acts thereof The memorable Saying of SCOTUS The power of the Will in things divine CHAP. XI The fourth and last point of ARMINIANISME touching the Synod of DORT The Synod of Dort not our Rule Private opinions no Rule The Informers imputations nothing at all THE SECOND PART touching POPERY CHAP. I. THe Author uncharitably traduced His profession for the doctrine discipline received and commanded in the Church of England Conformable Puritans Furious zeale The Church of Rome not a sound yet a true Church Private opinions disclaimed The Church of England asserted to her owne publick and proper Tenents The cause of all these Imputations CHAP. II. The Church Representative and Points Fundamentall what they are All that Papists say is not Poperie Particular Churches have and may erre The Catholick Vniversall Church hath not cannot erre Of Generall Councels The Author farre from the Iesuites fancy The XXI Article of the Church of England explaned CHAP. III. Strange accusations Antiquity reverenced not deified Fathers accused of some error by Iesuites The occasion of their enlarged speeches concerning Free-will The Author acquitted of Popery CHAP. IV. Private and publick doctrine differenced In what sense the Church is said to be alwaies visible The Author acquitted from Popery againe by others learned Divines Of the Church of Rome CHAP. V. Touching ANTICHRIST The Pope and Prelacie of Rome Antichristian That he is Magnus ille Antichristus is neither determined by the publick doctrine of the Church nor proved by any good argument of private men Difference among Divines who The Man of sinne should bee The markes of the great Antichrist fit the Turkish Tyrannie every way as well as the Papacy The peace of the Church not to bee disquieted through variety of opinions No finall resolution to be yet had in this point CHAP. VI. Touching IUSTIFICATION The state of a meere naturall man who to please GOD must become a new creature That newnes cannot bee wrought without a reall change of a sinner in his qualities In what sence it may be said that there is an Accesse of Iustification both by daily receiving remission of new sins and by increase of grace injoyning vertuous and good deeds unto faith CHAP. VII A change made in a justified man The Author agreeth in part with the Councell of Trent and therefore maintaineth Popery no necessarie illation The doctrine of the Church of England and of other reformed Churches in this point of Iustification CHAP. VIII Strange Popery GOD onely and properly justifieth CHAP. IX Holinesse of life added unto Iustification and Remission of sinnes GOD justifieth originally and Faith instrumentally CHAP. X. An Accesse declaratory made to the act of Iustification by the works of a lively faith S. PAUL and S. IAMES reconciled The old Prophets and ancient Fathers made new Papists by the Informers CHAP. XI The doctrine of MERIT ex condigno rejected as false and presumptuous Difference between the old and the new signification of Mereri CHAP. XII The quality and conditions of a good work required by the Roman Writers to make it rewardable as farre as they are positive no Protestant disalloweth of To those conditions may others be added CHAP. XIII GOD surely rewardeth good works according to his promise of his free bountie and grace CHAP. XIV The Church of England holdeth no such absolute certainty of salvation in just persons as they have of other objects of Faith expressly and directly revealed by GOD. CHAP. XV. Touching Evangelicall Counsailes Evangelicall Counsailes admitted according to the doctrine of the old Fathers and many learned Divines of our Church Popish doctrine concerning workes of Supererogation rejected CHAP. XVI S. GREG. NAZIANZ defended from the touch of uncircumcised lips CHAP. XVII The exposition of the saying of our SAVIOUR If thou wilt be perfect c. S. CHRYSOST S. AUG S. HIER S. AMBR. make it no imperious precept If it be the Informers are the least observers of it and sinne against their owne consciences CHAP. XVIII Touching LIMBUS PATRUM The dreames of Papists about Limbus Patrum related and rejected The state of mens soules after death The place proportioned to their state The soules of the blessed Fathers before CHRIST'S ascension in heavenly Palaces yet not in the third and highest heavens nor in that fulnesse of ioy which they have now and more of which they shall have heerafter The opinion of old and new Writers Our Canons not to be transgressed The doctrine and faith of the Church of England concerning the Article of CHRIST'S descent into Hell The disadvantage wee are at with our Adversaries Every Novellers Fancie printed and thrust upon us for the generall Tenet of our Church The plain and easie Articles of our CREED disturbed and obscured by the wild dreames of little lesse than blasphemous men by new Models of Divinity by Dry-fatts of severall Catechismes The Beleefe of Antiquity The Author and It far from POPERY CHAP. XIX The seventh point of Popery touching IMAGES The Historicall use of Images maketh nothing for the adoring of them Popish extravagancies CHAP. XX. S. GREG. doctrine concerning Images far from Popery CHAP. XXI No religious honour or worship to bee given unto Images They may affect the mindes of religious men by representing unto them the actions of CHRIST and his Saints In which regard all reverence simply cannot be abstracted from them CHAP. XXII Popish doctrine and practice both about adoration of Images rejected CHAP. XXIII The Church of England condemneth not the historicall use of Images The Booke of Homilies containes a general godly doctrine yet is it not in every point the publick dogmaticall resolved doctrine of the Church The Homily that seemeth to condemne all making of Images is to be understood with a restriction of making them to an unlawfull end Many passages therein were fitted to the present times and to the conditions of the people that then were The finall resolution of this controversie CHAP. XXIV Touching signing with the Signe of the CROSSE To signe with the signe of the Crosse out of Baptisme or upon the breast c. no more superstition than to signe in Baptisme or upon the forehead The practice of the ancient Church The reasons that moved them that might move us to use often signing They lived with Pagans and wee with Puritans both deriders of the signe of CHRIST'S Crosse CHAP. XXV The practice of the primitive Church approved Unadvised Informers Novellers rejected CHAP. XXVI The testimony of S. ATHANASIUS vilified by the Informers The testimonies of other Fathers concerning the efficacie and power of the signe of the Crosse CHAP. XXVII Popery is not the signing with but the adoring of the Crosse Strange effects which GOD hath wrought of old adhibito signo CRUCIS and may doe still by vertue of CHRISTS Death and Passion which that Signe doth represent CHAP. XXVIII The Informers presumption against the current of Antiquity CHAP. XXIX Touching the SACRAMENT of the ALTAR The Informers drawn low
certus qui de hac re justo latentique judicio non omnes instruit sed neminem fallit PROSP. Resp 7. ad Cap. GALLORUM Ex REGENERATIS in CHRISTO IESU quosdam RELICTA FIDE pijs moribus APOSTATARE A DEO impiam vitant in suâ AVERSIONE finire multis quod dolendum est probatur exemplis But the greatest question will be concerning the Learnedst in the Church of England said to consent unto Antiquity in this case of falling away from grace Where first I will not deny but that Many in the Church of England reputed learned are of that opinion that Faith had cannot be lost But if it shall appeare that the contrary Tenet is the PUBLICK DOCTRINE of the CHURCH of England then I have not wronged private men in making this comparison between them and Those whom themselves will acknowledge to be their Superiours both in learning and authority Now to give them all due satisfaction which may thinke themselves wronged by my comparative speech I argue as followeth They were the learnedst in the Church of England that drew composed and agreed the ARTICLES in 52. and 62. that ratified them in 71. that confirmed them againe in 604. that justified and maintained them against the Puritans at Hampton Court that have read and subscribed them at their Induction unto Benefices and Consecration unto Bishopricks that penned the Homilies read in Churches But all these have and all such doe assent unto Antiquity in this Tenent and subscribe it truely or in hypocrisie Therefore I may justly avouch it The learnedst in the Church of England assent therein to Antiquitie The Major I suppose no man will question The Informers themselves are peradventure within that Pale The Minor I make good particularly and will prove it accordingly obsignatis tabulis In the forenamed XVI ARTICLE we reade and subscribe this After that we have received the HOLY GHOST wee may DEPART AWAY FROM GRACE and FALL into Sinne and by the Grace of GOD we may rise againe and amend our lives Now let me ask the question Have you subscribed this Article or have you not If you be Beneficed men you have read it and subscribed it professed your assent and consent thereto before GOD and his CHURCH or else by Act of Parliament you have forfeited your spirituall promotions and are deprived IPSO FACTO within two moneths If so then have you subscribed that Arminianisme which you impute as an Error unto me Haply you will be of his minde one of your Tribe who when he was told what hee had subscribed for poore ignorant man he understood it not protested he would teare his subscription if he could come by it and so would have lost his Benefice which few of you will doe if it be a Good one for conscience sake marry for a Poore one you will not stick Haply you will quarrell the Sense of the ARTICLES but then you must remember that the plaine words sound to the meaning for which I have produced them and that untill the CHURCH it selfe expound otherwise it is as free for me to take it according to the letter as for you to devise a figure The ARTICLE insisteth upon men Iustified speaketh of them after Grace received plainly avoucheth They may fall away depart from that state which once they had they may by Gods Grace rise againe and become new men Possible but not Certaine or Necessary But the meaning by you assigned cannot be good being allied unto the stocke you are for by your Tribe the true meaning of the ARTICLE and the Doctrine there Delivered and Published by Authority eyther originall or derived primary or secondary was upon this very point challenged as unsound because against the current of their Institutions And had Arminianisme then been a nickname the challenge without doubt had fastned there but challenged it was in this Sense as Vnsound at the Conference of Hampton Court by those that were Petitioners against the Doctrine and Discipline established in the Church of England And being so challenged before His sacred Majesty was then and there Defended maintained avowed averred for True ancient justifiable good and Catholick by the greatest Bishops and learnedst Divines then living in this Church against that absolute irrespective necessitating and fatall Decree of your new Predestination stiled by you The Doctrine of YOUR DIVINES commonly called CALVINISTS as indeed it is YOURS being never heard of in the world but of late but stiled then and there by the Lord Bishop of London Dr. BANCROFT in publick audience with much vehemencie without any check dislike distaste dissent for we reade of none a desperate doctrine of Predestination At what time also that Reverend Prelate and most accomplished Divine whose memorie shall ever be pretious with all good and learned men the late Bishop of Norwich then Deane of PAULS Dr. OVERALL upon some touch by occasion of mentioning the ARTICLES of LAMBETH did relate unto his most SACRED MAIESTIE those concertations which himselfe had sometimes had in Cambridge with some Doctors there about this very point of Falling from Grace and that it was his Tenet and had beene That a justified man might FALL AWAY FROM GRACE and so ipso facto incur GODS wrath and was IN STATE OF VVRATH and DAMNATION untill he did recover againe and was renued after his fall At which time that Doctrine of the Church of England then quarrelled now stiled Arminianisme accused of Noveltie slandred as pernicious by these Informers and their Brethren was resolved of and avowed for True Catholick ancient and Orthodox by that Royall Reverend Honourable and learned SYNOD The Booke is extant published by warrant and re-published by command this present yeer of the Proceedings at that Conference which will averre all that I say for truth against you heer See the Book And for explication of that Authorized and Subscribed doctrine there is an Homilie in the Booke of Homilies first composed and published in King EDWARD'S time approved and justified in Parliament in Queene ELIZABETH'S daies and Authorized againe of late to be read in Churches entituled OF FALLING AWAY FROM GOD. Which very TITLE is sufficient warrant for the Doctrine or Error in this point imputed to M. MOUNTAGU But that which is Delivered in the Homily will justifie Him unto the full for the Homily doth throughly and wholly insist upon the Affirmation That FAITH once had may againe be LOST Out of the first part of that Homily you may take this my good Informers for your edification Whereas GOD hath shewed unto all them that TRULY do BELEEVE his Gospell his face of mercy in CHRIST IESUS which doth so enlighten their hearts that they be TRANSFORMED into his Image be made PARTAKERS of the heavenly light and of his HOLY SPIRIT be fashioned unto him in all goodnes requisite unto the CHILDE of GOD So if they doe afterward NEGLECT the same if they bee unthankfull unto him if they order not their
Church of England whose Discipline in that and in other DUTCH Synods is held unlawfull What Ends men had in that Synod I knowe not nor am curious to enquire how things were carried I as little understand or care Whether any or all subscribed absolutely or with protestation I cannot tell Let them looke unto it and answer for it whom it doth concerne This I am sure IOHN DEODATE Minister and Professor in the Church of Geneva and imployed unto that Synod of Dort from his Countrey being lately with me at Eaton professed there unto me his owne opinion in some points contrary to the conclusions of Dort as also the dissension of their Church at Geneva from the PRIVATE opinions as he called them of CALVIN and BEZA And I am as sure that the Church of England never so concluded nor determined it in her Doctrime I am sure it hath been opposed in the Church of England otherwise taught and professed in the Schooles when I was an Auditor there It hath been prohibited to be enjoyned and tendred or maintained as the Authenticall Doctrine of our Church by supreme Authority with sharp reproofe unto those that went about to have it tendred then when those Conclusions or Assertions of Lambeth as they are called in the Conference at Hampton Court were upon sending downe to the Universitie of Cambridge likely enough to have beene there applauded by some through the opinion of the great worth and learning that they had of the then Professor a thorough man everie way upon YOUR Side and an earnest Promoter of the novell opinions against other learned Divines part dead and yet part alive Since which time at the Conference of Hampton Court before HIS MAIESTY by Doctour BANCROFT the then Lord Bishop of London it was stiled against the Articles of Lambeth then urged by the Puritans a Desperate doctrine as I take it to be without reproof or taxation of any And can wee conceive this should have been acted spoken or tolerated against a Doctrine approved by the Church of England Besides in all probability the publick Doctrine of the Church of England is not very likely to have beene or to be upon the Party of a Faction that hath so long had a Schisme on foot against it to bring in Genevanisme into Church and State wholly totally were it possible at least so partially that sensim sine sensu it might creep upon us not as once 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by opposing the DISCIPLINE ex adverso but by complying with That formerly oppugned cum infortunio to winde in with the DOCTRINE point per point that men being so seasoned and infected with the ONE may at length more readily willingly and sooner incline unto the OTHER It being so in the nature of man that opinion settled for the excellent worth temper desert and conveniency of any one invention or proposall of some one man men may be disposed unto him in any or all other things though of another nature Considering then your Side your Comportments your Ends it is not in reason probable that you should have the Doctrine of the Church on YOUR Side against Mr. MOUNTAGU your affection to the Church setting reason of profite and interest aside being such as it is well knowne to be Say I it is not probable I say it is directly otherwise For the Church holdeth and teacheth punctually and that in the Opinion and with the dislike of the Learnedst of Your Side that Faith true justifying Faith once had may be lost and recovered againe that a man endued with GOD'S holy Spirit and enlightned with the Heavenly light may LOSE that HOLY SPIRIT have that Light put out become like unto SAUL and IUDAS may be brought into so vile a condition that hee shall be thought meet for no other purpose than to be condemned into Hell Now to your own understanding my good Brethren can the Church of England be thought to patronize YOUR Predestination and so farre to crosse and thwart YOUR Perseverance It is your own GOD hath appointed them to Grace Glorie GOD according to purpose hath called and justified them therefore it is certain that they must and shall be saved infallibly But if the Once justified by a lively Faith may in the opinion of our Church lose that justification they are not saved by an absolute necessitie IRRESPECTIVE without relation unto their Repentance For whatsoever thing may be otherwise than it is is not necessarily to continue one way and ever the same DAVID and PETER falling as they did unlesse they had repented as also they did should have perished eternally which because they repented they did not Certissimè liberantur qui liberantur No man taketh CHRIST'S sheep out of his hand none of GOD'S Elect doe perish for ever which although it be true it is so true upon supposition of the meanes Faith Repentance and finall Persevering in obedience without which they are none of GOD'S Elect nor belonging to CHRIST these being the appointed instrumentall causes of all their salvation as the proper immediate cause of the wicked's destruction is their impenitencie infidelity and disobeying GOD which the very Synod of Dort denieth not that define the wrath of GOD to remaine on them that Beleeve not That life eternall is for them that Beleeve which calleth them Praeteritos or non Electos that perish a Title that cannot accrue unto those that as the Doctrine of YOUR Divines was at least were made by GOD to perish everlastingly Quod ante Gehennam mali pereunt non est DIVINI operis sed HUMANI Quòd autem in Gehenna perituri sunt hoc facit DEI aequitas cui placere nulla potest Peccantis impunitas with FULGENTIUS so I conclude CHAP. VIII Touching Free-will the III. point of Arminianisme INFORMERS HE calles the Question of Freewil betwixt us and the Papists in this point a Question of obscurity MOUNTAGU I CALL it so indeed and in my poor understanding and small capacitie I ever took it to be a Question at least as it is intangled of perplexed obscurity You my good Brethren as it seemeth esteeme it not so Queis meliore luto finxit praecordia Titan. You can easily foord over all the depths therof and cleerly còmprehend all the darkest mirksomnesse therin Admiror stupeo why are you enraged against me if I cannot attaine the measure of your transcendentnesse but confesse my disability and imperfection But cleere or obscure light or darknesse in the point of Free-will in my Opinion what is it to Arminianisme in your information Was ARMINIUS also in the same opinion that the Question of Free-will was obscure Surely so and yet what meaned those dangers you talk of for opposition seeing men are not peremptory but upon resolution and resolution groweth not but upon perswasion which is ever upon evidence to the understanding If not so then wherein doth N. MOUNTAGU Arminianise But esto as you will every way What Error is in it
that point And these honest well-meaning Informers if they had imagined indeed that I did so acquit them rather should have challenged mee of contradiction than of Popery For it seemeth as much Popery to accuse the Fathers of Errors as to excuse them of Erring seeing those three IESUITES than whom scarce were ever three more eminent in the Society doe not excuse or acquit them but accuse them rather for going so farre in applauding of Free-will In this point it is plaine my meaning was that their Vnderstandings were not so darkened as their words at first apprehension may seeme to import to erre so grossely in the point as they seeme to doe nor did then and in that particular those worthie Lights of the Church of GOD faile in discerning of the Truth of GOD in that particular as to use the words of the forenamed learned Bishop they inclined contrary to Scripture unto Pelagianisme For things must bee taken and considered as they are spoken and upon what occasion and ground they are spoken If you were not so acute to conceive this indeed so honest to expresse it yet your dullest Readers would have observed it had there beene in you so much ingenuity as to have added that which ensueth in M. MOUNTAGU thus That they being to deale against fatall Necessity urged by many PATNIMS Philosophers in those dayes as also against the execrable impiety of the MANICHEES they extended the power of FREE-WILL unto the uttermost and set it upon the Tenters especially having then no cause to fear anyenemy at home unto the contrary ante mota certamina PELAGIANA There being yet no PELAGIANS sprung up in the world enemies to Grace advancers of Nature and Naturall powers beyond degree of Power and of Possibility In effect M. MOUNTAGU as touching freewill heer in this case hath said the same and no more but the same that before him Bishop MORTON did in his Appeale pag. CCII. THE occasion of this difference we learne to have beene a whirlwind of contrary Heresies wherewith in those dayes the Church of GOD was miserably afflicted Then the MANICHEES and before them the STOICALL CHRISTIANS had taught an absolute fatall Necessity of every mans Actions thereby taking from man the guilt of sinne For the overthrow of which pestilent Heresie as is confessed concerning S. CHRYSOSTOME some FATHERS did contrarily yeeld too much unto the power of will This was the occasion of their by-sliding who notwithstanding did often recover their footing and in their more intimate meditations gave direct acknowledgement of our Orthodoxall Defence Iust to an haire up and downe the same Popery that M. MOUNTAGU hath Delivered That Bishop and my poor self say one and the same thing and yet will even the Informers I dare say acquit Him of Popery why not Me as well in the selfe same case with him CHAP. IV. Private and publick doctrine differenced In what sense the Church is said to be alwaies visible The Author acquitted from Popery againe by others learned Divines Of the Church of Rome INFORMERS HE calleth the doctrine of the INVISIBILITY of the Church a private opinion no doctrinall decision nor to bee imputed unto the resolved doctrine of the Protestants Nusquam est saith hee quod nun quam videtur CHAP. V. pag. XLVIII And againe pag. L. Moderate men on both sides doe confesse that this controversie may cease MOUNTAGU MY words were onely these It may be some private opinions have run upon Invisibility of the Church But since you put me to it if there bee any such doctrine as you speak of it is a private opinion and I will now say expressely I hold that doctrine a PRIVATE opinion yet then and there I did not ponere that any had so said in terminis or runne that way but onely with restriction by a May-be of concession that some men singular from the doctrine of the Church in their owne private opinions had fallen upon and supported an Invisibilitie Now every man but your selves knowes that the doctrine of a Church Publick and Authorized is one thing and your doctrine or my doctrine and private opinion is another thing For such doctrine as you talk of I know none I acknowledge none but that of Libertines and Brownists with whom if you have any commerce intercourse or confarreation look unto it the Church of England as it detesteth them so is it for and of another straine ARTIC XIX touching the Church thus we read The VISIBLE CHURCH of CHRIST is a congregation of faithfull men in the which the pure word of GOD is preached and the Sacraments be duely ministred c. Where Church and Visible are convertible tearmes That doctrine then to which you should and would seeme to have subscribed talketh of no invisible but a visible Church tendreth no Invisibility And it is a Position drawne out from thence and published that there is a Church of CHRIST not onely invisible but also visible Though for invisible it is more than that Article specifieth yet is it most true that there is a Church also invisible which was never denied or thought upon to be denied Secondly it is also concluded thence that the visible Church is a Catholick Church So the Church is visible and the Church is invisible both which I beleeve and professe distinctly taken and as it ought to bee understood For these though seeming are not contradictory Propositions The Church is invisible in her more noble parts the Saints both regnant in heaven and militant in earth such as be secreti and occultè intus such as bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the secret hidden the reserved Ones of GOD Psal LXXXIII IV. as Iewels of price of value of account I doe also beleeve and professe a visibility of the Church on earth necessarily toto sui though not totâ se in some part or other at all times though in all parts of the world or it selfe intire at no one time Nothing visible in the amplest maner that can be is so visible that there is nothing in it or of it but is visible It never was it never shall be it is wholly impossible to bee that at some time or other there could not be found in any one part or corner of the world not any part visible of that Church Catholick The Divell never did nor ever shall so farre and fully prevaile against GOD and GOD'S Kingdome as to effect or procure such an absolute desolation And so is it true for of this onely restrainedly I spake Non est quod nusquam videtur not generally true I grant and without limitation There ever was and will bee ever upon earth a visible Church some where or other with visible cognisances marks and signes to be discerned by such as be assigned by the XIX Article to which men may repaire to heare GOD'S Word where Sacraments are ministred and may be received unto salvation where Priesthood and Ordination is and may be had according to CHRIST'S
very Divell within the bounds of worship as well as that cautelous Doctrine of DURAND that Images are to be worshipped improperly in as much as They doe put men in minde of the persons by them represented who are then adored before the Images as if they were then really present there Or as that honest conclusion of MARTIN AIALA Nemo in Ecclesiâ dicit qui rectè sentit Sanctos deberi adorari sed venerari whether in themselves or their representations But Doctrine without limitation of YOUR pointeth you unto and putteth you backe unto no other but the precedently remembred Doctrine of Dulia and Latria My words are If this you call DULIA and no more we admit it we give it too But whatsoever you say howsoever you qualifie the the thing with gentle words terming it DOULIA or HYPERDOULIA we say in your practice you far exceed and give them that honour which you call LATRIA and is indeed a part of DIVINE respect and WORSHIP so doe not we Let practice and doctrine goe together and we agree that is give them no LATRIA formall or interpretative and we agree CHAP. XXIII The Church of Engl. condemneth not the historicall use of Images The Book of Homilies containes a generall godly doctrine yet is not in every point the publicke dogmaticall resolved doctrine of the Church The Homily that seemeth to condemn all making of Images is to bee understood with a restriction of making them to an unlawful end Many passages therein were fitted to the present times and to the conditions of the people that then were The finall resolution of this controversie INFORMERS ALL directly contradicteth the doctrine of the Church of England in the Booke of Homilies MOUNTAGU YOu enlarge too much for all For in your opinion doth the English Church condemn the Historicall or civill use of Images which yet is a part of that all It doth not in practice all the world knoweth that nor yet in Precept or Doctrine that I know Shew me that ponam manum meam super os Men as learned as anie of your Side no disparagement to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and selfe-conceit are I doe assure you of a contrary minde I have named Bishop MORTON alreadie unto you And yet were it not so you shew no great wisedome in that Limitation which your selves put unto my contradicting the Church of England namely in saying that I doe it directly For where can you finde in any writings of mine expresse words against any one point established or delivered in the authorised doctrine of the Church of England and words are not direct which be not expresse Thirdly to come unto the issue you name the Homilies and mean I take it the second Tome of Homilies in the Sermon against the perill of Idolatry If you had vouchsafed us any proofs of your assertions we should have gone directly to worke with your allegations but because you take a rounder course to tender every thing in Magisteriall Dictates wee must shoote at Rovers after you and come up to you as conveniently as we may I answer then first that I willingly admit the Homilies as containing certaine godly and wholesome exhortations to move the people to honour and worship Almighty GOD but not as the publick dogmaticall resolutions confirmed of the Church of England The XXXIII Article giveth them to containe godly and wholesome Doctrine and necessary for these times which they may doe though they have not dogmaticall positions or doctrine to be propugned and subscribed in all and every point as the Books of Articles and of Common Prayer have They may seeme secondly to speake somewhat too hardly and stretch some sayings beyond the use and practice of the Church of England both then and now and yet what they speake may receive a faire or at least a tolerable construction and mitigation well enough For you have read peradventure it is not unlikely that you have heard by relation how strangely some of the ancientest Fathers do speake and how they hyperbolize sometimes in some points in their popular Sermons which in dogmaticall Decisions they would not doe nor avow the doctrine by them so delivered resolutivè as in case of Free-will of Invocation of Saints and others S. CHRYSOSTOME especially speaketh strangely of the Blessed Eucharist as good Popery 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as ever Papist conceived of Transubstantiation or orall manducation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To. VI. pa. 407. Then Angels assist the Priest at the Altar the whole troopes of Heavenly Powers cry aloud To. VI. pa. 46. and To. V. pa. 528. Dost thou imagine that at that time thou conversest with man Sure it is a thought of a stonie heart to thinke that thou art then upon the earth and not rather following the Angels in their Quires and Tom. V. pag. 511. Know you not that this Table is replenished with fire such and so consuming that unlesse GOD'S grace assisted powerfully men could not endure but should be consumed with the violent heate thereof Tom. 6. pag. 16. And a little before home to the purpose a man would think for Transubstantiation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When thou beholdest our LORD SACRIFICED there and the Priest standing by the Sacrifice and praying ever it and every one present BEREDDED with that most precious BLOOD dost thou suppose thou conversest then with man or hast thy station upon earth Which speeches cannot all of them possibly bee true in the literall sense no not in the opinion of the Church of Rome and were none of them literally true no not in the opinion of S. CHRYSOSTOME himselfe Now after this enforcing sort may our Homilies speake and bee so interpreted Things are not ever of one and the same man touching one and the same thing at different times unto distinct Auditories upon divers occasion spoken after one and the same way In verie Scripture there are many Hyperbolicall sayings that being literally taken will not hold weight at the ballance of the Sanctuary In the writings of the Fathers as appeareth by that of S. CHRYSOSTOME there are dogmaticall conclusions for resolution in points and retoricall inforcements to edifie affections disposed for and according to the Auditory Now our Homilies are all popular Sermons fitted unto the capacitie and conditions of the common people to edifie them to worke upon them ever strong in passion but weake in understanding The will is more in them to bee edified than the judgement the consciences and hearts of men to be wrought upon for good life and conversation than the understanding and apprehension for any peece of knowledge and that also disposed accordingly as fitted for times for persons and different occasions as they doe or may happen As the ancient Fathers of the primitive times had verie few or no Churches at all at least of note dignitie or of receipt because they lived in times of fierce persecution and were seldome or few of them stationarie but compelled subindè
MOUNTAGU NO MAN denyeth you doe But pardon me I meant it of discreet moderate understanding Divines I should have exempted you I perceive my error and such as you out of the number Pardon mee this fault I will commit it no more If I have any occasion hereafter to speake of learned and moderate men I will ever except and exempt you and yours I must confesse my error and simplicity for I would have thought that in the Sacrament everie man would have confessed a change that the consecrated Elements had beene somewhat more than meere ordinary Bread and Wine For I did conceive a sacramentall Beeing of them and not onely a naturall in their use and designment Vbi accesserit CONSECRATIO de pane fit caro CHRISTI And S. AUGUSTINES Saying is common and well knowne Accedat Verbum ad elementum fiet Sacramentum And CYRIL of Ierusalem Catech. v. saith to the same purpose Precamur DEUM hominum amantem ut emittat SANCTUM suum SPIRITUM in res propositas ut FACIAT PANEM CORPUS CHRISTI VINUM SANGUINEM CHRISTI For quicquid contigerit SPIRITUS SANCTUS illud ipsum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is sanctified and changed saith S. BASIL in his Liturgie and who is not of the same minde Speaketh he not unto the selfe same purpose You never heard it seemeth of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in HIM not of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of THEOPHYLACT in MATTH XXVI not of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in GREGORY NYSSEN nor of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in HIM in CHRYSOSTOME and others For it appeareth you are not much versed in Antiquity and ignorantly imagine that if these be granted Popish Transubstantiation must needs ensue which if it were so then that Popish Minion as Bish MORTON calleth it were not as it is a Babe of yesterdayes birth never heard of in the world for MCC yeers after CHRIST but a change of the elements that is Transmutation and Transelementation do not inferre you must knowe Transubstantiation For in the other two the matter remaineth but in this the matter is destroied the quantity and accidents onely remain There is a Conversion Sacramentall that is of signification and of operation and use as also in the Water of Baptism And in Conversions that are substantiall whether by divine power or course ordinary there is evermore tertium quid novum noviter productum out of that which is converted But in their Transubstantiation the Body of CHRIST is not produced anew nor receiveth any substantiall change Many be the differences that might be insisted upon but I passe them over The poor men that tendred this for Popery were doubtlesse out of their element and meddled beyond their latchet or else they may goe to their bookes afresh studie somewhat more strongly and then perhaps they will begin to sent it that Change Transmutation Transelementation doe not conclude as they simply beleeve Transubstantiation Then that speech of S. CYPRIAN will not relish of anie Poperie Iste panis quem DOMINUS Discipulis suis porrigebat non effigie sed naturâ mutatus omnipotentiâ verbi factus est caro Et sicut in personâ CHRISTI humanitas videbatur latebat Divinitas ita Sacramento visibili invisibiliter divina se infundit Substantia Nor that Saying of S. AMBROSE by these puny Divines censured for Popery as also Mast MOUNTAGU for approving it and subscribing to it Before Consecration it was bread common bread but after Consecration it becommeth the FLESH OF CHRIST because then the Sacrament is consummate Which did not seem Popery unto Bishop MORTON pag. 106. The Fathers saith he doe note in Baptisme a certaine change AMBROSE speaking of the water in Baptisme saith The nature thereof is by Benediction changed And hee is produced in the like case for proofe of Transubstantiation in the Eucharist In the margin he setteth down his words thus Fortè dices meus panis est usitatus sed panis iste ante verba Sacramentorum PANIS est ubi accesserit Consecratio de pane fit CARO CHRISTI The very words by mee recited out of Lib. IV. cap. 4. de Sacram. Is this Popery in M. MOUNTAGU Is it good Catholick Doctrine in Bish MORTON Hee approveth it and explaneth it thus and yet S. AMBROSE if you can light upon the right edition saith also of the elements Operatorius sermo est sunt quae erant in aliud commutantur But esse quod erant doth utterly take away and abolish that fiction of Transubstantiation unto another nature They remained what they were indeed yet changed in use to be Instruments by Faith of Grace as his owne similitude doth illustrate Tu ipse eras vetus Creatura postquam consecratus es nova Creatura coepisti esse Accipe igitur quemadmodum sermo CHRISTI omnem Creaturam mutare consuevit It was intolerable insolence in such Ignaroes to challenge this for Popery which they understood not or else malice Puritanicall to traduce me for Popery so publickly which in that learned Bishop they approve for good Divinitie In conclusion you manifest your selves meere Sacramentaries or worse that denie CHRISTS Body and his Bloud to be in the Sacrament I dare call it so in despight of detraction of the Altar For you informe against these words as Popish Bee contented with That it is the Body of CHRIST and doe not seeke nor define how it is so and wee shall not contest nor contend Which GOD forbid the Church of ENGLAND should maintain said Bishop BILSON The Figurists Significatists Symbolists taught you this Doctrine who acknowledge nothing receive nothing but naked and bare signes and figures I must subscribe unto our Church against you and them and Papists all three Transubstantiation or the Change of the substance of Bread and Wine in the Supper of the LORD cannot bee proved by holy writ but it is repugnant to the plaine words of Scripture overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament and hath given occasion unto many superstitions The BODY of CHRIST is given taken and eaten in the SUPPER only after an heavenly and SPIRITUALL maner and the meanes whereby the BODY of CHRIST is received and eaten in the SUPPER is Faith ARTIC XXVIII CHAP. XXXII Touching CONFESSION Information against the expresse direction and practice of the Church of England No new Popish custome but the ancient and pious manner of Confession for the helpe and furtherance of mens true repentance and for the continuing of them in amendment of life is may be and ought to be urged How Confession of sinnes to a Priest is required by the Church before the Receiving of the LORDS Supper INFORMERS WE require men saith he to make speciall confession of their sinnes unto a Priest if they finde their consciences troubled with any weighty matter eyther when they be sick or before receiving of the LORDS Supper MOUNTAGU BALAM at last went not to fetch divinations as at other times but set his face toward the
negare liberum voluntatis arbitrium qui confitentur omnem hominem quisquis credit in DEUM non nisi SUA LIBERA VOLUNTATE credere And PROSPER de vocatione gentium SED etiam voluntas hominis subjungitur ei Gratiae atque CONIUNGITUR Quae ad hoc praedictis est excitatae praesidijs ut divino in se cooperetur operi incipiat exercere ad meritum quod superno semine concepit ad studium de suâ habens mutabilitate si deficit de gratiae opitulatione si proficit And FULGENTIUS de Incarnat cap. XX. Quâ gratiâ humanum non aufertur sed sanatur non adimitur sed corrigitur non removetur sed illuminatur non evacuatur sed adjuvatur atque SERVATUR ARBITRIUM ut in quo infirmitatem homo habuit in eo habere incipiat sanitatem quo errabat eodem in viam redeat in quo caecus fuit in eo accipiat lumen ubi fuit iniquus serviens immunditiae iniquitati ad iniquitatem ibi gratiâ praeventus atque adjutus serviat justitiae in sanctificationem To this purpose the words are so evident in the ARTICLE there can be no tergiversation or eluding of them I could name you many that at least doe write so I content my selfe with one whom I dare say you will not reject The learned Bishop of Lichfield is the man I meane in his Appeale pag. XIII Yet have they also he speaketh it of the Centuriators of MEYDENBURG out of the cleere and sound testimony of the same Father S. GREGORY drawne a doctrine of Orthodoxall Truth in the doctrine of FREE-WILL holding that a man's will in respect of any spirituall good is not free in it selfe untill that it be freed by grace Then it is free in his opinion And this opinion he saith is an Orthodoxall Truth and his opinions in your opinion are neither Popish nor Arminian How can the same opinion be Popery in M. MOUNTAGU who goeth not any farther than that Bishop hath gone and hee had warrant from Antiquity COOPERATORES sumus gratiae DEI operantis in nobis Non enim DORMIENTIBUS provenit regnum coelorum saith LEO nee OTIO DESIDIAQUE TORPENTIBUS beatitudo aeternitatis ingeritur who yet denieth not that without GOD wee can doe nothing it is GOD that worketh the will and the deed All our works thou hast wrought in us and the like Quaeutique sine DEO nulla est nec proprietatem obtinet dignitatis the righteousnesse hee meaneth of a regenerate man nisi Spiritu sui vegetetur Authoris Dicente enim Discipulis suis Domino SINE ME NIHIL POTESTIS FACERE dubium non est hominem bona agentem à DEO habere effectum operis initium voluntatis LEO ser 8. Epiph. The freedome of will doth not exclude out GOD'S prerogative royall nor circumscribe it and GOD'S preeminence in the work of our salvation his chiefe hand in the businesse his grace preventing and concurring doth not take away mans Free-will in cases wherein Will is interessed Causes may be many and manifold unto severall acts and particular ends In this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and concatenation of causes there is a progresse ordinary from the first to the last and a reflection from the last unto the first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Second causes and subordinate are reduced unto the originall prime and beginning cause of all and agunt in virtute prime If in no respect else yet in this regard It is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of GOD that giveth the encrease To conclude then That man hath FREE-WILL is not by us gainsaid saith that worthy and learned Bishop of MEATH Freedome of will we know doth as essentially belong unto man as reason it selfe and he that spoileth him of that power doth in effect make him a very BEAST Quis nostrûm saith S. AUGUSTINE against the Pelagians dicit quod primi hominis peccato perierit arbitrium de humano genere Libertas quidem perijt per peccatum sed ILLA quae fuit in Paradiso habendi PLENAM cum immortalitate justitiam To deny Freewill at all is wilfull folly but to give unto it that power and sway as many doe is little lesse than Blasphemie Truth is ever in the midst betwixt two extreames and so is it heer most wisely tempered and qualified with moderation in the doctrine of the Church of England according to which I endevour to square my beleefe and opinions CHAP. XI The fourth and last point of ARMINIANISME touching the Synod of DORT The Synod of Dort not our Rule Private opinions no Rule The Informers imputations nothing at all INFORMERS HEe expresly maketh the Church of England to cast off the defence of sundry points which the Synod of DORT maintayned and determined MOUNTAGU IN ALL my writing to my remembrance I name that SYNOD but once onely and no more That at DORT and another Nationall Synod at GAPP in France and that respectively and in gentle nay honourable termes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the two last in the Church of Rome the one at FLORENCE the other at TRENT and pronounce not I hope in any disgrace unto the Synod of DORT that we may as well tender unto our Adversaries the Protestant conclusions and decisions of those TWO Synods as they presse us with the ANATHEMATISMES of Trent or Florence Beside this one time and occasion I never name DORT And for the particular points and passages of my Booke I protest that to my remembrance it came not so much as within the compasse of my thoughts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For what had I to doe with that Synod not once named by the Gagger I undertooke the defence of the publick doctrine of the Church of ENGLAND of which I am being not curious in alienâ republicâ with which I had nothing to do That fellow had as the use and custome of Papists is schismatically dividing himselfe from us cast upon the Church as of PUBLICK allowance many and some absurd propositions of PRIVATE Tenents particular fancies of some idle conceits I pleaded not guilty unto the Indictment and tooke off the CHURCH falsly charged from that issue wherein it may bee some other had joined against right and reason You or any Puritan or Papist make it plaine that any thing by me disclaimed for being the PUBLICKE ESTABLISHED doctrine of our Church is yet the doctrine of the Church and I am ready to recant If the Synode of DORT hath determined otherwise let their determinations stand for me I quarrell them not I meddle not with them Those that like the Decrees of that Synod or are bound to maintaine the Decrees of that Synode let them maintaine them if they like them Non equidem invideo I have no part nor portion in them I am not tied to uphold them farther than they consent unto that which I am bound to maintain the doctrine of the Church of ENGLAND And if
Nice it was an Error in debating though not fundamentall touching that yoke of single life which they had meant once to have imposed upon the Church but in conclusion they erred not PAPHNUTIUS gave better advice and they followed it The Article may very well have aimed at this difference in Prosecution and Decision in saying ALL are not governed with the Spirit and word of GOD which is most true but some are and those some in all probability ever may prevaile as ever hitherto in such Councels in those cases they have prevailed against the greater part formerly resolved otherwise Againe the Article speaketh of Generall Councels indefinitely without precisely determining which are Generall which not what is a Generall Councell what not and so may and doth conclude reputed or pretended GENERALL Councels univocè GENERALL though not exactly and truely indeed such as was the Councell of Ariminum whereof I did not so much as intend to speak my speech being limitted with true and lawfull of which sort are not many to be found Lastly the Article speaketh of things that are controversae fidei and contentiosi juris I speak of things plainely delivered in HOLY SCRIPTURE for such are the Fundamentall points of our Faith And that it is so the ensuing words of the Article doe insinuate Things necessary unto Salvation must bee taken out of SCRIPTURE alone COUNCELS have no such over-awing power and authority as to tye men to Beleeve upon paine of Damnation without expresse warrant of GOD'S Word as is rightly resolved in the Article They are but Interpreters of the Law they are not absolute to make such a Law Interpretation is required but in things of doubtfull issue our Fundamentals are no such COUNCELS are supposed not to exceed their commission which warranteth them to debate and determine questions and things litigiosi status If they doe not hoc agere sincerely if they shall presume to make lawes without warrant and new articles of Faith who have no farther authority than to interprete them lawes without GOD'S word that shall binde the conscience and require obedience upon life and death our Church will not justifie their proceedings nor doe I. Non debet se Ecclesia CHRISTO praeponere cùm ille semper veraciter judicet Ecclesiastici autem Iudices sicut homines plerunque fallantur saith S. AUGUSTINE against CRESCONIUS the Donatist but he speaketh not there of Fundamentals indeed not of the Church representative as I explaine my selfe Nor doth that principall place of all make against me which is in him contra Donatistas concerning the erring of Generall Councells Et ipsa Concilia quae per singulas regiones provincias fiunt plenariorum Conciliorum authoritati quae siunt ex universo Christiano orbe cedunt ipsaque plenaria saepè priora à posterioribus emendantur cùm aliquo experimento rerum aperitur quod clausum er at cognoscitur quod latebat For he taketh Councells in a generall acception as it is plaine by him and hee speaketh not of Fundamentall points of Faith as both the cause it selfe argueth and his assigning of better information in tract of time to direct consequent Councells in determining contrary to precedent who for any thing he saith to the contrary might have truely determined as things then stood To conclude this Information is a meer cavill De tali Concilio saniori parte conclusionibus in fide probabile est No more CHAP. III. Strange accusations Antiquity reverenced not Deified Fathers accused of some error by Iesuites The occasion of their enlarged speeches concerning Free-will The Author acquitted of Popery INFORMERS AGaine speaking of the Fathers in generall hee professeth his opinion to bee that Those worthy Lights did not any way faile nor did darkenesse possesse their cleere understandings CHAP. XVI pag. CXIII The which is a saying more Popish than learned Papists durst ever affirme MOUNTAGU NAy more sottish than any Puritan but your selves would ever quarrell Malice and Ignorance whither wilt thou As if M. MOUNTAGU had affirmed that no Father ever Erred in any point whatsoever Masters Informers you may goe range this calumny under some other head for Popery will not admit nor entertaine it No ignorant Papist lesse learned than your selves nedum LEARNED Papist either taught or thought that no Father ever Erred And as for M. MOUNTAGU he utterly disclaimeth it Though no man living carrieth a more awfull regard and reverent respect unto Antiquity than hee doth yet never did hee so doate upon them It is more than ever entred into the compasse of his thoughts so to overlavish transcendently in their commendation as to give them prerogative of not erring at all and so to advance them unto their MAKERS seate It belongeth not to these Ancients but to the Ancient of Dayes not to Erre And so much M. MOUNTAGU had expressed in that former passage of his penne Take them at large and they lavish so farre sometimes that the greatest Patrons of the power and efficacy of Free-will dare not joine issue with some of them Then followeth that calumniated piece by those Pure Ones Not as if those worthy Lights had at any time failed or darkenesse possessed their cleer understanding Now you Promoters could your Christian charity be so defective or your common wit sense or understanding at so low an ebbe or your honesty so little or none at all as out of these premises so laid together to inferre so mishapen a calumny that M. MOUNTAGU Delivered and Published this Error that the Fathers none of them eyther did or could Erre at all as if he had erected to himselfe a new frame and fabrick of Popery never heard of in the world Whatsoever became of their Lights and Understandings deep Malice possessed your malignant Passions thus shamelesly to slander him with indeed more than the grossest Popery Thus it is M. MOUNTAGU speaketh not of all the Fathers in generall nor of their opinions in any one point 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but onely of their opinion in and concerning Free-will who have meddled with and written about Free-will This then is the first untruth by false suggestion fastned on him Secondly he professeth plainly that in and concerning this point of Free-will those Fathers did so farre outlavish and speak sso inlargedly that the very IESUITES post mot a certamina PELAGIANA for feare of seeming to Pelagianise dare not say so much as they have said at least wise some of them for which I have the warrant of Bishop MORTON in his Appeale to bee according to the confession of most learned Papists SIXTUS Senensis MALDONATE TOLET and PERERIUS His words are that In the roote of the doctrine of Free-will CHRYSOSTOME CYRILL THEOPHYLACT EUTHYMIUS OECUMENIUS AMMONIUS and most of others especially in the Greeke Church did yeeld too much unto the power of Nature in the Free-will of man These tearmes are farre from acquitting and discharging the Fathers of all Error in
elsewhere before that Popery was heard of in the world or in the Church of Rome it selfe But the name of Altars was given unto them when they were of Wood as is plaine out of OPTATUS and others as I have there collected Now though you may stumble and break your shinnes at the Altar yet I hope you will not overthrowe the Sacrifice I have so good opinion of your understanding though weak that you will confesse the blessed Sacrament of the Altar or Communion-table whether you please to be a Sacrifice not propitiatory as they call it I will use this word Call it lest you challenge me upon Popery for using propitiatory for the living and dead not an externall visible true and proper Sacrifice but onely representative rememorative and spirituall Sacrifice Now if you grant a Sacrifice why deny you an Altar D. REYNOLDS and B. MORTON have granted that though we have no proper Altar yet Altar and Sacrifice have a mutuall relation and dependance one upon the other The name of Priests is given not only unto all Christians in generall but also to the Ministers of the new Testament in particular by the confession of D. REYNOLDS out of Esay LXVI 21. in his Conference chap. VIII Divis 4. pag. 470. Indeed first to the Ministers and then to those that are all a royall Priesthood They have authority as he confesseth to sacrifice spiritually good Sirs why not then an Altar at least of the same making to sacrifice upon And why then is it such Popery to name the LORD'S Supper The Sacrament of the ALTAR Walk at random and at rovers in your by-paths if you please I have used the phrase of Altar for the Communion-table according to the manner of Antiquity and am like enough sometimes to use it still S. PAUL calleth the Pagan ALTARS which were indeed and truely Altars TABLES and why may not wee name the LORD'S TABLE an Altar by the same warrant You cannot communicate he saith of the TABLE of the LORD and the TABLE of Divels Nor will I abstaine notwithstanding your oggannition to follow the steps and practice of Antiquity in using the words Sacrifice and Priesthood also and yet bee farther from Popery in that practice than you from Puritanisme or any Puritan is indeed from true Popery being two birds of one feather CHAP. XXX A reall presence maintained by us The difference betwixt us and popish writers is only about the modus the manner of CHRIST'S presence in the blessed Sacrament Agreement likely to be made but for the factious and unquiet spirits on both sides Beati Pacifici INFORMERS AFterwards hee expresseth himselfe more fully and saith thus unto his adversary But that you were bred up in a faction otherwise you would acknowledge there need be no difference betwixt the Papists and Us in the point of Reall Presence pag. 253. MOUNTAGU MORE fully you meane to be a Papist than before and that in the point of Reall presence which Reall presence in your Divinitie is flat Popery but not in the Divinitie of the Church of England Concerning this point I said and I say so still that if men were disposed as they ought unto peace there need be no difference and I added a reason which I repeate again heer The disagreement is only in de modo praesentiae the thing is yeelded to on eyther side that there is in the holy Eucharist a Reall presence God forbid saith Bishop BILSON we should deny that the flesh and bloud of CHRIST are TRULY PRESENT and truely received of the faithfull at the LORDS Table It is the doctrine that we teach others and comfort our selves withall Pag. 779. of True subject And the reverend and learned Answerer unto BELLARMINES Apologie commeth home to the Faith or Popery if you will condemned in M. MOUNTAGU who learned it of him and such as hee is Nobis vobiscum de OBIECTO convenit de modo lis omnis est You understand not objectum and modum heer take his owne application to the purpose PRAESENTIAM inquam credimus non minus quà m vos VERAM De MODO PRAESENTIAE nil temerè definimus And to them agreeth Bishop MORTON pag. 93. The question is not concerning a Reall Presence which Protestants as their owne Iesuits witnesse do also professe FORTUNATUS a Protestant holding that CHRIST is in the Sacrament MOST REALLY verissimè realissimeque are his words CALVIN teaching that the presence of CHRIST'S Body in respect of the soules of the faithfull is TRLUY in this Sacrament and SUBSTANTIALLY received with whom BEZA and SADAEL doe consent If this be the Doctrine that the Church of England teacheth and professeth as it is indeed I leave you to those that must looke unto you Yea but it is inexpiable that I say Wee need not so dissent from Papists As if it were a sacrilege not to jarre and jingle infinitely without cause I may I see turne my speech to you and you will not refuse to take it to your selves which I uttered touching the Iesuite Faction But that the Divell bred you up in a FACTION and sent you abroad to do him service in maintaining a FACTION otherwise you might right well acknowledge there is no such cause why in this point of the SACRAMENT we should be so distracted as WE and the PAPISTS are seeing both confesse that which is enough This is my body and contend meerly about the MODUS HOW it is my body A point of faith undeniable though it be unsearchable and incomprehensible Incomparable HOOKER that Puritanomastix might well say and you in your right wits would subscribe it thus Seeing that by opening the severall opinions which have beene held they are growne for ought I can see on all sides at the length to a generall agreement concerning that which alone is materiall namely the reall participation of CHRIST and of life in his body and bloud by meanes of this Sacrament wherefore should the world continue still distracted yes to please the humours and serve the turnes of Iesuites and Puritans and rent with so manifold contentions when there remayneth now no controversie saving only about the subject Where CHRIST is yea even in this point neyther side denyeth but that the soule of man is the receptacle of CHRIST'S presence It was no blessed speech in my opinion but unworthy to be heard in an open Pulpit and Published in Print MALEDICTI PACIFICI those that endevour to make up such rents Be you of that family if you please I am for peace and reconciliation and say still BEATI PACIFICI as I have good warrant from CHRIST and his blessed servant King IAMES of most happie memorie CHAP. XXXI The Author's acknowledgement of his error Consecration of the elements causeth a change yet inferres no Popish Transubstantiation The Informers out of their element Antiquity maintained Figurists Novellers condemned INFORMERS ANd againe No man denieth a change an alteration a transmutation a transelementation as they speake
wildernesse nor these men to cast on me particular calumnies but per satyram congested and conjected at a masse upon the Church of England in pretence of mee My words are It is confessed that private confession unto a Priest is of very ancient practice in the Church of excellent use and benefit being discreetly handled We refuse it to none if men require it if need be to have it we urge and perswade it in extremis wee require it in case of perplexitie for the quieting of men disturbed and their consciences This is my Popery per partes For warrant whereof I bring my witnesse and authoritie the Injunction Direction and Practice of the Church and of Bishops accordingly in the Church If I have misalledged falsified or else misapplyed my Authors and Authority why am I not taxed for that and charged with it If I cyte them truly and faithfully but they have erred into Popery speake it out my good Brethren that they to whom it appertaineth may stand up according as I hope they will as I am sure they should to maintaine according to their duetie and places that which their Mother Holy Church hath commanded in that sort and case to be observed What that is let Bishop MORTON speak and Bishop USHER deliver no Papists I know and I think none in your opinion The Bishop of LICHFIELD in his Appeale lib. 2. cap. 14. saith thus It is not questioned betweene us whether it be convenient for a man burthened with sin to lay open his conscience in private unto the Minister of GOD and to seeke at his hands both counsell of instruction and the comforts of GODS pardon But whether there be as from CHRISTS institution such an absolute necessity of this private Confession both for all sorts of men and for every particular sinne knowne and ordinarie transgression so as that without it there can be no remission or pardon to bee hoped for from GOD. And hereupon he reduceth the Differences betwixt Papists and Protestants unto two heads 1. the Necessity 2. the Possibility The PAPISTS impose a Necessity of Confession absolutè de jure divino of all sinnes with all circumstances which is a tyrannie and impossible and a torture to the conscience The PROTESTANTS doe acknowledge saith he the use of private Confession but with a double limitation and restraint the first is the foresaid freedome of conscience the second the possibility of performance And to this end and purpose he reciteth out of BELLARMINE CALVIN'S judgement thus Admittit etiam CALVINUS privatam Confessionen coram Pastore quando quis it a angitur afflictatur Peccatorum sensu ut se explicare nisi alieno adjutorio nequeat sed addit moderationem ut libera sit nec ab omnibus exigatur nec necessariò de omnibus The Councell of TRENT that Popish Cynosura hath decreed Auricular Confession to be of absolute Necessity from Ordinance divine and so wee must take it or incurre their Anathema if wee care for it The Master of Sentences saith Without it there is no way to heaven In IV. dist 17. INNOCENTIUS 111. denieth Christian buriall unto the not confessed when they dye In Concil Lateranensi C. XXI HUGO de potestate Ecclesiae is bold hee saith to speake it Whosoever commeth to Communion unconfessed be hee never so repentant and sorie for his sinnes doth without doubt receive to judgement More bold than wise in saying so I wis for it is oftentimes a matter of impossibilitie to doe it ever impossible to do it with particular enumeration of each sinne and speciall circumstance in each sinne Nor was it so rigidly practised of old as appeareth by LYRA in XVI XXI of Levit. nor is there such necessitie of absolute use nor anie such originall imposition The learned Bishop of MEATH setteth downe in his Answer unto the Iesuites Challenge the state of Confession in the doctrine of OUR Church thus Wee tell him againe that by the PUBLICK ORDER prescribed in our Church before the administration of the HOLY COMMUNION the Minister likewise doth exhort the people that if there be any of them which cannot quiet his owne conscience but requireth further comfort or counsell he should come to him or some other discreet and learned Minister of GOD'S Word and open his griefe that he may receive such ghostly counsell advice and comfort as his conscience may be relieved and that by the ministery of GODS Word hee may receive comfort and the benefite of ABSOLUTION to the quieting of his conscience Whereby it appeareth saith that learned Bishop that the exhorting of the people to CONFESSE their sinnes unto their GHOSTLY FATHERS maketh no such wall of separation betwixt the ANCIENT Doctors and Us. And againe Be it therefore knowne unto him that no kinde of Confession eyther publick or private is disallowed by us that is any way requisite for the due execution of the ancient power of the Keyes which CHRIST bestowed upon his Church The thing which we reject is that new pick-lock of Sacramentall Confession obtruded upon mens consciences as a matter necessary to salvation So that setting these late Romish aberrations aside which M. MOUNTAGU also hath excepted In HIS opinion as well as in M. MOUNTAGU'S wee may as wee doe advise and urge the use thereof And lest this phrase should be excepted against Vrging doth not ever imploy constraint or imperium it reflecteth as often upon argument perswasion and inducement Therefore you that are Informers against the Church and me remember to bee more temperate hereafter at least for some mens sakes whom you dare not cannot will not censure for Popish errors as you doe M. MOUNTAGU CHAP. XXXIII Touching the Sacrament of ORDERS The new religion full of exceptions though but against words onely Ordination acknowledged to be a Sacrament by M. CALVIN himselfe A Sacrament in lato sensu What our Church meaneth in saying there are but TWO Sacraments INFORMERS WHereas his Adversary chargeth our Church to maintain that no interior grace is given by imposition of hands in the Sacrament of holy Orders and that this our opinion is contrary to expresse words of our owne Bibles hee taketh no exception to him for calling it The SACRAMENT of holy Orders MOUNTAGU THis is no positive but negative Popery a sinne not of commission but omission Not to take exception no Peccadillo but a capitall crime with Puritanicall quick-silver Spirits whose service unto GOD is performed by taking exception against all things that sute not with their fancy Else what maketh it so hainous an offence with them to take no exception at a terme or a word We brabble not for words our difference is for and about things Contentions may be multiplied beyond all degrees of bounds moderation or measure and that in things needlesse and to no purpose oftentimes You foment this humor more than you need or shall have thank for of the PRINCE OF PEACE that call us out still unto direct Contestation and censure us
for Papists because wee are not so contentious nor brabbling as you would have us For heer what need you quarrell the not excepting against the terme Sacrament It was not proposed whether Ordination were a sacrament or not but whether in that which they call the Sacrament of holy Orders and the Church of England at least holy Orders any interior Grace were given by imposition of hands Iust as not long since you sought a knot in a rush for using the like phrase of sacrament of the Altar So if being to say somewhat against Transubstantiation I doe not quarrell the word I am a Papist though I dispute never so earnestly against the thing See how apt and disposed men are that love faction and division to take hold and fasten upon any thing to maintaine it But I can otherwise excuse my selfe and I beleeve shall not finde them in the excepting humor for it Know then Sirs Informers I durst not except against the phrase for feare of drawing more fists about my eares than my owne viz. of all YOUR DIVINES and they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom you call CALVINISTS For have you not read it or doe you not remember it what BELLARMIN hath said that CALVIN admitteth Ordination for a Sacrament And BELLARMINE doth not belie CALVIN for he doth so indeed These are his words lib. IV. ca. 19. sect 31. Superest Impositio manuum quam ut in veris legitimisque ordinationibus Sacramentum esse concedo ita nego locum habere in hâc fabulâ c. How that is and in what sort he expresseth himself lib. IV. cap. 14. sect 20. Nam impositionem manuum quâ Ecclesiae Ministri in suum munus initiantur ut non invitus patior vocari Sacramentum ita inter ordinaria Sacramenta non numero He admitteth it a Sacrament but not an ordinarie Sacrament No Papist living I think will say or desire more It is not for all but for some Which Saying of his is semblably expressed in that short small but perfect Catechisme in our Communion Book where the Question being asked How many SACRAMENTS are there the Answer is made TWO onely as generally necessary unto salvation not excluding others from that name and designation though from the prerogative and degree For touching sacramentall unction it is observed out of M. HOOKER that in the Writings of the antient Fathers all Articles peculiar unto Christian faith all Duties of Religion contayning that which sense or naturall reason cannot of it selfe discerne are commonly called Sacraments And this is not denied by B. MORTON For if wee should speak of improper Sacraments saith hee which are mentioned by the antient Fathers our Adversaries would not deny that not onely seven but seventy times seven Sacraments might bee named Therefore for the Church of England's sake be good to Master MOUNTAGU in this sinne of omission and unto the Church of England for the antient Fathers sakes unto them and unto all for B. MORTON'S and M. CALVIN'S sake who is the Father of your Divines called Calvinists who for Orders will you suffer them to bee called Holy goeth as farre as may be both for force and for forme of administration as if Ordination did in his opinion consist in relation unto some such gift or grace supernaturall as onely GOD can bestowe being the powerfull meanes of GOD though in different degrees unto eternall life It followeth CHAP. XXXIV Information against the Church-Booke of Ordination which acknowledgeth the giving and receiving of the HOLY GHOST in sacred Orders so that Priests have that interior grace power conferred upon them for the dispensation of Divine mysteries which others have not INFORMERS BUt denieth our Church to hold any such opinion These are his words This indeed is contrary to expresse words of our Bible and therefore directly contrarie to our opinion doctrine practice CHAP. XXXVIII fol. 269. MOUNTAGU COunterfeyting at length will be dismasked and Hypocrisie appeare in the true comportment For heer Sorex suo se indicio The Ape discovers himselfe to bee so by cracking of nuts so doe these men who what and what Side they are of Puritans in Faction and engrayned in their affection that way howsoever pretending conformity by subscription For what is that trowe ye that M. MOUNTAGU denieth our Church to hold which these Informers and their Abbetters hold not which they deny which in their opinion is Popery The Gaggers imputation upon us and our Church was that in the doctrine of the Church of England no interior Grace is given by imposition of hands in the Sacrament of holy Orders In effect that when it is formally and solemnly said RECEIVE THE HOLY GHOST this is but idle and without effect This imputation M. MOUNTAGU denieth to be true and just and affirmeth that in the resolution and doctrine of the Church of ENGLAND by imposition of hands internall Grace is conferred Now this these good Informers have presented to be a Popish error namely the publike and by Parliament established and authorised doctrine of our Church So said their grand Patriarches and Fathers before them the Puritan Vndertakers and Complayners unto Parliament also against the doctrine and discipline of the CHURCH Papisticus quidam ritus are their owne words stultè quidem ab illis sine ullo Scripturae fundamento institutus à disciplinae nostrae authoribus pace illorum dixerim non magno primum judicio acceptus minore adhuc in Ecclesiâ nostrâ retinetur Eccles discipli pag. 53. They say Wee cannot give the HOLY GHOST and therefore we doe foolishly to bid men RECEIVE it And yet these men that are of the Clergy M. YATES and M. WARD have subscribed I hope That interior Grace is given that is the HOLY GHOST is given in Ordination who present M. MOUNTAGU as a Papist for saying so How can these Priests answer the one Act or the other When they entred into Priesthood their profession was then amongst other things acknowledged and subscribed that the booke of ordering Bishops Priests and Deacons contayneth nothing contrary unto the Word of GOD and yet now it contayneth For this is expressely contayned there which M. MOUNTAGU amongst other points of Popery delivereth That interior Grace that is the HOLY GHOST is conferred in HOLY ORDERS and that this is the opinion doctrine and practice of the Church of England I may and do conclude with the VIII Canon against them leaving the execution which I hope will not be neglected unto Authority The Canon is Whosoever shall hereafter affirme or teach that the forme and manner of making and consecrating Bishops Priests and Deacons contayneth any thing in it contrary to the Word of GOD let him be excommunicate IPSO FACTO These men have affirmed it in most publick maner for Popery is contrary to the Word of GOD and they have imputed Popery to me for saying as I and they have subscribed I referre it to Them unto whom it belongeth