not onely a condition but a cause of that perswasion of fayth which they haue yea the authority of the Church is the formall cause of all that faith seduced Papists haue And therefore the distinction of a cause and condition helpeth them not It is true indeed that the Ministerie of the Church proposing to men thinges to bee beleeued is onely a condition requisite to the producing of a supernaturall act of fayth in respect of them that haue some other thing to perswade them that that is true which the Church proposeth besides the authority of the Church but in respect of such as haue no other proofe of the trueth thereof it is a formall cause Now this is the condition of all Papists For let them tell Mee whether they beleeue the Scripture to be the Word of God without any motiue at all or not and if they doe not as it is most certaine they doe not whether besides such as are humane they haue any other then the authority of the Church if they haue not as doubtlesse they haue not they make the authority of the Church the formall cause of their faith and fall into that sophisticall circulation they are charged with For they beleeue the articles of religion because reuealed and that they were reuealed because it is so contayned in the Scripture and the Scripture because it is the Word of God that it is the Word of God because the Church telleth them it is and the Church because it is guided by the spirit and that it is so guided because it is so contayned in the Scripture this is such a maze as no wise man will willingly enter into and yet the Treatiser commendeth the treading of these intricate pathes and telleth vs that two causes may bee causes one of another That the cause may bee proued by the effect and the effect by the cause and that such a kinde of argumentation is not a circulation but a demonstratiue regresse that two causes may be causes either of other in diuerse respects we make no question For the end of each thing as it is desired setteth the efficient cause a worke and the efficient causeth the same to bee actually enjoyed Likewise we doubt not but that the cause may be proued by the effect and the effect by the cause in a demonstratiue regresse For the effect as better known vnto vs then the cause may make vs know the cause and the cause being found out by vs may make vs more perfitly and in a better sort to knowe the effect then before not onely that and what it is but why it is also So the death of little infants proueth them sinners and their being sinners proueth them mortall The bignesse of the footstep in the dust or sand sheweth the bignesse of his foote that made that impression And the bignesse of his foote will shew how bigge the impression is that he maketh but this maketh nothing for the justifying of the Romish circulations For heere the effect being knowne in a sort in itselfe maketh vs know the cause and the cause being found out and knowne maketh vs more perfectly to knowe the effect then at first wee did but the case is otherwise with the Papists for with them the Scripture which in it selfe hath no credit with them but such onely as it is to receiue from the Church giueth the Church credit and the Church which hath no credit but such as it is to receiue from the Scripture giueth the Scripture credit by her testimony And they endeauour to proue the infallibility of the Churches judgment out of the Scripture and the trueth of the Scripture out of the determination and judgement of the Church Much like as if when question is made touching the quality condition of two men vtterly vnknowne a man to commend them to such as doubt of them should bring no other testimony of their good and honest disposition but the testimony of each of them of the other It is true then which I haue said that to a man admitting the Old Testament and doubting of the New a man may vrge the authority of the Old and to a man doubting of the Old and admitting the New the authority of the New but to him that doubteth of both a man must alledge neither of them but must bring some other authority or proofe so likewise to him that admitteth the Scripture and doubteth of the Church a man may vrge the authority of the Scripture but to him that doubteth of both as all doe when they begin to beleeue a man must alledge some other proofe or else hee shall cause him to runne round in a Circle for euer and neuer to finde any way out Wherefore to conclude this poynt let our Aduersaries know that wee admitte and require humane motiues and inducements and amongst them a good opinion of them that teach vs as preparing fitting vs to fayth Secondly that wee require a supernaturall ayde light and habit for the producing of an act of faith Thirdly that we require some diuine motiue inducement Fourthly that this cannot be the authority of the Church seeing the authority of the Church is one of the things wee are to bee induced to beleeue Fiftly that wee require the ministery of the Church as a propounder of all heauenly trueth though her authority can be no proofe in generall of all such truth Sixtly that the Church though not as it includeth onely the beleeuers that are in the world at one time yet as it comprehendeth all that are or haue beene is an infallible propounder of heauenly truth and so acknowledged to bee by such as are assured of the trueth of the doctrine of Christianity in generall Seauenthly that the authority of this Church is a sufficient proofe of the trueth of particular things proposed by her to such as already are by other diuine motiues assured of her infallibility §. 7. FRom the authority of the Scripture which he would faine make to bee wholy dependant on the Church the Treatiser passeth to the fulnesse and sufficiency of it seeking amongst other his discourses to weaken those proofes which are brought by Mee for confirmation thereof Affirming that though I make shew as if it were a plaine matter that the Euangelists in their Gospels Saint Luke in the Actes of the Apostles and Saint Iohn in the Apocalyps meant to deliuer a perfect summe of Christian doctrine and direction of faith yet I bring no reason of any moment to proue it Whereas yet in the place cited by him I haue these wordes contayning in them as I suppose a strong proofe of the thing questioned Who seeth not that the Evangelists writing the history of CHRISTS life and death St Luke in the booke of the Acts of the Apostles describing the comming of the Holy Ghost the admirable gifts and graces powred vpon the Apostles and the churches founded and ordered by them and Saint Iohn writing the Revelations
and grace thorough the same Lord IESVS CHRIST This forme of prayer wee finde to haue beene verie auncient but what the meaning of it is it is not soe easie to finde out For how may wee bee vnderstood to desire that the body of CHRIST which we represent vnto GOD in this commemoratiue sacrifice should bee carried into heauen seeing it is alwaies there Wherefore let vs heare what the holy Fathers haue sayd to this purpose Quis fidelium haberet dubium sayth Saint Gregorie in ipsâ immolationis hora ad vocem sacerdotis coelos aperiri in illo Iesu Cristi mysterio Angelorum choros adesse summis in a sociari terrena coelestibus iungi vnum quid ex visibilibus invisibilibus fieri That is What faithfull man or beleeuer will euer make any doubt but that in the houre of the oblation the Heauens are opened that so soone as the voyce of the Priest is heard Quires of Angels are present the lowest and highest things enter into a societie earthly things are joyned with those that are celestiall and things visible and invisible become one And in another place At one and the same time and moment that which is presented on the altar is caught vp into Heauen by the ministerie of Angels to bee ioyned in a neere sort vnto the body of Christ and is at the same time before the eyes of the Priest vpon the altar So then the oblations which we present vnto God on the Altar are then carried by the hands of Angels into Heauen when those sacramentall elements which we bring thither though they be still visible on the altar as Gregory saith yet being changed and become vnto vs in mysterie and exhibitiue signification the body and bloud of Christ once sacrificed and shed for vs and now in heauen continually represented vnto God to intercede for vs may rightly be said to bee carried vp into heauen But seeing by the precedent wordes of mysticall blessing and prayer the sacramentall Elements are so chaunged before the pronouncing of this prayer that they are already become in sort before expressed the body and bloud of Christ which is in heauen wee doe not in these wordes desire any such thing to bee done but this is that wee say Lord wee heere commemorate the death and sacrifice of thy Sonne Christ that once died for vs and now continually representeth the same his death vnto thee to procure vs good humbly beseeching thee that for his sake thus dying for vs now continually in heauen representing himselfe vnto thee setting the same his passions and sufferings before the eyes of thy Diuine Maiesty as if euen now he did hang on the Crosse all euill may bee farre remoued from vs all good brought vpon vs. And that all we that by communicating in these holy mysteries receiue the body bloud of the same thy Son Christ may be filled with all heauenly benediction and grace So that to commaund the sacrifice of Christs body and bloud once offered here by vs commemorated to be carried into heauen and to bee represented vnto God is no more but to make it appeare that that body of Christ which hee once offered by the passion of death and which we now commemorate is in Heauen there so represented vnto God that it procureth for vs all that wee desire There is nothing therefore found in the Canon of the Masse rightly vnderstood that maketh any thing for the new reall offering of Christ to God his Father as a propitiatorie sacrifice to take away sinnes neither did the Church of God at before Luthers time know or beleeue any such thing though there were some in the midst of her that so conceiued of this mystery as the Romanists now do Wherfore for the clearing of this point I will first set down what the conceipt of the Romanists now is then make it appeare that all the best learned at and before Luthers time thought otherwise touching this matter then these now doe These that now are expresse their conceipt touching this point in this sort First they shew what an oblation is Secondly what the nature of a sacrifice is And thirdly how and in what sort they imagine Christ is now newly really not offered onely but sacrificed also to take away our sinnes An oblation they rightly define to bee the bringing of some thing that we haue into the place where the name of God is called on and where his honour dwelleth a representing of it there vnto God a professing that wee will owne it no longer but that God shall bee the owner of it that it shall bee holy vnto him to bee imployed about his seruice if it bee an irrationall thing or to serue him in some speciall sort if it bee rationall as when parents presented and offered their children to God to bee holy vnto him as were the Nazarits who were to serue him in some peculiar and speciall sort and in this sort Christ presented and gaue himselfe to God his father from his first entrance into this world and was holy vnto him and an oblation But in this sort it is not for vs to offer Christ to God his father whatsoeuer any Papist may imagine For it were a wofull thing for vs so to giue vp Christ to his father as to professe that wee will owne him no longer nor haue any interest in him nor claime to him any more And besides if it were fit for vs so to doe yet who are wee that wee should present Christ vnto God his father to bee holy vnto him that so presented and gaue himselfe vnto him from his first entrance into the world that hee bringeth vs also to God to bee holy vnto him A sacrifice implyeth more than an oblation For if wee will sacrifice a thing vnto God wee must not onely present it vnto him professing that it shall bee his and that wee will owne it no more nor make any claime vnto it but wee must destroy and consume it also As wee see in the old law when liuing things were sacrificed they were slaine and consumed in fire when other that had no life were sacrificed they were consumed in fire And answerably herevnto Christ was sacrificed on the crosse when hee was crucified and cruelly put to death by the Iewes But how he should now bee really sacrificed sacrificing implying in it a destruction of the thing sacrificed it is very hard to conceiue First therefore they say that Christ may truely bee said to bee really sacrificed because when the words of consecration are pronounced ouer the bread they so cause the body of Christ to bee where the bread was that they cause not the presence of the blood and in like sort the words pronounced ouer the wine cause the presence of Christs blood and not of his body so that vpon the pronouncing of the words of consecration there would bee in the sacrament the body of Christ without the
if all haue sinned and haue bin depriued of the glory of God are justified by his grace redeemed then surely Mary was scandalized at that time and that is it that Simeon now prophesieth And even thy soule which knowest that being a virgine and neuer knowing man thou broughtest him forth which heardest of the Angell Gabriel the holy Ghost shall come vpon thee the power of the most high shall ouershadow thee a sword of infidelity shall pierce thou shalt bee stricken with a sword of doubting and thy thoughts shall rent thee into diuerse parts when thou shalt see him whō thou heardest to be the son of God and whom thou knewest to be generated in thee without the seed of man to be crucified to die to be subiect to humane punishments and at the last with teares strong cries complayning saying if it be possible let this cup passe from me Chrysostome vpon the 13 Psalme agreeth with Origen his words are these When Christ was crucified there was none found that did good the Disciples all fledde away Iohn ranne away naked Peter denied him the sword of doubting went through the soule of Mary her selfe And Augustine to the same purpose hath these words And that which hee addeth saying and a sword shall pierce thy soule that the thoughts of many harts may be reuealed thereby doubtlesse hee signified that euen Mary herselfe of whom the sonne of God tooke flesh should doubt in the time of Christs death but soe as to be confirmed in his resurrection And Theophylact vppon the same place of Luke Happily by the sword he vnderstandeth the dolor happily the scandall wherewith Mary was scanalized for seeing him to bee crucified happily shee thought how hee that was borne without the seed of man who had done miracles and raised the dead could be crucified spitte vpon and die and that hee sayth the cogitations of many harts shall bee reuealed importeth no more but the thoughts of many that shall be scandalized shall be reuealed and being reprehended they shall find present remedy and so shalt thou o virgin be reuealed and manifested what thou thoughtest of Christ and then thou shalt be confirmed in the faith so likewise Peter shall bee manifested when hee shall denie him but the power of God shall be shewed when he receaueth him vppon his repentance Chrysostome writing vpon those words behold thy mother and thy brethren c. and those words of Christ Who is my mother and who are my brethren sayth that Christ vttered these words not as being ashamed of his mother or denying her that bare him for had he bin ashamed of her he would not haue passed through her wombe but shewing that it would nothing profit her that she was his mother vnles she did all those things that beseemed her for this that she now attempted argued too much ambition for she would make it known to the people that she had power ouer and could command her sonne not conceauing any greate matter of him and therefore shee came vnseasonably See therefore sayth hee the want of discretion in her and them for it had beene fitte for them to come in and to haue heard with the multitude or if not to haue stayd till hee had ended his speech and then to haue come vnto him but they call him out and this they doe before all shewing too much ambition and willing to shew that with greate power they command him And in another place It is admirable to see how the disciples though very desirous to learne yet knew when it is fitte to aske him for they doe not this in the sight and hearing of all and this Mathew sheweth saying and comming vnto him and Saint Marke they came vnto him priuately or when hee was alone It had beene fitte his mother and his brethren had done so that they should not haue called him out and made such a shew as they did And writing vpon Iohn and intreating of those words of the virgin when the wine began to faile they haue no wine sayth Shee was willing to do them a pleasure and to make herselfe the more illustrious by her child and happily shee was carried with some humane affection as his brethren were when they sayd shew thy selfe to the world desiring to reape glory from his miracles and therefore hee auswereth something sharpely saying what haue I to doe with thee my houre is not yet come a little after speaking of her calling him out mentioned in the former place hee sayth Shee had not that opinion of him that was fitte but because shee had brought him forth shee thought to command him in euery thing after the manner of other mothers whom she should haue honoured and worshipped as her Lord and therefore hee sayth who is my mother And Theophylact writing vpon the same words sayth the mother of Christ would take vpon her to be a mother and shew that shee had power ouer her sonne for as yet shee conceiued noe great thing of him and therefore shee would drawe him out vnto her while hee was yet speaking being a little proud that she had such a sonne at her commaund What doth Christ therefore because he knew her intention heare what hee saith Who is my mother which he said not to wrong his mother but to correct her minde desirous of glory subject to such affections as men are wont to be Euthymius in his Commentaries obserueth the former place in Chrysostome but dareth not reprehend it as Sixtus Senensis telleth vs. But they will say Augustine affirmeth that the Mother of our Lord was without sinne surely it will be found that he saith no such thing the circumstances of that they alleadge out of Augustine are these The Pelagian commemorateth sundry holy ones which are reported not onely not to haue sinned but to haue liued righteously as Abel Enoch Melchizedech Abraham Isaak Iacob c. and addeth to these certaine women as Deborah Anna Samuels mother Iudith Esther another Anna the daughter of Phanuel Elizabeth and the mother of our Lord and Sauiour whom he saith that pietie requireth vs to confesse to haue beene without sinne The words of Augustine in answer to the Pelagian are these except therefore the holy Virgin Mary of whom for the honour of our Lord I will make no question at all now that wee are to speake of sinnes for hence doe we know that more grace was giuen to her wholly to ouer come sinne who was honored so much as to conceiue and beare him whom wee know to haue had no sinne this Virgin therefore excepted if we could gather together all those holy men and women as now liuing and aske of them whether they were without sinne what answer thinke we would they make I pray tell me whether that which this man saith or that which the Apostle Iohn surely how much soeuer they excelled in sanctity while they were in
state of grace And this is proued against him by the authority of such mē liuing in the Church in the dayes of our fathers as he must not except against Thomas Aquinas saith eternity of punishment answeareth not to the grieuousnesse of sinne but to the eternall continuance of it without remission and that therefore eternity of punishment is due to every sinne of the vnregenerate so continuing ratione conditionis subiecti in respect of the condition and state of him that committeth it in whom grace is not found by which only sinne may be remitted Whence it will follow that euery sinne of the vnregenerate so continuing is worthy of eternall punishment and shall soe be punished and therefore is mortall And on the contrary side euery sin of the regenerate that may stand with grace and not exclude it is rightly sayd to be veniall that is such as leaueth place for that grace that can and will procure remission of which sort are all the sins of the elect of God called according to purpose which are not cōmitted with full consent Cardinall Caietan writing vpon those words of Thomas Aquinas cleareth this point exceeding well Grace onely saith hee is the fountaine whence floweth remission of sinne nothing therefore positiuely maketh sin veniall or remissible but to be in grace nor nothing maketh a sin positiuely irremissible or not veniall but the being out of the state of grace for to be in the state of grace is to haue that which will procure remission of sin to bee out of the state of grace is to be in a state wherein remission cannot be had So that that which positiuely maketh sin veniall or not veniall is the state of the subiect wherein it is found if we respect therefore the nature of sin as it is in it selfe without grace it will remaine eternally in staine guilt and so will subject the sinner to eternall punishment so that euery sin in it selfe deserueth eternall punishment and is mortall but yet such is the nature of some sinnes either in respect of the matter wherein they are conversant or their not being done with full consent that they doe not necessarily imply an exclusion of grace out of the subiect in which they are found so doe not necessarily put the doers of them into a state positiuely making them not veniall by remouing grace the fountaine of remission So that to conclude no sin is positiuely veniall as hauing any thing in it that may claime remission for no sinne implyeth or hath any thing in it of grace the fountaine of remission but some sin either ex genere or ex imperfectione actus in respect of the matter wherein a man offendeth or in that it is not done with full consent to the exclusion of grace may bee saide to bee remissible or veniall negativè per non ablationem principii remissionis in that it doeth not necessarily imply the exclusion of grace the fountaine of remission and some sinnes either in respect of the matter or manner doe imply such exclusion and are therefore named mortall Richardus de Sancto Victore agreeth with the former and more clearely confirmeth our opinion then they doe The circumstances of that wee finde in him touching this point are these One had written vnto him desiring to be resolued in a certaine doubt the doubt was this how it could bee true that hee had learned of his teachers that veniall sinnes deserue onely temporall punishments mortall eternall whereas yet in those that goe to hell if any of those sinnes that they call veniall bee found they must bee punished and euery punishment sustained in hell is eternall seeing out of hell there is no redemption whence it will follow that euen those sinnes that are named veniall deserue eternall punishment for they are punished eternally in the damned and it must not bee thought that the punishment inflicted for them is more then they deserue All this concerning the eternity of the punishment of euery sinne of the reprobate hee acknowledgeth to bee true and therefore sheweth that some sinnes are said to bee veniall and mortall but for other considerations then some supposed His resolution therefore of the doubt proposed is expressed in these words That sinne seemeth vnto mee to bee veuiall which found in the regenerate in Christ of it selfe alone neuer bringeth vpon them eternall punishment though they repent not particularly of the same that is mortall which though it be alone bringeth eternall death vpon the doers of it without particular repentance that therefore is a veniall sin which of it selfe alone if there be nothing else to hinder is euer sure to be pardoned and remitted in the regenerate so as neuer to bring condemnation vpon them that is mortall that of it selfe alone putteth the doer into a state of condemnation and death Here we see sins are distinguished some are said to be veniall some mortal but none are said to be veniall without respect had to a state of regeneration as Bellarmiue imagineth To these we may adde Almain and Fisher Bishop of Rochester and sundry other but it needeth not for howsoeuer our Adversaries make shew to the contrary they all confesse that to bee true that wee say for every sinne eternally punishable deserueth eternall punishment but euery the least and lightest sin that wee can commit without grace and remission remaineth eternally in staine and guilt and is eternally punishable whence it will follow that euery sinne deserueth eternall punishment and so is by nature mortall So that in this poynt as in the former the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died is found to haue bin a Protestant Church CHAP. 10. Of free will CArdinall Contarenus hath written a most diuine and excellent discourse touching free will wherein hee sheweth the nature of free will how the freedome of will is preserued or lost in this discourse First hee sheweth what it is to be free and then 2◠what that is which wee call free will What it is to be free he sheweth in this sort As he is a servant that is not at his owne dispose to do what he will but is to do what another will haue him to do so he is sayd to be free who is at his own dispose so as to do nothing presently because another will haue him but what seemeth good vnto himself he hath a liking to do The more therefore that any thing is moued by of it self the more free it is So that in naturall things we shal find that accordingly as they are moued by any thing within or without themselues in their motions they come neerer to liberty or are farther from it so that a stone is in a sort free when it goeth downeward because it is carried by something within but it suffereth violence and is moued by something from without when it ascendeth yet doth it not moue it selfe when it goeth downward but
preached to the spirits in prison sometimes disobedient in the dayes of Noe. But as Saint Augustine fitly noteth this preaching of Christ in spirit mentioned by the Apostle was not after his death in his humane Soule but in the dayes of Noe in his eternall Spirit Deity And as Andradius rightly obserueth they that he preached vnto are named spirits in prison because they were spirits in prison when Peter wrote of them not when Christ preached to them though if they should be vnderstood to be named Spirits in prison as being such when Christ preached vnto them yet we might rightly conceiue as Saint Augustine doth that he preached to the Soules and Spirits of Men shut vp in the prison house of their sinfull bodies and the darke dungeons of ignorance and sin and not in the prison of hell Thus then our Diuines deny the descending of Christ into Purgatory Limbus puerorum and Limbus patrum perswading themselues that there are no such places But his descending into the Hell of the damned they all acknowledge though not to deliuer men thence yet to fasten condemnation to them that are there to bind Sathan the Prince of darkenesse that hee may not prevaile against them that beleeue in Christ and to keepe them from sinking downe into that deuouring piâ—… into which he went and out of which hee soe triumphantly returned Onely this difference may seeme to be amongst them that some of them thinke he went personally and locally others onely vertually in power and operation Which diuersity of opinions is likewise amongst the Papists Bellarmine and some other in our time teaching that hee went locally into the lowest Hell and the Schoole-men that he went not locally into the lowest Hell but vertually onely in the manifestation of his vertue and power and into Limbus Patrum locally and personally soe that all the controuersie betweene them and vs standeth in two points The descending of Christ into Limbus Patrum and the suffering of Hellish paines For whereas Cardinall Bellarmine laboureth to proue a locall Hell he busieth himselfe in vaine no man denying it But sayth he Beza and others do say the words vsed in the Hebrew and Greeke Sheol and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe alwaies signifie the Graue in holy Scripture and not Hell whence it may seeme to follow that there is no other Hell then the Graue and soe consequently noe locall Hell for damned soules Surely this is a most vnjust and vntrue imputation For Beza and the other learned Diuines he speaketh of do not affirme that Sheol and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe precisely and alwayes in holy Scripture signifie the graue but as Arias Montanus Andradius and sundry other excellently learned amongst our aduersaries do that Sheol which the Septuagint translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not precisely and immediatly signifie the place of damned soules but in an indifferencie and generality of signification noteth out vnto vs the receptacles of the dead And that seeing there are two parts that are sundered one from another in them that are dead there are likewise two kinds of receptacles of death or dwelling places for them on whom death hath her full force the one prouided for their bodies putrifying and rotting and the other for their soules tormented euerlastingly Soe that when these words thus indifferently signifying either of these receptacles of death do note out vnto vs the one or the other of these two places either the graue for the body or hell for the soule cannot be gathered out of the words themselues but the circumstances of those places of Scripture where they are vsed In like sort they say that the word Nephesh translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and anima doth not alwaies signifie the spirituall substance of man that is immortall but the whole person the life yea and some times that which hath beene aliue though now dead euen a dead carcasse according as wee reade in Leuiticus where God pronounceth that whosoever toucheth Nephesh that is a deade corpes shall be vncleane And in this sense it is that Arias Montanus translateth not that place in the Psalme Non derelinques animam meam in inferno that is Thou shalt not leaue my soule in Hell but Non derelinques animam meam in sepulchro that is Thou shalt not leaue my Soule Life or Person or that Body that sometimes was aliue in the Graue For it it cannot be vnderstood that the reasonable soule or immortall Spirit of Christ was euer in the graue either to be deliuered thence or left there If it be sayd that the Greeke and Latine words vsed by the Translators signifie more precisely hell and the reasonable Soule or Spirit then those Hebrew words Sheol and Nephesh doe we answere that whatsoeuer their vse and signification be in prophane Authors yet they must be enlarged in the Scriptures to signifie all that which the Hebrew words doe that so the translation may be true and full Bellarmine to confute this explication and construction of the Hebrew words made by Beza and the rest vrgeth that the Septuagint neuer translateth Sheol by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifies the graue but by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that therefore Sheol doth not properly signifie the Graue Hereunto we answere that the word of it selfe being indifferent to signifie any receptacles of the dead whether of their bodies or soules must not be translated by a word precisely noting the graue as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth and that therefore it is not to be marvailed at that the Septuagint neuer translate the Hebrew word by this Greeke word of a narrower compasse straiter significatioÌ„ Secondly we say that seeing Sheol when by the circumstances of the places where it is vsed it is restrained to signifie onely the place of dead bodies yet doth not precisely note that fitting receptacle provided for them to be laide in as in their beds of rest by the liuing as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth but any other receptacle whatâ—…er euen of such as want that honourable kind of buriall whether they be devoured by wilde beasts swallowed vp of the Sea or receiued into any other place of stay and abode till the time of the generall resurrection the Translators vsed not the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of too narrow compasse straight signification but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 enlarged by them to expresse all that the Hebrew word importeth in this sense Iacob said he would go down mourning into Sheol or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to his son not into a place of soules sequestred from God or into hell sor he neuer thought his sonne to bee gone thither nor into the graue properly so named for he thought his son had bin devoured of a wilde beast but into the receptacles of the dead and into the chambers of death wherein there are many very different
mansions The words of this holy Patriarch professing that he would goe down mourning to his son into Sheol or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not obseruing of this generalitie of signification of the word Sheol but restraining it to note only the receptacles of the damned spirits gaue occasion to some for to think that the soules of the Iust were in some part of Hell or at least in some invisible place farre froÌ„ Heauen within the confines of Hell till the resurrection of Christ if not till the generall resurrection his teturne to judge both the quick dead as Irenaeus Tertullian others imagined But howsoeuer the Greek or Latine words may seeme to bee restrained to note only the places of damned spirits yet it is plaine and euident that the Hebrew word Sheol signifieth any devouring gulfe or pit swallowing vp the dead in that Kore Dathan Aâ—…iram with their wiues children cattell tents all that euer they had went down into Sheol which cannot be vnderstood to be precisely the place of the damned spirits vnlesse we will imagine that sheepe oxen tents may finde any place amongst the damned spirits The reason why our Diuines doe so much vrge the generality of the signification of this word and will not suffer it to be restrained to signifie onely the place of damned spirits is because the proprietie of the word admitteth no restraint and there are many things in Scripture said to goe down into Sheol or to be in Sheol that cannot bee vnderstood to haue gone into Hell or to be in Hell not for that they deny Christs descending into the Hell of the damned for there is no Protestant but confeâ—…seth that Christ did virtually descend into Hell and many thinke he descended locally and personally which difference of opinions is also amongst the Papists For Durandus thinketh that Christ descended into no part of hell personally or locally but virtually onely The rest of the Schoolemen for the most part suppose that hee descended locally into that part of Hell which they call Limbus Patrum but into the Hell of the damned and the other infernall Mansions vertually onely But Bellarmine thinketh hee went locally into the lowest Hell or Hell of the damned mooued so to thinke as hee saith by the authoritie of the Fathers that seeme to haue beene of that opinion So that as I saide before the onely difference betweene the Romanistes and our Diuines about the descending of CHRIST into Hell is touching the suffering of Hellish paines whereof I haue spoken at large before clearing the opinions of our Diuines in such sort as I thinke our Adversaries will not much resist against the same so vnderstood as I haue shewed they must bee and touching Limbus Patrum Wherefore let vs proceede to take a view of the proofes they bring for confirmation of their Limbus The first place that Bellarmine bringeth for confirmation thereof is that in Genesis where Iacob saith I will descend or goe downe mourning to my Sonne into Sheol See saith Bellarmine Iacob was a godly man and so was Ioseph and yet neither of them went vp into Heauen but both descended into Hell That they descended into Sheol that is into the chambers of death and receptacles of dead bodies we make no question but that they went into the Hell of the damned or into any region of darknesse neare vnto it cannot bee proued howsoeuer some amongst the Auncient deceiued by the Greeke Latine words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Infernus vsed by the Translatours to expresse the force of the Hebrew word Sheol haue so thought The second proofe that he bringeth is this Abraham in the Gospell telleth the rich man in Hell that between theeÌ„ there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth such a saeparation as is by the renting of the earth diuiding of one part thereof from another therefore there is no solide thing betweene them and consequently they were all in the same deuouring gulfe or pitte But this surely is a strange kinde of proofe for his owne friends and followers vnderstand by this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the immoueable decree of God who will neuer suffer the one to passe to the other and not litterally such a void empty gaping distance as the word doth properly signifie Yea Maldonatus is so farre from being perswaded by the bare signification of this one word that Abraham Lazarus were in the same deuouring gulfe with the rich man that he saith the place Abraham speaketh of betweene which Hell there is so great a distance is heauen Wherevnto Augustine seemeth in part to consent who pronounceth that he could neuer find that Abrahams bosome wherein Lazarus rested was any part of hell Wherefore it is absurd to imagine vpon the bare onely signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Abraham the rich man in Hell were in the same pit diuided only by an empty gulfe between them seing Tertullian a very ancient writer that knew the force of this word as wel as Bellarmine affirmeth notwithstanding any thing that may be inferred from thence that Abrahams bosome is on high far aboue those infernall dwellings of the damned Wherevnto that in the Proverbs agreeth The way of life is on high to the prudent to avoide from Hell beneath The next place that the Iesuite bringeth to proue Limbus is that of Samuel whoÌ„ the Pythonisse raised when Saul consulted her being destitute of other means of direction But this place of all other maketh least to the purpose it being very doubtfull whether it were true Samuel that appeared or Sathan taking vnto him a body and comming forth in the likenesse of Samuel But let vs suppose it was true Samuel could not his Soule returne from some other place as well as out of Limbus No doubt it might that which Bellarmine hath that the Soule of Samuel appearing vnto Saul seemed to come out of the earth and consequently out of Limbus is a very silly conceipt for what eye could see discerne Samuels Soule But saith he Samuel appearing told Saul a wicked godlesse man that he should be with him very shortly therefore hee was in some region of Hell not in Heauen seeing this wicked King could not goe to him into heaven Wee need not seeke far for answere to this obiection for the ordinarie Glosse doth excellently answere it saying that if these were not the words of a lying Spirit they may be vnderstood in respect of the common condition of death not in respect of the same place there being so great a distance betweene them so surely setled established Touching this appearing Samuel I find great difference of opinions amongst Divines some thinking it was true Samuel the Man of God others a lying Spirit in his likenesse Lyra in his annotations vpon the 1. of Kings Chapter 28 putteth
according to the Translation they follow there is first a speech directed to the Church concerning Christ then an Apostrophe to Christ and then thirdly a returne unto the Church againe Secondly if that were graunted which he vrgeth touching the supposed Apostrophe it would not proue that there is no probabilitie in our Interpretation For this consequence will neuer be made good in the Schooles Christ is prophesied of in the words immediatly going before in these words God speaketh vnto him by way of Apostrophe therefore they cannot be vnderstood of deliuerance out of Babylonicall captivitie seeing it is certaine that Christ deliuered the Israelites out of all the miseries out of which they escaped But saith Bellarmine if wee admit this Interpretation in what bloud of the couenant may wee vnderstand the Iewes to haue beene deliuered out of Babylonicall captivitie Surely this question is soone answered For their deliuerance out of the hands of their enemies and all other benefites were bestowed on them by vertue of the couenant betweene God and them which was to be established in the bloud of Christ in figure whereof all holy things among the Iewes were sprinkled with bloud as the Booke of the Covenant the Altar the Sanctuary and People Wherefore seeing this place maketh nothing for the confirmation of the Popish errour touching Limbus let vs come to the last place brought for proofe thereof which is that of S. Peter concerning Christs going in spirit and preaching to the spirits in prison see whether from thence it may be proued any better S. Augustine vnderstandeth the words of the Apostle as I noted before of Christs preaching in the dayes of Noe in his eternall Spirit of Deity not of preaching in Hell in his humane Soule after death but this interpretation of S. Augustine first Bellarmine rejecteth as contrarie to the Fathers secondly endeauoureth to improue it by weakening the reasons brought to confirme it and by opposing certaine reasons against it The first of the Fathers that he alledgeth is Clemens Alexandrinus who indeede vnderstandeth the words of S. Peter not as S. Augustine doth but of Christ preaching in Hell after his death in his humane Soule but not conceiuing to what purpose preaching should serue in Hell if there were not intended a conversion sauing of some there he runneth into a most grosse dangerous error cōdemned rejected as well by Bellarm. his companions as by vs so that his authority as contrary to Augustines interpretation needed not to haue beene alledged nor would not haue beene if Bellarmine had meant sincerely For Clemens Alexandrinus affirmeth as hee well knoweth that so many Infidels as beleeued in Christ and listened to the wordes of his preaching when hee came into Hell were deliuered thence and made partakers of euerlasting saluation against which errour himselfe being Iudge Saint Augustine not without good cause disputeth in his Epistle to Euodius The second auncient Writer that hee produceth for proofe of Christs preaching in Hell after his death is Athanasius who indeed doth expound the wordes of Peter of Christs going in Soule to preach in Hell after his death but no way expresseth in what sort to whom to what purpose or with what successe he preached Epiphanius whom he produceth in the third place doth not so interprete the words of Peter himselfe but onely vpon another occasion citeth the epistle of Athanasius to Epictetus wherein hee doth so interprete them So that the authority of Epiphanius might haue beene spared Ruffinus in his explication of the Creede interpreteth the words of Peter as Athanasius doth Cyrill in the place cited by Bellarmine speaketh of Christs preaching to the spirits in Hell but saith nothing in particular of this place of Peter S. Ambrose doth not speake of this place but that other of preaching the Gospell to the dead So that there are no moe Ancient writers cited by Bellarmine that doe precisely interprete this place of Peter of Christs preaching in Hell in his humane soule after death but onely Clemens Athanasius Ruffinus and Oecumenius On the other side we haue S. Augustine Beda the authors of the Ordinarie and Interlincall Glosses Lyra Hugo Cardinalis and other interpreting the words as wee doe so that our Aduersaries haue no great aduantage in respect of the number of Interpreters and yet if they had it would not helpe them for confirmation of their supposed Limbus seing some of the Fathers cited by him as namely Clemens Alexandrinus speake directly of preaching in the lowest Hell for the conuersion of Infidels which they dislike as much as wee Wherefore let vs proceede to examine the reasons that are brought either of the one side or the other to confirme their seuerall interpretations of these words and let vs see how Bellarmine weakneth the reasons brought by S. Augustine and improueth his interpretation by reasons brought against it The first reason whereby S. Augustine confirmeth his interpretation is for that mortification in the flesh and viuification in the Spirit mentioned by the Apostle cannot be vnderstood of the body Soule of Christ as they that follow the other interpretation doe vnderstand them seeing Christ neuer dying in soule could not be said to be quickned in it Besides that the very phrase of the Scripture opposing flesh and Spirit in Christ doth euer import the infirmity of his humane nature and the power of his Deitie and in other men that part that is renued by the sanctification of the Spirit and that which is not yet so renued Against the former part of this reason of S. Augustine Bellarmine opposeth himselfe saying that it is not good seeing a thing may be sayd to be quickned that was neuer dead if it be preserued from dying kept aliue But he should know that onely those thinges may be said to be quickned in that they were preserued from dying which otherwise if they had not beene so preserued might haue beene killed or dyed of themselues Which cannot be verified of the Soule of Christ that could neither die of it selfe nor be killed by any other and therefore the Soule of Christ cannot be said to bee quickned in this sense The place in the seauenth of the Acts brought by Bellarmine to proue that those things may bee said to bee quickned that were neuer dead besides that it is nothing to the purpose is strangely wrested For S. Stephen in that place speaketh nothing of viuification or quickning in that sense we now speake of it but of multiplying increasing saying that After the death of Ioseph there rose vp another King in Egypt that knew not Ioseph who euill intreated our Fathers and made them cast out their infants and new borne children 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is that they should not increase multiplie and therefore Bellarmine should not in reason so haue pressed the Latine word of viuification vsed by the Vulgar translatour seeing the
reward is euer some good to be gained by our well doing or patient suffering counteruailing the difficultie in doing and bitternesse in suffering It is therefore most absurd that any thing which is a mans owne in as ample sort before he begin his worke as after he hath done it should be the reward of his worke But some man perhaps will say that a thing that was due in respect of the habit resting in the mind may become due in respect of the Act done and consequently that that which was due one way may become more waies due Surely wee make no question but it may because it was due to the Habit as to the Roote of such action when occasion should be offered opportunity serue not otherwise But seeing in Christ the glorification impassibility of his body was due vnto him as a consequent of personall vnion and not of any habituall quality or habit inclining fitting vnto action therefore that could not become due to any action of Christ that was due vnto him in respect of some former thing as that may bee due to the action of a Man that was formerly due to the habit that is the roote of such action The places of Scripture that are brought to proue that Christ merited for himself are specially two for though there be a third as pregnant as any of the other in the first to the Hebrewes where it is said of Christ Thou hast loued righteousnesse and hated iniquity therefore God euen thy God hath annointed thee with the oyle of gladnesse aboue thy fâ—…llowes yet doe they not much stand vpon it because if it proue any thing it proueth that Christ merited the grace of vnction which they deny who teach that Christ merited for himselfe The first of the two places alleaged to proue that Christ merited for himselfe is in the second to the Hebrewes where the Apostle saith Wee see Iesus for the passion of death crowned with glory and honour But the words as some thinke are not so to be read but to be placed in this sort Wee see Iesus who was for a litle while made lower then the Angels for the passion of death that is that he might suffer death crowned with glory and honour so expressing the finall cause of his humiliation and not the meritorious cause of his exaltation This coniecture is made exceeding probable by those words added by the Apostle that hee might taste of death which otherwise haue no coherence with any part of his speech The second place that they bring is that of the second to the Philippians The words are these Christ humbled himselfe and became obedient vnto the death euen the death of the crosse Wherefore God hath also highly exalted him and giuen him a name aboue every name c. This place as Hugo de Sancto Victore hath fitly noted importeth that the humiliation of the Son of God becomming Man was the cause of the exaltation of the nature of Man for when he personally assumed the nature of Man became Man Man became God almighty hauing all power a name aboue all names according to that of Leo Diuinae maiestat is exinanitio seruilis formae in summa prouectio est that is The abasing of the Diuine Maiestie and Person of the Sonne of God is the high aduancing exaltation of the forme of a Seruant and therefore he addeth that Ex quo Deus coepit esse homo homo coepit esse Deus Deus coepit esse homo subiectus homo coepit esse Deus perfectus Si Deus humiliatus est quantum potuit in homine homo sublimatus non est quantum potuit in Deo that is When God began to be Man and Man began to be God God began to be a Man in subiection and humilitie and Man to be God in the heighth of perfection For if God were humbled as much as hee might be in that he became man was not Man exalted as much as he might be in that hee became God God was humbled when first he became Man In quantum homo dignitate in quantum bonus voluntate that is in that a Man in condition and state in that a good man in will minde but manifested the same more specially in his passion Likewise the Man Christ was exalted when he was borne the Sonne of God but manifested the same more specially after his resurrection then before For wee must not thinke that the Man Christ did then first receiue the full and perfect power of Deitie when he sayd All power is giuen me in heauen and in earth seeing before the vttering of those words he commaunded the Diuels had the Angels to do him seruice and made the very elements of the world to bow and bend at his pleasure Wherefore this place is vnaduisedly brought by our Aduersaries to proue that Christ merited for himselfe it being most cleare and evident that the name aboue all names mentioned in this place which is the name of God Almighty was giuen to the Sonne of God donatione naturali that is by naturall communication when he was begotten of his Father before all eternity and to the Man Christ donatione gratuità that is by free gift when God was made man and Man became God as the ordinarie Glosse vpon these words fitly obserueth and so could no more bee merited by the passion of Christ then it was possible for him to doe any thing whereby to merite to be God And hereupon Caluine rightly asketh which all the Papists in the world are not able to answere Quibus meritis assequi potuit homo ut iudex esset mundi caput Angelorum atque ut potiretur summo Dei imperio that is by what merits could man attaine to bee Iudge of the world Head of Angels to haue the highest authority and power of God But some man will say that Christ pronounceth it was necessary that he should suffer and so enter into his glory and that therefore it seemeth he could not haue entred into it vnlesse hee had suffered Quomodò ergo suam saith Hugo si oportuit quomodò oportuit si suam Si gloria eius fuit quomodò vt ad illam intraret pati oportuit Sed suam propter se oportuit propter nos that is How then was it his glory if he could not enter into it vnlesse he suffered and how was it necessary that hee should suffer to enter into it if it were his Surely it was his in respect of himselfe and it was necessary he should enter into it by suffering onely in respect of vs. For Christ truly if he had pleased might haue entred into his glory some other way haue receiued it in what sort he would euen as hee needed neuer to haue wanted it vnlesse he had pleased but he would for our sakes by punishment enter into his glory that dying he might take away the
earnest and promised confidently to pacifie Ambrose he bade him goe with speede and himselfe followed after in hope of reconciliation trusting vpon the promises of Ruffinus But when Ambrose saw Ruffinus he sayd vnto him O Ruffinus thou doest imitate the impudencie of shamelesse dogges for hauing beene the aduiser and counsellor to so vile murthers thou hast hardned thy forehead and hauing cast away all shame blushest not after the committing of so great and horrible outrages against men made after the image of God And when he was importunate with him and told him the Emperour was comming full of fierie zeale he brake forth into these words I tell thee Ruffinus I will not suffer him to passe the thresholds of Gods house and if of an Emperour he become a tyrant I will ioyfully suffer death Whereupon Ruffinus caused one to runne to the Emperour to desire him to stay within the Court But the Emperour being on the way when the messenger met him resolued to come forward and to endure the reproof of the Bishop So hee came to the sacred railes but entred not into the Temple and comming to the Bishoppe besought him to vnloose him from the bands wherewith hee was bound The Bishop somewhat offended with his comming told him the manner of his comming was tyrant-like and that being mad against God he trampled vnder his feete the lawes of God Not so said the Emperour I presse not hither in despite of order neither doe I vniustly striue to enter into the house of God But I beseech thee to vnloose me to remember the mercifull disposition of our common Lord and not to shut the doore against me that hee would haue opened to all that repent What repentance therefore saith the Bishoppe hast thou shewed after so grieuous an offence what medicines hast thou applied to cure thy wounds It pertaineth to thee sayth the Emperour to prepare the medicines that should heale mee and to cure my wounds and to me to vse that thou prescribest Then sayd Ambrose seeing thou makest thy displeasure iudge and it is not reason that giueth sentence when thou sittest vpon the throne to doe right but thy furious proceedings make a law that when sentence of death and confiscation of goods shall bee passed there may passe thirty dayes before the execution of the same that so if within that space it be found vniust it may be reuersed or otherwise it may proceede This law the Emperour most willingly consented to make and thereupon Ambrose vnloosed him from his bands and he entred into the Temple and prayed vnto God not standing nor kneeling but prostrate vpon the earth and passionately vttering these words of Dauid My soule cleaueth to the pauement Lord quicken me according to thy word Here we see an excellent patterne of a good Bishoppe and a good Emperour and it is hard to say whether Ambrose were more to be commended for his zeale magnanimous resolution and constancie or the Emperour for his willing and submissiue obedience But of deposing Princes here is nothing Ambrose being so farre from any thought of lifting vp his hand against the Emperour that he resolued to subiect himselfe vnto him euen to the suffering of martyrdome if neede should require But saith Bellarmine Ambrose exercised ciuill authority in that hee tooke notice of this murther of the Emperour beeing a criminall cause and forced him to make a ciuill law for the preuenting of furious and bloodie proceedings in iudgment This surely is a weake collection for the Church hath power by vertue of her Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction to take notice of such horrible crimes as murther to punish them with spirituall punishments Neither was the inducing of Theodosius to make a ciuill law for the preuenting of such like euils as he was now censured for before he would reconcile him to the Church an act of ciuill authoritie But such testimonies as this is they that haue no better must be forced to vse That which followeth of Gregories confirming the priviledges graunted to the Abbey of Saint Medardus in such sort that whatsoeuer Kings Iudges or secular persons should go about to violate them should be depriued of their honour proueth not the thing in question For it is evident that the confirmation of these priviledges was passed not by S. Gregory alone but by a whole Councell and more specially by Theodoricus the King and Brunichildis the Queene who might binde their successours and other inferiour secular Rulers vnder paine of deprivation though neither Gregory of himselfe nor yet a councell of Bishops could doe any such thing by their authoritie alone Wherefore let vs proceede to the next example Gregory the second saith Bellarmine excommunicated the Emperour Leo the third who was an enemy to Images he forbade any tribute to be payde him out of Italy and consequently depriued him of part of his Empire Surely if Greg. the second of himself alone had had such power as to forbid all Italy vpon his dislike to pay any more tribute to the Emperour there were some good shew of proofe in this allegation But if wee examine the stories we shall finde the case to haue beene farre otherwise then Bellarmine would beare vs in hand it was For first Gregory did not excommunicate Leo of himselfe but called a Synode to doe it Secondly he did not forbid the paying of tribute out of Italy to the Emperour but the circumstances of the History are these Leo seeking to win the Bishop of Rome and the people of Italy to the casting downe of Images in the West as he had done in the East Gregory the Bishop did not onely refuse to obey him but admonished all other to take heed they did no such thing for feare of any Edict of the Emperour By which exhortation the people of Italy already mis-conceited of the Emperours governement were so animated that they were likely to haue proceeded to the election of a new Emperour and Nauclerus sheweth that the decrees of the Bishop of Rome disswading the people of the West from obeying the Emperour in casting downe of Images were of so great authoritie that the people and souldiers of Ravenna first and then of Venice beganne to make shew of rebellion against the Emperour and his Exarche or Lieutenant and to inforce the Bishop of Rome and the other people of Italy to disclaime the Emperour of Constantinople and to chuse another in Italy And that this rebellion proceeded so farre that euery city putting downe the Magistrates of the Exarch set vp Magistrates of their owne whō they named Dukes but that the Bishop of Rome at that time pacified thē and by his perswasions stayed them from chusing any new Emperour in hope that he would amend So that we see the Bishop of Rome with his Bishops by their authority did nothing but stay the people from obeying the Emperours vnlawfull Decrees as they iudged them but no way went about to depose the
highest and if it be a fault that I descend and performe not that I purposed I will repent of this my fault and by all due satisfaction pacifie and appease my God nothing shall seeme hard vnto mee so that I may avoyde this passion and decline this death in quâ viuens teneor that is in which I am holden though I liue These reasons he saith must needes preuaile and cannot bee resisted if mariage after a vow made to the contrary be lawfull if the Church may not dissolue it and if saluation may bee attained by men liuing in it as I haue sufficiently proued they may and therefore our Aduersaries rashly condemne such as in our time haue maried notwithstanding their vowes If a man saith Frisius shall vndertake to carry a burden to a certaine place and after finding his inability to performe it shall desire to be excused and that some lighter burden may be laid vpon him hee is much better to be allowed of then hee that goeth on in that hee vndertooke and fainting by the way hurteth himselfe and disappointeth him that set him on worke and in like manner hee is rather to bee approued that prayeth to bee eased of the ouer-heauy burden of single life and resolueth to liue honestly in mariage then hee that will still liue single though neuer so wickedly whatsoeuer Pighius and Eckius prate to the contrary who feare not to preferre a Priest that liueth in adultery before him that marieth a wife Besides all this which hath beene said seeing single life is not simply good and to bee desired but respectiuely to certaine endes therefore they that chose to liue single intended not the glory of GOD the good of his Church and the more opportunities of doing good without distraction did not make any lawfull vow seeing a vow must bee of that which is good and properly of the better good and consequently were not tyed to the keeping of it it being resolued that the vowes of fooles that is such as are made without respect to the right end without due consideration of their owne strength and a free and voluntary purpose of performing that they promise are not to bee kept Whence it will follow that the most part of the vowes men made in latter times not intending the right end are not to be kept CHAP. 58. Of Digamie and what kinde of it it is that debarreth men from entering into the Ministery HITHERTO wee haue proued the lawfulnesse of Ministers mariage and sufficiently shewed that no Law of GOD or the Church forbiddeth it and that no rash and inconsiderate vowe hindereth it if men cannot containe Now let vs proceede to see whether they bee any more restrayned and limited in their mariage then other men Some there bee who thinke they are and teach that they must marry but once onely whereas other may lawfully marrie as often as they please And further they suppose that if any man haue beene twice maried or haue maried a Widow hee may not beé admitted into the Ministery The ground of which conceit is that of the Apostle where hee saith A Bishop must be the husband of one wife But the meaning of the Apostle is that he who is to be chosen a Bishoppe must not haue more wiues then one at one time So that the Digamie the Apostle condemneth is not the hauing of two or more wiues successiuely but the hauing of more then one at the same time Of which it is that Iustine Martyr speaketh when expounding that saying of our Sauiour Hee that marieth her that is for saken committeth adultery hee concludeth that they who according to mans lawe runne into Digamies by our Masters judgement are found to bee sinners And therefore Chrysostome expoundeth the text of the Apostle as meant of Polygamy which is the hauing of many wiues at once His wordes are these The Apostle saith not this as making a Law that none without a wife may bee made a Bishoppe but appointing a measure of that matter For it was lawfull for the Iewes to be joyned in the second mariage and to haue two wiues at once Thus doth hee interpret the Apostles words though he were not ignorant that some followed another interpretation And therefore Bellarmine vntruely denyeth that any of the Ancient followed this interpretation but Theodoret. And the Rhemistes confesse that Chrysostome so interpreteth them but they say that writing vpon Titus hee followeth the other interpretation but surely it were strange if hee should so soone forget himselfe Let vs heare therefore what he saith that so we may the better discerne whether he dissent from himselfe and interpret the wordes of the Apostle to Titus as they would haue him or not His wordes are these The Apostle purposeth vtterly to stoppe the mouthes of heretickes which condemne marriage shewing that marriage is without fault and so precious that with it a man may bee preferred euen to the holy seate and chaire of a Bishoppe Also with this saying hee chastizeth vnchast persons while he suffereth them not after their second mariage to bee taken to the gouernment of the Church For hee which is found not to haue kept his beneuolence towardes his wife which is gone from him how should hee bee a good teacher of the Church Nay rather to vvhat crimes shall hee not daily bee subiect for you all knovv that although by the Lavves such second Mariages are permitted yet that thing is open to many accusations Therefore he will haue the Bishop to giue no occasion to them that are vnder him These are the wordes of Chrysostome Neither can any man doubt that will advisedly consider them but that hee speaketh of a second mariage while the first wife liueth but is gone away for so are the wordes and not defunct or dead as our Adversaries translate for their advantage and not of a second mariage after the death of the first wife For if he did he would not condemne them that marrie the second time as vnchaste and wanton or make them subject to any crimes With Chrysostome agreeth Theodoret his wordes are these The preaching then beganne and neither did the Gentiles exercise Virginity nor the Iewes admit it for they esteemed the procreation of children to be a blessing And therefore for as much as at that time they were not easily to bee found which exercised continencie of such as had maryed Wiues he commandeth them to be ordayned which had honoured Temperancie And concerning that saying the husband of one Wife I thinke certaine men haue saide well For of olde time both Greekes and Iewes were wont to be maryed to two three or more wiues at once And euen now when the Imperiall Lawes forbid men to marry two Wiues at one time they haue to doe with Concubines and Harlots They haue saide therefore that the holy Apostle sayth that he that dwelleth honestly with one onely Wife is worthy to bee ordained a
any Papist at this day If Gerson or any other whom I honour held this heresie they held it not heretically as the Romanists now doe euen as Cyprian helde the heresie of rebaptization and sundry of the Auncient the heresie of the Millenaries but not heretically so that Vincentius Lyrinensis saith The Fathers were saued and the children condemned the authors of errours acquited the followers of them in the same cast into the pit of hell But Mr Higgons saith Bernard whose sayings touching the not punishing of such as are freed from the impurity of sin I alleadge thereby to ouerthrow the erroneous conceipt of Papists touching Purgatory admitteth Purgatory therefore I traduce the Testaments of the dead to establish such doctrines as they impugne For answer whereunto I say that whether Bernard admit Purgatory or not yet may hee haue a sentence which supposing all sinfulnes to be purged out in the moment of dissolution proueth that there is no Purgatory to which purpose I alledge him therfore traduce not the testaments of the dead to establish any Doctrines they impugned as M ◠Higgons vntruely vnjustly chargeth me For my distilling our Church out of the writings of learned men liuing vnder the Papacie I shall haue a sitter place to answere him when I come to his Appendix where I will make it appeare that the Israel of God hath not binforced as he vntruely saith it hath to seeke to the Philistines as the distressed Israelites did for the sharpening of their tooles when there was no Smith in Israel but that the Israel in Canaan deriueth it self from that Israel that sometimes was in Egypt in misarable bondage enjoyeth the jewels and treasures fighteth against the enemies of God with the weapons brought from thence And thus much touching Gregory §. 2. IN the next place hee commeth to Augustine whom he saith I haue likewise abused The words wherein the supposed abuse is offered vnto him are these The Romish manner of praying for the dead hath no certaine testimony of antiquity for no man euer thought of Purgatory till Augustine to avoide a worse error did doubtingly runne 〈◊〉 after whom many in the Latine Church embraced the same opinion but the Greeke Church neuer receiued it to this day 〈◊〉 inwhich words he saith I note the temerity irresolution and folly of Augustine the Reader I doubt not will note his temerity and folly in censuring me thus without a cause for I note not Saint Augustine for temerity nor make him the Author of a new fancy as hee falsely chargeth mee but shew that whereas there were very dangerous opinions in the Church in his time touching the state of the departed many of great esteeme thinking that men dying in mortall sinne and adjudged to hell shall in the end come out thence and be saued hee sought to qualifie the matter in the best sort hee could with least offence vnto them and to bring them from that error and therefore sayth If they would acknowledge the punishments of such to be eternall and thinke onely that they may bee mitigated or suspended for a time or that men dying in the state of grace yet in some lesser sinnes are afflicted for a time in the other world though he know not whether these things be so or not yet he would not striue with them This is not to be the author of a new fancy but in hope to reclaime men from a great extremity to leaue something lesse dangerous in the same kind doubtfull and this is all that I say of Saint Augustine neither is this my priuate fancy but the Graecians in that learned Apology before mentioned haue the same obseruation to wit that hee wrote not those things which hee hath touching Purgatory out of a certaine perswasion and as vndoubtedly holding them to be true but as it were in a sort inforced and for the avoiding of a greater euill which was this that there is a purging of all sinnes after death as some then thought So that as it seemeth thinking it something a violent course directly to go against the opinion of many and fearing his words would not seeme probable if whereas others thought all sins may be purged out after death he on the contrary side should say none may be purged hee chose rather to goe in a middle way not contradicting that which is lesse absurd and inconuenient that so he might more easily bring them he had to deale with from that which was farre more inconuenient then too much to exasperate thē This was the apprehension the Grecians had of Augustines writings touching this point which whosoeuer shall without any sinister affection peruse will find to bee righte and true Touching irresolution it was farre from Augustine in matters pertaining to the rule of faith but in other things wherein men may bee ignorant and doubtfull and dissent one from another without danger of eternall damnation no man was more slow to resolue no man more inclined to leaue things doubtfull But howsoeuer that hee was doubtfull and vnresolued in the points concerning the state of the dead it is euident in that he sayth If they whose mercifull error he refuteth would onely thinke the paynes of them that are in hell to bee mittigated or suspended hee would not greatly striue about it though I am well assured hee would not willingly haue resolued that these things are so The like may be sayd touching the temporall affliction of good men dying in the state of grace but yet with some lesser sinnes for hee was euer doubtfull concerning the same and neuer resolued that they are vndoubtedly in a state of temporall afflictions as Maister Higgons vntruly reporteth and thence inferreth many things childishly against mee but that they are in a state wherein prayers may auaile thē which two things are very different For the Graecians in their Apology before cited admit remission of sinnes after this life and yet deny that there is any estate of temporall affliction And I haue shewed before how sinnes may be sayd to bee remitted after this life in the enterance into the other world without admitting Purgatory-punishmēts But it cannot be excused that I say Augustine fearefully opposed himselfe against the error of thē who thought all right-beleeuing Christians how wickedly soeuer they liued shall in the end bee saued Surely the Graecians said as much before and are in good hope to be excused and therefore I am in some hope that I may be also for I do not say that he so feared any thing as to conceale any truth he was thorowly resolued of and which hee held necessary to be knowne of all but that he feared to offend them hee dealt with farther than of necessity hee must and therefore resolued to yeeld to them as farre as possibly hee might without impugning knowne and resolued truthes they being many and of great esteeme that were otherwise minded then he was Thus
most blessed ones are who are in that possession it is a great question that the holy Angells are there is no question but concerning holy men departed whether they may be said to be now already in that possession it is doubtfull c. Surely it is maruaile if Saint Augustine escape the censure of Master Higgons who pronounceth it folly to doubt of these thinges Sixtus Senensis saith wee must ciuilly interpret Saint Augustine in these his sayings but Bellarmine saith directly hee sometimes doubted of the place where the soules of the iust are after death and that vpon the 36. Psalme he denyeth them to be there where after the iudgement they shall bee This is that Augustine that Master Higgons in his scurrill and ruffian-like phrase saith was not so easily to bee iaded by me as Ambrose Thinking them all Iades as it seemeth and vnfitte for such a horse-man as hee is to ride on that haue beene doubtfull or found to erre in this point if he doe I would desire to know of him what he thinketh of Irenaus who saith that the soules of men dying shall goe into an invisible place appointed for them by God and shall abide there till the resurrection attending and waiting for it and that after receiuing their bodies and perfitly rising againe that is corporally as Christ rose they shall come into the sight of God Of Iustine Martyr who saith no man receiueth the reward of the thinges he did in this life till the resurrection that the soule of the good theefe that was crucified with Christ entered into Paradise and is kept there till the day of resurrection reward that there the soules of good men doe see the humanity of Christ themselues the thinges that are vnder them and besides the Angels and Diuels Of Tertullian who saith Nulli patet coelum terrâ adhuc salvâ ne dixer im clausa that is heauen is open to none while the earth remaineth safe and whole that I say not shut vp and againe thou hast our booke of Paradise wherein wee determine that euery soule is sequestred apud inferos with them that are in the lower dwellings till the day of the Lord. Of Lactantius who will haue no man thinke that soules are iudged presently after death but that they are all detayned and kept in one common custody till the time come when the greatest iudge shall examine their workes Of Victorinus Martyr who vpon those wordes of Iohn in the Reuelation I saw the soules of the slaine vnder the Altar of God obserueth that in the time of the Law there were two Altars one of Gold within another of brasse without that as heauen is vnderstood by that golden Altar that was within to which the Priests entered onely once in the yeare so by the brasen Altar the earth is vnderstood vnder which is Infernus a region remoued from paines and fire and the resting place of the Saints in which the iust are seene and heard of the vngodly yet they cannot passe one to another Of Bernard whose opinion Alphonsus á Castro confesseth to be as I haue said Sixtus Senensis likewise but thinketh that hee is to be excused with a benigne affection because of the exceeding great number of renowned Fathers of the Church which seemed to giue authority to this opinion by their testimony amongst whom he reckoneth Ambrose for one Lastly of Pope Iohn the 22. who was violent in the maintenance of this opinion These premises considered let the Reader iudge whether Master Higgons had any cause to complaine of want of faithfullnesse and exactnesse in me in that I say that many of the Fathers thought there is no iudgment to passe vpon men till the last day that all men are holdē either in some place vnder the earth or else in some other place appointed for that purpose so that they come not into heauen nor receiue the reward of their labours till the generall iudgement and that many made prayers for the dead out of this conceipt such as that is in Iames his Liturgy that God would remember all the faithfull that are falne a sleepe in the sleepe of death since Abel the Iust till this present time For I doe not make this the ground of the generall practise and intention of the Church in her prayers as this shamelesse companion would make men beleeue SECT 5. FRom the foure Doctors of the Church and the supposed wronges offered to them he proceedeth to shew that I calumniate a worthy person to defend the inexcusable folly of our Geneuian Apostle his meaning is that I wrong Bellarmine to iustifie Calvine but what is the wrong done to the Cardinall Doctour Field saith hee accuseth Bellarmine vniustly of trifeling and sencelesse foolery in the question of prayer for the dead Let the reader take the paines to peruse the place cited by Master Higgons out of my booke and he shall finde him to bee a very false vnhonest trifeling fellow in so saying For first I doe not accuse Bellarmine of sencelesse foolery in the matter of prayer for the dead as hee vntruly reporteth against his owne knowledge but in that he seeketh to calumniate Master Caluine worthy of eternall honor in very childish sort about the name of Merit Caluine saith the Fathers were farre from the Popish errour touching merit and that yet they vsed the word whence men haue since taken occasion of errour therefore saith Bellarm hee dissenteth from all antiquity and acknowledgeth the Romane faith to be the auncient faith religion This is Bellarmines form of reasoning against Caluin if he say any thing which whether it be full of senceles foolery or not I wil refer it to the iudgment of any one that hath his sences Yet notwithstanding M. Higgons goeth on maketh a consolatory conclusion that Bell needeth not to be discontented that I haue thus wronged him seeing I haue likewise vniustly accused the Fathers But if hee may be as justly charged with foolery in his manner of reasoning against Calvin as the Fathers are truely reported to haue holden the opinion imputed to them by me as there is no question but he may I thinke this comfortable conclusion will not be very cordiall vnto him Secondly I doe not say that Bellarmine doth trifle in the question of prayer for the dead as he likewise adding one lye to another sayth I doe but in prouing the doctrine of the Romane Church that now is to be the same with that which was of olde And therefore silly Master Higgons knoweth not what he writeth But that Bellarmine doth indeede whatsoeuer this trifler sayth to the contrary egregiously trifle I will demonstrate to the Reader in such sort that neither Higgons nor any of his new masters shall be able to avoyde it Thus therefore the case standeth Bellarmine in his discourse of the notes of the Church not in the particular question