reprobate and not of the elect and godly sort but after he had pondered the text deeply he altered his opinion This is confirmed in these words of the selfe same chapter but I see another law in my meÌ„bers rebelling against the law of my mind leading me captiue vnto the law of sin which is in my members By these words of Paul it is euident that albeit he were the childe of God yet could he not merite any thing in Gods sight but rather in rigor of iustice prouoke his heauy displeasure against him For where or what could be his merite who was prisoner to the law of sinne Againe it is confirmed in these words For I doe not the good thing which I would but the euill which I would not that doe I. Thus saiâ—h saint Paul and doubtlesse since hee did the euill which he would not he sinned though he were regenerate and because he sinned he was worthie of condemnation for that death is the stipend of sinne Againe it is confirmed in these words For the law is spirituall but I am carnal sould vnder sinne Thus saith S. Paul of himselfe and yet is it true that one vnder sin can merit nothing saue hel fire and eternal paine Againe it is confirmed in these words Nowe if I do that I would not it is no more I that doe it but the sinne that dwelleth in mee Thus saith Saint Paul of himselfe and yet because sin abode in him and did that that was offensiue in gods sight he could neither merite grace nor eternal life as is already proued Further then this no man liueth without sinne as the papists grant and yet is euerie sinne mortall as I haue prooued elsewhere The first obiection Saint Paul speaketh of originall concupiscence which remaineth euen in the regenerate after baptisme but is no sinne at all For he onely calleth it sinne because it prouoketh a man to sin as a mans writing is called his hand for that it is written with his hand which exposition S. Austen approueth in sundrie places of his works The answere I say first that to say against the flat text of scripture without scripture is no reason at all I say secondly that S. Paul doth not onely call concupiscence sin but he proueth it by many reasons For first it striueth against the law of the minde Againe it leadeth one captiue into the law of sinne thirdly it doth that which is not good but euil I say thirdly that Saint Austen doth vndoubtedly iudge it to be sin neither shal any papist in the world euer be able to proue the contrarie howsoeuer they bare the world in hand I wil onely alleage a few places out of S. Austen make effectuall application of the same to which when anie either Rhemist or Romist shall answere sufficiently I promise to become his bondman The first place of Austen Concupiscentia carnis aduersus quam bonus concupiscit spiritus peccatum est quia inest illi inobedientia contra dominatum mentis poena peccati est quia reddita est meritis inobedientis causa peccata est defectione consentientis vel contagione nascentis The concupiscence of the flesh against which the good spirit striueth is sinne because it is disobedient against the dominion of the mind and it is the punishmeÌ„t of sin bicause it is inflicted for the deserts of disobedient Adam and it is the cause of sinne either by the default of him that consenteth or by the contagion of the child that is borne Thus saith S. Austen In which words he expresseth three things precisely first that concupiscence in the regenerate is the paine or punishment of sinne secondly that it is the cause of sinne thirdly that it is sin it selfe which three he doth not only distinguish but withall hee yeeldeth seueral reasons for the same And therfore most impudent are the papists who auouch with open mouthes that saint Austen onely calleth it sin because it is the cause of sinne The second place of Saint Austen Neque enim nulla est iniquitas cum in vno homine vel superiora inferioribus tur piter seruiunt vel inferiora superioribus contumaciter reluctantur etiamsi vincere non sinantur For it is some iniquitie when in one man either the superiour parts shamefully serue the inferiour or the inferiour parts stubbornly striue against the superiour although they be not suffered to preuaile Thus saith S. Austen whose words are so plaine as the papists can not possibly inuent any euasion at all For hee saith in expresse tearmes that the rebellion which is betweene the flesh and the spirit is sinne euen when it is resisted and cannot preuaile at which time and in which respect the papists wil haue it to be merite and no sinne at all The third place of Saint Austen Virtus est charitas qua id quod diligendum est diligitur haec in alijs maior in alijs minor in alijs nulla est plenissima vero quae iam non possit augeri quamdiu hic homo viuit est in nemine quamdiu autem augeri potest profecto illud quod minus est quam debet ex vitio est Ex quo vitio non est iustus in terra qui faciat bonum non peccet Ex quo vitio non iustificabitur in conspectu Dei omnis viuens Propter quod vitium si dixerimus quia peccatum non habemus nosmetipsos seducimus veretas in nobis non est Propter quodetiam quantumlibet profecerimus necessarium est nobis dicere dimitte nobis debita nostra cum iam omnia in baptismo dicta facta cogitata dimissa sint Charitie is a vertue with which we loue that that ought to be loued This in some is more in other lesse in others none at all but the perfect charitie which can not bee increased while a man here liueth is found in none so long as it can be increased that doubtlesse which is lesse then it shoulde bee proceedeth of sinne by reason of which sin there is not one iust vpon earth that doth good and sinneth not by reason of which vice none liuing can be iustified in Gods sight by reason of which vice if we say we haue no sin we deceiue our selues and the truth is not in vs by reason of which sin how much soeuer we profit yet must we say of necessitie Forgiue vs our trespasses euen after that al our thoughts words and works are forgiuen in baptisme Thus saith saint Austen Out of whose most golden words I note sundrie things to the euerlasting confusion of all impenitent papists For first Saint Austen saith that no man can haue charity in that perfite degree which the law requireth Secondly that the want thereof proceedeth of this concupiscence Thirdly that by reason of this concupiscence euerie man is a sinner Fourthly that by reason therof none liuing can be iustified in Gods sight
were married to wit that they would be louing diligent carefull obedient to their husbands and aboue all the rest keep their coniugall faith The third faith was that which these widowes made to the bishop the whole church to wit that they would execute their deaconship honestly faithfully constantly perseuer therein to the end The yonger widowes waxing wanton against Christ did not only breake their last promise forsaking the ministery of the church but their first and most holy promis made in baptisme while they departing from the purity of honest life and religion consecrated themselues to paganisme and infidelitie and so purchased to themselues Gods wrath eternal damnation Therefore the apostle maketh no mention of any vow but only reproueth vnconstant women who being relieued a long time by the common tresure of the congregation to minister to the sicke persons did afterward both forsake their promise Christ too and became heathens running after satan For this is euident by the words of the 15. verse of the 5. chapter from whence the obiection is taken where the apostle saith that some widowes are already turned back from Christ their guide to whom they had dedicated theÌ„selues in baptisme folowed after satan It wil not serue the papists to say after their wonted maner that marriage breaketh not our promise made in baptisme For albeit the faith of baptisme be not brokeÌ„ by marrying absolutely and simply yet is it indeede broken by marrieng against Christ that is by marrying in such maner as they renounce christianitie And this my answer is confirmed because if the apostle had meant otherwise he would haue called it the last faith and not the first I say fiftly that these words for when they shall wax wanton against Christ they wil marry do euidently proue that S. Paul meaneth the promise made in baptisme and I desire the gentle reader to marke my discourse attentiuely for this obiection is the bulwarke to defend this article of poperie I therefore note first that these foure things are really distinguished in S. Paul to wit the waxing wanton of the widows the marriage of the widowes the damnation of the widowes and the breach of their faith I note secondly that the wantonnes of the widows was before their marriage for so the apostle saith expresly I note thirdly that the widowes promised in their baptisme to keepe Gods holy commaundements among which one is this Non concupisces Thou shalt not lust I note fourthly y t the breach of euery commandement deserueth eternal death For so saith the apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for y e reward of sin is death And another scripture saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Accursed be he that confirmeth not the words of this lawe in doing them for as saint Iames saith though a man keep all the residue of the law yet if he offend in any one point he becommeth guiltie of all I note fiftly that by Gods law we are bound to refer all our workes all our words and al our thoughts to his honour and glory for so teacheth his apostle and consequently that the wantonnes of the yonger widowes was a breach of Gods holy laws These points obserued I conclude that the yonger widows had damnation not for marrying but for being wanton before their marriage For in being wanton against Christ they brake their first faith made in baptisme that is they performed not that obedience they promised in baptisme in not performing that obedience they deserued eternal death and so they had damnation bicause they were wanton against Christ. S. Paul saith not that they had damnation bicause they married which must be wel marked but bicause they made voide their first faith in breaking Gods coÌ„mandements as ye haue heard I say sixtly that saint Paul is so far from condemning marriage in the yonger widowes after their promise or vow which the papists would most willingly father vpon him as he exhorteth them to marry euen after such their promise or vowe I prooue it note wel what I say because so soone as hee hath willed the yonger widowes to marry in the 14. verse foorthwith in the 15. verse he yeeldeth the reason of that his aduise to wit because certaine are already turned backe after Satan Now in the 15. verse he must needs speake of such widowes as were receiued into the ministerie of the church because none could be turned backe from that to which they neuer were admitted he therfore speaketh likewise of the betrothed widows in the next verse before which I make euident three wayes first because otherwise his illation in the 15. verse shoulde be foolish friuolous foolish because it could haue no connexion with the 14. verse friuolous for that it could not conclude his purpose secondly because he had already in the 11. verse charged the bishop Timothy not to receiue any widow vnder the age of 60. yeeres This conclusion therefore being made touching the widowes not yet admitted he goeth forward and giueth his aduise for the yonger widowes then receiued of the church as if he had saide for as much as some of the yonger sort haue alreadie beene wanton and followed sathan and there is also danger in the rest I decree that hereafter none vnder 60. yeares be receiued and I exhort the yonger alreadie receiued and desirous to marrie to betake themselues to holie wedlocke to bring forth children to be housewiues and so to giue no occasion to the aduersarie to speake euill Thirdly because otherwise Saint Paul should equiuocate verie grossely in one and the selfe same reason giuing one signification to the same word in the premisses an other in the consecution Thus much of this obiection in special and of the mariages of Bishops priests deacons and religious persons in generall as also of the first â—rohibition against the same It nowe remaineth for the complement of this discourse that I solue certaine obiections made generally against this doctrine for which shalbe assigned the next chapter CHAP. IIII. Of certaine generall obiections against the marriages of Priests with briefe solutions of the same The first obiection BE sanctified therefore and be holy for I am holy your lord and God I answer that al the Israelits were commanded to be sanctified to be holy aswel as were the priests and so if this argument were of force in popish sence al people aswel as priestes shoulde abstaine from the vse of holy wedlocke yea the priests were euen then married as is already proued The second obiection I would haue you without care the vnmarried careth for the things of the lord how he may please the Lord but he that is married careth for the things of the world how hee may please his wife therefore priests ought not to be married The answere I say first that S. Paul preferreth the state of the vnmarried before the
otherwise he should be contrarie to himselfe who affirmeth it to bee sinne in many places of his works as is alreadie prooued but hee onely laboureth to perswade the reader that it is neuer imputed to the faithfull that stoutly striue against it And that this is the true meaning of S. Austen I proue it by the iudgement of S. Ambrose concerning the selfe same matter Thus doth hee write Caro contra spiritum contra carnem spiritus concupiscit â—ec inuenitur in vllo hominum tanta concordia vt legi mentis lex quae membris est insita non repugnet Propter quod ex omnium sanctorum persona accipitur quod Ioannes apostolus ait si dixerimus quoniam peccatum non habemus nosipsos seducimus veritas in nobis non est cum tamen idem ipse dicat qui natus est ex Deo peccatum non facit qoniam semen ipsius in eo manet non potest peccare quoniaÌ„ ex Deo natus est Vtrumque ergo verum est quia nemo sine peccato est in eo quod nemo est fine lege peccati qui natus est ex Deo peccatum non facit quia per legem mentis id est per charitatem quae Dei semen est peccatum non facit Charitas enim operit multitudineÌ„ peccatoruÌ„ the flesh lusteth against the spirit the spirit against the flesh neither is there found in any man such concord but that the lawe of concupiscence which is ingrafted in the members fighteth against the law of the mind And for that cause Saint Iohns words are taken as spoken in the person of all saints If we say we haue no sin we deceiue our selues and the truth is not in vs when for al that the same apostle saith He that is borne of God sinneth not because his seed abideth in him and he cannot sinne because he is of God Therfore both are true because no man is without sinne for that no man is without the law of sinne that is concupiscence and he that is borne of God sinneth not bicause he sinneth not by the law of his mind that is by charitie which is Gods seede for charitie couereth the multitude of sinnes Out of these words I note first that concupiscence moueth rebellion against the spirit in the holyest man vpon earth I note secondly that this rebellion of concupiscence is sinne in euerie one because S. Iohn speaketh of sinne indeede whose words saint Ambrose applieth heere to concupiscence I note thirdly that hee speaketh of originall concupiscence because he speaketh of that concupiscence which is in the saints that is in those that are borne of God I note fourthly that the faithfull sinne not because charitie couereth their sins So then S. Austen meaneth as S. Ambrose doth that they are without sin to whom sinne is not imputed Yea Aquinas himselfe granteth which is to be admired that the inordinate motion of sensualitie euen which goeth before the deliberation of reason is sinne though in a lowe degree These are his expresse wordes Dicendum quòd illud quod homo facit sine deliberatione rationis non perfectè ipse facit quia nihil operatur ibi id quod est principale in homine vnde non est perfectè actus humanus per consequens non potestesse perfectè actus virtutis vel peccati sed aliquid imperfectum in genere horum Vnde talis motus sensualitatis rationem praeueniens est peccatum veniale quod est quiddam imperfectum in genere peccati I answere that that which man doth without the deliberation of reason he doth it not perfectly because that which is the chiefe in man worketh nothing there wherefore it is not perfectly mans act and consequently it cannot be perfectly the act of vertue or of sinne but some imperfect thing in this kinde Whereupon such a motion of sensuality preuenting reason is a venial sinne which is a certaine imperfect thing in the nature of sinne The fourth replie Concupiscence at the most is but a little venial sinne as S. Thomas Aquinas truely saith therefore it cannot bring a man to hell neither debarre him of heauen The answere I answere that euerie sin is mortall vndoubtedly as which is flatly against Gods holy commaundements For that the transgression of Gods commandements is a grieuous mortal sinne no man euer did or will denie Cursed is euery one saith the apostle that continueth not in all things which are written in the booke of the law to doe them Againe in another place The reward or wage of sinne is death And S. Iames saith Whosoeuer shall keepe the whole lawe and yet faileth in one point he is guiltie of all Nowe that euerie sinne aswel great as small is against Gods holy lawe I prooue sundrie waies First because the Apostle saith that al our thoughts words and works ought to be referred to the glorie of God for most certaine it is that no sinne at al is referred to Gods glorie For no sin no not the least of al is referrible to god but is of it own nature repugnant to his glorie Secondly because wee must yeelde an account to God for euerie idle word as Christ himselfe telleth vs and yet as euerie child can perceiue God most merciful and most iust wil neuer lay that to our charge which is not against his holy law Thirdly because the apostle saith of sin generally that the punishment thereof is death Fourthly because sinne in generall is defined by the fathers to bee the transgression of Gods law which definition could not bee true if anie little sinne could stand with his commaundement Fiftly because famous popish writers as Ioannes Gerson Michael Baius Almayn and our owne Bishop of Rochester doe all freely graunt that euerie sinne is mortall of it owne nature and deserueth eternall death their words I haue alleaged in my booke of Motiues Sixtly because Durandus and Iosephus Angles to whom the Schooles of the papistes this day accord doe sharpely impugne Aquinas his doctrine in that he teacheth Venials not to be against Gods law The 7. conclusion Although good works do not iustifie yet are they pretious in Gods sight and neuer want their reward Christ himselfe prooueth this conclusion when he promiseth that not so much as a cup of colde water giuen in his name shall passe without reward And in another place hee saith That whosoeuer shall leaue house parents brethren wife or children for his sake shal receiue much more in this world and in the world to come life euerlasting And in another place Christ telleth vs that when the sonne of man commeth in his glory and al his holy angels with him then will he pronounce them blessed that haue done the works of charitie to their poore neighbours God saith S. Paul will reward euery man according to his workes The Lord rewarded me saith holy
be slaughtered and as a theefe to be hanged yet neither did he shew any impatience nor sought any reuenge albeit hee could haue caused a legion of Angels to haue attended him at his only word he was bound as a theefe accused as a theefe condemned as a theefe he was crowned with a crowne of thornes among theeues as if hee had beene the master theefe of all theeues the iudge was iudged the King was derided the Lord of all lords was turmoyled And yet behold the wisedome of our heauenly Salomon for as Adam trespassed on Fryday so did he suffer on Fryday as mans saluation seemed to require Where we haue to consider his patience who was led as a lambe to be slaine his humilitie who was condemned with theeues his charitie who died for his enemies his pouertie who was borne in a manger and this done wee may worthily exclaime O captaine where is thine ensigne O prince where is thy palace O bishop where is thy myâ—er O king where is thy diademe After the consideration hereof we must acknowledge that Iesus Christ our sweete redeemer suffered all these pangs tortures torments and villanies for the sinnes and loue of man and therfore that mans part and dutie is to abhorre detest and eschew sinne and that for his sake and loue who hath first so tenderly beloued vs. CHAP. V. Of the houre of Christs death and the circumstances of the same CHrist was led out of the walles of the earthly Ierusalem into Golgotha a foule place of dead mens carkases so to declare vncleannesse indeede not of himselfe who was most holy most pure most innocent but of vs most wretched sinners whose sins he willingly tooke vpon him to the ende that we by faith in him being made cleane through his bloud and passion might bee brought into the heauenly Ierusalem the ioy of all ioyes the kingdome of heauen Christ suffered his bitter and healthfull passion without the walles of the citie a little before the sixt houre and gaue vppe his blessed ghost at the ninth houre so as hee was about three houres in most cruell torments vpon the crosse In which time from the sixt houre to the ninth darknesse arose ouer al the land Whereby wee may sensibly perceiue how angrie God was against our sinnes which hee so seuerely punished in his onely sonne For euen at the feast of the Passeouer and in the full Moone when the sunne shined ouer all the rest of the world and at midday that corner of the world wherein so wicked an act was committed was couered with extreame darknesse three houres together Christ hanged naked vpon the crosse and was vilainously reproued as if he had beene the most wicked caitife that euer was in the world to the ende that we being clothed with his righteousnesse and blessed with his curses and sanctified by his onely oblation may be clensed from our sinnes and exalted vppe to heauen But here it is expedent that I answere to an important doubt The doubt Saint Iohn saith that Christ suffered about the sixt houre but Saint Marke affirmeth expressely that he was crucified the third houre The answere For the exact explication of this graue obiection wee must diligently obserue three things First that the Iewes deuided as well the night as the day into foure equall parts Secondly that they tearmed the foure parts of the night vigils and the foure parts of the day houres Thirdly that the names of y e foure houres were these the first the third the sixt and the ninth so that all the morning to nine of the clocke with vs was called the first houre with them from nine to twelue the third houre from twelue to three the sixt houre from three to night the ninth houre I therefore answere to the obiection that S. Iohn and saint Marke do well agree neither is the one dissonant to the other for when S. Marke saith that Christ was crucified the third houre he meaneth in the end thereof which was about noone or almost the sixt houre as S. Iohn declareth it for euerie one of their houres contained three of our houres as is alreadie said And euery day with them both began and ended at sixe of the clocke with vs. Where I note by the way that these houres are sometimes dilated made foure threes like to our houres for so we reade in S. Mathew at the hyring of the labourers into the vineyard But howsoeuer the supputation was made the midday euer iumped with the sixt houre either in the ende or in the beginning thereof Which obseruations anâ— distinction well remembred many obscure places in the scriptures will be euident CHAP. VI. Of Christs resurrection and the adiuncts thereof AT such time as Christ the sonne of the euerliuing God suffered his passion wonderfull and strange sights happened The Sunne was darkened the Moone being in the full gaue no light a thing so repugnant to nature that Dionysius Areopagita pronounced boldely though then an Ethnicke that either the sonne of God was tormented or else the worlde woulde bee dissolued the vaile of the Temple was rent in twaine earthquakes were seene the rockes were clouen asunder the graues were opened and such as slept arose with Christ to life againe Christ after his resurrection appeared sundry times first to Marie Magdalen when she taried still at the sepulchre to see Christ after his disciples were gone away to their owne home Christ appeared the second time the selfe same day to two of his disciples as they went to a towne called Emaus which was distant from Ierusalem about three score furlongs The cause of the second apparition was this because the saide disciples would not beleeue that which Mary Magdalen and Ioanna and Mary the mother of Iames and other women told them of Christs resurrection Christ appeared the third time to all the Disciples Thomas onely excepted who was then absent which apparition was done the first day of the weeke and when the doores were shut where the Disciples were assembled for feare of the Iewes and then Iesus stoode in the middes of them and bestowed his peace vpon them Christ after eight dayes appeared the fourth time to his disciples comming into the middest of them euen when the doores were shut and bidding Thomas to see his hands and to put forth his hand into his side and to be no longer incredulous but faithful Christ appeared the fift time to his Disciples at the sea of Tiberias where they were fishing at whose word they casting out their net were not able to draw it at all for the multitude of fishes By these and other his apparitions he made his resurrection manifest vnto the world Sixtly hee appeared to the eleuen Disciples in the mount of Galile But from hence arise doubts very worthie the examination The first doubt Christ saith in Iohn that hee appeared but thrise after his resurrection To this I answere
they iterate their sinne in performing the same Who neuerthelesse shoulde haue sinned but once if after the making of their vngodly vowes they had ceased from the performance thereof For which cause holy Bernard aduiseth his sister grauely not to keepe and performe any ill vow Thus doth he write Rescinde fidem in malis promissis In turpi voto muta decretum Malum quod promisisti non facias Quod incautè vouisti nō impleas Impia est promissio quae scelere adimpletur Breake thy faith in euill promises chaunge thy purpose in vnhonest vowes doe not that euill which thou hast promised performe not that which thou hast rashly vowed That promise is wicked which is performed with wickednesse S. Isidorus hath the selfe same resolution concerning ill vowes as hee is alledged by Gratian. S. Bede after he had largely discoursed vpon euil promises and withall shewed that it is better euen to be periured then to performe naughtie and wicked promises alledged for the confirmation of his opinion the fact of holy Dauid in the death of Nabal These are his wordes Denique iurauit Dauid per Deum occidere Nabal virum stultum impium atque omnia quae ad eum pertinebant demoliri sed ad primam intercessionem Abigail foeminae prudentis mox remisit minas reuocauit ensemin vaginam neque aliquid culpae se pro taliperiurio contraxisse doluit Finally Dauid sware by God that he would kill Nabal a foolish wicked man that he would destroy all his both smal great yet so soon as Abigail Nabals wife a wife woman made her petition to him he abated his anger put vp his sword and nothing lamented the breach of his othe S. Ambrose hauing at large prooued by many golden testimonies that it was sinne to breake ill vows then to performe the same at length alleageth the ensample of Christ himselfe for that only purpose these are his words Non semper igitur promissa soluenda omnia sunt denique ipse dominus frequenter suam mutat sententiam sicut scriptura indicat Therefore all promises ought not to be kept at all times for euen our Lord God himselfe doeth oftentimes change his purpose as holie Writ beareth record S. Austen reputeth it a great point of wisedome not to do that which a man hath rashly spoken thus doth he write Magnae sapientiae est reuocare hominem quod male locutus est It is great wisedome for a man to call backe and not performe that which he hath spoken vnaduisedly Soter who himselfe was the bishop of Rome teacheth expresly that rash promises ought not to be kept these are his words Si aliquid incautius aliquem iurasse contigerit quod obseruatum in peiorem vergat exitum illud salubri consilio mutandum nouerimus magis instante necessitate periurandum nobis quam pro facto iuramento in aliud crimen maius diuertendum If any man shall sweare vnaduisedly which if it be performed bringeth greater harme that ought to be changed by prudent aduise for we must rather be periured if neede so require then for performance of our othe to commit a greater sinne so then it is euident that vngodly and vnlawfull vowes ought not to be kept But such is not the vow of single life say the papists This therefore must be examined The vow of single life is a godly vow and so liked of Saint Paul as he reputed them damned that kept not the same I answer that it is a wicked and vngodly vow to tie our selues from marriage al the daies of our life and I wil proue the same by the best approued popish doctours and by the doctrine established in the Romish church and that because the replie containeth such matters as is no lesse intricate then important I therefore say first that it is a verie wicked and vngodly act for a man to expose himselfe to sinne Thus much is granted by the vniforme consent of all learned Papists insomuch as all the Summists agree in this that those arts which can seldome or neuer be vsed without sin are altogether vnlawfull Gregorie surnamed the Great as hee was vertuous and learned so was he the bishop of Rome and for that respect of great account among the Papists though he were no papist in deede as now a daies papists are so knowne and called thus doth he write Sunt enim pleraque negotia quae sine peccatis exhiberi aut vix aut nullatenus possunt quae ergo ad peccatum implicant ad haec necesse est vt post conuersionem animus non recurrat For there be sundrie arts which can hardly or not at all bee practised without sinne therefore after our conuersion wee may not haue recourse to such as anie way draw vs to sinne Nowe let vs applie this to the matter in hand for it is most certaine that he exposeth himselfe to sinne that bindeth himselfe neuer to vse the remedie against sinne for example if a man should vow that hee would neuer vse the helpe of surgerie or phisicke that man shoulde doubtlesse expose himselfe to the perill of death none but senselesse bodies will or can this denie So in our case of single life because God hath appointed matrimonie for a remedie against sinne so saith the Apostle to auoide fornication let euerie one haue his wife and let euerie woman haue her husband For which respect Saint Gregorie Nazianzene saith that marriage is not so subiect to perill as single life I say secondly that it is a great sinne to debarre and stop the course of naturall propension yea this is a thing so certaine as their angelicall doctour Aquinas proueth thereby the murdering of ones selfe to be sinne bicause it is against the inclination of nature Nowe let vs make application heereof for the propension to beget children is naturall as which was before sinne in the state of innocencie and so hee that maketh a perpetuall vow of chastitie feeling in himselfe this propension committeth a greeuous sinne I say thirdly that it is a damnable sinne to tempt God for it is written in Gods booke yee shall not tempt the Lorde your God Vppon which words the glosse receiued of all papists saith thus Deum tentat qui habens quid faciat sine ratione committit se periculo hee tempteth God who hauing ordinarie meanes committeth himselfe to daunger without cause This exposition is so agreeable to the text as Aquinas willingly admitteth the same Nowe let vs applie it to the matter in hande He that refuseth ordinarie meanes and so committeth himselfe to perill tempts God grieuously as both the popish glosse and Aquinas grant but the ordinarie meanes to auoide fornication is marriage saith the Apostle therefore he that voweth neuer to marrie exposeth himselfe to the danger of fornication thereby tempteth god grieuously and consequently his vow is wicked and damnable I say fourthly
being free from sinne no need at all to suffer for her selfe The answere I say first that what the late churche of Rome beleeueth is not much materiall because it is become the whore of Babylon as I haue prooued copiously I say secondly that though the blessed virgin had great grace and sanctification bestowed on her as who was not onely the mother of man but of God also yet was she conceiued in originall sinne vndoubtedly For so the holy scripture doth conuince so the auncient fathers affirme so the best approoued popishe doctors graunt and so right reason doth euidently conclude As by one man saith the apostles sinne entered into the world and death by sinne and so death went ouer all men in whom all men haue sinned Againe as by the offence of one the fault came on all men to condemnation so by the iustifying of one the benefite abounded towarde all men to the iustification of life And in another place there is none righteous no not one Againe in another place the scripture hath concluded al vnder sin y t the promise by the faith of Iesus Christ should be giuen to them that beleeue And the holy Psalmographe saith Enter not into iudgement with thy seruaunt for in thy sight shall none that liueth be iustified All which textes and such like are generally spoken of all no one nor other is exempt S. Ambrose hath a long discourse in which he prooueth that none but onely Iesus Christ is void of sinne These among others are his wordes Omnes intra retia erant imò adhuc intra retia sumus quia nemo sine peccato nisi solus Iesus quem non cognoscentem peccatum peccatum pro nobis fecit pater Infra venit ad laqueos Iesus vt Adam solueret venit liberare quod perierat Omnes retibus tenebamur nullus alium eruere poterat cum seipsum non possit eruere All were in the nettes yea we are yet in the nets because none is without sinne but onely Iesus whom when hee knewe no sinne the father made him a sacrifice for sinne in our behalfe Iesus came to the snare that hee might loose Adam he came to deliuer that which was lost We were al taken in the net we could not deliuer one another when no man could deliuer himselfe S. Augustine teacheth the same veritie in many places of his workes but I wil content my selfe with one or two Thus therfore doth he write vpon the 34. Psalm sic ergo peccatum domini quod factum est de peccato quia inde carnem assumpsit de massa ipsa quae mortem meruerat ex peccato Etenim vt celerius dicam Maria ex Adam mortua propter peccatum Adae Adam mortuus est propter peccatum caro domini ex Maria mortua est propter delenda peccata Euen so therefore is it called the sinne of the Lord which is made of sinne because hee tooke flesh from thence of that masse which had deserued death by reason of sin For to speake more brieflie Mary descending of Adam is dead by reason of Adams sinne Adam is dead for his owne sin and our Lords flesh of Mary is dead to put away sinne S. Augustine in another place hath these wordes Proinde corpus Christi quamuis ex carne foeminae assumptum est quae de illa carnis peccati propagine concepta fuerat tamen quia non sic in ea conceptum est quomodo erat illa concepta nec ipsa erat caro peccati sed similitudo carnis peccati Therefore Christes body although it were assumpted of the flesh of a woman which was conceiued of the stocke of the flesh of sinne yet because it was not so conceiued in it as it was conceiued therefore was it not the flesh of sinne but only the similitude of the flesh of sinne The same S. Augustine in another place writeth in this maner Sine dubio caro Christi non est caro peccati sed similis carni peccati quid restat vt intelligamus nisi ea excepta omnem reliquam humanam carnem esse peccati hinc apparet illam concupiscentiam per quam Christus concipi noluit fecisse in genere humano propaginē mali quia Mariae corpus quamuis inde venerit tamen eam non traiecit in corpus quod non inde concepit Doubtlesse Christes flesh is not the flesh of sinne but only like to the flesh of sinne what therefore must wee vnderstande but that all other mens flesh besides it is the flesh of sinne And heereuppon it is cleare that that concupiscence by which Christ would not be conceiued dispersed sin throughout mankind because the body of Marie though it came from thence yet could it not conuey that into the bodie which was not conceiued thereupon but of the holy ghost These words of S. Austen and Saint Ambrose are so plaine and easie as they neede no declaration Thomas Aquinas albeit hee constantly defendeth that the blessed virgin was neither borne in sinne nor yet sinned actually after hir birth more or lesse graunteth for all that that shee was conceiued in originall sinne and hee prooueth it by two euident reasons whereof this is one Sanctificatio de qua loquimur non est nisi emundatio à peccato originali culpa autem non potest emundari nisi per gratiam cuius subiectum est sola creatura rationalis ideo ante infusionem animae rationalis B. virgo sanctificata non fuit Sanctification whereof we now speake saith the cheefest popish doctour is nothing else but a clensing from originall sinne but sinne cannot bee purged without grace whose subiect can be nothing but a reasonable creature and therefore the blessed virgin could not be sanctified from sin before a reasonable soule was infused into her bodie This argument of Aquinas is so inuincible in popish manner of proceeding as no Iesuite in the world though they all hold the contrarie can inuent a sufficient solution for the same Deuout and holy Bernarde whose authoritie is great with all Papists holdeth the same opinion with Aquinas For albeit hee sharply reproue the practise of the cathedrall church of Lions for keeping the festiuitie of the conception of the blessed virgin calling that practise the noueltie of presumption the mother of temeritie sister of superstition and the daughter of leuitie yet doth he hold that shee was borne without sinne and 〈◊〉 continued all her life All learned men that euer wrote before our seditious lately hatched Iesuites confesse the conception of the blessed virgin to haue beene polluted with sinne and I prooue it by an irrefragable demonstration First because the blessed virgin if she had euer beene free from sinne should haue needed no Sauiour nor had anie Sauior and so Christ should not haue bin her Iesus which to say is both against the scripture and against the honour of that holy virgin Bernardus
and Aquinas saw the force of this reason and grauely vrged the same Yea the holy virgin renounceth flatly their hereticall and hypocriticall doctrine in her humble thankes to God for her saluation My soule saith she doth magnifie the Lord and my spirit reioyceth in God my sauiour For this cause Bernard cryeth out in these words Non est hoc virginem honorare sed honori detrahere The virgin is not this way honored but greatly dishonored Secondly because as Bernard saieth Where lust is there must needs be sinne and therefore since the virgin was conceiued with lust or else as they dare not say by the holy ghost it followeth that she was conceiued in sinne Other reasons the same Bernard hath but these may suffice The second reply But saint Austen saith that hee will alway except the holy virgine Mary when he disputeth or reasoneth of sinners or sinne The answer I say first that saint Austen confesseth flatly as you haue heard that the blessed virgin was vndoubtedly conceiued in original sin I say secondly that originall sin is of infinite deformitie as is already proued and consequently that the blessed virgin being polluted therewith was neuer able to yeeld condigne compensation for the same howe great soeuer her holinesse was afterward the reason is afore yeelded for that the infinit malice of sin surmounteth the value of the finite actions of all creatures And if she were not able to satisfie for her own sinnes much lesse had shee any surplussage of satisfaction left which may serue to binde vp the popes pardons for the sins of others I say thirdly that albeit S. Austen would not for the honor of our Sauior as he saith call the blessed virgin into question touching sin yet doth he not affirm her to haue bin void of all actual sinne but seemeth rather to hold the contrary For he addeth these words Vnde enim scimus quod ei plus gratiae colla tum fuerit ad vincendum omni ex parte peccatum quae concipere ac parere meruit quem constat nullum habuisse peccatum For how know we that she had more grace giuen her to ouercome all sinne who did conceiue and beare him that certainely was free from al sin In which words S. Austen sheweth plainly that he can not tell whether the blessed virgin was voide of all actuall sinne or no yet is he vnwilling to call her into question for the honour of our Lord Iesus whose mother she was according to the flesh Yea Saint Austen in his questions vpon the new testament if it be his worke confesseth freely that she sinned for want of faith These are his expresse words Hoc vtique significauit quia etiam Maria per quam gestum est mysterium incarnationis saluatoris in morte domini dubitaret ita tamen vt in resurrectione firmaretur This verily is signified that Marie by whome was accomplished the misterie of the incarnation of our Sauiour doubted in the death of our Lord yet so as she was confirmed in his resurrection Thus hee writeth and yet knoweth euerie child that to doubt in matters of faith is no little sinne S. Basil dissenteth nothing from Saint Augustine when hee telleth vs that the blessed virgin standing by the crosse wauered and was doubtfull in her minde while shee behelde on one side what miserie hee suffered on the other side what wonders he had done Saint Chrysostome affirmeth so expressely that the blessed virgin sinned that their angelicall doctour Aquinas is enforced to vse this sillie shift for a colorable answere to his words to wit that hee was excessiue in his words But who wil not rather thinke that hee was presumptuous in his answere These are S. Chrysostomes expresse words Quae estmater mea fratres mei aiebat siquidem nō adhuc debitam de ipso opinionem habebant sed more matrum Maria iure omnia filio se praecepturam censebat cum tanquam dominum colere reuereri licebat ideo in hunc modum respondit who is my mother my brethren said Christ for they had not yet a right opiniō of him but Mary after the maner of mothers thought she might command her sonne to do all things albeit she might well haue honored him as her Lord therfore did he answer in this maner Againe he saith thus Optabat enim vt tam hominum gratiam conciliaret ipsa clarior filij gratia efficeretur fortasse aliquo humano afficiebatur affectu For she wished that now he would win the fauor of men that she might be more famous for his sake and perhappes she was touched with some humane affection Againe in another place he saith thus Ambitione quadam ac ostentatione commoti foris eum in praesentia omnium euocarunt vt viderentur facile ac magna cum potestate Christo imperare Infra vnde patet inani quadam gloria illos commotos fuisse nihil adhuc magni de ipso cogitantes quod apertius Ioannes significauit dicens quia neque fratres eius credebant in eum They being tickled with ambition and vaine glorie called him out in the presence of all that they might seeme to command Christ at their pleasure and with authoritie Whervpon it is cleare that they were tickled with vaine glorie hauing no great opinion on him as yet which Iohn signified euidently when he saide For neither did his brethren beleeue in him Saint Hierome shall conclude this point which I haue handled more at large because many stumble at it and fewe seeme to vnderstand it well these are his expresse words Conclusit Deus omnes sub peccato vt omnium misereatur absque eo solo qui peccatum non fecit nec inuentus est dolus in ore eius God hath shut vp all vnder sinne that he may shew mercie vnto all him onely excepting that sinned not neither was there guile found in his mouth The third replie She was Christs mother and therefore was more blessed then al other women The answere I confesse willingly that shee was blessed aboue all women and yet that shee was a sinner and had Christ not onely for her sonne but euen for her Lorde and Sauiour neither was it so great a grace simplie and barely to beare Christ as the Papists faine it to be but the holy fathers S. Austen and S. Chrysostome shal tel vs what they thinke therof S. Austen hath these expresse words Hoc in ea magnificauit dominus quia fecit voluntatem patris non quia caro genuit carnē Propterea cum dominus in turba admirabilis videretur faciens signa prodigia ostendens quid lateret in carne admiratae quaedam animae dixerunt foelix venter qui te portauit ille imò foelices qui audiunt verbum Dei custodiūt illud hoc est dicere mater mea quam appellatis foelicem inde foelix quia verbum
Dei custodit non quia in illa verbum caro factum est habitauit in nobis sed quia custodit ipsum verbum Dei per quod facta est quod in illa caro factum est Our Lord magnified this in her for that she did the will of his father not because her flesh bare his flesh Therfore when our Lord seemed admirable to the people working signes and myracles and shewing what was hidde in the flesh the people maruelling saide happie is the bellie that bare thee and hee answered yea happie are they that heare the word of God and keepe it that is to say my mother whom ye cal happie is therefore happie because she keepeth the word of God not because the word was made flesh in her and dwelt in vs but because shee keepeth Gods worde by which she was made and which was made flesh in her Againe in another place he writeth thus Beatior ergo Maria percipiendo fidem Christi quam concipiendo carnem Christi Nam dicenti cuidam beatus venter qui te portauit ipse respondit imo beati quiaudiunt verbum Dei custodiunt denique fratribus eius id est secundum carneÌ„ cognatis qui non in eum credideruÌ„t quid profuit illa cognatio Sic materna propinquitas nihil Mariae pofuisset nisi foelicius Christum corde quam carne gestasset Therefore Marie was more blessed in receiuing the faith of Christ then in conceiuing y e flesh of Christ for he answered to one that said blessed is the wombe that bare thee yea blessed are they that heare the word of God and keepe it Finally his brethren that is his kinsmen in y e flesh that beleeued not in him what good had they by that kinred And euen so motherly kinred had doone Marie no good vnlesse shee had borne Christ more blessedly in her heart then she bare him in her flesh S. Chrysostome hath these expresse words Ea sententia dictum existima non quod matrem negligeret sed quod nihil vtilitatis ei matris nomeÌ„ allaturuÌ„ osteÌ„deret nisi bonitate fide praestaret Infra Nam si id profuturum erat per se Mariae profuisset etiam Iudaeis quorum consanguineus erat Christus secundum carnem profuisset ciuitati in qua natus est profuisset fraâ—ribus Atqui dum fratres verum suarum curam habuerunt nihil eis propinquitatis nomen profuit sed cum reliquo mundo damnati erant Thinke that Christ spoke that not because he had no care of his mother but because he woulde shew the name of a mother to profit her nothing vnlesse she were better in pietie and faith For if that could haue done Marie good of it selfe it would also haue profited the Iewes it would haue profited the citie in which he was borne it would haue profited his brethren but while our Lords brethren set their hearts vpon their owne worldly matters the name of kinred did them no good at all they were damned with others in the world The fift obiection Nathan the Prophet brought word to Dauid that God had forgiuen him his sinne and that he should not die neuerthelesse because Dauid caused Gods enimies to blaspheme by reason of that his sin God punished him by the death of his child So Dauid being penitent for his sinne in numbring the people obtained remission of the fault and yet suffered three daies pestilence in his people So God forgaue the Israelites their rebellious murmurings against him yet for that fault none of them coulde enter into the lande of promise so in baptisme also our sinnes are freely forgiuen vs and yet do we still suffer temporall paines for the same al the daies of our life Which texts of holy scripture and others of like sort do plainely insinuate that after God hath forgiuen vs our sins and remitted both the fault and the eternall paine there still remaineth some temporall satisfaction to bee done for the same either in this world or in purgatorie which satisfaction is accomplished in the popes pardons while he maketh application of the superaboundant passions of holy men and women locked vp in the treasure of the church of Rome The answere I say first that when God forgiueth vs any sin he freeth vs as wel from the pain as froÌ„ the fault which I proue by many reasons First because otherwise Gods works should be impefect though holy writ hold them most perfect when it saith Dei perfecta sunt opera Gods works are perfect which in the originall and Hebrew is vttered more significantly where God is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a stone or rocke noting vnto vs that his workes are done with power and might and therefore with all exact perfection And doubtles if his act in forgiuing sin be perfect as it is most perfect then after God hath remitted the fault there can remain no satisfactioÌ„ for the same Secondly if mans act should bee a partiall satisfaction for sinne then coulde not Christ be a perfect and absolute redeemer but as it were a ioynt redeemer together with man Thirdly the fault is neuer truly perfectly forgiuen where payment is still required for the same Fourthly God who is faithful in al his promises hath promised to forget all our iniquities when soeuer we truely become penitent for the same yet can be not possiblie forget that for which he requireth our satisfaction Fiftly the papists grant with vniform consent generally that in baptisme martyrdome god remits sins wholly and perfectly aswel in respect of the pain as of the fault and yet can they neuer yeeld any sufficient disparitie betweene the forgiuenes of our sins before after baptisme whereupon they may build their fondly forged satisfaction This is a mighty reason as which troubled me al the while I was a papist because I could neuer reade or inuent anie sufficient solution to the same though at that time I would most willingly haue done it it was one motiue to excite mee against their superstitious and idololatricall doctrine in regard hereof grauely learnedly and christianly saith S. Augustine Christus communicando nobiscum sine culpa poenam culpam soluit poenam Christ while hee tooke part with vs of our paine without sin purged vs both from the sin and from the paine due for sin I say secondly that the punishment which God layeth on vs after he hath remitted and forgiuen vs our sins are not satisfactions for our sins committed but they are fatherly correctious to teach vs our duties to minister to vs fit matter of spiritual exercises and to keep vs and others from sinne to come as also to ingraffe in our hearts how odious a thing sin is in Gods sight This to be so Chrysostome rightly surnamed Os aureum golden mouth vttereth very perspicuously in these golden words Nam ne peccantes inulti manentes nos efficeremur
holy angels And Lodouicus Viues vpon the same place of S. Austen hath these wordes Et istos quoque supplicijs liberabat Origenes sicut ex sanctis angelis praecedente tempore diabolos faciebat quae illius erant vicissitudines These also did Origen deliuer from punishment as in processe of time he made of angels diuelles such was his changeable course of dealing Roffensis our late popish bishoppe of Rochester confesseth a trueth in this matter to wit that the Greekes did neuer beleeue there was a purgatorie Againe that purgatorie was not receiued in all places at once neither yet generally for many hundred yeeres His wordes I haue alleadged in the first booke of my Motiues in the seuenth preamble The first obiection I haue loosed thy prisoners out of the pit wherein there is no water Ergo saith our Iesuite Bellarmine there is a purgatorie for out of hell none can be loosed The answer I answer that the prophet means nothing els but that God will deliuer his church out of all dangers howe great soeuer they seeme Againe this text may fitly be expounded of hell as Saint Hierome taketh it His wordes are these In sanguine passionis tuae eos qui vincti in carcere tenebantur inferni in quo non est vlla misericordia tua clementia liberasti Thou hast deliuered in the bloud of thy testament of thy free mercie those that were bound in the prison of hell where there is no mercy And indeed the merite of Christes bloud preserued vs from hell which otherwise was prepared for vs. This text may also be vnderstood of the captiuitie of Babylon from whence the church was deliuered The second obiection We went through fire and water and thou hast brought vs to a place of comfort or refreshing By this place it is cleere that there is a purgatorie The answere I say first that before hell had no water in it but now there is found both fire and water such is the constancie of popishe diuinitie I say secondly that by fire and water the prophet here vnderstandeth the victories which martyrs haue had in their manifold passions That is to say martyrs after all their crosses miseries and afflictions are brought to Christ their head and true comfort Thus doth S. Hierome expound this place whose expresse wordes are these Martyrum hic ostendit victorias quas in diuersis passionibus meruerunt ad vnum eos dicit refrigerium id est Christum Dominum per laqueos per cruces per verbera per ignes aestusq alia diuersa supplicia per quae holocaustum acceptum effecti sunt peruenisse Hee sheweth the victories of martyrs which they were worthie of in their manifold passions and hee saith they came to a place of refreshing that is to Christ our Lord through snares through crosses through beatinges through fire and heate and diuers other tortures through which they became an acceptable sacrifice S. Austen expoundeth it in the selfe same maner The third obiection They cried to the Lord in their trouble and hee deliuered them from their distresse Hee brought them out of darkenes and out of the shadowe of death and brake their bandes asunder Ergo there is a purgatory The answere I answere that the whole Psalme containeth in effect nothing els but thankes giuing to the Lord for his great mercie in that he hath deliuered them not onely from hell iustly deserued for their sinnes but also from the manifold dangers of this life So writeth S. Austen vpon this Psalme and S. Hierome is of the same opinion For these are his expresse wordes Vinctum enim erat genus humanum catenis criminum carceri diaboli mancipatum For mankinde was bound with the chaines of sinne and kept in prison as a slaue by the diuell The 4. obiection He shall fine the sonnes of Leui and purifie them as gold and siluer that they may bring offeringes vnto the Lord in righteousnesse Which fining say our papistes cannot be vnderstood but of purgatorie The answere I answere that the prophet Malachie speaketh flatly of the first aduent of our Sauiour Iesus Christ who by his bitter and sacred passion will purge his church from all her sinnes and then shall the faithfull offer vp the sacrifice of land and thankesgiuing Thus doth S. Hierome expound this text neither can any other glosse be consonant to the discourse of the prophet The 5. obiection S. Mathew saith that the sinne of the holy ghost shalbe forgiuen neither in this worlde neither in the worlde to come By which wordes he giueth vs to vnderstand that some sinnes are forgiuen in the world to come Ergo there is a purgatorie The answere I answere that Gods spirite knoweth best how to interpret the scripture and consequently that S. Mathew meaneth nothing els by these wordes neither in this world neither in the world to come but that the sinne against the holy ghost shall neuer be forgiuen For so doth S. Marke another Euangelist interprete this selfe same text These are the wordes hee that blasphemeth against the holy ghost shall neuer haue forgiuenesse but is culpable of eternal damnation Yea which is a confusion to the papists S. Mathew himself so expoundeth himselfe in the next verse aforegoing And so doth S. Chrysostome expound this place The 6. obiection Thou shalt not depart thence till thou hast paied the vttermost farthing Ergo after satisfaction made or the popes pardon graunted thou maiest come out of purgatory The answere I answere with S. Augustine that the prison whereof S. Mathew speaketh is hell from whence there is no departure in deed For hee that is once committed thither for non payment must tarry there world without end because hee can neuer answere this infinite debt The replie When he saith vntill thou hast paied hee giueth vs to vnderstand that after a certaine time we shall come out I aunswere that the word vntill doth not connotate the end of imprisonment but the continuation thereof because so is the vsual acception of that terme in the holy scriptures For when S. Mathew saith he knew her not vntil she had brought forth her first borne sonne it followeth not that he afterward knew the blessed virgine So when it is said that Michol had no child to the day of her death it followeth not y t she had children after her death Thirdly when our Sauiour promised to be with his disciples till the worldes end it doth not import that he wil after forsake them Fourthly when the prophet saith as the eyes of a maiden looke vnto y e hands of her mistres so our eyes wait vpon the Lord our God vntill hee haue mercy vpon vs he meaneth not that our eies shal not afterward wait vpon the Lord. No God forbid Fiftly when God saith sit thou at my right hand vntil I make thine enemies
thy footstoole he meaneth not that Christ shall sit no longer on his right hand No no God auert The 7. obiection If any man build on this foundation golde siluer pretious stones timber hay or stubble euery mans worke shalbe made manifest for the day shall declare it because it shalbe reuealed by the fire and the fire shall trie euery mans work of what sort it is This fire the holy fathers doe vnderstand of purgatorie Ergo it ought not to be denied The answere I say first that all the fathers as well old as latter writers confesse that S. Paules discourse is altogither metaphoricall consequently y t no doctrine of faith can be grounded thereupon I say secondly that the old writers dissent one from another in the exposition of his text For S. Chrysostome vnderstandeth it of hell fire S. Hierome of Gods examination in the day of general iudgment S. Gregorie of the fire of tribulation in this life S. Ambrose and S. Theodoret of the fire of Gods iudgemēt others otherwise Gregorius Magnus hath these expresse words Quamuis hoc de igne tribulationis in hac vita nobis adhibito possit intelligi albeit this place may be vnderstood of the fire of tribulation which we suffer in this life Out of which words I note that although this Gregory thought there was a purgatory of small sins after this life yet did he confesse y t this place could proue no such thing Hereunto I adde that if either this text or any other had been a sufficient warrantize for purgatory aswel the Greekes as the ancient fathers would haue receiued it both which their own Roffensis denieth as is already proued I say thirdly that it cānot possibly be vnderstood of purgatory and I proue it effectually First because al martyrs go straight to heauen as al papists confesse Secondly because al such as haue plenary pardons frō the pope escape purgatory go the ready way to heauē Thirdly because Ieremy Iob. Ioh. Baptist the blessed virgine sundry others in whose passions of supererogation they build the treasure of the church and popish pardons could neuer come in purgatory and yet doth the text say that all aswel good as bad must be tried by that fire whereof the apostle speaketh in this place I say fourthly y t the apostle here speaketh of y e fire of probation but not of purgation as y e papists would haue him to doe These are y e words vniuscuiusque opus quale sit ignis probabit the fire shal trie euery ones worke of what sorte it is Which S. Austen well obserued when he wrote in this maner Ignis de quo locutus est eo loco apostolus Paulus talis debet intelligi vt ambo per eum transeant id est qui aedificat supra hoc fundamentum aurum argentum lapides pretiosos qui aedificat ligna foenum stipulam The fire whereof the apostle Paul speaketh in that place must be vnderstood to be such an one that both sorts may passe through it that is aswel he that buildeth vpon this foundation gold siluer or pretious stones as he that buildeth wood hay or stubble I say fiftly that all thinges spoken of in this text are taken metaphorically gold siluer and pretious stones doe signifie sound doctrine timber hay and stubble signifie false doctrine the builders are such as teach that doctrine the day signifieth time the daughter of trueth and the fire signifieth Gods spirit which reuealeth all trueths maketh false doctrine knowen This exposition is gathered out of the circumstances of the text it selfe out of S. Ambrose and S. Austen and out of late popish writers For their owne Hofmeisterus if my memory faile me not and their Gagnaeius also haue this interpretation in flat and expresse termes It is long since I read them and I haue not now their bookes at hand otherwise I would haue alledged their wordes I say sixtly that al such as would ground popish purgatory vpon this text are enforced to confesse and admit manifold absurdities And for triall hereof togither with that which is already said these wordes of our Iesuite Bellarmine may suffice Respondeo nos cogi ab ipso textu ad aequiuocationem non vnam sed duas admittendas I answere that the very text doth compell vs to admit more then one equiuocation The 8. obiection What shall they do which are baptised for dead if the dead rise not at all Why are they then baptised for the dead out of this place as our Iesuite Bellarmine supposeth nay as hee braggingly boasteth is popish purgatorie prooued vndoubtedly The answer I say first that great is the impudencie of our Iesuit who glorieth so much in his late Romish exposition which neither any one of the ancient fathers approueth neither yet sundrie of his owne fellowes will admit For Epiphanius Theodoretus Chrysostomus Tertullianus Ambrose Sedulius Anselmus Oecumenius Haymo and Theophilactus do expound it flatly against our Romish Iesuite and so doe also his owne deare fellowes Aquinas and Caietanus I say secondly that S. Paul vnderstandeth by those that are baptised for dead such as are at the point of death and are reputed as dead or for dead this saith S. Epiphanius is the true meaning of the Apostle and that he saith truely I appeale to the true iudgement of the indifferent reader These are the words of Epiphanius Alii rectè hoc dictum interpretantes dicunt quod morti vicini si fuerint in pietatis doctrina instructi ob hanc spem ante obitum lavacro digni fiunt ostendentes quod qui mortuus est etiam resurget ob id indiget remissione peccatorū per lauacrū Others interpret this saying of the apostle truly say that such as are at the point of death if they be instructed christiāly are for this hope worthie of baptising before they die thereby signifying that he which is dead shall rise againe and for that ende hath need of remission of his sins by baptisme This then is the true meaning of S. Paul in this place what shall they do which are baptised for dead that is which are rather reputed for dead then for liuing Wherefore are they baptised if the dead rise not againe for since they cannot be baptised for anie commoditie of this life which presently they must forsake being so extreamely sicke their baptisme prooueth the resurrection of the dead And where our Iesuit listeth to wrangle vpon the words pro illis for them it shall suffice to tell him that their latin so magnified edition is false and that in the originall and Greeke copies it is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the dead and so his cauill is not worth a figge The ninth obiection S. Paul saith that in the name of Iesus euery knee voweth both of things in heauen and things in earth and things vnder the earth but the
damned in hell blaspheme Christ ergo there be some vnder the earth that is in purgatorie which worship and adore Christ. The answer I answere that the bowing of the knee whereof the apostle speaketh doth not signify worship or adoration but that subiection which shalbe shewed openlie in the last iudgement when and where the deuilles as well as men and the good angels shall yeeld homage and dominion vnto Christ. For so S. Paul expoundeth S. Paul in his epistle to the Romaines and S. Luke recordeth that the deuill falleth prostrate before Christ and acknowledgeth his power ouer him which is that bowing of the knee whereof S. Paul speaketh Other expositions whatsoeuer are repugnant to the text The replie S. Iohn saith that hee heard all the creatures which are in heauen and on earth and vnder the earth and in the sea and al that are in them saying in this maner praise and honor and glorie and power be vnto him that sitteth vpon the throne and vnto the Lambe for euermore Therefore they be vnder the earth which truely worship Christ and consequently since the deuils as yee grant do rather blaspheme then worship Christ they that worship Christ vnder the earth must needes bee the soules in purgatory The answere I answere that S. Iohn meaneth nothing els then that which S. Paul hath vttered he vseth the figure Prosopopeia after the vsuall course of the scriptures causeth things senselesse and voide of reason to sounde out the praise of God so saith the Psalmograph Dauid All thy workes praise thee O Lord and thy saints blesse thee and in another place thus The heauens declare the glorie of God and the firmament sheweth the worke of his hands yea as the prophet saith and as the three holy Hebrewes sang fire heate winter summer frost snow light darkenesse the starres the sunne the moone and creatures blesse the Lord. The tenth obiection S. Iohn saith that no vncleane thing shall enter into heauen but many depart out of this life which are not pure ergo such must be purged in purgatorie before they come in heauen The answere I say first that faith in Christ Iesus can as well purge a man in this life as the Popes pardons and yet as your selues teach vs a plenarie indulgence will salue this impuritie I say secondly that it is a needelesse thing to establish popish purgatorie because popish pardons supplie the want thereof This is proued copiously in my booke of Motiues I say thirdly that the faithfull and elect children of God haue their cleanenesse before him in Christ his sonne with which they may enter into heauen For as S. Iohn saith they haue washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lambe who as S. Paul saith when hee knew no sinne was yet made the sacrifice for sin that we might be the righteousnes of God in him And as S. Peter saith their hearts are purified by faith yea as Christ himself saith his sacred word hath made them cleane In fine holy Writ pronounceth them blessed that die in the Lord that they rest from their labors Which being so they neither haue any impurity nor suffer any purgatorie paine The replie You all confesse that your inherent iustice is vnperfect and impure and so your vncleanenes must be taken away after this life be fore yee come into heauen ergo there is a purgatorie The answere I answere that original concupiscence is an inseperable accidēt during this life aswel in you as in vs but as it is proper to this state so is it taken away in that very instant in which our state is altered The 11. obiection S. Peter saith that God raised vp Christ after he had loosed the sorrows of hel This place saith our Iesuite must needs be vnderstood of purgatory for first it cānot be meant of the damned because their paines shal neuer end Secondly it cannot be meant of the sorrowes of Christ because they were finished on the crosse Thirdly it cannot be meant of the fathers in Limbo because they had no paine at all it therefore remaineth that it be meant of the sorrowes which soules abide in purgatorie The answere I say first that if their Latin text were sound this obiection would solue it selfe for the originall and Greeke text is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hauing loosed the sorrowes of death Out of which words nothing can be gathered that fauoreth purgatory any thing at al. I say secondly that if it were as y e papists do reade the sorrowes of hel being loosed their soules should alwayes feele paine but neuer haue an end Which cannot be truely verified of their purgatorie fire I say thirdly that the fathers whō the papists hold to haue bin in Limbo at that time did according to their owne doctrine suffer poenam damni because they were not as yet partakers of the cleare vision beatificall which Bellarmine granteth in another place and so is repugnant to himselfe But let that be deemed a small fault in a Iesuite which is thought a great crime in another man Adde hereunto that poena damni is a greater pain then poena sensus by their best popish diuinitie I say fourthly that by the sorrows of death is meant nothing els but the bitter paines which Christ suffered vpon the crosse to accomplish mans redemption For then did he properly perfectly triumph ouer death when he rose againe from death who was deliuered to death for our sins saith Saint Paul and is risen againe for our iustification And the verie words of the text next following in the Actes doe confirme this exposition for there it is thus written whome God raised vp and loosed the sorrowes of death because it was vnpossible that he should be holden of it as if S. Peter had said although the passion of Christ was so bitter exceeding great as implying the curse and malediction due for our sinnes insomuch that the remembrance therof caused him to sweate out drops of blood yet could not death possiblie preuaile against him but that he should rise againe and conquer both hel and it The replie Although the greek word in the 24. verse signifieth death yet in the 27 verse it signifieth hel and so the sense is against you The answere I answer that the hebrew word in the psalme from whence this sentence is taken is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and signifieth a sepulchre or graue and so doth your owne great linguiste Arias Montanus interpret it as if the Prophet hadde saide thou wilt not leaue my soule or life in the graue For the course of holy scripture doth comprehende our life vnder the name of the Soule so saith the Prophet Ionas therefore now O Lord take I beseech thee my soule from me for it is better for me to die then to liue So is it in the Hebrew and original and yet by
the Papists themselues and consequently that the papists ought not to make account of his iudgement herein For you doe see that he granteth the punishment of the damned to be mitigated in hell for the prayers of the liuing which thing no papist will or dare auouch And the like is to be saide of other of the Fathers when they folow opinions not grounded vpon the word of God Saint Austen therefore must be reiected by his owne rule as I haue prooued in my Motiues when he dissenteth from Gods word the true touchstone and triall of all trueth And saint Austens inconstancie is plainely vttered in an other place where he hath these wordes Quod quidem non ideo confirmo quoniam non resisâ—o Which verily I do not therefore approue because I do not impugne it Out of which wordes I note that though saint Austen could not approoue the opinion of the vulgar sort as which he knew to haue no ground but a meere naturall affection yet would hee not condemne it but leaue it as in suspense The foureteenth obiection Praier for the dead is proued by the scripture euen in y t new testament for when S. Iohn forbids to pray for them that die without repentance he doubtles exhorts to pray for them that die penitent The answer I say first that when cardinall Allen in his notes vpon this place auoucheth roundly that this text coÌ„uinceth praier for the dead he may tell that tale to wise men and repute himselfe a foole for his paines For first as S. Austen vpon whose authoritie he only buildeth affirmeth that the apostle speaketh of him that dieth impenitent so doth the same S. Austen auouch that he doth iniury to a martyr that praieth for a martyr which is a receiued axiome with the papists and consequently when he inferreth out of S. Austen that we must pray for them that die penitent he concludeth against S. Austen that wee must pray for most constant martyrs and so commit a manifest iniurie So then albeit S. Iohn dehorteth from praying for such as die without repentance yet doth he not exhort vs to pray for those that die penitent for otherwise doubtles wee must pray for martyrs which no papist wil allow I say secondly that S. Iohn exhorteth to pray for penitent sinners here on earth but not for the dead I prooue it because these are saint Iohns words If any shal see his brother sinning a sin not to death but he that sinneth is in this life for wee can not see a man sinning in the next life where no sinne is committed and therfore S. Iohn speaketh of prayer only in this life I say thirdly that saint Iohus purpose is this no other to exhort vs to repentance for our sins in this life because after this life there is neither repentance nor remission of sinnes to be had neither can any other sense be truely deduced out of S. Iohns words Yea their owne cardinall Caietane doth so expound this place to their vtter confusion CHAP. VII Of praying to Saints departed COncerning the inuocation of Saints great abuses and intollerable superstition haue crept into the church and dazeled the eies of the vulgar sort wherein I desire diligent attention and indifferent iudgement vntill the end of my discourse The first Conclusion Albeit a christian man neuer pray to the saints departed yet doth he not sinne therein I prooue it because euery sinne is a transgression of Gods law or commandement but God hath made no law nor giuen any commandement to pray to saints Ergo not to pray to them is no sin at all The proposition is a receiued maxime in the Romish church grounded on these wordes of saint Austen Peccatum est factum vel dictum vel concupitum aliquid contra legem aeternam Sinne is any deed word or thought against the eternall law which is the will of God Saint Ambrose confirmeth Saint Augustines description in these wordes Quid est peccatum nisi praeuaricatio legis diuinae caelestium inobedientia praeceptorum What is sinne but the transgression of Gods lawe and the disobedience of his holie precepts The assumption is secure vntil the papists can alleadge some precept out of the olde or new testament for the inuocation of saints which they will doe ad Calendas Graecas But the Papistes thinke they haue a mightie obiection against this Conclusion taken out of Genesis in these wordes Et innocetur super eos nomen meum nomina quaeque patrum meorum Abraham Isaac And let my name be called vpon them and the names of my fathers Abraham and Isaac To which I answere thus First this vocation or nomination was not any precept from God but the meere fact of Iacob or Israel who as hee was holy so was he a man and might haue erred herein as man Secondly the hebrew text is thus Let my name be named in them that is let them bee called my children by adoption or let them bee surnamed after me For it was the custome both of the Hebrewes and of the Greekes to expresse the surname of euery one by the name of the father as Aristoteles the sonne of Nicomachus Zenophon the sonne of Gryllus Cambyses the sonne of Cyrus Thirdly the whole course of holy scripture doth yeelde this interpretation of Iacobs wordes In the olde testament it was a great reproch for a woman to beare no children though nowe with the Papists they be reputed holy that will rashly vow neuer to marry for which respect the small remnant of men left after the execution of Gods iustice in the destruction of Ierusalem inforced women contrary to womanly shamefastnesse to seek vnto men and to offer themselues to very base conditions to the end they would be their husbands and so take away their reproch Which thing the prophet Ieremy vttereth in these wordes In that day seuen women shall take hold of one man saying We will eate our owne bread and weare our owne garments onely let vs be called by thy name and take away our reproch Thus writeth Gods holy prophet whose discourse with the due circumstances thereof if the christian Reader wil exactly ponder he shall behold as clearely as the glittering beames of the sunne the most impudent and sophisticall dealing of the papists For though the words aswell in the latine as in the Hebrew be all one and the very same yet are the papists ashamed I am well assured to inferre or proue inuocation of Saints by this latter place That which I say is euident because these women desired nothing else of the man but that he would be their husband and that they might be called his wiues and so put away their reproch This interpretation is plainely touched in the expresse wordes of the text when the women desired the man to take their reproch away by letting his name be called vppon them for which end they promised not only
that whosoeuer will worship God truely must worship him neither in the mountaines neither in Hierusalem but in spirite and veritie I say thirdly y t as going on pilgrimage is commendable in some and tolerable in other some so is it necessary to saluation in none and very vnfit for many Which thing their own S. Bernard can tel them whose iudgment I am well assured no papist will refuse I say fourthly that popishe pilgrimage was not knowne in Christes church for the space of manie hundreth yeares after Christes sacred incarnation Neither shall the papistes euer be able to cite anie authenticall writer for the contrary The fift obiection S. Ambrose telleth great miracles done by the bodies of S. Geruasius and Protasius while they were touched lying on the coffin S Austen reciteth like miracles which were wrought by the reliques of S. Steuen S. Chrysostome Eusebius Palladius and diuers others make mention of the like miracles Yea the holy scripture it selfe telleth vs that myracles were done euen by touching the reliques of Elizaeus Why therefore may not the people this day resorte to suche places where such wonderfull miracles haue been done for to get helpe either of corporall diseases or spirituall is the cause of their going thither And for corporall helpes your selues this day go to S. Anne of Buxton and to other like places The answere I say first that the scripture telleth vs of the death of Saint Steuen of S. Ioseph of Moses and others as also of their funerals but not one word of inuocatioÌ„ or adoration done vnto their reliques I say secondly that y e fathers which tel vs of the miracles done by the reliques of saintes doe neither will vs to inuocate nor to adore them I say thirdly that miracles as S. Austen and S. Gregory doe truely write are for infidels and not for the faithfull For which respect they were frequent in the primitiue Church as rare as a white crowe or black swanne in latter daies I say fourthly that God wrought miracles by the reliques of his chosen seruantes aswel to prooue his owne diuine soueraigntie as their true faith in him But not that we should adore dumbe bones and dead ashes or seeke to merite by such pilgrimage I say fiftly that God confirmed the authoritie of Elizaeus by the myracle wrought at the contact of his dead bones that at the sight thereof the people might embrace his doctrine which they contemned in his life time or at least be thereby confounded to their greater condemnation And the same I say of other miracles done by other reliques I say sixtly y t if the good king Ezechias was highly coÌ„mended in the holy scripture because he pulled downe the brasen serpent set vp by Gods appointment so soone as the people committed idolatry by adoring the same worthily are those christian princes commended who prohibite their people from gadding on pilgrimage in popish idolatricall maner albeit y e originall therof was tolerable and a long time free from popish godles superstition I say seuenthly that waters haue natural curatiue qualities in sundrie places as haue also certain herbs stones and metals Which effects some ascribe to the water of Burton though my selfe haue long doubted thereof How soeuer that be to go thither for merite or in way of such satisfaction for our sinnes is flat idolatrie The sixt obiection S. Iustine who liued shortly after the apostles telleth of great honour done vnto reliques as that the bodies of martyrs defended men from the diuels cured many incurable diseases The answere I say first that Iustinus liued more then one hundreth and fiftie yeares after Christ and speaketh nothing at all of adoration Only this he saith that great myracles haue been done at the Sepulchres of martyrs which no learned man can or will denie I say secondly that the questions from whence your obiection came are counterfait and not S. Iustins indeed I prooue it because in the 82. and in the 86. questions I finde mention made of Origen who was borne long after the death of S. Iustinus So likewise in the 127. question mention is made of the Manichees who yet followed long after S. Iustines death CHAP. IX Of Christian righteousnesse or iustification THe Papistes doe not onely dishonour God while they seek to establish their owne righteousnesse but withall they slander good and true christians auouching them to be contemners of good workes but how blasphemous they be on the one side and howe malitious on the other shall sufficiently appeare by these briefe conclusions The first conclusion Man albeit hee was so created as hee might sinne and die which thing the euent it selfe declared yet was he so adorned and beautified with supernaturall giftes and graces aswel external as internal that he might haue liued eternally and haue eschewed all sinne world without end This conclusion I thus proue That man might haue liued euer if he had not sinned is euident by Gods owne wordes when he saith Thou shalt eate freely of euery tree of the garden but of the tree of knowledge of good and euill thou shalt not eate of it for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt die the death And againe in another place after that he had pronounced the earth cursed for Adams sinne he vttered these words For out of it wast thou taken because thou art dust and to dust shalt thou returne By which wordes it appeareth that if hee had not transgressed he should not haue died S. Austen confirmeth the same in these wordes Quapropter fatendum est primos homines ita fuisse institutos vt si non peccassent nullum mortis experirentur genus Wherefore wee must confesse that our first parentes were so created that vnlesse they had sinned they shoulde haue felt no kinde of death neither of soule nor of body Death saith S. Bernard shoulde neuer haue followed if sinne had not gone before S. Chrysostome gathereth this conclusion out of the expresse text of Genesis These are his wordes Factus enim est mortalis propter praeuaricationem vt ex hoc mandato his quae sequuta sunt claret Sequitur itaque ante praeuaricationem immortales erant alioqui post cibum non hoc supâ—licij loco imposuisset For he became mortall by reason of transgression as is euident by this commandement and that which followeth after Therefore they were immortal before the transgression otherwise after the eating thereof this punishment should not haue been imposed vpon them He confirmeth the same in another place where he writeth thus Cum Adam peccasset corpus illius confestim mortale ac passibile factum est plurimosque recepit naturales defectus So soone as Adam had sinned his bodie forthwith became mortall and passible and receiued many natural defects That Adam might haue liued without al kind of sin is likewise manifest by y e scripture which saith that God made man
in this chapter the fourth to the Romaines I note thirdly that faith is counted our righteousnesse Which the apostle expresseth more liuely in the fift verse But to him that worketh not saith hee but beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Loe not the worker but the beleeuer is iustified and that by imputation The same apostle after a long discourse to prooue that a man is iustified by faith onely in another place addeth these words We therfore think y t a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law Loe the holy apostle after a long disputation which is implied in the worde therefore concludeth that we are iustified by faith without works As if he had said sole faith only faith or faith without works doth iustifie albeit the papistes cannot or will not it see This whole processe is confirmed by the vniforme testimonies of the auncient fathers who all ascribe our iustification to sole faith S. Ambrose hath these wordes Iustificati sunt gratis quia nihil operantes neque vicena reddentes sola fide iustificati sunt dono Dei They are iustified freely because they neither doing any worke nor making any compensation are iustified by sole faith through the grace of God The like sayinges hee hath in sundry other places S. Chrysostome hath these wordes Vnum hoc tantummodo donum Deo obtulimus quod futura nobis promittenti credimus atque hac solum via seruati sumus This one only gift do we present to God that we beleeue him when he promiseth vs future giftes and by this only way are we saued Againe in another place he writeth thus Aut fidem dicit decretum illam vocans Ex sola quippe fide nos saluauit Or hee meaneth faith calling it the decree For by only faith hath he saued vs. S. Hilarie hath these wordes Mouet scribas remissum ab homine peccatum hominem enim tantum in Iesu Christo contuebantur remissum ab eo quod lex laxare non poterat Fides enim sola iustificat It vexeth the Scribes that man forgiueth sinnes for they onely considered Christ Iesus to be man and that he forgaue that which the law could not doe For sole faith doth iustifie S. Basill hath these words Nam ea demum perfecta omnimodae gloriatio est in Deo quando neque propter suam ipsius quis extollitur iustitiam sed agnoscit se quidem verae destitui iustitia verùm sola in Christum fide iustificatum esse For that is the perfite ioy al maner of comfort we haue in God when no man is puffed vp by reason of his owne righteousnesse but acknowledgeth himselfe to be destitute of true iustice in deed and seeketh to be iustified by sole faith in Christ. Origen writeth in this maner Dicit sufficere solius fidei iustificationem ita vt credens quis tantummodo iustificetur etiamsi nihil ab eo operis fuerit expletum He saith that the iustification of sole faith is sufficient so as a man may be iustified if he only beleeue although hee doe no workes at all And the same Origen prooueth in the same place by a long and learned discourse that wee are iustified by sole faith and not by workes S. Austen is plaine in this point who writeth in this maner Opus autem fidei ipsa dilectio est And charitie it selfe is the worke of faith What plainer testimonie can be had what papist can inuent any solution for the same who but mad men will not yeeld thereunto August in Epist. Ioann tract 10. in initio The 6. conclusion The good works of y e regenerate do neither merite grace in this life nor glory in the world to come This conclusion is against a graund and mightie article in popishe doctrine but I will prooue it by strong and irrefragable reasons S. Paul writeth to the Romaines in these wordes the afflictions of this present time are not worthy of the glory which shalbe shewed vnto vs. The workes of the regenerate saith S. Paul as ye see are not worthy of heauen They cannot therefore say I merite heauen because as the papists themselues doe graunt to merite heauen and to be worthy of heauen is all one the difference is onely in wordes not in sense The papists perceiuing the force of this argument vse this seely euasion although say they the actions of man be not worthie of heauen neither merite grace as they proceed from mans free-will yet are they worthie of heauen and meritorious as they proceede from the holy ghost But this is a friuolous childish and miserable shift onely inuented by the suggestion of Satan to seduce simple soules For first our workes are only ours as they proceed of and from our selues Secondly when the holy ghost and man worke both one and the same work that which the holy Ghost doth can no more be deemed mans act then that which man doth can be deemed Gods act yet so it is that y t which man doth cannot be deemed Gods Ergo neither that which God doth can be deemed mans The assumption wherein resteth the difficultie if there be any at all is manifest by mans sinfull actions For the most cruell act that can be imagined is not done without the concourse of the holy ghost as all learned papistes doe and must confesse Neuerthelesse mans sinfull actes are so farre from being Gods actes as the deformities and irregularities thereof be onely mans and neuer Gods and yet doth God concurre more effectually to those wicked acts in that he is the principall agent of the real and positiue entities thereof then man doth or can concurre to any act of Gods that is to any good act himselfe doth Note well for God is the creator of the diuell as he is an angel but not as hee is such an aungell and euen so is God the authour of mans acts as they be acts but not as such acts This place of the Apostle is handled more at large in my book of Motiues I my self saith the Apostle in my mind serue the law of god but in my flesh the law of sin Out of which words I note first that Saint Paul speaketh of the regenerate throughout this whole chapter because hee nameth himselfe who was Gods chosen and elect vessel For which respect and the like expressed in this seauenth chapter to the Romaines S. Austen changed his opinion and granted the apostle to speake here of the regenerate I note secondly that the elect regenerate do serue the law of sinne I note thirdly that the best liuers are so far from meriting grace of glorie that they deserue in rigour of iustice eternal death because death is the rewarde of sinne Which for that Saint Augustine coulde not well digest at the first he thoght that S. Pauls words in this chapter were to be vnderstoode of the
Fiftly that by reason thereof whosoeuer saith he hath no sinne is a flat lyer Sixtly that how vertuously soeuer we liue yet must we desire God to forgiue vs our sinnes by reason of this concupiscence Seauenthly that wee must thus pray euen after all sinnes be forgiuen vs in our baptisme The fourth place of Saint Austen Si in parente baptizato potest esse peccatum non esse cur eadem ipsa in prole peccatum est Adhaec respondetur dimitti concupisceÌ„tiam carnis in baptismo non vt non sit sed vt in peccatum non imputetur If it be demanded how concupiscence can be without sinne in the parent that is baptised and yet be sinne in the childe I answere that concupiscence is forgiuen in baptisme yet not so that it remaineth not still but that it be not imputed for sinne Thus saith Saint Austen in which words he sheweth plainely that concupiscence remaineth as well in the baptised parent as in the vnbaptised childe yet with this difference that it is sinne in the parent though not for sinne imputed but in the child it is both sinne and so reputed The fift place of Saint Austen Ideo apostolus non ait facere bonuÌ„ sibi non adiacere sed perficere Multumâ—n boni facit qui facit quod scriptuÌ„ est postconcupiscentias tuas non eas sed non perficit quia non implet quod scriptum est non concupisces The Apostle therefore saith not that he hath not power to do good but that he can not perfect that which is good For he doth great good who doth that which is written follow not thy lustes but he doth not perfect his well doing because he fulfilleth not that which is written Thou shalt not lust Thus saith S. Austen Out of whose words I note first that S. Austen speaketh these words of the regenerate for they onely can do good as is already prooued I note secondly that though the regenerate can do good and striue against lust yet can they not do that good so perfectly but it is alwayes annexed to sinne and chayned with it as with an heauie yokefellow I note thirdly and I wish the reader to marke well my words that the tenth commaundement which is thou shalt not lust prohibiteth not onely actuall lust done with consent but also originall lust without consent and consequently that concupiscence remayning in the regenerate is sinne properly and formally I prooue it because S. Paule could not performe this precept as S. Austen truely and learnedly obserued and yet concerning actuall consent S. Paule was free and innocent as who fought mightely against his concupiscence and would in no wise yeeld vnto the same He was therefore guiltie by reason of originall concupiscence which abode in him against his will To will is present with me sayth S. Paule but I finde no meanes to perfourme that which is good for I do not the good thing which I would but the euill which I would not that do I. Now if I do that I would not it is no more I that do it but the sinne that dwelleth in me Loe the holy Apostle confesseth plainely that he sinneth against his will and that by reason of originall concupiscence which remayned in him after Baptisme S. Austen singeth the same song and yet our Papists will not haue it sinne and why because forsooth it ouerthroweth their holy iustifications their inherent purities their condigne merites their mutuall satisfactions and their pharisaicall supererogations And yet Petrus Lombardus their worthie maister of Sentences whose booke to this day is publikely read in their schooles of Diuinity vtterly condemneth their hereticall doctrine in this point these are his expresse words Secundum animas vero iam redempti sumus ex parte non ex toto à culpa non à poena nec omninò à culpa non enim ab ea sic redempti sumus vt non sit sed vt noÌ„ dominetur But touching our soules we are redeemed in part not wholy from the fault not from the paine neither wholy from the sinne or fault For we are not so redeemed from it that it be not in vs but that it rule not ouer vs. Thus writeth the venerable popish master our reuerend father Lombarde out of whose words wee may gather with facility so much as wil serue our turn against al papists For first he saith y t we are redemed in part but not in al. SecoÌ„dly that we are not wholy redeemed froÌ„ sin Thirdly he telleth vs how and in what maner we be redeemed from sin to wit that albeit sin stil remaine in vs yet hath it not such dominion ouer vs as it can enforce vs to consent thereunto The second obiection If concupiscence were sinne in the regenerate it would make them guiltie of eternall death and yet are they free from all condemnation as witnesseth the Apostle The answer I answere that concupiscence as wel as other sinnes is apt of it owne nature to condemne vs but God of his mercie doth neither impute it nor other sinnes of humane frailtie vnto the faithfull for the merits of Christ Iesus The first replie Euery thing as the Philosophers truely say hath the denomination of the formalitie thereof but doubtlesse the formalitie of original sinne is taken away in baptisme other else in vaine were infants baptised and so there onely remaineth the materialitie as the schooles tearme it that is a certaine rebellion and inclination to sinne-ward The answere I answere that the formalitie of original sin is of two sorts or double to wit the guilte and the deordination The former by which the partie that sinneth is bound to paine temporal eternall is remitted by grace and baptisme in this life The latter which is a certaine disorder and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the mind wil and actions of man continueth stil euen to the last houre The second replie Naturall things neither make vs worthie of praise nor of dispraise as the Philosophers all grant but certes concupiscence in man is natural and so can it not be sinne The answere I answere that concupiscence as it is naturall indeede and giuen to man as man in the state of innocencie is ordinate agreeable to reason and altogether without sinne but concupiscence as it is connatural to corrupt man is inordinate rebellious against the spirit and altogether sinful in Gods sight The third replie S. Austen in one place saith plainely that originall concupiscence is no sinne vnlesse wee consent vnto it These are the words Quanto magis absque culpa est in corpore non consentientis si absque culpa est in corpore dormientis Howe much more is it without sin in the bodie of him that consenteth not if it be without sinne in his body that is a sleepe The answere I answer that S. Austen meaneth nothing lesse then to denie concupiscence to be sin for
vnder the obedience of the law bound to frame their liues according to the prescript rule thereof as other scripture maketh mention The replie How can any man frame his life after the prescription of the law if none liuing can keepe the law as you defend The answere I answere that if yee were well studied in your owne doctors and should marke well what they write yee coulde not be ignorant of this point Harken therefore what your owne Bernard saith and after you haue heard him remember well his words and neuer forget his holy instruction Thus writeth he in one place Cupiebat dissolui cum Christo esse sciens quòd peccatum separans inter nos deum penitùs auferri non poterit donec liberemur à corpore Sequitur itaque dico vobis genus illud peccati quod toties conturbat nos concupiscentias loquor desideria mala reprimi quidem debet potest per gratiam dei vt non regnet in nobis nec demus membra nostra arma iniquitatis peccato sic nulla damnatio esthis qui sunt in Christo Iesu sed non eiicitur nisi in morte quando sic discerpimur vt anima sepaietur à corpore The Apostle did couet to be dissolued and to be with Christ knowing that sinne which maketh a diuision betweene God and vs cannot wholy bee taken away while we remaine in this bodie I therefore say vnto you this kind of sin which so often troubleth vs I speake of concupiscence and euill desires ought may be repressed by the grace of God so as it raigne nâ—t in vs nor we giue our members to be weapons of iniquitie vnto sinne and so there is no damnation to those that are in Christ Iesus but it is not cast out saue only in death when wee are so torne that the soule is diuided from the body Thus he saith in another place Sit ergo in corde iustitia iustitia quae ex fide est Haec enim sola habet gloriam apud deum Sit etiam in ore confessio ad salutem securus iam suscipe eum qui in Bethlehem Iudae nascitur Iesum Christum filium Dei Let righteousnes therefore be in thine heart euen that iustice which is of faith for onely that righteousnesse or iustice hath glorie with God howsoeuer righteousnes be esteemed among men Haue also confession in thy mouth vnto saluation and then receiue him with security that is borne in Bethlehem of Iuda Iesus Christ the sonne of God Thus he saith in the third place Omne quod natum est ex Deo non peccat sed hoc dictum est de praedestinatis ad vitam non quòd omnino non peccent sed quòd peccatum ipsis non imputetur All that is borne of god sinneth not but this is spoken of the predestinate to life not because they sin not at al but for that sin is not imputed to them Thus doth he say in the fourth place Vtique quod factum est non potest non fieri ipso tamen non imputante erit quasi non fuerit Quod propheta quoque considerans ait Beatus vir cui non imputabit Dominus peccatum The sinne doubtlesse that is done can not be vndone yet for that God doth not impute sin vnto vs we shal be as if we had not sinned which the prophet considering saith Blessed is the man to whome God shall not impute sinne Out of these foure places conteining most comfortable and christian doctrine I note first that concupiscence remaineth in the regenerate euen vnto death I note secondly that it is properly sinne euen in the regenerate which being vttered by their owne deere Bernard giueth a deadly wound to the papists For he saith that that concupiscence which remaineth to death doth separate vs from God Which effect nothing but that which is properly sinne can possibly worke in man I note thirdly that although this concupiscence can not be taken awaie from the regenerate vntil death yet may it be so repressed by Gods spirite as it shall not raigne in them or haue dominion ouer them I note fourthly that it bringeth not damnation to the regenerate who striue against it and that because God doth not impute it to sinne I note fiftly that the regenerate are saide not to sinne not because they sinne not or haue no sinne indeede but because God of his meere mercie accepting their faith through the merits of Christ Iesus doth not impute sinne vnto them I note sixtly that no iustice but that which is of faith is or can be acceptable in Gods sight Ioyne these sayings of saint Bernard to the testimonie of saint Austen cited in the answer to the first obiection in the seuenth conclusion and that done a mightie article of popish doctrine will be vtterlie ouerthrowne The sixt obiection Wherefore saith S. Peter labour the more that by good works you may make sure your vocation and election Therefore good workes are a meane for vs to attaine to the effect of Gods predestination that is to life euerlasting as whose certainetie if the apostle say truelie is procured by mans freewil and good workes The answer I say first that God did elect and predestinate vs without regard of our works For as the apostle saith he chose vs in Christ before y e foundatioÌ„ of the world not bicause we were holy but that we should be holy I say secoÌ„dly that the words by good works are not in the originall Greek text but only in the popish latin vulgata editio For which like respects your late Tridentine council hath so magnified the same I say thirdly that good works are the proper effects of predestinatioÌ„ electioÌ„ and therfore are a sure testificaton therof in y e sight iudgement of man And if your translation be admitted wherin I wil not contend because y e sense is not much different yet can there no more be inferred vpon y e words vnlesse some wil say that the effect can go before the cause that which foloweth be the cause of that that went before But both their owne doctour Aquinas and their double glossa interlinialis and ordinaria doe giue the same exposition with mee to wit that the apostle willeth vs to make knowne our eleccion by doing of good works as which yeeld to man a morall certitude thereof The seauenth obiection Saint Paul willeth the Philippians to worke their saluation with feare and trembling but doubtlesse he that can worke his saluation may by his works merite heauen The answere I say first with the selfesame apostle in the next verse following that we are so far from meriting heauen by our works that it is God which worketh in vs both the will and the deede euen of his good pleasure Yea as he saith in another place we are saued by grace through faith that neither of our selues nor yet
say secondly that Gods ministers bind and loose sins by preaching his sacred word of which kind of binding and loosing Christ speaketh in Saint Matthew and in Saint Iohn For when the people of God beleeue in their hearts his word sincerely preached and in their conuersation shew the liuely fruits thereof then doubtlesse are their sinnes loosed on earth and then is that loosing also ratified in heauen then are the wordes of the Apostle verified who saith that the gospel of Christ is the power of God vnto saluation to euery one that beleeueth it then are Christs ministers as the Apostle saith become in them the sauour of life vnto life On the contrarie side when the people will not heare and beleeue Gods worde sincerely preached but contemne it and the ministers thereof then doubtlesse are their sinnes bound on earth and then is that binding also approued in heauen Then are the apostles words verified who saith that vengeance is readie against all disobedience Then are Christes ministers as y e apostle saith made vnto them the sauour of death vnto death What can be a more ioyfull loosing what can be a more terrible binding See the aunswere to the third obiection following and there marke S. Hieromes words I say thirdly that our people cōfesse their sins generally before the minister in the face of the whole congregation according to the holy scriptures Yea in the reformed churches abroad the people vse to confesse to the ministers such speciall sins as most greeue clog their consciences and for which they need graue aduise and godly councell Which christian libertie is graunted also in our churches of England For such as list may confesse their sinnes to the minister priuately and haue both his godly aduise and absolution if he deeme them penitent for their sinnes The replie Your confessions are nothing els but a meere mockery for ye confesse your selues generally to be sinners but ye name no sins at all Againe as in Germany they confesse some sinnes so do they leaue vnconfessed what pleaseth them And this is the scornful libertie which ye grant to your churches of England The answere I say first that we confesse our sinnes this day as the Israelites of olde confessed their sinnes before Ezra and the Leuites As the humble publican confessed his sins when he said O God be mercifull to me a sinner As the prophet Dauid confessed his sins when he said I know mine iniquities and my sin is euer before me Against thee against thee only haue I sinned and done euill in thy sight that thou maist be iust when thou speakest and pure when thou iudgest As the prodigal son confessed his sins when he said Father I haue sinned against heauen before thee am no more worthy to be called thy son And as your selues confesse your sins in the beginning of euery masse I say secondly that your selues graunt that Venials need no confession at al. And yet as I haue already proued the least sin of al deserueth eternall death For thus doth your own famous Canonist write Quibus consequens est posse quem si velit confesso vno peccato veniali alterum tacere Vpon which it followeth that one may if he list confesse one veniall sinne and conceale another Maior and other Schoole-doctors are of the same opinion I say thirdly that by the scriptures vpon which ye woulde gladly ground your confession we are no lesse bound to confesse one sin then another For your triuolous distinction of mortall and veniall sinnes can be found in no text of holy scripture And consequently since the scripture it selfe by your graunt freeth vs from confessing Venials it followeth directly that wee are bound to confesse none at all I say fourthly that your confession is ridiculous indeede as which vrgeth the penitent to confesse those sinnes to sinful men which God of his mercy hath forgiuen already I prooue it because your best approoued writers hold that contrition onely reconcileth sinners to God and taketh away both the fault and the paine But after that we are reconciled to God by only cōtrition and haue both our sinnes and the satisfaction remitted I weene it is a vain and a ridiculous thing to afflict our selues for popish absolution This that I say is witnessed by Martinus Nauarrus by your learned frier Ioan. Lud. Viualdus and diuers others I say fiftly that your confessions are neuer able to bring peace to any troubled conscience but to driue them headlong into desperation For first none liuing is able to make a true confession of all his sinnes which thing is so cleere by the Scriptures that your Cardinall Caietane cannot denie it Secondly thousandes are so turmoiled therewith that dayly they come to confesse the sinnes which they had forgotten condemning themselues of their former negligence Thirdly none of you all can prescribe howe much time or what diligence is inough y t ones confession may be perfit The consideratiō wherof bringeth many thousand souls to perplexitie For you beare thē in hand y t they must confesse all mortal sins and all specificall differences of the same And yet will I gage my life that ye haue ten thousand priestes in Europe yea perhaps in Italie that cannot perceiue the aforesaid differēce and much lesse can the lay people performe it See more hereof in my booke of Motiues The 2. obiection S. Iohn the baptist induced the people to the confession of their sinnes which doubtlesse was not to confesse themselues in generall to be sinners but to vtter euery man his sinnes So is it said in the actes of the apostles that many of them which beleeued came confessing and declaring their deeds And therfore saith S. Hierome that priestes binde and loose Auditâ peccatorum varietate hauing heard the varietie of sinnes The answere I say first that S. Iohn the baptist cannot meane of your sacramentall confession because it was not instituted before his decollatiō But you make smal accompt to wrest the holy scripture if by any meanes it could so serue your turne For as your graund doctor Pighius resembled it to a nose of waxe euen so in good sooth ye seeme to vse it The trueth is this S. Iohn exhorting the people to repentance and to amendment of their former liues euil spent found so good successe in his preaching that Hierusalem and all Iurie and all the countrey about Iordan were desirous to be baptized and in signe of their true repentance they publickly acknowledged their sinnes But that they this did in generall termes and not in popish maner I prooue it by two reasons First because popish auricular confession was not yet inuented but after Christes resurrection as all papistes graunt Againe because one man could not possibly heare seuerally the generall confessions of so manie multitudes speciallie in so short a time I say secondly that with