a citie and the Lord hath not done it Amos 3. 6. August haeres 65. This heresie the papists are not free from who affirme that Christs death was not Gods acte otherwise then by permission in respect of the malice of the Iewes Act. 4. sect 2. Whereas the scripture saith it was done by Gods hand counsell which is more then permission and so indeed God did not onely permit but vse the malice of the Iewes most holily and most iustly to bring his purpose to effect The Rhemistes also affirme that sinne standeth not with Gods will intention nor honor Annot. Rom. 3. v. 4. True it is that sinne is against the reuealed will of God in his worde but nothing can come to passe against the secret wil determination of God Neither is God the author of sinne which proceedeth from mans owne corruption but as it is a demonstration of his iustice in the punishment thereof as Augustine saith Creat Deus mala poenas iustissimas irrogando God createth euil by inflicting of most iust punishment Haeres 66. The papistes then which deny that euill any way commeth from God encline to this heresie of the Coluthians 16 An Arch-heretike called Marcus did hold that Christ did not verily suffer and indeed but in shew onely appearance Haeres 14. The Apollinaristes also affirmed that Christ tooke humane flesh without a soule August Haeres 55. I pray you how far are the papists from this heresie who affirme that Christ suffered not in soule Nay the Rhemists hold it to be a blasphemous assertion so to say Annot. Hebr. 5. ver 7. What is it else but eyther with Marcus to say that Christ suffered but in shew and that hee felt nothing in soule when hee cryed out vpon the Crosse my God my God why hast thou forsaken me for if there were no such matter indeed Christ must haue vttered these wordes onely in outward shew and pretense Or else they must fall into the Apollinaristes heresie for why did Christ take vppon him our flesh and soule but to redeeme man that was lost both in body and soule And therefore hee must needs haue suffered both in bodie and soule for if there were no vse of the humane soule in the worke of our redemption you might as well say with the Apollinaristes that Christ had no soule at all Thus Augustine reasoneth si totus homo perijt totus beneficio saluatoris indiguit si totus beneficio saluatoris indigebat totum Christus veniendo saluauit Cont. Felician ca. 13. If the whole man both body and soule were lost hee wholy had need of a Sauiour if hee wholy needed a Sauiour Christ by his comming did wholly saue him Ergo it followeth that Christ must wholly haue dyed and suffered in body and soule to redeeme man for our redemption was wrought by his death that was lost in body and soule 17 The Anthropomorphits did imagine that God was in shape and proportion like a man Haeres 50. Do not our Rhemistes sauour stronglie of this heresie which allow the Image of God to bee pictured in their Churches like an olde man with gray haires Annot. Act. 17. ver 29. 18 The heretikes Seleuciani or Hermiani denied that Christ did sit at the right hand of God in his flesh but that hee had left or put off his flesh and placed it in the Sunne Haeres 59. The papistes now though in words they affirme not this yet by a necessary sequele of opiniō they must leaue Christ without his flesh in heauen as often as they would haue it present in the masse for it seemed an absurd thing euen to those grosse heretikes that the body of Christ should bee in many places at once for if they had knowen the shiftes which papistes now haue found out to establish their Reall presence who doubt not to say that the body of Christ may bee in many places to place Christes flesh in the Sunne they needed not to haue remooued it out of heauen They might haue said he was in both places at once Yet here in the Seleuciani seeme to be more reasonable then papists that they haue prouided so glorious a place for the body of Christ euen the beautifull tabernacle of the Sunne but the other thrust the flesh of Christ into a narrow roome bring him within the compasse of a thin cake or put him into a boxe and housse him in their bellies yea send his bodie to a viler place then so euen to the draught where their bellies are purged as some of them haue beene driuen to graunt But that the flesh of Christ cannot bee in many places at once Augustine sheweth writing thus vppon those wordes in the Gospell What if you see the Sonne of man ascending where hee was before Illi put abant eum erogaturum corpus suum ille autem se dixit ascensurum in coelum vtique integrum They imagined that Christ would haue bestowed his bodie amongest them but he faith he will ascend into heauen that is to say whole and found tract in Iohan. 27. If so be then Christ doth now bestow his bodie in earth in Augustines iudgement he cannot be whole in heauen 19 The heretikes called Abeliani thought it not lawfull for their sect to liue without wiues and yet they neuer vsed nor kept companie with their wiues Haeres 87. Do not the papistes come neere them which hold that their priestes which were maried before orders ought not afterward to haue accesse to their wiues yet are they their wiues still Rhemist act 21. sect 1. 20 The Pelagian heretikes did hold three pernicious opinions First that a man may be perfect in this life and keepe all the commaundementes Haeres 88. So the Rhemistes say it is possible to keepe Gods commaundementes Annot. Iohn 4. sect 1. Secondlie the Pelagians say that grace is giuen onely vnto men to this end that they may doe more easely those thinges which they are commaunded to doe by their owne free will Haeres 88. So the Rhemistes say that man was neuer without free will but hauing the grace of Christ it is truely made free Annot. Iohn 8. sect 2. What is this else but that his free will is made more free and that grace helpeth him not wholly to worke but more easely onely Thirdly the Pelagians holde Gratiam Dei non ad singulos actus dari That the grace of God is not needefull to be giuen at euery assay but that their free will in most thinges is sufficient August Epistol 106. So the Rhemistes say that though the Gentiles beleeued specially by Gods grace yet they beleeued also of their owne free will Acts. 13. sect 2. What say they now else but that a man may beleeue by his owne free will without grace 21 The Manichees condemned the eating of flesh as beeing vncleane and impure Haeres 46. So the papistes at certaine times forbid the eating of flesh And heerein perhaps they differ from the
not a manifest applying of the words to the matter proposed to be occupied That wee would make the simple beleeue that no punishment of a mans owne person for sinnes committed nor penance enioyned by the Church is necessarie but all such things to be superfluous because Christ hath satisfied ynough for al 2. Corinth 2. Sect. 2. This is a malicious slaunder Wee affirme in deede that no punishment laid vpon any mans person either by himselfe or by the Church is any satisfaction to the iustice of God for our sinnes because Christ onely was able and hath made such satisfaction yet temporall punishment for chastisement ecclesiasticall discipline for satisfaction of the Church and amendment of open offenders are necessarie by the ordinance of Gods worde and in our Church are practised Fulk ibid. They saye that Luther Caluine and such wicked Libertines as it pleaseth them to terme vs do teach that Contrition is altogether a meane to make sinners eyther hypocrites or to put them in despaire Annotat. 2. Corinth 7. Sect. 3. Wee speake onely against the Popish heresie of penance or sorrowe to be satisfactorie for sinne and not against such sorrow which worketh true repentance and true contrition for all their sinnes past That wee refuse all mans attestation and approbation and will bee tryed by Scriptures onely and that wee count it a great absurditie to haue the Scriptures approued by the Churches testimonie Galath 2. Sect. 4. But wee affirme no such thing neither doe wee refuse to bee tryed by men iudging according to the Scriptures The approbation of the Scriptures by the Church wee allowe but wee count it a great absurditie that the authoritie of the Scripture shoulde depende vppon the Churches approbation and tryall which is the thing in question betweene vs. That wee teach that the charge of the Apostles was so distinct that none could preach or exercise iurisdiction but in those seuerall places which by Gods appointment or their lot for more particular regard of peace and orders sake were limited to euery one Galath 2. Sect. 6. But we teach contrariwise That euery one of the Apostles had as large and as generall authoritie as the other and that any of the Apostles by their commission might lawfully haue preached at Rome as well as Peter or Paul But after this distinction was made by God it was not lawfull for the Apostles to leaue or forsake their special charges and to intrude them selues into anothers limits as Saint Paul saith wee do not stretch our selues beyond our measure 2. Corinth 10. 14. That we haue no other arguments against the reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament but such as wee borrow of Aristotle and his like concerning quantitie accidents place position dimensions sight taste and other straites of reason to the which they bring Christes mysteries Coloss. 2. 1. We haue other arguments out of holie Scripture and the auncient writers Neither haue wee any arguments out of Philosophie but such as are grounded vpon the Scriptures which teach the perfect humanitie of Christ and all essentiall properties of a true and naturall bodie They say wee applie that text of Saint Paul Hee that will not labour let him not eate 2. Thessal 3. 2. against the vacant life of the Clergie Annot in hunc locum But wee require no such thing as to labour with the hands of such of the Clergie as labour in studie and teaching Against the idle life of Monkes Nunnes Friers and the rest of that crue as also against idle Masse-priests this text is strong That we hold nothing to be necessarie to saluation but the Scriptures 2. Timoth. 3. Sect. 3. We hold no such thing for so wee should exclude Christ him selfe as vnnecessarie to saluation But we affirme that the Scripture containeth all things necessarie to be learned to saluation and this is the true state of the question That wee plainly denie Melchisedech to haue bene a Priest Hebr. 7. Sect. 8. Here without shame they slaunder vs. This wee neuer denied neither by Gods grace will euer though we affirme that his Priesthood consisted not in offering of bread and wine neither doth the Apostle or any text of Scripture so teach They charge vs with this heresie That Christ was not the first man that entred into heauen Hebr. 10. Sect. 1. They belie vs to say we holde that Christ was not the first man that entred into heauen with his bodie or whole humanitie as the text is Hebr. 10. 20. And that dedicated and prepared away for all his members to enter into heauen both with their bodies and their soules by vortue of whose death all the faithfull from the beginning were receiued into heauenly rest in their soules That we will haue no difference betweene the laitie and the Clergie 1. Pet. 5. Sect. 2. It is false which here they obiect against vs. Wee onely mislike their Popish difference who do in such sort set apart their Clergie from the rest of the people as though they onely were the Lords lot and inheritance the rest excluded That we say the Scriptures be so easie that they may be not only safely read but also expounded boldly of all the people as wel vnlearned as learned and consequently euery one by himselfe and his priuate spirite without respect of the expositions of the learned fathers or expectation of their pastors iudgement may determine make choice of such sense as himselfe liketh 2. Pet. 3. Sect. 1. All these are great vntruthes In deede we do hold that the people may safely be admitted to the reading of the Scriptures though we denye not but that there are certain places therein hard to be vnderstoode yet we giue them not libertie to expound scripture as themselues listeth not staying for the iudgement of their pastors For we plainly protest that whosoeuer despiseth the ordinarie Ministerie of the word which God hath established in his Church for the direction of vs in the truth shal neuer attaine vnto true knowledge As for the expositions of the fathers we are so far from reiecting them where they interprete according to the sense of the Scriptures that they do in a manner anow all our interpretations which you mislike That wee affirme that wee neither keepe neither possiblie can keepe Gods commandements 1. Iohn 2. Sect. 7. Wee say not so but that we can not keep them in such perfection as the iustice of God requireth though by his grace we doubt not but we are enabled in such measure to keepe them as his mercie in Christ accepteth Fulk ibid. Thus wee see with how many slaunders our countrimen of Rhemes doe vnkindly charge and load vs withal neither are these all more who pleaseth may collect out of that blacke booke of theirs The want of the rest which I haue not here set downe I will supply out of another countrey-mans booke of ours to whome we are much beholding for afoording of vs such plentie of so good stuffe First
they what a principall sectmaster with his blasphemous mouth or penne vttereth saying In the verie best times such was partlie the ambition of Bishops partlie their ignorance and foolishnesse that the verie blinde may easely perceiue Sathan verely to haue beene president of their assemblies And in the margent they note Bezaâ— blasphemie against the first general Councels Rhemist act 15. sec. 10. In this place Beza speaketh not one word against the first general councels but against the assemblies of proud vnlearned light-headed Bishops of Greece which liued in those best times whereof it is manifest by the Church stories that many of them were heretical and blasphemous It is a loose argument Beza saith there were wicked Bishops in the best times Ergo he blasphemeth against the first generall councels That Beza saith Melchisedeches priesthoode was wholly spirituall Annot Hebr. 8. sec. 3. He saith not that Melchisedeches priesthoode was onely spirituall as the spirituall priesthoode of the faithfull is but that Melchisedeches priesthood was figuratiue hauing a spirituall relation to Christes eternall priesthoode Fulk ibid. But no maruell if they make not daintie to slaunder the ministers of the gospell when they dare open their lying mouthes against christian princes and offer violence to the Lordes annointed As Bellarmine most slaunderously giueth out of our gracious Soueraigne I am reipsa Caluinistis in Angliamulier quaedam summus Pontifex est And nowe in trueth a certaine woman in England taketh vpon her to be chiefe Bishop of the Caluinistes Bellarm. de notis Ecclesiae lib. 4. cap. 9. A foule and a disdainefull slaunder Whereas our prince doth not vsurpe vpon the office of Bishops and ministers but as all godly princes haue done as Dauid Hesekiah and others she thinketh that it belongeth to her princelie charge to haue a care of Religion and to looke to the house of God Beside these slaunders which they haue raised concerning the opinions and doctrine of our Church they haue deuised and forged lies also concerning other matters Staphylus and furious Surius say that Luther learned his diuinitie of the deuill An other maintaineth that he has borne of the deuil An other that he died of drunkennesse vid. Fox pag. 1257. Bellarmine reporteth out of railing Cochleus that Luther died sodainely for saith hee hauing supped verie daintily and being made merrie with good cheere and with his ieastes made al at the table to burst foorth into laughter he immediatelie sickened and died the same night Bellarm. lib. 4. De notis eccl cap. 17. And he maketh himselfe pretie sport in telling a lying tale out of the same Cochleus how Luthers bodie being clapt in lead in the midst of winter in the frost and cold sodainly beganne so to stincke that the verie smell pearced the lead and whereas they were purposed to conuey his corps to Wittemberge to be buried they were constrained to leaue it by the way lib. 4. De notis eccles cap. 14. They may be ashamed to forge such shamefull lies for neither was Luthers death sodaine who had an old infirmitie hanging vpoÌ„ him being accustomed to be much troubled with oppression of humors in the orifice or opening of his stomach Neither died he the same night but the next morning betweene 8. and 9. of the clocke Reported by Melancthon who better was acquainted both with Luthers life and death then any papist of them all Luther made a most comfortable end made a most sweete praier before his death which is rare I thinke with the popish sort consul Fox Pag. 864. The rest which they report of his body is as true as that which they fained of M. Bucer that he should denie at his death that Christ our Messiah was come Fox Pag. 1257. colum 2. whose maner of death D. Redman that preached at his funerall and many other English men knewe to be contrarie to their vngodly reportes Of like credite is that foule sorgerie of M. Caluins departure as Bellarmine though not the deuiser therof yet blusheth not to be the reporter That Caluine calling vpon the deuill blaspheming and swearing gaue vp the ghost and that he accursed the day and houre when euer he began to apply him selfe to studie and writing Bellarm. lib. 4. De notis eccles cap. 8. Whose eares now would not tingle to heare these malicious and deuilish reportes of so godly a man as though M. Beza who was an eie-witnesse both of his life and death and hath penned the storie thereof could not better testifie for this matter then they which haue al by hearesaie Wel M. Caluin liued well and died the Lordes seruant whatsoeuer these blacke-mouthed and cankred-harted papistes say to the contrarie It were better for them rather to make Balaams wish that they also may die the death of the righteous then thus to blaspheme Gods Saintes As though we were ignorant of their popish custome and practise in belying the seruantes of God When Horsey that wicked Chauncelour had with his owne handes murthered Rich. Hun in the prison was it not giuen out that he had hanged him selfe Fox pag. 867. How cruellie was the congregation at Paris persecuted and most vilely slaundered of theÌ„ Ann. 1558. The priestes and friers in their rayling sermons perswaded the people that the Lutheranes assembled together to make a banquet in the night and there putting out the candles they went together Jacke with â—ill as they said after a filthy beastly maner Other Sorbonistes accused them that they maintained there was no God and denied the diuinitie and humanitie of Christ the immortalitie of the soule the resurrection of the dead and briefly all the articles of true religion Fox pag. 927. with such like malicious misreportes and slaunders the auncient Church in the primitiue time was slaundered who were accused of incest conspiracie sacrificing of infantes putting out of candels and filthy whoredome with such like Fox pag. 36. Therefore it neede not seeme strange vnto vs that the enemies of the Church doe in these daies also whet and sharpen their tongues against the professors of the trueth especially seeing that they which doe euen now scourge and afflict vs with their scorpion tongues are not ashamed to speake broadly yea and vntruly of the primitiue Church for these are the Rhemistes owne wordes In the primitiue Church when Infidels dwelt among the Christians and oftentimes came to their publike preachinges it was both vnprofitable and ridiculous to heare a number talking teaching singing psalmes one in this language an other in that all at once like a blacke Sauntes Annot. 1. Corinth 14. sect 5. Although there were some disorder among the Corinthians yet it is lewdly done generally to charge the whole primitiue Church And thinke ye these men haue not a verie reuerent opinion of the labours of the Apostles that compare the publike exercises of the Corinthians who were a Church planted and founded by S. Paule to a blacke Sauntes Barke on now ye papistes and seeing
you spare neither Apostle pastor nor minister neither primitiue and auncient nor present and now being Church say on still as ye doe that the protestants tende euery day more and more to Atheisme and Antichristianisme Rhemist 2. Thessa. 2. sect 14. That the protestantes haue forsaken Christ the protestantes are become Iewes the protestantes wil be circumcised according to Moses law the protestantes require to haue the paschal Lambe the protestantes tell the people there is no hell at all the protestantes at their next proceeding wil vtterly denie God Har ding praefat ad defens apolog ex Iuello Well yee slaunderous mouthed hypocrites if Ieremies saying were not verified vppon you Thou hast a whores forehead thou wouldest not be ashamed 3. 3. ye might well blushe and shew al your blood in your face when you inuent such vnchristian slaunders against vs which the worlde crieth shame vpon and your owne consciences accuse ye of Wee haue no other shielde to holde vp against these iniuries of yours but the prophet Dauids saying with his words in the person of our Church As he loued cursing so let it come vnto him and as he loued not blessing so shall it be farre from him as he clothed him selfe with cursing like a rayment so shall it come into his bowels like water and like oyle into his bones Let it be vnto him as a garment to couer him and for a girdle wherewith he shall alway be girded Let this be the rewarde of mine aduersarie from God and of them that speake euill against my soule Psal. 109 vers 17. 18. 19. 20. Heare ye also what Bernard saith Gladius anceps lingua detractoris Nec verò huiusmodi linguam ipso mucrone quo dominicum latus confossum est crudeliorem dicere verearis haec enim non iam examine Christi corpus fodit sed facit examine fodiendo A slauderous tongue is a two edged sword And such a tongue we need not doubt to cal more cruel then the speares point that peirced our Lordes side for this doth not pierce or wound the dead bodie of Christ but slayeth and woundeth it to death serm de triplici custodia Thus yee papistes shew your selues greater enimies to Christ in slaundering his Church then if ye had thrust his body through that hanged vppon the crosse for then his bodie was first dead before it was pierced But you doe rent and wound the liuelie bodie of Christ now which is his Church I pray God giue you grace if yee belong vnto him to repente you of this wickednes And thus much also concerning the slaunders and malicious reportes giuen out by papistes against our Church The 3. part of the manifold vntruthes forgeries and bold denials of papistes of manifest vntruthes Part. 3. IT followeth now in the third place hauing alreadie sufficiently discoursed of their personal slaunders which they vomite and spue vp either against our Church in general or against some particular members thereof that now we lay open to the worlde their vntruthes and lies which in heapes are coyned and forged out of their shoppes that whereas they accuse vs of lying saying most scornefully That lies are as common with heretikes as lice with beggers Harding it may euidentlie appeare to the world whether of twaine be the greate lyers And first of their forgeries Neuer anie Heretikes were more cunning or had better dexteritie in forging of writinges and foisting bookes of their owne deuising and making vnder the name of other authors First the Canons of the Apostles as they call them which are fathered vpon the Apostles are but bastard writinges falsely going vnder their name for in the last canon the gospell written by S. Iohn is numbred among the bookes of the newe testament which is confessed by all to haue beene penned by the Euangelist after the death of all or most of the Apostles How could then these Canons as they affirme be deuised and published by the Apostles them selues assembled together Againe those Canons of the Apostles doe recken 3. bookes of the Macchabees amongest the canonicall scripture But the papistes them selues receiue but two if then they were perswaded them selues that they were the verie Canons of the Apostles how durst they disagree from them in opinion Plura apud Whitacher controu 1 de scriptur cap. 4. The constitutions also of the Apostles the collection whereof is ascribed to Clemens seemeth to be but a forged booke conteining many thinges false and friuolous as lib. 6. cap. 14. He bringeth in Iames the brother of Iohn writing and speaking with the rest of the Apostles many yeares after his death Lib. 6. cap. 7. he calleth Philip spoken of Act. 8. an Apostle but lib. 8. cap. 52. he maketh him but a Deacon Of the like credite are the counterfeit writinges which passe vnder the name of Abdias Ignatius Hippolytus Policarpus as it may appeare by the homely stuffe contained in them Abdias prescribeth a most superstitious obseruation of Lent fast not onely in abstaining from all flesh-meates but also from all carnall copulation betweene man and wife The same Abdias is also contrarie to himselfe for he affirmeth that Paule suffered 2. yeares after Peter And saith further that Paule after Peter was crucified remained in his custodie at Rome mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles which was as Hierome saith the 3. or 4. yeare of Nero so that by this account there must be 10. yeares space betweene the suffering of Paule and Peter for it is confessed by all writers that Paule suffered the 14. that is the last yeare of Nero. Ignatius saith in his epistle to the Philippians that if any man shal fast on Sunday or Saturday he is a murtherer of Christ so hoat this counterfeit father is about his counterfeit traditions Of the like authoritie is Policarpus epistle ad Philippen which is gathered out of the Apocryphall constitutions of counterfeit Clemens Hippolytus booke is too ful of fables then to be thought to be that auncient Martyrs worke for writing of Antichrist he saith he shalbe no man but a deuil in the shape of man that Iohn the Euangelist shal come with Henoch and Helias before the comming of Antichrist that Antichrist shal bring deuils with him in the shape of Angels and commaund them to carie him vp to heauen with other such stuffe Now commeth in that vncleane dunghil of decretals which are falsely attributed to those good Bishops of Rome that suffered in the great persecutions in the primitiue age of the Church for the testimonie of Iesus As wee may strongly coniecture by the matter and substance of those decretals The epistle fathered vppon Alexander doth euidentlie appeare to be counterfeit by the date which it beareth when Traianus and Helianus were Consuls But there was neuer anie Helianus Consull with Traianus Fulk 1. Tim. 4. 13. Euaristus Bishop of Rome is saide to haue decreed that no priest should be ordained without a title But it is not like that
now in England saith he a certaine woman is the Caluinistes chiefe bishop speaking thus in contempt of our gracious Soueraigne Ans. 1. Luther is belied by the Iesuite he saith onely that where a priest cannot be had there a Christian man or womā may stand in as good steed but he maketh no mention of boies Fox pag. 1281. articul 13. condemned by Leo the x. By this we may see what small credit is to be giuen vnto the Iesuite in citing quoting the opinions or sayings of protestants 2. We acknowledge no sacrament of penance and therefore whatsoeuer Luther thought of that sacrament it is no matter to vs. But the other is a foule lie and a monsterous slaunder vttered of our Prince for her Maiesty doth not take vpon her any part of the pastoral office of Bishops or other ministers She neither handleth the word nor sacramentes nor exerciseth ecclesiastical discipline nor ordaineth ministers neither doth any thing else properlie incident to the office of ecclesiasticall persons The Church of England doth giue vnto her that lawfull power that Christian princes alwaies had as to ordaine constitute ecclesiasticall lawes to see that ecclesiasticall persons do faithfully execute their office and charge and to prouide for the encrease and establishment of true religion 3. They might here haue remembred them selues how that sometime indeede a woman was their chiefe Bishop Dame Ione by name that sat 2. yeares in the popes chaire at Rome though for shame and yet with out shame they denie so manifest and plaine a storie 4. yea they them selues are the heretikes that allow women to execute the office of Ministers for in a case of necessitie as they call it they hold it lawfull for lay men and women yea heretikes and infidels to baptize and consequentlie in Baptisme to giue remission of sinnes wherein they goe further then euer Luther did who alloweth Christians onely and faithfull men or women to supplie the want and absence of the priest or minister not heretikes or infidels the Iesuite therefore might heere haue plucked himselfe by the nose who so affirmeth and not haue twitted or cast an other in the teeth with that heresie which hee himselfe mayntayneth Bellarm de baptis lib. 1. cap. 7. In the fift place hee obiecteth the heresie of Proclus who affirmed that concupiscence verily was sinne and that sinne did raigne in those that were borne anew Ans. First that sinne reigneth in the faithful that are regenerate we vtterly denie being so taught by S. Paul Rom. 6. 12. Secondly that sinne notwithstanding remaineth in the regenerate that the cōcupiscence or lust of the flesh euen in them is sinne wee learne out of the same Apostle who doubteth not to call Lust sinne I knew not sinne but by the law and presently he sheweth what sinne hee speaketh of I had not knowen lust except the law had said thou shalt not lust Rom. 7. 7. likewise ver 14. 17. 20. of the same chapter he giueth it the name of sinne So Augustine calleth concupiscence Per peccatum accidens malum an euill brought in by sinne Hypognost articul 4. And againe Aduersus libidinem si certas malum est this is a signe that concupiscence is euill because we striue against it cont Iulian. lib. 3. chap. 21. To affirme then that concupiscence is sinne and properly euill of it selfe is by Saint Pauls rule no heresie In the next place hee compareth vs to the Nouatians who denied that the Church had any power to reconcile men vnto God but onely by baptisme Such are wee he saith because wee take away the Sacrament of penance Answ. First the Nouatians denied recouerie or forgiuenesse of sinnes to those that fell after baptisme But wee affirme no such thing holding no sinne to be irremissible but blasphemie against the spirite according to the scripture and that it is neuer too late for men while they liue here vpon earth to repent them of their sinne and returne vnto God all this wee graunt and yet acknowledge no sacrament of penance Secondly if we are therefore heretikes because we refuse the popish sacraments of confirmation and penance receiuing onely two the sacraments of Baptisme and the Lords supper let Augustine beare vs companie who acknowledgeth no more Dormiente Adam fit Eua de latere sic de Christi latere effluebant aqua sanguis sacramenta quib firmatur ecclesia While Adam slept Eua was made out of his side so out of Christes side issued water blood the sacraments whereby the Church is established In the 7. place Bellarmine obiecteth the heresie of the Sabellianes which affirme one person onely to be in God and not three of this opinion was Michael Seruetus saith he Answ. True it is that this impious wretch Seruetns for this and such like heresies was worthily put to death at Geneua Is it not then great impudencie for the Iesuite to vpbrayde vs with those heresies which he himselfe knoweth are condemned by vs and iudged worthie of death So diuerse amongest them haue bene discried of heresie yea diuerse of their pope-holy fathers Marcellinus sacrificed to Idols Liberius subscribed to the Arians Honorius 2. was a Monothelite Siluester the 2. a Magitian and Necromancer Iohannes the 22. affirmed that the soules of the dead see not God before the resurrection These and diuerse heresies haue bene found euen in the popes chaire Woulde they now thinke them selues wel dealt withal if we should charge their whole Church with these heresies that haue bene maintained by some amongst them yet this hard measure they offer vs in blaming our whole Church for Seruetus heresie and such other Eightlie the Iesuite chargeth vs with the damnable heresies of the Manichees First they did not ascribe the beginning or cause of sin vnto free will but vnto the prince or God of darknes But wee saith the foule mouthed Iesuite are worse then the Manichees for we make God the author of sinne Ans. Here this malicious man doth shamefully belie vs for which of vs euer said that God is the author of sinne or who euer denied that mans free will was the cause of sinne A free will we confesse in man to doe euill without constraint or enforcing but not free at all to make choice of good as Augustine confesseth Liberum arbitrium non est idoneum quae ad Deum pertinent sine Deo aut inchoare aut peragere cont Pelag. hypognost articul 3. Mans free wil is not fit in diuine matters to beginne or finish any thing without God Secondlie saith the Iesuite the Manichees did accuse the fathers and patriarkes of the olde testament so saith he doth Caluine and the rest Ans. The Manichees did not onely condemne the patriarkes but reiected also the olde testament But wee both receiue the law the prophets as the oracles of God neither dowe condemne those holy persons as wicked men though wee excuse not all their infirmities but say with Augustine Sic
because they taught that there was but one nature in Christ his humane nature being absorpt of his Godhead of which opinion saith Bellarmine is Swinckfeldius Brentius who affirmeth that the humanitie of Christ is euerie where Ans. First what haue wee to do with the Swinckfeldians or the vbiquitaries it is nothing to the Protestants what they holde The Papistes come neerer the vbiquitaries than protestants for it is their common opinion that the bodie of Christ in one moment may be in a thousande places at once and more if it happen at one time the Masse to be celebrated in so manie places I praie you how can this be vnlesse you say with the Lutherans and vbiquitaries that Christes bodie is euery where Secondly concerning this matter our opinion is this that it is a blasphemous assertion to say in the abstract Humanitas Christi est vbique The humanitie of Christ is euery where but yet it is true in the concrete in concreto Christus homo est vbique The man Christ is euerie where so that we neither destroy the natures by confounding them nor dissolue Christ by separating and disioyning them 18 Xenaias the Persian first openly taught that the images of Christ the Saints are not to be worshipped so say the Protestants Bellarmine Ans. First it is not true that Xenaias first published this doctrine the Apostles were long before him who warne vs to take heede of idolatrie which is worshipping of images Paul Rom. 1. 23. 1. Iohn 5. 21. Augustine also maintaineth this doctrine Illud inquit quod sedere pater dicitur non flexis poplitibus fieri putandum est tâ—lâ— enim simulachrum Dâ—o nefas est Christiano in templo collocare Whereas God the father is said to sitte we must not thinke it is by bowing of his knees for it is a heynous sinne to erect such an image vnto God in the temple of Christians De fid Symbol cap. 7. Yet such images of God the father are euery where to be seene in Popish Churches And againe he saith Nobis vnus colendus diligâ—â—dus Deus praecipitur qui fecit haec omnia quorum illi simulachra venerantur vel tanquam Deos vel tanquam signa imagines Deorum We are commaunded to worship one onely God which made all these things the pictures or portraitures whereof they worship either as Gods or as the images or resemblances of God De doctrin Christian. lib. 3. cap. 7. Images then are not to be worshipped no not in the remembrance of God What is become now I pray you of Xenaias heresie 19 The Iesuite here hath found out a newe heresie of the Lampetiani who should say that Monasteries ought to be free from perpetual vowes that the parties might at their choice goe backe from their vowes So saith he doth Luther hold and the rest Ans. Is not this now a damnable heresie As though it were not lawfull for those which haue rashly vowed and aboue their strength euen by the rules of the Gospel to be sorie for their rashnes and feeling their owne weaknesse to desire to be loosed from their vow and to take heed that they do no more presume beyond their strength As if a man hath foolishly vowed to liue a single life and afterward is inflamed with lust and seeth he cannot containe the Apostle giueth him leaue to marrie To auoide fornication let euery man haue his wife 1. Corin. 7. 2. He speaketh of all that cannot otherwise auoide fornication haue they vowed or not vowed Augustine giueth his sentence of the vowes of fasting saying thus â—eiunia legitima in necessitate soluta non faciunt reos si stomachi fuerit causa â—ut infirmitatis febrium Lawfull fastes being broken for necessitie as if the stomacke be weake or the partie sicke do not make men guiltie of offence ex veteri Testament quest 61. If the vow of fasting may be broken because of the weaknes of the stomacke why not the vow of continencie also for the frailtie of the flesh Yea Augustine disswaded Bonifacius a secular lord who had vowed and purposed with himselfe to become a Monke Cupiebas te in ocium sanctum conferre in ea vita viuere in qua serui Dei Monachi viuunt vt autem non faceres quid te reuocauit nisi quia considerasti ostendentibus nobis quantum prodesset Christi Ecclesiis quod agebas you were desirous to haue giuen your selfe to that holy vacant life of Monks from so doing what els withdrewe you but that you considered as I shewed you how much your seruice did profite the Churches of Christ epist. 70. This Boniface did fight in defence of the faith against the barbarous infidels See then S. Augustine taketh it to be no fault to dissuade a man froÌ„ perfourming that which he had vowed with him selfe Heare also what a later writer saith whome the Papistes challenge wholly to be theirs Non arbitror Deum saith he exigere quodcunque sibi promissum bonum si pro eo aliquid melius fuerit persolutum I do not thinke that God wil exact euerie thing vowed or promised vnto him if in steede thereof we perfourme somewhat that is better epist. 57. But the married estate is better than the single life to him that cannot containe wherefore such an one doth not euill if after his vow he marrie Againe Id promittere nos in nostra professione non credimus quod certum est non posse tenerâ— lib. de dispens We do not take vpoÌ„ our selues to promise that when we enter into our profession which it is certaine cannot be kept Wherefore men ought not to make absolute vowes of single life but so farre as they shall bee able to contayne Necessitas also saith hee non habet legem ob hoc exeusat dispensationem Necessitie hath no law and therefore excuseth a dispensation or loosing of the vow ibid. Let these men go for heretikes togither with vs if it be heresie to say that rash vowes vpon necessitie may bee broken or dispensed withall 20 Two other heresies remaine the first which is the sixteenth in number of certaine that are namelesse who affirmed that the bodie of Christ remained not in the Eucharist if it were kept till the next daye The other of those who should say that the Eucharist was a figure onely of the bodie of Christ and both these heresies as he calleth them are saith he maintained by vs. Ans. First wee do not say that the Eucharist is a bare signe of the bodie of Christ but that Christ is verily present with all the benefites of his death to the faithfull and worthie receiuer Secondly yet wee vtterly denie that the same flesh which Christ tooke of his mother which hanged vpon the crosse and where withall hee ascended vp into heauen is now really substantially and carnally present in the sacrament at all much lesse that it remaineth there afterward Neither for so holding ought wee to be
our Sauiour Except a man bee borne of water and the spirite he cannot enter into the kingdome of heauen Iohn 3. 5. May it not aswell bee answered that children also are excluded here as in the other place for the words are in both places generallie spoken without exception Agayne Christ sayth except yee eate if this may be done in vow and defire that is spiritually which wee affirme and graunt then is it not meant of the sacramentall eating onely as the Papistes beare vs in hande and so they are contrary to themselues Lastly if it bee necessarie to receiue the Eucharist eyther actually and indeede or in vow and desire which is most true There is the like necessitie thereof as of baptisme For the Rhemistes confesse as much that they before God are accepted as baptized that depart this life with vowe and desire to haue this sacrament but by some remediles necessitie could not obtaine it Annot. Iohn 3. Sect. 2. Thus baptisme by their owne confession is prooued to be no more necessarie than the other Sacrament and so are they taken with their owne wiles Against the reall presence in the Eucharist amongst other arguments wee do bring foorth this S. Paul in diuers places calleth the Sacrament bread after consecration as 1. Corinth 10. 16. The bread which we breake is it not the communion of the body of Christ And chap. 11. 26. As often as ye shall eate this bread drinke this cup ye shewe the Lords death till hee come The Apostle calleth it bread Ergo it is bread not the bodie flesh or bloud of Christ. To this argument they make vs this aunswere The Apostle calleth it bread because it was bread before or because it appeareth to be bread not that it is bread Bellarm. de Eucharist lib. 1. cap. 14. res ad loc 13. Yea but the Apostle maketh mention together both of the bread and cup If it be called bread because of the appearance onely then by the like reason so is the cup and as there is no bread in deede so there shalbe no cup. Againe saith hee The bread which wee breake but the shape or forme of bread cannot be broken but the substance Neither will they say that Christes bodie is diuided or broken therefore it is true bread which the Apostle so calleth Lastly if they like this speech of the Apostle that hee should call it bread after consecration how coÌ„meth it to passe that they are afraide to call it bread in the Canon of the Masse but the bodie of Christ only It should seem therfore by their practise that they mislike the apostles phrase maner of speech That the Eucharist ought to be ministred in both kindes we confirme it out of that place Iohn 6. 53. Except ye eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud ye haue no life in you which our aduersaries expound of the Eucharist Their answere is this that here the coniunction or particle and must be taken after the phrase of Scripture for the Distinctiue vel either as if the sense were this except you either eate or drink Bellarm. de Eucharist lib. 4. cap. 25. By this reason they make it a thing indifferent either to eate or to drinke to doe any one of them and so as the people doe onely eate in the Sacrament amongst them not drink the contrarie custome also may be brought in for the people to drinke onely and not to eate which I thinke they wil be loath to graunt Againe where they presse vs for the necessitie of baptisme with that place Iohn 3. 5. Except a man be borne of water and the Spirite wee can aunswer them with their owne words And in this place is taken for either vel as if it were said Euery man must be borne either of water or of the spirit Although we haue better answer are not driuen to vse any such shift yet thus they do make rods for themselues to be whipt withall Whereas we thus reason that the Eucharist ought to bee ministred in both kindes because the death of Christ cannot otherwise be liuely shewed foorth but both by eating and drinking in remembrance of Christ The Iesuite boldly aunswereth that a sufficient commemoration may be made by receiuing onely in one kinde Bellarm. de Sacramen Eucharist lib. 4 cap. 27. cleane contrarie to Saint Paul who saith As often as ye shall eate this bread and drinke this cup ye shewe the Lords death till he come 1. Corin. 11. 26. To remember and shewe foorth the death of Christ hee requireth receiuing in both kindes That the marriage of Ministers is authorized by the word of God wee proue out of S. Paul 1. Timoth. 3. 11. who hauing first described the office of Bishops Pastors of the Church and what maner of men they ought to be commeth afterward to set foorth the qualities and conditions that should be in their wiues That they should be honest sober and faithfull The Iesuite here celleth vs that the Apostle meaneth such as had beene their wiues before they were ordained lib. 1. de Clericis cap. 20. Ans. I wil aske them then one question Their former wiues maried before did they renouÌ„ce them afterward or retaine theÌ„ If they renounced them what need had the Apostle to be so carefull in setting downe rules and precepts for their wiues for it was no more to them how they demeaned themselues than other women If they retained them in the name of their wiues they either liued together or apart not apart for the Apostle prescribeth an order for the Ministers house children v. 4. But there is no reason that the mother should want the comfort of her children though shee enioyd not the companie of her husband It is therefore most like the mother liued with her children and the children with their father and where els then should their mother liue but with their father If then they liued in one house together how then is shee not now his wife as freely for all honest purposes and ends of mariage as before Who seeth not now how weakely these things hang together And that it is as lawful for the Ministers of Gods worde to marrie aâ—ter their calling to the Ministerie as before we shew it by these words of the Apostle Haue we not power to lead about a sister awife 1. Cor. 9. 5. Their answer is that it must be read thus a sister a womaÌ„ for certain deuout womeÌ„ folowed the Apostles which ministred vnto them of their substance Rhemist Annot. in hunc locum Ans. But this were a superfluous speech to say a sister a woman whereas it had been enough to say sister which word also expresseth the sexe And seeing the Apostles had wiues of their own it is an absurd thing to imagine that they would choose rather to go in the companie of strange women their owne wiues being more necessarie to attend on them more fit for
much troubled about this question whether the Pope may be deposed for heresie Albert. Pighius holdeth that the Pope cannot be an heretike therefore not for any cause to be deposed Iohannes de Turre cremat is of opinion that the Pope for secrete heresie is actually deposed of God may be by the Church declared to be so deposed Others helde that the Pope neither for manifest nor secrete heresie either is actually or may be deposed Caietanus that the Pope for manifest heresie is not actually deposed but may be deposed by the Church There is a fifth opinion that the Pope being a manifest heretike doth cease of himself to be pope that he may be iudged by the Church yet they iudge not the Pope for he is now no Pope Iohan. Driedo Melchior Canus Bellarmine consenteth lib. 2. de Pontif. cap. 30. Concerning the popes temporal iurisdiction some of them teach that the pope by the worde of God hath full plenarie power in all matters both Ecclesiastical ciuill Augustin Triumphus Hostiensis Others that he hath not directly immediatly any temporal authoritie but only spiritual yet indirectly imediatly by reason of his spiritual power he hath chiefe authoritie also in temporal matters Sic Iohan. Driedo Iohan. de Turre cremat Pighius Caietanus Bellar. lib. 5. de Pontif. ca. 1. They are much busied about the Councel of the Iewes that condemned Christ whether it erred or not Some hold that the question was de facto non de iure not by what right Christ should be put to death but they consulted only of the fact to put him to death therefore in a matter of fact might erre Others think that they erred in their own mind affectioÌ„ toward Christ not in the sentence for Christ was worthie of death bearing our sinnes But Bellar. is of an opinioÌ„ by himself that the Councel did erre for they were priuileged only froÌ„ error before Christs coÌ„ming not afterward li. 2. de Concil ca. 8. Thus they wearie theÌ„selues in their owne foolish conceits Some think that generall Councels cannot erre though they haue not the Popes confirmation so the diuines of Paris Others hold the cleane coÌ„trarie that they may as Caietanus Turrecremat Bellar. li. 2. de concil c. 11. Some hold opinion that a general Councel is aboue the Pope Nichol. Cusanus Panormitanus Abulensis So also it was concluded in the Councels of Constance Basile The Canonists teach that the Pope by right is aboue the Church Councels but he may if he please submit himself to their iudgement giue them authoritie ouer him But others think that he hath such an absolute authoritie that he cannot submit himself to the sentence or censure of Councels though he would So Antoninus Iohan. de Turre cremat Caietanus Pigghius with others vnto this Bellarm. subscribeth the Popes waged champion to fight for his triple crowne Alphons de Castro is of opinion that heretikes are members of the Church Bellarm. bestoweth some labour to confute his opinion Thus one Papist maketh worke for another Bellarm. de Eccl. li. 3. ca. 4. Iohan. de Turre cremat requireth faith as necessarie to make a true member of the Church which is a true sound opinion but he is confuted by Bellarm. who holdeth faith in this case to be needlesse li. 3. de Eccl. ca. 10. Iohannes de Turre cremat saith it is against the Catholike faith to affirm that the faith of the Church did not only rest or was preserued in the virgin Marie in the passioÌ„ of Christ Bellar. thinketh that faith was preserued as well in the Apostles as in Marie that theirs failed no more than hers li. 3. de Eccles. ca. 17. And herein the Iesuite coÌ„meth nearest the truth The Apostles faith was not lost but greatly shaken at the death of Christ and they remained wauering doubtful til they were by Christ risen again confirmed Some affirme that the vow of continencie or single life is annexed to priesthod by the law of God Iohan. Maior Clictouaeus Others that it is not grounded vpon the diuine law but onely brought in by the constitution and decree of the Church and may be dispensed withall Tho. Aquinas Caietanus so thinketh also Bellarm. de clericis lib. 1. ca. 18. The Canonistes holde that the constitution of tithes euen in respect of the quantitie proportion of the tenth is established by the law of God therefore cannot be altered to any other quantitie Bellarm. calleth it an error of the Canonists confuteth it determining the matter thus that the paiment of tithes is De iure diuino quoad substantiam non quoad quantitatem is by the word warranted in respect of the substance or equitie not in regard of the precise quantitie de Clericis lib. 1. cap. 25. The Canonists hold that clergie men are exempt from the power of secular Princes not only in Ecclesiastical but in politike ciuill affaires by the law of God Others affirme that they are freede their persons their goods onely by humane constitution Franciscus Victoria Dominicus a Soto and Bellarm. de Clericis lib. 1. cap. 28. Scotus did hold that venial sinnes were remitted in the verie instant of the separation of the soule from the bodie but they were remitted per merita prâ—cedentia by vertue of the merites which went before in the life Tho. Aquinas held the contrarie that they were not remitted then but afterward in Purgatorie To this agreeth Bellarmine and the rest Bellar. libâ—â— de Purg. ca. 10. Some Papistes holde that the soules in Purgatorie are vncertaine of their saluation and though they shalbe saued yet they know it not Dyoâ—is Carthusianus Michael Baij but the general opinion of the Papists now is that they are certaine of their saluation Bellarm. de Purg. lib. 2. ca. 4. Some of them thinke that veniall sinnes by nature deserue eternall death that they are but venial of Gods mercie wherein they holde the truth for the stipend of all sin is death Rom. 6. 25. so Michael Baij Gerson Iohan Roffens But now the Iesuits generally hold the contrarie that venial sinnes are pardonable of their own nature Bellarm. ibid. Some are of opinion that prayers may be made for soules that are in Hell Bellarmine generally all that rable holde it onely to be lawfull to pray for soules in Purgatorie But the truth is the dead are not to be praied for at all Bellarm. de Purg. lib. 2. ca. 5. The papistes generally hold that the soules which neede no â—lensing in purgatorie do streight-waies go to heauen yet Bellarmine hath a trick by himself thinketh it not improbable that there should be another place not so ful of ioy as heauen is nor in paine equal to purgatorie li. 2. de Purg. ca. 7. But we acknowledge neither the one nor the other for Scripture no where maketh mention of moe places than heauen hell Th. Aquinas holdeth that the least