is the chiefe ground of Purgatory as hath beene shewed And therefore I conclude that either the body goeth to Purgatory as well as the soule or else a full satisfaction is not made for the temporall punishment or at least that the fire of Purgatory is but an imaginary and witty conceit to keepe men in some awe and to maintaine their owne pride and pompe 53. Next vnto Purgatory is Prayer for the dead which is both the mother and daughter of that fire for as it is vpheld by Purgatory a weake and imaginary foundation so it vpholdeth Purgatory a paper building neuerthelesse it is ouerturned by it owne poyse and weight For this they teach That the prayers and suffrages of the liuing doe nothing profite those that doe enioy blessednesse as the Martyrs and such like according to that of Saint Augustine Iniuriam facit martyri qui or at pro martyro He doth wrong a Martyr that prayes for a Martyr nor the damned whether they be in the lowest Hell as reprobates or in Lymbo as vnbaptized Infants but onely the soules in Purgatory And yet notwithstanding they both alledge the authorities of ancient Fathers to prooue the prayer for the dead who prayed for those whom they assured themselues to be in heauen and also by their owne doctrine and practice declare that they haue vsed to pray for the damned As touching the Fathers Nazianzene prayed for Cesarius and Ambrose for Theodosius Valentinian and Saint Augustine for his mother And in the ancient Leiturgies of the Church prayers were made for Patriarks Prophets Martyrs and the blessed Virgine Mary her selfe yea for the Popes also as for Pope Leo for example and yet they thought all these to be in the state of blessednesse as it appeareth in the same places where these prayers are expressed and therefore Cassander their iudicious reconciler calleth those prayers Testimonies of charitie towards the dead congratulations of their present ioyes and professions of their faith and hope concerning the immortality of their soules and resurrection of their bodies not supplications for their releasement out of Purgatory as our Romanists imagine Now hence thus we reason If the Fathers prayed for them who were in possession of blessednes then their testimonies serue nothing for their purpose who affirme that soules in Purgatory are onely benefited by such prayers and if soules in Purgatory bee onely benefited by such prayers as they say then they deale impertinently and deceitfully to bring in the testimony of the Fathers for maintenance of such prayers in the one bewraying the imbecillitie of their cause in the other the weaknesse of their iudgements and in both crossing themselues in that which they would build vp as the builders of Babel did Neyther doth this onely bewray their fraude in misapplying the authorities of the Fathers but also it implyeth a playne contradiction for they teach that though wee ought not to pray for the soules of the Saints that are in heauen yet wee may pray for the resurrection and glorification of their bodies which notwithstanding are not tormented in Purgatory but asleepe in their graues And so it followeth that by their doctrine we may not pray at all for the Saints departed and yet wee may pray for their bodies which are the one halfe of them And againe we may not pray for any that are dead except they be in Purgatory and yet we may pray for the bodies of the dead that are not in Purgatory but in their graues 54. If they reply as Bellarmine doth that we may pray for the Saints in Heauen not for releas of any paine but for increase of their glorie either of their soules presently or of their bodies futurely at the Resurrection then I say they contradict themselues againe For how doe the Praiers of the liuing doe no good to any but those that are in Purgatorie whereas they are meanes to increase the glorie of their soules and to procure the consummation of their bodies glorie also As for their practice in praying for the damned Damascene reporteth that Gregorie the Pope absolued Traiane and a Martyr Falcenilla from the paines of hell and also relateth out of the historie of Palladius that Saint Maehary demanded of the dead skull of an Idolater whether the Praiers of the liuing did good vnto them in Hell or not to whom the skull should answere When thou offerest vp Praiers for the dead we in the meane time feele some refreshing The like wee read of Iudas in the Legend of Saint Branden. Bellarmine indeed reiecteth this Tale of the skull as a Fable but yet he gain-saith not the deliuerie of Traiane by the praiers of Gregorie But Antoninus the Archbishop of Florence approoueth the first as an authenticall Storie so doth Aquinas the last and frameth this answere thereunto that the soules of the damned receiue no mitigation of their paine by the Praiers of the liuing but onely a certaine vaine and deceitfull ioy and the Schoole men deuise strange reasons how this should be brought to passe some saying that Traian by the vertue of Gregories Praiers returned to life and did penance and so obtained pardon and glorie others affirming that his soule was not simply absolued from the guilt of punishment but that his paine was suspended vntill the day of Iudgement others imagining that his soule was not freed from Hell but from the torments of Hell so that he should remaine there but should feele no paine And lastly Bernardine reiecting all these opinions and concluding that Traian was not definitiuely condemned but conditionally to wit the diuine Wisdome fore-seeing that Gregorie should pray for him and therefore to haue deferred his damnatorie sentence Thus they labour in by-paths that forsake the way of Truth and wander they know not whither But to the point either that is false that soules in Purgatorie are onely helped by the Praiers and Sacrifices of the liuing or this that by them the damned may be either released or refreshed 55. Lastly both the Doctrines of Purgatorie and Praier for the dead are directly crossed by their Canon of the Masse for there those dead persons for whom Praier is made are said to rest in Christ and to sleepe the sleepe of peace and yet here they say that none are to be praied and sacrificed for but those onely that are in Purgatorie What is there then any rest in Purgatorie is to
expounded the Scriptures as their owne Doctors confesse Canus saying that they spake with a humane spirit and erred sometimes in things which afterward haue appeared to appertaine to the faith and Posseuine that there are some things in the Fathers wherein vnwitingly they dissented from the Church either therefore they must tax them with infidelity aswell as vs or cleare vs aswell as them if al the force of the argument hang vpon this pin that therefore wee are Infidels because we priuatly expound the Scriptures 32. To the second viz. that all vnlearned Protestants are Infidels because they rely their faith vpon the credit of the translatours I answere three things first that they doe not rely their faith vpon the credit and fidelity of any translatour but partly vpon the iudgement and authority of the Church which receiueth such translations and alloweth them and is able to iudge of them and partly and principally vpon the word translated which containeth such holy and heauenly doctrine as none that readeth or heareth it can chuse but acknowledge the Maiestie of Gods Spirit speaking in it 33. Secondly if our people are therefore Infidels because they cannot examine the translations by the Hebrew and Greeke and doe therefore rely their faith vpon the translatours credit then Augustine was an infidell who knew neither of these languages but was as it is written of him monoglossos and then many godly Doctours and Fathers of the Church were Infidels who for the most part were all ignorant of the Hebrew tongue and some of them of the Greeke also and lastly then all the godly Christians in the purer times who both read and heard the Scriptures translated into their mother tongues were infidels for they all relyed their faith vpon the word translated but not for the translators sake who might erre in translating many places but for the sound holy and heauenly doctrine therein contayned 34. Thirdly if this maketh men infidels to relye their faith vpon man then the ignorant Romanists must needs be all infidels whose implicite Colliarlike faith is grounded onely vpon the Church that is not onely vpon the Pope who is in power the whole Church but also vpon euery ordinary Pastor be he Iesuite or Priest or Frier or any other whom they are according to their diuinity bound in conscience to beleeue whatsoeuer they teach as hath been shewed now this is to rely their faith vpon the fidelity and credit of man and therfore the blame of infidelity falleth vpon them more iustly then vpon vs and thus this accusation of theirs that we haue no faith no religion no God no Christ but are plain Infidels is a most notorious and open slander 35. Thus generally they slander our religion and the professors thereof but not content therewith they set vpon particular persons and those that are most eminent in our Church either in authority of place or excellency of learning that like Captaines march in the head of the ranks For to omit their horrible raylings against Kings Princes Magistrates Nobles and men of high place that any wayes opposed themselues to the Romish Monarchie whose glorious vertues were so resplendent that the mist of their slanders cannot darken the lustre thereof Lord how they raue and rage against the ashes of Luther Oecolampadius Zwinglius Caluin Beza and other worthie champions of our Church O◠Luther they write that he was an Apostate Friar that through enuy pride and ambition fell from them because the office of publishing Indulgences was taken from the Monks of his order and translated vnto the preaching Friers and that he had conference with the Diuell about the priuate Masse and was taught by him that it was vnlawfull and that in a disputation at 〈…〉 psia he vttered these blasphemous speeches This cause was neither begun for God nor shall be ended for God and that his life was incestuous and he himselfe a notable wine-bibber and his death infamous and fearefull he going to bed merry and drunke and being found the next morning dead his body being black and his tongue hanging forth as if he had been strangled and that after his death his body so stanke that they could not endure to carry it to his graue but threw it in a ditch and that the Deulls departed from many that were possessed and came to his sunerall These and many other strange fictions they haue set vpon the stage for the disgracing of the life death and memory of that blessed instrument of God 36. For Caluin they report that he was branded on the back by the Magistrate for his Sodomiticall and brutish lust and that he dyed in despaire calling vpon the Diuell swearing cursing and blaspheming most miserably being possessed with the lousie disease and wormes so increasing in an impostume or most stinking vicer about his priuy members that none of the standers by could any longer indure his stinke The like slander they lay vpon the life of Beza who they say in his youth was an effeminate wanton luxurious Poet and deserued as much shame for his filthy life as Caluin had done Zwinglius was slaine say they by Gods iust iudgement in the warre against the Catholicks Oecolampadius dyed suddenly in the night and Carolastadius was murthered by the Deuill 37. Further they tell how Luther went about in vaine to restore to life one Mesenus that was drowned by whispering and murmuring in his eare and how he would haue cast out the Deuill out of a certaine mayd but was in danger to be slayne by him and how Caluin compacted with one Bruleus to fayne himselfe to be dead that to shew the lawfulnesse of his extraordinary calling he might miraculously rayse him to life againe and that he prooued dead indeed and deceiued his expectation and made him a knowne impostor Thus they belch forth their venome against these good men that through their sides they might wound the Gospell and truth which they professed but with what likelyhood of truth I pray you marke and iudge and because matters of fact can be prooued by no other euidence but by witnesse except God miraculously discouer them to the world and witnesses also must be impartiall and without exception or else their testimonie is of no moment let vs therefore compare those that speake for them with these that are against them and try whether deserue most credit 38. Sleidan writeth of Luther that his death was most sweet and comfortable full of heauenly prayers and godly exhortations at which were present the Earle of Mansfield and other Noblemen Iustus Ionas the Schoolemaister of his children Michael Caeleus Iohannes Aurifaber and many more who testified the same to be true and Erasmus reporteth of his life that it was approoued with great consent of all men and that the integritie of his manners was such that his very enemies could finde nothing in him that they might calumniate which
shew also how good workes to wit almse-deedes pilgrimages workes of supererogation vowed chastity voluntary pouerty Monkish obedience which they esteeme the chiefest good workes are made Idols in that they repose the confidence of their heart and the hope of saluation in them through the power of meriting which they ascribe vnto them as also how they turne their Sacraments into Idols by teaching that they conferre grace Ex opere operato by the very worke done and that effectiuely actiuely and immediatly they produce in the heart the grace of regeneration and iustification which is the proper and immediate worke of the Godhead but I passe ouer these many other things because they admit in shew some probable exception though no sound confutation and I insist in those things onely in which euery Ideot and almost Infant may discerne most grosse and palpable Idolatry And those are these fiue in number the bread in the Sacrament Images Reliques Angels and Saints departed And lastly the Crosse and Crucifix of which in order 14. The blessed Sacrament of the body and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ ordayned for a perpetuall remembrance of his death and passion and for the strengthning and nourishing of the soules of the faithfull to eternall life is transhaped by them into a most horrible Idoll For this they teach and practise that that very thing which to all the senses is but bread being but lately moulded and knead by the Baker is to be worshipped and adored with diuine worship because forsooth after consecration it is the true and naturall body of Christ And therefore at the Priests eleuation of the hoast they all fall downe vpon their knees and worship it with great deuotion and expect from it forgiuenesse of their sinnes and all manner of earthly and temporall blessings and whosoeuer refuseth to doe this is an Heretike 15. Their Apologie is that there is a reall and naturall presence of Christs body and bloud in the Sacrament and therefore not the bread but the body of Christ into which the bread is transubstantiate is worshipped of them and so they thinke to free themselues To which I answere that if that were certaine then their defence was iust and their practice godly and we in calling them Idolaters for this cause should bee slanderers of the truth but seeing the contrary is rather certaine to wit that Christ is not corporally in the Sacrament but in heauen and that the bread remayneth still true bread both for matter and forme after consecration they cannot be excused from notorious Idolatry in worshipping a piece of Bakers bread in stead of Christ the eternall Sonne of God for to the outward senses it beareth the shape taste figure and colour of bread This is certaine and to the vnderstanding in reason it is bread because accidents cannot be without a substance this is as certaine and to faith it is bread because the Word which is the foundation of saith so calleth it after the words of consecration neither is there any Scripture to auouch the contrary saue that which may well receiue our interpretation as well yea better then theirs as the best learned amongst them confesse for Bellarmine confesseth that it may iustly bee doubted whether the Text this is my body be cleare inough to enforce transubstantiation And Scotus and Cameracensis thinke our opinion more agreeable to the words of institution and thus they haue against them sense and reason and faith and for them onely a doubtfull Exposition of two or three places of Scripture and therefore three to one but they are guilty of Idolatry 16. Besides graunt that there is a reall transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ yet the accidents of bread and wine remaine vnchanged and the forme and shape Now howsoeuer the learned may here distinguish their worship from the outward accidents to the inward substance yet the common people are not able so to doe but worship confusedly the outward accidents together with Christ contayned vnder them and so in that respect are Idolaters also for accidents be creatures as well as substances Yea and Bellarmine also doth allow them so to dâ—e for thus he writeth Diuine worship doth appertaine to the Symboles and signes of bread and wine so farre forth as they are apprehended as being vnited to Christ whom they containe Euen as they that worshipped Christ vpon earth being clothed did not worship him alone but after a sort his garments also Here is a braue straine of Diuinity they worshipped Christ in his clothes therfore they worshipped Christs clothes So Christ is worshipped vnder the formes of bread and wine therefore the formes of bread and wine must be worshipped This is like the Asse which bore vpon his backe the Image of Isis and when men fell downe before the Image he thought they worshipped him but hee was corrected with a cudgell for his sawcinesse and so are they worthy for their folly that cannot distinguish betwixt a man and his garments Christ and the signes of Christ but promiscuously confound the worship of the one with the other Rather therefore may we thus conclude they which worshipped Christ on earth did not worship his garments that he wore therefore they which will worship Christ in the Sacrament must not worship the outward Elements and so it will follow that as it had beene Idolatry in any to worship the garments of Christ so it is in the Romanists to worship the accidents of bread and wine 17. Lastly let it be supposed that there is such a reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament yet according to the doctrine of the Church of Rome no man can be certaine when it is because it depends vpon the intention of the Priest for thus they teach if the Priest should say the words of consecration without intention to consecrate the bread and wine he should effect nothing or if hee intend to consecrate but one hoast and there chance to be two or more then nothing is consecrated at all and so the intention of the Priest being vncertaine to the people there must needes be an vncertaine adoration and the Priest oftentimes intending nothing lesse then the matter it selfe which hee hath in hand there must needes be certaine and vndoubted Idolatry for if the bread and wine be not effectually consecrated as they are not without the Priests intention then Christ is not really present and so nothing is worshipped but the bare bread for remedy hereof they haue deuised two poore shifts one that the people must adore vpon a condition to wit if the due forme in consecrating bee obserued the other that an actuall intention is not necessarily required but onely a vertuall that is when an actuall intention to consecrate is not present at the very time of consecration by reason of some vagation of the minde yet it was present a little before the operation is in vertue
to some puritie doth approoue and confirme all these grosse opinions of the Schoole Diuines for thus it decreeth that it is good and profitable humbly to inuocate the Saints and to fly to their prayers and succour for the obtayning of blessing from God in Christ And that wee may see the meaning of this Decree the Romane Catechisme which was made by the commaundement of the Bishop of Rome doth more expressely affirme that the Saints are therefore to be called vpon because they pray continually for the saluation of men and God bestoweth many benefits vpon vs for their merit and grace sake and that they obtaine pardon for our sinnes and reconcile vs into the fauour of God And for the refining Iesuites they haue not yet refined this errour for Coster writeth that the Saints are to be inuocated both that they may mediate our cause to God and also that themselues may helpe vs. Viega another Iesuite saith that they are as it were the dores by which an entrance is opened to vs vnto the most holy places in heauen Osorius another of the same stampe affirmeth that God giueth vs all good things by the intercession of the Saints And lastly to make vp the messe Bellarmine himselfe that is more wary then all the rest doth not blush to say that Gods predestination is helped supported by the prayers of the Saints because God hath determined to vse their prayers for the effecting of mans saluation Behold here a Map of the Romish doctrine Who can now choose but account them Idolaters when they thus teach the people That all blessings descend vpon them by the meanes of the Saints and so encourage them to repose their confidence in their merits 69. But from their doctrine let vs come to the practice of their Church and we shall see this more cleerely and heere some few examples shall serue for a taste for to propound all in this kinde would bee both tedious and needlesse Thus therefore in their publike Seruice Bookes Rosaries and Breuiaries they pray vnto the Saints To Saint Paul Vouchsafe to bring thy humble suppliants to heauen after the end of this life to whom thou hast reuealed the light of truth To Saint Iames the greater Haile ô singular safeguard of thy pilgrims bountifully heare the prayers of thy seruants helpe them that worship thee and bring them to heauen To Saint Thomas thus Vouchsafe to establish vs thy suppliants in his faith by handling of whoÌ„ thou deseruedst to acknowledge to be God To Saint Iohn Haile ô holy Apostle of our Lord Iesus Christ I intreat thee by his loue who chose thee out of the world that thou wouldest deliuer me thy vnworthy seruant from all aduersitie and from all impediments of body and soule and receiuing my soule at the houre of death wouldest bring me to life euerlasting To Saint George thus Hee saue vs from our sinnes that wee may rest with the blessed in heauen Here Saint George is made a Sauiour and that from sinne and so either Christ is cleere put out of his office or George ioyned with him in his office Againe to Saint Erasmus Graunt that by thy merits and prayers we may ouercome all the snares of our enemies and be freed from the pouerty of body and minde and from eternall death To Saint Christopher O glorious Martyr Christopher bee mindefull of vs to God and without delay defend our body sense and honor thou that deseruedst to carry in thine armes ouer the Sea the Flower of heauen cause vs to auoid all wickednesse and to loue God with all our hearts To Saint Cosmus and Damianus O most holy Physicians who shine in heauen most cleerely by your merits preserue vs both from bodily plague and disease and also from the death of the soule that we may liue in grace vntill we enter into heauen To Francis the Fryer thus O Francis sunnes light singular crucified Saint c. beâ— thou to vs the way of life make satisfaction for vs alway shew to Christ the marks of thy wounds This Frier Francis they make equall to Christ and therefore they say that Christ imprinted his fiue wounds vpon him as if he also were to suffer for the world and redeeme mankind and that they were alike in all things as those blasphemous Verses of two shamelesse Iesuites Turselline and Bencius doe declare 70. What should I trouble thee gentle Reader with any more of this trumpery their Bookes are full of such-like prayers if any please to read them and that we may plainely see that they put their trust and confidence in them not onely the words doe sufficiently signifie but also the liberall indulgences their Popes haue annexed to the deuout sayings of such Orisons As Pope Sixtus hath promised eleuen thousand yeeres pardon to them that shall say a certaine prayer before the Image of the Virgine Mary beginning thus Aue sancta Mater Dei c. But to leaue the rest of the Saints and to come to the blessed Virgine whom with Epiphanius we blesse and honour but in â—â— casâ— worship it is a wonder into what an abominable Idoll they haue translated not her for shee abhorres their impietie but the Idea and fancy of her which they haue deuised in their owne braynes for they call her the Queene of heauen the Mother of mercy the Gate of Paradise the Life and hope of a sinner the Light of the Church the Lady of the world the Aduocatresse and Mediatrix of mankinde yea they say that the death and passion of Christ and the holy Virgine was for the redemption of mankinde and that she also must come betwixt God and vs for the remission of sinne and that her Sonne and she redeemed the world with one heart as Adam and Eue sold the world for one apple And thus they ioyne the Virgine Mary with Christ in the office of our redemption and so make her equall with him which were somewhat tolerable if they could stay there but they climbe higher in impudency and not onely match her with Christ but set her aboue him For they tell vs of a vision How Christ preparing to iudge the world there were two Ladders set that reached to heauen the one red at the top whereof Christ sate the other white at the top whereof the Virgine Mary sate and when the Friers could not get vp by the red Ladder of Christ but euermore fell downe Saint Francis called them to the white Ladder of our Lady and there they were receiued And a late Iesuite hath set forth to the view of the world certaine Verses wherein he preferres the milke of our Lady in many respects before the bloud of Christ yea they subiect Christ now raigning in the heauens to his Mothers command as it is sung in some of their Churches O happy Virgine that our sinnes dost purge Eâ—treate thy Mother and thy Sonne doe
of this life to bee purged in that purging fire This is also their doctrine Now I would aske of them if all the reliques of sin be wyped away by this annoynting Sacrament then what vse is there of Purgatory and if the reliques of sinne bee to bee purged in Purgatory then what vse of this Sacrament Either therefore this fire doth dry vp the vertue of that sacramentall Oyle or this sacramentall Oyle doth quench that fire They will say peraduenture that eyther all are not anoynted with this Oyle â— or that some that are anoynted by their owne infidelity and impenitency barre out the vertue thereof Or lastly that the sinne being remitted yet the temporall punishment due vnto it is to bee payd in Purgatory To which I reply first that it is against the rule of their owne Religion that none that are anoynted with this Oyle should goe to Purgatory for then a very small number should goe to that place seeing their Priests are so diligent for their owne belly sake that they seldome suffer any to passe away without this Pasport Secondly for them which barre out the efficacy of the Sacrament by their owne infidelity or impenitency not that purging fire of the Suburbs but the deuouring fire of Hell it selfe is prepared as they themselues acknowledge And thirdly if there be not a purging away of some filthy staines of sinnes from the soule by that fire but onely a satisfactory punishment why do they call it a Purgatory Nay and why doeth Bellarmine thus define it to bee a place wherein as it were in a Prison after this life those soules are purged which were not sufficiently purged in this life to the end that being so purged they may enter into heauen whither no polluted thing can haue admittance And thus it remaynes a necessary conclusion that either the reliques of sinne are not clensed away by Extreme vnction and so that Sacrament is of no force or if they be they are not then purged in Purgatory and so that fire must needes be quenched 51. But if this Oyle will not serue to extinguish Purgatorie because the fire burneth so hot let vs adde vnto this the Popes Pardons which will at least evacuate and empty it that there shall be no fuell for that fire For they teach that a Pardon or Indulgence is the remission of temporal punishment due for actuall sinnes out of the dispensation of the Churches Treasury Thus doth Tollet define it and Bellarmine and Gregory de Valentia adding onely that it is by meanes of application of the superabounding satisfaction of Christ and the Saints made by him that hath authority there unto Now none hath authority thereunto but the Pope onely and such as are delegated by him to that purpose for the keyes of this Treasury were committed to Peter and his Vicar saith Osorius another Iesuite and from them is deriued to Cardinalls Archbishops Bishops and other inferiour Clarkes And the Pope by his iurisdiction may absolue all that are in Purgatory from the paine and so empty Purgatory at once saith Antoninus the Archbishop of Florence which if it be true then either the Pope is vnmercifull if he can and will not for who would suffer such a number of poore soules to bee so tormented when with a word of his mouth he might release them or if hee would and cannot then their doctrine is false of his absolute Iurisdiction Let them choose whether they will But of this more hereafter Now to the purpose Some of them hold that the paynes of Purgatory hold but ten yeeres some an hundred some two hundred they that stretch them farthest yet say that they must end at the day of Iudgement because then all must bee Sheepe or Goates none betwixt both of middle nature as Beliarmine affirmeth Well then if Purgatory dure no longer then we shall not neede to feare it no more then that fire which the Philosopher calls Ignis fatuus For let any man goe to Venice and say but a prayer of Saint Augustine printed in a table and he shall haue 82000. yeeres pardon that is longer then the world is like to endure by their owne confession and therefore longer then needes This indulgence was granted by Pope Boniface the eyghth Or if Venice be too farre a iourney let him stay at home and but nod the head at the Name of Iesus and hee shall haue twenty yeeres pardon for euery time I would nod twenty times a day if this were true and that commeth to 7300. in the yeere O how a man may disappoint this Purgatory if he haue any wit in his head This Indulgence came from Pope Iohn the two and twentieth Or if this be also too great a matter let a man weare but an Agnus Dei about his necke and thinke onely in his heart on the Name of Iesus at the houre of his death and hee shall haue plenary forgiuenes of all his sinnes And for them that are there already they are helped out daily or at least may bee by the Suffrages and Masses of those that are aliue and if any remaine there the fault is in the Priests that say not Masses fast enough and the reason of that is because they receiue not money fast enough for there is the common Prouerbe most true No penny no pater noster To conclude in the yeere of Iubile a perfect and full pâ—rdou is graunted to all that desire the same or on whom the Pope will bestow it therefore the soules in Purgatory cannot be excluded Now if all these things stand true then Purgatory must fall for who would fall into Purgatory that may thus easily preuent it or who would suffer any of his friends soules and acquaintance to lye burning there one houre when it is in his power thus to redeeme them Either therefore the doctrine of Pardons is false and fayned or else Purgatory is no better then a scarcrow 52. Adde to these that soules onely are tormented in Purgatory and not bodies but bodies sinne as well as soules and some sinnes are committed by the whole man to wit bodie and soule together and therefore the body is not free from the relicks of sinnes no more then the soule especially from obligation vnto temporall punishment How can then these relicks bee purged away in this fire when as the one part of man which standeth in neede of purging as well as the other neuer commeth thither Bellarmine sawe this contradiction well enough and therefore labours to salue it by a false position driuing out one nayle of error with another to wit That sinne is onely an act of free-will and therefore after the dissolution of the body and soule by death remayneth onely in the soule and not in the dead body But this is first false for albeit properly it is the soule that sinneth yet the body also sinneth by being an instrument of the soule in sinning and he himselfe saith
it had bene a truth vpon so fit an occasion neuer preferred Peter but exhorteth all and so Peter also to equality and humility yea not onely so but expressely forbad all king-like and monarchicall superiority amongst them and not onely tyrannicall as Bellarmine would haue it as may euidently appeare by comparing Luk. 22. 26. with 1. Pet. 5. 3. 52. Thus hee confesseth their doctrine next he commeth to distinguish of it namely that their Apostolicall power was equall in respect of the people but yet not equall betweene themselues in which respect Peter was not onely a common Pastour with his fellow Apostles but extraordinarily pastor pastoruÌ„ a Pastour of the Pastours that is of the Apostles theÌ„selues this is his distinction but it is idle and vaine as may appeare by this reason because if he were the chiefe Pastour of the Apostles then he either ordained them to their offices or fed them with his doctrine or gouerned them by his authority or did some part of the office of a Pastour vnto them but hee neither ordained them for Christ himselfe did that norâ—ed them with doctrine for they were all taught of God and equally receiued the holy Ghost which did lead them into all truth nor gouerned them for they sent him hee did not send them and called him to an account he did not call them and therefore was no wayes to be esteemed their Pastour and super-intendent but their equall and Co-Apostle 53. And whereas hee defendeth the extrauagant of Pope Boniface which is so rightly termed for containing a most extrauagant doctrine from the truth hee must needs defend this double iurisdiction by the speech of Peter to our Sauior Ecce duo gladii behold heere are two swords and his answere to the same It is enough with how absurd a collection it is let his owne fellowes bee Iudges Franciscus de Victoria Stella Maldonate Arias Montanus and Suares the Iesuite All which with many others reiect this collection of theirs as most absurd and impertinent I conclude if Pope Boniface did extrauagate in that extrauagant in the application of this place why doe they hold that the Pope cannot erre iudicially If hee did not whydoe so many learned men of his owne side contradict him Either sure the Popes two swords are ruâ—â—ie and cannot bee vnsheathed or els hee would neuer suffer his authority to bee thus diminished not onely by his enemies but euen by those that fight vnder his owne banner And thus this Antithesis also stands vnblemished for all that is yet said to the contrary 54. The Gospell teacheth that there is but one Mediator betwixt God and man euen the God-man Iesus Christ and that hee beeing the onely Propitiatour is also the onely Mediatour But the Church of Rome teacheth that as many Saints as are in Heauen so many Mediatours and Intercessours wee haue to God and among the rest the blessed Virgin the mother of our Lord whom they call their Aduocatresse Deliueresse Mediatresse Sauiouresse and Comfortresse 55. Bellarmine seeketh to escape from this Contradiction by a threefold distinction first hee sayth that Christ indeed is the onely Mediatour of redemption because hee onely made reconciliation betwixt God and vs by paying the ransome for our sinnes but neuerthelesse the Saints are Mediatours of intercession by praying for vs. This he barely affirmeth without any proofe and therefore it seemeth he would haue vs take it vpon his word for current coyne without any tryall but wee haue learned out of Gods word to try the spirits and to weigh all such ware in the balance of the Sanctuary and therefore finding by the Scripture that Christ did not onely pay the ransome for our sinnes but also that hee maketh request for vs. and not finding in all the booke of God that the Saints in Heauen either doe present our prayers vnto God or make request for our particular necessities wee haue iust cause to reiect this distinction as too light ware and as counterfeit coyne 56. I but sayth hee the Saints triumphant pray for the Saints militant therefore they are their Mediators I answere Though it be granted that they do pray for them in generall which indeed is not denyed and in particular which can neuer be proued yet the argument hath no good consequence that therefore they should bee our Mediatours for as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth A Mediatour must bee a middle-man differing from each party at variance after some sort but the Saints triumphant are not mediâ— betwixt God and vs both because in presence they are alwayes with God and neuer with vs and also in semblance more like to God then vnto vs for they are perfectly happy holy and righteous we beeing miserable sinfull and wicked and in knowledge they are satisfied with heauenly obiects and haue no participation with humane affaires being therefore thus far remooued from vs and so neere knit vnto God in all these by his owne rule they cannot any wayes bee our Mediatours neither of redemption nor intercession 57. His second distinction is that Christ is called the onely Mediatour because hee is the Mediatour not onely in regard of his office but also of his nature for that hee is in the middest betwixt God and man hee himselfe beeing God and man To which I answere that it is most true which hee sayth but yet it is both contrary to that which hee himselfe hath deliuered elsewhere and also ouerthroweth that which hee holdeth heere for the first he laboureth to proue in another place that Christ is the Mediatour onely in respect of his humane nature and here hee sayth in respect of both natures how can these bee reconciled mary by another distinction It is one thing sayth hee to bee a Mediatour in respect of person and another thing in respect of operation in the first Christ is the Mediatour by both natures in the second by his humane nature onely As if hee did not operate and worke the Mediation in the same respect that hee is Mediatour I but hee will say the chiefe worke of our redemption was the death of Christ but the God-head cannot dye therfore c. I answere Though Christ died as he was man yet the person that died was God and man for as Tolet his fellow Iesuite and Cardinall obserueth Christ dyed not as other men in whose power it is not either to hold the soule in the body or to recall it backe againe being expelled but Christ ioyned his soule and body together at his pleasure as hee that holding a sword in one hand and a scabbard in another puls it out or thrusts it in at his pleasure By which it is plaine that though Christ dyed in respect of his man-hood yet the author of his death was his God-head so he is our Mediatour in both natures Secondly he ouerthroweth his own positioÌ„ by this distinctioÌ„ for first if Christ bee the only Mediatour in respect of office and
of God A dead man cannot moue the members of the body nor vse the naturall saculties of the soule no more can the vnregenerate mooue one haire bredth to Heauen-ward nor vse any graces of the Spirit A dead man hath no sense nor feeling though hee bee neuer so sharply handled seeth not though the Sunne shineth neuer so bright heareth not though a trumpet be sounded in his eare no more can the vnregenerat feele the wounds of Gods Lawes heare the sound of the Gospell nor see the cleare light of truth that shinethround about him Lastly in a dead man there is a separation of the soule froÌ„ the body so in the vnregenerate there is a separation of Gods Spirit from the soule which is the soule of the soule For this cause S. Aug. likened the vnregenerate man to the Shunamites sonne beeing dead whom the Prophet Elizeus raised from death to life and others to Lazarus stinking in the graue or to the widowes sonne of Naiâ—â— lying dead vpon the beare or to Iairus daughter that was dead in the house noting three degrees of sinnes one more notorious then the other yet all in the state of death vntill Christ by his Spirit shall inspire life into them and this is the perfect analogy and proportion betwixt a dead man and a sinner and therefore Bellarmines exception is false that they doe not agree in all things for there is nothing wherein they doe agree not if the comparison bee rightly proportioned 82. Secondly if they did disagree in other things yet in this wherein lyeth the life of the similitude they must needs agree that as a dead man hath nothing whereby he can helpe himselfe for the recouery of his life so man spiritually dead hath nothing in him no faculty or power of the soule whereby he can any way further the obtaining of his coÌ„uersioÌ„ And this was Saint Augustines opinion agreeable to the Gospell for his words are plaine concerning Pauls conuersion that he was called from Heauen and by that mighty and effectuall calling conuerted Gratia Deisolaerat It was onely the grace of God And no otherwise did Iustine Martyr conceiue thereof when hee sayth That as to haue beeing at the first when wee are created was not of our selues so to choose and follow that which is pleasing to God is not by vs but by his perswading and mouing vs to the faith In this therefore which is the point of the question the similitude holds most strongly and so Bellarmines exception is nothing to the purpose 83. Thirdly and lastly it is most absurd of all which hee sayth that because a sinner liueth naturally therefore he moueth towards grace more then a dead carkas to nature which hath no life at all for in respect of grace it is all one to haue no life at all and to haue no life of the Spirit For nothing can worke aboue the compasse of it owne beeing Naturall life cannot tranicend the Spheare of nature nor any way moue to the Spheare of grace For as Plants that liue the vegetatiue life cannot arise to the sensitiue life which is in beasts nor they to the rationall which is in men So neither can these arise vp any whit to the life of the Spirit which is in Gods Saints till a new life bee inspired into them which new life as it is the conuersion of the soule to God so it is the foundation of all spirituall actions seeing life in euery kinde is the foundation of all the actions in that kind For vntill there bee life in a plant it doth not grow vntill it bee in a beast it doth not moue nor feele vntill in a man hee doth not thinke speake or remember and so vntill this life of the Spirit bee in the soule it cannot will nor worke any thing that is good Therefore I conclude that though a sinner liue naturally yet beeing dead to grace that that life doth no more helpe to his conuersion then the sensitiue life of a beast doth to the obtaining of reason or the vegetatiue life of a Plant to the obtaining of sense 84. The Gospell teacheth that all should read the Scriptures for so our Sauiour chargeth and his Apostles Paul and Peter and Iohn charge not Priests onely but all others And Abraham sendeth the rich Gluttons brethren to Moses and the Prophets And the Eunuch is not rebuked but approued by Philip for reading the Prophesie of Esay And the Bereans are commended for examining Pauls doctrine by the Scripture which should neuer haue beene if it had not beene lawfull for them to doe it This is the doctrine of the Gospell most plaine and euident But the Church of Rome teacheth that all men must not read the Scripture to wit Laymen except they bee permitted by their Ordinary because pearles are not to bee cast amongst swine nor a sword or a knife put into a childes hand nor occasion of errour offered to the ignorant nor matter of offence to the weake as also because they are more obscure then can bee vnderstood of the Laicks and common sort of people Thus they paint ouer the foule wrinkled face of Iezabel with false colours but yet the contrariety is plaine All ought to read the Scriptures and some ought not to read the Scriptures The one is the doctrine of Iesus Christ The other of the Pope and his Church 85. But Bellarmine distinguisheth two wayes First that there is a double way of knowing the Scriptures one by hearing and another by reading The first is commanded to all and therefore necessary to be vsed of all But this last is not commanded to any but to the Clergie and those whom they shall thinke fit to read them with profit and without danger But who seeth not that when our Sauiour willeth to search the Scriptures hee speaketh of reading And when the Bereans examined Pauls sermon by the Scriptures they did it by reading And when Abraham remitteth Diues brethren to Moses and the Prophets hee sendeth them to reading For Moses and the Prophets were dead in their persons and liued onely in their writings And lastly when the Apostles wrote their Epistles to the seuerall Churches they wrote them to this end that they might bee read of all For so Saint Paul chargeth the Colossians after they had read the Epistle that they themselues would cause it also to bee read in the Church of the Laodiceans Besides if it bee a dangerous thing for the ignorant to read the Scriptures for feare they should peruert the sense so fal into heresie or impiety then much more dangerous is the hearing of it seeing there is no preaching so pure as the word it selfe man euer mixing some dregs of his own corruption with the pure wine of the word nor any preacher so sincere but he doth often erre and so the hearer being debarred from trying his doctrine by the touchstone of the Scripture must needs irrecouerably fall into
to be true may appeare by this that Fisher the Bishop of Rochester his profest aduersary writing against him doth not in all his booke once tax him of misdemeanour or of any notorious crime which he would surely haue done if any either iust cause or light suspition had beene ministred vnto him 39. Touching the life and death of Caluine Beza who was his familiar friend and dayly associate affirmeth that the one was full of holinesse and good works and voyd of scandall and the other full of peace to himselfe and comfort to his friends and beholders Nicholaus Gelasius writeth of his death that he was at that time so farre from blaspheming and cursing that the day before his death he called all the Ministers of the city together and tooke his leaue of them with most holy and louing speaches and the next day gaue ouer his life dormienti similior quam morienti more like to one that slept then that dyed 40. Zwinglius was slaine indeed in the warre against Romanists but that doth not proue either his life to haue beene vicious or his doctrine erroneous for then good Iosias should be condemned for an vngodly king who was slaine in warre by the Egyptians and they must needs bring their owne Doctor Sanders into the same imputation and that by greater reason who was slaine in the Irish war not onely against Protestants but like a perfidious traitour against his owne countrey and Soueraigne Oecolampadius whom they accuse to haue died suddenly in the night albeit that kind of death hath and might befall Gods deare children as it did that good Emperour Theodosius of whose saluation Saint Ambrose neuerthelesse maketh no doubt yet Simon Gryneus who was present at his death and Wolfangus Capito that liued at that time report that he lay sick sixteene dayes and before his death exhorted all that were present to prayer and constancie and after he had sung the fiftieth Psalme throughout he gaue vp the ghost with much assurance of Gods fauour As for Carolostadius though we haue no witnesses of his life and death extant in print as far as I haue read yet it is most likely that this report of his death commeth out of the same mint seeing it issued out of the mouth of his sworne enemies and those that hated him Beza himselfe confesseth the errours of his youth but they were whilst he was a Romish affected and vnconuerted and yet no such great matters neither as might vtterly blemish his good name for they were not lasciuious acts but wanton poems the froth of youth but let them touch him if they can after he became a Protestant malice it selfe is not able to cast any durt of scandall vpon him 41. Now compare our witnesses with theirs theirs were enemies ours friends theirs led with malice ours with loue theirs absent ours present theirs report that which they had by hearesay if they did not rather deuise then receiue ours tell nothing but that whereof they were eye-witnesses now iudge whether malice be not more prone to slander then friendship to flatter and whether an enemy is not euer more forward to defame then a friend to maintaine credit and whether is more likely to lye a malitious foe in disgracing or a louing friend in commending and lastly whether deserueth better credit those that are absent and fetch their report from other mens mouthes or those that are present and speake vpon their owne knowledge and beholding Surely the doubt may easily bee resolued if we consider either that which the Poet sayth c. One eye witnesse is more worth then tenne eare witnesses or that which their own Bellarmine sayth Stultum est c. It is a foolish thing to beleeue those that are absent rather then those that were present or that which reason it selfe grounded vpon Religion telleth vs that malice is more prone to lye and discredit an enemie then loue and friendship is to defend a friend seeing an euill affection in a wicked man is perfectly euill but a good affection in any man is imperfectly good These testimonies being thus weighed in an euen ballance wee haue greater reason to beleeue Sleydan Erasmus Gelasius Melanchton Capito Gryneus then Cochlaeus Surius Bolsecas or Schusselburgus though not a Romanist yet as great an enemy or any of these rayling Rabsakehs who cared not what they wroght against our persons so that they might springle disgrace vpon our Religion thereby 42. But wee if wee would vrge this argument against them and indeed as oft as wee doe it wee produce not for witnesses their enemies but their close friends and profest fauourers of their Religion as Polonus Platina Onuphrius Luiâ—prâ—ndus 〈…〉 uclerus Sigonius Baronius c. all which doe report of their owne Popes that many of them were such monsters of men as the Sun neuer saw greater neither Sardanapalus nor Nâ—ro nor Heliogabalus nor Scilla nor Catiline doe goe before many of them in cruelty gluttony luxury and all manner of vices insomuch as it grew into a Prouerbe that hee which would represent the most compleat villaine that could be imagined his next way were to make the picture of a Pope now these are not our slanderings of them as theirs are oâ— vs but the constant reports of those that were sworne subjects to the Sea of Rome and therefore would haue rather with Shem cast their cloakes vpon the naked filthinesse of their holy Fathers then with Cham laughed at the same had it not beene so notorious and famous that it could not bee hidden 43. To conclude that not onely by probable coniecture but by euident proofe their slanders may appeare wee haue two notable arguments of the same the first is that strange tale spread abroad in Italy touching Luthers death before he was dead how in his sicknesse hee desired the body of our Lord to bee communicated vnto him and after when he saw his end approach entreated that his body might bee laide on the Altar and worshipped with diuine honours and how at his buriall Almighty God raised a great noyse and tumult and that the holy hoste hung in the aire and in a thunder that his body was taken out of his graue and nothing left but a stinke of brimstone which had well nigh stifled all the standers by This tale was published before Luthers death and a copie thereof came into his owne hands which he read with a glad heart and detested the blasphemy therein contained The like slander was raised vp touching Beza his death long before hee dyed and came also into his hands as may appeare in his Epistle before his annotations vpon the new Testament by which wee may see what manner of reports they bee which are deuised by these Romanists against vs and ex vngue leonem by this iudge of the rest The second is the confession of that perfidious Apostate Bolsek who as it is reported in a publike Synode with
wine instituted by Christ to put vs in mind of his death and passion bee for such their effectuall representation adored and worshipped with diuine worship as well as Images and pictures for their representation especially seeing they carrie a more exact resemblance and liuely signification of him then any picture can doe Here is a plaine contradiction betwixt the proofe of their Transubstantiation and their doctrine of adoration of Images standing vpon these termes An Image must be worshipped because it representeth the person of Christ but the Sacrament is not to bee worshipped though it represents Christ more fully then any Image except he be corporally and substantially present in it 29. Secondly it is crossed by the Canon of the Masse diuers waies First by the praier that is vsed before the eleuation where the Priest desireth God to behold the same sacrifice with a propitious and fauourable countenance like as the sacrifices of Abel Abraham Melchizedech c. If Christ were really offered by the Priest hee need not pray that God would be propitious to that sacrifice for in him hee is euer well pleased neither can his sacrifice be possibly disrespected of God being of infinite merite and price to satisfie the rigour of his Fathers iustice it were therefore either horrible blasphemy in their Masse to equalize this absolute sacrifice of Christ with the imperfect sacrifices of Abel and Abraham which stood in need of Gods mercifull acceptation or it is false that Christ is really sacrificed in the Masse one of the two must needs be either blasphemy in the Canon of the Masse or falshood in their doctrine of Transubstantiation 30. Againe by another prayer which is vsed in the consecration where the Priest prayeth that God would command those things to be carried by the hands of the holy Angell vp to the high Altar into the sight of the diuine Maiestie Now by these words those things haec cannot bee vnderstood Christ neither in Grammaticall construction nor in any religious sense for in true Grammaticall Latine he should haue said if he had ment Christ either hunc this or hoc viz. sacrificiâ—â— this sacrifice and not haec these things for though the elements be two yet by their own doctrine whole Christ is in each of them and therefore cannot bee spoken of in the plurall number as if he were either diuided in himselfe or multiplied to more then himselfe in the construction of religion it can be no lesse then blasphemy to imagine that an Angell must carry vp Christ into Heauen and present him there vpon the high Altar to the diuine maiestie for it implieth in him either inability or vnwillingnesse to present himselfe to say he is vnable is to deny him to be God and so Almighty and to say he is vnwilling is to deny him to bee our high Priest and Mediatour to whose office it onely pertaineth to offer vp the sacrifices of the faithfull vnder the Gospell as the Priest in the law of Moses might onely offer the sacrifices of the law and enter into the most holy place to make reconciliation for the people so that it remaineth that the composer of the Masse could not vnderstand by haec these things Christ himselfe but the elements Bread and Wine which are a representation and commemoration of that one all-sufficient sacrifice on the Crosse and so either the Masse is erronious or Transubstantiation a false doctrine for if the Masse be true then Transubstantiation is false and if Transubstantiation be true then the Masse is false 31. Thirdly it is crossed by their manifold crossings vsed by the Priest in the Masse for if Christ in person bee really present as a complete sacrifice what neede such signings or crossings by the earthly hands of a sinfull Priest is hee sanctified by them that were blasphemy to thinke He needeth no sanctification being the Holy of holies Is the diuell driuen away by these meanes that is a greater blasphemy to beleeue for hee once conquered the diuell in such sort that he dareth neuer meddle with him any more And yet the blasphemous Iesuites are not afraid to affirme that the diuels may and doe so come neere to their Sacrament that they can both carry it away and abuse it also Surely if this bee true then the diuels know Christ is not there for they durst not come so neere vnto him sacrificed on the Altar by whose true sacrifice on the Crosse they receiued such a deadly wound Lastly is God put in minde of his Sonnes sacrifice on the Crosse by their crossings of him vpon the Altar This is impudency to thinke for Almighty God cannot forget the sacrifice of his owne Sonne neyther can his Crosse bee any whit dignified by their crossings Which way soeuer they turne them here is eyther impietie in their Masse or falsity in their doctrine of Transsubstantiation 32. Thus much touching the contradictions in the Eucharist Now let vs see their concordance in other Articles of their Religion and that with greater breuitie And first in their Article of Iustification therein there lurke foure maine contradictions First they say that the first iustification when a man of vniust and wicked is made iust and good is the free gift of God and deserued by no precedent works and yet they say againe that a man doth prepare and make himselfe fit for this iustification by certayne acts of faith Feare Hope Repentance and the purpose of a new life Yea Bellarmine doth not sticke to say that this faith iustifieth by way of merite and deserueth forgiuenesse of sinnes after a certaine manner And all of them â—each that those dispositions and preparations arise partly from grace and partly from free-will as two seuerall and deuided agents and that it is in the power of mans will eyther to accept that grace of God or to refuse it as hath beene at large discouered in the fourth Reason Now heare the contradictions If it bee meerely Gods free gift then it is no wayes mans free-will and if it bee any waies mans free-will to prepare himselfe then it is not euery way Gods free gift For it is not in this case as in other externall donations the King may giue a pardon freely and yet the prisoner may haue power to receiue or to refuse the pardon because the pardon is one thing and the prisoners will on other but in the iustification of a sinner the gift it selfe is the very change of the minde and the will and the whole man for it is as they say when a sinner is made righteous and an vniust man is made iust and so the will hath no power to reiect it when God effectually giues it nor power to accept it till God alter and change it by his grace And hence it followeth that to say it is Gods free gift and yet that we in part prepare our selues thereunto by our owne free-will implyeth contradiction as also this to