Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
death_n word_n wound_v wrath_n 23 3 6.8480 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A15422 Synopsis papismi, that is, A generall viewe of papistry wherein the whole mysterie of iniquitie, and summe of antichristian doctrine is set downe, which is maintained this day by the Synagogue of Rome, against the Church of Christ, together with an antithesis of the true Christian faith, and an antidotum or counterpoyson out of the Scriptures, against the whore of Babylons filthy cuppe of abominations: deuided into three bookes or centuries, that is, so many hundreds of popish heresies and errors. Collected by Andrew Willet Bachelor of Diuinity. Willet, Andrew, 1562-1621. 1592 (1592) STC 25696; ESTC S119956 618,512 654

There are 17 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

from heauen Sic Bullinger serm 60. in Apocalips Thirdly the Dragon is sayd Apocalips 12.4 with his tayle to drawe many starres from heauen that is many excellent men as starres in giftes and knowledge shall bee deceiued by the Pope and be wonne vnto him yea the Pope himselfe is a Starre fallen from heauen to the earth from heauenly doctrine to earthly tradition Apocalips 9.1 thus Antichrist also may be sayd to fetch fire from heauen 2. The second miracle hee shall cause the Image of the beast to speake which the Iesuite vnderstandeth literally that is grossely Answere First Bellarmine and our Iesuites doe not here agree for Bellarmine sayth that these two miracles shall be wrought by Antichrist himselfe to fetch fire from heauen and to cause the Image to speake But the Rhemists saye this other beast is another false Prophet inferiour to Antichrist which shall also worke wonders such an one as Caluine say they where they shew their malice more then learning for Caluine they know tooke not vpon him to worke myracles annot Apocal. 13. sect 3. 2 This causing the image to speake hath a better meaning The image of the beast is the shadow of the olde stately Empire of Rome which was erected by the Pope for the west partes wanted an Emperour the space of three hundred yeeres from Augustulus time till Pope Leo the third who made Charles the great king of France Emperour And at this day is there nothing in the Empire but onely a name title and image for neither hath the Emperour the Imperiall authoritie which is in the Pope nor the Imperiall kingdomes vnlesse he haue them of his owne And the Pope onely maketh this Image to speake for vnlesse he doe confirme the election of the king of the Romanes he is not thought worthy the name of Emperour Bullinger ibid. 3 And yet we denie not but that they both haue and may make images speake either by the helpe of the diuell as Dunstane caused a roode to speake or by iugling as the Roode of grace by gimmals was made to roule the eyes mooue the lippes and such like in king Henries dayes 3 The third myracle that Antichrist shall work is to fayne himselfe dead and to rise againe Apocalyps 13.3 Answere There can bee no such thing gathered out of the text First the wordes will not beare it the text is that one of the heads was wounded to death and the wound was healed which cannot be so meant as though hee fayned himselfe dead but he receiued a wound indeede 2 The sence is mysticall as thorough the whole chapter First it is sayd that the seuenth head was wounded to death but reuiued agayne that is the seuenth gouernement of the Romanes in the Popedome for the papacie had many times deadly blowes and yet was healed agayne especially when there were three Popes together at Rome in France and the third in Spaine but this wound was cunningly healed vp in Pope Martin the fift in the Councell of Constance the other three beeing deposed Sic Bullinger Serm. 59. Secondly it is said vers 14. that the beast whose image remained had the wound of a sworde and yet liued which is vnderstoode of the Romane Empire reuiued and quickned by the Pope The Protestants IT is true that Antichrist shall worke signes and wonders by the power of Sathan 2. Thessal 2. but lying signes both because they shall bee done to confirme lyes neither shall they bee such as the Prophets wrought but many of them but cunning and cousening sleights of iuglers And for such wonders wee neede not to search farre the Popish Church is full of them Where else then should wee looke for Antichrist 1 There haue beene of the Popes themselues Sorcerers and Coniurers such an one Antichrist shall bee sayth Bellarmine Siluester the second came vp to the papacie by the helpe of the diuell as wee haue before shewed Gregorie the seuenth was condemned in the Councell of Brixia for a Coniurer And Benno a Cardinall in those dayes thus writeth of him that on a time hee sending two of his seruants for a certaine Sathanicall booke charging them not to looke into it they notwithstanding looked into it and presently a great multitude of diuelish spirites were round about them who were instant vpon them to knowe why they were called for the seruants beeing at the first astonished yet comming to themselues enioyned them to plucke downe certayne high walles neere to Rome and so they came to their master Fox page 176. What other Antichrist now neede wee looke for If hee must bee a Coniurer wee may heere make our choyce 2 Wee are not ignorant what lyes and fables are reported by the papists of the myraculous actes of their popish Saints of the which wee haue spoken before As howe Dunstane appeared to a cripple that came to his Tombe to bee helped of his lamenesse How Plegildus a priest sawe and handled the shape of a childe vpon the alta● which after hee had kissed returned agayne to the likenesse of bread How a certaine Iewes boy tolde his father that hee saw a childe broken in peeces vpon the altar and distributed among the Christians and the boy for that was cast into a furnace of fire and was preserued from the fire by the Virgin Marie which appeared to him and spred her garment ouer him Many such either lyes and fables or workes of diuels the popish Church hath many What neede wee therefore doubt but that it is the Antichristian Church 3 Augustine sayth Saint Paul calleth them lying wonders either because Antichrist shall deceiue men per phantasmata with iugling sleights or because ad mendacia per trahet credituros by his wonders he shall make them beleeue lies But in which sense they are so called it shall appeare when Antichrist is come sayth hee and indeede it is now apparant for our aduersaries haue plenty of both kindes both myracles wrought indeede by the diuell and many prety iugling feates beside THE EIGHTH PARTE OF THE QVEstion concerning the warres and kingdome of Antichrist The Papists BEllarmine sayth that Antichrist shall make great battayles agaynst the error 64 Saynts and shall conquere the whole worlde first by crafte he shall aspire to the kingdome of the Iewes secondly he shall fight with three kings of Lybia Aegypt Aethiopia Thirdly with a great armie he shall persecute the Christians throughout the world and this shall be the battaile of Gog and Magog Bellarm. cap. 16. 1 That he shall craftily aspire to the kingdome he proueth it out of Daniel 11.21 where it is prophecied of one that he shall obtayne the kingdome by flatteries Ans. This prophecie of Daniel as likewise the whole chapter was historically accomplished in Antiochus Epiphanes who defrauded Seleucus his brothers sonne of the kingdome and circumuented his elder brother Demetrius so that it being once fulfilled it cannot be wrested to any other sense of Antichrist it cannot be
my God which wordes must needs declare an inward confidēce and assured trust in God The Protestants WE holde it was necessary for our redemption that Christ should not onely suffer bodily paines but also feele the very anguish and horror of soule that as by his death we are redeemed both body and soule so he should pay the ransome for both in his body and soule 1. That our Sauiour suffered great anguish in soule the scripture testifieth for before his suffring in his body vpon the crosse being in the garden he saith of himselfe My soule is heauy vnto death at the same time being grieuously troubled he sweat water and blood and last of all hanging vpon the crosse he cryed out By those effectes it is euidently proued that there was a greater feare in him then of the death of the body for many holy Martyrs haue without any shew of such griefe endured horrible torments in the flesh and therefore consequently it followeth that those things proceeded from the griefe of his soule as the Apostle sheweth Heb. 5.7 He offered vp praiers with strong crying and teares to him that was able to saue him from death and was heard in that which he feared If it had beene onely feare of bodily death what need such strong cries with teares And the text is plaine that he was heard that is saued frō the death which he feared but he was not saued from the bodily death for he died and gaue vp the ghost wherefore it was the great horror of soule that caused him to feare Bellarm. answereth for all this that it was the bodily death which he feared but not of necessitie because he could not otherwise choose but willingly he would abide this brunt also of the feare and sorrow of death Voluit poenam maeroris timoris subire vt redemptio esset copiosae And heerein he exceedeth all other men that haue suffered for they are ridde from feare because God giueth them greater comfort and they regarde not the present torment but Christ willingly and of his owne accord drew himselfe into this agonie of feare Ans. 1. That Christ as he was God had determined and set it downe to dye for the world it is not to be doubted of but that as he was man he had not a desire to escape death as being ignorant of Gods determination it is contrary to the Scriptures which make mention of his earnest praier that he made thrice that the cup might passe Math. 26. Therefore Christ willingly entred not into that agony of feare in his humane desire but as submitting himselfe and his will in obedience to his fathers will 2. He is contrary to him selfe in saying that Christs bodily sufferings were sufficient for our redemption and yet graunteth that Christ vt redemptio esset copiosa That our redemption might be more full would abide also the smart of the feare of death If he feared but the bodily death as he saith yet was he troubled in soule and therefore besides bodily paine he suffered anguish in his soule Argum. 2. Act. 2.24 Whom God hath raised vp saith S. Peter and loosed the sorrowes of death for it was impossible that he should be holden of it Ergo Christ suffered the sorrowes of death and felt the wrath of God which caused those sorrowes The vulgare Latine hath the sorrowe of hell solutis dolorib infern● which pincheth the Papists very sore for how could Christ be loosed from the sorrowes of hell if first he had not beene helde of them That which Bellarmine answereth that Christ loosed the sorrowes of hell for others which were to be deliuered is but a poore shift for the text is plaine It was impossible that he that is Christ himselfe should be stil holden of it it is spoken of the holding of Christ and not of any other Argu. 3. The prophet Esay saith He was wounded for our sins and broken for our iniquities the chastisement of our peace was vpon him and with his stripes are we healed Esay 53.5 But we could haue no peace with God vnlesse all the punishment due vnto vs for our sinne had beene vndertaken by Christ wherefore seeing we by our sinne had deserued to be punished both in body soule it was necessary that our redeemer should be wounded and broken wholly for vs for how els by his stripes should we wholly be healed Augustine thus reasoneth against Felicianus the Arrian and proueth that Christ tooke not onely humane flesh but an humane soule Si totus homo peri●● c. If man wholly were lost saith he he had wholly need of a Sauiour and if he wholly needed a Sauiour Christ by his comming wholly redeemed him therefore Christ tooke vpon him the whole nature of man both body soule for if since the whole man hath sinned Christ onely had taken our flesh the soule of man should still remaine guiltie of punishment haec Augustine cont Felician cap. 13. By the same reason we proue it was necessary that Christ should suffer both in body and soule by the which Augustine inferreth that Christ tooke both body and soule he did assume them both to redeeme both But he redeemed vs not in being borne for vs or walking or preaching heere vpon earth although these were preparations to his sacrifice but by dying and suffering for vs Ergo he suffered both in body soule the punishmēt due vnto sinners They graūt that Christ suffered anguish in soule yet not properly in the soule but onely for the bodily death which was no part of the punishmēt of the soule which consisted in the very sense and feeling of Gods wrath and the torments of hell due vnto mankinde for their sinnes This punishment of the soule ought also necessarily to haue beene vndertaken by Christ being the redeemer both of body and soule THE FOVRTH PART WHETHER CHRIST descended in soule into hell to deliuer the Patriarkes The Papists THey doe beleeue that Christ according to his soule went downe to hell to error 101 deliuer the Patriarkes and all iust men there holden in bondage til his death Rhemist Act. 2. sect 12. Argum. 2. He that ascended is he that descended first into the lowest parts of the earth Ephes. 4.9 that is into hell the which is the lowest place in the earth Bellarm. cap. 12. Ans. 1. The earth it selfe is in respect of the world the lowest part so that here one parte of the earth is not to be compared with another but the whole earth in respect of the high heauens hath the name of the lower partes so is it taken Psal. 139. ver 15. Thou hast fashioned me beneath or in the lower partes of the earth But Dauid I trust they will not say was borne in hell because he speaketh of the lower partes of the earth consul Bez. in hunc locum So that by the descending of Christ into the lowest partes of the earth is meant nothing els but the lowest and extreamest degree
the Iewish ceremonies this is great presumption to thinke it is lawfull for the Church to doe whatsoeuer Christ and his Apostles did Fulk 1. Tim. 4. sect 18. The Protestants ALthough there be great moderation to bee vsed in the ceremonies of the Church and there is also some limitation for them yet hath the Church greater libertie in the rites and ceremonies which are appoynted for order and comelinesse sake then in the doctrine of fayth and religion The doctrine of saluation is alwayes the same and cannot be changed and toucheth the conscience But rites and ceremonies are externall and commanded for order sake and neither are they vniuersall the same in euery Church nor perpetuall but are changed according to times and as there is occasion Againe the precepts of Christianitie are either directly expressed or necessarilie concluded out of the scriptures but externall rites and ceremonies are not particularlie declared in the word there are onely certaine generall rules set downe according to the which all ceremonies brought into the Church are to bee examined as for the Sacraments of the Church they cannot bee altered hauing a perpetuall commandement from Christ Therefore the Church cannot appoynt what how many ceremonies soeuer she shall thinke good but according to these foure rules and conditions which followe here in order 1 All things ought to bee done to the glorie of God euen in ciuill actions much more in things appertayning to the seruice of God 1. Cor. 10.31 Our aduersaries offend agaynst this rule applying and annexing remission of sinnes to their owne inuentions and superstitious ceremonies as vnto penance and extreame vnction which they also make Sacraments for this is greatly derogatorie to Christs institution who hath only appoynted the hearing of his word and vse of the Sacraments for the begetting and encreasing of faith and by this faith only is the death of Christ applied vnto vs for the remission of sinnes 2 All things ought to be done orderly and decently 1. Cor. 14.40 Wherefore al ridiculous light vnprofitable ceremonies are to be abolished such our aduersaries haue many as knocking kneeling creeping to the Crosse lighting candles at noone day turning ouer of beades and many phantasticall gestures they haue in their idolatrous Masse as turning returning looking to the East to the West crossing lifting quaffing and shewing the emptie cup with many such toyes 3 All things ought to bee done without offence 1. Corinth 10.32 But to whom that hath but a little feeling of religion is not the abhominable sacrifice of the Masse offensiue What good conscience doth it not grieue that the Priest should create his maker as they say should offer vp the bodie of Christ in sacrifice and be an intercessor as it were for his mediatour desiring God to accept the sacrifice of his sonnes bodie As also to make it a propitiatorie sacrifice for the quicke and the dead But of these matters we shall haue fitter occasion to entreate afterward when we come to the seuerall controuersies 4 All things ought to bee done to edifying 1. Corinth 14. vers 12. But the popish ceremonies are so farre from edifying that by reason of their infinite rabble and number they are a clogge vnto Christians and more burdensome then were the obseruations of the Iewes They haue hallowed fire water bread ashes oyle waxe flowers braunches clay spittle salt incense balme chalices paxes pixes altars corporals superaltars altarclothes rings swords and an infinite companie besides doe these tend thinke you to the edification of the minde Nay they doe cleane destroy and extinguish all spirituall and internall motions drawing the heart from the spiritual worship of God to externall beggerlie and ragged reliques and ceremonies Fulk 1. Timoth. 4. sect 1. Beza lib. confess de eccles articul 18.19.20 The fift question whether the Church of Rome be the true Church THis question hath two parts First whether the Romane Church be the Catholike Church or not Secondly whether the Church of Rome be a true visible Church THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE ROMANE Church be the Catholike Church The Papists BEllarmine defining the Church maketh this one part of the definition to be error 27 subiect vnto the Bishop of Romes iurisdiction Lib. 3. de eccles cap. 2. And therefore they conclude that they are out of the Church and no better then heretikes that doe not acknowledge the Pope to be their chiefe Pastor Canis de praecept eccles cap. 9. So they make the Romane faith and Catholike to bee all one Rhemist annot in 1. Rom. sect 5. Their reasons are none other then we haue seene before taken from vniuersalitie antiquitie vnitie vnto the which wee haue alreadie answered quaest 3. of this controuersie Not. 1 2 3. The Protestants WHile the Church of Rome continued in the doctrine of the Apostles it was a notable and famous visible Church and a principall part and member of the vniuersall Catholike but now since it is degenerate and fallen away from the Apostolike faith from being the house of God to be a synagogue for Antichrist we take it not to be so much as a true visible Church But neuer was it to be counted the Catholike Church as though all other Churches were parts and members of it but it selfe onely was a part as others and Catholike too while it continued in the right faith but not Catholike as hauing iurisdiction ouer the rest and all to receiue this name of her 1 The vniuersall Catholike Church is so called because it conteyneth the whole number of the elect and first borne of God Heb. 12.23 Whereof manie are now saints in heauen many liuing in the earth many yet vnborne But all these were not neither are of the Romane faith the holie men departed knewe not of these superstitious and prodigious vsages which now doe raigne in the Church of Rome nay many of them neuer heard in their life so much as of the name of Rome Ergo. 2 It is called Catholike and vniuersall because they that are to be saued must belong vnto this companie and be of this Church for without the Church there is no saluation for Christ onely gaue himselfe for his Church to sanctifie it and cleanse it Ephes. 5.25 But all that dye out of the faith of the Romane Church do not perish Nay verely we doubt not to say but that all which depart this life in the communion thereof without repentance are barred from saluation and dye out of grace We are in the right faith neither will we be our owne iudges the scriptures shall iudge vs Euery spirit that confesseth that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God 1. Iohn 4.2 We beleeue aright in both the natures and all the offices of Christ which you doe not which doe greatly deface his prophetical office in not reuerencing his word but making it imperfect his kingdom in appointing him a Vicar and Vicegerent vpon earth as though he of himselfe were not sufficient to gouerne
Scripture We will brieflie runne them ouer not to derogate from the blessed memorie of so excellent an Apostle but a litle to stay and bridle the preposterous zeale of our aduersaries who doe ascribe more vnto him then euer he would haue challenged to himselfe To let passe the smaller slippes and scapes of this Apostle as his rashnesse in aduenturing beyond his strength to walke vppon the Sea Matth. 14. Secondlie his vnaduised speech in the Mountaine Math. 17. let vs make three Tabernacles thirdlie his ignorance Matth. 19. In saying to Christ how often shall I forgiue my brother till seuen times Fourthlie his impatiencie as in drawing out his sworde and cutting off Malchus eare Fifthlie his timorousnesse in flying from Christ at his apprehension Sixtlie his curiositie Iohn 21. In asking concerning Iohn what shall this man doe To let passe these as common infirmities There are fower great faultes which Peter fell into much amplified and stoode vppon by the fathers 1 He de●orted our Sauiour from his passion with these words Master fauour thy selfe Math. 16. and was therefore called Sathan an aduersarie to the death of Christ and so to the redemption of man Augustine chargeth him with great forgetfulnes hauing made so notable a confession of Christ before and noteth him for some sparkes of distrust and infidelitie Ille Petrus qui iam eum confessus fuerat filium dei timuit ne sicut filius hominis moreretur in Psal. 138. The same Peter sayth he which a little before had confessed him to be the Sonne of God feared lest he should dye and perish as a man 2 In promising rashly not to denye Christ yea vnto death whereas Christ had foretold him of his fall before Augustine noteth great presumption Petrus ex egregio praesumptore creber negator effectus Epist. 120. cap. 14. Peter of a great presumer is become a desperate denyer 3 The third great sinne was committed by Peter in denying of Christ and that thrice yea with an oath at the instance of a mayden and in a very short while before the cocke crewe twise Mark 14.72 The Iesuite answereth that this was no hinderance to Peters primacie but a furtherance and a confirmation of it But whether it were a let to his primacie or not let all men iudge seeing it had been sufficient to haue hindered his saluation and destroyed his faith without the great mercie of God Let vs heare Augustines iudgement of Peters fall Some man may excuse Peter and say that he did nothing but as Christ forewarned him What then sayth he if Peter therefore did not amisse because his fall was foretold by Christ Rectè etiam fecit Iudas qui tradidit dominum quia hoc praedixerat dominus then Iudas did well too sayth he in betraying of Christ for this also Christ shewed afore But some agayne may say he denyed not Christ for hee sayd hee knewe not the man Quasi vero sayth he qui hominem Christum negat non Christum neget as though hee that denyeth the man Christ doth not flatly denye Christ. Christ also taketh away all doubts saith he when he thus said to Peter the cock shall not crowe till thou hast denyed me thrice he sayth not till thou hast denyed the man but me Agayne Ipse potius redarguit defensores suos Peter himselfe doth confute his maintayners and defenders Agnouit planè peccatum suum infirmitas Petri Peters owne conscience gaue him that hee had sinned for he went out and wept bitterly But if by this meanes his primacie was confirmed he had occasion to reioyce and not to weepe Yea he wept bitterly his sinne was very great how then dare one of your sect say with a blasphemous mouth Petrus non fidem Christi sed Christum salua fide negauit Peter denyed not the faith of Christ but his faith remayning safe and sound he denyed Christ The ancient writers durst not so extenuate Peters fall no nor Peter himselfe that wept full sore as these men presume to doe 4 The last fault noted in Peter was that for the which he is reproued of Paul Act. 2. Tush saith Bellarmine it was a very small and light offence Yea was it so smal a fault to constrayne the Gentiles to doe like the Iewes for this was the poynt as S. Paul writeth Galath 2.14 And Augustine saith Petrus non obiurgatus a Paulo fuit quòd seruabat consuetudinem Iudaeorum in qua natus educatus fuit sed quòd eam gentibus imponere volebat Exposit. ad Galat. Peter was not rebuked of Paule because hee kept the custome of the Iewes wherein hee was brought vp but because he would lay it vpon the Gentiles Was this leuissimum peccatum a small transgression S. Paule should greatly haue been to blame for rebuking Peter openly and so plainly for so small an offence and should haue done agaynst his owne rule Galath 6.1 But Peter did it of a good mind sayth Bellarmine Yea did then he was worthie to be excused not worthie of blame as S. Paule writeth He might also doe it ignorantly and vnwittingly saith hee How can that be seeing he was one that made the decree Act. 15 That no yoke should be layd vpon the Gentiles other then there expressed and now contrarie to that decree hee constrayneth the Gentiles Iudaizare to play the Iewes These things doe not hang together I will now conclude out of Augustine as hee alleageth out of Cyprian Nec Petrus cum secum Paulus de circumcisione disceptaret postmodum vindicauit sibi aliquid insolenter vt diceret se primatum tenere De baptis 2.2 Howsoeuer it was Peter when Paule reasoned thus with him did not stand vpon his pantofles chalenge any primacie to himselfe But it is very like if there had been any such primacie in Peter of power and iurisdiction a primacie of order wee graunt as Cyprian in that place calleth Peter primum the first that this sharpe reprehension of Paul should either haue been spared or els not done in that vehement manner THE THIRD QVESTION CONCERNING Peter his being at Rome THis question hath two parts first whether Peter were at all at Rome or not Secondly whether he were Bishop of Rome THE FIRST PART WHETHER PETER were at Rome error 38 OVR aduersaries would seeme to prooue it by these and such like arguments 1 Out of that place of S. Peter 1.5.13 the Church that is at Babylon saluteth you Babylon here say they is taken for Rome from whence Peter wrote his Epistle Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 2. de pontif Rhemens argum in 1. Epist. Petri. We answere First it is a sillie argument for them hereby to proue Peters being at Rome for thus much they haue gayned by it that Rome is Babylon and so the seate of Antichrist Reuel 18. Secondly there were two Babylons one in Syria the other in Aegypt from either of which S. Peter might dare his epistle and it is most like that he
owne sonnes for to enrich the See of Rome as Augustine very well saith Qui vult exhaeredato filio ecclesiam haeredem facere quaerat alterum qui suscipiat non Augustinum immo deo propitio nullum inueniat He that would make the Church his heire and defeate his own children let him seeke some bodie else to accept of his gift surely Augustine wil not nor I trust any honest man beside The Protestants FIrst we willingly grant that the Church may inioy those tēporall possessions which haue been of old granted vnto it for the better maintenance thereof so they bee not abused to riot and excesse as the Leuites beside their tithes had their cities and fieldes Numb 35. Secondly the iudgement of Ecclesiasticall matters doth of right appertaine to the Church as Amariah the Priest was the chiefe in all matters of the Lord 2. Chron. 19.11 Thirdly we doe not vtterly exclude spirituall persons from temporall causes but as the ciuill Magistrate hath his interest in ordaining of Ecclesiasticall lawes so spirituall persons ought not to be strangers from the ciuill state being meete men for their knowledge and conscience to be consulted withall and conferred with and to be ioyned in Councell with the Magistrate in difficult matters as wee reade Deuter. 17.8 How the high Priest and chiefe iudge did ioyne in mutuall helpe and assistance But that any spirituall person may bee a temporall prince and haue the chiefe gouernement of both states and handle both swordes we say it is contrarie to the word of God for in these three poyntes standeth chiefly the office of the prince in making and ordaining ciuill lawes in hauing power of life and death in proclaiming of warre and waging of battayle with none of these ought Ecclesiasticall persons to deale as we will now shew in order 1 Concerning the making of ciuill lawes and statutes though the Ecclesiasticall bodie according to the ancient custome of this land haue their suffrage and voyce and doe giue consent yet the chiefe stroke in alowing confirming and enacting of such lawes is in the prince and cannot agree or bee matched with any spirituall office Saint Paul saith Who is sufficient for these things that is for the work of the Ministerie 2. Cor. 2.16 If therefore spirituall persons suffice not to execute to the full their spirituall charge though they should bend all their studie and care that way much more insufficient shall they be if they be entangled in temporall affayres for the well guiding and ordering whereof a whole man likewise is scarce sufficient Againe saith he no man that warreth entangleth himselfe with the affaires of this life 2. Timoth. 2.4 By affaires seculare here are not onely vnderstoode as the Iesuite imagineth merchandise traffike buying selling and such like but the care and charge also of ciuill gouernement of making lawes and orders for the ciuill state which must needs bee a great let to the spirituall busines and require greater studie and labor then the other baser workes which are named To this Augustine agreeth Quo iure saith he defendis villas Vnde quisque possidet quod habet Iure humano iure imperatorum quare quia ipsa iura humana per imperatores reges seculi Deus distribuit generi humano tract in Ihoann 6. By what law doest thou defend thy possessions by the lawe of man the lawe of the Emperors for these humane lawes by Gods ordinance are giuen vnto men by the Emperors and Kings of the world See then ciuill lawes and humane constitutions are giuen and made not by the Pope Priest or any other Prelate but onely by Kings and Princes and the ciuill magistrates 2 It were a mōstrous an vnnatural thing that any Ecclesiastical gouernor should haue power of life death for he hath no better right to the ciuil sword then the prince to the Ecclesiasticall sword and if it be not lawfull for the ciuill Magistrate to excommunicate which is as the spi●tuall sword and the greatest censure of the Church no more is it to be suffered that by the authoritie or commaundement of any Ecclesiasticall person any man should bee put to death The high Priest was not to deale with matters of bloud which touched the life but the offenders were brought to the gates of the citie where the magistrates sate Deuter. 17.5 Not to the temple where the priest ministred Nay we see that in the most corrupt times of the Iewish common-wealth namelie when they put our blessed Sauiour to death the priests did not challenge any such power It is not lawful say they for vs to put any to death Iohn 18.31 But that power was in the temporall Magistrate as Pilate said to Christ Knowest thou not that I haue power to crucifie thee and power to loose thee Ioh. 19.10 Ergo the Pope cannot bee a temporall prince to haue power of life and death 3 If the Pope be a temporall prince then hee may wage battaile which although the Iesuite dare not plainely affirme yet it followeth necessarilie vpon his assertion for it is lawfull for any temporall prince to make warre And it hath been the common practise of Popes and popish prelates so to doe There were great bitter battailes fought betweene Vrbane the sixt and the Antipope Clement in the which on the one side there were 5000. slaine Fox pag. 434. Henry Spenser a lustie young bloud Bishop of Norwich was the Popes Captaine generall in France where he sacked the towne of Grauenidge and put man woman and childe to the sword So Pope Iulius cast his keyes into the Riuer Tybris and tooke himselfe to his sword waged many battailes and at the last was encountred withall by Lewes the French King vpon Easter day where there was of his army slaine to the nūber of 16000. But these warlike affaires of the Pope misliked the Papists themselues for hee was therefore condemned in the Councell of Turone in France Anno. 1510. We may see how well these furious Popes doe followe the rule of Christ who cōmaunded Peter to put vp his sword into his sheath If it were not lawfull for Peter to strike with the sword how is it lawfull for the Popes that I am sure dare not challenge more to themselues then was lawfull for Peter Thus wee see how absurd a thing it is that the Pope should bee a temporall Prince THE NINTH QVESTION OF THE PRErogatiues of the Pope BEside these priuiledges and immunities of the See of Rome which hitherto we haue spoken of both in spirituall and temporall matters there are other prerogatiues which haue been in times past giuen to the Bishops of Rome most blasphemous wicked which the Papists of this age are ashamed of and therefore passe them ouer with silence for Bellarmine saith nothing of them Wee will therefore spare our labor in confuting of them they are so grosse and absurd but onely bring them forth that the godly reader may vnderstand the
whether they that haue the dispensation of the Keyes doe alwaies necessarily bind and loose before God of these in order THE FIRST PART WHEREIN THE AVthoritie and power of the Keyes consisteth The Papists error 73 BY the Keyes and power of binding and loosing they chiefly and principally vnderstand the censures of the Church as Excommunications Anathematismes suspensiōs Degradations the whole Ecclesiastical iurisdictiō Rhemist Annot. Matt. 16. sect 14. Bel. lib. 1. de pontif cap. 13. Secondly they tye remission and retaining of sinnes to their imagined and deuised sacrament of penance saying that where Christ gaue authoritie to remit sinnes to his Apostles Iohn 20.23 he instituted the sacrament of penance Rhemist Iohn 20. sect 3. The sacrifice also and Sacraments of the Church say they are ministred for remission of sinnes Rhemist 2. Corinth 5. sect 3. Thirdly they seeme to grant in words that by preaching also of the Gospell sinnes are reteined and remitted ibid. but they make small account thereof for as we haue heard they make it not of the essence of their priesthood to preach neither doth it properly appertaine vnto that office yea say they absolutiō cānot be rightly sought for at the priests hands but by confession of our sins which is done in penance Rhem. Ioh. 20. sect 5. This then is their opinion that by their deuised ceremonie and Sacrament of penance sinnes are properly forgiuen and that the preaching of the word is not thereto necessarie Their chiefe argument is by abusing that place Iohn 20.23 where they say Christ instituted the Sacrament of penance when he gaue power to his Apostles to remit and reteine sinnes Ans. First your Sacrament of Penance is neither grounded vpon this nor any other place of scripture here in the wordes of Christ there is no institution of a sacrament because there is no visible element giuen whereunto the worde being added may make a sacrament Secondly here the commission is but renewed which was granted before to his Apostles and their successors Matth. 18.18 Fulk Annot. Iohn 20. sect 3. The Protestants THe Keyes of the Church that is the power to bind and loose sinners to open or shut vnto them the kingdome of God consisteth both in the externall discipline and gouernement of the Church lawfully executed according to the word of God as also in preaching of the Gospell by assuring in Christs name all faithfull and penitent persons remission and forgiuenes of their sinnes and in denouncing and threatning the wrath of God against the disobedient and impenitent also as the sacraments are ioyned to the word as seales and pledges of the promises thereof so by the right administration of the sacraments together with the preaching of the word sinnes are retained or remitted The Rhemists therefore doe vs great iniurie in falsely charging of vs that we should hold that the spiritual power of the Church standeth only vpon the preaching of the word whereas wee grant that it is exercised also in the Ecclesiasticall gouernement of the Church both in punishing excommunicating censuring of offenders which is the binding of them and in releasing and absoluing them againe which is the other power of loosing Rhemist 2. Corinth cap. 10. sect 1. Leauing now this part of spiritual power in Ecclesiasticall discipline which is not in this place in question betweene vs wee must touch that other part which is exercised in the word and sacraments 1 That the sacraments doe binde and loose it is proued out of the word of God they doe binde Whosoeuer eateth drinketh vnworthily eateth drinketh his own damnation 1. Cor. 11.29 they doe also loose As oft as ye shal eate this bread and drinke this cup you shewe the Lords death till he come vers 26. But here is a double caution and condition to be annexed First that all Sacraments worke not this effect but onely those of Christs institution which are but two baptisme and the supper of the Lord for Paul saith I haue receiued of the Lord that which I deliuered vnto you 1. Cor. 11.23 If the Apostles would not neither might deliuer any Sacraments but those which were instituted of Christ what great presumption is it in any other to doe it Secondly we must not think that remissiō of sinnes is necessarily tied to the Sacraments as though there could be no remissiō without thē for the grace of remission may be effectual in the name of Christ by the preaching of the word without a sacramēt Ioh. 20. sect 4. Ful. For the word may be preached without a sacramēt but the sacramēt cānot be ministred without the word for that were as though a man should deliuer a seale without a writing Neither is it our meaning that as the Rhemists cauil with vs the sacramēt cannot be administred without a sermon of the death of Christ for though that were alwaies to bee wished yet where it cannot bee had there must and ought to be a briefe shewing and declaration of the death of Christ out of the word so oft as the Sacrament is administred as it is obserued in our Church Fulk Annot. 1. Corinth 11. sect 15. 3 We must take heede we conceiue not thus as though the Sacrament gaue grace by the worke wrought and that by the very vse forme and externall act of the Sacrament wee obtaine remission of sinnes as the Rhemists would beare vs in hand 1. Corinth 11. sect 15. But the Sacraments are onely effectuall to the worthie receiuers and to the worthie receiuing faith is requisite as Saint Paul willeth all men to examine themselues 1. Corinth 11.28 which is as hee himselfe interpreteth it to proue whether they be in the faith 2. Corinth 13.5 These conditions then being obserued we denie not but that there is an exercise of the keyes euen in the Sacraments 2 But chiefely and principallie is this power dispensed by the preaching of the word as Saint Paul saith Wee are the sauour of death vnto death vnto some there is the binding and to other the sauour of life vnto life there is the loosing 1. Corinth 2.16 So our Sauiour Christ saith He that refuseth mee the word that I haue spoken shall iudge him in the last day Iohn 12.48 Here is the power of binding Againe the truth shall make you free Iohn 8.32 Here is the power of loosing Who therefore doubteth this that the preaching of the word is the most proper and principall way and meane for the exercising of this Ecclesiasticall power for seeing faith is the key of heauen thereby wee haue free accesse vnto the throne of grace Rom. 5.2 and faith commeth by hearing Rom. 10.17 and hearing by the word It remaineth that by the word the keyes are dispensed Augustine also subscribeth vnto this for speaking of reformation of life and repentance with remission of former sinnes thus he saith Quid empturus es vt facias quae emplastra quaesiturus ecce cùmloquor muta cor factum est quod tam
other but all shall not passe through Purgatorie by their owne confession They are driuen to this shift to graunt that vers 13. the fire is taken in one sense namely for the sentence and iudgement of God and vers 15. in another that is for the flames of Purgatorie But who seeth not how absurd a thing this is that in an allegorie the same word and in the same place should be so diuersly taken Thirdly The day shall reueale it that is sayth Bellarmine the day of the Lord at the comming of Christ the Rhemists vnderstand the particular day of euery mans death so well they agree together But it is apparant that this is the meaning that the day that is the time shall declare it for God hath appoynted a time to examine euery mans doctrine by fire which is nothing els but the iudgement of God by the fire of his word whereby euery man in the day of his calling and conuersion shall knowe whether he hath preached aright or not Fulk The Protestants THat there is no such place of Purgatorie after this life but that here onely is the place of repentance and to be reconciled vnto God and that the soules departed are presently either receiued vp to heauen or thrust downe to hell thus it is proued out of the scriptures Argum. 1. The scripture maketh but two kinds of works either good or euill Ecclesiastes 12.14 But two sorts of men he that beleeueth shall be saued he that beleeueth not shall be condemned Mark 16.16 But two places heauen and hell Math. 25. Christ hath but two flockes one of sheepe at the right hand another of goates at the left and he saith to the one Come ye blessed to the other Goe ye cursed There are but two sorts of men therefore but two places Ergo no Purgatorie Bellarm. There shall be indeede at the comming of Christ but two places heauen and hell Purgatorie shall haue an end Ans. First you say your selues that there shall be two infernall places for euer Hell for the wicked and a Limbus for infants that dye vnbaptized and heauen that maketh three and now you say there shall be but two Secondly there are but two places now because there are but two sorts of men for the beleeuers are alreadie passed frō death to life Iohn 5.24 The vnbeleeuers are alreadie condemned Iohn 3.18 Thirdly Augustine consenteth with vs Non est vlli vllus medius locus vt possit esse nisi cum diabolo qui non est cum Christo There is no middle or third place but he must needes be with the diuell that is not with Christ. De peccator remiss merit lib. 1. cap. 28. And againe Tertium locum penitus ignoramus imo nec esse in scripturis sanctis inuenimus The third place beside heauen and hell we are vtterly ignorant of nay wee finde not in scripture that there is any Arg. 2. S. Paul saith that euery man shall receiue the works of his bodie according to that which he hath done either good or euill 2. Cor. 5.10 Therefore there is no place to cleanse and purge the soules of men after this life for then they should not receiue according to the works done in their flesh Bellarmine sayth that euen they whose sinnes are remitted after death doe receiue nothing but that which was done in the flesh for they deserued in their life time to be helped after death Ans. First as for desert we will shewe elsewhere that it hath no place before God neither in this life nor the life to come for the scripture sayth Blessed is he to whom the Lord imputeth no sinne not who deserueth remission of sinnes Rom. 4.6 Secondly this deuised and friuolous distinction doth not stand with the Apostles meaning for he speaketh of things actually done in the flesh not deserued to be done and of the workes of the bodie not of the soule of things perfectly done not begun onely or in choate and he vseth it as a reason to perswade men euen while they liue to be accepted of God vers 9.11 But if there might be any such helpe after death there needeth no such hast presently to be conuerted vnto God Argum. 3. Apocal. 14.13 Blessed are the dead from henceforth that dye in the Lord for they rest from their labours Ergo there is no Purgatorie for all the godly departed are at rest Bellarm. First it is not meant of all the godly but onely of Martyrs which dye for the name of Christ. Ans. As to liue in Christ Iesus is a phrase of scripture signifieth to liue godly in Christ 2. Timot. 3.12 so to dye in the Lord signifieth to dye in the faith of Christ 1. Thessal 4.16 Therefore this place is vnderstood of all the godly Bellar. 2. This word amodò from henceforth is not to be vnderstood straight after their death but straight after the day of iudgement thē they shal be blessed Ans. First by this reason none that are dead in Christ should be happie before that time And yet by your owne confession Martyrs are straightway receiued vp to heauen Secondly S. Iohn vseth this word elsewhere to signifie from this time forward as Iohn 1.51 Christ sayth to Nathanael From henceforth you shall see heauen open Rhemist Thirdly it may be also vnderstood of the soules of Purgatorie that are without danger of sinne and damnation and are put in vnfallible securitie of their saluation with vnspeakable comfort Ans. First so the Saints liuing are blessed being as well without feare of damnation Rom. 8.1 and are assured of their saluation Rom. 8.16 Secondly I pray you what rest or comfort can they haue that endure greater paine then any in this life And how can their consciences be quieted seeing their soules are so afflicted for bodies they haue none whatsoeuer they suffer is in soule how then can ioy and paine comfort and horror be together in the soule Fulk ibid. THE SECOND PART OF THE CIRCVMSTANces and other matters belonging to Purgatorie The Papists error 11 1. THey say it is an article of faith to beleeue that there is a Purgatorie and that he which beleeueth it not is sure to goe to Hell Bellarm. lib. 1. de purgatorio cap. 11. The Protestants WE hold that it is not onely an article belonging to the faith but contrarie to it and that though there were a Purgatorie yet it should not be necessarie to saluation to beleeue it First because the scripture hath not determined it which containeth all things necessarie to saluation Secondly the Greeke Church holdeth it not to this day they confesse no Purgatorie though they pray for the dead it were a hard matter therfore to pronounce them damned Thirdly Augustine doubted of it He sayth that there should be some such place after death non incredibile est it is not incredible vtrum ita sit quaeri potest aut inueniri aut latere fideles potest whether it be so or not
to come Ans. Mark expoundeth Mathew He saith It shall neuer be forgiuen Mark 3.29 So that not to be forgiuen either in this world or the world to come is nothing els but neuer to be forgiuen for if it be not forgiuen in this life it shall neuer be forgiuen Bellarm. Yea but Mathew must expound Marke because he setteth it downe more fully and Marke doth but abridge the Gospell written by S. Matthew De Purgat lib. 1. cap. 4. Ans. But why should not Mark rather expound Mathew seeing he writ after him and we vse to expound the former writers by the later not contrariwise AN APPENDIX OR AN APPERTINENCE TO this part concerning the burials and funerals of the dead THere are certaine poynts wherein there is no great variance or dissension betweene vs. First we confesse that it is meete and conuenient that the bodies of Christians being departed should after a seemely and comely manner be brought to the graue as Dauid commendeth the men of Iabesh Gilead for burying the bodie of Saul 2. Sam. 2.5 The brethren also tooke the bodie of Stephen buried it Act. 8.2 Secondly it is not to be denied but that lamentatiō and sorow may be made for the dead obseruing S. Pauls rule that We mourne not as those that haue no hope that is excessiuely 1. Thess. 4.13 where S. Paul doth not simply forbid Christians to sorow but not as the Gentiles The brethrē also made great lamentation for Stephen Act. 8.2 Thirdly we doe also graunt that according to the diuers customes of coūtreys it is not vnlawfull to vse some comely rites and ceremonies in the buriall of the dead not for religion but for orders sake as among the Israelites the mourners were wont to goe about in the streetes Ecclesiast 12.5 And Christ commended the woman in the Gospell for anoynting of him against his buriall Mark 14. But beside these poynts by vs confessed and acknowledged there are other more waightie matters as touching the order of funerals wherein we worthily and iustly dissent from our aduersaries error 16 1 They doe attribute much to the places where men are buried as in Churches and Churchyards but especially vnder the Altar Rhemist as the soules of the righteous doe rest in Christ who is that altar vnder the which the Apostle sawe the soules of Martyrs so for the correspondence to the place in heauen their bodies are commonly layd vnder the altar where the sacrifice of the body of Christ is daylie offered Annot. Apocalyps 6. vers 9. Ans. The altar of the Crosse was the onely place where the bodie of Christ was sacrificed neither need it to be often offered in sacrifice but it sufficed once onely to haue been done Heb. 9.25.27 And in the Communion we acknowledge no sacrifice but of praise and thanksgiuing Heb. 13.15 It is kept onely in remembrance of the death of Christ 1. Cor. 11.25 And how should it be auaileable for the dead seeing it profiteth not all the liuing but onely those that are present which doe eate and drinke the holy elements of bread and wine in remembrance of the bodie and blood of Christ giuen and shed for them So saith the scripture Doe this as oft as you doe it in remembrance of me 1. Cor. 11.25 The doers therefore agents and receiuers haue the present benefite not they which are absent how then can the dead receiue any solace by it It profiteth then not a whit to be layd in Churches or Churchyards or other hallowed places as they call them for all places are alike neither helpeth it the dead to be buried in one place more then another for God shall command the sea and all other places to giue vp their dead Apocalyps 20. The very heathen did confesse as much one sayth It skilleth not humíne an sublimè putrescam whether I rot vnder or aboue the ground And another thus writeth Coelo tegitur qui non habet vrnam Heauen is a couering to him that hath no other coffin It were a foule shame then for Christians to exceede the very Gentiles in their superstitious conceits Augustine sayth Si aliquid prodest impio sepultura preciosa oberit pio vilis aut nulla If sumptuous funerals profite the wicked then homely or no burials doe hurt the godly Therefore as it helpeth not a wicked man to be buried in one place more then another so it doth not hinder or hurt the godly and righteous man 2 We condemne also their superstitious ceremonies which they vse at their error 17 funerals as the burning of Tapers which signifieth say they that the soules of the dead are aliue Bellarm. de purgator lib. 2. cap. 19. Ans. First this superstitious vse of setting vp candles was directly forbidden in the Elibertine Councel Canon 34. Of the like sort also were other superstitious vsages as the going about of the belman to will the people to pray for their soules the ringing or iangling of bels to bring their soules to heauen with queere songs and other melodie to commit the bodies to the ground and commending their soules to the protection of Saints We denie not but comely and decent orders voyde of superstition may be vsed according to the fashion of the countrey as Iacobs bodie was embaulmed after the manner of the Egyptians Genes 50.2 At the buriall of their Kings the Israelites vsed to burne odors Iere. 34.5 The Iewes manner was to wash the bodies of the dead to winde it vp in a linnen cloth and burie it with spices and odors So our Sauiours bodie was buried after the manner of the Iewes Iohn 19.40 We reade also that Ioseph was put into a coffin or chest Genes 50.26 Of these and the like customes Augustine giueth a rule writing vpon those words in the Gospell Iohn 19.40 As it was the manner of the Iewes to burie Non mihi videtur Euangelista sic frustra dicere voluisse ita quippe admonuit in huiusmodi officijs quae mortuis exhibentur morem cuiusque gentis esse seruandum in Iohann tract 120. Me thinketh the Euangelist sayd not thus without cause hereby letting vs to vnderstand that in performing such dueties of buriall to the dead the manner and custome of euery countrey is to be kept The Iewes also had a custome with some companie or frequencie of people to bring their dead to the ground Eccle. 12.5 And in the while to vse some admonition to the people concerning death and mortalitie which came in by sinne and of the wrath and mercie of God Syrus interp in Mark 14.3 Neither doe we see why it is not lawfull now among Christians at funerals and burials to haue some godly sermon and exhortation to put the people in mind of their end and to comfort them with the hope of the resurrection as also to giue God thankes for those his faithfull seruants that did glorifie him by their life and by their godly departure This seemeth also to haue been the
doe as well belong to the institution as the other Secondly they say that the words of institution doe not serue any thing at all for the instruction of the people to shew them the right vse of the Sacrament but onely for benediction and consecration of the elements Bellarm. cap. 19. Thirdly they doe hold that only by the pronouncing of those words the elements are consecrated whereas by the whole action and cerebration of the Sacrament the giuing receiuing inuocation thankesgiuing according to Christs institution the consecration is performed vpon the elements Fulk 1. Corinth 10. sect 4. Arg. 1. That the words of institution rehearsed do helpe as well to admonish stirre vp the people to a thankful remēbrance of the death of Christ as to consecrate blesse the elemēts it is manifest whereas Christ saith as the words are vsually rehearsed Doe this in remembrance of me and S. Paul saith That by receiuing the sacrament we doe shew forth the Lords death 1. Corinth 11.26 Ergo the people are by the words pronounced instructed and admonished and taught the right vse of the sacrament Argum. 2. that the words of institution doe helpe toward the benediction or consecration of the Elements we deny not but not by them alone but praier also and thankesgiuing and the whole action beside of receiuing To the consecration or sanctifiyng of any creature two things are required the word of God and praier 1. Timoth. 4.5 Neither the word sanctifieth without praier nor praier without the word Ergo to the sanctifiyng cōsecrating of the sacrament the bare rehearsall of the institution sufficeth not without inuocation and praier Augustine saith Accedat verbum ad elementum et fiet Sacramentum Let the word be ioyned to the element and it is become a Sacrament And in an other place he sheweth what word he meaneth Faciente verbo non quia dicitur sed quia creditur hoc est verbum fidei quod praedicamus The word effecteth this not because it is spoken or vttered but because it is beleeued this is the word of faith saith the Apostle which we preach thus farre Augustine tract in Johan 80. Wherefore it is not the muttering of a few words in a strange toung after the manner of enchaunters that by any secret force giuen vnto them hath power to consecrate but the vnderstanding hearing and beleeuing the institution of Christ with calling vpon the name of God and thankesgiuing before him AN APPENDIX OF THIS PART WHETHER THE forme of wordes in the institution of the Sacraments may not be by some addition or other alteration changed The Papists THe words of institution may be changed two manner of wayes either substantially error 89 when the sence is also altered with the words or accidētally whē the elements or syllables are onely changed but the sence remaineth the same If there be a change in the substance of the words the sacrament is imperfect if the alteration be of the forme onely of words and not of the sence the sacramēt is not destroyed but he sinneth that doth so alter them Wherefore it is not lawfull any way at all to alter or change the forme of words Bellarmine cap. 21. li. 1. Argum. It is not lawfull to adde or take to or from the words of scripture much lesse to change the words appointed to be vsed in the Sacrament Bellarm ibid. Ans. To adde or detract to or from the word of God with a purpose and intent to wrest it to a contrary meaning and destroy the true sence thereof cannot be done without great impiety and such is the manner of all heretikes But to alleadge Scripture in keeping still the full sence though we misse of the wordes is not to be counted so heinous a sinne we see the holy Apostles in citing textes of Scripture doe not alwaies binde themselues to the very wordes as Act. 7.43 Heb. 10.5 The Apostle saith A body thou hast giuen me In the Psalme we read Mine eares hast thou opened diuerse wordes yet the same sense Augustine saith very well they that vnderstand the Scripture though they keepe not alwaies the wordes are better then they that read and vnderstand not Sed vtrisque ille melior qui et cum volet ea● dicit et sicut oportet intelligit But he is better then both that both remembreth the wordes and keepeth the sense too yet he also deserueth praise that beareth the sense in minde though he cannot the words The Protestants NO substantiall change we confesse is to be admitted in the forme of Institution which may alter the sense neither is any particular man by himselfe to make any accidentall change and bring in a new forme of wordes but the publike and vniforme order of the church must be kept yea and the church likewise is bound both to reteyne the true sense and as neere as may be the very words but where occasion serueth to make some small accidentall change of the words the sence being nothing diminished it is not condemned as an vnlawfull and sinfull act Argum. 1. The Euangelists report not all the same forme of words which should be vttered by our Sauiour neither yet S. Paul fully accordeth with them in the precise and strict forme of institution as by comparing of them together it may be seene Mat. 26. ver 27. Take eat this is my body S. Luke cap. 22. This is my body which is giuen for you do this in remembrance of me ver 19. S. Paul Take eat this my body which is broken for you doe this in remēbrāce of me 1. Cor. 11.24 ver 28. This is my blood of the new testament that is shedde for many for the remission of sinnes This cup is the new testamēt in my blood which is shed for you This cup is the newe testament in my bloud this do as oft as you drink it in remēbrance of me If it had beene a sinne to haue missed in some termes and sillables no doubt the spirite of God would not haue suffered these holy writers to haue made the least scape Is it to be thought a sinne in the Church which in stead of Take ye eate ye in the plurall number hath appointed the Sacrament to be ministred particularly in the singular number to euery of the cōmunicants saying Take thou eat thou drinke thou Wherfore all accidentall change of words carieth not with it a guilt of sinne Augustine indeede saith Certa sunt verba euangelica c. The words of the gospell are certaine whereby Baptisme is consecrated But yet he saith else where In ipso verbo aliud est sonus transiens aliud virtus manēs In the word spoken the sound which passeth is one thing the vertue or sense of the words which abideth is an other It is then the sence of the words not the sound or sillables that is certaine and permanent THE THIRD PART OF THE INSTRVMENTALL cause of the Sacraments that is the lawfull
Minister SOme things are yeelded vnto of both sides First that no man ought to take vpon him to administer the Sacraments vnlesse he be thereunto lawfully called and ordeined by the Church sauing that they make exception of Baptisme which in case of necessity as they teach may be giuen by the hands of lay men or women but of this matter we shall haue fitter occasion afterward to consider Secondly it is agreed that the efficacy or vertue of the Sacrament dependeth not of the faith or honesty of the Minister but a faithfull man may receiue the sacrament worthily euen at the hands of an vnworthy Minister The Papists THe point of difference betweene vs is this They do teach that the efficacie error 90 perfection and being of the Sacrament doth necessarily depend of the intention of the Minister so that they holde it to be no sacrament if the Minister haue not Intentionem faciendi quod facit ecclesia A full purpose and intent in ministring the Sacrament to doe that which the Church doth that is to consecrate the elements and to make a Sacrament Trident. concil sess 7. canon 11. Bellarm. cap. 27. So that by this rule if the Ministers intention be not wholy vpō the busines he hath in hand it shall be no Sacrament Argum. If the Ministers intention were not necessary to make a sacrament when it chaunceth that the gospell is read at the table by a Minister there being both bread and wine set before them and he in reading saith This is my body and This is my blood straightwaies all that bread wine should be consecrate and become a sacrament but because his intention is wanting it is none Bellarm. ibid. Ans. 1. But what if the Minister should haue a fantastical conceite and intent as he readeth to consecrate all the bread wine vpon the table then it should seeme by your rule that it must needs be a sacrament which were euen as absurd a thing as the other 2. There are other lets impediments from hauing a sacrament at the table thē the intention of the minister being wanting or kept back for the elements are not consecrated nor the Sacrament made by the bare pronouncing of the words but the whole institutiō ought to be obserued there must be eating drinking taking and doing al in the remēbrāce of the death of Christ there must be distributing receiuing inuocatiō thākesgiuing the whole action in the sacramēt is the cōsecration therof these things thē being wāting there can be no Sacrament The Protestants IF the Sacrament be administred aright according to the institution of Christ whatsoeuer the Minister be howsoeuer affected be he neuer so prophane in his hart without any godly purpose or intention yet to the worthie receiuer it ceaseth not to be a Sacrament Caluin in antidot concil Tridentin sess 7. canon 11. Argum. 1. The word of God with what intention soeuer it be preached yet may haue his effect and worke faith in the hearer So Christ be preached saith S. Paul whether vnder pretence or sincerely I therein ioy Philip. 1.18 Ergo the Sacraments also may haue their efficacie without the intent of the Minister argum Lutheri Argu. 2. If the effect of the Sacrament consisteth vpon the intention of the Minister then should euery man be vncertaine whether any thing be wrought in him or he haue receiued any benefit by the Sacrament because he knoweth not the intent of another mans hart and so should he be depriued of the spirituall comfort which he might reape by the Sacrament Caluin Augustine saith Sacramentum Baptismi tam sacrum est vt nec homicida vel ebrioso ministrante polluatur The Sacrament of Baptisme is so holy that it cannot either by a murtherer or drunken person ministring it be defiled And I pray you is it not like to be a good intention that should enter into the harts of such lewd and wicked men Therfore without any good intention euen by the hands of such may the Sacraments be giuen THE FOVRTH PART WHETHER THE Sacraments be seales of the promises of God The Papistes error 91 THey vtterly deny that the Sacraments be pledges and seales vnto vs of the promises of God or that therby our faith is nourished and confirmed and we assured of free remission of sinnes by the death of Christ neither that the sacraments were ordeyned for any such end Bellarm. lib. 1. de sacram cap. 14. Argum. 1. If the sacraments confirme vnto vs the promises of God in his word then must they of necessitie be more euident and better known vnto vs then is the word of God for that which is lesse knowen and not so notorious cannot perswade vs of that which we haue better knowledge of But such are the Sacraments which are not so euident being called mysteries of religion as are the words of God Ergo Bellarm. ibid. Ans. 1. It is strange to see that you should now contend for the euidence and plainenes of Scripture which you haue locked vp from the people with no other pretence then because they are hard and obscure and dangerous ro be read of the simple Secondly you doe not well in comparing the word and the sacraments together for they cannot be diuorsed or separated for the word giueth life to the sacraments the sacraments againe giue liuely testimony and witnes to the truth of the word But let this be the question not whether the writing by it selfe and the seale by it selfe are of greatest force but whether an instrument with a seale be not of greater euidence and strength then without it So the word of God which doth but beate vpon the sence of hearing must of necessitie not in it self but in respect of vs worke more effectually being sealed by the sacraments where we receiue instruction by two other sences of ours the sight and the taste The Protestants THat the Sacraments are ordeined of God to be pledges and seales of his promises made vnto vs in Christ that as verily as the externall elements are applied to the outward man so our soules spiritually are refreshed with an assured hope of the remission of our sinnes in Christ and so the sacraments to be seales onely of the righteousnes of faith and not giuers or workers of grace in vs it is euident out of the Scripture Argum. 1. Abraham receiued the signe of circumcision as the seale of the righteousnes of faith Rom. 4.1 Circumcision then was to Abraham a seale of the righteousnes of faith that is that he was iustified by faith Ergo so are all other sacraments Rhemist Indeede circumcision was a seale to Abraham for he was iust before and receiued this sacrament as a seale thereof afterward But it foloweth not that it was so in all for in Isaac his sonne and so consequently in the rest the Sacrament went before and iustice followed annot Rom. 4. sect 8. Ans. 1. The Apostle setteth forth the example of Abraham to shew
person of Christ euen as his humanitie so that Christ was bread by consecration as he was man by his incarnation an horrible and monstrous opinion which is fathered vpon Rupertus the Abbot Iohannes Parisiensis also came neere this opinion who likewise affirmed that the bread was assumed to the person of Christ and vnited vnto him yet not immediatly as the other taught but by the mediation and meanes of the humanitie of Christ. Secondly of those that maintaine the conuersion of the elements First some would haue the forme onely of bread chaunged not the matter as Durandus Secondly some contrariwise would haue the matter altered and the forme to remaine Thirdly the Iesuits affirme the bread wholly in substance both in matter and forme to be changed the outward formes and accidents onely remaining ex Bellarm. lib. 3. de sacram Eucharist cap. 11. Thus men when they begin once to leaue the truth the Lord leaueth them to themselues and they runne mad in their owne inuentions not finding any end and so it is iustly come vpon them as S. Paul saith of the heathen Because when they knew God they did not glorifie him as God neither were thankfull they became vaine in their own imaginations and their foolish hart was full of darkenes when they professed themselues to be wise they became fooles Rom. 1.21.22 We therefore leauing these shalow pittes of humane inuentions which will holde no water will betake vs to the fountaine of truth This then to conclude is our definitiue sentence and full determination according to the Scriptures that Christ indeed is verily present in the Sacrament neither by conuersion of the bread into his body either wholly or in parte nor by assumption of the bread to the vnity of his person nor yet by the coniunction of his body and bread together but he doth verily exhibite himselfe with all his benefits spiritually by faith to be eaten and drunke of the worthy receiuer as we haue sufficiently proued before out of the Scriptures THE THIRD QVESTION WHETHER THE Eucharist being once consecrated be a Sacrament though it be neither eaten nor drunk The Papists THe elements in the Sacrament that is the bread and wine being once consecrate error 116 which say they is done by the prolation of those words hoc est corpus meum This is my body whether they be receiued or not at that instant but be reserued and kept in boxes and pixes and other vessels of the Church for daies weekes moneths to be caried solemnely to those that are sick and to be applyed to other vses are still the very body and blood of Christ. Trident. Concil sess 13. can 4.7 Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 2. Argum. 1. Christs words which were spoken ouer the bread This is my body were true as soone as he brought them forth before he said Take eat and so likewise of the cup therefore it was a Sacrament before they did receiue and eate it and had beene a Sacrament still if it had not bene receiued at all at that time Bellarm. ibid. Ans. 1. Those wordes of Christ This is my body were not spoken before he brake the bread and distributed it but first as S. Math. setteth it downe he brake the bread and gaue it to his Disciples saying Take eate and then follow those words This is my body Math. 26.26 which seeme to haue bene vttered euen in that instant when they tooke the bread and began to eate it Secondly the institution of the Sacrament consisteth partly of a promise partly of a precept the promise is this Hoc est corpus meum This is my body the precept Accipite manducate Take eate Christ doth no otherwise make good his promise then we performe the condition vnlesse therefore accordingly we doe take and eat it it is not the body of Christ. The Protestants THe Eucharist is no sacrament beside or without the vse thereof so that though some form of words be pronounced ouer it if it be not receiued and eaten and drunk it is no sacrament neither is that which remaineth after the distribution the Eucharist being ended either of the bread or wine any part of the sacrament but so much onely as is taken and vsed Argum. 1. It is no Sacrament vnlesse it be vsed according to the institution as Christ hath commanded it but to the institution it belongeth on the behalfe of the Minister to blesse break and distribute it on the behalfe of the communicants to take eate and drinke it in them all thereby to shew the Lords death and to doe it in remembrance of Christ. But this cannot be performed by vsing the words of benediction onely but by the whole action for how can they shew the Lords death or doe it in remembrance of Christ vnlesse they take and eate Ergo if it be not so vsed it is no Sacrament Argum. 2. The Sacraments of the new testament are alike and of one and the selfesame kinde there is one way of instituting and consecrating both but the water in baptisme is no part of the Sacrament but during the solemne action of baptizing afterward it returneth to the common vse so much as is not vsed Ergo it is so also in the Eucharist for as Christ saith to his Apostles Ite baptizate Goe and baptize so that it was no Sacrament vnlesse some body were baptized euen so he saith Accipite ●anducate Take eate No Sacramēt then vnlesse it be receiued and eaten And here I pray you let it be noted how well the Iesuits agree amongst themselues our Rhemists doe commend the reseruing also of the water in baptisme and carrying of it home to giue it the diseased to drink annot Iam. 5. sect 5. Bellar. saith that Res permanens in baptismo That the thing permanent in Baptisme that is water which remaineth is not the sacrament but ipsa actio the action of baptizing it selfe and alloweth onely the Eucharist to be reserued and remaine a Sacrament Etiam extra vsum Without the vse thereof Bellar li. 4. de Eucharist cap. 3. But we haue shewed already that both the Sacraments are halowed and sanctified alike and that both in the one and the other the vse onely and present action according to Christs institution maketh the Sacrament In Augustines time some vsed to receiue the Communion dayly but vpon the Sabboth or Lords day it was commonly receiued of all Quotidie Eucharistiae communionem percipere nec laudo nec reprehendo omnib tamen dominicis diebus communicandum suadeo et hortor Euery day to receiue the Eucharist I neither commend nor dispraise it but euery Lords day I doe perswade men and exhort all to communicate It should seeme then that in those daies there was no such superstitious reseruation of the Sacrament seeing euery day or at the least euery Sabboth it was administred THE FOVRTH QVESTION CONCERNING the elements or materiall part of the Sacrament namely bread and wine The Papists 1. The bread
we made partakers of the bodie and blood of Christ but this fayth the wicked cannot haue The first part is proued out of the Gospell He only that drinketh of the blood of Christ shall neuer thirst agayne Iohn 4.14 He that shall neuer thirst must beleeue in Christ Iohn 6.35 Ergo he onely that beleeueth doth drinke the blood of Christ. So Augustine saith Nolite parare fances sed cor non quod videtur sed quod creditur pascit doe not prepare your iawes but your heart it is not that which is seene but what is beleeued that nourisheth Ergo Christ must bee receiued by faith therefore Infidels or vnbeleeuers cannot receiue him Argum. 2. Whosoeuer eateth the flesh of Christ and drinketh his blood shall haue eternall life Iohn 6.54 But the wicked haue not eternall life Ergo they neither eate nor drinke Christ. Augustine sayth De mensa dominica sumitur quibusdam ad mortem quibusdam ad vitam res verò cuius sacramentum est omni homini ad vitam nulli ad exitium quicunque eius particeps fuerit From the Lords table some doe receiue vnto life some vnto death but the thing whereof it is a sacrament worketh in all to life in none to death whosoeuer are partakers of it But the bodie and blood of Christ are the things signified in the sacrament Ergo whosoeuer receiueth them hath life thereby the wicked then receiue them not THE SECOND PART OF THIS CONTROVERSY CONCERNING the Popish Masse THis part likewise comprehendeth diuers questions 1 Of the diuers representations of the death and sacrifice of Christ. 2 Of the sacrifice of the Masse the name thereof and of the sacrificing priesthood 3 Of the vertue and efficacie which they falsely ascribe to the Masse 4 For whom the sacrifice of the Masse is auaileable whether for the quicke and the dead 5. Of priuate Masses 6. Of the manner of saying and celebrating Masse 7. Of the ceremonies which they vse in the idolatrous sacrifice of the Masse some goe before some are obserued in the celebration thereof 8. Of the forme of the Masse which consisteth partly of the Canon and of the preface to the Canon where we are to shew the foule and heretical blasphemies which in great number are belched out by them in the Masse Of these now in their order THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE DIVERS representations of the death of Christ. The Papists THey are not contented with that one liuely representation of the death of Christ which is exhibited in the Lords Supper but they haue brought in error 126 two more beside that and so make three in all the first say they is simplex repraesentatio a simple and plaine representation of the death of Christ which is done so often as the Sacrament is receiued the second is Repraesentatio ad vinum A liuely and full representation of Christs death which they doe vse yearely to set forth by solemne gestures apparell and other ceremonies vpon Good Friday as it is commonly called before Easter when they doe make nothing else but a Pageant play of the Sacrament the third representation is also a sacrifice beside and that is the sacrifice of the Masse Bellarm. de Missa lib. 1. cap. 1. The Rhemists make a fourth representation beside which is in the solemne receiuing of the Communion at Easter So then first Christs death is shewed forth by the Sacrament of the Eucharist all the yeare long as it hangeth in the pixe or when it is carried to house the sicke Catechism Rom. pag. 408. Secondly it is represented once in the yeere by their solemne Pageant vpon good Friday when there is no Sacrament consecrated but an histrionicall expressing by certaine gestures and actions the manner of Christs crucifying Thirdly in the continuall sacrifice of the Masse Christ his death is represented And lastly in the solemne receiuing at Easter for then especially the mysterie of Christ our Paschall lambe is commended to the people to be eaten with all sinceritie in the Sacrament and so doe the Rhemist expound that place of Saint Paul Let vs keepe feast or holy day not with the leauen of malitiousnes 1. Cor. 6.8 literally applying it to the feast of Easter Rhemist in hunc locum The Protestants FIrst we are taught by the word of God that by eating the bread and drinking of the cup in the Sacrament not by gazing looking lifting vp turning hanging vp bread in pixes or by any such meanes but onely as we haue saide is the Lords death shewed forth and represented 1. Corinth 11.26 Wee acknowledge therefore one onely Sacramentall representation of Christ and no more in the Lords Supper the sacrifice of the Masse we iudge to bee an abominable idol as afterward shall be shewed Secondly it is a foule absurditie to make any representation of Christs death by bare gestures shewes and actions of the bodie without any Sacrament as they doe in their popish pageants vpon Christs Passion daye for at that time there is no Sacrament consecrated Eckius cap. 15. But the Priest by certaine gestures and motions of the bodie in bowing bending casting abroade his armes and such like dooth resemble Christ crucified Bellarm cap. 1. But to call this a liuely representation being done without a Sacrament and the other in the Sacrament simplicem repraesentationem but a simple and plaine representation is too great presumption wherein they prefer their owne superstitious deuises before the ordinance of Christ. Thirdly that place of Saint Paul is vnfitly applied to the celebration of Ester Augustine expoundeth it far otherwise Diem festum celebremus non vtique vnam diem sed totam vitam in azymis synceritatis veritatis Let vs keepe holy day not one onely day but all our life long in the vnleauened bread of purenes and trueth So then in Augustines iudgement the Apostle had no relation to any certaine time which he would haue kept holy but to the reformation of the whole life THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE sacrifice of the Masse and the Priesthoode thereto belonging THE FIRST PART OF THE name and terme of Masse The Papists error 127 THere are diuerse opinions amongst them concerning the originall of this name Some say it is called Missa the Masse Quia oblatio preces ad Deum mittantur Hugo de S. Victore Others quod Angelus a Deo mittatur quisacrificio assistat Because an angell is sent of God to bee assistant at the Masse Thom. Aquinas 3. part quaest 83. artic 4. Some of the hebrue worde Missath Deut. 16. which signifieth an oblation Some ex missis donarijs symbolis of the giftes and offerings sent or put in before the Communion But what beginning soeuer it had they doe now generally take the Masse for that solemne action whereby the Sacrament is made a sacrifice and offered vp to God Bellarm. lib. 1. de missa cap. 1. The Protestants WE doe not greatly force vpon this name for both the name
Masse is not of that nature for it is made by the ministerie of man for euery one of their sacrificing Priests is able to make the bodie of Christ but this bodie which Christ had to offer was made onely by God without the helpe of man as the Apostle saith Againe say if you dare that the bodie which you offer is the true Tabernacle and temple of God for then it would followe that God dwelleth in temples made with hands that is by the ministerie of man contrarie to the Scriptures seeing you affirme that the bodie of Christ is no otherwise present but by the ministerie of the Priest And what a goodly Tabernacle is this for God thinke you which you shut vp in a pixe and hang vp in your Churches A mouse may eate it the fire may consume it corruption may take it would God suffer his Tabernacle thus to be defiled Wherefore vpon these premises we conclude that what you offer in your popish sacrifice cannot be the proper gift belonging to Christes Priesthoode Argum. 3. The Apostle saith Hebr. 13.10 Wee haue an altar whereof they haue no power to eate which serue in the Tabernacle Ergo we haue not onely a common table to eate meere bread vpon but a verie altar in the proper sense to sacrifice Christs bodie vpon Rhemist annot Hebr. 13. sect 6. Ans. First the Apostle speaketh of the sacrifice of Christs death whereof we are made partakers by faith which they can reape no benefite by which remaine in the ceremoniall obseruations of Leuiticall sacrifices Christ therefore is our Priest altar and sacrifice for verse 12. the Apostle maketh mention of the suffrings of Christ he meaneth not then the Communion table which is vnproperly called an altar or any materiall altar beside but the altar onely of Christs death Secondly if wheresoeuer in Scripture this worde altar is read it must be taken for a proper materiall altar we shall haue also a material altar in heauen Apoc. 8.3 which I am sure they wil not grant Thirdly the Apostle saith We haue an altar which is but one whereas popish altars are many it cannot therefore be vnderstoode of such altars The Protestants THat there are spirituall sacrifices remaining yet vnto Christians in the exercise of religion we doe verily beleeue being so taught by the Scriptures such are the sacrifices of praise and thankesgiuing Heb. 13.15 The sacrifice of almes and distribution verse 16. the mortifying also of the flesh is a kinde of crucifying and so a spirituall sacrifice Galat. 6.14 And in this sense wee denie not but that the Sacrament may be called a sacrifice that is a spirituall oblation of praise and thankesgiuing but that there is a proper and externall sacrifice as in the lawe of Goates and Bullocks vpon the crosse of the bodie of Christ so in the Eucharist of the same bodie and flesh of Christ we doe hold it for a great blasphemie and heresie Argum. 1. The very flesh and true naturall bodie of Christ is not as wee haue shewed before at large in such carnall and corporall manner present in the Sacrament therefore it cannot in the Sacrament be sacrificed and offered vp Argum. 2. This sacrificing of the bodie and blood of Christ is contrarie to Christs institution for he saith onely Take yee eate yee drinke yee he saith not Sacrifice yee or lift vp and make an oblation of my bodie Neither doe those wordes hoc facite doe this giue them any power to sacrifice for to whome he saith Eate yee drinke yee to the same also he saith Doe yee Wherefore if doe yee be as much as sacrifice yee all Christians for whome it is lawfull to eate and drinke the Sacrament by this rule haue authoritie to sacrifice Againe the words are Doe this in remembrance We remember things absent and which are alreadie done and past if then there be a present sacrifice in the Sacrament of the bodie of Christ it cannot properly be said to be a memorie of his sacrifice Argum. 3. The Apostle saith that Christ neede not to offer himselfe often but that he hath done once in the end of the world Heb. 9.26 And with one offering hath hee made perfite for euer them that are sanctified 10.14 Ergo Christ cannot be sacrificed againe for that were to make his sacrifice vpon the crosse imperfect Bellarmine answereth that the Apostle here speaketh of the bloodie and painefull sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse which was sufficient once to bee done but this taketh not away the vnbloodie sacrifice which is but an iteration of the former whereby the fruite and efficacie of that first oblation is applied vnto vs Bellarm. lib. 1. de miss cap. 25. Ans. First the Apostle excludeth all manner iterations of the sacrifice of Christ for otherwise if Christ should now bee often howsoeuer sacrificed the difference would not hold betweene the sacrifices of the lawe which were often done and the sacrifice of Christ which was once to be performed for their sacrifices were also in a manner iterations and commemorations of the sacrifice of Christ. The Apostle then thus reasoneth They had many iteratiue and commemoratiue sacrifices of Christs death Ergo we haue not now Secondly that is but a foolish and false distinction of the bloodie and vnbloodie sacrifice as they vnderstand it for there can be no proper vnbloodie sacrifice of Christ neither could he be offered vp otherwise then by dying Heb. 9.27.28 Therefore he is not offered vp in the Sacrament because now he dyeth not Thirdly neither neede wee inuent a new kinde of sacrifice for the application of Christs death for to that end Christ hath appointed the preaching of the word and instituted the Sacraments wherby the death of Christ with al the benefites thereof are most fruitefully applied vnto vs Galath 3.1 1. Corinth 11.26 Argum. 4. Augustine in a certaine place allegorizing the parable of the prodigall child thus writeth Vitulum occidit quando in sacramento altario memoriam passionis in mente renouauit He slew the fat calfe when hee renewed in the Sacrament of the altar the memorie of his passion in his minde Hee calleth it the Sacrament not the sacrifice of the altar and it onely bringeth to our minde the memorie of Christs passion and sacrifice there is then no oblation or sacrifice in the Sacrament but onely a commemoration of Christs sacrifice which we denie not AN APPENDIX OR THIRD PART OF the name and office of Priestes The Papists AS they doe falsely teach and perswade that there is yet remaining a proper error 129 externall sacrifice for Christians vnder the Gospell so also they maintaine a sacrificing Priesthoode And further they say that the Leuiticall Priesthoode was not translated into the sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse but is properly turned into the Priesthoode and sacrifice in the Church according to Melchisedechs rite in offering vp the bodie and blood of Christ in the formes of bread and wine Rhemist
life or quickening to bee made a true and right faith The words then are thus to be read and distinguished So faith without works is dead that is this kinde of faith which neither worketh nor euer shall Not thus Faith is dead without workes as though a true faith were quickened by works But euen as the bodie is dead hauing neither soule nor the operations thereof life motion sense so this vaine speculatiue kinde of faith is dead both wanting the spirite and soule that is hauing not one sparke of true faith neither the operations and fruites thereof which a liuely faith sheweth by loue as the soule worketh life and motion in the bodie for a liuely faith can neuer bee without workes And a dead faith will neuer haue workes but remaineth dead for euer Wee must not therefore thinke that it is one and the same faith which sometime is dead without workes and againe is made aliue and quickened when workes come But wee must vnderstand two kindes of faith one altogether voide of good workes which is onely a faith in name and a verie dead faith Another is a liuelie faith alwaies working and this can neuer become a dead faith so neither can the other bee euer made a liuelie faith Argum. That charitie is not the forme or any cause of faith but the effect rather and fruite thereof we doe learne out of the word of God Christ saith Iohn 3.18 Hee that beleeueth shall not bee condemned but is alreadie passed from death to life Iohn 5.24 Faith then is able to saue vs and alone iustifieth vs before God without loue which alwaies foloweth a true faith but is not ioyned or made a partner with it in the matter of iustification But faith could doe nothing without the forme thereof Ergo charitie is not the forme of faith Saint Paul also faith Faith which worketh by loue Galath 5.6 The being and substance of faith is one thing the working another Loue onely concurreth with faith in the working it is no part of the essence or being of faith August Ea sola bona opera dicenda sunt quae fiunt per dilectionem haec necesse est antecedat fides vt inde ista non ab istis incipiat illa Those onely are to bee counted good workes which are wrought by loue faith of necessitie must goe before for they must take their beginning from faith and not faith from them Faith then goeth before loue that worketh therefore loue is not the forme of faith for forma prior est re formata the forme should goe before the thing formed THE FOVRTH PART HOW MEN are iustified by faith The Papists WEe are saide to bee iustified by faith because faith is the beginning error 81 foundation and the roote of iustification Concil Triden sess 6. cap. 8. Faith then by their sentence doth not fully iustifie the beleeuer but is the beginning way and preparation onely to iustification Andrad ex Tilem de fide err 11. Rhemist Rom. 3. sect 3. The Protestants FAith is not the beginning onely of our iustification but the principall and onely worker thereof neither are wee iustified in part or in whole by any other meanes then by faith Argum. He that is at peace with God is fully and perfectly iustified his conscience cleared and his sinnes remitted But by faith wee haue peace of conscience Ergo by faith wee are fullie and perfectly iustified Rom. 5.1 The Scripture also faith The iust man shall liue by faith Rom. 1.17 But wee liue not by iustification begun onely but perfited and finished Ergo our full iustification is by faith Augustine vpon these words Iohn 6.29 This is the worke of God that yee beleeue c. Si iustitia est opus Dei quomodo erit opus Dei vt credatur in eum nisi ipsa sit iustitia vt credamus in eum If iustice or righteousnes bee the worke of God how is it the worke of God to beleeue in him vnlesse it be righteousnes it selfe to beleeue in him See then it is not initium iustitiae credere sed ipsa iustitia it is not the beginning of iustice to beleeue but iustice and righteousnes it selfe THE FIFT PART WHETHER faith bee meritorious The Papists BY faith we doe merite eternall life Catechis Roman p. 121. ex Tilemann de error 82 fide err 20. Rhemists also ascribe meriting to faith Rom. 3. sect 3. Argum. Faith is a worke Ergo if we be iustified by faith wee are iustified by workes and soe consequently by merite The Protestants Ans. FAith in deed is a worke but not any of our owne works it is called the worke of God Iohn 6.29 God doth wholly worke it in vs Ergo wee cannot merite by it Argum. Saint Paul saith Ephes. 2.8 By grace are you saued through faith not of yourselues for it is the gift of God not of workes least any man should boast himselfe Faith then is no meritorious cause of our iustification but onely an instrumentall meanes whereby we doe apprehend the grace of God offered in Christ God giueth both faith and the end of faith Vtrumque Dei est as Augustine saith quod iubet quod offertur Beleeue and thou shalt be saued both come of God the thing commanded that is faith and the thing offered namely saluation Ergo all is of grace THE SIXT PART WHETHER to beleeue bee in mans power The Papists RHemist Act. 13. sect 2. giue this note that the Gentiles beleeued by their error 83 owne free will though principallie by Gods grace therefore to beleeue partly consisteth in mans free will though not altogether this is their opinion The Protestants FAith is the meere gift of God Ephes. 2.8 and wholly commeth from God it is not either in part or whole of our selues Argum. Rom. 11.36 Of him through him and for him are all thinges Ergo fidei initium ex ipso neque hoc excepto ex ipso sunt caetera Therefore saith Augustine the beginning of our faith is of him vnlesse wee will say that all things else are of God this onely excepted And afterward hee sheweth that our faith is wholly of God not part of him part of our selues Sic enim homo quasi componet cum Deo vt partem fidei sibi vendicet partem Deo relinquat So man shall as it were compound with God to chalenge part of faith to himselfe and leaue part for God THE SEVENTH PART WHEther faith may be lost The Papists error 84 A Man may fall away from the faith which once truely he had as Saint Paul saith of some They had made shipwrack of faith 1. Timoth. 1.19 Rhemist ibid. Ergo true faith may be lost The Protestants Ans. THe Apostle saith Some hauing put away a good cōscience made shipwrack of faith Such a faith in deed that hath not a good cōscience may be lost for it is not a true liuely faith but a dead fruitelesse faith Argum. But hee that once
the holy and blessed babe in the constitution both of bodie and soule excelled the common condition of all other infants for as he was voyd of originall sinne so he was without the effects and fruites thereof which doe shewe themselues in children for neither suffered he the like pangs and infirmities in bodie being in his infancie as other children doe that are vexed and tormented in bodie neither was he subiect to the vnreasonable and brutish motions of the minde which are in children Therefore Augustine sayth Hanc ignorantiam animi infirmitatem quam videmus in paruulis nullo modo fuerim in Christo paruulo suspicatus This kind of ignorance and infirmitie of minde which is in children I cannot thinke to haue been in the babe Christ. And what ignorance and infirmitie he meaneth afterward he expresseth Cum motibus irrationabilibus perturbantur nulla ratione nullo imperio cohibentur When their brutish and vnreasonable motions come vpon them they are ruled neither by reason nor any other gouernment These infirmities both in bodie and soule wee denye to haue been in Christ and yet we doubt not to conclude that as Christ grewe in stature of bodie as Augustine sayth Mutationes aetatum perpeti voluit ab ipsa exorsus infantia He passed through the ages of mans life beginning with his infancie so likewise as the scripture sayth he increased in wisedome Luk. 2.52 AN APPENDIX OF THE MANNER of Christs birth The Papists THey say Christ came out of his mothers wombe the clausure not stirred as error 99 he passed thorow the doores when he came in to his disciples the doores being shut Iohn 20.19 and as he passed thorow the stone arising out of the Sepulchre Rhemist annot Iohn 20. sect 2. Bellarm. de Eccles. lib. 4. cap. 9. The Protestants 1. IT can neuer be proued that Christs bodie came either thorowe the wood of the doores or thorowe the stone of the Sepulchre or clausure of his mothers wombe And concerning the last the scripture is euident to the contrarie where it is sayd that our Sauiour Christ was presented to the Lord according as it is written Euery male that first openeth the matrix c. Luk. 2.29 2. We graunt that both the birth of Christ his rising out of the graue his comming in the doores being shut was strange and miraculous because one substance gaue place to another for a time and after the passing of his bodie the place remained whole and shut as before but not in the very instant of passing The red sea gaue place to the Israelites while they passed and closed together againe so did the prison doores open miraculously to the Apostles Act. 5.19 An incredulous Iewe seeing the eare of Malchus so soone healed would not haue thought that Peters sword went betweene it and his head as we are sure it did So we say concerning the birth of Christ that the place gaue way while he passed and closed vp afterward againe as before Augustine bringeth in Christ thus speaking Ego viam meo itineri praeparaui and a little after transitu meo illius non est corrupta virginitas I made a way for my selfe out of the wombe neither by my passage was her virginitie lost Christ had a way out of his mothers wombe but if the clausure had not giuen place there had been no way made Againe he sayth Spatia locorum tolle corporibus nusquam erunt quia nusquam erunt nec erunt Take away space of place from bodies and they shall be no where and if they be no where then are they not at all But the Papists in saying that Christ went thorow the very substance and corpulence of things doe take away from his bodie his proper place for two substances cannot be in one place and therefore they destroy the nature of his bodie THE THIRD PART WHETHER CHRIST suffered in soule The Papists THey vtterly denie that Christ felt any paine or anguish in soule vpon the error 100 Crosse otherwise then for griefe of his bodily torments but doe charge them with horrible blasphemie that doe so affirme Rhemist Math. 27. sect 3. 1. The scripture doth ascribe the worke of our redemption and reconciliation only to the blood of Christ vpon the Crosse Coloss. 1.20 Ephes. 1.7 Ergo the death of the bodie of Christ without any further anguish in soule was sufficient Bellarm. de Christi anima lib. 4. cap. 8. Ans. 1. By the blood of Christ vpon the Crosse must needes bee vnderstood all the parts and circumstances of his passion both his sufferings in bodie and soule for if it should be vnderstood properly the blood of Christ onely were sufficient and so his bodie and flesh should be excluded and if the shedding of his blood be taken simply we shal finde that it was no part of his death for his side was pearced whereout issued water and blood after he had yeelded vp the ghost and all the torments of death were past yea after he had vttered these words vpon the Crosse It is finished that is he had payd the full raunsome for mankind Iohn 19. vers 30.34 Wherefore by his blood must be vnderstood by a Synecdoche when one part is taken for the whole all the other paines and torments which he suffered in his flesh Secondly yea and the paines of the soule to are by that speech fitly expressed for the blood of euery creature is the life thereof Genes 9.4 Leuit. 17.14 But the soule is the life of man Ergo not vnproperly by the shedding of Christs blood euen the vexation and at the last the expiration of his soule and so his whole passion both in body and soule is signified Wherefore as in those places alleadged we read the blood of Christ or the blood of the Crosse so otherwhere in more generall termes the Apostles call it The dying of Christ 2. Cor. 4.10 And the suffrings of Christ 1. Pet. 4.13 Argum. 2. If Christ when he cried out vpon the Crosse O God my God why hast thou forsaken me had felt the wrath of God and despaired of his help he should most greeuously haue sinned Bellarm. ibid. Ans. 1. It cannot be that Christ thus cried out for the paine of bodily death for then he had beene of greater infirmitie then many of his seruants that in the midst of extreme torments neuer complained And therefore it must needs be the burthen of the wrath and curse of God that he endured for our sinne that made him so to cry out vpon the crosse 2. Neither doth it follow that Christ vttered those words in despaire but only to shew the great anguish trouble and perturbation of his spirite being vpon the crosse considered now as a meere man his diuine nature and power repressing and hiding it selfe for a time and although in the vexation of his soule he thus cryed out yet he was not altogether left comfortlesse in spirite in that he said My God
is THE SECOND PART WHETHER CHRIST bee our mediator as he is man onely or as hee is both GOD and man The Papists error 104 THey doe teach that Christ onely exercised his priesthood the office of the mediator as he was man not as he was both God man Rhem. Heb. 5. sect 4 His obedience sacrifice prayer satisfaction entring into the heauens was all performed by in his manhood only Secundum formam serui as he was in the forme of a seruant not secundum formam Dei as he was in the forme of God Bellarm. de Christo lib. 1. cap. 1. Argum. 1. If he were priest as he is God he should be inferior and not equall to God and so be Gods priest and not his Sonne for he to whom sacrifice is offered is greater then he that offereth it Rhemist ibid. Answ. It followeth not that because Christ is our priest and mediator as God and man that therefore he should performe all the dueties of the Priesthood as he was God all the partes of his priesthood that required obedience seruice homage subiection as were his sufferings and sacrifice he exercised as man but the authority of reconciling vs to God he wrought both as God and man Argum. 2. There is one God and one Mediator of God and men the man Iesus Christ 1. Timoth. 2.5 Why sayth the Apostle The man Iesus Christ but to signifie that according to his manhood onely he is our Mediator Bellarm. cap. 3. Ans. 1. You may as well conclude out of this place that the Mediator is onely man and not GOD as that hee is mediator onely as man and not as GOD but if out of these wordes it may bee prooued that the Mediator is both GOD and man as it necessarily followeth for how else can he be a Mediator of God and men it dooth as well follow that hee is Mediator both as God and as man Indeede the Apostle sayth The man Iesus Christ not God and man for the one he had sayd before There is one God in that speech including our Sauiour Christ who is one God with his Father Secondly what Saint Pauls meaning is it appeareth in the next verse who gaue himselfe a ransome vers 6. As Christ therefore gaue himselfe a ransome so is hee Priest and Mediator but he gaue himselfe as he was God as he was man hee was giuen Ergo as God he is Mediator The Protestants IN the office of the Priesthood two things must be considered a ministerie and an authoritie In respect of the ministeriall parte Christ performed the office of his priesthood as man but in respect of authoritie of entering into the holyest place and reconciling vs to God which was the principall parte of his Priesthood he did performe it as the Sonne of God as the Lord and maker of the house and not as a seruant And so we holde that Christ neither according to his humanitie alone nor his Godhead alone but that whole Christ is a Priest both as God and man Argum. 1. Saint Paul sayth God was in Christ reconciling the worlde to himselfe 2. Corinth 5.19 Ergo Christ as God is our reconciler and mediator Againe Christ as he is without Father and mother hath no beginning of his dayes nor end of his life so is hee a Priest after the order of Melchisedech but Christ as he is God and man hath neither father nor mother as he is God hath no beginning of dayes and in his whole person no end of his life therefore as God and man he is a Priest of Melchisedechs order Argum. 2. Saint Paul sayth The lawe was giuen by Angels in the hand of a Mediator Galath 3.19 But then Christ was God onely Ergo hee is Mediator also as God Bellarmine sayth that hee is called Mediator because that person was appointed afterward to bee Mediator But the text is playne that he then actually performed the office of a Mediator so much as pertayned to his Godhead for the Lawe was giuen in the hand of a Mediator which kinde of speech sheweth a present execution of the Mediatorship Augustine sayth Non mediator homo praeter diuinitatem diuina humanitas humana diuinitas mediatrix The man Christ is not mediator beside his diuine nature the diuine humanitie and the humane diuinitie is the Mediatrix Ergo Christ Mediator both as God and man THE THIRD PART WHETHER CHRIST merited for himselfe The Papists error 105 CHrist they say by his passion and sufferings hath not onely merited eternall life for vs but euen by his owne merite obtayned his owne glorification Rhemist annot Hebr. 2.1 Argum. 1. Philip. 2.9 He humbled himselfe vnto the death of the Crosse wherefore God hath also highly exalted him and giuen him a name aboue all names Ergo Christ merited his exaltation Rhemist in hunc locum Ans. 1. This place sheweth a sequele of the exaltation of Christ after his humiliation it maketh not one the cause of another as our Sauiour himselfe sayth Luk. 24.26 Christ ought to haue suffered and so enter into his glory Secondly the exaltation which the Apostle here speaketh of is the fame which God chalengeth to himselfe Isai. 45.22 Euery knee shall bow vnto me and euery tongue shall sweare by me But it were most grosse to affirme that the diuine power and glory can be merited Christ hath his diuinity by nature and not by merite The Protestants IT is not in any wise to be thought that Christ merited his glory which is due to him in respect of his diuinity but that by the glorious work of our redemption he hath declared himselfe to be a person worthy of all honour and glory Apocal. 5.9 the place is so to be vnderstoode Argum. 1. If Christ had respect vnto himselfe in his sufferings to gayne or merite any thing for himselfe his loue should greatly bee obscured and darkened which Saint Paul so greatly cōmendeth In that he died for his enimies Rom. 5.10 For now should not his loue bee whole and entire towards vs as though for our cause he onely had died But it is now a diuided and halfe loue for he died as they say partly to merite for himselfe partly to merite for vs. But the scripture speaketh cleane contrary Iohn 17.9 For their sakes sanctifie I my selfe he sayth not partly for their sakes partly for mine owne Argum. 2. All glory that Christ hath was from euerlasting due to his person because he is the eternall Sonne of God As hee himselfe sayth Iohn 17.5 And now glorifie mee with thine owne selfe with the glory which I had with thee before the world was and this glorie was due vnto Christ so soone as he was incarnate by the right of his Godhead Hebr. 1. When he bringeth in his first begotten Sonne into the worlde hee sayth Let all the Angels of God worship him And the Rhemists themselues confesse in their Annotat. vpon these wordes that straight vpon Christs descending from heauen it
was the duetie of Angels to worship him Ergo hee merited not his glorification by his death which was due vnto him euen at his first incarnation Argum. 3. If Christ merited his owne glorification then hee also merited the hypostaticall vnion that his manhood should bee ioyned to his Godhead in vnitie of person for his glory maiestie and power giuen to his manhood doth issue and arise from the vniting of his Godhead therewith in one person but his humanity deserued not to be vnited to the Godhead Nemo tam caecus est sayth Augustine No man is so blind that he dare say that Christ by his well liuing merited to be called the Sonne of God And hee prooueth it out of the first of Luk. vers 35. Therefore shall that holy thing bee called the Sonne of God not for any workes going before but because the holy Ghost came vpon her Wherefore the diuine glorie which Christ hath was not merited but his owne it was from the beginning which glory the humane nature in Christ is made partaker of not for any merite but because it is vnited to the Godhead in the same person through the abundant and vnspeakable grace and loue of God vnto mankinde which of his free grace rather tooke vnto himselfe the nature of men then of Angels Wherefore Christ by his perfect obedience and blessed sacrifice hath merited abundantly for vs remission of sinnes and eternall life but by his merites he hath gayned nothing for himselfe neither had he any respect to the bettering of his own estate in his sufferings but onely to pay a raunsome for vs. THE TWENTIETH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE COMMING OF CHRIST TO iudgement which appertaineth to his whole person as he is both God and man THis controuersie hath two partes First concerning the signes which must come to passe before his appearing Secondly of the time and maner of his appearing The first part contayneth three questions Frst whether the Gospell bee already preached to the whole world Secondly whether Henoch and Elias shall come in the flesh before the day of iudgement Thirdly of the great persecutions toward the end of the world THE FIRST QVESTION WHETHER the Gospel be already preached thorough the worlde The Papists error 106 THey denie that the Gospell hath beene already published to all nations of the worlde for there are many great countries which neuer heard of the Gospell as they affirme But before the comming of Christ to iudgement they say it shal be preached to the whole world Bellar. de Roman p●ntif lib. 3. cap. 4. Argum. 1. Math. 24.14 Christ sayth This Gospell of the kingdome shall be preached thorough the whole worlde for a witnes vnto all nations then shall the end come The end of the world shall immediately follow the generall preaching of the Gospell which if it hath been performed it is most like to haue been done in the Apostles time then the world should haue ended long agoe Bellarm. ibid. Ans. This word Then doth not alwaies in the scripture signifie a certaine and definite time presently to follow as Math. 9.1 Then he entred into a ship and so forth Luke also setteth foorth the same storie cap. 5.18 Then brought they a man lying in a bed But in saying Then they haue not relation to the same time for they keepe not the same order in rehearsing the storie Matthew setteth downe one thing that was immediatly done by our Sauiour Christ before and Luke another And so is the word Then vsed in other places not to describe a consequence of time with relation to that which went before but absolutely without any such respect to name the time present only wherein any thing is done So tunc then signifieth as much as in illo tempore in that time not which shall immediately follow vpon the generall publishing of the Gospel but which God hath appoynted We must also consider who it is that sayth Then namely God himselfe with whom a thousand yeares is as one day and one day as a thousand yeares Christ Then may come many hundred yeares after and yet it shall be true that then shall the end be But we rather take the first sense that Then is here taken indefinitely as it is thorough the whole chapter as vers 21. Then shall be great tribulation which cannot haue relation to that which he spake of before for then it must be vnderstoode of the destruction of Ierusalem but our Sauiour meaneth by Then the time towards the ende of the world as vers 29. Immediately after the tribulation of those dayes the Sunne shal be darkened Then shall the signe of the Sonne of man appeare Argum. 2. We see the Gospel hath been preached in great countreyes of late which neuer heard the Gospel afore as it is thought Rhemist Math. 24. sect 4. Ans. 1. They speake doubtfully they cannot tell as it is thought say they 2. They meane the preaching of their Friers in those newe found countreyes which was not the preaching of the Gospel but of vile superstition not to conuert the people to God but to robbe and spoyle them and make a pray of them killing slaying them without al mercy reade Benzo in historia noui orbis 3. We deny not but that the Gospell may be reuiued and renued in many countreyes where notwithstanding it was planted many yeares afore As this countrie of ours in ancient time called Britanie was first instructed in the faith by the preaching of Ioseph of Arimathea as Gildas saith or as Nicephorus saith by Simō Zelotes yet after that the foundation of the faith thus begun it was confirmed afterward in king Lucius daies by the preaching of Fagane Damiane which at Lucius request were sent into the land from Eleutherius B. of Rome and so may it come to passe in other countreyes a second preaching therefore taketh not away the former but confirmeth and reuiueth it The Protestants THat the Gospell was by the Apostles preached to all the knowen and inhabited nations of the worlde we cannot but affirme being so taught by the scriptures Argum. 1. Our Sauiour saith to his Apostles Ye shal be my witnesses to the vttermost partes of the earth Act. 1.8 which is spoken to the persons of the Apostles not in them to all Pastors and preachers as some expound it for in the same vers there is mention made of the comming of the holy Ghost and howe first they should begin to witnesse at Ierusalem which things were indeede so accomplished in the Apostles Saint Paul also Rom. 10.18 expoundeth that place of the Psalme Their sound is gone forth into all the worlde of the Apostles Agayne seeing the Apostolicall calling and gift is now ceased neither are we to looke that men should be immediatly called from heauen and the preaching of the Gospell to all nations is an Apostolicall worke for the which the Apostles also receiued the gifts of tongues seeing now we haue neither Apostolike