and publique person cannot erre and therefore that they are to bee censured for Heretiques whosoeuer will not receiue and beleeue as articles of the Christian faith whatsoeuer the Pope defineth iudicially and publiquely as sitting in Peters chaire Remig. This lately coyned diabolicall distinction of the Popes double person with the circumstances wherewith it is adorned may fitly be tearmed a trick of Legierdemaine wherewith many haue béene seduced a long time For when the Pope is charged and plainely conuicted to haue decréed false and erroneous doctrine to bée holden for articles of the faith then the Pope and his Iesuites with their Iesuited broode tell vs peremptorily and as it were violently enforce vs to beléeue it that such decrées procéede from the Popes Holinesse as a priuate man but not as a publique person What a thing is this if the Pope decrée any thing how absurd soeuer it be and affirme the same to be his iudiciall sentence out of Peters chaire then the same must be holden and be beléeued for an article of faith and to be as true as the Gospell of Iesus Christ and he that will not so hold and so beléeue must be burnt for an Heretique for all this no Scripture no generall Councell no holy Father no learned Popish Writer for yâ— space of 1400. yeares after Christs sacred incarnation my life and saluation I gage for the tryall can be truely produced or alleaged for the confirmation and clearing of such Popish dotage or rather of such diabolical heresie and neuer-inough detested villany Theoph. Your words doe penetrate and touch the very bottome of my heart but is it possible that you can prooue and iustifie this your assertion if you can this performe popery is confounded and striken dead I therefore pray you for Christs sake to proue this point so soundly and cleerely as I may be assured of the truth thereof Remig. M. Doctor Gerson Chauncellor of the vniuersity of Paris a famous papist and one of the principall deuines in the general Councell of Constance deliuereth the truth to the view of the christian world in these expresse words concluditur ex hac radice duplex veritas prima quod determinatio solius Papae in his quae sunt fidei non obligat vt precise est talis ad credendum alioquin staret in casu quod quis obligaretur ad contradictoria vel ad falsum contra fidem Out of this roote is concluded a double truth first yâ— the resolution or determination of the Pope alone in things belonging to faith as it is precisâ—ly such not confirmed by a generall councell doth not tie or bind a man to beléeue it for otherwise the case might so fal out that one should be bound either to beléeue contradictories or else falshood against his faith Againe in another place the same doctor and great learned man hath these expresse words in causis fidei non habetur in terra iudex infallibi is vel qui non sit deuiabilis a fide de lege communi praeter ipsam Ecclesiam vniuersalem vel concilium generale eam sufficienter repraesentans in causes of faith there is no infallible iudge vpon earth or which cannot swarâ—e from the faith by the common course of Gods procéeding sauing the vniuersall Church or a generall councell Many like testimonies this learned writer hath which I let passe in regard of breuity for that I déeme these twaine so cleare and so sufficient as they will perswade euery indifferent reader for first we sée plainely by M. Gersons resolution that no Christian is bound to beleue the decrée definition determination or resolution of the Pope as he is barely and precisely Pope or Bishop of Rome without yâ— assistance of a general councell Secondly that the Pope may erre both priuately and publickely in the resolutions of faith aswell as their Bishops and ministers of the Church Thirdly that there are but two infallible iudges vpon earth concerning matters of faith that is to say the whole Congregation of the faithfull and a generall Councell lawfully and sufficiently representing the same which resolution of this learned man I admit with heart and voyce as most Christian sound orthodoxe and consonant to the holy scriptures generall Councels holy fathers and best learned papists M. doctor Fisher late Bishop of Rochester and a popish canonized martyr deliuereth his opinioÌ„ in these expresse words nec Angustini nec Hieronymi necalterius cuiâ—sâ—â—bet auctoris doctrinae sic Ecclesia subscripsit quin ipsilocis aliquotab ijs liceat disâ—entire naÌ„ in noÌ„nullis ipsis locis se plane monstrarunt homines esse atque nonnun quam aberrasse the Church hath not se subscribed either to the doctrine of Austen or of Hierome or of any other author or writer but that she may sometime dissent from their opinions for themselues haue plainely shewed themselues to be men and that they wanted not their errors The Iesuite Bellaâ—mine so deare to the Pope for his writing that he gaue him a Cardinals hat wrote in this manner sine dubio singuli Episcopi errare posâ—unt aliquando errant inter se quandoque dissentiunt vt nesciamus quinam eorum sequendus sit without doubt all Bishops seuerally may erre doe sometime erre indéede doe also sometime so dissent one from another that we cannot tell which of them we may safely follow By the verdit of these famous learned papists we sée M. Gersons doctrine plainely confirmed for albeit they name not the Pope yet must they confesse perforce that he is implyed in their words or else that he is no Bishop at all which is a thing not impossible by popish faith though I affirme it not Iacobus Almaynus Gulielmus Ockamus Thomas Waldensis Iosephus Angles with many others I might alledge but I déeme these sufficient Two things I will adde for your better satisfaction herein the one that this weightie point of doctrine was most soundly handled and throughly debated in the councell of Constance where it was concluded that a generall councell is aboue the Pope that a generall counsell may depose the Pope that the same councell de facto deposed Pope Iohn the 23. of that name and that the Pope as a publike person may both be an heretike and decrée hereticall doctrine The other that the councell of Constance was holden and celebrated in the yéere of our Lord God 1415. and that M Gerson was a famous diuine of the same councell both beholding with his eyes and hearing with his eares him selfe not being mute in the interim thrée Popes Iohn the 23. Gregory the 12. and Benedict the 13. deposed by the same councell and the constant resolution of the councell against the Popes fasly challenged priuiledges as namely that the Pope as Pope and as he is a publike person neither is nor can be an infallible iudge in matters of faith Theoph. These things are wonderfull which you
religion and so much of late Romish faith and doctrine as is consonant and agreeable to the same But for all this the Papists seeme to haue strong reasons for their vnwritten traditions which indeede are so strong as my selfe know not how to answere them Remig. Doubt nothing in this behalfe God of his mercy will illustrate your vnderstanding in this difficulty as he hath done already in the rest but for this subiect I haue written so largely thereof in two seuerall bookes viz. the downe fall of Popery and the Iesuits Antepast that I am altogether vnwilling to handle the same a fresh Theoph. I haue read both those bookes they doe content me exceedingly howbeit some obiections may yet be made against the doctrine there deliuered which my selfe am not able to confute I therefore would humbly intreate your paines not for a new discourse thereof which I hold needlesse but for a fuller and plainer explication of some especiall doubts wherewith our learned papists troubleme Remig. Propound them in Gods name by whose holy and powerfull assistance I trust to returne them to the Popes vtter shame to the and euerlasting confusion of al Iesuited papists that shall obstinately beléeue or defend the same CHAP. 5. Of Popish vnwritten traditions Theophilus I will still by your fauour argue as a papist on the behalfe of the papists that so I may more cleerely haue a souÌ„d insight into the truth you Protestants for so we vse to terme you beare vs in hand that the scripture or written word of God conteineth all things necessary for mans saluation but our learned and religious Cardinall Bellarminus assureth vs that the truth is farre otherwise and that many things necessary for mens saluation are onely knowen and receiued by tradition and what he writeth is the Popes ownefaith and consequently the faith of the whole Church for he dedicated his bookes to the Popes holynesse who highly commended and approued them that he made him Cardinall though before but a poore Fryer for his paines Remig. I answere first that I know your Cardinall right well and willingly acknowledge him to be learned as also religious and â—ealous after the manner of his sect but in such sort as Paul was before his conuersion Secondly that your Cardinal doth often acknowledge the truth vnawares against himselfe as doe your other Iesuits one onely assertion I will now cite out of the Iesuite S. R. Robert Parsons is the man in his pretensed answere to the downefall of popery these are his expresse words where if by diuina eloquia we vnderstand holy writ as Bell translateth and Saint Austen séemeth to meane me thinkes he plainely auoucheth that God hath procured euery thing to be cléerely written which to know is necessary to euery mans saluation the same teaceth Saint Syril saying not all things which our Lord did are written but what the writers déemed sufficient as well for manners as for doctrine that by right faith and works we may attaine to the Kingdome of Heauen and Saint Chrisostome what things soeuer are necessary are manifest out of scripture this is our Iesuites owne tale in the best manner he can vtter it whiles he bestirreth himselfe more then a little to answere my booke the downefall of popery out of whose confession and frée graunt such is the force of truth I obserue these memorable and golden lessons First that euery thing necessary for euery mans saluation is contained in the holy scriptures Secondly and this is a thing to be admired comming from a papists mouth that euery point necessary for saluation is plainely and cléerely set downe in holy writ Thirdly that God himselfe appointed all necessary things to be cléerely written Fourthly that Saint Augustine Saint Chrisostome and Saint Cyrill are of mine opinion Fiftly that the Iesuite vnawares iustifieth that doctrine which he puposely laboureth to ouerthrow for as our Lord Iesus said to Saul it is hard for him to kicke against prickes Theoph. The Iesuite S. R. when you rightly name Parsons graunteth all things to be written which are necessary for saluation but not which are necessary for faith and doctrine these are his owne and expresse words for surely the Prophets and Euangelists writing their doctrine for our better remembrance would omit no one point which was necessary to be actually knowne of euery one especially seeing they haue written many things which are not so necessary and this conclusion teacheth Saint Austen when he saith that those things are written which seemeth sufficient for the saluation of the faithfull where I note saith S. R. that he said not which seemeth sufficient to Christian faith but which seemed sufficient to saluation because fewer points suffice to saluation then the Christian faith containeth thus writeth the Iesuite in flat termes freely graunting the scripture to containe all things necessary for saluation but not all things necessary for faith and doctrine Remig. I answere first that the Iesuite granteth as much as I desire when he graunteth the holy scripture to containe all things necessary for our saluation for doubtlesse if all things necessary for saluation be written in the scripture it followeth of necessity that no vnwritten tradition is necessary for the same Secondly that noting is or can be necessary for the Christian faith but the same is also necessary for saluation for otherwise it would follow which no Christian may anouch that a man may be saued without the Christian faith but S. Athanasius in that créede or summary of faith which the Church of Rome receiueth and highly reuerenceth affirmeth resolutely that whosoeuer beleeueth not stédfastly euery iote of the Christian faith shall perish euerlastingly Thirdly that whosoeuer hath the holy scripture hath all things necessary for his saluation Fourthly that séeing the Christian faith by popish doctrine contaïneth many points not necessary for saluation it followeth of necessity that many points of popish so supposed Christian faith are néedlesse in very déede and for that respect with some other our Church of noble England hath abolished the same with spéede for we are the true reformed Catholikes who hold constantly the old Roman religion in euery point but the late start-vp Romish faith is fully replenished with curious sophistications friuolous diâ—â—â—â—â—ns vain inuentions counterfeit myracles grosse errors palpables herâ—stes intollerable superstitions méere foolishnesse and flat leasings Theoph. It is nowhere siad in scripture saith the Iesuite S. R. that all the bookes chapters verses and sentences which in the Bible are admitted for Canonicall are truly Canonicall and Gods pure word without the mixture of mans word and yet is this a point of Christian faith yea hereupon depend all the articles which we gather out of the scripture this is that inuincible Bulwarke saith Parsons which no Protestant can euer batter downe while the world shall endure Remig. I answere first that by our Iesuits doctrine as
auncient and most learned fathers by whose iudgements it is very cléere and euident that the chaire of Moyses and the doctrine of Moyses is all one and consequently that not they who occupy the roome of Moyses or Peter are to be followed but they that teach the doctrine of Moyses and Peter are to be heard and their commaundements must be done and ceâ—tes if euer the Bishops of Rome the late Popes I meane shal be able to proue that they preach no otherwise then Saint Peter did if first they preach at all nor decrée or commaund no otherwise then Saint Peter or Saint Paul did I wil obey them I will with a beck doe as they commaund me Fourthly I answere with popish Fryer Lyra whom Sir Thomas Moore called a great Clearke the Pope so estéemeth his writings in these expresse words omnia quaecunque dixâ—rint vobis facite q uia Praelatis etiaÌ„ malis est obediendum nisi in his quae sunt manifestè contra Deum doe all things that they shall say vnto you because we must obey euen those Prelates that be euill vnlesse they teach plainely against God Fifthly with Dionysius Carthusianus in these very words hoc est absolutê vniuersaliter intelligendum quia Scribae Pharisaei multa superstitiosa falsa docuerunt corrumpentes scripturam irritum facientes verbum Dei per suas traditiones intelligendum est ergo de Predicatoribus eorum non contrarijs legi Moysimalis enim PraesideÌ„tibus obedienduÌ„ est quaÌ„diâ— non docent nec iubent contraria Deo this must not be vnderstoode absolutely and generally because the Scribes and Pharisies taught many superstitious and false things corrupting the Scripture and making frustrate the word of God with their traditions we must therefore vnderstand it of their Preachers which teach nothing contrary to the Law of Moyses for we must obey euill Rulers so long as they neither teach nor commaund against God Thus write Lyranus and Carthusianus two famous Popish Fryers teaching the selfe saine doctrine with the holy Fathers Saint Austen and Saint Hylary viz yâ— we must beléeue those Preachers and teachers that teach the same doctrine which Moyses thaught that yâ— is to fit in the chaire of Moyses but not barely to occupy the place The fourth Reply Theoph. God commaunded to obey the Priests and not to swarue in any one iote from their doctrine by turning either to the right hand or to the left this argument seemeth to me to be vnanswerable Remig. Marke well my answere and then you will say it is of no force I answere thus that the Priests of Moyses law might eâ—â—e and did de facto erre indéede which conclusion I haue already proued out of the doctrine of the Scribes and Pharisees for they were not onely wicked men in life and conuersation but they also seduced the people taught false doctrine and corrupted the pure word of God which point because it is a thing of great consequence I will endeuour my selfe by Gods helpe to make it plaine vnto you And because nothing is or can be of greater force against the papists then to confute their doctrine by the testimony of their owne approued Doctors I will after my wonted manner alledge the expresse words of approued papists who were very deare vnto your Pope Nicolaus Lyranus who hath written very learned commentaries vpon the whole Bible the old and new Testament a zealous popish Fryer hath these words hic dicit glosâ—a Hebraica si dixerint tibi quod dextra sit sinistra vel sinistra dextra talis sententia est tenenda quod patet manifestè falsum quia sententia nullius hominis cuiuscunque sit authoritatis est tenenda si contineat manifestatè falsitatem vel errorem Et hoc patet period quod permittitur in textu Postea subditur et docuerint te iuxta legem eius ex quo patet quod si dicant falsum et declinent a lege Dei manifestè non sunt audiendi Here saith the Hebrew glosse if they shall say to thée that the right hand is the left or the left hand the right such sentence is to be holden which thing appeareth manifestly false for no mans sentence of how great authority soeuer he be must be holden or obeied if it manifestly conteine falshood or errour this is manifest by that which goeth before in the text they shall shew to thée the truth of iudgemeÌ„t It followeth in the Author and they shall teach thée according to his law Hereupon it is cléere that if they teach falsly and swarue from the law of God manifestly then are they not to bée heard or followed Thus writeth this learned Popish Doctor out of whose words well worthy to be engrauen in golden letters I note these memorable obseruations First that our Papists now a dayes are so grosse and sensâ—es as were the old Iewish Rabbins as who labour this day to enforce vs to beléeue the Pope though hée erre neuer so grosly telling vs that chalke is chéese and the left hand the right Secondly that Nicholaus de Lyra a great learned Papist whose authority is a mighty argument against the Papists doth here expresly condemne the grosse errour of the Hebrew Doctors and in them the impudent errour of all Iesuites and Romish Parasâ—tes who to satisuÌ„e the humour of their Pope and to vphold his Antichristian tyranny doe wrest the holy scripture from the manifest truth thereof Thirdly that we must neither beléeue Bishop nor the Pope of Rome nor any mortall man of what authority soeuer if he teach vs contrary to the manifest truth of Gods word Fourthly that this learned Popish Doctor doth gather out of the text it selfe that the high Priest might erre preach false doctrine and consequently that the Iesuite Bellarmine doth but flatter the Popes holinesse when he bestirreth himselfe to proue out of this place that the Bishops â—f Rome cannot erre because the Iewish Bishops had the like priueledge and could not teach against the truth The same Doctor Lyra deliuereth the same doctrine in effect in another place where he hath these words Ve vobis Scribae hic ostendit qualiter corrumpebant veritatem doctrinae in his quae pertinent ad salutem Dicebant enim quod obseruare legem erat necessariuÌ„ omnibus ad saluteÌ„ quod falsum est quia multi gentiles sunt saluati vt Iob plures alij ex suppositione autem huius falsi discurrebant alioqui doctores Hebraei per diuersas ciuitates castra vt possent conuertere aliquos de Gentilitate ad Iudaismum Wo to you Scribes here he sheweth how they corrupted the truth of doctrine euen in those things which pertaine to saluation for they said that the kéeping of yâ— law was necessary for all men vnto saluation which is false because many Gentiles are saued as Iob and sundry others by reason of this false supposition some Hebrew
that hold preach or defend the contrary this excommunication Pope Sixtus the fourth thundred out in his Extrauagant in the yéere 1474. by which practicall procéedings and doctrine we may easily espie the vncertainety of the Popes faith and religion as also his ignorance in the high mysteries of popish doctrine for though he cannot erre iudicially in matters of doctrine as the papists must beléeue yet can he not decide this easie question whether the Virgin Mary was conceiued in originall sinne or not but Aquinas the Popes angelicall doctor and canonized Saint whose doctrine two Popes Vrbanus the fourth and Innocentius the fifth haue confirmeth to be sound and true affirmeth resolutely that she was conceiued in originall sinne tell me now what ye thinke of the Popes succession at Rome Theoph. I see flatly and euidently that by popish doctrine faith and religion we cannot this day tell who are true Bishops of Rome indeed and consequently that the succession deriued from them is of no credit or force at all but yet by your fauour I desire your further resolution to such shewes and colours of succession as they pretend for the Church of Rome Saint Austen saith say they that the succession of Priests euen from Saint Peter to these daies kept him in the bosome of the Church so Optatus Tertullianus others do often alledge stand vpon the succession of Bishops as an argument of the truth Remig. It is true that Saint Austen made a great account of the succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome and my selfe also all learned men I thinke doe iumpe with Saint Austen in that his opinion for the resolution of which obiection sundry obseruations already Proued are to be well remembred First that the Bishops of Rome were in the beginning many of them holy Martyre who gaue their liues for the testimony of our Lord Iesus Secondly that they ioyned formall succession with materiall vntill Saint Austens dayes and long after Thirdly that the Church of Rome by little and little swarued from the truth and declined in many points of doctrine from the auncient receiued faith Fourthly that the latter Bishops of Rome haue decreed publickely against the knowen faith in so much as some of them haue béene condemned with the sound of the Trumpets other some haue béene conuicted of Arrianisme others of Nestorianisme others of flat Atheisme others to haue crept into Peters chaire as they terme it by flat Simony others haue occupied the place by violent intrusion others by homage done to the diuel of hell Fifthly that faith and honest dealing was now decaied in the Church of Rome and long before the daies of Carranza and Platina brought to that miserable estate that euery ambitious fellow might inuade Peters seate Sixthly that by popish doctrine and vniforme assertions of best approued popish writers succession in the Church of Rome is so doubtfull that they cannot proue themselues this day to be true Bishops indeed I say by popish doctrine because my selfe doe hold them true Bishops though very wicked and vngodly men of which point I shall haue occasion to speake of more at large by and by my answere therefore in briefe is this viz that the Bishops of Rome in Saint Austens time ioyned formall succession with materiall which if the Bishops of Rome would this day performe all godly Christians would now ioyne with them as Saint Austen did in his time for as Saint frene say we ought to obey those Priests that with the succession kéepe the word of truth Theoph. Saint Paul saith plainely that there must bee Bishops and Pastors in the church vntill the worlds end whereupon it followeth say the Papists whom now I haue vpon good grounds renounced that you Protestants haue no Church at all for before Luther departed from them all Bishops and Priests for many yeares together embraced their Romish religion This obiection say our Iesuites and Iesuited Popelings doth so gall the Protestants as they cannot tell in the world what answere to frame thereunto Remig. I answere first that we are the true reformed Catholikes as is already proued Secondly that Pastors Doctors as S. Paul saith haue euer béene in the Church are at this present and shall be to the worlds end Thirdly that albeit the visible Church cannot want materiall succession the continuance whereof Christ hath promised yet cannot that succession without formall yéeld any sound argument of true faith and religion For which respect the famous Papist Nicholaus de Lyra after he hath told vs that many Popes haue swarued from the faith and become flat Apostataes concludeth in these expresse words propter quod Ecclesia consistit in illis personis in quibus est notitia vera et confessio fidei veritatis By reason whereof the Church consisteth in those persons in whom there is true knowledge and confession of the faith and verity Thus writeth this learned popish Fryer telling vs resolutely y◠though there must be euermore a visible Church with visible Pastors Doctors in it yet those visible Pastors Doctors both may swarue haue de facto swarued from the true faith religion and that therefore the Church indeed consisteth of the predestinate and elect children of God whose faith shall neuer faile this poynt you haue heard so pithely approued as is able to satisfie euery in different reader Theoph. The Iesuites say that howsoeuer you wrangle about your formal succession yet it is cleere that you haue no material succession at all vnlesse you tearme it material succession when meere Lay-men occupy the roomes of lawful Bishops for none may take vpon them or intrude thēselues into the holy ministery but such as are lawfully called thereunto as Aaron was yet all the world can tell you that all your Ministers Bishops Priests and Deacons in the time of King Edward and Queene Elizabeth and now of King IAMES haue no other orders consecration at all but such as they receiued of our Romish Bishops indeede Remig. Our succession is both materiall and formall Christian and Apostolicall as which is consonant to the holy Scriptures and to the vsuall practise of the primitiue Church For first our Bishops can proue their Doctrine by the scriptures and by the testimonies of best approued popish writers as we haue séene already Secondly our Bishops haue mission and imposition of hands according to the practise Apostolical and of all approued antiquity Thirdly our Bishops are made in such forme and order as they haue euer béene accustomed a few popish superstious and beggerly ceremonies omitted which by little little had of late yeares crept into the Church that is to say by frée election of the Chapiter by consecration of the Arch-bishop and other his associates and by the admission of the Prince Theoph. Saint Epiphanius inueigheth bitterly against one Zachaeus who being but a Lay-man as your Puritaines be presumed impudently to
houre and go downe at such an houre as also that the Moone shall shine at such a time be darke at such a time and so in sundry other things All which though foretold by man cannot but be true and come to passe Semblably may we say that though the predictions recounted in the law and the Prophets must needes come to passe and cannot but bee true yet may they be the words of pure man and not canonicall Scripture Theoph. You deceiue your selfe in your owne allegations for neither the rising and setting of the sunne nor yet the light and darknesse of the moone must néedes come to passe as Astronomers do affirme for God all sufficient the author thereof can stay or change their naturall courses at his holy will and pleasure Ioshua in the power of God commanded the sunne to stay in Gibeon the moone in the valley of Aâ—alon and it came to passe accordingly The sunne at the request of good King Ezechias went backward ten degrées In the time of Christs most bitter and sacred passion darknesse was ouer all the land of Chanaan from the sixth houre vntill the ninth that is to say by Theological supputation from twelue a clock till thrée in the afternoone and yet did Christ suffer when the moone was at the full and about noone or mid-day For he was crucified oh cruell Iewes euen when they kept their feast of the Passeouer which was and must néedes be done in the full moone according to the prescript of the law Theoph. Your discourse yeeldeth great solace to mine heart I see it as cleerly as the noone day that all creatures are subiect to God their maker that euery word of man is fallible and that onely Gods will is Canonicall and cannot but be true But Christ addeth a limitation and restrictioÌ„ to his words which troubleth me more then a little He saith not simply and absolutely that all things written in the Law the Prophets and the Psalmes must be fulfilled but that all things which are there written of him must of necessity come to passe Remig. Though Christ vse a restriction by reason of his occasioned particular application yet is his argument generall as which is drawne from the excellencie infallibility of holy writ as if he had said whatsoeuer is written in the law of Moses in the Prophets and in the Psalmes that same must néedes come to passe and cannot but be true and consequently whatsoeuer is there spoken of me that must néeds come to passe neither is this mine but Christs owne exposition I assure you Theoph. If it bee possible to proue this the Papists may sing this dolefull song The Pope from their royall Scepters hath many Kings put downe but now his necke is broken and the Romish faith quite ouerthrowne Remig. It is not onely possible but a thing very easie Marke well and vnderstand my discourse aright Our Sauiour in the same chapter reproueth his Disciples as they went to Emmaus condemning them of folly and infidelity for that they did not simply and generally beléeue all that the Prophets had spoken Oh fooles saith Christ and slow of heart to beléeue all that the Prophets haue spoken Againe another text saith that he began at Moses and at all the Prophets interpreted vnto them in all the Scriptures the things which were written of him This is that interpretation which the holy Ghost affoordeth vs. Out of which I obserue these memorable docoments First that Christ spake absolutely and simply without any restriction at all of all things written in the Law the Prophets and the Psalmes Secondly that Christ interpreted in all the Scriptures the things that were written of him Thirdly that all the Scriptures of the Prophets of Moses and of the Psalmes are true and the Canonicall rule of our faith Theoph. Christ indeed speaketh simply and generally of the Prophets but he neither nameth Moses nor the booke of Psalmes Remig. I answere first that Christs speech is Synecdochicall very usual and frequent in the holy Scriptures it compriseth the whole in the part thereof Secondly that Christ nameth both Moses and all the rest of the old Testament For after he had reproued his Apostles for not beléeuing all things in the Prophets the text saith plainely in the words following that Christ began at Moses and interpreted in all the Scriptures and a little after in the selfe same chapter he maketh mention both of Moses of the Prophets and of the Psalmes and in the verse then immediately following it is sayd that Christ opened their vnderstanding that they might vnderstand the Scriptures so that Christ vndoubtedly meaneth all the scriptures of the old Testament when synecdochically he meaneth onely the Prophets which thing I shall yet proue by another scripture more plaine then all the rest Do not thinke that I will accuse you to my father there is one that accuseth you euen Moses in whom yée trust For had yée beléeued Moses yée would haue beléeued me for he wrot of me but if yée beleeue not his writings how shall yee beléeue my words These are the very words of our Lord and Maister Christ out of which I gather these comfortable lessons First that the writings of Moses accuse the reprobate and consequently that they are Canonicall Scripture for otherwise neither their condemnation nor their accusation should be of force Secondly that to beléeue Moses marke these words is to beléeue Christ himselfe Thirdly that not to beleeue the writings of Moses is not to beléeue Christs words and consequently that the writings of Moses are Canonicall Scripture and the pure word of God Theoph. You resolue me so soundly in euery point that I can no way in truth withstand your doctrine Howbeit me thinke I heare the Iesuite Parsons whispering in the eares of his silly Disciples that there is no text from the first of Genesis to the last of the Apocalips which saith that all the Bookes Chapters Verses and Sentences which in the Bible are admitted for Canonical are truly Canonical Gods pure word without the mixture of mans words if possibly you be able to confute this obiection they haue no more to say Remig. Answere me awhile to my demaundes and you shall easily finde out the confutation he that saith generally without restriction at all that all men are lyars doth he not affirme old men and yong rich and poore learned and vnlearned and euery man of what state or calling soeuer he be to be a lyar Theoph. He so affirmeth it cannot be denied Remig. Doth not he who saith that all things in S. Paules Epistles are the pure word of God affirme euery Chapter euery verse and euery sentence therein contained to be the pure word of God Theoph. It is most true it cannot be gainesaid Remig. Doth not he affirme euery Booke euery Chapter euery verse and euery sentence of the Propheticall writings to
aduersaries arguments plainely resolutly confesseth the doctrine which I defend In one place hee hath these expresse words me thinkes he plainely auoucheth he speaketh of Saint Austen that God hath procured euery thing to be cléerely written which to know is necessary for euery mans saluation In another place hee hath these words what things soeuer are necessary are manifest out of scripture Now sir what man can thinke our Iesuite to bee in his right wits that thus woundeth himselfe with his owne weapons for he doth not onely grant that euery thing necessary for euery mans saluation is manifest in the scripture but withall that euery necessary thing is cléerely written in the same and consequently he granteth vnaware against himselfe either that to beléeue the holy Bible to be the pure word of God is a trifle a thing of small moment and not at all necessary to saluation which if the Papists doe they must perforce condemne themselues and vtterly ouerthrow their Romish faith or else that the same is plainely and cleerely set downe in the holy Scripture the cause is cléere I hope I haue said enough Theoph. All the world knoweth old and yong rich and poore learned and vnlearned that to know and beleeue the holy Bible to be Gods word is so necessary to saluation as none without it can be saued It now remaineth for my full satisfaction and resolution in all points of Catholike doctrine in controuersie that if I know how to answere the Papists concerning one point of doctrine wherwith they neuer cease to charge you your profession I would think my selfe able to answere and confound all Papists in the world and to perswade all indifferently affected persons to abhorre and detest late start-vp popery world without end Remig. Let me know I pray you heartily what yâ— point of doctrine is wherewith our aduersaries so surcharge vs and our profession conceale nothing from me that any way troubleth your conscience for doubtlesse I am most willing to vndergoe any paines for your instruction in the truth Theoph. They charge you to hold teach that the best liuer among you sinneth in the best act he doth which seemeth a doctrine so strange irksome to all godly eares as my selfe caÌ„not but detest the same for if we can do nothing but sinne we must perforce condemne all good workes all preaching all teaching and all holy conuersation Remig. I wonder that any liuing wilcharge our Church with such vnsauory doctrine Theoph. Your aduersaries affirme with open mouthes so disgracing you and your profession as much as in them lieth that this is a generall receiued axiome with all your Deuines Iustus in omni opere bono peceat The iust man sinneth in euery good worke he doeth and that all euen our best workes are sinne Remig. My selfe though most vnworthy of that sacred name am one among the rest Howbeit I am so farre from beléeuing or defending that doctrine that I vtterly renounce the same in the sense formerly by you auouched For the exact examination of which proposition by them te armed our Maxime or Axiome let vs dispute the question pro contra as we haue done the rest CHAP. 6. Of the state of the regenerate with the particular adiuncts of the same Remigius THis proposition which séemeth to trouble you more then a litle the iust man sinneth in euery good work may admit a double sense and meaning viz a rigorous and a fauourable interpretation Iâ— we interprete it according to the rigour of the words the sense must be this the iust man sinneth euen in the best worke he doth which sense I willingly graunt is not onely straunge but with all very irksonâ—â— to all Christian eares howbeit if it may finde a fauourable interpretation the sense and meaning will be this the iust man sinneth whiles he doth the best worke he can which sense is most Christian sound Catholike Apostolicall and consonant to the holy scriptures But here ye must marke seriously that it is one thing to sinne in doing a good worke an other thing to sâ—me while the same good worke is a doing Iheoph This your distinction as it is very subtile so is it also right iovous comfortable to mine heart it affordeth me a kind of glimmering though no ful insight into the question Remig. He that will exactly know the truth of this question must apâ—ly distinguish the quadruple state of man First his state before sinne vntill his fall Secondly his state after sinne vntill his regeneration Thirdly his state after regeneration vntill his glorification Fourthly his state after glorification world without end In the first state albeit man sinned indéede and thereby made both himselfe and his posterity subiect to eternal torment yet was he so created of God his maker that he might haue liued without sinne for euer and aye In the second state man can doe nothing that good is but sinne continually In the third state man by Gods grace and great mercy is enabled to do good though not wholly to â—schew sinne saue onely according to the measure of his regeneration In the fourth state man is so confirmed in grace that he cannot sinne world without end Which distinction being well marked and remembred we shall easily vnderstand that albeit man can neuer be without sinne in this life but adde sinne to sinne continually yet may he by the grace of regeneration do good workes euen while he sinneth mortally Theoph. It seemeth to mee a thing impossible that man shall be able to do any good worke while he sinneth damnably Remig. It is a generell receiued axiome with all skilfull Logicians that true things must be graunted falsâ— things denied and ambiguous things distingushed which being true as it is most true indéede if we shall distinguish regeneration aright the truth of this intricate question will soone appeare viz. that one may aswell both sinne and do good at one and the same time as he may at the same time be both a father and a sonne Theoph. Our Papists contend with might and maine that howsoeuer we distinguish regeneration yet shall man in his iustification be freed from all sinne and consequently he cannot sinne mortally in the best act he doth Remig. The Papists erre grosly about regeneration whilest they doe not vnderstand the same aright according to the holy scriptures or they beare the world in hand that euery iustified person is fréed from all sinne in his soule and onely subiect to sinne materially in his body which if it were true as it is most false then doubtlesse could not the regenerate man commit mortall sinne while he doth his best workes Theoph. The Apostle seemeth to stand on their side when he telleth vs that the flesh lusteth against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh and it is confirmed by the same Apostle in another place where he affirmeth himselfe to serue the law of God in his
minde but the law of sinne in his flesh which doctrine elsewhere he deliuereth in other termes distinguishing man into the inward and outward man and in another place into the old and new man Remig. The Pope his Cardinals Iesuits and Iesuited Popelings for the maitenance of their false and erronious doctrine of mans iustification do shamefully abuse and wrest the holy scriptute to a contrary sense and meaning fraudulently perswading their silly deuoted vassals that originall concupiscence remaineth onely in the body and not at all in the soule where as the truth is farre otherwise as holy wridtoth euidently coâ—uince Theoph. They contend and obstinately affirme that the inward man doth connotate the soule and the outward man the body and the termes of inward and outward seeme very agreeable to their application Remig. The spirit the law of the mind the inward and outward inall are all one with the holy Apostle and do signifie the whole man as he is regenerate and semblably the flesh the law of the members the outward and the old man are with the same Apostle all one and do signifie the whole man as he is corrupt by the fall of Adam Theoph. If it be possible for you â—oo demonstrate this doctrine out of holy writ you thereby giue the Pope a deadly wound and turne his religion vpside downe Remig. Marke well my discourse that ye may vnderstand the same Saint Iohn hath these expresse words which are borne hot of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man but of God in which asseueration the holy Euangelist vnderstandeth by the word flesh the whole man as he is corrupt and vnregenerate Theoph. How can it be proued that Saint Iohn vnderstandeth the corrupt man by the word flesh Remig. These foure are distinguished in the Euangelist blood the will of the flesh the wil of the man and God by which distinction he giueth vs to vnderstand that the will of the flesh doth connotate the whole man corrupt I proue it because the Euangelist distinguisheth blood flesh and man one from another by a particular dissunctiue and God from them all by a particular aduersatiue Theoph. Your affirmance of the quadruple distinction is euident but how should flesh connotate the corrup man it doth not so well appeare Remig. I proue it two waies First if the word flesh should signifie the body or fleshly parts of man the Euangelist should thereby consound himselfe and frâ—strate his distiction the reason is euident because in the first word blood he did formerly infâ—â—nate so much vnto his reader Secondly because the Euangelist addeth an adiunct to the word flesh which can no way agrée to the body Theoph. What is that adiunct I pray you Remig. The will of the flesh for will is added vnto flesh not vnto blood and it is a proper faculty of the soule but not of the body for the flesh or body hath no will at all which for all that the Euangelist attributeth to the flesh and consequently he meaneth and speaketh of that flesh which hath a will and so of the corrupt man fitly compared to flesh as who before his regeneration sauoreth onely the things of the flesh which sense the Apostle plainly vnâ—oldeth when he affirmeth the animall sensuall and naturall man not to perceiue the things of thy spirit of God This reason or explication is confirmed by an other testimony of the same Apostle where he auoucheth the flesh to lust against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh so that the children of God cannot performe the things they will and earnestly desire for this conflict betwéene the flesh and the spirit must néeds be vnderstoode of the regenerate and vnregenerate parts of man for the flesh lusteth not without the soule as both Saint Austen and reason teaceth vs. Theoph. The Papists expound the words of the Apostle otherwise affirming the cumbat to be betweene the body signified by the flesh and the soule signified by the spirit Remig. The Papists say much but proue little they striue for life to obscure the Apostles true sense and meaning as which turneth their faith religion vpâ—idedoune but I God willing will proue what I say by the expresse words of holy writ and by euident reason First therefore many texts of holy scripture doe conuince the Papists oâ— grosse errour while they peruerâ—ly and mordicus auerre that the soule of the regenerate is frée from all mortall sin and that originall sinne remaineth onely in the body materially the first text is comprised in these words create in me a cleane heart O God and renew a right spirit within me cast me not away from thy presence and take not thine holy spirit from me In these words the holy Prophet sheweth plainely that he was regenerate and yet not frée from sinne for in that he desireth his heart to be purified and his spirit to be renued he giueth vs to vnderstand that his soule is not frée from sinne nor himselfe perfectly regenerate On the other side in that he prayeth God not to take away his holy spirit from him nor to cast him away from his presence he sheweth euidently to the indifferent reader that he is regenerate though not wholly yet in part The second text confirmeth the same in these words though our outward man perish yet the inward man is renewed daily The third text is yet plainer in these words be renewed in the spirit of your minde and put on the new man which after God is created in righteousnesse and true holines The fourth text is as plaine in these words séeing yée haue put off the old man with his works and haue put on the new which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him The fifth text doth further confirme the same in these words night and day praying excéedingly that we might sée your face and might accomplish that which is lacking in your faith By al which texts it is very cléere and euident that the regenerate man is not wholly renewed in his souls for which respect Saint Iohn exhoedeth him that is iustified to be iustified more Qui iustus est iustificetur adhuc Yea S. Paul throughout a whole chapter doth in effect intend no other thing but onely to demonstrate by many arguments that mans regeneration is vnperfect aswell in the soule as in the body two verses onely will suffice for the cléering of our question The former verse is conteined in those words for we know that the law is spirituall but I am carnall fold vnder sinne The latter verse in these words for I know that in me that is in my flesh dwelleth no good thing for to will is present with me but I find no meanes to performe that which is good Out of which verses I obserue these memorable doctrines First that by the word flesh must néedes be vnderstoode the whole man as