fastidia detergeret Nihil enim fere de illis obscuritatibus eruitur quod non planissimè dictum alibi reperiatur The holie ghost hath magnifically and wholsomlie so tempered the holy scriptures that with euident places he might satisfie hunger and with more darke places might wipe awaie disdainfulnes For nothing almoste is found out of those obscurities which is not found els where most plainlie vttered It were no hard matter to heape vp manie testimonies of the auncient fathers to this purpose but that the va nitie of this answerer appeereth sufficientlie in all our bookes written against the papists in which not onely by the manifest places of the scriptures but also by most euident testimonies of the doctors of the church we confute them in the most and greatest matters of controuersie that ate betweene vs. But what saith our gallant answerer that the councels fathers and anciters of theChurch haue from time to timedeclared the true sense of the scriptures vnto vs hath none of these at any time erred in expounding the scriptures may we safely beleeue them whatsoeuer they say He wil I warrant you deny it except the Pope of Rome do alow their interpretations And therfore this flying from the only scriptures to the interpretation of Coun cels fathers ancetors of the Church is nothing els but an impudent shift to reserue vnto the Pope liberty authority to make what meaning of scripture they please thereby to giue colour to euery fansie they list to father it vpon the authority of the holie scriptures The third cause he affirmeth to be that by chalenging of onely scripture they maie deliuer themselues from all ordinan ces or doctrines left vnto vs by the first pillers of Christs Church though not expressely set down in the scripture c. In deede to deliuer our selues from the burthen of mens traditions the ordinances or doctrines of men we affirme the holie scriptures to be hable and sufficient to make vs wise vnto saluation by faith in Iesus Christ as the Apostles and principall pillers of the Church haue taught vs who haue left no such ordinances or doctrines but they be either expressely set down in the holy scriptures or by plaine and necessarie collection to be gathered out of the same For how will our aduersaries prooue that anie thing is receaued from the Apostles which hath not testimonie out of the writings of the Apostles who can be a sufficient witnes of such de liuerie seeing manie things were of olde referred to the Apostles tradition which euen our aduersaries do not admit to be Apostolical seeing the most auncient and immediate successors of the Apostles as Polyearpus Anicetus can not agree about a ceremony receaued from the Apostles namelie the celebration of Easter what certentie can there be of anie other ordinances or doctines fathered vpon the Apostles without witnes of their writings yea and some times directlie contrarie and repugnant to their writings But hereof saith our aduersarie they assume authoritie of allowing or not allowing whatsoeuer liketh or serueth their turnes for the time and hereof he bringeth example First of the number of sacraments whereof some protestants haue written diuerslie because the name of sacrament is diuerslie taken sometimes largelie for euerie holie signe sometimes strictlie for such holie signes onely as being instituted of God are seales of the dispensation of his generall grace in the new teftament perteining to euerie member of the Church somtimes for al holy mysteries or secrets c. But what doth it serue anie protestants turne whether there be more or fewer signes in number that maie be called sacraments seeing all protestants agree about the things themselues that are set forth in the scriptures to be visible signes of grace inuisible and the name it selfe Sacrament in that sense we speake of when we saie there are 2. 3. 4. or 7. sacraments is not once vsed This diuersitie therefore is but of a terme and that not vsed in scripture therefore it ariseth not of anie interpretation or peruerse vnderstanding of the scripture as our answerer would haue it seeme to be But let vs heare his example Martin Luther saith he after he had denied all testimonie of man besides himselfe he beginneth thus about the number of sacraments Principiò neganda mihisunt septem sacramenta tantúm tria pro tempore ponenda First of all I must denie seauen sacraments and appoint three for the time Marie this time lasted not long for in the same place he saith that if he would speake according to the vse of onely scripture he hath but one sacrament for vs that is baptisme In this sentence how manie lies and slaunders be packed together First he saith Martin Luther denieth all testimonie of man which is false for he alloweth all testimonie of man that agreeth with the testimonie of God expressed in the scriptures and often citeth the testimonies of the auncient fathers for confirmation of the trueth which he taught indeede he alloweth man no authoritie to institute sacraments or to make articles of faith or lawes to binde the conscience of man and he would haue all mans testimonies to be examined and iudged according to the word of God but this is not to denie all testimonie of man but to distinguish true testimonies of man from false An other slaunder is where he saith that Luther in denying all mans testimonie excepteth him selfe which is altogether vntrue For he requireth none other credit to be giuen to his owne testimonie then he alloweth to the testimonie of other Neither doth he arrogate any authoritie to him selfe which he derogateth from other men And namelie in this booke of the captiuitie of Babilon he taketh not vpon him absolutelie to teach euerie point but so farr forth as he did for the present vnderstand of them promising after greater study more diligent inquirie to intreat of diuers of them more certenly euen in this verie place of the number of the sacraments he saith he will admit three onclie for the present time intending to be further a duised whether there be fewer or more to be entituled with that name Wherein our answerer offereth him the third iniurie in translating tria pro tempore ponenda I must appoint three for the time as though Luther had taken vpon him to appoint how manie sacraments the Church should haue or would challenge power to appoint more or Jesse at his pleasure where as his wordes if the answerer did not wilfullie corrupt them by false translation do import no such thing but onelie as farr as he did presentlie see there were no more but three of those that were commonlie called sacraments of the new testament which were rightlie to be called by that name The fourth slaunder is that Luther hath but one sacrament for vs which is Baptisme if he would speake according to the vse of onelie scripture yea this is a double slaunder for neither doth
them peaceablie she was declared to be iust or iustified in the sight of men Therefore there are two kindes of iustification the one by faith before god the other by works before men therefore a man is not iustified by faith only but by works also which saying of S. Iamesis not repugnant to that we holde that a man is iustified before god sola fide by faith alone or by faith without the workes of the lawe as S. Paule saieth which is alone which comprehendeth al good works as also the examples of Abraham and Dauid in the 4. Chapter to the Romanes doc plainelie declare where the Apostle speaketh expreslely of circumcisiō which was a worke of obedience following the faith of Abraham And Dauid pronounceth the blessednes of a man to whome the Lord imputeth righteousnes without workes which must needes be vnderstood euen of workes following faith because Dauid speaketh of himselfe and of all men generallie that shall obtaine blessednes by the grace of god without merite of workes For to him that worketh reward is not imputed according to grace but according to debt Againe the Apostle writing to the Galathians which were faithful speaketh generally It is manifest that by the lawe no man is iustified before god for the iust shal liue by faith By which texts many more the conclusion is moste necessarie that before God workes following faith doe not iuslifie but faith alone without workes yet not a dead but a liuing faith which worketh by loue Further he saith they haue expresselie for absolution whose sinnes ye forgiue are forgiuen whose sinnes ye retaine are retained Iohn 20. but we haue no where that Priests cannot forgiue or retaine sinnes in earth But the controuersie is not whether the Ministers of God haue power to forgiue or retaine sinnes for we beleeue that they haue such power but whether absolute power properlie to forgiue sinnes and how the same is to be exercised is the question For we beleeue that God onelie hath power absolutelie properlie to remit sinnes according to the scripture man by declaring Gods will pleasure Yet againe they haue expresselie The doers of the lawe shall be iustified Rom. 2. And we saie euen as much but because none is found a doer of the lawe we saie with the same Apostle that it is manifest that no man is iustified before God by the lawe But our answerer inferreth moreouer that we haue no where that the law required at Christians hands is impossible or that the doing therof iustifieth not Christians yes we haue it expressely That which was impossible of the law in as much as it was weake by the flesh God sending his sonne in the similitude of sinfull flesh c. If there had beene a lawe giuen that had bene able to giue life righteousnes in deede had bene of the lawe but the scripture hath concluded all vnder sinne that the promis by the faith of Iesus Christ might be giuen to them that belecue Againe by the workes of the lawe no flesh shal be iustified before him therefore no Christians by the workes of the lawe shal be iustified before him Moreouer we are saued by grace through faith not of workes Ergo Christians for none els are saued are iustified through faith without workes Yet againe they haue expresselie Psal. 75. Vowe ye and render your vowes we haut no where vowe ye not or if you haue vowed breake your vowes we confesse the Prophet willeth the people to vowe yet he meaneth onelie thinges lawfull and in their power to performe we bid no man to breake his vowe if it be lawful and possible but if he haue vowed to goe a pilgrimage which is Idolatrie or to liue vnmaried which is not able to liue continentlie we exhort him to repent of his wicked or vnaduised vowe to serue God as he hath appointed or to vse the remedie that God hath prouided They haue againe expreslie Keepe the traditions which ye haue learned either by worde or epistle 2. Thess. 2. we haue no where the Apostles left noe traditions to the Church vnwritten Saint Paull willeth the Thessalonians to keepe the traditions or doctrine which he had deliuered vnto them either by word of mouth or by his epistle This prooueth not that the Apostles left any traditions which are no where written in the holie scripture because they were not all written in the epistle of Saint Paul to the Thessalonians But we haue expresselie that the holie scriptures are able to make vs wise to saluation to make the man of God perfect and prepared to all good works which things seing we haue fufficientlie in the holie scriptures we neither regard nor receiue any other doctrine vnder name of tradition of the Apo stles or of Angels from heauen Still they haue expresselie If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commaundements and when he said he did that already if thou wilt be perfect go sel all thou hast giue to the poore follow me And we haue no where that either the commaundements of God cannot be kept or that we are not bound vnto them or that there is no degree of life one perfecter then another We graunt that who so by good deeds will seeke to enter into life as that yong man did must doe the deedes of the commaundements which if he can doe he shal liue by them but albeit he boasted that he had kept the commaundements yet it followeth not that he did keepe them indeede and as god required but was a blinde hipocrite and sought to iustifie him-selfe according to the heresie of the Pharisies That we are not bound to keepe the commaundements as neere as God will giue vs grace is no article of ours but a slaunder of his Finallie we denie that anie mortall mans life is perfect yet we graunt that some mens liues come neerer to perfection then other some Neither doth our Sauiours words include perfection in selling his goodes nor in giuing them to the poore for if a man bestowe all his goodes to feede the poore and haue not loue he is nothing but he addeth that he must followe Christ and take vp his crosse and so by Christs grace he shal attaine vnto perfection which he falselie imagined that he he had obtained by a pharizaical obseruation of the lawe this fauoreth not Monkes and friers more then hipocrites and liers Beside this They haue expresselie worke your owne saluation with feare and tremhling Phil. 2. we haue no where either that a man can worke nothing toward his owne saluation being holpen with the grace of God or that a man should make it of his beliefe that he shall be saued without all doubt or feare The saying of Saint Paull we acknowledge that men should worke out their owne saluation with feare and trembling together with the next verse following for it is God that worketh in
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are able to make thee wise you harpe onelie vpon the word of instructing which the vulgar interpreter vseth not sufficient to answere the greeke verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet if it be rightlie vnderstood as perhappes he meant it signifieth to furnish and not to teach properlie so the sense might be that the scripture is able to furnish thee with knowledge to saluation and that 〈◊〉 a sufficiencie Now to your pelting cauilles You aske if the Scriptures which can shew Timothie the waie to saluation and bring him also to it if he will follow them be sufficient for the wholl Church so that all Doctrine by tradition is superfluous I answere yea For there is but one waie to saluation for all the Church But you obiect that euerie Epistle of Saint Paull enstructeth a man to saluation yet it not sufficient for the wholl Church I answere that euerie Epistle of Saint Paull is not sufficient to instruct a man to saluation or to make him wise vnto saluation But that which Saint Paull spaketh is of the wholl scripture not of euery epistle For you might as well obiect that euery chapter and verse instructeth a man toward saluation rather then to saluation but not sufficientlie yet the wholl is able to make a man wise vnto saluation Your second obiection is that the Apostle speaketh principallie of the olde Testament and will Master Charke saie that the olde Testament is sufficient to Christian men for their saluation without anie other writt Yea I warrant you for there is no Doctrine in the new but it was taught in the olde Saint Paull affirmeth that he said nothing but that which the Prophetes and Moses had spoken of thinges to be performed The new Testament hath no other Doctrine then the olde onelie it testifieth the performance of those thinges in Christ which the olde Testament foreshewed to be performed Againe because you grate so much vpon the exclusion of other writt Saint Paull addeth by faith in Iesus Christ which containeth all that is written in the new Testament concerning the storie of performancet and seales of this faith And if the olde were sufficient how much more is the olde the new together a rich aboundant Doctrine The 〈◊〉 that you make against his translation of the wholl Scripture which you would referre to euerie Scripture is answered before the translation must be according to the circumstance of the place Euerie Scripture which is euerie seuerall booke or euerie seuerall Chapter or euerie seuerall verse is not able to make the man of God perfect and perfectlie prepared to euerie good worke but the wholl is therefore the translation must be the whole scriptures and not euerie scripture But now to your tow reasons In the first you saie that Saint Paull could not meane to Timothie of all the scriptures together which we now vse for that all was not then written To this you confesse that he answereth there was inough written then for the susficient saluation of men of that time and therest is not superfluous But this you saie is from the purpose Yea is how so I praie you you answere it was sufficient with the supplie by worde of 〈◊〉 vnwritten but that is contrarie to the purpose for Master Charke telleth you that from the time that any 〈◊〉 was written that scripture contanied sufficient 〈◊〉 to saluation without anie supply of anie other Doctrine that was not in that Scripture comprehended although preaching and other meanes were necessarie to reach men which is beside the purpose Before the scripture was written the same doctrine in substance was deliuered by reuelation that afterwarde was written The continuance thereof was not onelie by bare tradition but also in euerie age renewed by reuelation Againe the age of men was lo long that there remained alwaies faithfull and ceratine witnesses of the doctrine aliue so that it could not be corrúpted but it was easie by those witnesses to be refuted But when the age of man was drawne into the streights of 70. yeares or litle more as Moses sheweth the Doctrine of the Church was committed to writing euen as much at the first as was sufficient for the instruction of the people vnto saluation without anie supplie of traditions The 〈◊〉 of the Prophetes and Apostles writinges is a more full and plentifull declaration of thesame Doctrine of saluation not anie addition of anie new Doctrine or waie to saluation Your second reason is that 〈◊〉 partes of scripture be wanting now which were in Saint Pauls time But that you are not able to prooue For although there is mention in the olde testament of diuerse bookes written by Prophets which are not now extant yet it followeth not that those were extant in Saint Pauls time And if any were yet were they but explications and interpretations of the bookes of Moses which are extant euerie syllable and pricke and shall be to the ende of the world But Epiphanius affirmeth that all thinges cannot be taken from the scripture wherefore the Aposties 〈◊〉 somethings in writing and somethings in tradition To this I answere first that Saint Paul is greater then Epiphanius Secondlie that Epiphanius saith not that anie thing necessarie to saluation cannot be taken out of the scripture For he speaketh onelie of this opinion that it is sinne to marrie after virginitie decreed which neuertheles maie be taken out of the scripture if the vow were aduisedlie taken and no necessitie of incontinencie requiring mariage But of tradition we shall haue further to consider in the next section The thirteenth section intituled Of teaching traditions besides the scripture Art 5. GOtuisus reporteth the Iesuits to saic that the want of holie scriptures muste be supplied by peecing it out by traditions Cens. f. 220. Here you repeat your olde friuolous quarrel that the Iesuites haue no such vnreuerent words Master Chark chargeth you out of Hosius with a farre worseisaying that if traditions be reiected the verie Gospell it selfe seemeth to be reiected For what els are traditions then a certaine liuing Gospell But thereto you answere not one worde and the meaning of those words reported by Gotuisus you mainteine egerlie thorouhout this section as you did in parte in the 12. section that the scriptures are not sufficient and that there must be traditions receiued beside the scripture To what ende but to supplie the want and insufficiencie of the holie scriptures Nay saie you Though both parts of Gods worde that is both written and vnwritten be necessarie vnto Gods Church yet both of them do stand in their full perfection assigned them by God neither is the one a maime or impeachment to the other You meane they are as perfect as God made them not that the written word is sufficient to teach all trueth vnto the perfection of the man of God And so for all your vaine compasse of wordes the sense is all one The scripture is but a part or a
peece of Gods worde and traditions are an other peece and this peece must be added to that or els it is not a perfect or sufficient instruction of itselfe for Gods Church The comparison you make of ioyning S. Lukes Gospell to that of Saint Matthew or Saint Paules epistles to them both to resemble your patching of traditions to the written word of God is both odious and vnlike and without begging the wholl matter in question gaineth nothing For the adding of the writings of one Euangelist to another or of an Apostle to the Euangelistes is but the heaping of heauenlie treasure to the further inriching of the Church in all light of spirituall knowledge so the accession of the bookes of the new testament is as it were the vnfolding or laying open of the same diuine riches that was perfectlie contayned in the olde testament for the saluation of all Gods elect that liued vnder that discipline But your traditions as you maintaine them argue an insufficiencie of the holie scriptures which allso you confesse your selfe and are not a more plaine or plentifull application of the mysteries comprehended in them Therefore though you can for manners sake otherwhile forbeare odious speeches aginst the dignitie of holie scriptures yet euen that odious conclusion gathered by Gotuisus must needes follow of your doctrine concerning the insufficiencie of scriptures and the necessitie of traditions That your traditions are Gods word and of equall authoritie with the scriptures you promise to shew more largelie in the twelft article together with certaine meanes how to know and discerne the same Sed haec in dicm minitave Parmeno You haue taken a pretie pause of three yeares long since you were interrupted as you 〈◊〉 in the end by a writte de remouendo But the daie will come that shall paie for all Whether anie cause or matter hath beene ministred by you of odious speeches against the dignitie of holie scriptures Mastet Charke declareth by one example out of Hosius which with all the rest that he saith you omit to answer as trifling speech to litle purpose So whatsoeuer by anie colour of reason you can not auoid by your censorious authoritie you maie contemne and passe ouer But his conclusion seemeth worthie the answer which he maketh in these wordes To conclude it is a great iniquitie to adde traditions or your vnwritten verities to the written word of God whereunto no man maie adde because nothing is wanting from which no man maie take because nothing is superfluous But to him that addeth shall the curses written in the booke be added for euer Against this conclusiō you note in the margent great iniquitie to adde one veritie to another or to beleeue two verities together A fine ieste but a grosse begging of the wholl cause For who shal graunt that your vnwritten vereties be truth and not falsehood falselie by you termed verities vnwritten There is no veritie of matters necessarie to be knowne vnto saluation which is not written in the holie scriptures that are hable to make vs wise vnto saluation But good Lord what a sturre you keepe because M. Chatk noteth in the margent Apoc. 22. ask how this place is alledged against you c. As though that which is true of one booke yea of euery booke of the scripture maie not iustlie be verefied of the wholl bodie and boke of the the Bible Because adding to the word of god argueth imperfection in the word of god Your stale obiection of Saint Iohns Gospell written after the Reuelation is alreadie answered For al bookes of scripture that haue beene written since the fiue bookes of Moses are no addition to the word of God but a more cleere explication of the 〈◊〉 first com mitted to writing by inspiration of God Neither do they teach an other waie of saluation then Moses did but set forth the same more plainlie by demonstration by examples of Gods iustice and his mercie by threatenings by exhortations by explication of his promises by shewing the accomplishment and the manner of perfourmance of them in Christ and his Church And this they do moste absolutelie sufficiently and plentifully to the saluation of Gods people These things saith S. Iohn are written that you should beleeue that Iesus is Christ the sonne of God and that beleeuing you maie haue euerlasting life in his name Here you maie as well cauill that not onelie the Gospell of Saint Iohn or the miracles written in the same is necessarie to be beleeued vnto saluation but all the rest of the scripture also foolishlie opposing thinges that are no waie repugnant but the one including the other For the beleeuing of Saint Iohns Gospell doth not exclude but include all other bookes and partes of holie scripture which teach the same meane of saluation or any thing thereto pertaining But how holdeth this argument saie you no man maie adde to the booke of Apocalips ergo no man maie beleeue a tradition of Christ or his Apostles Maie we not as well saie ergo we maie not beleeue the actes of the Apostles No sir for we make our argument in this man ner No man maie adde to the booke of the Apocalips much lesse may anie man adde to the wholl Bible of the olde and new testament And consequentlie there are no traditions of Christ and his Apostles to be credited as needefull to saluation which are not contained in the holy scriptures Thus we alledge scriptures and thus we argue vppon them not as it pleaseth you to deseant vpon our allegations and to dissigure our arguments But it is lamentable you saie to see the 〈◊〉 dealings of these men in matters of such importance It is verie true vnderstanding you and your complices to be the men that vse such fleightes in 〈◊〉 waightie causes As for our doctrine is plaine without any seame that the scriptures are sufficient to saluation therfore al tradition besides them are 〈◊〉 to that purpose But let vs see who 〈◊〉 sleightes by your iudgement First you aske Master Charke what he 〈◊〉 by adding Who doth adde Or in what sense as though his meaning and sense of adding were not manifest as also his accusation that the I suites the Papistes do adde to the word of God their traditions a necessarie to saluation yet not expressed or contained in the word of God But if God saie you left anie doctrine by tradition vnto the Church and our ancetours haue deliuered the same vuto vs especiallie those of the 〈◊〉 Church what shall we do in this case Shall we refuse it It seemeth dangerous and I see no reason The question is not whether we should refuse anie thing that God hath left but whether God hath left anie such tradition to be beleeued vnto salua tion which is not contained in the holie scriptures But if our ancetours of the primitiue Church haue deliuered anie such tradition vnwritten as left by Christ what shall we doe you
necessarie to saluation not expressed in so manie wordes and syllables yet in full sense contained and to be plainlie concluded out of the holie scriptures and these we receiue to be of as great credit as anie thing that is expresselie contained in the scriptures The other kinde of traditions was rites and cerimonies which are not necessary to saluation but are in the Churches power to alter as it maie stand best with edification Among which S. Basill rehearseth some that long since are abolished as the rite of standing in praier one the Lords daie and betweene Easter and Whitsontid which of it selfe is a thing indifferent as also that manner of glorifying in which they said with the holy ghost whereas al the Church long since hath said neither in the holie Ghost nor with the holie Ghost but to the holie Ghost To beleeue that the holie Ghost is to be glorified equallie with the Father and the sonne it is necessarie to saluation but in what forme of wordes that shal be song in the Church it is indifferent and the later Church hath vsed her libertie herein to alter that forme which Saint Basill saith was deliuered by the Apostles themselues without writing By this I hope it is manifest what kinde of traditions are of equall force or authoritie with the scripture euen they which haue their ground in the scriptures and none other For as the same Basill affirmeth Euerie word or deede ought to be confirmed by testimonie of the holie Scriptures Againe For if all that is not of faith is sinne as the Apostle saith and faith is of hearing and hearing by the word of God whatsoeuer is beside the holie Scripture being not of faith is sinne Thus Basill whatsoeuer he speaketh of vnwritten traditions he meaneth not against the insufficiencie of the holie scriptures except you will saie he is contrarie to him-selfe in manie places beside these that I haue noted Tr. de vera piafide Epist. 80. in Reg. Breu. Inter. 1. 65. 68. de ornatu Monachi Your next testimonie is out of Eusebius lib. 1. Eu. Demonst. cap. 8. whole wordes you mangle after your manner leauing out at your pleasure more then you rehearse Eusebius hauing shewed the excellencie of Christ aboue Moses declareth also that there are two manners ofliuing in Christianitie the one of them that are strong and perfect the other of them that are subiect to manie infirmites and that whereas Moses did write in tables without life Christ hath written the perfect preceptes of the new Testament in liuing mindes his disciples following their Masters minde considering what Doctrine is meete for both sortes haue committed the one to writing as that which is necessarie to be kept of all the other they deliuered without writing to those that were able to receiue it wich haue excelled the common manner of men in knowledge in strength in abstinence c. And this is the meaning of Eusebius in that place not of anie traditions necessarie to saluation of euerie man which are not taught in the holy scriptures but of certaine precepts tending to perfection not enioyned to all but written in the heartes of some The third man is Epiphanius who you saie is more earnest then Eusebius writing against certaine heretikes called Apostolici which denied traditions as our Protestantes do Which is but a tale for they were more like to Popish monkes and friers then Protestantes For they professed to abstaine from marryage to poslesse nothing and such other superstitions they obserued But what saith Epiphanius for traditions He saith that we must vse tradition For all thinges can not be taken out of the scripture wherefore the holie Apostles deliuered somethings in the scriptures and something in tradition Mine answer to Epiphanius is the same that it was to Basilius Namelie that such things as were not expressed in plaine wordes in the scripture were approoued by tradition being neuertheles such thinges as were to be concluded necessarilie out of the scripture As in the question for which he alledgeth tradition it is manifest Tradiderunt c. the holie Apostles of God saith he haue deliuered vnto vs that it is sinne after virginitie decreed to be turned vnto marriage This the Papistes doubt not but that they are hable to prooue out of the scripture except where the Pope dispenseth And we acknowledge that where the vow was made a duisedly to a Godlie purpose and abilitie in the partie to performe it that it is sinne to breake it neither can the Pope dispense with it In the other place where he rehearseth manie examples of traditions he speaketh of rites and ceremonies as is before declared wherof manie are not obserued in the Popish Church neither is there anie of them necessarie to saluation But Epiphanius you saie prooueth it out of scripture 1. Cor. 11. 14. 15. vhere Saint Paulsaith as I deliuered vnto you And againe so I teach and so I haue deliuered vnto the Churches and If you holde fast except you haue beleeued in vaine To the first I answer that it prooueth no traditions necessarie to saluation which are not contained in the scriptures as is more manifest by the second and third text for where Saint Paul saith so I teach in all the Churches of God 1. Cor. 14. 33. he saith immediatelie before that God is not the God of sedition but of peace 1. Cor. 15. 1. 2. 3. the Apostle speaketh manifestlie of the doctrine of the resurrection wherof he him-selfe in that place writeth plentifullie and in manie other places of scripture the same article is taught moste expresselie You see therefore how substantiallie Epiphanius prooueth tradition vnwritten out of the scripture to be necessarie to saluation which is our question But with Epiphanius saie you ioyneth fullie and earnestlie Saint Chrysostome writing vpon these wordes of Saint Paul to the purpose Stand fast and holde traditions out of which cleere wordes Saint Chrysostome maketh this illation Hinc patet c. Hereof it is euident that the Apostles deliuered not all by epistle but manie thinges also without writing and those are as worthie credit as these Therefore we think the tradition of the Church to be worthie of credit it is a tradition seeke no more The sense of these wordes is that the Apostles in their preaching did expresse manie things more perticularly then in their epistles not that they preached anie thing necessarie to saluation but that the same was contained either in their epistles or in other bookes of the holie scripture And so I saie of the tradition of the Church which is a doctrine contained in the scriptures though not expressed in the same or in so manie wordes as the three persons and one God in trinitie and trinitie in vnitie to be worshipped c. is of equall credit with that which is expressed in the scriptures because the ground of our faith standeth not vppon the sound of wordes but vppon
the sense and true meaning of thinges them-selues And this is Chrisostomes meaning not of traditions altogether without the compasse of the scriptures and yet held necessarie to saluation For of the sufficiencie of the scri ptures he speaketh in diuers places and namelie vppon that cleere text 2. Tim. 3. Hom 9. of the scripiure he saith Siquid vel diseere velignorare opus sit illic addiscemus If anie thing be needefisli to know or not to know in the scriptures we shall learne But because you saie those wordes of Saint Paulare cleere 2. Thess. 2. for vnwritten tradititions I praie you what argument can you conclude out of them Saint Paul deliuered to the Thessalonians something by preaching and something by writing ergo he deliuered something that is not contained in the holie scriptures written either by himselfe or anie other of the holie men of God appointed for that purpose Who is so childish thinke you to graunt you this consequence therefore for anie thing you haue brought or can bring or anie thing that the fathers haue said or can saie the word of God writ ten is perfect and hable to make a man wise to saluation by faith in Iesus Christ which is to be had sufficientlie in the holie scriptures as Christ him-selfe doth witnes Iohn 5. 39. And so the former conclusion doth still stand It is great iniquitie to receiue traditions altogether beside the holie scripture as necessarie to saluation which must needes argue the holie scriptures of imperfection and vnsufficiencie Neither doth the consent of Antiquitie refute this assertion of Master Charke seeing the auncients as it is said spake either of doctrine not expressed in word but contained in deede in the scriptures or els of rites and ceremonies the perpetuall obseruation where of is not necessatie to eternall life as is prooued by the discussing of manie of them which the elder fathers do father vpon the tradition of the Apostles as much as anie other that they name And if you saie they were deceiued in such as are abolished how shall we know that 〈◊〉 not in such as are retained For in their 〈◊〉 they were all generallie receiued as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well such as are discontinued as those 〈◊〉 remaine 〈◊〉 if any man will aske you what be these Apostolicall 〈◊〉 in particuler you could alleadge him testimonies 〈◊〉 auncient fathers for a great number But you referr 〈◊〉 Saint Cyprian Serm. de ablut pedum Tertullian 〈◊〉 milit and Saint Hieron dialog contra Luciferianos 〈◊〉 say he shall finde store Belike your note booke 〈◊〉 you thither although you listed not to take so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your selfe but turne it ouer to your 〈◊〉 Howbert he that is disposed to read the sermon 〈◊〉 Cyprian shall finde no store at all but of the necessitie of washing offcete which ceremonie was taken by the example of Christ yet is not thought necessarie in the Popish Church at this daie Tertullian in deede hath some prety store yet not to mantaine popish traditions so much as to ouerthrow them For he 〈◊〉 some things that are taken out of the scripture as to renounce the deuill in Baptisme c. some that are growne out of vse manie hundred yeares agoe as that the baptized should taste of milke and honie that they should abstaine from washing seauen daies after That men should signe their forheade at euerie steppe and proceeding going forth and comming home at putting on of apparell and at pulling on of shooes at washings at table at lighting of candells at beddes at stooles at all times and places Saint Hierome also in the person of the heretike rehearseth traditiones and among them such as Papistes do not obserue namelie the mixture of milke and honie geuen to them that are newlie baptized On the Lords daie and during the wholl time of Pentecoste neither to kneele in praiers nor to fast These are parte of those Apostolical traditions in particular which if they had beene necessary to saluation must haue beene perpetuallie continued If they were vntruelie ascribed to the Apostles what wartant can we haue of any other seeing the most auncient writers commend these as much as anie other for Apostolicall traditions Yet a few other examples you wil adde out of Saint Augustine whoe prooueth baptisme you sare by tradition of the Church lib. 10. de gen ad lit cap. 23. to this answere hath beene made sufficientlie in the 11. section that Saint Augustine doth not defend baptisme of infants onelie by the custome of the Church but also by the scriptures Likewise you saie he prooueth by the same tradions that we must not rebaptize those which are baptized of heretikes lib. 2. de bapt capt 7. lib. 1. cap. 23. lib. 4. cap. 6 It is true that he perwsadeth him selfe that this custome of not rebaptizing came from the Apostles tradition yet doth he by many arguments out of scripture prooue that such are not to be baptized againe which haue beene once baptized although by heretikes and therefore he saith of the same matter Hoc planè verum est quia ratio veritas consuetudini praeponenda est Sed cùm consuetudini veritas suffragatur nihil oportet firmius retineri This is plainlie true that reason and truth is to be preferred before custome but when truth consenteth with custome nothing ought more steadefastlie to be 〈◊〉 You see therefore that he buildeth not onelie vppon custome or tradition which is the matter in question but vppon trueth and reason which is founded by the holie scriptuers Your middle quotation de bap lib. 1. cap. 23. you may correct against your nextreplie for there are but 19. Chapters in that booke Againe you saie He prooueth by tradition the celebration of the Pentecost commonlie called Whitsontide ep 11 c. 1. If it were as you saie it is but a matter of ceremony not necessarie to saluation but in the power of the Church to alter as many like which are abrogated But in trueth he prooueth it not as you say by tradition For these are his wordes Illa autem quae non scripta c. But those thinges which are kept beeing not written but deliuered which are obserued thoroughout all the worlde it is giuen to be vnderstoode that they are retained as commended and decreed either by the Apostles them-selues or by generall Councells the authoritie of which is moste whollesome in the Church as that the passion of our Lord and his resurrection ascension into heauen and the comming of the holie ghoste from heauen are celebrated with yearelie solemnitie You see by his owne wordes that he is not certaine whether he should laie this ceremoniall celebration vpon deliuery of the Apostles or vpon decrees of general coun cells And whencesoeuer they came the matter is not great in such thinges as of their owne nature are indifferent and therefore alterable by discretion of the Church in all times Whether the Apostles were baptized which is
the next matter that you saie he prnoueth by tradition it is a question not so needefull to be decided although it may be prooued out of scripture that some of them which were Iohns disciples were baptized by him and so it is like were all the rest seeing Ierusalem and all Iurie and all the coast neere vnto Iordan were baptized by Iohn euen to the Pharisees and Saduces Publicans and souldiers it is not probable that the Apostles whoe before their calling by Christ were of honest and deuout conuersation did neglect that diuine institution which all men that would seeme to be religious made hast to receiue Furthermore you saie he prooueth by tradition the ceremonies of baptisme as deliuered by the Apostles lib. de fide Oper. cap. 9. The question is whether the Eunuch whome Philip baptized made such profession of his faith c. renouncing of the deuill as is required of them that are baptized when the scripture maketh mention onelie of a short confession that Iesus Christ is the sonne of God Where Saint Augustine sheweth that the holie ghost would haue vs to vnderstand that althinges were fulfilled in his baptisme which though they be not expressed in that scripture for breuities sake yet by order of the tradition we know that they are to be fulfilled Where tradition is not taken for that which is altogether beside the scripture but that which according to the scripture deliuereth what is to be obserued concerning the celebration of that sacrament which is the seale of mortification and regeneration That the Lordes supper should be receiued before other meates he thinketh of it as of other ceremontall matters that it came either from Apostolike tradition or from decrees of generall councell yet is it a thing not necessarie alwaies to be obserued for your selues doe housell sicke folkes at all times of the daie or night without respect whether they haue tasted any thing or no otherwise as a matter of order and decencie it is obserued of vs also to minister that sacrament before dinner and to them that be fasting if the case of necessity require not the contrarie Yet againe you saie he prooueth by tradition the exorcisme of such as should be baptized l. de nupt concu cap. 20. l. 6. cont Iulian. c. 2. But the truth is that by the ceremonie of exorcisme exsufflation and renunciation that is vsed in baptisme he goeth about to prooue that infantes before baptisme be in originall sinne and in the power of the deuill as is euident by both the places which prooue not exorcisme to haue beene receiued by tradition but by the end of that ceremonie vpon what beginning soeuer vsed in the Church at that time that infants are borne in originall sinne and subject to the power of Sathan before they be baptized The wordes of the former place are these In veritate itaque non in falsitate c. In truth therefore not in falsehoode the deuils power is exorcised in infants and they renounce him by the heartes and mouthes of their bearers because they cannot by their owne that beeing deliuered from the power of darke nes they may be translated into the kingdome of their Lorde Here is neuer a word of traditiō The second place hath these words Sedetsi nullaratione indagetur nullo sermone explicetur verum est tamen quòd antiquitas c. But although it originall sinne may be sought out by noe reason by no speach it may be expressed yet is it true that by true Catholike faith from auncient time is preached and beleeued thoroughout the wholl Church which would neither exorcise nor exsufflate the children of the faithfull if shee did not deliuer them from the power of darkenes and from the prince of death Here the auncient doctrine of original sinne is confirmed by the olde ceremonies of exorcisme and exsufflation which were vsed in baptisme to signifie that infants were by that sacrament deliuered from the guilt of originall sinne by which they were vnder the power of darkenes and death But that these ceremonies were Apostolike traditions he saith not or that they are of necessitie to 〈◊〉 vsed in baptisme when the one of them namelie 〈◊〉 is not vsed at this day for ought I know in the Popish forme of baptisme The Moscouites in place of it as it seemeth vse excreation For when the Godfathers and Godmothers answere that they renounce the deuil they spit out one the earth as it were in signe of detestation In Saint Augustines time they vsed to blow out In the last place you saie he prooueth by the same tradition that we must offer vp the sacrifice of the masse for the dead lib. de cura pro mort agenda cap. 1. 4. serm 32. de verbis Apostoli Of the sacrifice of the Masse Saint Augustine speaketh nothing but that praiers were offered for the dead at the celebration of the Lordes supper which he calleth sacrifice he saith it was by authoritie of the whol Church which was notable in that custome and that the wholl Church obserued it as deliuered from their fathers But seeing the elder Church for more then an hundred yeares after Christ had no such custome nor doctrine and especiallie seeing the same custome is against faith taught in the holie scriptures that the dead in the Lord are blessed that iudgement followeth immediatelie after death c. The authoritie of faith and trueth is to be preferred before the tradition and custome of men Neither is it to be thought to haue proceeded from the Apostles which is disprooued by the writings of the Apostles the onelie certaine witnes of the doctrine deliuered by them which is necessarie for vs to beeleeue and follow And therefore this new sir Censurer doth greatlie abuse the olde saints whome he would haue patrones of his vnwritten verities partely in charging them to referre vnto tradition many things that they doe not partlie in drawing to doctrine necessarie that which they speake of ceremonies mutable not the least in picking out one or two ouersightes to be pardoned vnder colour of them to maintaine all the grosse heresies of Poperie that are intollerable The fourteenth section Whether the Iesuites speake euil of scripture Art 6. intituled Nose of waxe IF you had ser downe Master Charkes replie betweene your Censure and your defense as reason would you should haue done for men to iudge indifferentlie betweene both you might haue spared more then two pages which you haue spent in charging him with a slaunder of the Iesuites where he reporteth that they saie the scripture is a nose of waxe when they saie it is as a nose of waxe For no reasonable man can make any other sense of those wordes the scripture is a nose of waxe but euen the same that you confesse to be the saying of the Iesuites the scripture is as a nose of waxe as Master Charke telleth you And moreouer that Paiua saith the fathers
conscience of men to sanctifie them by their worke whome Christ by his onelie oblation hath made perfect for euer They that holde these points denie Christ to be a perfect Prophet King and Priest But these be deepe mysteries of puritanisme saith the answerer Christ is a Prophet alone a King alone a Priest alone the ouerthrow of all gouernment No sir no to acknowledge Christe to be our onelie Prophet king and priest ouerthroweth not but establisheth all power that is ordeined vnder him to teach gouerne and sanctifie The scripture in deede Eph. 4. Acts. 5. doth allowe Prophets and teachers in the Church but not authors of new doctrine no makers of new articles of faith no traditions beside the Gospell of Christ which is written that we might beleeue and beleeuing haue eternall life in his name The scripture alloweth Kinges and rulers 1. Pet. 2. Act. 2. but the scripture giueth no authoritie to any king or ruler to dispense against the lawes of God nor to any Prophet or priest to discharge subiects of their oth made to their lawfull Prince to binde the conscience of man with new constitutions as necessarie to saluation c. But whereas you aske whether Priests may not sanctifie by the word of god 2. Tim. 4. you are neare driuen for proofes For to omitte that the Chapter you quote hath neuer a word either of priests or sanctifying and to take your meaning to be of 1. Tim. 4. verse 5. the Apostle speaketh not of the Priest or ecclesiasticall ministers power of sanctifying but of euerie Christian man and woman to whome euerie creature of God in the right vse thereof is sanctified by the word of God and praier and against them that forbid thinges consecrated and allowed by God as matrimonie and meates sanctifyed by his worde that hath giuen them to be receiued with thankesgiuing and by the praier of the thankefull receiuer as a mean to obtaine sanctification from God whoe onelie is holie and therefore hath onelie power properlie to sanctifie and to inioyne as more holie by their owne making and not by Gods sanctification virginitie then matrimonie fish then flesh yca take vpon them to sanctifie Gods creatures in an other vse then God hath appointed them as water fire garments boughs flowers bread and such like for religion and sanctifying of Christian men Againe he asketh what doe the traditions of Christ and his Apostles for of those onelie they talke when they compare them with scripture impeach the teaching of Christ and his Apostles I answere there are no traditions of Christ and his Apostles pertaining to a Christian mans dutie to obtaine erernall life but those that be comprehended in the holie scriptures as the spirite of God in the scripture which cannot lie doth testifie And therefore they are the traditions of men and not of Christ and his Apostles that areso called vnder which title all heresies fansies may be brought in without testimonie of the written worde of God Wherefore such traditions doe greatlie impeach the office of Christes teaching reproouing his Apostles and Euangelists of imperfection if they haue not comprehended the summe of all that Christ taught and did for our saluation which Saint Luke in the beginning of his Gospell doth professe that he hath done and that verie exactlie And further it is false that our answerer saith they talke of the traditions of Christ and his Apostles onelie when they compare them with scripture For they compare the decrees of their Pope and of their generall councells allowed by him to be of equall authoritie with the holie scriptures as well as traditions Secondlie he asketh what doth the spiritual authorttie of the Pope vnder Christ diminish the Kinglie power and authoritie of Christ I answere the Pope hath no spirituall authoritie vnder Christ by anie graunt of Christ but he vsurpeth authoritie aboue Christ when he will controll the lawes and institutions of Christ as denying the cuppe of blessing vnto the laie people and in taking vpon him to make newe lawes and to inioyne men to obserue them in paine of damnation as be his lawes of abstinence from mariage and meates for religions sake which Christ hath left free for all men euen for Bishops Priests and Deacons of the Church and in an hundred matters beside Last of all he asketh How doth the priesthood of men as from Christ or the sacrifice of the altar instituted by Christ disgrace Christs priesthood or his sufficient sacrifice once for all offered on the crosse I answere the priesthood of reconciling by sacrifice doth not passe from Christ to anie man because he hath by one sacrifice made perfect for euer all that are sanctifyed and liueth for euer to make intercession for vs therefore hath as the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a priesthood that passeth not to any other in succession as Arons priesthood did whereby he is able to saue for euer those that come vnto God by hym Againe I denie that Christ did institute that sacrifice of the altar whereof there is no worde in all the scripture and therefore a new priesthood and a new sacrifice must needes be blaspemous against the eternal priesthood of Christ and that one sufficient sacrifice which he offered and therebie found eternall redemption The texts alledged by Master Charke Heb. 7. 9. he saith doe not impeach this dailie sacrifice of theirs because they graunt that sacrifice once offered c. in that manner as it was then done meaning bloodelie whereas they offer it vnbloodelie c. But the wholl discourse of the Aposile throughout the wholl epistle almoste excludeth all repetition of that sacrifice in any manner For therepetition of the same sacrifice should argue imperfection in it as it did in the Iewish sacrifices and without shedding of blood there is noremission of sinnes Is Christ shoulde be often offered he should often suffer All which being impossible it remaineth that as Christ offered himselfe but once and not often so no man hath authoritie or power to offer him anie more neither is there anie neede he should be more then once offered seing by that one oblation he hath made perfect for euer all that are sanctified and hath found eternall redemption for all that beleeue in him But for proofe that there must be such a daylie sacrifice in the Church vntill the end of the world he alledgeiu the prophecie of Daniell 12. Malachie 1. whereas Daniell speaketh of the dailie sacrifice of the Lawe which should cease in the persecution of Antiochus and be vtterly abolished by the death of Christ. And Malachic of the sacrifice of praise and thankesgeuing which by all nations is offered as a pure sacrifice and acceptable to him through Christ. The former exposition is allowed by S. Ierome to be verified of Antiochus in a type of Antichrist whoe shall forbid culium Dei the worship of God which doth not require any such
holde thy peace that no man euer perceiue or smell out that I haue so euill a conscience And afterward should set forth my selfe lustilie and clapping my handes together with full mouth should sing Hei how the Christians haue not anie place of scripture which affirmeth and prooueth that the word is made flesh And yet at the last I should submitte my selfe againe and desire to be instructed and taught how they could prooue it out of the scripture which I before had rent in peeces If this were leife and lawfull for me to doe O mortall God how great businesse and trouble might I cause in the olde and new testament as well to the Iewes as Christians These are the verie wordes of Luther in deede Now the ende why he vseth these fond comparisons he sheweth afterward Quisquis enim vult verba scripturae aliter quà m sonant interpretari is tenetur ex textu eiusdem loci aut ex aliquo fidei articulo probare For whoesoeuer will interpret the wordes of scripture otherwise then they sound he is bound out of the text of the same place or out of some article of faith to prooue it Which rule in deede or the like if it be notkept there will be no ende of vaine licentious interpretations But Zuinglius and Oecolampadius out of the text of the same place where the cuppe is called the new testament in his bloode and out of the article of Christs incarnation and true manhoode vnconfounded with his godhead doe prooue that their interpretation must needes be true therefore these similitudes doe not shew that their exposition is absurde also Luther him selfe denyeth that his meaning was to deface them by those grosse similitudes absurdities Deus nouit c. God knoweth saith he that with these grosse similitudes I studdie not to deface Zuinglius and much lesse Oecolampadius vnto whome God hath giuen manie gifts aboue many other men whose case I doe lament from my heart neither with such wordes doe I bend my pen against them but rather against the Deuill proudlie and bitterlie 〈◊〉 vs which hath circumuenied and deceiued them that I might fulfill the lust of my minde against him to the honour of God c. These sayings of Luther declare that albeit he stood too much in his owne conccyt touching this sacramentarie matter and was verie hastie and rash of iudgement in condemning them that helde the truth against him yet he was not so voide of charitie as the answerer gathereth by some vehement speaches of his shewing here how he meaneth them and would haue thē to be vnderstood namely not against the persons of Zuinglius and Oecolampadius but against the deuill who as he falselie imagined had deceiued them in this matter So that the controuersie is still betweene the true Catholikes and the Papists which part prouoketh to the scriptures in their true meaning as the onelie sufficient rule to decide all controuersies of religion But which part alleadgeih the true meaning saith our answerer according to the councell of wise Sisinius to Theodosius the Emperour we desire to be tried by the iudgement of auncient fathers indifferent in this matter for that they liued before our controuersies came in question This he saith but as I haue prooued before and namelie in the exampled of transsubstantiation they will not stand to the iudgement of the auncient fathers further then their Pope shal alow them As for vs we refuse not the iudgement of the most auncient fathers except it be in such matters wherein it is manifest by the plaine texts and necessarie collections out of the scripture that they were deceiued as euen the Papists will confesse in some poyntes that they were This wise Sisinius whose counsell he would haue followed was a wise heretike whoe first gaue the aduise to Nectarius the Catholike Bishop by whome it was commended to the Emperour and had good successe against all other heresies saue the heresie of the Nouatians who by meanes hereof came in credit with the Emperour and had free libertie to vse their conuenticles openlie By which it appeareth that it is no perfect kinde of triall which was first offered by an heretike wherebie he could not be conuicted of his heresie Againe it was not vsed against the sufficiencie of the scripture and the triall that maie be had therebie but onelie to cutte of quarelous disputation of heretikes which are alwaies more readie to contend then to learne the truth Last of all where he saith the auncient fathers are indifferent for that they liued before our controuersies came in question it is no sufficient argument seeing the auncient fathers erred them-selues in some points and no man is an indifferent iudge in that case wherein he is deeeiued him-selfe Againe the auncient fathers are not all of one antiquitie but commonlie the most auncient the purest and furthest from all smacke of Antichristian errors the later more sauouring of the infection of the times drawing toward the apostasie Euen as water the nearer the spring is purer but running further of through vnpure soyle receiueth some taste thereof So the Councell of Sisinius in respect of the most auncient fathers that were before the heresies of those times was better to be vsed in his time then in these daies when they that liued fiue hundred yeares after Sisinius maie be counted auncient fathers in respect of vs yet their iudgement not so weightie nor so meete to be imbraced as those first fathers of the primitiue Church to whose iudgement if all matters of controuersie were referred the Papists should get but small aduantage But our aduersaries saith the answerer will allow no exposition but their owne wherebie it is easie to defeat whatsoeuer is brought against them scripture or Doctor In deede this which he saith is moste true of the Papists as I haue prooued before but vntrue of vs for we allowe all interpretations that are not contrarie to the analogie of faith and are agreeable to the plaine words necessarie circumstances of the place of scripture not repugnant to anie other euident text of scripture According to which rules we must examine all expositions of all men since the Apostles time yea the Apostles them-selues were content that their doctrine should be examined by the scriptures of the olde testament but so are not the Papists for they holde opinions altogether beside the scriptures But our answerer to iustifie that which he hath saide against vs bringeth examples of shifting scriptures and Doctors all which except one are gathered out of diuerse writings of Doctor Fulke for answere of which seeing he hath set forth a speciall treatise I referre the reader thereunto pag. 38. 39. 40. That one example which he could father vpon no man I will examine here The like euasion saith he they haue when we alleadge the wordes of Saint Paull Qui matrimonio c he that ioyneth his virgin in mariage doth well and he that ioyneth
the workes of nature or will which are in vs but by the he lie ghoste which is geuen vnto vs which both helpeth our infirmitie and worketh with our health for that is the grace of God by Iesus Christ our Lord. to whome with the father and the holie ghoste be ascribed eternitie and goodnes for euer In this discourse of S. Augustine is declared that the commaundements of God are made possible and not heauie to be fulfilled by the grace of God nor by the strength of man either of nature or will and that by two meanes faith and loue Faith by which we craue obtaine forgiuenes of our imperfection and loue by which we cherefully endeuour to accomplish in work so much as we can which we can not do perfectly in this life in as much asno mans heart is pure in this life no mans loue is perfect in this world yet faith purifying our harts that by themselues are vnclean obtaineth as the same 's Augustine saith that which the law commaundeth But how far is this from the popish assertion to wit The law is not abooue our abtlitie to keepe it The cursse that you cite out of Augustine Serm. 191. and Ierorme explan Symb. ad Damasum is but a crack of a broken bladder in stead of a thunderbolte For both the sermon and the explanation are counterfeit stuffe being all one word forword except a litle 〈◊〉 flue in the beginning and the end and yet are most impudentlieascribed both to Augustine and Ierome But that ne ther of both is author of that sentence I wil prooue by 〈◊〉 of Saint Ierome who expresselie affirm ah that which the sermon and explanation accurseet We cursse the blasphemie of them saie the counterfeiters which saie that anie thing impossible is commaunded by God to man and that the commaundements of God cannot be kept of euerie one but of all in common Saint lerome dialog aduers. Pelag. lib. 1. saith Possibilia praecepit 〈◊〉 ego fateer Sed haec possibilia cuncta singuli habere non possumus non imbeciliitate naturae ne calumniam facias deo sed animilassitudine quae 〈◊〉 simul semper non potest habere virtutes God commaunded things possible and that I confesse But all these possible thinges euerie one of vs can not haue through weakenes of nature lest thou shouldest slaunder God but through wearines of minde which can not haue all vertues together and alwaies And his whole discourse in that dialogue is to prooue that no man can be without sinne the contrarie whereof is flat Pelagianisine He expoundeth also at large how the commaundements of God are possible and how vnpossible which maie be seene of anie man that will read his writings against the Pelagians and therfore it is very iniurious vnto him to make him a patrone of that sentence which he put posedlie and plentifullie impugneth To conclude Chrysostome and Basile meane not that a perfect obseruation of Gods law is possible in this life but that God geueth grace in some measure to keepe them to those that are borne 〈◊〉 in Christ in whome onelie is performed that which was impossible by the law as the A postle saith These fathers and diuerse other whose authority the Pelagians abused as you do to vpholde their heresie by such speeches meant to accuse the negligence and slothfulnes of men in keepeing Gods commaundements not to extoll the power and abilitie of mans free will to keepe them as Saint Augustine prooueth by manie testimonies taken out of their writinges in his treatises against the Pelagians The eleuenth section of de facing the scriptures and doctrines by tradition THe Iesuites you saie do not vse these termes of defacing that the scripture is imperfect maimed or lame and thereof I will not contend but the same in effect they holde as Master Charke saith when they affirme that all things necessarte to saluation are not contained in the scripture Your similitude of a marchant leauing his commaundements partelie in writings and partelie by word of mouth and referring the resolution of doubtes vnto his wife is not sufficient in this case For our Sauiour Christ liueth for euer whereas his seruants and the men of whome his Church which is his spouse consisteth are changed in euerie generation So that there can be no certaintie of his commaundements but onelie by his writings which if they containe not all thinges necessarie to saluation they are imperfect lame and maimed And where you saie that Saint Augustine prooueth the contrarie at large lib. 1. cont Cresc c. 32. it is vtterlie vntrue For he saith expresselie concerning the question of rebaptising them that were baptized by heretikes Sequimur sanè nos in hac re etiam Canonicarum authoritatem certissimam scripturarum We truelie doe follow in this matter also the most certaine authoritie of the Canonicall scriptures whereunto he adioineth the consent of the Catholike Church after some disceptation about the matter whose counsell agreeable to the holie scripture no man doubteth bur it is to be followed Theverie same doctrine you saie teacheth the said father lib. de side operibus cap. 9. and also ep 66. ad Don. In the former is no worde to the purpose he speaketh of the Eunuch whome Philip baptized whose confession of Christ being verie shorte some thought to be sufficient for anie man that should receaue baptisme whereas there is a more distinct knowledge and particuler explication of this faith in other places of scripture set downe that is to be required of them that are catechised and come to baptisme In the last quotation I thinke there is a faulte either in your Printer or in your notebooke which setteth downe ep 66. for ep 166. which is directed to the Donatistes whereas the other is to Maximus But in this epistle to the Donatistes there is nothing that prooueth this matter that the scriptures containe not all things necessarie to saluation Onelie he exhorteth the Donatistes to vnitie shewing that out of the same scriptures which teach Christ to be the head his bodie the Church is to be discerned and learned Touching the twelue pointes of doctrine set downe by the Censure as not conteined expresselie in the scripture and yet to be beleeued Master Charke answereth that seuen of them are in scripture the rest not necessarie to be beleeued But here you saie the question is of expresse scripture and not of any farre fet place that by interpretation may be applied to a controuersie If you meane by expresse scripture that which is expressed in so many wordes as the thing in cōtrouersy we deny that we haue anysuch question with you For we holde that any thing which by necessary demonstration can be concluded out of the scripture is as true as necessary to be beleeued as that which is expressed in plaine wordes And so we meane when we saie all thinges necessarie to saluation are conteined in the holie scriptures And as for your
the Lordes daie Here you cauill that there is no mention of Saturdaie or sondaie much lesse of celebration of either and least of all of the changeing of the Sabbath into an other daie But if it please your Censurship are you ignorant what day of the weeke is called dies Dominicus the Lordsday whether saturdaie or sondaie if it be sondaie as al professors of Christes name confesse here is as much mention thereof as is needfull for the daie into which the change is made Or if that be not sufficient you maie haue further Act. 20. 7. 1. Cor. 16. 2. And whie is the first of the Sabbath called the Lordes daie but in respect of the celebration there of in honour of the redemption of the world by Christ For otherwise all daies of the weeke are the Lordes daies in respect of their creation Thirdlie seeing the Lordes daie was one daie in the weeke vsed for the assemblie of the Church for their spirituall exercises of Religion it is certaine that the change of the Iewish Sabbath was made into that daie except you would be so waywatd to saie there were two daies in euerie weeke appointed by God to be celebrated whereas the lawe of God requireth but one and giueth libertie of bodelie exercise in sixe daies So that the change of the Sabbath daie is sufficientlie prooued out of the Scripture into the Lordes daie The sixt point is about foure Gospells and the Epistle to the Romanes which Master Charke saith to be prooued out of the scripture but yet he quoteth no place of scripture where onelie he saith the inscription expresseth the names of the writers But what a mocker is this you saie Are the bare names of the Apostles sufficient to prooue that they were written by them who can prooue by scripture that these names are not counterfet as in the Epistle to the Laodiceans in the Gospells of Bartholomew and Thomas c. But abide you sir your question hath two branches the one that the 4. Go spells are true Gospells the other that the epistle to the Romanes was written by Saint Paul and not that to the Laodiceans To the former it is answered that they are prooued by other vndoubted bookes of the scripture both of the olde testament and the new secing they declare that to be fullfilled of Christ which was spoken in the lawe in the Prophetes and in the Psalmes To the other it is answered that admitting the Epistle to the Romanes to be scripture the inscription of his name is sufficient to prooue that it was written by Saint Paull And so of therest Although the name of the writer is not materiall vnto saluation when the booke is receiued to be Canonicall as diuers bookes of scripture are receiued whose writer is vnknowne That Epistle which is called to the Laodicians is not receiued and therefore the inscription is vnsufficient as the Gospelles of Bartholomew and Thomas and such like which are knowne to be countefet by the dissent they haue from the other canonicall scriptures Whereas you require one place of Scripture to prooue all the foure Gospelles to be canonicall you declare your wrangling and wayward spirit But name you anie one point of Doctrine writen in anie of those foure Gospells and the same shall be aduouched by other textes of scripture and so maie eucrie point conteined in them if neede were But you affirme that Origen saith he reiecteth the Gospell of Saint Thomas onelie for that the tradition of the Church receiued it not Which is false He saith he hath read the Gospell after Thomas after Mathias and manie other Sed in his omnibus nihil aliud probamus niss quod Ecclesia idest quatuor tantùm euangelia recipienda But in all these we allowe nothing els but that which the Church alloweth that is that onelie foure Gospells are to be receiued In these wordes he affirmeth that he approoueth the iudgment of the Church he saith not that the iudgement or traditions of the Church was the onelie cause whie he reiected those Gospells for he said before they were receiued of heretikes and wherefore but in maintenance of their heresie which is contrarie to the holie scriptures That all counterfet Go spells were reiected by the Church it is confessed but the Church had this iudgement of discretion confirmed by the canonical scriptures against which Epiphanius saith nothing But when Faustus the Manichie denied the Gospell of Saint Mathew saie you saith not S. Augustine Mathaei Euangelium probatum aduersus Faustum Manichaeum per traditionem The Gospell of Mathew was alleged against Faustus the Manichie by tradition August lib. 28. Cont. Faust. c. 2. If you aske me I saie no he hath no such wordes Yet doth he auouch the Gospell of Saint Mathew in that Chapter by testimonie of the Church from the Apostles by continuall succession euen vnto his time against the Maniches but in far other words then you haue set downe in steed of Saint Augustines wordes by which the reader maie once against perceiue how impudentlie and ignorantlie you ailedge whatsoeuer the note booke which was neuer of your own gatheriug because you vnderstood it not did minister vnto you For these are the wordes of the collector of your notes not of S. Augustine Maie not the papists haue great ioie of such a Cenfure defender Yet you triumph like a Iustie champion and aske what can be more euident then all this to prooue our opinion of the necessitie of tradition to confound the fonde madnes of this poore Minister Alas poore defender what waightie euidencethou hast brought to prooue the necessity of tradition which prooueth thee to be a blind beggerlie yet a bolde brocher of other mens notes which thou vnderstandest not thy selfe The seuenth doctrine which is required to be prooued out of the scripture is that God the father begat his sonne onelie by vnderstanding him-selfe Here Master Charke in steede of these darke wordes out of Thomas how the father begat the sonne wisheth cleare and perfect wordes in so high a mysterie which you saie are plaine and vsuall to those which haue studied any thing in diuinitie As though there were no diuinitie in the holie scriptures and so many of the auncient fathers which haue neither this question nor these wordes but that al diuinity were included in the brest of Thomas Aquinas and such doctors as he was That he quoteth a place or two of the scripture to prooue that Christ was the onelie begotten sonne of God you make smal account of seeing the question is of the māner how this generation maybe which the Church de fendeth against the aduersaries And here you insult against M. chark as ignorant in those high points of diuinitie whereas Catholiks know what the Church hath determined herein against heretikes and infidels as though either of both cared for the Churches determination if the one were not vanquished by scripture the other by right reason
Laodicea or from the Laodiceans which in sense maie be al one with the most vsuall reading that expresseth the preposition from Therefore it is true that Master Charke saith by both the editions and by the vulgar Latine text also that albeit manie make mention of an Epistle written by Saint Paull to the Laodiceans he him selfe maketh none The 12. section Of the Scriptures missalledged for the contrarie by M. Charke THe text is 2. Tim. 3. 16. 17. The wholl Scripture is inspired of God and is profitable c. The Censure had cauiled against his translation which it was nessarie for him to defend against which defence you haue nothing to replie and therefore begin with the first reason about profitable and sufficient Hetahis profitable sometimes shall import sufficient and not barelie profitable as for example when some reason is adioyned why it should be profitable nothing els applied or seruing to that effect as when the Apostle writeth that godlines is profitable to al things hauing the promises of this life and of the life to come where profitable importeth sufficient for the obtaining of all good thinges of both liues Against this you trifle First that it is but a slender argument to inferre one particular of an other But if your eies were matches your might see a particular inferred of an vniuersall Whersoeuer some reason is alledged whie a thing should be so prositable that nothing els is necessarie for the effect there profitable importeth sufficient as in that example godlines is profitable for all thinges c. But so it is in the text in question therefore in that text profitable importeth sufficient Neuertheles in your opinion M. Charke is vttrerlie deceiued in this example of godlines which by the 〈◊〉 of Saint Ambrose Saint Ierome and Saint Augustine importeth no more but that godlines hath her promises of reward in all actions whether they be about matters of this life or of the life to come So that the meaning is that pietie meriteth in all actions but is not sufficient to the obtaining of all good thinges of both liues First concerning Saint Ambrose reade him who will vpon this text and he shall finde the contrarie Pietati operam dandam commonet quia grandem habet presectum Qui enim misericordiae student senioribus 〈◊〉 reddentes parentibus in presenti vita auxilia Dei non 〈◊〉 in He admonisheth to labour in godlines because it hath greas profit For they that are mercifull 〈◊〉 their olde Parents loue they shall 〈◊〉 mant the helpe of God in this present life and in the world to come they shalhaue immortalitie with glorie Againe omnis enim 〈◊〉 discipline 〈◊〉 in misericus dia pietate est All the summe of our discipline is in 〈◊〉 and pietie Now pietie as you confesse comprehendeth charitie and the loue of God And therefore in the end Saint Ambrose after he hath shewed that bodelie exercise taken for fasting and abstinence without godlines shal haue 〈◊〉 punishment concludeth that fasting and abstinence of men that are spirituall being to the end of pietie is comprehended therein S. Ieromes wordes vpon this text are no more but these Et 〈◊〉 tempus in futurum nam ipsa vidua in presenti casta est merces eius manetinea Godlines is profitable c. both for the present time for the time to come For euen the widow her selfe is both chast in the present time her reward abideth in her What is here against the sufficiencie of pietie S. Augustine de morib Eccles. lib. 1. c. 33. hath onelie these wordes 〈◊〉 to this text speaking of the godlie life of Christians liuing vnder discipline in citties Ita pietatem sedulò exercent corporis verò exercitationem vt ait idem Apostolus ad exiguum tempus 〈◊〉 nouerunt So they exercise godlines diligentlie as for corporall exercise as the same Apostle saieth they knowe to pertaine but to a short time Where is here either the vnsufficiencie orthe merit of godlines for the promise of reward is of mercie not of merit This reason therefore of Master Charkes for the safficiencie of the Scripture standeth im mooueable seeing the Scripture is so profitable to all points of doctrine that nothing els is required to perfection The second reason you saie he frameth in these wordes That which is profitable to all the partes which maie be required to perfection cannot but be sufficient for the perfection of the wholl but that the Scripture is profitable in such manner the Apostle doth fullie declare in rehearsing all the particular partes which are necessarie and adding also after generallie that the man of God maie be perfect 〈◊〉 the Scripture is 〈◊〉 Here of your charitie you praie God to helpe Master Charke 〈◊〉 him that he is a simple one to take controuerfies in hand And then you aske what boie in Cambridge would haue reasoned thus And whie all this forsooth euery boie knoweth there is a cause sine qua non which is not onelie profitable but also necessarie to all partes whereof it is such a cause and yet it is not sufficient alone either to the partes or to the wholl as the head is 〈◊〉 for all the actions of this life as to sing weepe dispute yet is it not sufficient alone to performe these actions Therefore it followeth not that whatsoeuer is profitable to all particular partes should be sufficient to all Dij te Damasyppe 〈◊〉 verunrob consilium 〈◊〉 tonsore Or as we saie in English the vicar of fooles be your Ghosllie father Did you learne when you were a boic in Cambridge orOxford to repeate your aduersaries proposition by halfes then to confute as much there of as you list Looke backe you shall finde that his proposition is not what soeuer is profitable to all particular parts is sufficient for the wholl but whatsoeuer is profitable to all the partes which maie be required to perfection is sufficient for the perfection of the wholl or whatsoeuer is so profitable to euery part as maketh the wholl perfect is sufficient to the wholl Against these propositions if you haue anie thing to obiect perhappes we shall haue it in your next replie for hetherto you haue said nothing and his argument standeth still His third reason is taken of the wordes of S. Paull immediatlie before where he saieth vnto Timothie That the holie Scriptures which he had learned from his infancie were able to make him wise vnto saluation So the argument is this that which is able to make a man wise vnto saluation is sufficient the holy scriptures are of ability to make a man wise vnto saluation ergo they are sufficient But this you denie What I praie you for I hope the 〈◊〉 be rightlie framed In effect the minor which is the very wordes of Saint Paull For as though either you knew not or cared not for the originall text which saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
see no reason to refuse it But if you will learne reason when it is shewed you maie see more then you do now Are your ancetors of the primitiue Church greater then Saint Paull Is there anie testimonié of man greater then the witnes of an Angell from heauen yet if Saint Paull him selfe or an Angell from heauen should preach an other Gospell then Saint Paull had preached and is contained in the holi scriptures that false Gospell were to be resused and the author thereof to be accursed Now that Saint Paull preached nothing beside the doctrine conteined in the scriptures he is a sufficient witnes himselfe Act. 26. 22. But why see you no reason to refuse such traditions so obtruded Forsooth because the same men that deliuered vnto you the scriptures and saide this is Gods writen worde and saide of other forged scriptures this is not Gods written worde the same deliuered to you these doctrines saying this is Gods wordes vnwritten So that by this reason you haue no other foundation of your faith but the testimonie of men who as they may speake the truth in one matter so they may lie or be deceiued in an other As euen by your owne reason the Grecians the Armenians the Georgians the Moscouites and all other sectaries are bound to beleeue all that to be the word of God vnwritten which the same men affirme to be such that deliuered the canonicall scriptures to them and said it was the word of God written But in steade of this vnsure and sandie ground the children of God haue a more firme rocke to builde their faith vpon namelie the spirit of trueth sealing in their heartes the testimonie of men concerning the truth of Gods worde written In which the same spirit also testifieth of the sufficiencie of the word written vnto saluation in such sort as if we receiue the word written for truth we must needs condemne for false what word soeuer speaketh either the contrarie or addeth any thing as wanting and not set forth in the word written And this I say not as though the primitiue Church or the godlie fathers of the same haue brought in any thing vnder the name of tradition of Christ or his Apostles as necessarie to saluation although some of them in matters of rites ceremonies haue alledged tradition beside the scriptures yet in such things as are now for the most part abolished either because they were not deliuered by the Apostles as it was pretended or els because such matters are mutable and not perpetuall though they were receiued from the Apostles But let vs examine the examples that you ioyne to your reason First Saint Augustine and Origen doe teach vs that baptizing of infantes is to be practized in the Church onelie by tradition of the Apostles For which you quote August lib. 10. ad gen lit cap. 23. Origen in cap. 6. Epist. ad Rom. What Saint Augustine saieth and how the baptisme of infantes is practized by authoritie of the scripture I haue shewed before sect 11. As for Origen in the place quoted hath neuer a word to any such matter But of these impudent allegations we haue had too many examples alreadie The second example is Saint Hierome and Epiphanius tell vs that the faste of the lent and oher the like is a tradition of the Apostles Hierom. Epist. 54. ad Marcella Epiphann Haer. 7. 5. Hieromes wordes are these against the Montanistes Nos vnam quadragesimam secundùm traditionem Apostolorum toto anno tempore nobis congruo ieiunamus 〈◊〉 tres in anno faciunt quadragesimas quasi tres passi sunt saluatores non quòd per totum annum excepta pentecoste ieiunare non liceat sed quòd aliud sit necessitate aliud voluntate munus offerre We fast one lent or fourtie daies according to the tradition of the Apostles in the wholl yeare in a time conuenient for vs they make three lentes or fourtie daies fast in a yeare as though three sauiours had sussered not but that it is lawfull all the yeare long except in the pentecostor fiftie daies but that it is one thing to offer a gift of necessitie an other thing to doe it of free will Here Hierome saith that one fourtie daies fast is of the tradition of the Apostles but other writers say otherwise For Damasus in his Pontificall saieth that Telesphorus Bishope of Roome did institute this seauen weekes faste before Easter Telesphorus him-selfe in his decretall Epistle saith that he and his fellow Bishoppes gathered in a Councell at Roome did ordeine this fourtie daies faste onelie for clerkes and contendeth in manie wordes that there must be a difference betweene clerkes and laie men as well in faste as in other thinges If you saie these authorities are counterfet 〈◊〉 as I thin 〈◊〉 you may truelie though you will not willinglie yet what saie you to 〈◊〉 an elder witnes then Hierome whoe testifieth out of yeares that two hundered 〈◊〉 before his time there was great controuersie betweene the next successours of the Apostles concerning the daie of the celebration of Easter and that the coutrouersie was not onelie of the daie but also of the fast some fasting one daie some two dates some more So that of the Apostles tradition we haue no certaintie in any monument of antiquitie Againe it is to be noted that Hierome holdeth it vnlawfull to faste betweene Easter and Whitesontyde which he calleth Peatecoste by the same tradition of the Apostles which yet in the Popish Church is not obserued at this daie for beside the fridaie fast they haue also the gang weeke fast in that time which in Saint Hieromes age was accounted vnlawfull to fast in Your other witnes Epiphanius speaketh not of your fourtie daies lent but of a shorter and yet a streighter For these are his wordes Aquo verò non assensum est in omnibus orbis terrarum regionibus quòd quarta prosabbato ieiunium est in Ecclesia ordinatum Siverò etiam oportet constitutionem Apostolorum proferre quomodo illic decreuerunt quarta prosabbato ieiunium per omnia excepta pentecoste de sex dieb paschatis quomodo praecipiunt nihil omnino accipere quà m panem salem aquam qualemque diem agere quomodo dimittere in illucescentem dominicam manifestum est And of whome is it not agreed in all regions of the world that one wednesdaie and fridaie fast is ordeined in the Church But if we must also bring forth the constitution of the Apostles how they haue there decreed one the wednesdaie and fridaie a fast thoroughout all except pentecost and of the six daies of Easter how they commaund to take nothing at all but bread and salte and water and how to spend the daie and how to giue ouer against the dawning of the Lords daie it is manifest Here he speaketh but ofsixe daies before Easter daie and of an other manner of diet then the Popish Church holdeth to be necessarie
of Colene in a moste apt similitude called the scripture a nose of waxe and Pighius the leaden rule of the Lesbian building But now concerning the matter it selfe You would shift it of by saying The Iesuites doe compare the hereticall wresting and detorting of scripture vnso the bowing of a nose of waxe vpon certaine circumstances which are these First not in respect of the scripture it selfe but in respect of heretikes and other that abuse it and that before the rude people that cannot iudge thirdlie to the ende to flatter Princes or the people in their vices Thus much was said before in the Censure But it was replied that Andradius confesseth the fathers of Colene doe saie that the holie scripture is as a nose of wax So doth Pighius and it is a thing more commonlie knowen then that it can be denied Therefore the wresting of the scripture is not compared by them to the bowing of a waxen nose but the scripture it selfe to a nose of wax as that which is as easie to be drawne into any sense as a nose of wax may be turned euerie waie The wordes of Pighius are plaine Sunt enim scripturae velut caereus quidam nasus qui sicut hor sum illor sumque facilè se trahi permittit quo traxeris haud inuitus sequitur ita illae se flecti duci atque etiam in diuer sam sententiam trahi accomodarique ad quid-uis patiuntur nist quis veram illam inflexibilemque earundem amussim nempe Ecclesiasticae traditionis authoritatem communemque sententiam ilsdem adhibeat For the holie scriptures are as it were a certaine nose of wax which as it easelie suffereth it selfe to be drawne this waie and that waie and whether soeuer you draw it is followeth not vnwillinglie so also they doe suffer them selues to be bowed to be led and also to be drawen into a contrarie meaning and to be applied vnto what you will except a man lay vnto them that true inflexible rule of them namelie the authoritie and common vnderstanding of the Churches tradition These wordes declare if the sense of all Papists be the same that the Iesuites do not onelie compare the scripture it selfe but also that they make this comparison in respect of the scripture it selfe which suffereth it selfe as easelie to be wrested and abused as a nose of wax abideth to be bowed nor before the rude and ignorant onelie nor to flatter Princes and people in their vices alone but before any persons or to any purpose whatsoeuer and that there is not in them a certaine and infallible sense to iudge of the Churches doctrine or to finde out the true Church from all false congregations by the trueth taught in the scriptures but that the authoritie and common vnderstanding of the Popish Churches tradition is the onelie true sense inflexible rule of the holy scriptures wherebie also it is manifest though you denie it neuer so stoutlie that you doe impute the wresting of the scriptures vnto the imperfection of Gods worde set forth in them and not onelie to the malice of the wrester For if the will of God be but as well expressed in them as the will of princes is in their written lawes and proclamations the one maie as well be found out by reading and weighing of the holie scriptures as the other may be out of prophane writings especially where the spirit of God graunted vnto the praiers of the elect openeth their vnderstanding not onelie to conceiue as the naturall man maie by studie and ordinarie helpes the true scope and purpose of God vttered in them but also to beleeue and embrace whatsoeuer the Lord their God hath propounded in them Therefore though the scripture may be wrested to the destruction of the vngodlie as Saint Peter sheweth yet Master Charke telleth you that it cannot so be wrested but that still it remaineth the light vnto our feet and the lanterne vnto our steppes and euerie parte thereof is like the arme of a great Oke which cannot be so wreste but that with great force it will returne into the right position to the shame and perill of the wrester which answere of his you doe so dissemble as though you had neuer seene it And you doe wiselie seeing otherwise then by silence you could not auoid it But howsoeuer Master Charke storme you will defend your blasphemie of the nose of waxe not onelie in a kingdome where the Ghospell is preached but also in the kingdome of vs ministers where the letter of the scripture is worsse wrested by vs to all errors and licentiousnes then euerie waxen nose was yet bended to diuerse fashions O ye senseles papists had you neuer a man of moderat iudgement to set forth against vs but this loosetongued Gentelman which so he maie raile with full mouth against vs hath no care how his slaunders maie be coloured Doe we peruert the scriptures to all errors then surelie we holde no trueth there neuer was anie heresie neither can there be anie heresie but that with manie errors it maintaineth and holdeth manie truethes Yea the Deuill him-selfe the father oflies beleeueth some truethes and for shame dare not professe the maintenance of all errors We thinke verie hardlie of Antichrist and his brood the papists yet we maie not saie that they wrest the scriptures to all errors and licentiousnes for if they so did they should not deceaue so manie by shew of trueth in errors except they did professe some articles of trueth in deede As for the wresting of the Scripture to all licentiousnes let God and all the world of reasonable and indifferent men iudge how iustlie we maie be charged therewith If we be licentious in our liues God will finde it out and let man where he findeth it punish vs. But if we wilfully peruert the scriptures to the maintenance of all licentiousnes the Lord reward vs according to our deedes and be not mercifull to them that sinne of malicious wickednes But it is no fault in the scriptures saie you that they may be abused For Christ him-selfe was called the rocke of offence and the stone of scandall not for anie faulte or imperfection in him but through the wickednes of such as abuse that benefit So if the Iesuites had said no more but that the scripture maie be abused no man could haue found fault with them And Christ is called a stone of offence or stumbling not altogether in respect of the wicked that abuse him for he is called a stone moste precious and necessarie to build vpon of stumbling to those that refuse to build vpon him which meeting with him must either stumble and fall or els if it fall vpon them they must be ground to pouder But the the scripture is compared to a nose os wax because it is in their imagination that vse the comparison as pliant to follow euerie waie and to yeald as probable a sence one waie as an other as
he quare venerit in carne Christus inueniemus qui eum negant in carne venisse Let vs inquire wherefore Christ came in the flesh and we shall finde who they are which denie him to haue come in the flesh For if you giue heede to their tongues you shall heare manie heretikes confessing that Christ came in the flesh but the trueth conuinceth them wherefore came Christ in the flesh was he not God was it not saide of him In the beginning was the worde and the worde was with God and the worde was God did he not feede the Angells and doth not he him-selfe feede the Angells did he not so come that he departed 〈◊〉 fromthence did he not so ascend that he did not forsake vs Then wherefore came he in the flesh Because the hope of resurrection ought to haue bene shewed vnto vs. He was God and he came in the flesh for God could not die the flesh could therefore he came in the flesh that he might die for vs. And how died he for vs No man hath greater loue then this to giue his life for his friendes therefore loue brought him to the flesh Whosoeuer therefore hath not loue denieth Christ to haue come in the flesh It is manifest now by this discourse of Augustine vppon some particuler causes of Christ comming in the flesh that his cheife and principall offices cannot be excluded in the right interpretation of this text and therefore Master Charke hath rightlie inferred that whoesoeuer denieth the offices of Christ or any parte of them is no lesse confounded by this scripture then they that denie his person or anie parte or essentiall propertie thereof and that by the consent of the auncient fathers exposition without the which also the text is euident of it selfe For the verie names of Iesus and Christ doe comprehende his offices which whoesoeuer denieth although in wordes he confesse his person and names doth make but an Idoll of Iesus Christe whoesoeuer therefore confesseth not Christ to be a Sauiour Prophet King and Priest is not of God but of Antichrist he whosoeuer confesseth not that he is a wholl and onelie Sauiour Prophet King and Priest is of the same spirite of Antichrist that denieth Iesus Christ being come in the flesh or as the vulgare translation hath that dissolueth Iesus For whoesoeuer setteth vp anie other Sauiour Prophet King or Priest in that sense that these offices pertaine vnto Iesus Christ dissolueth Iesus denieth Iesus Christ to haue come in the flesh whoe came to be our onelie Master-teacher according to the manifest texts of scripture which hath taught vs all thinges likewise our onelie spiritual King eternall and high priest whose office both kinglie and priestlie being confirmed to him by an othe passeth not from him vnto anie other in succession but remaineth alwaies the onelie mightie Prince King of Kinges and Lord of Lordes Whoesoeuer therefore derogateth from Christ anie parte of these dignities offices denieth Iesus Christ comming in the flesh and so doe the popish Catholikes or papistes by their doctrine of traditions Popes authoritie sacrifice of the Masse and such like Nay saith the answerer Martine Luther interpreteth this place to be vnderstoode of M. Charke and his fellowes saying That spirit is not of God but of Antichrist which dissolueth Christes flesh in the sacrament It cannot be denied but Martin Luther was in this case to rash and presumptuous in condemning other men for holding this contrarie to that wherein he erred him-selfe But this answerer is too impudent to faigne sayings wordes of his yea and to applie that which he saied further then Luther him selfe doth For first these wordes that are alleadged as Luthers saying are none of his but forged by the answerer Secondlie that which Luther saieth founding to such a matter can not be drawne against M. Charke and his fellowes who maintaine no such absurditie as Luther in that place oppugneth The very wordes of Luther in his booke intituled Defen verb Caenae Accipite c. are these Quare in superioribus dixi hunc spiritum non esse bonum neque per istos fanaticos homines quicquam boni machinari quanquam existimem hos concionatores contra quos haec scribuntur nondum mali quicquam in animo habere Sed bone Deus non sunt sui ipsorum compotes continentes à 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 captiui tenentur Quare eis nimium sidendum non ect Nam spiritus qui Christi carnem dissoluit non est à Deo inquit Ioannes idqque probam spirituum vult esse Hic spiritus verè dissoluit carnem Christi cùm cam inutilem pereuntem prorsus communem carnem affirmat qualis est bouis aut vituli Wherefore I saide before that this spirite is not good neither goeth about any good thing by these fantasticall men the rebellious boures although I suppose these preachers against whome these thinges are now written as yet to haue none euil thinge in their minde But good God they haue no power nor holde of them selues they are blinded and holden captiue by a spirite wherefore they must not be trusted too much For that spirite which dissolueth the flesh of Christ is not of God saith Saint Iohn and that he will haue to be the triall of spirites This spirite in deede dissolueth the flesh of Christ when it affirmeth that it is vnprofitable perishing and altogether common flesh such as is the flesh of an Oxe or a calfe This is Luthers saying now it is certein that M Charke and his fellowes doe neithet thinke nor speake so vnreuerentlie of the flesh of Christ animated with his spirite which they acknowledge to be verie true meate wherewith we are fed vnto eternall life They had some smacke of Nestorianisme therefore against whome Luther vttereth these wordes from which M. Charke and his fellowes God be thanked are free But now commeth our answerer after he hath forged a place of Luther and hammered it out against Master Charke to maruaile that these men can finde so many absurdities vpon one sentence of scripture and first he would aske whether Master Charke thinketh that the Papistes doe exclude Christ when they allowe Prophets to teach vnder him Kinges to raigne vnder him Priests to sanctifie vnder him or no. As though there were no waie for Papists to be guiltie of Antichristianisme except they did exclude Christ altogether whereas it hath bene prooued that whosoeuer doth not acknowledge the wholl and euerie part of his offices is of Antichrist As for Prophets Kinges and Priests to teach reigne and sanctifie vnder Christ is not the matter in question but to teach reigne sanctify beside Christ to claime like authotitie in teaching gouerning sanctifying with him as to be fellow Prophets fellow Kings fellow priestes with him to teach that Christ taught not to make articles of faith to dispense against Gods commaundements to make lawes to binde the
which truelie comprehendeth all thinges vniuersallie These wordes in rehearsing the saying of Vincentius our answerer could not beare and therefore left them out bragging of vniuersalitie antiquitie and consent whereby his aduersaries spirit might quicklie be tried But let him once attempt to trie anie one peece of Poperie by this rule of Vincentius and so shew it to be Catholike as he describeth Catholike and he shall finde it an harder matter to performe then to talke of examining his point by the authenticall writings of the most auncient doctors for 200. yeares after Christ. The seuenth waie of triall is succession of Popes in the seate of Rome wherein the successor alwaies teaching the doctrine of his predecessor it must needes be a strong argument to prooue the descent and continuance of one the same faith from the Apostles time This argument is vsed by Saint Augustine and Optatus against the Manichees and Donatistes But this waie of triall he knoweth his aduersaries will not admit But he is deceiued for seeing he ioyneth succession in doctrine with succession in place let him make triall when he dare and prooue that Peter and all the Bishops of Rome that liued for foure fiue or six hundred yeares after Christ did holde all points of Poperie and had none other faith then the Papists haue now Some of the later mightholde some few and of the best errors But let them shew all in euerie one and take all but that shall thev neuer be able to doe brag they of succession as long as they list The eight waie of triall is to examine what part doth holde any olde condemned heresie for the true Church can neuer admit or defend any heresie for otherwise she could not be the piller of truth The true Church may erre in matters which are not of necessitie to saluation yet be the piller of trueh so long as she holdeth al truth necessarie to saluation yea some true Church may be seduced for a time with hereticall opinions as the Churches of Corinth and Galatia but not obstinately defend them nor continue in them For of a particuler Church as the Church of Ephesus the Apostle speaketh wherein Timothie had his conuersation But we beleeue saith the answerer with holie Athanasius in his creede that he which holdeth not the faith whollie in all points shall perish eternallie howsoeuer our aduersaries doe salue the matter in their Prophets Berengarius Husse Wicklife and Luther whome they saie to haue bene holie men and yet to haue erred in diuerse pointes offaith and to haue held their errors obstinatlie to the daie of their death And we beleeue with holie Athanasius that whoesoeuer shall not holde that Catholike faith which he or whoesoeuer vnder his name setteth downe in that Symbole or creed wholl and vndefiled without doubt he shall perish eternallie But not euerie one that erreth in any small point of doctrine or faith which is not of the foundation of our religion For so doth not Athanasius saie and our aduersarie falsisieth both his wordes and meaning to drawe him to that sense of his Now if Berengarius Wicklife Husse Luther cannot be conuinced of any heresie contrarie to Athanasius Creede though they erred in other points they are not subiect to his sentence of eternall damnation more then Cyprian Augustine Hierome whoe erred also in some points of doctrine yet are rightlie accounted saints and elect of God as they which held the foundation and all articles of faith necessarie to saluation But where he chargeth vsto saie that Berengarius Husse c. did erre in diuerse points of faith meaning thereby diuerse articles of Athanasius Creede he doth vs and them great iniury for that we neither saie nor thinke neither saie we that they did obstinatelie holde those errors wherein they were deceiued although they did stiflie holde them not as heretikes which are condemned in their owne conscience but as men deceiued with zeale of truth euen in those points wherin they were deceiued But we beleeue saith he the contrarie by which beliefe he will condemne the best and most auncient Catholike fathers who as men helde euerie one of them for the moste parte one error as hath bene shewed But whoesoeuer coulde shew saith he but one confessed heresie to be defended by our Church there needed no more disputation about the matter It will be a hard matter to make the Papists confesse that their Church holdeth any heresie but it hath beene often shewed that the Popish Church holdeth many things of olde time condemned for heresie as worspiping of the Image of Christ in the Carpocratites and Gnostikes Inuocation of Angels in the Caianes licensing of women to Baptize in the Marcionites worspiping of Angels of men and women that are dead in the Collyridians and such like But for the right vse of this triall he requireth two conditions to be obserued The first is that the partie do in deede holde that which is obiected and not a certaine likelyhood of it in which point he chargeth vs to slaunder them with the heresie of Pelagius concerning free will who held that men without the helpe of Gods grace by the power and force of nature could worke well but they require that a man should be preuented and holpen with the grace of God In trueth we do not obiect vnto them all articles of Pelagius heresie but yet they are not free for Pelagius held that by the power of nature men might keepe Gods law but more easelie by the help of Gods grace the former the Papists holde not but they holde the latter that a man holpen with Gods grace hath free-will and power to keepe Gods law Their doctrine also of merite ex congruo of workes preparatorie before grace and such like are nothing els but branches of the Pelagian heresie The like iniurie he saith we do them in objecting the heresie of those that did sacrifice to our Ladie which they do not A great iniurie I promise you the Collyridians offered cakes onelie to her the Papists offer candels ouches and brouches monie and Iewels The Collyridians did garnish a charret where her Image was the Papists adorne tabernacles as they call them yea chappels altars and Churches to worship her Epiphanius condemneth the studie of making her Image and the Images of dead saints as a deuellish attempt He inueigheth most seuerelie against the worshipping of the virgine Marie of Angels and of saintes departed yetall this is Catholike among the Papists and we offer them iniurie to charge them with this olde heresie because they do not offer cakes as the Collyridians did The second condition is that the heresie obiected be accounted condemned for an heresy in the Primitiue Church not onelie held by an heretike for heretikes held manie trueths together with their heresies And here he complaineth that Doctor Fulke doth them wrong in saying that praiers for the dead is an heresie because the Montanistes which were
your fault At the least it is your fault that in so straunge a report you haue not sette downe his wordes in latine if euer you sawe the preface your selfe As for the corrupt edition or often chaungeing of Luthers workes by him-selfe we haue not to do with it for whie might not Luther reforme his owne workes if ought in them were erronius or offensiue But it is a cauill that you adioyne of the confession of Auspurg whereunto the Germanes perhaps ascribe too much as Alasco writeth For though there be diuers editions thereof differing in wordes yet are they not contrarie in sense as appeareth by the harmonie of confessions latelie set forth at Gencua Now sir so much as we finde sounding toward your reporte I will sette downe that the reader maie iudge how vprightlie you do charge Luther with denying three of the foure Gospells Enarrat in epist. Petri argumentum Primùm omnium notandum c. First of all it is to be noted that all the Apostles do handle the same doctrine for which cause it is not well done that men do number but onelie foure Euangelistes and foure Gospells whereas whatsoeuer the Apostles haue left written is one Gospell For the Gospell signifieth nothing els but the preaching and publishing of the grace and mercie of God by our Lord Christ deserued and purchased to vs by his death and that thou maiest take it properlie it is not that which is conteined in bookes and is comprehended in letters but rather a vocall preaching and a liuing worde and voyce which soundeth into the wholl world and is so openly blowen out like a trumpet that it may be heard euerie where neither is it a booke which conteineth a law in which are many good doctrines as it hath beene commonlie taken heretofore for it doth not commaund vs to worke any thing where by we may become iust but it sheweth vnto vs the grace of God freelie and giuen without our meritte namelie that Christ hath beene our mediatour and hauing made satisfaction for our sinnes hath abolished them and made vs iust and saued by his workes Now whoesoeuer doth either preach or write these thinges he teacheth the true Gospell that which all the Apostles and peculiarlie Saint Paull and Saint Peter in their Epistles haue performed Therefore whatsoeuer is preached of Christ is one Gospell although one handle it after one manner an other man after another in diuerse manner of wordes do reason of it For the matter may be handled either in long or in short speach and be described either streightlie or largelie But seeing all perteineth to this end to teach Christ to be our sauiour and that we are made iust and saued by faith in him without our workes it is one word it is one Gospell as there is but one faith onelie and one baptisme in all the Church of Christ. Therefore thoureadest nothing writen by any of the Aposties which is not conteined in the monuments of the other Apostles But they which haue handled this point especiallie and with greater diligence that faith alone in Christ doth iustifie they are the best Euangelistes of all And in this respect you may more rightlie call the Epistles of Paul the Gospel then those which Matthew Marke and Luke haue written For these men describe not much beside the storie of the Acts and miracles of Christ. But the grace which is wrought vnto vs by Christ none doth sette forth more fullie or more rightlie then Saint Paul especiallie in the Epistle to the Romanes Now seeing there is much more moment in the word then in the factes and miracles of Christ and if we should want the one it were much better to lacke the Acts and history then the word and doctrine it followeth that shose bookes are to be had in highest price which handle the doctrine cheeflie and the wordes of our Lord Iesus Christ. Seeing that if there were no miracles of Christ extant and we were altogether ignorant of them the words were sufficient for vs without the which we could not so much as liue Therefore hereof it followeth that this Epistle of Saint Peter is to be accounted among the most excellent bookes of the new testament and is the true and pure Gospell as in which he doth nothing els but that which Paul and the other Euangelists do teaching sincere faith that Christ is giuen vnto vs which hauing taken away our offences doth saue vs c. This that he speaketh naming Matthew Marke and Luke say you signifieth some tooth against these three Gospells And what tooth I pray you because these three Gospells speake too much of good workes As though S. Paul in his Epistles and namelie in that to the Romanes doth not speake as much of good workes as all those three Gospells and Saint Peter though breeflie doe not speake as much in effect But in the preface in question you affirme that Luther hath these wordes The Epistles of Paul and Peter doe farre passe the Gospells of Matthew Marke and Luke which yet more prooueth Luthers euill opinion of those three Gospells I doubtnot albeit I neuer sawe the preface my selfe but Luther doth plainlie expresse in what respect the Epistles of Paul and Peter doe excell the histories of the Gospell written by Matthew Marke and Luke euen as he doth in this preface vnto his exposition of Saint Peter Because these Epistles are more occupied in setting forth the Grace of Christ and the fruit and benefit of his passion which no more prooueth his euill opinion of those three Gospells then when Christ preferreth Iohn the Baptist before al the Prophets it prooueth his euil opinion of all the Prophets or when he preferreth him that is least in the kingdome of heauen before Iohn Baptist it prooueth his euil opinion of Iohn Baptist. These brutish Papists thinke all men voide of common sense when they make such impudent conclusions As for your first charge that it is a false opinion and to be abolished that there are foure ghospels For the ghospell of S. Iohn is the onely faire true and principall ghospell when you can alledge the words of Luther in latine to iustifie your report and because we know not how to come to the sight of that preface will set downe two sentences that goe before them and as manie that followe them you shall receiue a reasonable answere But vntill you haue thus much performed I am perswaded you wil be as farre to seeke as Campian was for his reporre of Luther that he should call the Epistle of Saint Iames Stramineam strawie or like strawe And yet you take vppon you to shew the intollerable impudencie of Master Chark and his fellowes in the Tower against Master Campian for that he could not presentlie shew out of their bookes where these wordes are written by Luther especiallie of Master Whitaker whoe to the admiration and laughter of all other nations hath set forth in latine that Luther neuer
if default be not in our selfe yet we saie they are sinne of them selues for which we ought to sigh and grone with the Apostle And where you saie we haue no hope of victorie because we sinne though we consent not and thereof make manie wordes in vaine of the excellencie of popish doctrine it is moste vntrue for we haue a most cer taine hope by the grace of god in Iesus Christ to haue deliuerance frō the one victory of the other that to the obtening of the crowne of euerlasting glorie Now are we come to the tenth commaundement which is contrarie to the Iesuites doctrine which you say the Censure out of S. Augustine expoundeth to be meant of consent lib. 1. denupt conc cap. 23. where S. Augustine doth not so expound this cōmaundement thou shalt not lust but sheweth as he doth in other places before noted that it is not fullfilled in this life Next to this you saie it pleaseth Master Charke to put downe foure manifest lies saying As the Papists make of the tenth commaundement two commaundements so this fellow maketh of two seuerall breaches of two diuerse commaundementes but one sinne And both these you saie are slaunders But how both these if they were slaunders should make foure lies I doe not yet see except it be by multiplication Your answere is first that the Catholikes make but one of the tenth commaundement but the question is which is properlie and distinctlie the tenth commaundement Verie well if it be a question and such a question as you conclude not to be defined in your Church you doe ill to make it an argument to conuince him of slaunder For if that opinion be true that maketh but one commaundement against coueting which few papists doe follow and yet many auncient writers doe holde as you confesse then doe the rest make two commaundemetes of that one against coueting Yes Saint Augustine you saie contendeth in diuerse places that these two clauses thou shalt not haue strange Gods and thou shalt not make any grauen Idoll are but one commaundement and therefore that the two other of coueting make two distinct commaundementes That S. Austine liketh that diuision I denie not but that he contendeth for it is vntrue And you your selfe note six auncient writers namely Origen Procopius Clemens Alexandrinus Hesychius S. Ambrose S. Ierome that follow our diuision assigning foure preceptes to the first table and six to the second To which may be added Greg. Nazianzen decalog Mosis carmine Augustine or whoesoeuer was author of those books called quaestiones ex veteri N. T. quaestione 7. Beside the authority of those olde fathers reason is against it For whereas you saie this clause Thou shalt not couet thy neighbours wife is the ninth commaundement and the rest the tenth Moses is against you Exod. 20. placing thou shalt not couet thy neighbours house first and then thou shalt not couet thy neighbours wife which were a confusion if that which is in the second place were the ninth that which is in the first were the tenth beside the transposition that part of the tenth commaundement should be ioyned with the ninth Therefore seeing the same Moses placeth the coueting of the wife Deu. 5. in the first place it is manifest that both those clauses make but one commaundement els should it be vncertaine which is the ninth and which the tenth Againe where you saie it is moste conuenient that the twoe generall internall consentes vnto the two lusts of carnalitie and couetousnes called by Saint Iohn concupiscence of the flesh and concupiscence of the eie should be expresselie and particularlie forbidden by two distinct commaundements I answere that it is more couuenient that concupiscence of all sinnes against the second table should be forbidden in one generall commaundement And it is meruaill how in Saint Iohn you forgotte the pride of life which he ioyneth with the concupiscence of the eies and of the flesh which was as needefull to be forbidden as the other two though you saie the internall temptations against the other commaundement are neither so frequent nor so daungerous as those two Yes verely the temptations to ambition rebellion disobedience malice lying such like are both as frequent and as daungerous as vnto bodelie lust and couetousnes To that you sate they are sufficientlie forbidden by the wordes set downe in the commaundements them-selues it may be answered so are the other two and therefore all lust with consent is forbidden in euerie one of them as lust vnto adulterie in the commaundement prohibiting adulterie desire of reuenge in the commaundement prohibiting murther by our sauiour Christs owne interpretation and authority by like reason ambition or lust of disobedience in the commaundement that biddeth parentes to be honoured couetousnes in that which forbiddeth theft the lust of lying or slaundering in that which forbiddeth false witnes Therefore the commaundement of lust beeing one and general must needes be the tenth and the comaundement of hauing no gods but one the true God the first the commaundement of not making nor worshipping Images the second which are two perfectlie distinct preceptes the one commaunding the true God to be honoured alone the other commaunding the worship of God to be spirituall and forbidding all carnall imaginations of Gods worship as by Images or any other thing of mens deuise wherebie they chaunge the glorie of the immortall God into the shape of a mortall man beastes fouls or any other thing Therefore he that worshippeth Baall as a God breaketh the first commaundement he that worshippeth Iehoua in the calfe that Aaron made or the calues that Ieroboam set vp or by offering incense to the brasen serpent offendeth against the second commaundement This diuision therefore is both most conuenient as that which distinguisheth all good workes and all sinnes by their proper precepts and also necessarie as that which maketh tenne commaundements euerie one perfectlie distinct from the other and that sheweth all men all manner of sinne as well that which is in act as that which is in desire not onelie that which is with consent but euen that also which proceedeth of the corruption of nature and is resisted by the spirit of God Therefore that which you saie vntrulie of the first two braunches is true of the last that they conteine but one thing namelie a prohibition of concupiscence against any of the other five preceptes of the second table But it is a weightie argument that the 70. interpreters doe recite them distinctlie as two commaundementes in their Greeke translation How shall we know that You answere by repeating the verbe twise But that is a slender proofe for the verbe is twise repeated in the Hebrew text and in Deut. 5. once changed In the twoe first commaundements there are foure verbes denied there shalls not be thou shalt not make thou shalt not bow downe thou shalt not serue Yet these two you will haue
life the same should stand in force before God FVLKE Our sauiour Christ in this place doth first of all authorize his Apostles to execute the office of publike preaching of the Gospell in all the world vnto the which he had before chosen appointed them Then doth he furnish them with giftes of the holie Ghost meete for so high and painfull a calling last of all he ratifieth the effect of their ministerie to be accomplished in the remission of the sinnes of all them that beleeue their preaching and in the retaining of their sinnes that do not obey the voice of the Gospell to beleeue it For the power of remitting sinnes must not be separated from the office of teaching whereunto it is annexed by our sauiour Christ who doth not giue his Apostles authoritie to remit sinnes so that he would transferre into them anie thing that is proper vnto him-selfe For it is proper to him to remit sinnes which honour so farre forth as it pertaineth to his onelie person he doth not resigne to his Apostles but commaundeth them in his name to testifie the forgiuenes of sinnes that he might reconcile men to God by their ministerie For I haue shewed before in the words of S. Hilarie that to speake properlie God onelie by men remitteth sinnes not following the sentence of man but man following the iudgement of God which is to pardon all penitent sinners and to retaine the sinnes of vnbeleeuers vnto eternall condemnation Therefore it is much more then the place doth afforde that you affirme the iudgement and rule of our soules with al authoritie in correcting our sinnes in most expresse and effectuall tearmes and in moste ample manner is giuen to the Apostles and their successors in this place For Christ in this place doth constitute Apostles and not Iudges messengers and declarers of his good pleasure and will vnto men not rulers of mens soules he giueth them power to remit or retaine sinnes in his name to the inestimable comfort of all penitent sinners and to the terrour and in crease of damnation of all vnbeleeuers he giueth them not al authoritie and that in moste ample manner in correcting our sinnes neither are there in the place anie expresse or effectual tearmes our of which such omnipotent authoritie can be concluded as afterward when we come to your syllogisme we shall platnlie declare Againe there is no mention in the text of anie iurisdiction communicated vnto them but of the office of teaching whereunto Christ was sent for a time which he committeth to his Apostles and their successours For these wordes of our sauiour As my father hrth sent me I also do send you can not be enlarged generallie to all such purposes as God sent Christ but must be vnderstood according to the matter he speaketh of that is of the office of Preaching teaching which Christ at that time did cease to execute in his humanitie remaining yet still the onelie doctor and teacher of his Church because he is author of the doctrine that is taught and by his holie spirit teacheth continually in giuing effect to the labours of his Apostles Euangelists Prophets Pastours teach ers which he hath giuen vnto his Church for the external ministerie of instructing the same in al truth necessarie to the eternall saluation of his elect He substituteth therfore his Apostles in that necessarie office of preaching the Gospell he enableth them by his spirit which he testifieth vntothem by an holy signe to proceed from him He maketh an assured promis that they should not labour in vaine but that in pardoning retaining sinnes according to the doctrine of his Gospel whatsoeuer they did should stand in force before God ALLEN What dignitie could euer be giuen more in what tearmes more plain by what order more honourable for surelie if either Christ could remit sinnes as we haue at large prooued that he could by commission and sending of his father or if the holie spirit of God maie remit sinnes or if Christes word will procure man anie power to remit sinnes then vndoubtedlie maie the Apostles remit sinnes For they haue the expresse warrant of them all Much said Paul when he affirmed in the Apostles name and person of all Priestes Quòd 〈◊〉 erat in Christo mundum reconcilians sibi posuit in nobis verbum reconciliationis Pro Christo ergo legatione fungimur That God was in Christ reconciling the world to him selfe and hath put in vs the word of reconcilement therfore our calling is to serue as an Embasy in Christes owne stead These wordes be of great waight and exceedinglie set forth the vocation of the spirituall gouernours as of those that holde by the warrant of Gods sending and thereby occupie Christes owne roome Marie the place for all that appertaineth to their calling generallie as wel to preach as otherwise to guide the people of God in the behalfe of their Master to whome we al be subiect but this present text whereupon we now treat doth properlie concerne the commission giuen to the Apostles for the sacrament of penance and remission of sinnes For it doth in moste cleere and vndoubted sense giue to them the like right in that case that Christ him selfe had by the sending of God the father that is to saie the very same authority that he had in respect of his mediation and manhoode A Equalem patri filium nouimus saith Saint Augustine sed bîc verba Mediatoris agnoscimus medium quippe se ostendit dicendo ille me ego vus We know the sonne to be equall with the father but here we must acknowledge the wordes of a mediator For he shewed him selfe to be as a meane when he said He sent me and I send you That is to saie as Theophilact expoundeth it Take vpon you my worke and function and doe it with confidence For as my father did send me so I send you againe and I will be with you to the ende of the worlde FVLKE There is no dout but the Apostles had power to remit sins but yet for al your thetorical interrogations none other then I haue expressed before nor greater then may stand with the glory of Christ who maketh not men equal with him when he authorizeth them as his seruants to be ministers of his mysteries and stewardes of his gracious giftes And Paul trulie said much when he affirmed that god was in Christ recōciling the world to himselfe not imputing to them their offences which clause I know not why you haue omitted hath put in vs that word of recōciliation We are therfore embassadours for Christ c. For he said that it is proper to god to reconcile the world to forgiue sins or not to impute them that is but a ministery of reconciliation which he hath geuen vnto men she weth how this ministerie is executed namely by preaching reconciliation as the embassadours of God to desire men to be reconciled vnto God
which only meane of preaching expressed in this place you with a Marie for all that fumble vp with I cannot tell what guidance because you cannot content your selfe to be a minister a seruant a subiect but you must be a Lord a Prince a ruler But the other text of Ioh. 20. yousay doth properlie concerne the commission giuen to the Apostles for the sacrament of penaunce and remission of sins But whether I praie you in the scripture shal we read of this your sacrament or the institution thereof what is the visible worde or element thereof yet you saie that this text doth in moste cleare and vndoubted sense giue to them the like right in that case that Christ him-selfe had by the sending of God the father that is to saie the verie same authoritie that he had in respect of his mediation and manhood So that be like Christ as Mediator hath no authority peculiar to himselfe in respect of the excellency of his person but that which is communicable vnto others and is communicated to his Apostles But that is a strange doctrine neuer heard of before in the Church of God except it were from the mouth of Nestorius or any of his disciples For our sauiour Christ receiued in his manhoode that which no other man is able to receiue because he one lie is God and man he receiued the spirit not according to measure Iohn 3. 34. as all men muste do that receiue it therefore no man can receiue such power by the spirit in measure which he receiued by the spirit infinitelie or without measure But Saint Augnstine is called to witnes that this text doth giue theverie same authoritie to the Apostles that Christ had in respect of his mediation and manhoode Whereas Saint Augustines words import no such thing but onelie shew that Christ though equal to his father in respect of his Godheade yet as he is our Mediatour is sent of his father in respect of his manhood But of the verie same authoritie that Christ had in respect of his mediation giuen to the Apostles he speaketh not a word That you ioyne his māhood to his mediation as though the mediator were nothing but man or as though the man Iesus Christ which is our onelie mediator were not Immannell that is God with vs it is not without some smack of Nestorian heresie wherebie you seeme so to separate the man from God as though any thing might be verified of the man which in respect of the vnitie of person might not be verified of God or as though there were not such a perfect vnion of the two natures in one person that although they both continue vnconfounded reteining their essentiall properties yet any part of the office and authoritie of Christ which he exercised in his humanitie might as latgelie as fullie and with the verie same authoritie be committed ouer to any other mortall man to be exercised as it was by Christ himselfe But Theophilact is cited to be an interpreter of Saint Augustine whoe saith vpon these wordes as the father hath sent me c. in the person of Christ take vpon you my worke and be sure that I will be with you meaning that he committeth to them the office of teaching whereunto he was sent by his father but of equall authoritie with him he speaketh no worde Which place you haue verie licentiouslie translated to draw it to your purpose For the words are no more but these as Philippus Montanus hath translated them Meum opus inquit suscipite confidite quod vobiscum sum futurus And in the ende he willeth men to consider the dignitie of priests that it is diuine For it perteineth to God to remit sinnes so therefore are they to be honoured as God For although they be vnworthie what is that they are the ministers of Gods giftes and grace worketh by them euen as he spake by Balaams asse For our vnworthines hindreth not grace so because by meanes of priests grace is graunted they are to be honoured Thefe wordes of Theophilact declare that although he ascribe much to the dignitie of Priests yet he doth not allowe them the verie same authoritie that Christ had in respect of his mediation but a farre inferior ministerie And excellentlie to our purpose wrote the holie father Cyril as well for the dignitie of the Apostolike vocation as for the honourable legacie in these wordes Ad gloriosum Apostolalatum Dominus noster Iesus Christus Discipulos suos vocduit qui commotum orbem firmarunt sustentacula eius facti vnde per Psalmistam de terra de Apostolis dicit quia ego firmaui columnas eius Columnae enim robur veritatis discipulisunt quos ita dicit se mittere sicut à patre ipse missus est vs Apostolatus dignitatem ostenderet magnitudinem potestatis eorum aperiret These wordes and the residue following concerning the same purpose goe thus in english Our Lord and master Christ Iesus promoted his disciple to a glorious Apostleship whoe becing made the proppes and staies of all the earth haue established the wauering worlde whereupon the Psalmist sayeth thus of the earth and the Apostles I haue surelie and firmelie set the pillers thereof For the disciples no doubt be the verie pillers strength and staie of trueth whome Christ saith that he doth send euen as his father did send him that thereby he might declare to the worlde as well the dignitie of their Apostleship as open to all men their excellencie and the might of their power and no lesse signifie vnto them what way they had to take in all their life and studies For if they be so sent as Christ him selfe was sent of the father it is requisite to consider for what worke purpose the father euerlasting sent his sonne in flesh to the worlde And that him selfe els where declareth saying Non veni vocare iustos sed peccatores ad poenitentiam I came not to cal the iust but sinners to repen tance in another place it is said God sent not his sonne into the world to iudge the worlde but that the worlde shold be saued by him al these thinges and other he touched brieflie in these few wordes Sicus misit me pater ego mitto vos vt hinc intelligant vocandos esse 〈◊〉 ad poenitentiam 〈◊〉 corpore simul spiritumale habentes Like as my father sent me so I send you that sinners should be called to repentance and be healed both in bodie and soule Thus farre spake S. Cyril of the excellent calling of the disciples of the cause of their large commission not restricted by any streighter tearmes then Christs owne commission was which he receiued from his euerlasting Father FVLKE The wordes of Saint Cyrillus declare no more then I haue said before that the Apostles were sent of Christ as Christ was sent of his father to call sinners to repentance by their ministerie of preaching not
vbi de fructu suae conuersionis infidus est Christ deliuered the keies to the Church saith S. Augustine that whatsoeuer she loosed in earth should be loosed in heauen and what soeuer she bound in earth should be c. that is to saie that whosoeuer would not beleeue that sinnes should be forgiuen him in his Church they should not beforgiuen vnto him but whosoeuer did beleeue and being corrected did turne him-selfe awaie from them being placed in the bosome of the same Church should be healed by the same faith and correction For whosoeuer doth not beleeue that his sinnes maie be forgiuen vnto him is made worsse by dispairing as though nothing remained better for him then to beleue when he is vnfaithful vnbeleeuing of the fruite of his conuersion These wordes of Saint Augustine do shew that sinnes are forgiuen to the penitent and faithfull that beleeue the doctrine of repentance and forgiuenes of sinnes which is preached in the Church The place of Optatus vrging the vnitie of Peters chaire against the schismatikes that were deuided from the communion of the Catholike Church ascribeth no greater authoritie to Peters chaire in exercising the keyes or anie other power of the Priesthood then to all other chaires That Epiphanius allowethrepentance after baptisine against the Catharistes it prooueth no more an other sacrament of penance then that we do euen as he graunt that there is place of repentance before god reconciliation vnto the Church for such as do daily fall after baptisme But contrary wise it appeareth that Epiphanius alloweth but one sacrament of repentance which is baptisme Andyet saith he we take not awaie the mercie of God knowing the preaching of the trueth and the mercie of the Lord c the pardonable nature the vnstedfastnes of the soule the weaknes of the flesh the deepenes of the sense of manie men because no man is void of sinne and pure from filthines though his life be but one daie vpon the earth And perfect repentance in deede is in the lauer of baptisme but if a man fall the holie Church of god doth not loose him for it gran teth him a returne and after that repentance an other repentance The Greeke word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying a sorowfullnes for that which is committed by which the partie maie be brought to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the perfect repentance that he spake of before that is recouer the grace of forgiuenes of sins confirmed vnto him in baptisme which is the onelie sacrament of repentance the fruite whereof endureth vnto our liues end to make vs partakers of the fruite of regeneration that is life euerlasting The examples that he bringeth of repentanee offered to Cain and graunted to Peter do Prooue that he speaketh not of any sacrament of rePentance but sheweth that God receaueth them that fall after baptisme vnto repentance according to the preaching of trueth and of the mercie of God I muse what you meane when you saie that Epiphanius termeth baptisme perfect repentance with Saint Paul to the Hebr. cap. 6. For the Apostle to the Hebrewes hath no such terme either in that chapter or in anie other place of that epistle except you dreamed of such a matter because he professeth to leaue the first principles of religion as repentance from dead workes c. which pertaineth to the doctrine of baptisme and Imposition of hands and to grow to perfection In the Catholike Church as Lactantius saith there is confession because there is faith there is also repentance which wholsomlie healeth the sinnes and wound to which the weakenes of the fleshis subiect by which it is prooued that there is remission of sinnes in the Church continuing vntill the comming of Christ to iudgement ALLEN But he that listeth to see in what office and by whome he holdeth this singular honour of remission of sinnes he shall finde not onelie the Apostles who were called by Christ but all other Bishops also that succeede them in the Church to be her ministers herein Whereof let him reade the 26. Homely of Saint Gregorie pertaining almost whollie to that purpose I will repeat a few wordes onelie out of it committing the rest to the diligence of the reader Libet intueri saith he illi discipuli ad tanta onera humilitatis vocati ad quantum culmen gloriae sint oeruecti Ecce non solùm de semetipsis securi fiunt sed etiam alienae obligationis relaxationis potestatem accipiunt principatumque superniiudicij sortiuntur vt vice Dei quibusdam peccata retineant quibusdam relaxent Ecce qui districtum iudicium Dei metuunt animarum iudices fiunt alios damnant velliberant qui semetipsos damnare metuebant Horum profectò nunc in Ecclesia Dei Episcopi locum tenent ligandi atque soluendi authoritatem sumunt grandis honor sed graue pondus est istud honoris It is my meaning now to beholde to what marueilous honour the Disciples of Christ be exalted which before were called in their base state to great burden and troubles For now they be not onelie in assurance of their owne state but they haue obtained power of binding and releasing other and the verie soueraigntie of heauenly iudgement that in Gods owne steade they may some mans sinnes release and other offencesreteine Loe those that once feared the straight sentence of Gods owne iudgement are made the iudges of other mens soules to condemne or deliuer where they list that before doubted of them-selues And now truelie in these mens roomes are the Bishops of Gods Church and receiue the authoritie of binding and loosing and their owne state ofregiment High surclie is their Chaire but greater is their charge S. Gregorie said so farre But Saint Augustine shall make vp this matter with words of such waight that I trust euerie man shall see the trueth and almost feele the grossenesse of falsehood thereby He writeth thus vpon this verse of the Psalme Eructauit which is the 44. in number with him Pro patribus tuis nati sunt tibi filij constitueseos Principes super omnem terram In place of thy parentes thou hast Children borne thee them thou maist make the Princes of the wholl earth The Apostles did beget thee they were sent them-selues they preached in their owne persons and finallie they were thy fathers But could they alwaies corporallie abide here And though one of them said I would gladlie be dissolued and be withChrist yet for your sake I counted it more necessarie to tarie in flesh Thus he said but how long could his life last he might not remaine til this daie much lesse for the time to come What then is the Church desoiate after the departure of her parents God forbid In steade of thy parentes thou hast sonnes saith the text what is that to saie Marie the Apostles sent by Christ are as fathers and for them God hath raised vp children or sonnes which be the holie Bishops of the world
For at this daie the Bishops that be throughout all Christendome how rose they to that roome The Church calleth them fathers and yet shee did beget them and she placed them in that roome of their fathers Non ergo reputes desertam quia non vides Petrum quòd non vides Paulum quòd non vides illos per quos nataes de prole tua tibi creuit paternitas pra patribus tuis natisunt tibi filij constitues eos principes super omnem terram Do not therefore think thy selfe desolate because thou hast not Paull because thou hast them not now present by whome thou wast borne of thy owne issue fatherhood is growne to thee and for thy fathers thou hast brought forth sonnes them shalt thou make the rulers ouer al the earth Thus much out of Saint Augustine By whome you maie perceaue the great prouidence of God that euerlastinglie vpholdeth the ordinance of his sonne Christ Iesus as well now by the children borne from time to time in the Churches lap as before in the spring of our faith by the Apostles sent and appointed in person by Christ him-selfe FVLKE I suppose the title of your booke will admonish you not to restraine this office onelie to Bishops which so often you haue made common to all priestes For Gregory also in the same homyly nameth often times all pastours of the Church to whome the power of binding and loosing doth appertaine which are many other beside Bishops Moreouer inueighing against the ignorance and vnworthines of them that occupied such places which take vpon them to loose where God doth binde and binde where God doth loose he concludeth that then the absolution of the gouernours of the Chuch is true when it followeth the will of the eternall Iudge By which saying and more to the like effect in that place he declareth his iudgement of the kinde of power or authoritie which the Church hath that it is not absolute but subiect vuto the will of God and is an expressing of Gods forgiuenes or retaining not a proper forgiuing or retaining The saying of Saint Augustine prooueth in deede a continuance of the ministery of the Apostles in the office of Bishops but hereof it followeth not that onelie Bishops as they are distinct from priestes haue this power for not onelie Bishops be the children of the Church but all faithfull men to whome the inheritance of the world is like wise appointed ALLEN And here you must know that not onelie Bishops who succeede the Apostles in all kinde of power and regiment but also all other inferiour Priestes to be compted with them as successors in ministring diuerse sacraments as baptisme penance the reuerend Sacrament of the Aultar and such like but looke what power either Apostle or Bishop hath in remission of sinnes in consecrating Christes bodie in baptizing the same hath the wholl order of holie Priesthood by the right of their order and maie practize the same vpon such as be subiect vnto them in all causes not exempted for reasonable causes by such as haue further iurisdiction ouer the people Wherof I will not now talke particularlie the learned of that order know the limits of their charge and commission better then I can instruct them and the simpler sort must seeke for knowledge of their duetie by the holie Canons of Councels and decrees of Bishops made for that purpose I can not now stand thereon meaning at this present onelie to defend the holie order and challenge for it such right as the scripture and Chistes owne word giueth which in this contempt of vertue and religion is moste necessarie for all men to consider FVLKE There is no power or authoritie graunted by our sauiour Christ to preach the word of God or to minister anie sacrament but the same is common to euerie one of the Pastoures of the Church and not onelie lawfull but also necessarie for them to exercise in their seuerall charges Wherefore that ministering of some sacraments is permitted to them and of other denied them it is beside the word of god Againe the word of god that giueth them general power whose sinnes soeuer whatsoeuer you shal bind or loose is directlie against al exempted cases which sauor of nothing but of Antichristian tyrannie As for the cannons of Counceles and decrees of Bishoppes whether you send the simple to learne the limites of their charge can not restraine that Christ hath enlarged and therefore if your meaning were as your wordes professe to defend the holie order and challenge for it such right as the scripture and Christes owne worde geueth you would enueigh against the pride and ambition of the Pope other prelates that exempt anie cases from the Priests power and authoritie which the holie scripture and the expresse wordsof our sauiour Christ doth in such ample manner graunt vnto them ALLEN Therefore vpon our large discourses for this last point I now deduct the particulars to this summe which maie stand for a certaine marke as well for the good to discerne the trueth as for the aduersaries to shoote at whiles they liue Alpower and euery iurisdiction or right of Christs Church remaineth as amplie and in as full force and strength at this daie and shall till the worlds end so continue as they were by Christ graunted first in the persons of the Apostles or other instituted But the power of remission of sinnes was giuen properlie and in expresse termes to the Apostles Ergo the same remaineth still in Gods Church Whereupon it is so cleare that the Priestes at this day haue as ful power to forgiue sins as the Apostles had And this argument of the continuance of all offices and righte of the Church is the moste plainest and readiest waie not onelie to helpe our cause now taken in hand but vtterlie to improoue all false doctrines and detestable practises of heretikes For they must here be examined diligentlie what common wealth that is what Church that is in which Christ doth prescrue the gouernment giuen to the Apostles where it is that the power not onely os making but also of practizing al sacraments hath continued still what companie of Christian people that is wherein the Apostles Doctors preachers ministers through the perpetuall assistance of Gods spirit be continued for the building vp of Christes bodie which is the number of faithful people What Church that is which bringeth forth from time to time sonnes to occupy the romes of their fathers before them It is not good reader the pelting packe of Protestants It is not I saie and they knowe it is not their petie congregations that hath till this daie continued the succession of Blshoppes by whome the world as Saint Augustine saith is ruled as by the Apostles and first Fathers of Religion Surely our mother the Church hath hene long baren if for her Fathers the Apostles who died so long since she neuer brought forth children til now to occupie their roomes and
great lacke ofrulers if she haue made her onelie contemners to be her owne gouernours No these sellowes holde not by her but they holde against her these sit in no seat Apostolike but they by all force dishonour the seat Apostolike these are not they qui pro patribus nati sunt tibi filij but these are the sonnes quos enutriuisti genuisti ipsi spreueruntte If you aske of these men how they holde they seeke no Fathers after whome they maie rightly rule they seeke no large rew of predecessours in whose places they may sit they aske no counsell of Gods Church by whose calling they should gouerne but they make a long discourse of statutes and temporall lawes to couer their ambitious vsurpation that in great lacke of Christes calling their vniust honour may be approoued by mans fauour Thereby let them holde their temporall dignities their landes their liuelihoodes their wiues also if ther can obtaine so much at the commō wealthes handes but their spiritual functions their ministering of Sacraments their gouernance of our soules and what els soeuer they vsurpe without the warrant of Gods Church the longer they exercise them the farther they be from saluation and the neerer to eternall woe and miserie But to come to our purpose it is our Church Catholike in which all holie functions haue bene practized after Christes institution euer since his ascension vp to heauen And therefore this principall power of remitting and retaining sinnes must needes be contained in the Church by her ministers and priests as it was begonne in the Apostles before FVLKE I like well your pretence after a large discourse to knit vp your whole entent in a Syllogisme which you set as a matke for vs to shoote at while we liue verilie your argument if one word were awaie I would willinglie graunt but the word properlie you are neuer able to prooue while you liue nor all the papists in the world after you are dead therefore in respect of that word I denie your Minor And yet I graunt that you inferre vpon it your conclusion in such termes as you haue set it downe that lawfull Priestes Elders or ministers of Gods Church at this daie haue as fullpower to forgiue sinnes in their seuerall charges as the Apostles had in their gener all commission But here you will needes examine vs what Church that is in which Christ doth preserue the gouernment giuen to the Apostles The Catholike Church forsooth 2. Where the power of ministring the sacraments if you meane that by your termes of making and practizing hath continued still in the Catholike Church 3. What companie of Christ an people that is wherein the Apostles Doctours preachers ministers through the perpetuall assistance of Gods spirit be continued for the building vp of Christes bodie which is the number of the faithfull Still I answere the companie of the Catholike Church 4. What Church that is which bringeth forth from time to time sonnes to occupie the romes of their Fathers before them Here I answere manie hereticall and malignant Churches but onelie the Catholike Church hath continued from the beginning in such propagation You answere your selfe and saie it is not it is not the pelting-packe petrie congregation of the Protestants to your double negatiō a single affirmation may serue It is the Church of them you cal Potestantes in Europe which is a part of the Catholike Church dispersed ouer all the earth which Church of the Protestantes I see not why you should so pelt at it with your pettierhetorike It is God be thanked as great and as glorious at this time in the eies of the world as the Romish rable except that the ministers thereof be not so prowde nor so gorgeous That whore of Babilon your dame whome you would haue to be accepted for the Catholike Church of Christ which boasted her selfe that she was no widow is now of manie forsaken of her spirituall for nication begetteih but feew bastardes in comparison of that she was wont to doe Therefore it is not no no that wil be able to pul vs out of the Apostolike chaires in which we teach nothing but the Doctrine of the Apostles consonant vnto the Doctrine of the Prophets These Fathers we seek to holde of and all other that holde of the same line we hold with them as for large view of predecessours we know it must necessarilie insue the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles because of the perpetuall continuance of the Church And therefore we take not vp olde mouldie and mothen parchementes to seeke our progenitours names but by consanguinitie of Doctrine with the Apostles as Tertullian calleth it knowe we are Apostolike and set in Apostolike places As for the long discourse of statutes temporall lawes that you talke of we claime no spirituall inheritance thereby although we accept the confirmation of temporall lawes for the better execution of our offices What I pray you Sir had not you Papists in Queene Maries time as large a discourse of statutes and temporal lawes as we haue for the maintenance of your popish superstition and all thinges thereto belonging and yet you would procure enuie to vs of statutes and temporall lawes as though wee helde onelie by them As for temporal dignites landes lieuely hodes I knowe not how they shoulde be mainteined but by temporall lawes Out wiues we holde by the law of God against which there is no temporal lawe of the land by infinit better right then you doe hold your stewes and other remedies of your incontinencie and as for spiritual functions we holde them by the same right that they were first giuen to the Church and haue therein continued euen to this daie An answer to such as denie this power to passe from the Apostles to al other Priests because many of them beeing euill men may be thought not to haue the holy Ghost whereby they should effectuallie remit sinnes THE SIXTH CHAP. ANd to Caluin or other of his secte that require the like vertue and force of the holie Ghostes assistance in all men that take vpon them to remit sinnes as it was giuen to the Apostles who first receiued that power I answer that the same gift of the holie Ghost is yet in the ministers of the same Sacrament no lesse then in the Apostles For though they had more plentifull sanctification whereby they were in all their life more holie and more vertuous then lightlie anie other either Priestes or laie men were after them yet the giftes of the holie Ghost touching the ministerie and seruice of Gods Church which were not so much giuen them for their owne sakes as for the vse of the common wealth and for the right of practizing certaine holy functions requisite for the peoples sanctification as they were also giuen to diuers that were neither good nor vertuous and therefore lacked that which properlie is that grace of the holie Ghost that is called of our schoole men
gratia gratum faciens such a grace as maketh a man acceptable to God Therefore the holie Ghost breathed vpon the Apostles then by Christ and giuen yet to Priests in their ordering by Bishopes is a gift of God and a grace of the holy ghost not whereby man is made rertuous or cunning or happie before God but it is a gift onelie of God whereby man is called aboue his owne nature and dignitie to haue power and authoritie to doe and exercise anie function in Gods Church to the spirituall benefit of the people which is not onelie not alwaies ioyned to vertue and holie knowledge but it full often by calling due to them which are moste wicked persons without anie impaire of their authoritie And these kinde of giftes and graces of the holie Ghost be called gratiae gratis datae certaine giftes giuen to men for no desertes of their persons but freelie for the vse of other men to whome they be beneficiall euen there where they be hurtfull to the bestowers In which sense Saint Paule numbreth a great sorte in the fourth to the Ephesians and the first Epistle to the Corinshians and he calleth them not onelie the graces of the spirite but also the diuisions of functions and ministrations as the gift of working of miracles the gift of tongues the gift of prophecying the gift of preaching and so foorth all which being the giftes and graces of the spirit for the Churches edifying and of Saint Peter being called the holy Ghost in the Actes yet they were giuen to euill men often as well as to good without all imparing of Gods honoure yea with the great encrease of God glorie that euen by the wicked is able to worke his wil and holie purpose for the benefit of his Elect. And in this sense the spirite of God breathed vpon the Apostles was a gift of the holie Ghost whereby man should remit by lawfull power the sinnes of the people Whereupon Theophilact sayeth that Potestatem quandam donum spirituale dedit Apostolis vs remittant peccata ostendens quod genus spiritualium donorum eis dederit inquit quorum remiser it is peccata remittuntur eis that is to saie Christ gaue to his Apostles a certaine power and spirituall gift whereby they might remit sins for he shewed what power of the spirit it was that breathed on them when he said whose sinnes you doe for giue they be forgiuen Whosoeuer shall vndoubtedlie remit sinnes and absolue sinners must haue the same gift of the holie Ghost which the Apostles had whereby he cannot erre And this gift no man denieth but it maie be in a wicked and vngodlie man For euen such an one may preach the doctrine of Christ of remission of sinnes publikelie and priuatlie if he haue the calling that is required to that office Neither doth Caluine or any other that are of his iudgement otherwise require the like force of the holie ghostes assistance in al men that take vpon them to remit sinnes For there is not onelie a power but a knowledge required in him that shall assuredlie and vndoubtedlie forgiue sinnes And therefore the papistes doe vnreasonably make a diuorse of the keie of power from the keie of knowledge which power if it be no guided by knowledge doth nothing but insteade of opening and shutting with the keies committed to the Church throw forth the keies as the blinde man casteth his staffe which cannot happen so right in to the locke that they should open it to the penitent sinners For it is not the Priestes authoritie that can open the dore of comforte to a sinners conscience except he can declare vnto him out of the word of God how and by what meanes he maie be reconciled vnto God That the holie Ghost is giuen by Bishopes to Priestes in their ordering it is more boldlie affirmed then euer it can be prooued for Christ onelie hath authoritie to giue the holy Ghost and therefore to declare that it commeth from him alone among men he breathed vpon his Apostles which though the Bishops doe vntill their longues ake yet can they not furnish their parties by them ordered with giftes meet for their calling as Christ did his Apostles They must make choise therefore according to the Doctrine of the Apostle of those that haue those gratious and necessarie giftes of God before and to them they must commit the power and authoritie to exercise the same to the publike benefice of the Church But if they wil giue authoritie to them that haue no wisdome to exercise the same they make the most foolish iudges of all the world and such are worthelie contemned Therefore howsoeuer you distinguish grace you must not seeke to winne credit to them which haue nothing but pretense of authoritie when they be voide of all vnderstanding how to vse it as manie hundreds yea thousandes of your hedge Priests are if their calling were neuer so good as it is moste corrupt and vnlawfull ALLEN If our aduersaries be ignorant of these thinges which be so common in schooles of diuinitie yet we think they should remember that Saint Paul did not dissalow the authoritie nor power of preaching in such as were euil men and taught for emulation and not of sincere zeale of the Gospell and that Christ him-selfe stopped not such as cast out deuilles in his name and therefore were not without the gifte of workeing miracles though he professed that manie of them at the date of iudgement challenging some right of heauen vpou that acte should not be receiued to glory how the gift of prophecy was common in the olde 〈◊〉 not onelie to the wicked but to such as willinglie would deceiue the people And Caiphas he prophecied by the spirit of God as by force of his office being yet in purpose to worke wickednes against Christ himselfe for whose trueth he then by force of the spirit prophecied But of the Sacramentes of Gods Church euerie one that they may beministred beneficiallie to the receiuing in much wickednes of the giuer there is no man can be ignorant For it is a rule and a principle moste certaine that God worketh his will in them by the ministerie of men be they neuer so euill For elle they were mans sacraments and not Gods and we could not be certaine neither of our baptisme neither of right receiuing of Christes bodie in the holie sacrament of his eultar nor of any other spirituall benefit that we now by mans ministery receiue in the Church Much cōsort it were for al Christian people to hauesuch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then soules and such disposers of Gods mysteries as would could in all sinceritie and faithfulnes worke Gods 〈◊〉 and that would alwaies vse the high power giuen them to 〈◊〉 and neuer to destroie and that they would so doe both S. Peter and S. Paule doe often exhort them But neither the miserie of mans sinsull nature can suffer that nor our wickednes can
the Church imbaryed from the vse and exercise of that office of remitting sinnes and such other the like spirituall functions FVLKE That the lacke of the fruit of any sacrament is most commmonlie in the receiuer rather then in the insufficiencie of the minister it prooueth that the minister doth not properlie giue the effect of the sacraments but the outwarde seales thereof as Saint Iohn Baptist doth moste wiselie distinguish them saying I baptize with water but he that commeth after me shall baptize with the holie ghost and with fire Saint Basill in the place by you quoted saying that the power of remitting of sinnes is not giuen absolutelie but in the obedience of him that repenteth c. declareth what manner of power this is contrarie to that you haue hetherto for the moste part maintained As also that he sayeth within few wordes after that the new testament doth promise remission of all sinnes to them that worthely repent he concludeth plainlie against your long discourse wherin you would haue it seeme as though the priest had absolute power of remitting and not an authoritie of declaring the sentence of God concerning such And Saint Cyprian or whoesoeuer is author of that worke De cardinalibus Christi operibus confirmeth that which I saide that the minister doth not properlie giue the effects of the sacrament but onelie the outwarde seales thereof as Iohn Baptist doth testifie His whol sentence I will repeate because you haue not so fullie set it downe not so truelie translated it Veniebat Christus ad Baptismum non egens lauacro in quo peccatum non erat sed vt sacramento perennis daretur autoritas tanti virtutem operis nulla personarum acceptio commendaret quoniam remissio peccaterum siue per Baptismum siue per alia sacramenta donetur propriè spiritus sancti est vt ipsi soli huius efficientiae priuilegium mancat Verborum solennitas sacri inuocatio nominis signa institutionibus Apostolicis sacerdotum ministerits attributa visibile celebrant sacramentum rem verò ipsam spiritus sanctus format efficit consecrationibus visibilibus inuisibiliter manum totius bonitatis author apponit plenitudinem gratiae vnctionis diuinae pinguedo sanctificationibus officialibus infundit remsacramenti consummat persicit Christe came to Baptisme not wanting that 〈◊〉 as he that was free from sinne but that perpetuall authoritie might be giuen to the sacrament and that no respect of persous might commend the vertue of so great a worke because remission of sinnes whether it be giuen by Baptisme or by other sacraments is properlie the holie ghostes and to him alone the priuiledge of this essectuall workeing remaineth The solemnitie of wordes and the inuocation of the holy name and the signes appointed for the ministery of the Preists by the Apostles doctrine and instruction doe celebrate the visible sacrament but the thing it selfe the holie ghost formeth and worketh and the author of all goodnes doth inuisiblie put his hande to the visible consecrations and the fatnes of the diuine vnction doth power the fullnes of grace into the ministeriall sanctifications and doth make consummate or make perfect the matter of the sacrament That the ministers desertes doth nothing alter the sacramentes or the effect of them it is no controuersie betweene vs howsoeuer you would make the ignorant beleeue that Caluine is of another opinion wherein his writings are moste manifest to the contrarie Where you approoued him that is lawfullie called to haue receaued the gift and grace of the holie Ghost which is the selfe same that the Apostles receaued of Christ for the like functions you take too much vpon you for the ordinarie and externall calling to exercise an outwarde ministerie where of Cyprian discourseth may be without receauing of the holie Ghoste Againe no man hath authoritie to giue the holie Ghost in ordaining more then in Baptisme or anie other parte of the ministerie of the Gospell Thirdlie where you require lawfull calling and ordaining in the minister of the sacrament that the receiuer being rightlie qualified maie obtaine like benefit of whomsoeuer the office is exercised you exclude lay men and women from ministring of the sacrament of Baptisme which your doctrine doth admitte Finallie where you assure the minister of the continuance of his authoritie by that gift of the holie Ghost be his life and desertes neuer so euill you saie verie much For what if he be an Idolater a persecutor of Christians or degenerated into Mahometisme wil you say his gift and authoritie doth still continue nay you saie it continueth though he be neuer so ignorant Then if he be a naturall foole or a mad man or one void of all Christian knowledge either when he was ordained or fallen since into such extremitie of ignorance yet by your rule he retaineth his gift Nay if he be for heresie schisme or notorious euill life lawfullie embarred from the vse and exercise of remitting sinnes and other like spirituall functions yet his gift of the holie Ghost continueth still with him This is in deede an indeleble character that is imprinted so deepe that nothing can scrape it awaie except perhappes a glasse or knife in degradation For as I take it you meane of him that is onely suspended from his office as though the practize onelie and not the authoritie for a time might be taken from him But to make an end of this matter I turne Caluins reason against him selfe He and his flocke be of that fond and blinde iudgment that the whole text of the twentith of S. Iohn wherin Christ giueth authoritie to the Apstoles to remit sinnes is meant onelie of preaching the Gospell for which function Christ gaue them the holie Ghost Now sir vpon this I vrge him with his owne reason I ask him first whether the ministers that by him cresent to preach the word of the holie ghost as for example Beza that he sent into Fraunce first or Richerus whome he sent to Coligninia or Hermam that came by the holie Ghostes sending vnto Flaunders Brabant had these the holie ghost or no If they saie yea as I think they will they be so bolde in an other mans house then demaund of them further whether the said spirit maie erre If they saie no as possiblie they will then conclude against them thus The holie Ghost can not erre ergo you haue not the holie Ghost and consequentlie you haue then no better right in preaching then poore Priestes haue in remitting or absoluing Therefore I leaue Caluine wrestling with his owne shadow and will follow on my purpose and course of matter which I haue in hande FVLKE Now we shall heare how cunninglie you can turne Caluins reason againste him selfe First you saie he and his flock be of that fond and blinde iudgement that the wholl text wherein Christ geueth authoritie to his Apostles to remit sinnes is meant onelie of Preaching the Gospell for which function
then vntill you haue made a shew of trueth and then straight giue it ouer challenging a proper power properlie to remit sinnes euen the power that is proper to God and the same to exercise as properlie as God doth with deification of your Priestes persons and such other arrogant assumptions Where you saie that God doth not resigne his right to the waies and workes of anie diuine function giue ouer the wholl title that is due to him-selfe in the said diuine actes I adde that he doth neither resigne his right nor his practize or exercise there of he doth not giue ouer his wholl title or anie parte or portion thereof When you go about to demonstrate your proposition you saie that Christ resigned his roome but not his right A pretie collusion of words but a matter ful of her eticall meaning For Christ resigned neither his roome nor his right when he ascended into heauen but set himselfe downe in the throne of magnificence that he might fullfill all things with his glorious an gracious presence by which he continueth with his Church vnto the end of the world Neither hath he neede of anie substitute or vicegerent to exercise anie point of that office which is proper to the vniuersall head of the vniuersall Church neither can anie mortal creature exercise the office of the head of the whol Churh because it is a meere diuine power by euerlasting right as you confes proper to our sauiour Christ that from him as from the head life and all powers of life should flowe into his wholl Church and euerie true member thereof And therefore whatsoeuer from the beginning he hath exercised in his owne person he doth not now practize by anie other but still by himselfe and in his owne person But the office of teaching which in his humanity he exercised and before his incarnation was exercised by the Prophets and Priests he hath committed to his Apostles Euangelistes Prophets Pastours and Teachers vnto the end of the world but that one man should rule his whol Church either by doctrine or discipline whereunto it is not possible for him to haue an eye and ouerseeing Christ hath neuer appointed but as he hath appointed seuerall teachers so also hath he ordained seuerall gouernours And no more possible it is that one man should rule and gouerne al the Church then it is possible that one man should teach al the Church despersed as it is now and hath been of olde ouer al the face of the earth But that Peter or anie other man should rule the Church in Christes steade you saie it prooueth much that Christ is head of the Church according to his manhood That Christ who is God and man is head of his Church it is a Christian confession But that Christ is head of his Church according to his manhood I see not how it differeth from flat Nestorianisme or Arrianisme For wholl Christ is head of his Church according to that he was head thereof before his incarnation and flesh assumpted yet intended and he is head of his Church according to that he filleth all in all Ephes. 1. It is one thing to saie that Iesus Christ or the man Iesus Christ is head of his Church another thing to saie that Christ is head of his Church according to his manhood Beside I know not what humane head ship you ascribe vnto Christ that make him head in respect of such externall regiment as may be exercised by man and yet by no one man alone but by manie men at once in this dispersion of the Church all which acknowledge Christ to be their onelie head because they must gouerne the Church by his word onelie and by lawes framed agreeable vnto the same That the Protestantes bring foorth children to Caluin or Luther it is nothing but tailing without reason For the Protestantes are willing to departe with anie pretence of right or honout so that God maie haue his whol glory by such meanes as he hath appoin ted Therefore according to Saint Augustines allusion they beget children by preaching of the Gospell vnto Christ and not to them selues The function of Preaching you saie is Christes still If you meane that he is the author of the doctrine preached and so the onelie master and teacher of his Church it is true but this function the Protestantes claime not but to be ministers appointed to declare this doctrine in the world This function as a part of his humiliation hath he cleane giuen ouer since his ascension and appointed in his stead Apostles Euangelistes Prophets Pastours and teachers to exercise the same function to the edifying of his Church vntill the end of the world You charge vs to saie that the function of Preaching is meant by remitting of sinnes which we saie not For Preaching extendeth further then the remitting of sinnes But we saie that by preaching publiklie or declaring priuatelie as the case requireth the grace and mercie of God in pardoning all penitent and beleeuing sinners the minister of God doth remit sinnes in the name of Christ while the pardon pronounced by him is of as great force to assure the re pentaunt sinner of remission of his sinnes as if Christ him-selfe should declare it out of heauen wherein we speake neither foolishlie nor against the common sence of all the fathers as by some of their writinges alledged before I haue plainlie declared ALLEN And they that are most tender in outward words of Godshonour will yet seeme to occupie that his proper function with out all derogation to his right therein But in deede their preaching which is their remission of sinne is not the power of God to saluation but it is his permission for our great punishment The lawful doctrine of Christs Church is truely no lesse theproper work of Christ then is forgiuenes of sinnes yet it is with out controlling of Nouatians Heretiks exercised by mans ministerie in earth S. Augustine saith hereof thus Christus est qui docet Cathedram in coelo haber scholaipsius in terra est scholaipsius corpus ipsius est It is Christ which teacheth and he hath his pulpit in heauen and his schoole in earth and his schoole is his body the Church Christ doth not then resigne vp his office in preaching no more then he doth his authority of pardoning no man succeeding him in either of the roomes but occupieth both vnder him in his Church which is his inheritance for euer the which Churh holdeth by him as a schoole to teach trueth in as a court and iudgement seat to pardon or punish sinnes in Thus he FVLKE The proper function of Christ which is to be the onelie author of the true Doctrine that is taught in the Church none of vs will presume to occupie we leaue that blasphemie to the Pope and the popish Church but the Gospel which we preach is the power of God vnto saluation in the remission of our sins reuealed
in this age by the singular mercie of God to the vndoubted saluation of many thousands The outward preaching of Christes Doctrine is not the proper worke of Christ but common to all his true and faithfull seruantes the Prophettes Apostles and their successoures Bishopes Pastours and teachers It is Christ as Austine saieth that teacheth inwardly by his spirit from heauen and is the author of the doctrine that is taught on earth in which respect he saith He that heareth you heareth me c. But it is the voice of man that vttereth this Doctrine in the outward eares of men and not the voice of Christ. ALLEN But to beare downe the aduersaries of trueth fullly we will ioyne with them touching the sacrament of extream vnction the sacrament of baptisme and such other in which they cannot nor doe not denie concerning one of them but man without all derogation to Gods honour remitteth sinnes And how can it here seeme strange that in the sacrament of penance God should by mans office remit mortall crimes seeing it cannot be denied but God vseth not onelie mans ministerie but also the externall seruice of bare and base water which is much inferiour by nature and dignitie to a Priest or anie other man to take awaie sinnes both originall and actuall in the sacrament of baptisme in which sacrament seeing aswell the Priest is the minister as the water an instrument whereby God remitteth all sinnes be they neuer so many and grieuouse whether they be committed by their owne acte or by our fathers ofspring why doth it dishonour God any more that the Priest should be the minister of remission in the sacrament of penance then it doth by as great an office almoste in remitting of sinnes in the sacrament of baptisme Againe read the Epistle of S. Iamer and you shall finde the Priest made a minister the oile an instrument in the extreamitie of sicknes to forgiue sinnes how much more is the priest without anie imparing of Gods power the worker vnder him of our reconciliation and pardoning in the sacrament of penance in which especiallie the grace of God is giuen aboue all other sacraments to that onlie end and purpose I may be more bold to vse this comparing of sundrie Sacraments together because not onely Saint Ambrose refuteth the Father of this fond heresie by the same reason but also because moste of the Doctors of the Church doe confesse that she euer had these waies to remit mans sinnes by without derogation to Christes soueraigntie herein of whome onelie she holdeth her right as well in the sacrament of penance as in baptisme or extreame vnction Saint Chrysostome saith Neque enim solùm cùm nos regenerant sed postea etiam condonandorum nobis peccatorum potestatem obtinent infirmatur inquit inter vos aliquis Accersat presbyteros Ecclesiae Neither haue Priests power in baptisme onelie but afterward also they haue good authoritie to forgiue our sinnes Is any man feeble amongst you saith he Call for the Priests of the Church let them saie praiers ouer him annoint him with oile and the praier of faith shall saue the sicke and if he be in sinnes they shall be forgiuen him But this sacrament instituted by Gods word and Christes authoritie vsed of olde and well knowne to all the Fathers is now become nothing in our building Sinne is now a daies so fauored that no sacrament may be abiden for the release thereof The verie expresse wordes of Scripture can take no place where flattering of wickednes and phantasie ruleth to the contrarie FVLKE Touching extreame vnction we shall speake anone but of baptisme we saie that to speake properlie man baptiseth with water vnto repentance as an outward seale of the forgiuenes of sinnes Christ onelie baptizeth with the holie Ghost and with fire actuallie and effectuallie to purge and clense our sinnes Of the sacrament of penance we must first be resolued before we can acknowledge any office of man to remitte mortal crimes therein If Christ had instituted a sacrament of penance as he hath of baptisme we wold acknowledge the like effectes in the one that we doe in the other Concerning the anointing with oile spoken of in Saint Iames whereunto besides bodelie health remission of sins was promised it was a sacrament while that special gift of healing continued but no instituriō of perpetuall continuance Chrysostome citeth this text of Saint Iames to prooue that not onelie in the sacrament of regeneration but afterwards also the Priests hath power to remit sinnes not onelie by teaching and admonishing but also by helpe of praier But of anie perpetuall sacrament there is no mention in him neither was it instituted by our sauiour Christ with anie commaundement of perpetuall continuance as babtisme the Lordes supper are but onely so long as the gift should continue Neither doth Saint Iames giue it in charge as a perpetuall sacrament but onelie admonisheth the Church to vse that benefit of healing so long as it should remaine with men ALLEN There be some that affirme this annoiling to haue beene a miraculous practise to take awaie the diseases of the sicke and therefore that it did decaie with the working of other the like miracles which after the spring of our religion were not vsual But that is a fond glosse For I aske of thē whether the people then Christianed were instructed or rather commaunded to call for the Apostles or others to heale them miraculously of their diseases or whether all Priestes had the gift of working miracles in the Primitiue Church If they saie yea touching the first piont then as well were they charged to send for them to reuiue them after they were dead because the Apostles so could doe when they same occasion and so did by some But that is plaine absurde and false that euer Apostle gaue in charge to anie man much lesse to make a generall precept as S. Iames here doth to seeke after miracles for that were to tempt God And for the second they are not so vnreasonable to answere me that all Priestes could worke miracles which is a seuerall gift of the holie Ghost from the power of their ministerie and therefore Saint Iames would not haue charged the sicke persons to haue called indifferentlie for Priestes to heale them miraculouslie the gift of miracles being not common to them all nor perpetuallie promised to anie of them all Againe I would knowe of them whether there was anie miraculous healing that had the remission of sinnes ioyned vnto it or to the externall creature by which they healed any person If they saie yea then it followeth that the Priestes might by the office of that creature heale a man of his sinnes which they affirme to be blaspemie and dishonour to God But to what absurditie so euer you bring them they will not confesse mortall men in externall Sacraments to remit sinnes FVLKE You are better aduised now concerning Caluines iudgement of the oile where
of the Primitiue Church or to disprooue Beatus Rhenanus which denieth the same accusing both the noueltie and and the tyranie thereof and the danger that mens consciences haue beene in through it beside manie other knowne inconueniences ALLEN But now if you conferre with the Fathers of all ages and of euerie notable Church touching this confession to Gods Priests you may beginne if you list euen at this daie and driue vp both the trueth of the doctrine and the perpetuall practise thereof euen to the Apostles time In the late holie Council holden at Trent both the doctrine is confirmed and declared with all grauitie and also the aduersaries of that sacrament and the misconstructers of Christes wordes of remission to pertaine to preaching of the Gospell not to the verie act of absolution be by the consent of all Catholike states of the Christian world accursed excommunicated It was at Furence also decreed in a most generall assemblie of both the Latine and Greek Church that as wel the whol sacrament of penance as that especiall part which is called confession was of Christes institution In the great councell holden at Lateran there is so plaine charge giuen to euerie Christian to confesse his sinnes either to his owne ordinarie Parochian or to some other Priest that hath by him or otherwise authoritie and iurisdiction ouer the penitent that Protestantes affirme albeit verie false'y that confession was first instituted in the said Councel and this was more then three hundred yeares since And foure hundred yeares before that in a Prouinciall Councell that was kept at Vormacia there is a Canon made concerning the qualities of the priests that are constituted to be confessours and Penitentiaries where it is commaunded that they be such Qui possunt singulorum causas originem quoque modum culparum sigillatim considerare examinare That can particularlie trie out and examine the causes of euerie offender the manner and ground of their faultes FVLKE We are so well accquainted with your often bragges of Fathers and Councells that we neuer start for them seeing we knowe you haue nothing but the drosse of the latter times to cast at vs. For the Councell of Trentes decree we esteeme it as it is worthie being made by a few buckeram Bishoppes of Italie and some other Epicurian prelates of other countries to patch vp rather then to repaire the ruines and decaies of the kingdome of Antichrist In the late Councel of Florence I remember nothing decreed of this matter neither doe you note where we should finde it In the Lateran Councell that was kept litle more then 300. yeares since the Protestantes doe trulie affirme that the necessitie of auricular confession was first imposed vpon men of the Romish Church For in the councell of Wormes which you saie was 400 yeares elder there is neuer a word of confession or confessor but of wife consideration to be had of them that did penance by which are ment open offenders that did open pennance neither are you able to prooue the contrarie Paenitentibue saith the Canon serundum differentiam peccatorum c. To the penitents or such as doe penance let penance be decreed by the iudgement of the Priest according to the difference of their sinnes Therefore in giuing penance the Priest ought seuerallie to consider the causer of euerie one the beginning also manner of the faulies and diligentlie to examine and manifestlie to know the affection and sighings of the offenders also to consider the qualities of the times persons of the places ages that according to the consideration of the places ages or times or according to the qualitie of the offences the groning of euery offendor he turne not his eies from the holie rules Thus sarre the Canon after which follow the rules of penance to be apointed for diuers kindes of offences as for him that hath killed a Priest a pagane his parents or brother or for him that hath slain a man in his madnes or against his will and such like whereby it appeereth that the Canon was made for penance to be enioyned to publike offenders and not to compell men to confesse their secret sinnes ALLEN Which decree is borowed word for word almoste out of the last Canon of Constantinople Councell called the sixth generall which was long before all the forsaid Synodes Their discourse is long vpon the Priestes dutie which shoulde sitte on confessions whome they instruct by these wordes Oportebit qui facultatem absoluendi ligandi à Deo receperunt peccati qualitatem speculentur peccatoris promptitudinem ad reuersionem vt sic medicamentum admoueant aegritudini aptum ne si de peccato sine discrimine statuant aberrent à salute aegrotantis Those that haue receiued of our Lorde power to loose and binde must trie out the qualitie of euerie fault and the readines of the offender to returne vnto vertue that they maie prouide a medicine meet to the maladie lest if they should without distinct knowledge of their sinne giue iudgement they should erre in poruiding health for the sicke person By which Councell kept in Constantinople you maie easelie gather that neither confession was euer omitted by the lawe nor the common Penitentiarie long abrogated out of Constaninople Church And when I name these decrees of so manie generall Councels in diu rfe ages I do not onelie call them generallie to witnesse for my cause which were inough seeing euerie determination there passeth as by the sentence of the holie Ghoste and Christes owne iudgement of whose presence such hotie assemblance is assured but I appeale to eueric holy Bishop Priest and Prince of the world that agreed to the same and were there assembled euerie of which was of more experience learning and vertue or at the least of more humilitie then all our aduersaries aliue But now if you go to trie other the learned writers of all times for the practize of this point then our labour shall be infinite but our cause more strong and 〈◊〉 aduersaries sooner confounded I need not for that practize name the learned schoolemem of excellent capacitie in deepe mysteries because they were so late and because Heretikes can not denie but they are all vndoubtedlie against them and euerie one for vs Thomas Aquinas is ours Dionysius is ours I meane the Carthusian If anie man doubt of Saint Bernard let him reade the life of Malachie whome he praiseth sor bringing into vre the most profitable vse of confession in the rude partes of Ireland Saint Bede is prooued before not onelie to haue allowed confession to the Priest but to haue expounded Saint Iames wordes of confession for the sacrament of pennance and vttering our sinnes to Gods Ministers And he recordeth that in our Countrie of England before his daies confession was vsed to a Priest Whereof as also os pennance and satisfaction there is an example or two in the
the head of the house But if he will saie this other man was no frier then he must shewe what he was whoe was the testator what fraude Luther and his Prior vsed to deceiue him and bring good proofe thereof or els who is bound to beleeue him But to goe forward other estate or degree or Apostleshippe he knoweth not that Luther had anie what then was not this sufficient calling for him that was a Doctor of the Popish Church to preach against the abuses and errors thereof and when his doctrine and conclusions were vndoubtedly agreeable to the holie scriptures might he not iustlie affirme that they were from heauen And that he was sent from heauen to teach the Germanes the trueth of the Gospell which of long time had beene hidden from them For that he was their first Apostle or that before his daies they neuer had any true religion or Christian doctrine he neuer said Neither did he make more account of himselfe then of Saint Augustine and all other Fathers of the Church although in the booke quoted by Frarine he preferreth that doctrine which is agreeable to the holie scriptures before the iudgement of Augustine and all men that euer were As for the familiar conference and talke with the Deuill which Frarine affirmeth that he reporieth of himselfe And that Cocleus and al his enemies doe gnaw so much vpon to prooue that he was set on by the Deuil to gainesaie the masse Is nothing but a ridiculous cauill For Luther speaketh of a spirituall conflict that he had with Sathan for saying masse so long which at length he acknowledged to be blasphemous against the death of Christ. Not of any bodelie appeerance of the Deuill or familiar talke with him as the malice of the Papists doe expound him Next Luther our Orator will examine Caluins vocation Caluine saith he was borne at Nouiodunum in Picardie What of that He was banished from his countrie for his wicked behauiour That is false For he liued in his countrie in good credit both of learning and honestie till the crueltie of the Papists caused him to seeke the libertie and profession of religion abroad which he could not haue at home That he was the veriest vnthrist naughtiest varlet of all his companions when he was in his countrie is an impudent slaunder for at Orleans he red the lawe lecture oftentimes in the place of Petrus Stella the publike reader and was so well accounted both for his learning and vertue that the degree of Doctorship in that facultie with full consent of all the teachers was offered him without anie expences as one that had verie well deserued of the vniuersitie Afterward at Paris he set forth that notable commentary of his of Seneca de Clementia He was of great familiaritie with Nicolaus Copus Rector of the vniuersitie of Paris and in good credit with the Queene of Nauarre sister vnto King Frauncis He had conference with Iacobus Faber Stapulensis in Aquitanes and after he had set forth that worthie booke of his called Psychopanuchia at Orleans against them which taught that the soules departed doe sleepe vntill the resurrection without sense of good or euill he came to the Citie of Basill This course of his life as it is written in his storie with much more to this effect doth witnes that he was euen from his youth a man indued with singuler modestie temperance and godlines whatsoeuer his aduersaries without all proofe or shewe of truth are not ashamed to inuent and brute against him When he was at Basill he did not hide his head as the slaunderer saieth but desired in deed to be priuate that he might better applie his studies and especiallie the Hebrew tongue But such was his excellencie that he could not be hid from the principall learned men of that vniuersitie and so litle was he hid that there he first set forth his Institution dedicated to King Frauncis Our declaimer saith that from Basile he passed to Strasburg and there began to shew his head and preach to the Runnagats But that is false for from Basill he went into Italie to visit the Duchesse of Ferrara from whence he returned into Fraunce where hauing set all his affaires in order he brought away his onely brother AntonieCaluine intending to settle him selfe either at Basill or at Strasburg But al other passages being stopt he was forced to trauaile thorough Sauoye and comming to Geneua onely to visite Farellus and Viretus by whose zealous earnest labours Popery being banished and the Church there reformed he was staied by the terrible obtestation of Farellus and by the Presbyterie and Magistrates chosen to be a teacher and intepreter of the Scriptures in that Church But that he put out the deputie of the citie expelled the Bishops and Popish cleargie reigned there like a conquerour by the law of ireason and force of armes as Frarine saieth it is a moste impudent lie though an hundred Lindanes had sworne that it was true For the Bishoppe with his Popish cleargie was departed out of the citie and the Religion reformed by publike authoritie receiued long time before Caluines first arriuall thether Of like trueth it is that Beza in his baudie and filthie epigrames as it pleaseth Frarine to call them farre passeth the wanton Pagan Poetes Martiall and Tibullus For in the moste licentious of these epigrames first condemned by Beza himselfe there is not one word of obscenitie although they were made in a fained argument after the immitation of those Poets And if they had bin as full of baudie tearmes and matters as Martiall himselfe Yet so long as Beza cōtinued in popery where they were freely printed selde they were catholike enough What should I speake saith he of Bernardinus Ochinus the preacher of Polygamie Verelie there is no cause why he should speake of him seeing both the man and the doctrine are detested in our Churches and by our writings confuted He nameth also Bernard Rotman and Iohn of Leyd authors of the Anabaptisticall sedition at Monster as though wee had any thing to doe with them Yes saith he they conquered the field against the Lutheranes by pretence of scripture onelie as Rotman before vanquished the Papists The storie is written who list to reade wherein may be found they vsed other craftes beside force of armes then pretence of scripture onelie to compasse their diuelish attempts And what if they had vsed the pretence of scripture onelie as the diuel did in tempting our sauiour Christ was the scripture onelie of lesse force to confute their false pretence then when it was vsed by our Sauiour Christ against the Deuill He telleth vs of Hosiander reprooued of vs for heresie of Carolostadius who thorough folly madnes became a ploughnian The names also of Peter Martyr Illiricus Musculus Farellus Viretus and Bucer a gainst whom he hath nothing to say besides I know not what Marote Malote And that these should vsurpe
Can anie thing be spoken more abiect or more contradictorie to the scriptures and Fathers then this Can hell be more opposite to heauen then the carnalitie of this Apostata to the spiris of all saintes See you not how this fellow insulteth how he chafeth how he raileth but will you see also how he lieth how he falsifieth how he slaundereth For Luther saith not that mariage in comparison of virginitie is as golde he saith not that the state of virginity and continencie is as stinking dong c. But the comparison he maketh is betweene the state of matrimonie and the popish spirituall or Ecclesiasticall state of which he saith de vsu vel abusu c. of the vse or abuse of the states at this present we saie nothing but of the condition and nature of the states in them-selues and doe conclude that matrimonie is as gold but the spirituall state meaning of the popish Church is as doung because that setteth forwarde to faith this vnto impietie And lest you doubt what spirituall state he speaketh of he calleth it expresselie in the same discourse spiritualis status in papatu the spirituall state in poperie And for a more manifed discouerie of this impudent slaunderer I will set downe his wordes in the same place more at large yealding reasons why he doth so highlie prefer mariage before that popish state speaking nothing of virginitie or continencie or true chastitie as this shameles cauiller doth crie out Nemo igitur obiicies tua sententia coelelis permanebit sed quisque matrimonium contrahet quaeres huic Paulino textui aduersaretur Respondeo De spiriiuali nunc statu loquor ad matimonium comparato non de coelibatu Status spiritualis nulli prorsum rei accommodus est sed perditissimus praestaretque neminem spiritualem quemque coniungtam esse Porrò coelibatus vera continentia aliud est ac spiritualis status de hoc nihil omnino hîc Paulus agit de vera n. castitate loquitur Nullus enim statuum impudentior ad libinem promptior est Ecclesiastieo spirituali statu vt hodiernus dies contestatur Quòd siex illis coelibes quidam essent non tamen vtuntur calibatu ad Pauli institutum normam vt nequaquam castitas esse queat cuius hîc 〈◊〉 mentionē facit Isti enim ex castitate meritum iactantiam magnificentiam coram Deo hominib faciunt in eafidunt idquod cūfide pugnat D. Paulus verò exeafacilitatem quandam seruitutem ad verbum Dei fidem effecit Spiritualis verò status non ex labore suo viuit Arcadico iumento segnior c. Thou wilt obiect by thy sentēce therefore shall no man remaine continent but euerie one shal marie which thing is contrarie to the text of Saint Paule I answer I speake now of the spirituall state being compared to matrimonie not of continencie or virginitie The spirituall state or the spiritualtie is good for nothing in the world but is moste wicked and it were better that there were neuer a spirituall man and that all were maried But as for virginitie truecontinency it is an other thing then the state of the spiritualtie of which Saint Paul in this place speaketh nothing at all for he speaketh of true chastitie For no state in the world is more shameles and more prone to filthie lust then the ecclesiasticall and spirituall state as this daies experience doth testifie And if anie of them were continent yet they vse not their continencie to the purpose and rule of Saint Paull so that it can not be that chastitie whereof Saint Paull maketh mention in this place For these men of their chastitie do make a desert a boasting and magnificense before God and men and put their trust therein which is contrarie to faith Whereas Saint Paul thereof hath made a certaine easines and seruice vnto the word of God but the spirituall state liueth no of their labour being more slow then an Asse c. Thus hast thou reader Luthers iudgement out of his owne sayings by which thou maist must needes acknowledge what iniurie this falsarie hath donne vnto him in saying that Luther affirmeth the state of virginity or continencie to be as stinking dung promoting to impietie when Luther speaketh of the Popish spiritualtie whose doctrine and manners are blasphemous and wicked like the olde heretikes called Apostolici and Origeniani turpes which boasted of continencie and performed nothing lesse as Epiphanius and other do testifie The second of these last 4. that Christ and Saint Paull did not counsell but dissuade virginitie vnto Christians You aske if anie thing can be more contrary to Christs and Saint Paules sayings Master Charke answereth you sufficientlie the counsel pertaineth not to all but vnto those that haue the gift the rest are dissuaded from the attempt And for them that haue the gift Master Charke saith it is more profitable for them manie waies to absteine Luther saith Nec ideo coelibatum virginitatem reprobare mihi animus est nec inde quenquam ad iugale vinculam inuitare Quisque pro dono suo diuinitut impertito vt potest feratur Neither is it my minde to reiest continencie and virginitie nor to prouoke anie man from thence vnto wedlock Let euerie man beare him-selfe according to the gift that he hath receaued of God as he can What would you saie more that all men are here exhorted vnto virginitie euen those that haue not the gift of continencie it seemeth you would by alledgeing the saying of Saint Ierome Quasi hortantis c. it is the voice of our Lord as it were exhorting and stirring vp his souldiers to the rewarde of chastitie he that can take it let him take it he that can fight let him fight conquerre and triumph And whome doth Ierome meane by his souldiers all men in differently or those onely whom God hath armed with the grace gift of continencie If you 〈◊〉 say all S. Ierome in the wordes going immediatelie before in the same place will tel you another tale Qui potest capere capiat vt vnusquisque consideret vires suas vtrum poffit virginalia pudicitiae implere praecepta Per se enim castitas blanda est quemlibet ad se alliciens Sed considerandae suntvires vt qui potest capere capiat He saith he that can take it let him take it that euerie man maie consider his strength whether he be hable to fulfill the precepts of virginitie and chastitie For chastitie in deede of it selfe is pleasant and alluring euerie man vnto it But men must consider their strength that he which is hable to take it maie take it You see here that Christ exhorteth none but them that are hable by his grace and that all haue not strength to containe those that haue the strength Luther also exhorteth to vse it they that haue it not are commaunded by the Apostle to
marrie The third doctrine touching the necessitie of a wife to euerieman to be as great as the necessitie of eating drinking or sleepeing which importeth that he maie not welmisse her 24. houres together you maruaile Master Charke was not ashamed to maintaine But neither Luther nor Charke do maintaine it necessarie for euerie man to haue a wife but onelie for them that haue not the gift of continencie which cannot auoide sinne without mariage as the text of the Apostle is manifest Where you inferre that then he maie not well misse her 24. houres together it is a fond conclusion For the like necessitie of thinges bindeth not to the like often vse of the same thinges As if I should saie meate and drinke is as necessarie for the life of man as breathing it followeth not that a man must eate and drinke euerie moment because he must breath euerie moment Correction we saie commonlie is as necessarie for children as meat and drinke and yet I trow it followeth not that children must of necessity be beaten once in 24. hours Letting of blood or sweating for some bodies is as necessarie as sleepe therefore must they be lette blood and sweate allwaies once in 24. houres But you maruaile especiallie if that sentence of Luthers be added to the former serm De matrim Verum est profectò it is true verilie that he must needes be a baud that flieth matrimonie seeing God hath created man woman for copulation and 〈◊〉 sake This you saie is a wise reason of a 〈◊〉 Apostata for euerie man must either couple and marie by this or be a baude But in trueth we maie saie this is a slaunderous conclusion of an impudent lier For Luther in the place quoted speaketh against them that differ and flie mariage that they might liue more licentiouslie in whoredome as his wordes going before are plaine Plerique ideo matrimonium differunt fugiunt quòd primùm satis ad tempus aliquod vsque scortari velint suamque explere voluptatem 〈◊〉 vbi saturi fuerint honestatise item dedere sed bonae verba quaeso c. Manie do therefore differ and flie mariage because they will first for a certaine time committe whordome inough and take their pleasure to the full afterward when they are glutted they will giue them-selues to honestie also but suft I praie you c. and so proceedeth to inueigh against such purposes and at length commeth to these wordes cited by our defender and other that follow Verum profectò est eum lenonem esse oportere quimatrimonium fugiat quî aliter eueniret posteaquam marem foeminam commixtionis multiplicationis causa condidit At quare scortatio matrimonij statu non anteuertitur Nam vbi praecipua gratia non excipiat necessum est naturam feruere multiplicaeri Si â—d in matrimonio non contingat vbi aliâs quà m in fornicatione aut peioribus peccatis accideret It is true in deed that he must needes be a baude which flieth matrimonie And how can it be otherwise seing he hath created man and woman for copulation and multiplications sake But whie is not whordome preuented by the state of mariage For where speciall grace doth not except a man nature must needes boile and be multiplied if that happen not in mariage where should it happen els but in fornication or worse sinnes Yea the saying which I cited in answer to the next point before doth follow necideo coelibatum c. neither doe I reiect continencie or virgininitie let euerie man vse his gift as he hath receiued it of God All which I suppose is manifest to declare that Luther compted not all men baudes that liued vnmaried but those onelie that had not the gift of continencie and which by flying holie mariage fall into greeuous sinnes of fornication and vncleannes The last Doctrine that al Chrstians are as holie as iust as the mother of god as the Apostles were if it be vnderstood as Luther meaneth containeth no absurditie neither is it any badge of intollerable pride For Luther meaneth of the holines iustice of Christ communicated vnto vs by which we are made holy iust as Christ is made equallie to al Christians iustice and holienes not of the effects of this grace which worketh inequallity of holines righteousnes as the image of God is more or lesse restored in euerie one And this his words declare Quia verò renati sumus filij atque haeredes Dei pari sumus in dignitate honore D. Paulo Petro. S. deiparae virgini ac diuis omnibus Habemus enim eundem the saurum à Deo bonaque omnia tam largiter quà m ipsi Siquidem ipsosnon secus atque nos renasci oportuit quare non plus habent quà m quilibet reliqui Christiani Because we are borne againe the sonnes and heires of God we are equall in dignitie and honour to Saint Paul Saint Peter to the virgine mother of God and to all the Saints For we haue the same treasure of God and all good thinges as largelie as they For that was necessarie for them also no lesse then vs to be borne againe Therefore they haue no more then all other Christians By these wordes it is euident that Luther maketh this equallitie in the grace of regeneration the common effects thereof not in the speciall gifts that follow according to the seueral measure of grace that God giueth to euerie one and therefore it is out of season to dispute here of the degrees of rewardes or the excellencie of Gods giftes in some more then other no nor of the merit of good works except you wil saie that the grace of regeneration is giuen according to merit Although the terme of merit vsed often times in the Fathers which you doe gladlie vsurpe signifieth not the desert of good workes as the Papists take it but the praise commendation or honor of vertue and sometimes vertue and good deedes themselues Finallie to compare with the Apostles and the virgine Marie in holines and righteousnes of life it is neither the meaning of Luther nor of the Ministers of England but to acknowledge that we haue receiued the like pretious faith in the righteousnes of our God and Sauiour Iesus Christ by which we are made holy righteous in him Saint Peter will warrant vs. 2. Pet. 1. For the ligittimation of Dyonise falselie surnamed the Areopagite you would faine bring the authoritie of generall Councelles but your note booke deceiued you For you quote Concil Const. Act. 4. can 2. both 〈◊〉 your page and in your correction but in deede 〈◊〉 which is saide of him is in Concil Constantinopol 6. 〈◊〉 vndecima Which was holden almoste 700. yeares after Christ where oue Sophronius Patriarch of 〈◊〉 writing to the Councell maketh mention Dionysius the Areopagite and his writtings as he supposed not counterfeit But where lay the bookes of Dionyse for 600.