wher of the high Priest was a figure Neither was the citie of refuge appointed onelie for the triall of the slaughter whether it were willinglie or vnwillinglie committed as you saie but also for a kinde of punishment and detestation of manslaughter so that if the sleaer were found out of the City before the death of the high Priest the auenger of blood might kill him and not be charged with his blood Where you refuse the mysterie of Christes death in the death of the high Priest and flie to the fantasies of the Iewes you declare that you care not what you bring so you maie obtaine your purpose But Chri stian diuines as Cyrillus Maximus and others of the death of the high priest in that place gather deliuerance by the death of Christ. Saint Ambrose also is cleere that the high Priest in this place signifieth Iesus Christ and confuteth the politike reasons by you rehearsed out of R. Mose and R. Leui for that in causis paribus there was impar euentus In equal causes vnequall end For the high Priest might die saith he the next daie after the manslaier hath taken his refuge Againe he addeth that Christ is exors omnium voluntariorum accidentium delictorum void of all offences voluntarie and chaunceable by which he acknowledgeth vnwilling manslaughter to be an offence Saint Ierome also Dialog aduers. Pel. lib. 1. is plaine in that wholl case and sinne of ignorance and that he which is fled to the citie must tarie vntill the high Priest die that is vntill he be redeemed by the blood of our Sauiour Beda also vpon this place by his allegorie sheweth how he thought of that kinde of sinne Also Theodoretus in lib. Num. quaest 51. declareth both the mysterie of the high Priests death and sheweth that such vnwilling manslaughter is sinne Cur ad obitum Pontificis praescribet eireditum qui nolens interfecit Qnia 〈◊〉 Pontificis secundùm ordinem Melchisedech erat humani peccati solutio Whte vntill the death of the high Priest doth he prescribereturne vnto him which hath slaine a man vnwillinglie Because the death of the high Priest after the order of Melchisedech was the loosing of the sinne of man and so forth to the same effect And if all the politike reasons be graunted of the mans tarying vntill the high Priest die yet the mysterie of Christes death is not thereby taken away whoos 's blood clenseth vs from all sinne voluntarie or vnuoluntarie The last fault of the definition is that the Iesuites acknowledge not the sinne of ignorance you answer they do of that ignorance whereof a man him-selfe is the cause but not of that ignorance which the schoolemen call inuincible which is not in the doers power to auoid nor he fell into it by his owne defaulte as in the example of the Queenes subiect being in his Princes affaires in India and commaunded by proclamation in Westminster to appeare there at a certaine daie in which cause his absence is excused by inuincible ignorance This case graunted betweene the Prince and his subiect prooueth not that ignorance excuseth before God because there is not the like reason seeing no such ignorance whereby a man should transgresse the law of God is in man but by voluntarie and witting transgression of the first man and his owne negligence which maketh his fact sinfull because he is cause of his ignorance by negligence or in the sinne of Adam in whome you confesse that all men sinned At least wise if originall sinne be voluntarie by the sinne of Adam so also is the transgression of gods law in these cases of inuincible ignorance wittinglie committed by the same sinne of Adam Augustine whome you quote for your purpose speaketh of naturallignorance and infirmitie which is in insants not of that whereby men fall into error and so transgresse Gods law For that he calleth penall ignorance and difficultie which is iustlie laid vpon them that neglected to seeke knowledge and is sinfull therefore cannot excúse sinne Chrisostome whome you quote likewise is manifestly against you his wordes are these Quòdsi ea ignoraueris quae scriri non possunt praeter culpam eris siverò quae scitu possibilia sunt facilia extremas poenas merito dabis If thou be ignorant of those thinges which are not possible to beknowne thoushalt be blamles but if they be possible and easie to be knowne thou shalt worthelie suffer extreame punishment As in the cases of Abimelech with Abrahams wife and Iacob with Lea who if they had made diligent inquirie needed not to haue beene deceiued through ignorance Neither doth God excuse Abimelech from sinne altogether as you saie albeit he pardoned his ignorance and kept him from the fact of adulterie acknowledged his minde to haue beene free from the purpose of Adulterie For the punishmeut laid vpon him argueth what he deserued by his ouer hastie purpose of mariage with Sara and Abimelech confesseth that Abraham had brought vpon him and his Kingdom a great sinne Also when God saith to him I haue kept thee thatthou shouldest not sinne against me he declareth plainlie that if Abimelech had lien with Sara vpon that ignorance he had sinned against God But of Iacobslying with Lea in steade of Rachell you mooue a greater contention and alledge Saint Augustine in his defense But whosoeuer gaue you your notes through your negligence in not reading the places your selfe made you erre through ignorance For S. Augustine doth notin all those Chapters once touch the question whether Iacob sinned in that he did not regarde what woman was laid in his bedde by which negligence as Master Charke saith he might haue committed most horribleincest with his mother aunt or daughter Onelie he defendeth his Polygamie by the custome of that time and the contention of his wiues for their lodgeing with him and last of all allegorizeth vpon the wholl storie drawing the error of Iacob and all the rest to a mysterie Nor yet de ciuit dei lib. 16. c. 38. doth he defend his negligence rehearsing onelie how he came to haue foure wiues when he went into Mesopotamia for one onelie adding that because he had lyen with Lea vnwittinglie he did not put her awaie lest he might be thought to haue mocked her Neither hath Iustinus Martyr lib. de verit Christ. rel anie defense of Iacobs innocencie or excuse of his negligence in this fact but sheweth onelie what mysterie maie be gathered of his marriages as Saint Augustine doth Finallie Theodores your last auncient witnes agreeing with the rest saith that Iacob betrothed onelie Rachell and beside the purpose of his will had to doe with Lea. But immediatelie assoone as he perceiued the deceit he tooke it heauilie and complained to his father in law what word of defense or excuse of his fact committed through ignorance negligence haue you in this saying yet you conclude after your vaunting mannner And what one
to vs. So that after that daie no sinnes mortal could ordinariely be loosed but by theÌ„ that sacrament which in their ministery he then did institute FVLKE Now you come towarde the point when you promis to let vs see how your popish confession is of Christes institution It dependeth you saie directly vpon Christes owne wordes whose sinnes you doe forgiue c. That would we faine see how For you your selfe though you make a very disorderly syliogisme cannot tel which way to infer it vpon your premises But thus you reason If Christ gaue power to Priestes to forgiue or retaine sinnes then there must needes be some subiect to their power and iudgement I answere you that euery power draweth not a iudgement with it and therefore you foist in the word iudgement vnreasonablie although I graunt also a kinde of iudgement vnto them and that men are subiect to this power and iudegment of the ministers by whome is declared the infallible sentence of God Then saie you it is a cleare case that in the verie same words that power was deliuered to them the bond of obedience was also prescribed to vs. Of what obedience I pray you that we should obay them in any thing they shal speake or only when they speake in the word of the Lord If the latter only for no man wil graunt the former shew vs if you be able the Lords word and commaundement for sacramental confessoÌ„ as you terme it to be necessary Your conclusion hangeth as wel by your premises as confession dependeh vpon Christs words That after that date no sins mortall could ordinarilie be loosed 〈◊〉 by them and in that sacrament which in their ministery he then did institute All sin is mortall and deseruing death The wages of sinne saith the Apostle is death But your conclusion is confuted by your selfe afterward graunting sinnes to be remitted by baptisme and as for other sacraments I dare saie you will not exempt them but that sinnes are forgiuen by them And that which is the chiefe matter in controuersie namelie that a sacrament was there and then instituted you alwaies affirme but neuer are able to prooue And whereas you affirme that the necessitie of auricular confession standeth not vpon positiue lawes but by Christes institution it is maruell that this institution should so manie hundreth yeares be vnknowne in the Church The Master of the sentences can saie nothing for it but alledgeth diuers authorities to and froe and in the end hath no certaine argument to perswade vs that it is of Christes institution Gratian likewise in his decrees after diuers testimonies producted on both sides whether it be necessarie or no concludeth in these words Quib authoritatibus vel quibuslibetrationum firmamentis vtroque sententia satisfactionis confessionis innitatur in medium breuiter exposuimus cui autem harum 〈◊〉 adhaerendum sit 〈◊〉 is iudicio referatur viraque enim 〈◊〉 habet sarientes religi osor viros Vpon what authorites and what fundations of reasons both the iudgement of satisfaction and confession doth leane we haue briefely brought forth and declared But to whether of these we ought chieflie to sticke it is reserued to the iudgement of the reader for either of both opinions hath wise and religious men fauorers of it If the Romish Church in Gratianstime had receiued the opinion of the necessitie of shrift to a Priest to be grounded vpon the institution of Christ neither he nor the Master of the sentences would haue bin in such a mamering about it wherfore it appeereth to be but young ware the institution whereof was so vncertaine to those principal pillers of popery In so much that the glosse vpoÌ„ the 5. aistinct In penitentia was bolde to vtter these wordes which should haue prooued him an heretike if the popish Churh in his time had held that confession was of Christs institution and not vpon any positiue laws In hac distinctione in aliis duabus sequentibus agitur 〈◊〉 de illa parte poenitentiae que dicitur oris confessio operis satisfactio quà m de aliis ider videndum est 〈◊〉 oris confessio fuerit instituta virum necessaria sit vel 〈◊〉 voluntaria qualiter sit facienda cui et quando dicunt quidam institutam fuisse in Paradiso 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 peccatum dicente Donino ad Adam Adam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ideo enim 〈◊〉 vt ipso conficente peccatum 〈◊〉 sorma aliis in posterum confitendi Sed quoniam in ille interrogatione dominus minùs expressè videbatur adconfirendum 〈◊〉 idro post exquisiuit á Cain fratricida expressiâ—s vbi est Abel frater tuus Alij dicunt quód sub lege primò instituta quando Iosua percepit Aâ—hor â—rimen sâ—um confiteri â—â— lapidatus est 45. dist secundum illud Alij dicunt quód in Novo testamento á Iacobo dicente consitemini alterâ—â—â—um peccata vestra c. Sed melius dicitur eam institutam fuisse a quâ—dâ—m vniuersale Ecclesiae traditione potius quám ex nouo vel veteri testamento authoritâ—s traditio Ecclesiae obligatoria est vt preceptum ait 1.1 di in his rebus Ergo necessaria est confessio in mortalib apud nos apud graecos non quoniam non emanauit apud illos traditio talis 〈◊〉 nec confisiunt in 〈◊〉 sed in firmentatis 5. di cap. 1. si illud ergo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alteruâ—rum peccata vestra 〈◊〉 consilium primó aliâ—â—uin liâ—oret et Grecos non obstanto eorâ—â— consuetudine In this distinction and the other two that follow it is intreated as well of that part of penance that is called confession of the mouth and satisfaction of the worke as of other partes And therefore it is to be seene when confession of the mouth was instituted whether it be necessarie or onelie voluntarie How it is to be made and to whome when Some say it was instituted in paradise immediately after sin committed when the Lord saide vnto Adam Adam where are thou for therefore he enquired that he confessing his sinne a forme of confessing should be giuen to others afterwarde But because in that confession the Lord secmed not so expresselie to haue warned him to confession therefore he enquired afterward of Cain the murtherer of his brother more expresselie where is Abel thy brother Other say it was first instituted vnder the law where Iosua commaunded Achar to confesse his fault and he was stoned 45. di sed illud Other saie that it was instituted in the new Testament by Saint Iames saying confesse your sinnes c. But it is better to saie that it was institutad by a certaine vniuersal tradition of the Church rather then by authoritie out of the new or olde testament And the tradition of the Church is of authoritie to binde as it is commaunded ar 11. di in these things Therefore confession in mortal sinnes is necessarie with vs but not with the Greekes because such tradition hath
and the Pope haue two keies and they but one resolue vs these matters out of the holie scripture and you shall come somewhat nearer your purpose of pardons As for the communion of holie works which is betweene the heade and the members if you meane thereby the workes of men ioyned with the satisfaction or merites of Christ either shew vs where it is taught in the scriptures or giue vs le aue to denie it vntill you can prooue it ALLEN Perchaunce some Protestant will here call vs back and require proofe that there should be anie paine or tempor all correction remaining for those persons which hauetheir sinnes forgiuen by God in the sacrament of Penance or otherwise by the onelie faith of the partie penitent as he maie perhaps surmise If he list to be satisfied in this case let him turne backe and make a short view of the works of God since the beginning and there consider well whether God him-selfe hath not commonlie visited his children receiued to mercie with some correction answerable in respect of his iustice to the greeuousnes of the crime forgiuen Who is so froward or so rude but he may well discerne betwixt the sault of our first Father and the punishment of euerlasting damnation deserued thereby His sinne was one thing his deserued punishment an other thing his sinne was disobedience his punishment correspondent to that was euerlasting death Yet whensoeuer one of these two is forgiuen the other must needes be forgiuen also because he can neither be subiect to damnation whose sinne for which damnation was ordeined is forgiuen neither his fault be forgotten whose euerlasting punishing is pardoned which is the rewarde of sinne But now both these being once through Christ remitted to Adam as we read in the booke of wisedome who perceiueth not that he was for all that long afterward subiect to temporall death and manie other miseries both of this life and of the next beeing onelie punishments appointed by God for the ful satisfying euen of those sinnes which were forgiuen him FVLKE Out of all peraduenture we require proofe not onelie of this point but of manie more positions which you haue barelie affirmed to build your popish pardons vpon them And touching this point we do require proofe not onely that after sinnes and eternal paines remitted there are temporall paines remaining to satisfie Gods iustice but also if there were anie such remaining by what authoritie you should release them I know that often times after sinne remitted God sendeth or suffereth a temporal paine to remaine but that is not for satisfaction of his iustice but for a mercifull chastisement of his fatherlie discipline The punishment due to Gods iustice is eternall damnation for euery sinne as euen the glosse vpon the Extrauagant of Boneface the eight doth acknowledge And when God doth freelie remit the sinne he doth as freelie remit the punishment due for the same For what remaineth to be punished when the sinne is remitted Temporall paines therefore satisfie not his iustice but admonish his children of their ductie and make them carefull not to commit sinne which by his chastisment they are put in minde to be displeasing vnto him The temporall death and miseries that Adam was subiect vnto through his disobedience remained in him and his posteritie not as a satisfaction of Gods iustice for his sinne remitted and satisfied by Christ but as a monument and example of his iustice for sinne and therefore they remaine not onelie in the elect but in the reprobate for an admonition to beware of sinne vnto the Godlie and to take excuse awaie from the wicked of ignorance of Gods punishment for sinne yet are all those punishments vnto the Godie turned into blessings being either made his fatherlie chastisments for their amendment or els occasions of their eternall 〈◊〉 as aduersitie by humbling of them death by deliuering them into the possession of eternall life and therefore is blessednes pronounced both of the one and of the other But that Adam was subiect to anie miseries after this life or in this life as being onelie punishments appointed by God for the 〈◊〉 satisfying euen of those sinnes which were forgiuen him we denie vtterlie For the obedience of Christ was 〈◊〉 full satisfaction for the disobedience of Adam both for him and all Gods elect ofhis posteritie For if by the transgression of one manie haue died much more the grace of God and the free gift in grace which is of one man Iesus Christ hath abounded vnto manie For if through the transgression of one death hath raigned by one much more they which receaue the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousnes shall raigne in life by one Iesus Christ. For as by the disobedience of one man manie were made sinners so by the obidience of one man manie shall be made iust This and much more hath the Apostle to prooue that the redemption of Christ was more bountifull toward them which are iustified thorough faith then the transgression of Adam was rigorous to their condemnation which could not be if anie parte of Gods iustice remained to be satisfied by the punishment of the partie after his sinnes were remitted and he made iust by the redemption and iustification of Christ. Therefore the temporall paines whereto Gods children are subiect after their sinnes remitted are not left for the satisfiing of the iustice of God Or if you will needes contend that they are so left and that the Pope out of the treasure of the Church hath authority to pardon all such punishment or anie parte thereof let him make triall ofhis power in such corporal punishments as God laieth vpon his children for their corrections let him by his pardon release anie man of his sicknes age death if he can do none of these then either these are no punishments due to satisfie Gods iustice or els he hath no such power as is bragged of by dispensing of the treasure of Christes copious redemption to pardon men of all their punishment due to the iustice of God for sinne For if he had such power euerie sick man that receiueth a ple narie pardon à poena culpa should presentlie recouer of his disease yea I maruell how he should die if death be a penaltie due to the iustice of God for sinne which hath such a plentiful indulgence of all paines inioyned or deserued by sinne But if he cannot release one fit of an ague with all the pardons I maruell how he should release a man of all his paines of purgatorie yea spoile all purgatorie at once of all them that suffer paines therin except it be because he hath power onelie ouer that prison which is of his owne building and all that come therin but hath no power at all ouer them vpon whom God laieth any affliction either bodilie or spirituallie ALLEN Looke at the Prophet Dauid whether God corrected him not with temporall scourge after he
acceptus est quemadmodum paulò pòst dicemus omnibus sacrarum literarum candidatis qui adhue nonnihil propter parabolae obstacula haerebant omnem nebulam discussit c. There remained yet not the lest endeuour namelie that we should bring forth examples which wereioined with no parable Therefore we began to thinke of all that we could to vnfolde all that we could but yet none other example came to minde but that is set forth in our commentarie or els whatsoeuer came to minde was like vnto those examples But when the 13. daie drew neere I tell the trueth that so true that though I would conceale it my conscience compelleth me to vtter that which the Lord bestowed vpon me being not ignorant to how great reproches and scornes I lay forth my selfe when I say the 13. daie of Aprill drew neere me thought as I was a sleepe that with great tediousnes I was againe disputing with the scribe my aduersarie that my mouth was so stopped that my tongue denying her office I was not able to speake out that which I knew to be true which trouble as dreames are wont sometimes to mocke men in the deceitfull night for here I declare no higher matter then a dreame as cōcerning my selfe although it is no light matter that I learned by this dreame thankes be to God to whose onelie glorie I vtter these thinges which vexation I saie seemed to trouble me vehementlie Then sodainlie there seemed an admonisher to be present with me whether he were blacke or white I do not at all remember for I tell a dreame which said why dost thou not thou coward answere him that which is written Exod. 12. For it is the paschall which is the passeouer of the Lord. Immediatlie as this sight appeered I awoke withall and leapt out of my bed And first I considered the place in the Seauentie Interpreters on euerie side and thereof before the wholl congregation I preached as well as I could Which sermon when it was heard as soone after we shall declare draue awaie all mist or want of vnderstanding from all those that were studentes in the holie Scriptures which vnto that time did somewhat doubt because of the obiection of the parable Thus farre Zuinglius by whose wordes you may easelie perceiue what proofes he receiued of his Doctrine of the Sacrament of a spirit by night as our defender saieth when he sheweth onelie that he was admonished by Gods prouidence in a dreame ofthat example Exod. 12. in which the trope or figure is manifest being also in the doctrine institution of a sacrament whereunto the Lords supper doth most properly answere which is vsed in the words of the Lords supper this is my body without anie such parable as was obiected vnto him in the other examples Where he saith that he remembreth not whether the aduertiser were white or blacke he meaneth no more as all men that know the prouerbe must confesse but that he remembreth not what he was whether knowne to him or vnknowne of whom he dreamed that he receiued that example The same prouerbe he vseth not long before in the same discourse of him that disputed against him who whether he was white or blacke that is what manner of man he was he would not describe Surius quarelleth against him that he would attribute so much to a dreame when otherwise he will admit nothing but holie scriptures whereas euerie reasonable man may see that he admitteth no Doctrine vpon the bare credit of a dreame or of the admonisher were he whit or blacke but is onelie put in minde by a dreame of a place of holie Scripture that serued to stoppe his aduersaries mouth and to remooue all doubt from them that were nouices in the studie of the scripture And this is a thing that manie times commeth to passe that a man which earnestlie studieth of anie matter shall in his dreame be admonished of some better waie then he could thinke of waking Which when he hath considered to be the best for anie good purpose he neede not to doubt but that it came vnto him by the prouidence of God without being afraide to follow it because he thought of it first in a dreame What Luther thought of Zuinglius it skilleth not seeing as he was stiffe in his error of the carnall manner of presence so he was apt both to thinke and speake worse then the trueth was of all them that held the contrarie The last two were Caluine and Beza of whome it is needles to saie anie more then hath alreadie beene setforth in their defense in print these two yeares with out replie of anie papist Although God be praised the Church of England dependeth neither vpon these not vpon other men further then they were faithfull interpreters of the worde of God according to which our faith is framed and not after the decrees of men Concerning the death of Martine Bucer welknown in England whome the papists abroad as they doe of the rest imagine to haue died a foule death our defender quarrelleth with Master Charke for belying of Lindan and charging him to saie that Lindan auoucheth it where he onelie reporteth as he hearde of certaine worshipfull Marchants of Colene But in trueth Master Charke saieth not that Lindan doth auouch it but onlie that by vttering his false reports he maketh Bucers death as horrible and monstrous as may be suspected Pontacus the popish historian vttereth a like report as the defender confesseth that he died a Iew denying the Messias Surius addeth another tale that he circumcised his sonne begotten of I know not what woman Thus these lying papists heape lies vpon lies and when they haue neither sufficient author nor probabilitie of trueth to beare them out then certaine worshipfull Marchauntes then a certaine graue and most excellent learned man then some of Bucers owne disciples are the reportes vnder which cloake it is an easie matter to forge anie slaunder and turne ouer the enuie of it to the man in the moone in the meane time to burthen men with suspicion of infamie among credulous persons where no proofe of their false accusations can be demaunded and obtained Touching Bucers inconstancie The defender out of Surius and other of that stampe gathereth manie thinges peruerting to vnstedfastnes of iudgement what soeuer Bucer did saie laboring to make vnitie betweene Luther and Zuinglius Charging him also to recant the article of the baptisme of infants to be vnnecessarie as he had written before vpon the third Chapter of Saint Mathewes Gospell and vpon the 26. of Mathew to aske pardon of God and of the Church for that he deceiued so manie with the heresie of Zuinglius as he calleth it Both which matters are meere forgeries for in those commentaries vpon that Gospell which we haue seene there is no such matter Finallie where he affirmeth that Caluine differed from Zuinglius which Master Fulke in all his writings most impudentlie denieth he
in outward signes and elements to be instituted or commission of great matters graunted or charge of singular waight giuen to seruants in absense of their Masters in all such cases plaine speaking by Gods prouidence was euer vsed and by all reason must be vsed or ells man falling into error in the execution of his commission is sufficientlie to be excused because he could not attaine to the meaning of his Masters wordes And yet the wicked of these daies haue found such light in scripture that they haue made our Master Christ to speake one thing and meane the contrarie in the very instiution of Sacraments and haue found figures to delude deseat the world of the necessarie fruit of them al. FVLKE Since you were a Papist you neuer vttered a more fase proposition that in the institution of Sacraments Christs wordes were euer plaine and without colour or figure nor yet a more foolish and vnlearnd assertion For you oppose figure to plainenes and colorablenes As for your Metaphor of colour I will not meddle with it but if you meane thereby as it is commonlie taken for dissimulation I protest that Christ in no speach euer vsed anie As for plainenes he sought when he vsed figures or rhetorical colours Therefore as I graunt that in institution of Sacraments Christs wordes were euer plaine so Ivtterlie denie that in institution of sacraments Christes wordes were neuer figuratiue and I holde him for a verie either ignorant or impudent person that dare affirme the contrarie That the wordes of Christ could not worke with singular efficacie grace and vertue and therewith giue to the ministers iust authoritie for the execution of Christs meaning being vttered in figuratiue speaches parables without infinite error is a brutish affirmation as afterward I wil shewe by manie particular examples In the meane time that which commeth neare to this cause what boie that learneth Moselanes figures will denie that these speaches of binding of loosing of the keies of the kingdome of heauen of Peter being a rocke or stone on which the Church is builded are figuratiue speaches and parables meaning not proper binding loosing keies Rocke or building but parables or thinges like vnto those But against this you obiect with interrogation did God speake parables when he instituted the solemnitie of so manie sacrifices c Yea verilie then did he moste of all speake parables For then he signified that reconciliation was onelie by Christs death whereof all these sacrifices were parables similitudes and figures as the Apostle declareth Heb. 9. verse 9. in plaine wordes And yet it followeth not that euerie word was figuratiue or parabolicall which he vsed in the institution of euerie sacrifice and therefore the seuerall sorte of the beast or creature with the sexe and kinde and other partes of the ceremonie thereto belonging might be in proper tearmes without iustifying of that monstrous paradox that no figuratiue speaches were vsed in the institution of sacraments or that in the institution of sacraments Christs wordes were euer without figure But you vrge vs farther asking whether he did speake parables when the sacrament of the Lambe was to be instituted I hope you plaie not the lad to trifle about the distinction of parables and figures but you meane that he vsed no figuratiue speaches as your first proposition was I answer you he did and that doe I plainelie prooue when he said the Lambe so taken prepared and eaten with haste is the Lordes passeouer where indeede it was a sacrament and signe thereof and not the Lordes passeouer in proper speach Moses also reporting the Lords institution biddeth the people to slaie the passeouer and the people are willed to teach their yonge children ignorant of the end and vse thereof that it is the Lordes passeouer and so diuerse times both in the 12. and 13. Chapters it is repeated that the lambe so slaine is the passeouer of the Lord. Therefore it is plaine that God did vse figuratiue speach in the institution of the Sacrament of the Lambe euen when he did teach the people the vse and end thereof not to obscure the mysterie but by similitude of passing ouer their houses where the posts were sprinckled with the blood more plainelie to expresse and set forth the same You aske the third time whether God did speake by figure to Abraham when he commaunded him to circumcise the male of euerie one of his people Gen. 17 I answere you yea he did speake by figure For when he begane to speake of that matter ver 10. He said this is my couenant betweene me and you and betweene thy seed after the which ye shal keepe that euerie male among you be circumcised Which that you should not doubt to be a figure in the next verse following he expoundeth it saying that circumcision shal be a signe of the couenant that is betweene me and you And verse 13. he saith so shall my couenant be in your flesh for a perpetuall couenant And in the 14. verse the soule of the vncircumcised male shal be rooted out from his people because saith he he hath transgressed or made void my couenant The like demaund you make of the institution of the Sabbaoth which I knowe not whether you number among the sacraments or no. In Gen. 2. where it is said that God rested from all his worke which he had made there is a figure because he ceased onelie from creation but not from gouernment and preseruation of those thinges which he hath made And in the 35. of Exod. whereunto you send vs if you take the wordes of the law without anie figure whosoeuer shall do anie worke on the Sabboth day shal die the death you condemne a great manie whome our sauionr Christ doth excuse not onelie from punishment of death but euen from breach of the cōmaundement Luke 13. 14. Mat. 12. To your last question I answere that he neuer dissembled in the olde lawe or the new but if you vnderstand by speaking on thing and meaning an other figuratiue speaches I saie he often vsed them when anie externall worke was to be practized for euer by charge of his worde among the people as is moste euident in the sacramentes of circumcision and the passeouer therefore your distinction is falsc friuolous for God hath vsed figuratiue speaches often times in the institution of the sacraments not to deceiue the people that they should take one thing for an other but the better to expresse the vertue and effect of them according to the capacitie of the people As in calling the Lambe the pascal they were more liuely put in minde both of the temporall benifit and passing ouer and also of their spirituall deliuerance When circumcision is called the couenant whereof it was a signe the people were admonished what was the spirituall meaning thereof namelie that they should cut of the olde man with all concupiscences of the flesh which God requireth of all them that
had expresselie forgiuen him by the warrant of the Prophet Nathan his greeuous sinnes Consider the case of all Gods elect people how sharpelie they were visited for sinne after it was in them pardoned Marke whether Marie Moises his sister was not punished and separated seuen daies as it were for penance after her brethren had procured her pardon at Gods handes Thus hath God of respect not onelie to mercie but also partlie to iustice so alwaies pardoned that he had consideration of iudgement and righteousnes Now whome should the Church follow in remitting of sinnes but him by whofe power and warrant she doth remit sinnes FVLKE We see that god did chastise the Prophet Dauid and his posterititie with a rodde of man and with a fatherlie correction but his mercie and louing kindnes he neuer tooke from them Neither punished them to satisfie his iustice for their sinne remitted but to make them and other by their example more carefull not to commit sinne in time to come The case of Gods elect people was somewhat otherwise Exod. 32. where although he receiued to mercie the wholl people that they should not be destroied from the face of the earth yet he might of his iustice punish a number of particular persons that were moste rebellious and authors of the defection and Idolatrie Marie the sister of Moses was also punished of God first to humble her and bring her to repentance and that punishment was continued on her for a few daies partlie to exercise her in earnest and hartie repentance partlie to admonish the people by her example to beware of murmuring against Gods ministers their lawfull magistrates not in respect of anie satisfaction of Gods iustice which can receiue none but a ful sufficient satisfaction in his beloued sonne Iesus Christ. Wherefore if the Church will follow God in remission of sinnes she must remit them freelie as God doth in Iesus Christ forgiue vs for so Saint Paull meaneth that men should forgiue one another their trespasses and not to remit the fault and retaine the paine except it be in case where men are appointed by God to execute paines as the Magistrates are or to practize discipline as the Church is in which case the Church may not think to satisfy Gods iustice but to seek reformation of the offender and to prouide for the example of others ALLEN Seeing God then him-selfe after he hath by his owne means and absolute power pardoned mans faultes and discharged him of the sentence of death and damnation had yet enioyned penance as when he said to Adam In the sweate of thy browes thou shalt prouide for thy liuing And to Eue. Thou shalt in paine bring forth thy Children And to them both that they should die the temporall death though they might escape by his mercie euerlasting miserie seeing this we neede not to doubt but temporall punishment often remaineth after the sinnes be remitted and that the Church of God doth imitate moste conuenientlie the saied mercie enioyned with iustice in all her most righteous practize of pardoning and punishing sinne in Christes behalfe by whose iurisdiction she herein holdeth But for the further proofe of the matter I haue saide much in the defense of Purgatotie and this question properlie of Purgatotie and this question properlie perteineth to 〈◊〉 place FVLKE That temporall punishment is laied vpon men often times although their sinnes be remitted it is no question but whether such punishment be a satisfaction to the iustice of God or a fatherlie discipline of his mercie that is the matter in controuersie The Church therefore in exercising the discipline of God vpon offendours may and ought to imitate the example of god but then shee must beware of two things the one that she laie no other burthen of punishment vpon the offendours then the worde of God will warrant therefore penance is not arbitrarie as the Canonists doe saie but to be directed by the worde of God Secondlie shee must take heede that shee release no more punishment then shee is able to laie on And therefore shee must be assured by the worde of God whether shee can eioyne penance to be suffered in Purgatorie before shee take vpon her to remit any such punishment touching which matter as you haue saied more in the defence of Purgatorie so haue I answered sufficientlie to the ouerthrow of Purgatorie and all that dependeth thereupon That Christ gaue by his expresse worde authoritie to the pastours of Gods Church to binde and loose not onely the sinnes themselues but also the temporall paine or penance remaining THE FOVRTH CHAP. ALLEN BVt now for the iurisdiction that Gods Church hath in releasing the same punishment which remaineth after the fault be forgiuen it standeth no doubt vpon that high commission which Christ receiued of his Father and did communicate moste amplie to the Apostles and by then to all Bishops for euer For the father did not onelie honour Christ his sonne according to his humanity with the power of priesthoode or with other soueraignitic for the institutious of sacraments or such like but with all regiment of that bodie whereof he is the heads as he is man By which keye of iurisdiction he corrected sinners with great Maiestie and pardoned them at his pleasure not onelie of sinne and euerlasting paine where the penitencie of the partie did so require but also of such correction as the law had prescribed for sinne or Gods iustice had enioyned for the same FVLKE That the Church hath any iurisdiction in releasing that punishment which remaineth after the faulte for giuen for a satisfaction of Gods iustice it hath not hetherto beene prooued nor euer shall be prooued by authoritie of the holie scriptures which teach the contrarie that Christ alone hath by his one sacrifice made perfect for euer those that are sanctified And therefore it is vnreasonable to seeke whereupon it standeth For neither did Christ receiue any such commission in his humanitie neither did he deliuer ouer any such iurisdiction vnto his Apostles to release temporall punishment due to Gods iustice vnsatisfied by his death and passion For by one oblation once offered by his eternall spirit he made perfect for euer those that are sanctified And the power of Priesthoode and soueraigne authoritie to institute sacraments and to be head of his Church he receiued not as man onelie but as our mediatour God and man The Lorde said vnto my Lorde saith Dauid sit thou on my right hand Thou art a Priest for euer c. Which offices authorities can not beseparated from his diuinity without Nestorian impiety Christ is head of his Church a Priest for euer as he is Dauids Lord but as he is Dauids Lord he is not onelie his sonne but his God therefore he is heade of his Church and a priest after the order of Melchisedeeh not as he is man onelie but as he is God man neither did he pardon any