fastidia detergeret Nihil enim fere de illis obscuritatibus eruitur quod non planissimè dictum alibi reperiatur The holie ghost hath magnifically and wholsomlie so tempered the holy scriptures that with euident places he might satisfie hunger and with more darke places might wipe awaie disdainfulnes For nothing almoste is found out of those obscurities which is not found els where most plainlie vttered It were no hard matter to heape vp manie testimonies of the auncient fathers to this purpose but that the va nitie of this answerer appeereth sufficientlie in all our bookes written against the papists in which not onely by the manifest places of the scriptures but also by most euident testimonies of the doctors of the church we confute them in the most and greatest matters of controuersie that ate betweene vs. But what saith our gallant answerer that the councels fathers and anciters of theChurch haue from time to timedeclared the true sense of the scriptures vnto vs hath none of these at any time erred in expounding the scriptures may we safely beleeue them whatsoeuer they say He wil I warrant you deny it except the Pope of Rome do alow their interpretations And therfore this flying from the only scriptures to the interpretation of Coun cels fathers ancetors of the Church is nothing els but an impudent shift to reserue vnto the Pope liberty authority to make what meaning of scripture they please thereby to giue colour to euery fansie they list to father it vpon the authority of the holie scriptures The third cause he affirmeth to be that by chalenging of onely scripture they maie deliuer themselues from all ordinan ces or doctrines left vnto vs by the first pillers of Christs Church though not expressely set down in the scripture c. In deede to deliuer our selues from the burthen of mens traditions the ordinances or doctrines of men we affirme the holie scriptures to be hable and sufficient to make vs wise vnto saluation by faith in Iesus Christ as the Apostles and principall pillers of the Church haue taught vs who haue left no such ordinances or doctrines but they be either expressely set down in the holy scriptures or by plaine and necessarie collection to be gathered out of the same For how will our aduersaries prooue that anie thing is receaued from the Apostles which hath not testimonie out of the writings of the Apostles who can be a sufficient witnes of such de liuerie seeing manie things were of olde referred to the Apostles tradition which euen our aduersaries do not admit to be Apostolical seeing the most auncient and immediate successors of the Apostles as Polyearpus Anicetus can not agree about a ceremony receaued from the Apostles namelie the celebration of Easter what certentie can there be of anie other ordinances or doctines fathered vpon the Apostles without witnes of their writings yea and some times directlie contrarie and repugnant to their writings But hereof saith our aduersarie they assume authoritie of allowing or not allowing whatsoeuer liketh or serueth their turnes for the time and hereof he bringeth example First of the number of sacraments whereof some protestants haue written diuerslie because the name of sacrament is diuerslie taken sometimes largelie for euerie holie signe sometimes strictlie for such holie signes onely as being instituted of God are seales of the dispensation of his generall grace in the new teftament perteining to euerie member of the Church somtimes for al holy mysteries or secrets c. But what doth it serue anie protestants turne whether there be more or fewer signes in number that maie be called sacraments seeing all protestants agree about the things themselues that are set forth in the scriptures to be visible signes of grace inuisible and the name it selfe Sacrament in that sense we speake of when we saie there are 2. 3. 4. or 7. sacraments is not once vsed This diuersitie therefore is but of a terme and that not vsed in scripture therefore it ariseth not of anie interpretation or peruerse vnderstanding of the scripture as our answerer would haue it seeme to be But let vs heare his example Martin Luther saith he after he had denied all testimonie of man besides himselfe he beginneth thus about the number of sacraments Principiò neganda mihisunt septem sacramenta tantúm tria pro tempore ponenda First of all I must denie seauen sacraments and appoint three for the time Marie this time lasted not long for in the same place he saith that if he would speake according to the vse of onely scripture he hath but one sacrament for vs that is baptisme In this sentence how manie lies and slaunders be packed together First he saith Martin Luther denieth all testimonie of man which is false for he alloweth all testimonie of man that agreeth with the testimonie of God expressed in the scriptures and often citeth the testimonies of the auncient fathers for confirmation of the trueth which he taught indeede he alloweth man no authoritie to institute sacraments or to make articles of faith or lawes to binde the conscience of man and he would haue all mans testimonies to be examined and iudged according to the word of God but this is not to denie all testimonie of man but to distinguish true testimonies of man from false An other slaunder is where he saith that Luther in denying all mans testimonie excepteth him selfe which is altogether vntrue For he requireth none other credit to be giuen to his owne testimonie then he alloweth to the testimonie of other Neither doth he arrogate any authoritie to him selfe which he derogateth from other men And namelie in this booke of the captiuitie of Babilon he taketh not vpon him absolutelie to teach euerie point but so farr forth as he did for the present vnderstand of them promising after greater study more diligent inquirie to intreat of diuers of them more certenly euen in this verie place of the number of the sacraments he saith he will admit three onclie for the present time intending to be further a duised whether there be fewer or more to be entituled with that name Wherein our answerer offereth him the third iniurie in translating tria pro tempore ponenda I must appoint three for the time as though Luther had taken vpon him to appoint how manie sacraments the Church should haue or would challenge power to appoint more or Jesse at his pleasure where as his wordes if the answerer did not wilfullie corrupt them by false translation do import no such thing but onelie as farr as he did presentlie see there were no more but three of those that were commonlie called sacraments of the new testament which were rightlie to be called by that name The fourth slaunder is that Luther hath but one sacrament for vs which is Baptisme if he would speake according to the vse of onelie scripture yea this is a double slaunder for neither doth
conscience of men to sanctifie them by their worke whome Christ by his onelie oblation hath made perfect for euer They that holde these points denie Christ to be a perfect Prophet King and Priest But these be deepe mysteries of puritanisme saith the answerer Christ is a Prophet alone a King alone a Priest alone the ouerthrow of all gouernment No sir no to acknowledge Christe to be our onelie Prophet king and priest ouerthroweth not but establisheth all power that is ordeined vnder him to teach gouerne and sanctifie The scripture in deede Eph. 4. Acts. 5. doth allowe Prophets and teachers in the Church but not authors of new doctrine no makers of new articles of faith no traditions beside the Gospell of Christ which is written that we might beleeue and beleeuing haue eternall life in his name The scripture alloweth Kinges and rulers 1. Pet. 2. Act. 2. but the scripture giueth no authoritie to any king or ruler to dispense against the lawes of God nor to any Prophet or priest to discharge subiects of their oth made to their lawfull Prince to binde the conscience of man with new constitutions as necessarie to saluation c. But whereas you aske whether Priests may not sanctifie by the word of god 2. Tim. 4. you are neare driuen for proofes For to omitte that the Chapter you quote hath neuer a word either of priests or sanctifying and to take your meaning to be of 1. Tim. 4. verse 5. the Apostle speaketh not of the Priest or ecclesiasticall ministers power of sanctifying but of euerie Christian man and woman to whome euerie creature of God in the right vse thereof is sanctified by the word of God and praier and against them that forbid thinges consecrated and allowed by God as matrimonie and meates sanctifyed by his worde that hath giuen them to be receiued with thankesgiuing and by the praier of the thankefull receiuer as a mean to obtaine sanctification from God whoe onelie is holie and therefore hath onelie power properlie to sanctifie and to inioyne as more holie by their owne making and not by Gods sanctification virginitie then matrimonie fish then flesh yca take vpon them to sanctifie Gods creatures in an other vse then God hath appointed them as water fire garments boughs flowers bread and such like for religion and sanctifying of Christian men Againe he asketh what doe the traditions of Christ and his Apostles for of those onelie they talke when they compare them with scripture impeach the teaching of Christ and his Apostles I answere there are no traditions of Christ and his Apostles pertaining to a Christian mans dutie to obtaine erernall life but those that be comprehended in the holie scriptures as the spirite of God in the scripture which cannot lie doth testifie And therefore they are the traditions of men and not of Christ and his Apostles that areso called vnder which title all heresies fansies may be brought in without testimonie of the written worde of God Wherefore such traditions doe greatlie impeach the office of Christes teaching reproouing his Apostles and Euangelists of imperfection if they haue not comprehended the summe of all that Christ taught and did for our saluation which Saint Luke in the beginning of his Gospell doth professe that he hath done and that verie exactlie And further it is false that our answerer saith they talke of the traditions of Christ and his Apostles onelie when they compare them with scripture For they compare the decrees of their Pope and of their generall councells allowed by him to be of equall authoritie with the holie scriptures as well as traditions Secondlie he asketh what doth the spiritual authorttie of the Pope vnder Christ diminish the Kinglie power and authoritie of Christ I answere the Pope hath no spirituall authoritie vnder Christ by anie graunt of Christ but he vsurpeth authoritie aboue Christ when he will controll the lawes and institutions of Christ as denying the cuppe of blessing vnto the laie people and in taking vpon him to make newe lawes and to inioyne men to obserue them in paine of damnation as be his lawes of abstinence from mariage and meates for religions sake which Christ hath left free for all men euen for Bishops Priests and Deacons of the Church and in an hundred matters beside Last of all he asketh How doth the priesthood of men as from Christ or the sacrifice of the altar instituted by Christ disgrace Christs priesthood or his sufficient sacrifice once for all offered on the crosse I answere the priesthood of reconciling by sacrifice doth not passe from Christ to anie man because he hath by one sacrifice made perfect for euer all that are sanctifyed and liueth for euer to make intercession for vs therefore hath as the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a priesthood that passeth not to any other in succession as Arons priesthood did whereby he is able to saue for euer those that come vnto God by hym Againe I denie that Christ did institute that sacrifice of the altar whereof there is no worde in all the scripture and therefore a new priesthood and a new sacrifice must needes be blaspemous against the eternal priesthood of Christ and that one sufficient sacrifice which he offered and therebie found eternall redemption The texts alledged by Master Charke Heb. 7. 9. he saith doe not impeach this dailie sacrifice of theirs because they graunt that sacrifice once offered c. in that manner as it was then done meaning bloodelie whereas they offer it vnbloodelie c. But the wholl discourse of the Aposile throughout the wholl epistle almoste excludeth all repetition of that sacrifice in any manner For therepetition of the same sacrifice should argue imperfection in it as it did in the Iewish sacrifices and without shedding of blood there is noremission of sinnes Is Christ shoulde be often offered he should often suffer All which being impossible it remaineth that as Christ offered himselfe but once and not often so no man hath authoritie or power to offer him anie more neither is there anie neede he should be more then once offered seing by that one oblation he hath made perfect for euer all that are sanctified and hath found eternall redemption for all that beleeue in him But for proofe that there must be such a daylie sacrifice in the Church vntill the end of the world he alledgeiu the prophecie of Daniell 12. Malachie 1. whereas Daniell speaketh of the dailie sacrifice of the Lawe which should cease in the persecution of Antiochus and be vtterly abolished by the death of Christ. And Malachic of the sacrifice of praise and thankesgeuing which by all nations is offered as a pure sacrifice and acceptable to him through Christ. The former exposition is allowed by S. Ierome to be verified of Antiochus in a type of Antichrist whoe shall forbid culium Dei the worship of God which doth not require any such
the workes of nature or will which are in vs but by the he lie ghoste which is geuen vnto vs which both helpeth our infirmitie and worketh with our health for that is the grace of God by Iesus Christ our Lord. to whome with the father and the holie ghoste be ascribed eternitie and goodnes for euer In this discourse of S. Augustine is declared that the commaundements of God are made possible and not heauie to be fulfilled by the grace of God nor by the strength of man either of nature or will and that by two meanes faith and loue Faith by which we craue obtaine forgiuenes of our imperfection and loue by which we cherefully endeuour to accomplish in work so much as we can which we can not do perfectly in this life in as much asno mans heart is pure in this life no mans loue is perfect in this world yet faith purifying our harts that by themselues are vnclean obtaineth as the same 's Augustine saith that which the law commaundeth But how far is this from the popish assertion to wit The law is not abooue our abtlitie to keepe it The cursse that you cite out of Augustine Serm. 191. and Ierorme explan Symb. ad Damasum is but a crack of a broken bladder in stead of a thunderbolte For both the sermon and the explanation are counterfeit stuffe being all one word forword except a litle 〈◊〉 flue in the beginning and the end and yet are most impudentlieascribed both to Augustine and Ierome But that ne ther of both is author of that sentence I wil prooue by 〈◊〉 of Saint Ierome who expresselie affirm ah that which the sermon and explanation accurseet We cursse the blasphemie of them saie the counterfeiters which saie that anie thing impossible is commaunded by God to man and that the commaundements of God cannot be kept of euerie one but of all in common Saint lerome dialog aduers. Pelag. lib. 1. saith Possibilia praecepit 〈◊〉 ego fateer Sed haec possibilia cuncta singuli habere non possumus non imbeciliitate naturae ne calumniam facias deo sed animilassitudine quae 〈◊〉 simul semper non potest habere virtutes God commaunded things possible and that I confesse But all these possible thinges euerie one of vs can not haue through weakenes of nature lest thou shouldest slaunder God but through wearines of minde which can not haue all vertues together and alwaies And his whole discourse in that dialogue is to prooue that no man can be without sinne the contrarie whereof is flat Pelagianisine He expoundeth also at large how the commaundements of God are possible and how vnpossible which maie be seene of anie man that will read his writings against the Pelagians and therfore it is very iniurious vnto him to make him a patrone of that sentence which he put posedlie and plentifullie impugneth To conclude Chrysostome and Basile meane not that a perfect obseruation of Gods law is possible in this life but that God geueth grace in some measure to keepe them to those that are borne 〈◊〉 in Christ in whome onelie is performed that which was impossible by the law as the A postle saith These fathers and diuerse other whose authority the Pelagians abused as you do to vpholde their heresie by such speeches meant to accuse the negligence and slothfulnes of men in keepeing Gods commaundements not to extoll the power and abilitie of mans free will to keepe them as Saint Augustine prooueth by manie testimonies taken out of their writinges in his treatises against the Pelagians The eleuenth section of de facing the scriptures and doctrines by tradition THe Iesuites you saie do not vse these termes of defacing that the scripture is imperfect maimed or lame and thereof I will not contend but the same in effect they holde as Master Charke saith when they affirme that all things necessarte to saluation are not contained in the scripture Your similitude of a marchant leauing his commaundements partelie in writings and partelie by word of mouth and referring the resolution of doubtes vnto his wife is not sufficient in this case For our Sauiour Christ liueth for euer whereas his seruants and the men of whome his Church which is his spouse consisteth are changed in euerie generation So that there can be no certaintie of his commaundements but onelie by his writings which if they containe not all thinges necessarie to saluation they are imperfect lame and maimed And where you saie that Saint Augustine prooueth the contrarie at large lib. 1. cont Cresc c. 32. it is vtterlie vntrue For he saith expresselie concerning the question of rebaptising them that were baptized by heretikes Sequimur sanè nos in hac re etiam Canonicarum authoritatem certissimam scripturarum We truelie doe follow in this matter also the most certaine authoritie of the Canonicall scriptures whereunto he adioineth the consent of the Catholike Church after some disceptation about the matter whose counsell agreeable to the holie scripture no man doubteth bur it is to be followed Theverie same doctrine you saie teacheth the said father lib. de side operibus cap. 9. and also ep 66. ad Don. In the former is no worde to the purpose he speaketh of the Eunuch whome Philip baptized whose confession of Christ being verie shorte some thought to be sufficient for anie man that should receaue baptisme whereas there is a more distinct knowledge and particuler explication of this faith in other places of scripture set downe that is to be required of them that are catechised and come to baptisme In the last quotation I thinke there is a faulte either in your Printer or in your notebooke which setteth downe ep 66. for ep 166. which is directed to the Donatistes whereas the other is to Maximus But in this epistle to the Donatistes there is nothing that prooueth this matter that the scriptures containe not all things necessarie to saluation Onelie he exhorteth the Donatistes to vnitie shewing that out of the same scriptures which teach Christ to be the head his bodie the Church is to be discerned and learned Touching the twelue pointes of doctrine set downe by the Censure as not conteined expresselie in the scripture and yet to be beleeued Master Charke answereth that seuen of them are in scripture the rest not necessarie to be beleeued But here you saie the question is of expresse scripture and not of any farre fet place that by interpretation may be applied to a controuersie If you meane by expresse scripture that which is expressed in so many wordes as the thing in cōtrouersy we deny that we haue anysuch question with you For we holde that any thing which by necessary demonstration can be concluded out of the scripture is as true as necessary to be beleeued as that which is expressed in plaine wordes And so we meane when we saie all thinges necessarie to saluation are conteined in the holie scriptures And as for your
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are able to make thee wise you harpe onelie vpon the word of instructing which the vulgar interpreter vseth not sufficient to answere the greeke verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet if it be rightlie vnderstood as perhappes he meant it signifieth to furnish and not to teach properlie so the sense might be that the scripture is able to furnish thee with knowledge to saluation and that 〈◊〉 a sufficiencie Now to your pelting cauilles You aske if the Scriptures which can shew Timothie the waie to saluation and bring him also to it if he will follow them be sufficient for the wholl Church so that all Doctrine by tradition is superfluous I answere yea For there is but one waie to saluation for all the Church But you obiect that euerie Epistle of Saint Paull enstructeth a man to saluation yet it not sufficient for the wholl Church I answere that euerie Epistle of Saint Paull is not sufficient to instruct a man to saluation or to make him wise vnto saluation But that which Saint Paull spaketh is of the wholl scripture not of euery epistle For you might as well obiect that euery chapter and verse instructeth a man toward saluation rather then to saluation but not sufficientlie yet the wholl is able to make a man wise vnto saluation Your second obiection is that the Apostle speaketh principallie of the olde Testament and will Master Charke saie that the olde Testament is sufficient to Christian men for their saluation without anie other writt Yea I warrant you for there is no Doctrine in the new but it was taught in the olde Saint Paull affirmeth that he said nothing but that which the Prophetes and Moses had spoken of thinges to be performed The new Testament hath no other Doctrine then the olde onelie it testifieth the performance of those thinges in Christ which the olde Testament foreshewed to be performed Againe because you grate so much vpon the exclusion of other writt Saint Paull addeth by faith in Iesus Christ which containeth all that is written in the new Testament concerning the storie of performancet and seales of this faith And if the olde were sufficient how much more is the olde the new together a rich aboundant Doctrine The 〈◊〉 that you make against his translation of the wholl Scripture which you would referre to euerie Scripture is answered before the translation must be according to the circumstance of the place Euerie Scripture which is euerie seuerall booke or euerie seuerall Chapter or euerie seuerall verse is not able to make the man of God perfect and perfectlie prepared to euerie good worke but the wholl is therefore the translation must be the whole scriptures and not euerie scripture But now to your tow reasons In the first you saie that Saint Paull could not meane to Timothie of all the scriptures together which we now vse for that all was not then written To this you confesse that he answereth there was inough written then for the susficient saluation of men of that time and therest is not superfluous But this you saie is from the purpose Yea is how so I praie you you answere it was sufficient with the supplie by worde of 〈◊〉 vnwritten but that is contrarie to the purpose for Master Charke telleth you that from the time that any 〈◊〉 was written that scripture contanied sufficient 〈◊〉 to saluation without anie supply of anie other Doctrine that was not in that Scripture comprehended although preaching and other meanes were necessarie to reach men which is beside the purpose Before the scripture was written the same doctrine in substance was deliuered by reuelation that afterwarde was written The continuance thereof was not onelie by bare tradition but also in euerie age renewed by reuelation Againe the age of men was lo long that there remained alwaies faithfull and ceratine witnesses of the doctrine aliue so that it could not be corrúpted but it was easie by those witnesses to be refuted But when the age of man was drawne into the streights of 70. yeares or litle more as Moses sheweth the Doctrine of the Church was committed to writing euen as much at the first as was sufficient for the instruction of the people vnto saluation without anie supplie of traditions The 〈◊〉 of the Prophetes and Apostles writinges is a more full and plentifull declaration of thesame Doctrine of saluation not anie addition of anie new Doctrine or waie to saluation Your second reason is that 〈◊〉 partes of scripture be wanting now which were in Saint Pauls time But that you are not able to prooue For although there is mention in the olde testament of diuerse bookes written by Prophets which are not now extant yet it followeth not that those were extant in Saint Pauls time And if any were yet were they but explications and interpretations of the bookes of Moses which are extant euerie syllable and pricke and shall be to the ende of the world But Epiphanius affirmeth that all thinges cannot be taken from the scripture wherefore the Aposties 〈◊〉 somethings in writing and somethings in tradition To this I answere first that Saint Paul is greater then Epiphanius Secondlie that Epiphanius saith not that anie thing necessarie to saluation cannot be taken out of the scripture For he speaketh onelie of this opinion that it is sinne to marrie after virginitie decreed which neuertheles maie be taken out of the scripture if the vow were aduisedlie taken and no necessitie of incontinencie requiring mariage But of tradition we shall haue further to consider in the next section The thirteenth section intituled Of teaching traditions besides the scripture Art 5. GOtuisus reporteth the Iesuits to saic that the want of holie scriptures muste be supplied by peecing it out by traditions Cens. f. 220. Here you repeat your olde friuolous quarrel that the Iesuites haue no such vnreuerent words Master Chark chargeth you out of Hosius with a farre worseisaying that if traditions be reiected the verie Gospell it selfe seemeth to be reiected For what els are traditions then a certaine liuing Gospell But thereto you answere not one worde and the meaning of those words reported by Gotuisus you mainteine egerlie thorouhout this section as you did in parte in the 12. section that the scriptures are not sufficient and that there must be traditions receiued beside the scripture To what ende but to supplie the want and insufficiencie of the holie scriptures Nay saie you Though both parts of Gods worde that is both written and vnwritten be necessarie vnto Gods Church yet both of them do stand in their full perfection assigned them by God neither is the one a maime or impeachment to the other You meane they are as perfect as God made them not that the written word is sufficient to teach all trueth vnto the perfection of the man of God And so for all your vaine compasse of wordes the sense is all one The scripture is but a part or a
necessarie to saluation not expressed in so manie wordes and syllables yet in full sense contained and to be plainlie concluded out of the holie scriptures and these we receiue to be of as great credit as anie thing that is expresselie contained in the scriptures The other kinde of traditions was rites and cerimonies which are not necessary to saluation but are in the Churches power to alter as it maie stand best with edification Among which S. Basill rehearseth some that long since are abolished as the rite of standing in praier one the Lords daie and betweene Easter and Whitsontid which of it selfe is a thing indifferent as also that manner of glorifying in which they said with the holy ghost whereas al the Church long since hath said neither in the holie Ghost nor with the holie Ghost but to the holie Ghost To beleeue that the holie Ghost is to be glorified equallie with the Father and the sonne it is necessarie to saluation but in what forme of wordes that shal be song in the Church it is indifferent and the later Church hath vsed her libertie herein to alter that forme which Saint Basill saith was deliuered by the Apostles themselues without writing By this I hope it is manifest what kinde of traditions are of equall force or authoritie with the scripture euen they which haue their ground in the scriptures and none other For as the same Basill affirmeth Euerie word or deede ought to be confirmed by testimonie of the holie Scriptures Againe For if all that is not of faith is sinne as the Apostle saith and faith is of hearing and hearing by the word of God whatsoeuer is beside the holie Scripture being not of faith is sinne Thus Basill whatsoeuer he speaketh of vnwritten traditions he meaneth not against the insufficiencie of the holie scriptures except you will saie he is contrarie to him-selfe in manie places beside these that I haue noted Tr. de vera piafide Epist. 80. in Reg. Breu. Inter. 1. 65. 68. de ornatu Monachi Your next testimonie is out of Eusebius lib. 1. Eu. Demonst. cap. 8. whole wordes you mangle after your manner leauing out at your pleasure more then you rehearse Eusebius hauing shewed the excellencie of Christ aboue Moses declareth also that there are two manners ofliuing in Christianitie the one of them that are strong and perfect the other of them that are subiect to manie infirmites and that whereas Moses did write in tables without life Christ hath written the perfect preceptes of the new Testament in liuing mindes his disciples following their Masters minde considering what Doctrine is meete for both sortes haue committed the one to writing as that which is necessarie to be kept of all the other they deliuered without writing to those that were able to receiue it wich haue excelled the common manner of men in knowledge in strength in abstinence c. And this is the meaning of Eusebius in that place not of anie traditions necessarie to saluation of euerie man which are not taught in the holy scriptures but of certaine precepts tending to perfection not enioyned to all but written in the heartes of some The third man is Epiphanius who you saie is more earnest then Eusebius writing against certaine heretikes called Apostolici which denied traditions as our Protestantes do Which is but a tale for they were more like to Popish monkes and friers then Protestantes For they professed to abstaine from marryage to poslesse nothing and such other superstitions they obserued But what saith Epiphanius for traditions He saith that we must vse tradition For all thinges can not be taken out of the scripture wherefore the holie Apostles deliuered somethings in the scriptures and something in tradition Mine answer to Epiphanius is the same that it was to Basilius Namelie that such things as were not expressed in plaine wordes in the scripture were approoued by tradition being neuertheles such thinges as were to be concluded necessarilie out of the scripture As in the question for which he alledgeth tradition it is manifest Tradiderunt c. the holie Apostles of God saith he haue deliuered vnto vs that it is sinne after virginitie decreed to be turned vnto marriage This the Papistes doubt not but that they are hable to prooue out of the scripture except where the Pope dispenseth And we acknowledge that where the vow was made a duisedly to a Godlie purpose and abilitie in the partie to performe it that it is sinne to breake it neither can the Pope dispense with it In the other place where he rehearseth manie examples of traditions he speaketh of rites and ceremonies as is before declared wherof manie are not obserued in the Popish Church neither is there anie of them necessarie to saluation But Epiphanius you saie prooueth it out of scripture 1. Cor. 11. 14. 15. vhere Saint Paulsaith as I deliuered vnto you And againe so I teach and so I haue deliuered vnto the Churches and If you holde fast except you haue beleeued in vaine To the first I answer that it prooueth no traditions necessarie to saluation which are not contained in the scriptures as is more manifest by the second and third text for where Saint Paul saith so I teach in all the Churches of God 1. Cor. 14. 33. he saith immediatelie before that God is not the God of sedition but of peace 1. Cor. 15. 1. 2. 3. the Apostle speaketh manifestlie of the doctrine of the resurrection wherof he him-selfe in that place writeth plentifullie and in manie other places of scripture the same article is taught moste expresselie You see therefore how substantiallie Epiphanius prooueth tradition vnwritten out of the scripture to be necessarie to saluation which is our question But with Epiphanius saie you ioyneth fullie and earnestlie Saint Chrysostome writing vpon these wordes of Saint Paul to the purpose Stand fast and holde traditions out of which cleere wordes Saint Chrysostome maketh this illation Hinc patet c. Hereof it is euident that the Apostles deliuered not all by epistle but manie thinges also without writing and those are as worthie credit as these Therefore we think the tradition of the Church to be worthie of credit it is a tradition seeke no more The sense of these wordes is that the Apostles in their preaching did expresse manie things more perticularly then in their epistles not that they preached anie thing necessarie to saluation but that the same was contained either in their epistles or in other bookes of the holie scripture And so I saie of the tradition of the Church which is a doctrine contained in the scriptures though not expressed in the same or in so manie wordes as the three persons and one God in trinitie and trinitie in vnitie to be worshipped c. is of equall credit with that which is expressed in the scriptures because the ground of our faith standeth not vppon the sound of wordes but vppon
the next matter that you saie he prnoueth by tradition it is a question not so needefull to be decided although it may be prooued out of scripture that some of them which were Iohns disciples were baptized by him and so it is like were all the rest seeing Ierusalem and all Iurie and all the coast neere vnto Iordan were baptized by Iohn euen to the Pharisees and Saduces Publicans and souldiers it is not probable that the Apostles whoe before their calling by Christ were of honest and deuout conuersation did neglect that diuine institution which all men that would seeme to be religious made hast to receiue Furthermore you saie he prooueth by tradition the ceremonies of baptisme as deliuered by the Apostles lib. de fide Oper. cap. 9. The question is whether the Eunuch whome Philip baptized made such profession of his faith c. renouncing of the deuill as is required of them that are baptized when the scripture maketh mention onelie of a short confession that Iesus Christ is the sonne of God Where Saint Augustine sheweth that the holie ghost would haue vs to vnderstand that althinges were fulfilled in his baptisme which though they be not expressed in that scripture for breuities sake yet by order of the tradition we know that they are to be fulfilled Where tradition is not taken for that which is altogether beside the scripture but that which according to the scripture deliuereth what is to be obserued concerning the celebration of that sacrament which is the seale of mortification and regeneration That the Lordes supper should be receiued before other meates he thinketh of it as of other ceremontall matters that it came either from Apostolike tradition or from decrees of generall councell yet is it a thing not necessarie alwaies to be obserued for your selues doe housell sicke folkes at all times of the daie or night without respect whether they haue tasted any thing or no otherwise as a matter of order and decencie it is obserued of vs also to minister that sacrament before dinner and to them that be fasting if the case of necessity require not the contrarie Yet againe you saie he prooueth by tradition the exorcisme of such as should be baptized l. de nupt concu cap. 20. l. 6. cont Iulian. c. 2. But the truth is that by the ceremonie of exorcisme exsufflation and renunciation that is vsed in baptisme he goeth about to prooue that infantes before baptisme be in originall sinne and in the power of the deuill as is euident by both the places which prooue not exorcisme to haue beene receiued by tradition but by the end of that ceremonie vpon what beginning soeuer vsed in the Church at that time that infants are borne in originall sinne and subject to the power of Sathan before they be baptized The wordes of the former place are these In veritate itaque non in falsitate c. In truth therefore not in falsehoode the deuils power is exorcised in infants and they renounce him by the heartes and mouthes of their bearers because they cannot by their owne that beeing deliuered from the power of darke nes they may be translated into the kingdome of their Lorde Here is neuer a word of traditiō The second place hath these words Sedetsi nullaratione indagetur nullo sermone explicetur verum est tamen quòd antiquitas c. But although it originall sinne may be sought out by noe reason by no speach it may be expressed yet is it true that by true Catholike faith from auncient time is preached and beleeued thoroughout the wholl Church which would neither exorcise nor exsufflate the children of the faithfull if shee did not deliuer them from the power of darkenes and from the prince of death Here the auncient doctrine of original sinne is confirmed by the olde ceremonies of exorcisme and exsufflation which were vsed in baptisme to signifie that infants were by that sacrament deliuered from the guilt of originall sinne by which they were vnder the power of darkenes and death But that these ceremonies were Apostolike traditions he saith not or that they are of necessitie to 〈◊〉 vsed in baptisme when the one of them namelie 〈◊〉 is not vsed at this day for ought I know in the Popish forme of baptisme The Moscouites in place of it as it seemeth vse excreation For when the Godfathers and Godmothers answere that they renounce the deuil they spit out one the earth as it were in signe of detestation In Saint Augustines time they vsed to blow out In the last place you saie he prooueth by the same tradition that we must offer vp the sacrifice of the masse for the dead lib. de cura pro mort agenda cap. 1. 4. serm 32. de verbis Apostoli Of the sacrifice of the Masse Saint Augustine speaketh nothing but that praiers were offered for the dead at the celebration of the Lordes supper which he calleth sacrifice he saith it was by authoritie of the whol Church which was notable in that custome and that the wholl Church obserued it as deliuered from their fathers But seeing the elder Church for more then an hundred yeares after Christ had no such custome nor doctrine and especiallie seeing the same custome is against faith taught in the holie scriptures that the dead in the Lord are blessed that iudgement followeth immediatelie after death c. The authoritie of faith and trueth is to be preferred before the tradition and custome of men Neither is it to be thought to haue proceeded from the Apostles which is disprooued by the writings of the Apostles the onelie certaine witnes of the doctrine deliuered by them which is necessarie for vs to beeleeue and follow And therefore this new sir Censurer doth greatlie abuse the olde saints whome he would haue patrones of his vnwritten verities partely in charging them to referre vnto tradition many things that they doe not partlie in drawing to doctrine necessarie that which they speake of ceremonies mutable not the least in picking out one or two ouersightes to be pardoned vnder colour of them to maintaine all the grosse heresies of Poperie that are intollerable The fourteenth section Whether the Iesuites speake euil of scripture Art 6. intituled Nose of waxe IF you had ser downe Master Charkes replie betweene your Censure and your defense as reason would you should haue done for men to iudge indifferentlie betweene both you might haue spared more then two pages which you haue spent in charging him with a slaunder of the Iesuites where he reporteth that they saie the scripture is a nose of waxe when they saie it is as a nose of waxe For no reasonable man can make any other sense of those wordes the scripture is a nose of waxe but euen the same that you confesse to be the saying of the Iesuites the scripture is as a nose of waxe as Master Charke telleth you And moreouer that Paiua saith the fathers
of Colene in a moste apt similitude called the scripture a nose of waxe and Pighius the leaden rule of the Lesbian building But now concerning the matter it selfe You would shift it of by saying The Iesuites doe compare the hereticall wresting and detorting of scripture vnso the bowing of a nose of waxe vpon certaine circumstances which are these First not in respect of the scripture it selfe but in respect of heretikes and other that abuse it and that before the rude people that cannot iudge thirdlie to the ende to flatter Princes or the people in their vices Thus much was said before in the Censure But it was replied that Andradius confesseth the fathers of Colene doe saie that the holie scripture is as a nose of wax So doth Pighius and it is a thing more commonlie knowen then that it can be denied Therefore the wresting of the scripture is not compared by them to the bowing of a waxen nose but the scripture it selfe to a nose of wax as that which is as easie to be drawne into any sense as a nose of wax may be turned euerie waie The wordes of Pighius are plaine Sunt enim scripturae velut caereus quidam nasus qui sicut hor sum illor sumque facilè se trahi permittit quo traxeris haud inuitus sequitur ita illae se flecti duci atque etiam in diuer sam sententiam trahi accomodarique ad quid-uis patiuntur nist quis veram illam inflexibilemque earundem amussim nempe Ecclesiasticae traditionis authoritatem communemque sententiam ilsdem adhibeat For the holie scriptures are as it were a certaine nose of wax which as it easelie suffereth it selfe to be drawne this waie and that waie and whether soeuer you draw it is followeth not vnwillinglie so also they doe suffer them selues to be bowed to be led and also to be drawen into a contrarie meaning and to be applied vnto what you will except a man lay vnto them that true inflexible rule of them namelie the authoritie and common vnderstanding of the Churches tradition These wordes declare if the sense of all Papists be the same that the Iesuites do not onelie compare the scripture it selfe but also that they make this comparison in respect of the scripture it selfe which suffereth it selfe as easelie to be wrested and abused as a nose of wax abideth to be bowed nor before the rude and ignorant onelie nor to flatter Princes and people in their vices alone but before any persons or to any purpose whatsoeuer and that there is not in them a certaine and infallible sense to iudge of the Churches doctrine or to finde out the true Church from all false congregations by the trueth taught in the scriptures but that the authoritie and common vnderstanding of the Popish Churches tradition is the onelie true sense inflexible rule of the holy scriptures wherebie also it is manifest though you denie it neuer so stoutlie that you doe impute the wresting of the scriptures vnto the imperfection of Gods worde set forth in them and not onelie to the malice of the wrester For if the will of God be but as well expressed in them as the will of princes is in their written lawes and proclamations the one maie as well be found out by reading and weighing of the holie scriptures as the other may be out of prophane writings especially where the spirit of God graunted vnto the praiers of the elect openeth their vnderstanding not onelie to conceiue as the naturall man maie by studie and ordinarie helpes the true scope and purpose of God vttered in them but also to beleeue and embrace whatsoeuer the Lord their God hath propounded in them Therefore though the scripture may be wrested to the destruction of the vngodlie as Saint Peter sheweth yet Master Charke telleth you that it cannot so be wrested but that still it remaineth the light vnto our feet and the lanterne vnto our steppes and euerie parte thereof is like the arme of a great Oke which cannot be so wreste but that with great force it will returne into the right position to the shame and perill of the wrester which answere of his you doe so dissemble as though you had neuer seene it And you doe wiselie seeing otherwise then by silence you could not auoid it But howsoeuer Master Charke storme you will defend your blasphemie of the nose of waxe not onelie in a kingdome where the Ghospell is preached but also in the kingdome of vs ministers where the letter of the scripture is worsse wrested by vs to all errors and licentiousnes then euerie waxen nose was yet bended to diuerse fashions O ye senseles papists had you neuer a man of moderat iudgement to set forth against vs but this loosetongued Gentelman which so he maie raile with full mouth against vs hath no care how his slaunders maie be coloured Doe we peruert the scriptures to all errors then surelie we holde no trueth there neuer was anie heresie neither can there be anie heresie but that with manie errors it maintaineth and holdeth manie truethes Yea the Deuill him-selfe the father oflies beleeueth some truethes and for shame dare not professe the maintenance of all errors We thinke verie hardlie of Antichrist and his brood the papists yet we maie not saie that they wrest the scriptures to all errors and licentiousnes for if they so did they should not deceaue so manie by shew of trueth in errors except they did professe some articles of trueth in deede As for the wresting of the Scripture to all licentiousnes let God and all the world of reasonable and indifferent men iudge how iustlie we maie be charged therewith If we be licentious in our liues God will finde it out and let man where he findeth it punish vs. But if we wilfully peruert the scriptures to the maintenance of all licentiousnes the Lord reward vs according to our deedes and be not mercifull to them that sinne of malicious wickednes But it is no fault in the scriptures saie you that they may be abused For Christ him-selfe was called the rocke of offence and the stone of scandall not for anie faulte or imperfection in him but through the wickednes of such as abuse that benefit So if the Iesuites had said no more but that the scripture maie be abused no man could haue found fault with them And Christ is called a stone of offence or stumbling not altogether in respect of the wicked that abuse him for he is called a stone moste precious and necessarie to build vpon of stumbling to those that refuse to build vpon him which meeting with him must either stumble and fall or els if it fall vpon them they must be ground to pouder But the the scripture is compared to a nose os wax because it is in their imagination that vse the comparison as pliant to follow euerie waie and to yeald as probable a sence one waie as an other as
them peaceablie she was declared to be iust or iustified in the sight of men Therefore there are two kindes of iustification the one by faith before god the other by works before men therefore a man is not iustified by faith only but by works also which saying of S. Iamesis not repugnant to that we holde that a man is iustified before god sola fide by faith alone or by faith without the workes of the lawe as S. Paule saieth which is alone which comprehendeth al good works as also the examples of Abraham and Dauid in the 4. Chapter to the Romanes doc plainelie declare where the Apostle speaketh expreslely of circumcisiō which was a worke of obedience following the faith of Abraham And Dauid pronounceth the blessednes of a man to whome the Lord imputeth righteousnes without workes which must needes be vnderstood euen of workes following faith because Dauid speaketh of himselfe and of all men generallie that shall obtaine blessednes by the grace of god without merite of workes For to him that worketh reward is not imputed according to grace but according to debt Againe the Apostle writing to the Galathians which were faithful speaketh generally It is manifest that by the lawe no man is iustified before god for the iust shal liue by faith By which texts many more the conclusion is moste necessarie that before God workes following faith doe not iuslifie but faith alone without workes yet not a dead but a liuing faith which worketh by loue Further he saith they haue expresselie for absolution whose sinnes ye forgiue are forgiuen whose sinnes ye retaine are retained Iohn 20. but we haue no where that Priests cannot forgiue or retaine sinnes in earth But the controuersie is not whether the Ministers of God haue power to forgiue or retaine sinnes for we beleeue that they haue such power but whether absolute power properlie to forgiue sinnes and how the same is to be exercised is the question For we beleeue that God onelie hath power absolutelie properlie to remit sinnes according to the scripture man by declaring Gods will pleasure Yet againe they haue expresselie The doers of the lawe shall be iustified Rom. 2. And we saie euen as much but because none is found a doer of the lawe we saie with the same Apostle that it is manifest that no man is iustified before God by the lawe But our answerer inferreth moreouer that we haue no where that the law required at Christians hands is impossible or that the doing therof iustifieth not Christians yes we haue it expressely That which was impossible of the law in as much as it was weake by the flesh God sending his sonne in the similitude of sinfull flesh c. If there had beene a lawe giuen that had bene able to giue life righteousnes in deede had bene of the lawe but the scripture hath concluded all vnder sinne that the promis by the faith of Iesus Christ might be giuen to them that belecue Againe by the workes of the lawe no flesh shal be iustified before him therefore no Christians by the workes of the lawe shal be iustified before him Moreouer we are saued by grace through faith not of workes Ergo Christians for none els are saued are iustified through faith without workes Yet againe they haue expresselie Psal. 75. Vowe ye and render your vowes we haut no where vowe ye not or if you haue vowed breake your vowes we confesse the Prophet willeth the people to vowe yet he meaneth onelie thinges lawfull and in their power to performe we bid no man to breake his vowe if it be lawful and possible but if he haue vowed to goe a pilgrimage which is Idolatrie or to liue vnmaried which is not able to liue continentlie we exhort him to repent of his wicked or vnaduised vowe to serue God as he hath appointed or to vse the remedie that God hath prouided They haue againe expreslie Keepe the traditions which ye haue learned either by worde or epistle 2. Thess. 2. we haue no where the Apostles left noe traditions to the Church vnwritten Saint Paull willeth the Thessalonians to keepe the traditions or doctrine which he had deliuered vnto them either by word of mouth or by his epistle This prooueth not that the Apostles left any traditions which are no where written in the holie scripture because they were not all written in the epistle of Saint Paul to the Thessalonians But we haue expresselie that the holie scriptures are able to make vs wise to saluation to make the man of God perfect and prepared to all good works which things seing we haue fufficientlie in the holie scriptures we neither regard nor receiue any other doctrine vnder name of tradition of the Apo stles or of Angels from heauen Still they haue expresselie If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commaundements and when he said he did that already if thou wilt be perfect go sel all thou hast giue to the poore follow me And we haue no where that either the commaundements of God cannot be kept or that we are not bound vnto them or that there is no degree of life one perfecter then another We graunt that who so by good deeds will seeke to enter into life as that yong man did must doe the deedes of the commaundements which if he can doe he shal liue by them but albeit he boasted that he had kept the commaundements yet it followeth not that he did keepe them indeede and as god required but was a blinde hipocrite and sought to iustifie him-selfe according to the heresie of the Pharisies That we are not bound to keepe the commaundements as neere as God will giue vs grace is no article of ours but a slaunder of his Finallie we denie that anie mortall mans life is perfect yet we graunt that some mens liues come neerer to perfection then other some Neither doth our Sauiours words include perfection in selling his goodes nor in giuing them to the poore for if a man bestowe all his goodes to feede the poore and haue not loue he is nothing but he addeth that he must followe Christ and take vp his crosse and so by Christs grace he shal attaine vnto perfection which he falselie imagined that he he had obtained by a pharizaical obseruation of the lawe this fauoreth not Monkes and friers more then hipocrites and liers Beside this They haue expresselie worke your owne saluation with feare and tremhling Phil. 2. we haue no where either that a man can worke nothing toward his owne saluation being holpen with the grace of God or that a man should make it of his beliefe that he shall be saued without all doubt or feare The saying of Saint Paull we acknowledge that men should worke out their owne saluation with feare and trembling together with the next verse following for it is God that worketh in
life the same should stand in force before God FVLKE Our sauiour Christ in this place doth first of all authorize his Apostles to execute the office of publike preaching of the Gospell in all the world vnto the which he had before chosen appointed them Then doth he furnish them with giftes of the holie Ghost meete for so high and painfull a calling last of all he ratifieth the effect of their ministerie to be accomplished in the remission of the sinnes of all them that beleeue their preaching and in the retaining of their sinnes that do not obey the voice of the Gospell to beleeue it For the power of remitting sinnes must not be separated from the office of teaching whereunto it is annexed by our sauiour Christ who doth not giue his Apostles authoritie to remit sinnes so that he would transferre into them anie thing that is proper vnto him-selfe For it is proper to him to remit sinnes which honour so farre forth as it pertaineth to his onelie person he doth not resigne to his Apostles but commaundeth them in his name to testifie the forgiuenes of sinnes that he might reconcile men to God by their ministerie For I haue shewed before in the words of S. Hilarie that to speake properlie God onelie by men remitteth sinnes not following the sentence of man but man following the iudgement of God which is to pardon all penitent sinners and to retaine the sinnes of vnbeleeuers vnto eternall condemnation Therefore it is much more then the place doth afforde that you affirme the iudgement and rule of our soules with al authoritie in correcting our sinnes in most expresse and effectuall tearmes and in moste ample manner is giuen to the Apostles and their successors in this place For Christ in this place doth constitute Apostles and not Iudges messengers and declarers of his good pleasure and will vnto men not rulers of mens soules he giueth them power to remit or retaine sinnes in his name to the inestimable comfort of all penitent sinners and to the terrour and in crease of damnation of all vnbeleeuers he giueth them not al authoritie and that in moste ample manner in correcting our sinnes neither are there in the place anie expresse or effectual tearmes our of which such omnipotent authoritie can be concluded as afterward when we come to your syllogisme we shall platnlie declare Againe there is no mention in the text of anie iurisdiction communicated vnto them but of the office of teaching whereunto Christ was sent for a time which he committeth to his Apostles and their successours For these wordes of our sauiour As my father hrth sent me I also do send you can not be enlarged generallie to all such purposes as God sent Christ but must be vnderstood according to the matter he speaketh of that is of the office of Preaching teaching which Christ at that time did cease to execute in his humanitie remaining yet still the onelie doctor and teacher of his Church because he is author of the doctrine that is taught and by his holie spirit teacheth continually in giuing effect to the labours of his Apostles Euangelists Prophets Pastours teach ers which he hath giuen vnto his Church for the external ministerie of instructing the same in al truth necessarie to the eternall saluation of his elect He substituteth therfore his Apostles in that necessarie office of preaching the Gospell he enableth them by his spirit which he testifieth vntothem by an holy signe to proceed from him He maketh an assured promis that they should not labour in vaine but that in pardoning retaining sinnes according to the doctrine of his Gospel whatsoeuer they did should stand in force before God ALLEN What dignitie could euer be giuen more in what tearmes more plain by what order more honourable for surelie if either Christ could remit sinnes as we haue at large prooued that he could by commission and sending of his father or if the holie spirit of God maie remit sinnes or if Christes word will procure man anie power to remit sinnes then vndoubtedlie maie the Apostles remit sinnes For they haue the expresse warrant of them all Much said Paul when he affirmed in the Apostles name and person of all Priestes Quòd 〈◊〉 erat in Christo mundum reconcilians sibi posuit in nobis verbum reconciliationis Pro Christo ergo legatione fungimur That God was in Christ reconciling the world to him selfe and hath put in vs the word of reconcilement therfore our calling is to serue as an Embasy in Christes owne stead These wordes be of great waight and exceedinglie set forth the vocation of the spirituall gouernours as of those that holde by the warrant of Gods sending and thereby occupie Christes owne roome Marie the place for all that appertaineth to their calling generallie as wel to preach as otherwise to guide the people of God in the behalfe of their Master to whome we al be subiect but this present text whereupon we now treat doth properlie concerne the commission giuen to the Apostles for the sacrament of penance and remission of sinnes For it doth in moste cleere and vndoubted sense giue to them the like right in that case that Christ him selfe had by the sending of God the father that is to saie the very same authority that he had in respect of his mediation and manhoode A Equalem patri filium nouimus saith Saint Augustine sed bîc verba Mediatoris agnoscimus medium quippe se ostendit dicendo ille me ego vus We know the sonne to be equall with the father but here we must acknowledge the wordes of a mediator For he shewed him selfe to be as a meane when he said He sent me and I send you That is to saie as Theophilact expoundeth it Take vpon you my worke and function and doe it with confidence For as my father did send me so I send you againe and I will be with you to the ende of the worlde FVLKE There is no dout but the Apostles had power to remit sins but yet for al your thetorical interrogations none other then I haue expressed before nor greater then may stand with the glory of Christ who maketh not men equal with him when he authorizeth them as his seruants to be ministers of his mysteries and stewardes of his gracious giftes And Paul trulie said much when he affirmed that god was in Christ recōciling the world to himselfe not imputing to them their offences which clause I know not why you haue omitted hath put in vs that word of recōciliation We are therfore embassadours for Christ c. For he said that it is proper to god to reconcile the world to forgiue sins or not to impute them that is but a ministery of reconciliation which he hath geuen vnto men she weth how this ministerie is executed namely by preaching reconciliation as the embassadours of God to desire men to be reconciled vnto God
then vntill you haue made a shew of trueth and then straight giue it ouer challenging a proper power properlie to remit sinnes euen the power that is proper to God and the same to exercise as properlie as God doth with deification of your Priestes persons and such other arrogant assumptions Where you saie that God doth not resigne his right to the waies and workes of anie diuine function giue ouer the wholl title that is due to him-selfe in the said diuine actes I adde that he doth neither resigne his right nor his practize or exercise there of he doth not giue ouer his wholl title or anie parte or portion thereof When you go about to demonstrate your proposition you saie that Christ resigned his roome but not his right A pretie collusion of words but a matter ful of her eticall meaning For Christ resigned neither his roome nor his right when he ascended into heauen but set himselfe downe in the throne of magnificence that he might fullfill all things with his glorious an gracious presence by which he continueth with his Church vnto the end of the world Neither hath he neede of anie substitute or vicegerent to exercise anie point of that office which is proper to the vniuersall head of the vniuersall Church neither can anie mortal creature exercise the office of the head of the whol Churh because it is a meere diuine power by euerlasting right as you confes proper to our sauiour Christ that from him as from the head life and all powers of life should flowe into his wholl Church and euerie true member thereof And therefore whatsoeuer from the beginning he hath exercised in his owne person he doth not now practize by anie other but still by himselfe and in his owne person But the office of teaching which in his humanity he exercised and before his incarnation was exercised by the Prophets and Priests he hath committed to his Apostles Euangelistes Prophets Pastours and Teachers vnto the end of the world but that one man should rule his whol Church either by doctrine or discipline whereunto it is not possible for him to haue an eye and ouerseeing Christ hath neuer appointed but as he hath appointed seuerall teachers so also hath he ordained seuerall gouernours And no more possible it is that one man should rule and gouerne al the Church then it is possible that one man should teach al the Church despersed as it is now and hath been of olde ouer al the face of the earth But that Peter or anie other man should rule the Church in Christes steade you saie it prooueth much that Christ is head of the Church according to his manhood That Christ who is God and man is head of his Church it is a Christian confession But that Christ is head of his Church according to his manhood I see not how it differeth from flat Nestorianisme or Arrianisme For wholl Christ is head of his Church according to that he was head thereof before his incarnation and flesh assumpted yet intended and he is head of his Church according to that he filleth all in all Ephes. 1. It is one thing to saie that Iesus Christ or the man Iesus Christ is head of his Church another thing to saie that Christ is head of his Church according to his manhood Beside I know not what humane head ship you ascribe vnto Christ that make him head in respect of such externall regiment as may be exercised by man and yet by no one man alone but by manie men at once in this dispersion of the Church all which acknowledge Christ to be their onelie head because they must gouerne the Church by his word onelie and by lawes framed agreeable vnto the same That the Protestantes bring foorth children to Caluin or Luther it is nothing but tailing without reason For the Protestantes are willing to departe with anie pretence of right or honout so that God maie haue his whol glory by such meanes as he hath appoin ted Therefore according to Saint Augustines allusion they beget children by preaching of the Gospell vnto Christ and not to them selues The function of Preaching you saie is Christes still If you meane that he is the author of the doctrine preached and so the onelie master and teacher of his Church it is true but this function the Protestantes claime not but to be ministers appointed to declare this doctrine in the world This function as a part of his humiliation hath he cleane giuen ouer since his ascension and appointed in his stead Apostles Euangelistes Prophets Pastours and teachers to exercise the same function to the edifying of his Church vntill the end of the world You charge vs to saie that the function of Preaching is meant by remitting of sinnes which we saie not For Preaching extendeth further then the remitting of sinnes But we saie that by preaching publiklie or declaring priuatelie as the case requireth the grace and mercie of God in pardoning all penitent and beleeuing sinners the minister of God doth remit sinnes in the name of Christ while the pardon pronounced by him is of as great force to assure the re pentaunt sinner of remission of his sinnes as if Christ him-selfe should declare it out of heauen wherein we speake neither foolishlie nor against the common sence of all the fathers as by some of their writinges alledged before I haue plainlie declared ALLEN And they that are most tender in outward words of Godshonour will yet seeme to occupie that his proper function with out all derogation to his right therein But in deede their preaching which is their remission of sinne is not the power of God to saluation but it is his permission for our great punishment The lawful doctrine of Christs Church is truely no lesse theproper work of Christ then is forgiuenes of sinnes yet it is with out controlling of Nouatians Heretiks exercised by mans ministerie in earth S. Augustine saith hereof thus Christus est qui docet Cathedram in coelo haber scholaipsius in terra est scholaipsius corpus ipsius est It is Christ which teacheth and he hath his pulpit in heauen and his schoole in earth and his schoole is his body the Church Christ doth not then resigne vp his office in preaching no more then he doth his authority of pardoning no man succeeding him in either of the roomes but occupieth both vnder him in his Church which is his inheritance for euer the which Churh holdeth by him as a schoole to teach trueth in as a court and iudgement seat to pardon or punish sinnes in Thus he FVLKE The proper function of Christ which is to be the onelie author of the true Doctrine that is taught in the Church none of vs will presume to occupie we leaue that blasphemie to the Pope and the popish Church but the Gospel which we preach is the power of God vnto saluation in the remission of our sins reuealed
profitable other whiles to be deceites but yet inuented for holie purposes now by avouching they could not stand with Gods iustice if they shoulde remitte anie part of the appointed paine for sinnes and else when that there was no paine for remitted sinnes at all whereupon the indulgences should not be needfull but vaine and friuolous with such other inconstant stammering as lightlie is common to them that seeke to vp hold falshood against their owne skill and consciences But his followers as well of the Protestants as Zuinglians and Caluinistes to make the waie of wickednes more easie and plaine haue boldlie denied all penance and temporall paine for sinne remitted whether it be by Christs or the Churches enioyning haue taken awaie Purgatorie haue bereued Priesthood of all power and the Church of all her treasure of Christes copious and abundant redemption Whereupon I cannot otherwise iudge but that doctrine which else can not be refelled but by the waste of so manie vndoubted articles should stande exceeding fast and be grounded moste surelie vpon all these foresaide truthes without the destruction whereof it can not be of anie force ouerturned FVLKE As no man would thinke any such matter if you had not put it in their heades so no wise men can thinke otherwise of Pardons then he did before you tooke in hande their defence sauing that all reasonable men may thinke them so much the worsse because you are able to defend them no better And if all the principles of popery as you saie be contained in the matter of pardons as in a summe or abridgment the children of God maie behold the prouidence of god more clearelie in setting Luther first against them at such time as he knewe no such matter neither had anie purpose but to disswade the moste grosse abuses and palpable impostures which were that time mantained about them alowing the pardons still as good and lawful But for the mantainers of this conclusion you say he and his haue taken awaie all penance and satisfaction for sinne c. Naie they haue established and restored the true vse of repentance and shewed that the death of Christ is the onelie satisfaction for sinnes the discipline of the Church from a batbarous antichristian tyrannie they haue reduced within the limmites of the scriptures and the practize of the primatiue and pureit age of the Church the chastising that God vseth for correction of his children they haue taught out of the scriptures how it is to be taken patientlie as an admonition for amendement not an amends for our misdoing which sauoreth as much of pride as their doctrine doth of humility The secrets of the next world not reueiled in the scriptures they leaue vntil the time of the general reuelation of al secrets and therfore they presume not to allow purgatorie paines for the clensing of those sinnes which the scripture teacheth to be purged by the bloode of Christ in whome all our sinnes are thorowlie punished to the full satisfaction of the iustice and wisedome of God They haue left to the saints al their merits which is nothing els but the grace of God sufficient for their saluation not placing the workes of saints in the place of Christes passion which is onelie of it selfe soueraigne and satisfactorie for all men The mysticall bodie of Christ and the holie cōmunion of saints they beleeue to receiue all vertue and power of life from Christ the head and euery member to exercise that office which by his grace is assigned vnto it therefore they haue done no iniurie to Christ his Church his saints sacraments or his holy Religion but their dutie in purging the doctrine ofChrist his Church his saints sacraments and Religion from error falsehood heresie and blasphemie You tell the reader that you doe not riot in wordes to ouerrunne your aduersarie but if he be wise he will remēber that a crafty orator doth sonest deceiue when he pretendeth moste plainenes What Luther thought and taught at the first of pardons his writings are extant in print to declare in which he confesseth that he did fight in the darke yet it pleased God by the importunitie of his aduersaries to sturre him vp to search the trueth out of the holie scriptures Neither hath Zuinglius or Caluine or anie of the Protestants taught otherwise of repentance satisfaction power of priesthood or the tresure of the Church then Luther did after God had reueiled the trueth vnto him and he openlie preached the same Seeing therefore the matter of pardons cannot stand but vpon the blasphemous heresies which the popish antichristian Church doth teach against the glorie of the onelie redemption of Iesus Christ our onelie and whole sauiour and reedemer it must needs be one of those pestilent poisons which Sathan after his loosing out of the bottomeles pit hath powred forth into the world the defacing of the glorie of Christ and the destruction of manie ignorant soules ALLEN Therefore least any man by making smaller accompt of so litle a braunch of the Churches faith then he should do fall further vnto the mistrusting of other many of knowen importance I thought it good to debate the question of Indulgences which be now commonly called the Popes Pardons though not onely he but also other Prelates of Christendome haue their seuerall right eche one according to the measure of the Churches graunt and his iurisdiction therein In which matter because most men of smaler trauail haue erred rather by misconstruing the case mistaking the state of the cause then for any lacke of sufficient proofe of the matter after it were wel vnderstanded I will studie first clearly to open the meaning of that whereon we stande and then to go through the whole question with as much light and breuitie as I can tempering my selfe as much as I maie from all such 〈◊〉 as the depth of so grounded a conclusion and the learned disputation of Schoolmen might driue me vnto Wherein I am content rather to followe the desire and contentation of the reader then to satisfie my owne appetite which I feele in my selfe to be somewhat more greedie of matter sometimes then the common people whome I studie moste to helpe can well beare and yet if they thinke it anie vantage to knowe trueth and the necessarie Doctrine of their faith they must learne to abide the orderlie methode and compasse of the cause and further I shall not charge them FVLKE You come to late after the vanitie treacherie and blasphemie of pardons hath beene so long set abroad and knowen to the world and bringing no better stuffe then you do to suppose that you shal be able to restore pardons into the auncient credit they had within these foure score yeares euen with the simplest papist in Europe You would make the matter more plausible by communicating the right of pardons to all prelates of christendome as wel as to the Pope whereas indeed your popish Church keeping no proportion aloweth none
he quare venerit in carne Christus inueniemus qui eum negant in carne venisse Let vs inquire wherefore Christ came in the flesh and we shall finde who they are which denie him to haue come in the flesh For if you giue heede to their tongues you shall heare manie heretikes confessing that Christ came in the flesh but the trueth conuinceth them wherefore came Christ in the flesh was he not God was it not saide of him In the beginning was the worde and the worde was with God and the worde was God did he not feede the Angells and doth not he him-selfe feede the Angells did he not so come that he departed 〈◊〉 fromthence did he not so ascend that he did not forsake vs Then wherefore came he in the flesh Because the hope of resurrection ought to haue bene shewed vnto vs. He was God and he came in the flesh for God could not die the flesh could therefore he came in the flesh that he might die for vs. And how died he for vs No man hath greater loue then this to giue his life for his friendes therefore loue brought him to the flesh Whosoeuer therefore hath not loue denieth Christ to haue come in the flesh It is manifest now by this discourse of Augustine vppon some particuler causes of Christ comming in the flesh that his cheife and principall offices cannot be excluded in the right interpretation of this text and therefore Master Charke hath rightlie inferred that whoesoeuer denieth the offices of Christ or any parte of them is no lesse confounded by this scripture then they that denie his person or anie parte or essentiall propertie thereof and that by the consent of the auncient fathers exposition without the which also the text is euident of it selfe For the verie names of Iesus and Christ doe comprehende his offices which whoesoeuer denieth although in wordes he confesse his person and names doth make but an Idoll of Iesus Christe whoesoeuer therefore confesseth not Christ to be a Sauiour Prophet King and Priest is not of God but of Antichrist he whosoeuer confesseth not that he is a wholl and onelie Sauiour Prophet King and Priest is of the same spirite of Antichrist that denieth Iesus Christ being come in the flesh or as the vulgare translation hath that dissolueth Iesus For whoesoeuer setteth vp anie other Sauiour Prophet King or Priest in that sense that these offices pertaine vnto Iesus Christ dissolueth Iesus denieth Iesus Christ to haue come in the flesh whoe came to be our onelie Master-teacher according to the manifest texts of scripture which hath taught vs all thinges likewise our onelie spiritual King eternall and high priest whose office both kinglie and priestlie being confirmed to him by an othe passeth not from him vnto anie other in succession but remaineth alwaies the onelie mightie Prince King of Kinges and Lord of Lordes Whoesoeuer therefore derogateth from Christ anie parte of these dignities offices denieth Iesus Christ comming in the flesh and so doe the popish Catholikes or papistes by their doctrine of traditions Popes authoritie sacrifice of the Masse and such like Nay saith the answerer Martine Luther interpreteth this place to be vnderstoode of M. Charke and his fellowes saying That spirit is not of God but of Antichrist which dissolueth Christes flesh in the sacrament It cannot be denied but Martin Luther was in this case to rash and presumptuous in condemning other men for holding this contrarie to that wherein he erred him-selfe But this answerer is too impudent to faigne sayings wordes of his yea and to applie that which he saied further then Luther him selfe doth For first these wordes that are alleadged as Luthers saying are none of his but forged by the answerer Secondlie that which Luther saieth founding to such a matter can not be drawne against M. Charke and his fellowes who maintaine no such absurditie as Luther in that place oppugneth The very wordes of Luther in his booke intituled Defen verb Caenae Accipite c. are these Quare in superioribus dixi hunc spiritum non esse bonum neque per istos fanaticos homines quicquam boni machinari quanquam existimem hos concionatores contra quos haec scribuntur nondum mali quicquam in animo habere Sed bone Deus non sunt sui ipsorum compotes continentes à 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 captiui tenentur Quare eis nimium sidendum non ect Nam spiritus qui Christi carnem dissoluit non est à Deo inquit Ioannes idqque probam spirituum vult esse Hic spiritus verè dissoluit carnem Christi cùm cam inutilem pereuntem prorsus communem carnem affirmat qualis est bouis aut vituli Wherefore I saide before that this spirite is not good neither goeth about any good thing by these fantasticall men the rebellious boures although I suppose these preachers against whome these thinges are now written as yet to haue none euil thinge in their minde But good God they haue no power nor holde of them selues they are blinded and holden captiue by a spirite wherefore they must not be trusted too much For that spirite which dissolueth the flesh of Christ is not of God saith Saint Iohn and that he will haue to be the triall of spirites This spirite in deede dissolueth the flesh of Christ when it affirmeth that it is vnprofitable perishing and altogether common flesh such as is the flesh of an Oxe or a calfe This is Luthers saying now it is certein that M Charke and his fellowes doe neithet thinke nor speake so vnreuerentlie of the flesh of Christ animated with his spirite which they acknowledge to be verie true meate wherewith we are fed vnto eternall life They had some smacke of Nestorianisme therefore against whome Luther vttereth these wordes from which M. Charke and his fellowes God be thanked are free But now commeth our answerer after he hath forged a place of Luther and hammered it out against Master Charke to maruaile that these men can finde so many absurdities vpon one sentence of scripture and first he would aske whether Master Charke thinketh that the Papistes doe exclude Christ when they allowe Prophets to teach vnder him Kinges to raigne vnder him Priests to sanctifie vnder him or no. As though there were no waie for Papists to be guiltie of Antichristianisme except they did exclude Christ altogether whereas it hath bene prooued that whosoeuer doth not acknowledge the wholl and euerie part of his offices is of Antichrist As for Prophets Kinges and Priests to teach reigne and sanctifie vnder Christ is not the matter in question but to teach reigne sanctify beside Christ to claime like authotitie in teaching gouerning sanctifying with him as to be fellow Prophets fellow Kings fellow priestes with him to teach that Christ taught not to make articles of faith to dispense against Gods commaundements to make lawes to binde the
heretikes did holde it But he rather doth offer manifest wrong to Doctor Fulke whovseth not to reason so looselie But rather concludeth that praier for the dead is an error because it was first inuented and practized by an heretike For all trueth hath an higher and more auncient spring then anie heretike or heresie But for so much as he hath answered this wholl obiection sufficientlie in his confutation of Popish quarrells I will send the reader thither where he shall finde that which maie satisfie him in this matter The last kinde of triall whereof he will speake at this time is to consider the manner of olde heretikes and to compare the same with ours And here he would haue the two former conditions obserued To wit that we consider such qualities onelie as were accounted hereticall in them and to examine them truelie in our selues The maners of heretikes is no sure way of trial for heretikes come often times in sheepes clothing pretending greater holinesse in conuersation then true Catholikes do But let vs see how he will prooue vs heretikes by this kinde oftriall For example saith he Saint Augustine doth note it as an heretcall propertie in the Donatistes to hate the sea of Rome and to call it the chaire of pesttlence Doth this agree to the Protestants or to vs as also defaming of the said sea for the euill pretended life of some particular men But here he breaketh his owne conditions For Petilian did not hate the sea of Rome as the sea of Antichrist For the Donatistes had their mock-Bishop at Rome also But he railed vpon all the chaires or sees of all Catholike Bishops and on the Bishops them selues that were not of his schisme and heresie and on the Apostolike chaire of Ierusalem as wel as on that of Rome Againe the Donatistes called the chaire of Rome the chaire of pestilence when it was the chaire of a Catholike Bishop we call it the chaire of pestilence now that it is the seat of the beast and great whore of Babilon Antichrist As Esay calleth Ierusalem an harlot which yet sometime had bene a faithful citie Wherefore the example of the Donatistes maketh nothing against vs. Another hereticall tricke Augustine noteth in them to persuade the people that the visibie Church had erred oppressed the true Church banishing her from the sight of the world Doe not our aduersaries saith the answerer saie the verie same No sir we haue nothing to doe with the Donatistes whome the Papists doe resemble more then we For in the place quoted there is no talke of the visible Church as you note in your example But this is the matter The Donastites affirmed that the Church was vtterlie lost in all other partes of the worlde and remained onely in Africa and in the part of Donatus So the Papists affirme that the Church was lost in all other partes of the world and remained onelie in Europe and in the part of the pope But we holde that the Catholike Church of Christ is dispersed ouer all the wholl world where the name of Christ is called vpon as Saint Augustine in the same place sheweth out of the scripture that it must be euen among them that either know not or els acknowledge not the Bishop of Romes authoritie That he chargeth vs for condemning all the Church for the faultes of some as the Donatists did we do not But rather the answerer faulteth herein with the Donatistes who vpon shamefull slaunders inuented to deface the godlie life of Luther Caluine Beza and such like laboureth to bring the trueth of their Doctrine in discredite as the Donatistes did by charging the Bishop of Carthage and others with treason against Christ in deliuering the bookes of his Gospell to the gentiles to be burned But yet moreouer he noteth against the same heretikes saith he for hating and condemning the life of Monkes as also for drawing nunnes out of their cloistures and ioyning them-selues with the same in pretended wedlock To reprooue the life of them that were innocent was a point of hereticall malice but to hate and condemne the life of detestable hypocrites and abhominable liuers as the moste of the Popish monkes and nunnes were and are is an argument of Godlie zeale an hypocrite and an holie man an heretike a Catholike maie doe the same actions oftentimes which differ not in the kinde of action but in the end purpose cause and manner of doeing But where findeth our answerer the Donatistes noted as he saith for hating and condemning the life of Monkes drawing Nunnes out of cloistures and ioyning them with themselues in pretended wedlock His quotation sendeth vs to the second booke against the epistle of Parmenian cap. 9. and Ep. 169. ad Eusebium But in neither of both places is this noted in them for they hated not the life of Monkes and Nunnes which had such of their owne as in the former place Saint Augustines words are Annon cum mach is particulam suam ponunt qui greges ebrios sanctimonialium suarum cum gregibus ebri is circumcellionum die noctuque permixtos vagari turpiter sinunt Do they not put their parte with adulterers which suffer the dronken flockes of their owne nunnes with the dronken flockes of the circumcellions daie and night mingled together to wander about filthelie This is all that he writeth there of monkes or nunnes which whether it do more neerelie touch the life of Popish nunnes lymiting friers then the conuersation of Protestants let the indifferent reader iudge In the epistle to Eusebius he complaineth of one 〈◊〉 which sometime had beene a Subdeacon of the Church of Sanianum who when he was forbidden to haue such accesse vnto the nunnes as was against the discipline and despised orderlie and wholsome precepts he was remooued from the cleargie and being him-selfe stirred vp against the discipline of God he remoued him selfe vnto them and was rebaptized Also two nunnes with their tenants out of the ground of the Catholike Christians whether the same man remooued or whether they followed him them selues yet were they rebaptized and were with the flockes of Circumcellions among the wandring flockes of women which therefore would haue no husbands lest they should haue discipline The proud fellow boasteth him-selfe in the madde banquets of detestable drunkennesse reioycing that a moste broad license of naughtie conuersation is opened vnto him from whence in the Catholike Church he was prohibited Here is neither the hatred and condemning of Monkes liues nor drawing of nunnes out of cloistures nor ioyning them in pretended wedlock noted in the Donatists But two light nunnes by a quondam clearke either conuaied by their consent or following him out of the ground of Christian Catholikes into the sect and groundes occupied by the Donatistes c. In the same epistle also he speaketh of the daughter of a certaine tenant of the Church that was caried awaie by the Donatists against her parents
some fault the other for sawe the seedes of superstition and Idolatrie then in sowing better then he yet are not Saint Paul Barnabas Ierome hereby noted for heretikes But for railing saie you and foule scurrilitie such as Protestants vse ordinarilie against vs and among them selues when they dissent I dare auow to be proper to them and their ancetora onelie All this while you tell vs not what you call railing and foule scurrilitie except you meane that the verie same odious termes which are lawfull or tollerable in you be railing and foule scurrilitie in vs onelie because you accompt vs heretikes and then we must accompt you to be trifling sophisters which to conuince vs of railing can bring none other arguments but that which is the wholl matter in contro uersie betweene vs namelie whether we or you be the heretikes and yet you dare auow railing foule scurrility such as Protestantes vse against you not onelie to agree to vs but also to be proper to vs our ancetors by whom you vn derstand none but heretiks Othe modesty of Papistes among whome no one person can be found that euer vsed railing or scurrilitie if this be true that you dare auow of the propertie of heretikes and of all them whome you take for such But it is good to examine your reason by which you would prooue railing to be proper vnto gospellers as you terme them and thereby easilie take a scantling of the diuersitie of their spirits from Popish Catholikes First the mouth speaketh according to the aboundance of the heart which is trew in such sense as it is spoken of by our Sauiour Christ for wickednesse is first bred in the heart before it breake forth of the mouth but it followeth not thereof that you conclude when you saie I meane a man maie be knowne by his speach for then the wickednes of euerie hypocrite might appeare by his talke which is vntrue But Saint Peter said vnto Simon Magus vpon his onelie speech saie you I see thee to be in the verie gall of bitternes c. yet was it no railing speech which Simon Magus vttered nor dissembled speech for he plainlie professed that he was desirous to buie the gift of the holie ghost and last of al it was not onelie speach for the text saith he offered mony for his march andise for otherwise his onelie words as they are reported by Saint Luke were not sufficient to discouer so great wickednes of his heart giue vnto me also this power that vpon whomsoeuer I laie my handes he maie receiue the holie ghost it might haue bene thought vpon this onelie speech that Simon latelie baptized was desirous to haue beene a Minister of the dispensation of the holie ghost to the benefit of gods Church by the graunt of the Apostles if he had not profered monie also by which his couetousnes and other wicked blasphemous opinions of the holie ghost were plainlie discouered You shew your selfe therefore to be a man mightie in the scriptures that can bring no better example or proofe that one by his onelie speech sometime maie be sufficientlie conuicted of the wickednes of his hart then this of Peter and Simon Magus where onelie speech was not vsed and the speech that was vsed was not of it selfe able to discouer the heart of him that spake In matters of greater controuersie betwixt vs perhaps you are better exercised or els we are like to finde feeble arguments on your behalfe To proceede you saie the scripture is plaine in this point what point that a man maie be knowne alwaies by his speech for that he maie sometime thereby be abundantlie conuinced we doubt not well what saith the scripture he that hath not the spirit of Christ appertaineth not to Christ. This is most true of the spirit of adoption which also sheweth it selfe in the fruites of mortification and renouation But hereof we maie not conclude thatall thinges in them that haue the spirit of Christ. are perfect so that they neuer offended no not in wordes or that in whomesoeuer appeereth anie thing which proceedeth not from the spirite of Christ as in the best there do manie things they are therefore to be iudged void of the spirit of Christ. And therefore we maie see what sound diuinitie you teach and how well you vnderstand the scriptures vpon which you conclude as followeth Now then if we consider the quiet calme and sober spirit of Christ and of all godlie Christians from the beginning and the furious reprochfull and vnclean spirit of Sathan and all heretikes from time to time and do compare them with the writings of both partes at this daie we maie easilie take ascantling of the diuersitie of their spirites Verilie it shall be found as hard a matter as it was before you made this demonstration for notwithstanding we acknowledge the quiet calme and sober spirit of Christ and Christians yet you confesse and the scripture is plentifull to prooue that Christ and his Apostles against the wicked and obstinate enemies of the trueth vsed most hott vehement and sharpe speeches and they which haue trueth on their side maie vse the like in like causes by their examples So that by vehemencie of speech the cause can not so easilie be discerned neither is your scantling right to be taken thereby Those kinde of speaches for the moste parte are to be accompted furious reprochfull and vncleane which are vttered of malice against the trueth when the same being spoken of zeale against falsehood maie wel stand with the quiet calme and sober spirit of Christ. Yet are there also certaine vncleane reprochfull and scurrilous speaches which serue not so much to describe falsehood and sinne to the detestation thereof as they seeme of them-selues to bewraie the hatred and intemperate heate of them that vse them against the persons of other and these in no case are commendable but to be reprooued whether they be found in Papistes or Protestantes as neither of both perhapsmaie be cleerelie excused of this falt By this it may be gathered what railing is properlie not euery hot worde as you saie but such as are vsed in an euill cause against trueth iustice of malice commonlie sometime of immoderate zeale such as be offensiue in what cause soeuer or of what zeale soeuer they be vsed and such railing I dare auouch you shall not be able to prooue that it is proper to Protestantes no nor to heretikes For there be heretikes which not with railinges and reprochfull speeches make diuisions in the Church beside the Doctrine of Christ but with faire smooth flatering talke deceiue the harts of the simple therfore railing is not a proper and perpetuall note of heretikes Now as concerning your examples first you begin with Master Charke asking what more venemous wordes can be imagined then these of scorpions poysoned spiders and the like vsed by Master Charke against reuerend men Here except you can first
caepta 〈◊〉 quidam enim altiùs repetentes à beato Helia Iohanne sumpsere principium quorum Helias plus nobis videtur fuisse quà m Monachus Iohannes antè Prophetare caepisse quà m natus est alij autem in quam opinionem vulgus omne consentit asserunt Antonium huius propositi fuisse caput quod ex parte verum est It hath beene often douted among many by which of Monkes especiallie the wildernes began to be inhabited for some fetching the matter somewhat high haue taken the beginning of blesseá Elias and Ihon of which two Elias seemeth to vs to haue beene more then a Monke and Iohn to haue prophecied before he was borne but other into which opinion all the common sorte consenteth affirme that Antonie was the heade or cheefe of this purpose which is partlie true By these wordes it is euident that Saint Ierome counteth Helias and Ihon Baptist to be of a higher calling then that they could be called Monkes or patterns of Monasticall life ascribing the beginning of them rather to Paul and Antonie then to Helias and Iohn Baptist although they both for some time did lead an austere life in the wildernes the same doth your next author Cassianus Collat 18. Cap. 6. neither doth he once call Iohn Baptist a Monke or patterne of monasticall life but onelie sheweth that the Anachorites desiring to encounter openlie with the deuill feared not to pearse into the vast solitarie places of the wildernes ad imitationem scilicet Iohannis Baptistae to the imitation of Iohn Baptist who ledd his life in the wilderens so doe not your Popifh Monkes but lie in their warme nests in the cloysters What Sozomenus saith I haue shewed a little before Isodorus agreeth with Saint Ierome and Cassianus that the Anachorites which liue alone doe follow Elias and Iohn Baptist where as the Coenobites which liue in companies in that point more like your Monks do follow the Apostles As for Theoph. in c. 1. Lu. which you note next hath nothing sounding towards the name of monkor monastical life except you meane where he saith that Iohn liued in the wildernes as Elias did The last author you quote Nicephorus Hist. li. 8. c. 39. hath nothing more then the verie words of Sozomene that some men said that Elias was the beginner of that solitarie life of Christians some that Iohn Baptist. And among all your authors there is not one that saieth Iohn Baptist was a Monke of the newe Testament or a patern of such monasticall life as you defend that there should be so great consent there of that matter where of you bragge so much But names and quotations of Doctors are sufficient either for you that by all likeliehood neuer turned the bookes your selfe or for your sottish schollers that accept all your wordes without examination and triall After this followeth a vaine strife of words cōcerning the signification of this terme sect which of M. Charke is taken for a schisme as it is manifest by the example he bringeth of the 1. Cor. 1. The Censurer sometime taketh it in good part and sometime in euill sometime he maketh it equall with the terme of heresie sometime more particulare which contention seeing it is vnprofitable for the readers I do willinglie omit referring them that list to vnderstand ofit further to the comparison ofboth their writings where they shall finde that Master Charke in effect preuenteth all his cauillations by saying that the names of heresie and sect areoften times confounded which to prooue the Censurer busieth him-selfe in vaine It is somewhat materiall that he saith the Corinthians erred in a point of faith esteeming the vertue or power of Baptisme not to depend onelie of Christ but of the dignitie of the Baptizer And surelie there muste be some opinion touching faith where there is a schisme in the Church though there be not a dissent in the necessarie articles of faith but a schisme or sect may be where neither the generall doctrine nor the societie of the Church is forsaken as inthe example 1. Cor. 1. which is contrarie to the descriptionof the censure Sectaries are such as cut themselues of in opinion of religion from the general body of the Catholike Church for so did not the Corinth 1. Cor. 1. howsoeeur they had an opinion of some excellencie in the minister of Baptisme nor the 1. Cor. 11. 18. where Saint Paul likewise chargeth them with schismes when they came together to celebrate the communion which text being likewise quoted by M. Chark is cleane omittedby the defender But now you would cleare your sectes of Monkes and Fryers from the example of the Corinthian schismatikes by a fond similitude supposing our ministers should saie in a contrarie sense of libertie I will luie vnmaried after the order of my Lord of Canterburie I will bem aried after the platforme of my Lord of London I will haue two wiues together after the fashion of Master Archdeacon of Salisburie I will haue a wife and a wench after the custome of some other Archdeacon and preahcer Concerning your example if any Archdeacons be of such fashion as you describe them I would they had such punishment as to such fashions belongeth and if you be hable lawfullie to conuince them thereof I doubt not but they shal As for the other 2. of being maried vnmaried be matters in deede of Christian libertie that euerie minister may choose that which he findeth to be most expedient for him but if any minister should glorie of his continent life out of mariage by hauing my Lorde of Canterhurie for his patterne or of his chaste life in mariage by following my Lorde of Londons platforme he might iustlie be noted for a schismatike as Saint Paull doth the Corinthians when they saide I am of Paul I of Apollo I of Cephas and I of Christ. For the platforme order patterne or example of men in these cases must not be their warrant but the worde of God which text is plaine that in profession of Religion we may not be called by the names of men no nor by the name of Christ or Iesus therebie to make a diuision or seperation of our selues in excellencie from other to whome Iesus Christ is common as well as to our selues For euerie one of your sects termed of Benedict Augustine Frauncis Dominike Iesus c. although in the generall doctrine of Poperie they al agree yet haue they their seuerall opinions each one of the excellencie of thier orders and patrons which maketh a schisme and often times hath broken forth into great brawling and open contention It is too manifest that the Monkes commonlie hated the Fryars the Dominicans and Franciscans were at deadlie feede the not obseruants enuied the obseruants and they despised the children of their owne father Frauncis as bastardes in comparison of them selues and now the Iesuites are hated and inuicd of all other sects of Monkes and especiallie of Fryars whome they bring
into great contempt wheresoeuer they plant them-selues in so much that the Fryers in some places haue slirred vp sedition against them caused them to be expelled It remaineth therefore that the Iesuites are a sect or schisme euen in Popery as they are a detestable kinde of heretikes against the Catholike faith which is common to al obstinate Papists and it is true likewise which Master Charksayeth that the Pharises were a notorious sect ver did they not cut of themselues from the religiō of the Church nay they bare the greatest sway in the Church albeit some of thē held great heresies yet they professed to imbraceal the doctrine of the Church and so did the Saduces in so much that some of them climed vp euen to the high priests office yet were they a detestable sect but of a bastarde Church as the Iesuites are of the Popish Church of Rome His definition also if you did not cauill and trifle about words is true that a sect is a companie of men that differ from the rest of their religion in matter or forme of then profession Whether you deriue the Etimologie à secando of cutting or à sequendo of following although I thinke Master Charke meaneth it of cutting the absurdities you gather are wilfull cauillations For Bishopes ministers lawyers iudges c. though they differ in auctoritie apparell state and forme of life yet they differ not in forme of profession of religion from the rest of our religion They be diuerse offices and lawful callings in one profession of religion but so are not Iesuites and other orders of Monkes and Fryers for they albeit they hold one religion with the rest yet doe differ in the sorme and profession of that religion beeing no necessarie offices or callinges instituted by God but seuerall professions begonne by men whose imitation soeuer they pretend Therefore no wise man but such a quarreling Censurer woulde haue made the cases of Bishopes iudges lawyers like in this point with Dominicans Franciscans Iesuites Like wisedome and grauitie you shew in flouting of Master Charkes definition with your ridiculous comparisons where he sayeth a sect is a companie of men For when you haue sported your selfe vntil you haue wearied your selfe and your reader in the end you confesse that you are not ignorant that in common speach this word sect may improperly signifie the mē also which professe the same but not in a definition where the proper nature of each word is declared Whether it be properlie or improperlie so taken because it is a brable of wordes I will not contend but if you exclude all improper or figuratiue speaches whose sense is commonlie knowne as this of sect from definitions you will driue them into a straight roome For we may not saie Logicke is a science or arte bene disserendi which in common speach signifieth to dispute well because disserere in latine doth properlie signifie to sow or set in diuerse places and seeing the worde sect in common speach may signifie the men that professe such a seperation why may there not a definition be giuen of the terme according to that signification Now whether the Iesuites be a sect according to Master Charkes definition you will examine after you haue tolde vs that his conclusion is like that he made in the Tower against Campian which was to dispatch him at Tyburne nothing following of the premises which fond comparison I passe ouer seeing all men knowe that conclusion was not of Master Charkes making by which Campian was hanged at Tyburne and all men may see what was Master Charkes disputation in the Tower and how it was answered by Campian But to the matter in hand you aske what is in M. Charkes illation that can make the lesuites a sect if it were all graunted to be true the Iesuites receiue a peculiar vow to preach as the Apostles did euerie where of free cost First to dedicate a mans life by vow to Gods seruice you saie it is alowed in scripture Numbers 6. Ps. 131. yea that is euery mans dutie but Master Charkes illation is of a peculiar vow which by no scripture is allowed but of such things onelie as God accepteth to his seruice and are in our owne power to performe as the vow of a Nazarite the vow of sacrifices of thankesgiuing c. Other be either superstitious or vnlawfull vowes Secondlie to preach euerie where and at free cost you thinke he should be ashamed to saie that it maketh a sect seeing Christ commaunded his Apostles to preach euerie where freelie and Saint Paul glorieth that he had taught the Gospell of free cost Yes Syr this maketh a sect for them to vow to exercise the office of Apostles which are not called by Christ to be Apostles the vow is vnlawfull and the votaries are sectaries not of the Apostles but of that pseudo Apostle Laiolas that was of his own ordination Againe where you saie that the Apostles were commaunded to preach the Gospell in all places freelie it is false for that precept Mat. 10. giue freelie as you haue receiued freelie either is ment of the graces of healing or if you ioyne it with the other preceptes that follow of not possessing golde nor siluer nor monie garments c. other prouision for the iournie it is as they are particular for that viage and not generall for all time of their Apostleshippe For otherwise the Apostles should haue greeuouslie offended in not preaching in all places of free cost and Saint Paull in taking of double wages of somme Churches that in some other he might preach freelie Therefore as vpon good consideration in some place the Apostles did preach of free cost and so may men at this daie yet for any man to vow that in al places and at al times he wil preach at free cost the vow is vnlawfull because it is contrarie to the ordinance of God which hath ordained and appointed that they which preach the Gospell should liue of the Gospell 1. Cor. 9. 14. And it cannot but be to the iniurie such as will procure contempte and neglect vnto them that preach the Gospell and liue according to the ordinance of the Gospell in taking the stipende for them appointed that there should be a sect or company of men which should professe alwaies and in all places to preach of free cost You proceede and aske what then maketh them sectaries to whippe and torment them-selues if it were true seeing Saint Paull chastened his owne bodie and caried the bonds of Christ in his flesh and the scriptures talke much of mortifying our members of crucifying our flesh and the like and neuer a word of pampering the same As though there could be no chastening of the body bearing of Christs markes mortifying the members or crucifying the flesh except men whippe and torment them-selues or that whosoeuer doth not whippe him-selfe doth pamper his flesh Saint Paull did chastise his bodie with
many women together vnder the cloake of mariage by his authority or what carnall liberty of mariage Luther graunteh otherwise then the Apostle alloweth in the case of the infidels departure Albert he put the case of the second third fourth tenth or more beinginfidelis or false Christians which is altogether vnlikely and almoste vnpossible to come to passe For he that is once ridde of an vnfaithfull match being himselfe a good Christian will not 〈◊〉 take a wife but of Christian Religion and if he be deceuid twise it were mōstrous that he should be deceiued in his third choise But if he should wilfullie and wittinglie match with so manie knowne heathen women it would breed another case then Luther speaketh of and he were worthie to be cut of from the congregation of Christians as one that sheweth him-selfe to be a dissembling hypocrite rather then a faithful Christian. The fift doctrine that you reported of Luther is that if the wife will not come les the maide come Which M. Chark hath answered sufficientlie to be spoken of a third cause of diuorce when the woman shall obstinatelle refuse hir husbandes companie But this you saie cannot be excused either by M. Hanmers shameles denial or by M. Charks impertinent interpretation For you saie that this was practised in Germanie to all kind of lasciuiousnes yea among the Ministers them selues as Sebastian Flaske sometime a Lutheran Preacher doth testifie Here is vpon the testimonie of a lewd baudie knaues confession of his owne filthines for which it is like that he was banished frō the Church and so becam a papist a slaunder raised vpon the wholl ministery yea vpon the wholl nation of Germanes that professe Luthers Doctrine that by authoritie of Luthers writting they vse to call their maides to bed when their wiues will not come c. But to iustifie Master Charkes interpretation and to let the reader see the intolerable impudencie of this wretched defender I will set downe as I haue done in the rest Luthers wordes concerning the matter in question more at large by which it may appeare that Master Hanmer might iustlie denie the wordes to be Luthers where they were drawne so farre from his meaning After he hath shewed three causes of diuorce in his iudgement the first being impotencie the second adulterie the third desertion or forsaking he speaketh ofit in these words Tertia ratio est vbi alter alteri sese subduxerit vt debitam beneuolentiam persoluere nolit au habitare cum 〈◊〉 Reperiuntur enim interdum adeò pertinaces vxores quae etiamsidecies in libidinem prolaberetur maritus pro sua duritia non curarent Hic 〈◊〉 est vt maritus dicat Si tunolueris alia voler si domina nolit adueniat ancilla it a tamen vt antea iterum tertiò vxorem admoneat maritus coram aliis eius esiam pertinaciam detegat vt publicè ante conspectum Ecclesiae duritia eius agnoscatur reprehendasur Situm renuat repudiae eam in vicem Vasthi Esther surroga Assueriregis exemplo Porro hîc tu Diui Pauli 1. Cor. 7. imitaris verbis maritus proprij corporis potestatem non habet sed vxor Et vxer sui corporis ius non habet sed maritus Ne fraudetis vos mutuò niss vterque consenserit Ecce 〈◊〉 hîc fraudem 〈◊〉 Apostolus Nam in desponsione alter alteri corpus 〈◊〉 tradit ad matrimonij obsequium vbi ergo alter debitum obsequium negat tum alteri corpus 〈◊〉 deditum spoliat vi aufert quod propriè coniugij repugnat iuri immo coniugium dissipat Igitur hanc vxorem cohihere magistratus est atque interimere Hoc si 〈◊〉 magistratus imaginandum est marito suam 〈◊〉 vxorem à Latronibus raptam interfectam esse confiderandumque vt aliam ducat Ferendum est aliquando vt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tollatur spolieturque corpus tollerandum non est si vxor sese marito ipsademat praedetur aut ab aliis adimatur The third way is when the one withdraweth himselfe from the other so that he will not pay the due beneuolence or refuseth to dwel with the other For there are found women sometimes so obstinat that although their husbands should ten times fall into filthie lust such is their hardnes that they would not care Here now it is good time for the husband to saie if thou 〈◊〉 not another will if the mistres will not let the maide come but yet so that the husband before do admonish his wife the second and third time and discouer her 〈◊〉 also before other men that openlie and before the sight of the Church her hardnes may be knowne reprehended If then she refuse be thou deuorced from hir and in steed of Vasthi take Ester by the example of King Asuerus and in this case thou maiest leane vnto the wordes of Saim Paule 1. Cor. 7. the husband hath not the power of his owne bodie but his wife and the wife hath none authoritie of hir owne bodie but hir husband Doe not defraud one another except it be by consent of both Beholde the Apostle here forbiddeth fraud one both partes For in their betrothing they deliuer their bodies one to the other to the seruice of matrimonie Therefore where the one denieth the due seruice then he robbeth taketh away by force his body which he hath giuen to another which is properly repugnant to the right of mariage yea and dissolueth the mariage Therefore it is the Magistrates dutie to bridle his wife yea and to put hir to death This if the magistrat omit the husband must imagine that his wife is stollen awaie and slaine by theeues and consider how to marie another Is it to be borne at any time that a man should be spoiled and robbed of his owne bodie and is it to be tollerated if the wife doe take awaie and steale hir selfe from hir husband or be taken awaie by other Now reader it is thy part to iudge whether Master Charke haue made an im pertinent interpretation of Luthers wordes and whether any practize of such lascuiuiousnes as was touched can be defended by this doctrine of Luther Last of all whether there be anie honestie in the defender that faseth out the matter still as though Luther spake not of a cause of diuorce but of licentious lecherie to be committed with the maid so often as her mistres should chaunce to refuse her husbandes companie vppon anie occasion yea he rubbeth his forehead hardlie and saith to Master Charke when you are not ashamed to defend the doctrine ye are more bolde then the Lutheranes them-selues who for verie shame do suppresse the Germaine booke wherein it was written as Cromerus a Germane testifieth If the Lutheranes had beene so ashamed of the doctrine as you saie they were whie suffer they the latine booke to be so often printed As for suppressing of the Germane booke for verie shame
witnesses concerning the rumor of Martine Luthers departure out of this life But Hosius was a Bishoppe and a Cardinall forsooth as though a malitious Papist when he hath a white rochet put on his backe or a redde hat clapt on his head were sopriuileged by his titles that he must needes be credited though he lie neuer so impudentlie Touching the dissention of Luther with others that professed the Gospell Master Charke doth graunt that in some points he disagreed from them and yet he saith there was a singular care among them of the vnitie in the Gospell But this our defender taketh in so euill part that he calleth it in tollerable impudencie speciallie that for profe thereof Master Charke citeth the acte of concorde agreed vpon at Marpuge Anno. 1529. vpon the reporte of Brentius which since hath shewed him selfe an obistinate heretike and author of the opinion of the vbiquitie of Christes bodie who reporteth that the Zuinglians were vanquished and yet he giueth them this testimonie that they desired with teares to be called bretheren which Luther refused But what the agreement was the booke of Acts printed both in Latine and Dutch doth testifie vnto the worlde The 15. Chapter of which conuention con cerning the matter in controuersie was this Credimus profitemur omnes de caena domini nostri Iesu Christi Vsum illius sub vtraque specie iuxea Christi institutionem obseruandans dum esse Quodque missanon sit vllum eiusmodi opus quo alto alteri qutsquam siue mortuo siue viuo gratiā consequi possit Quod item sacramentum altaris sit sacramentum veri corporis sanguinis Iesu Christi Et quòd esus spiritualis eius 〈◊〉 corporis sanguinis sit vnicuique Christiano homini inprimis necessarius Adhaec quòd vsus huius sacramensi perinde atque verbum ipsum à Deo opt max. sit institutus atque ordinatus ad excitandas ad fidem infirmas hominum conscientias per spiritum sanctum Quanquam autem inter nos hactenus non planè potuit conuenire num verum corpus 〈◊〉 sanguis Christi pani ac vino corporaliter insit debebit nihilominus tamen vtraque pars altera erga alteram declarare Christi anam charitatem quatenus idomnino cuiusque conscientia ferre potest Et vtraque pars deum opt max. diligenter precabiturrot is nobis per spiritum suum verum eius rei intellectum constabilire dignetur Amen Martinus Lutherus Ioann Brentius Iustus Ionas Ioan Oecolampadius Philippus Mclancthon Huldricus Zuinglius And. Ostander Martinus Bucerus Stephan Agricola Gaspar Hedio We all beeleeue and profes concerning the supper of our Lord Iesus Christ that the vse thereof in both kinds according to the institution of Christ is to be obserued And that the masse is not any such work whereby any one man may obtaine grace for another whether he be dead or a liue Also that the sacrament of the altar is the sacrament of the true body blood ofIesus Christ. And that the spirituall eating of the same his body blood is very necessary for euery Christian man Moreouer that the vse of this sacrament euē as the word it selfe is instituted ordeined of almighty God to stir vp vnto faith the weake consciences of men by his holie spirite And although it could not hetherto be altogether agreed amongst vs whether the true bodie and true blood of Christ be in the bread and wine corporallie yet neuer 〈◊〉 both parties ought to declare Christian charitie one towards the other so farre as euerie mans conscience can beare And both partes shall diligentlie pray vnto almightie God that he by his spirite may vouchsafe to establish vnto vs the true vnderstanding of that matter Amen Martine Luther c. The subscriptionof their names appeareth before You heare how farre forth they agreed and to a full 〈◊〉 indeed the Lutherans could neuer be brought nor Luther himselfe who in this point was out of measure hard intractable which seeing it is not denied by Master Charke or any of vs it is altogether needles that our defender spendeth two leaues and more in citing testimonies of his dissent from the rest that professe the Gospell which he calleth Zuinglians and Caluinists And to make the matter more large he 〈◊〉 the writings of Brentius Stankatus Ochinus men fallen from the truth into open errors condemned of all pattes against the professors of the truth But what care the godlie had to maintaine the vnitie of the Gospell may appeere by the harmonic of confessions of so manie diuerse Churches in the somme of Christian Religion and doctrine of the most necessarie points of faith vnto eternall saluation thoroughlie agreeing within them selues and against the heresies of the Papists and all other sectaries both olde and new That the Lutherans notwitstanding continue still their vncharitable iudgement against the other it is in deede to be lamented but yet noe cause for Papists to reioyce whoe whether it be by vs or them in al other points of their heresies are beaten downe and brought to confusion And still that remaineth true that Master Charke saide of Oecolampadius Bucer others although in some pointes they disagreed from Luther and other of his side yet was there among them a singular care of vnitie in the Gospell The entercourse of louing letters that you so earnestly require may be seene among Caluins epistles where there are louing letters betweene Caluine Melancthon Vitus Theodorus and other And now we are come to the odious inuectiues against the liues of Caluine and Beza taken out of a vile libell written by Ierome Bolsec an vnlearned vngodlie and vnshamefast knaue who once was a Carmelite frier and flying from his cloister came first aud deceiued the Dachesse of Ferrara for a time but his knauerie being knowne and he espied he was banished from her and then within three daies studie he professed him selfe to be a Phisition and came to Geneua where being contemned of the learned in that science he would take vpon him to be a diuine openly inueighed against the doctrine of prae destination not as a Papist out as a meere Pelagian for which he was condemned and banished the Citie and after for like troubles he was twyse banished the territorie of Berna After that when he thought the Churches of Fraunce should haue continued in peace he fained repentance and sought reconciliation of the Church of Geneua labouring ambitiouslie to be admitted into the ministery but when warre persecution befel vnto the Church contrary to his expectation he returned to his leech craft and reuolted againe to Poperte and in satisfaction of his Apostasie hath forged and refined these lies against Caluine and Beza Anp this is that reuerend man whome our defender commendeth for wisedome learning and honestie Whose impudent slaunders with noc indifferent man can finde anie credit seeing all law and common equitie alloweth exception against such a vile person to be
examples of inuocation of Saintes praier for the dead purgatorie and the like if you can winne them either by manifest wordes or by necessarie conclusion we are content you shall weare them and we also wilyeald vnto them otherwise you prate without proofe of expressed in the scripture trifling vppon the terme expressed which either we vse not in this question or els we meane therbie certainlie declared and taught in the scriptures either in expresse wordes or by necessarie conclusion But now let vs see how Master Chark is distressed in answering these twelue particulers For the first of the seauen which he acknowledgeth to be contained in the scripscripture which is that there is two natures and two wills in Christ he citeth these wordes Rom. 1. of his sonne which was made vnto him of the seede of Dauid according to the flesh Also Math. 26. not as I will but as thou wilt here you saie that the interpretation of the Church being set aside and the bare text onelie admitted these places cannot conuict an heretike yes verelie the onelie authoritie of the textis sufficient to confit me faith and to conuince an heretike For the former point thus The diuinitie and humanitie are two natures in Christ is diuinitie and humanitie ergo two natures The maior is manifest the minor is plaine by the text the sonne of God one nature the seede of Dauid an other nature For the fecond point The will of God and the will of man the one contradictorie to the other are two willes In Christ was the will of God contradictorie to the wil of man ergo two wills The minor is prooued out of the text not as I wil but as thou wilt seeing Christ was both God man That the Monothelits in the 6. Councill of Costantinople could not be conuinced out of the scriptures it is an intollerable slaunder of that reuerend assemblie for euen by this text and manie other their error was made manisest wherunto albeit the consent of the aun cient fathers was added yet is there no word in all that 4. action which you quote to prooue that they were not sufficientlie confuted out of the holie scriptures The second point is the proceeding of the holie ghost from the father and the sonne equallie for which Master Chark quoteth Ioh. 15. 26. When the holie ghoste shall come which I will send you from my father the spirit of trueth which proceedeth from the father c. Against this you cauill that it prooueth not the proceeding equallie and cite Cyril for your witnes in 15. Ioh. who out of this place prooueth that equally as wel as the proceeding seeing the heretikes might be ashamed to say that the spirit of the father was sent by the son as by a minister which also if they should saie he disprooueth for that if the sonn were as a minister he should be of an other substance then the father and the spirit proceeding from the father being of the same substance with the father should be greater in nature then the fonne whereas the sonne saith plainlie of the holy ghoste he shal glorifie me c. An other cauil you haue that this place telleth not whether he proceeded by generation or without generation from the father But it is sufficient that neither this place nor any other place of scripture teacheth that the holie ghoste is begotten therefore we beleeue without generation The third point is the vnion of the word vnto the nature of man and not to the person of man which because you did set downe obscurelie M. Charke did not rightlie vnderstand yet the text that the quoteth 1. 〈◊〉 14. The word was made flesh includeth that assertion also seeing there was no person of the man when the vnion was made vnto the nature of man but the word in taking vpon him the nature of man did vnite him selfe to it in vniting tooke it as it is euident Luk. 1. 35. Mat. 1. 20. The fourth doctrine is the baptising of infants for which Master Charke quoteth Gen. 17. 12. the infant of eight daies shall be circumcised Against this you haue manie trifling cauills that baptisme is not expressed of the sexe of the eight daie Against which I oppose the authoritie of Saint Augustine which lib. 1. cont Crescon Grammat cap. 31. confuteth the rebaptization of such as were baptized by heretikes by example of them that were circumcised by the Samaritantes whose circumcision was not to be repeated to whome the like might be obiected But it is sufficient that wherein baptisme answereth to circumsion the reason is one in both Circumcision was the sacrament of regeneration as baptisme is the one giuen to infantes ergo the other The cerimonie of the eight day had an other reason not needefull to be obserued in baptisme The distinction of the sexe is taken awaie by Christ in whome there is neither male nor female That Beza was striken dumme with this question in the conference at Poyssie it is a slaunder of Cladius de Xanctes confuted by Beza him-selfe But you had rather followe Saint Augustine who contendeth and prooueth that baptizing of infantes is onelie a tradition of the Apostles and not left vs by anie written Scripture lib. 10. cap. 23. super Gen. ad lizeram So you write but I will set downe Saint Augustines wordes that the reader may see what contention and proofes he vseth hauing protested of his ignorance how the reasonable soule commeth into the bodie he concludeth that the baptisme of infantes fauoreth their opinion which thinke that soules are procreated of the parentes And of the baptisme of infantes thus he writeth Consuctudo tamen matris Ecclesiae in baptizandis paruulis nequaquam spernenda est neque vllo modo superflua de putanda nec omnino credenda nisi Apostolica esset traditio Habet enim illaparua aet as magnum testimonij pondus quae prima pro Christo meruit sanguinē fundere Yet the custome of our mother the Church in baptizing of infantes is not to be despised nor by any meanes to be thought superfluous nor to be credited at all if it were not an Apostolike tradition for euen that litle age hath greate weight of testimonie which first obteined to shed blood for Christ. You see that here is neither contention not profe that it is onelie a tradition not leftin writing for he alledgeth one testimonie out of Scripture of gods acceptation of that age to martirdome much rather to baptisme and manie other testimonies might be brought for the same purpose as Matt. 19. 14. 1. Cor. 7. 14. c. As for Origen he doth onelie make mention of the baptisme of infants according to the obseruance of the Church to prooue originall sinne But whether it stand onelie vpon tradition and not vpon the scripture he saith not one word The 5. Doctrine is the changeing of the Sabbath into Sondaie M. Charke quoteth Apo. 1. 10. I was in the spirit on
the Lordes daie Here you cauill that there is no mention of Saturdaie or sondaie much lesse of celebration of either and least of all of the changeing of the Sabbath into an other daie But if it please your Censurship are you ignorant what day of the weeke is called dies Dominicus the Lordsday whether saturdaie or sondaie if it be sondaie as al professors of Christes name confesse here is as much mention thereof as is needfull for the daie into which the change is made Or if that be not sufficient you maie haue further Act. 20. 7. 1. Cor. 16. 2. And whie is the first of the Sabbath called the Lordes daie but in respect of the celebration there of in honour of the redemption of the world by Christ For otherwise all daies of the weeke are the Lordes daies in respect of their creation Thirdlie seeing the Lordes daie was one daie in the weeke vsed for the assemblie of the Church for their spirituall exercises of Religion it is certaine that the change of the Iewish Sabbath was made into that daie except you would be so waywatd to saie there were two daies in euerie weeke appointed by God to be celebrated whereas the lawe of God requireth but one and giueth libertie of bodelie exercise in sixe daies So that the change of the Sabbath daie is sufficientlie prooued out of the Scripture into the Lordes daie The sixt point is about foure Gospells and the Epistle to the Romanes which Master Charke saith to be prooued out of the scripture but yet he quoteth no place of scripture where onelie he saith the inscription expresseth the names of the writers But what a mocker is this you saie Are the bare names of the Apostles sufficient to prooue that they were written by them who can prooue by scripture that these names are not counterfet as in the Epistle to the Laodiceans in the Gospells of Bartholomew and Thomas c. But abide you sir your question hath two branches the one that the 4. Go spells are true Gospells the other that the epistle to the Romanes was written by Saint Paul and not that to the Laodiceans To the former it is answered that they are prooued by other vndoubted bookes of the scripture both of the olde testament and the new secing they declare that to be fullfilled of Christ which was spoken in the lawe in the Prophetes and in the Psalmes To the other it is answered that admitting the Epistle to the Romanes to be scripture the inscription of his name is sufficient to prooue that it was written by Saint Paull And so of therest Although the name of the writer is not materiall vnto saluation when the booke is receiued to be Canonicall as diuers bookes of scripture are receiued whose writer is vnknowne That Epistle which is called to the Laodicians is not receiued and therefore the inscription is vnsufficient as the Gospelles of Bartholomew and Thomas and such like which are knowne to be countefet by the dissent they haue from the other canonicall scriptures Whereas you require one place of Scripture to prooue all the foure Gospelles to be canonicall you declare your wrangling and wayward spirit But name you anie one point of Doctrine writen in anie of those foure Gospells and the same shall be aduouched by other textes of scripture and so maie eucrie point conteined in them if neede were But you affirme that Origen saith he reiecteth the Gospell of Saint Thomas onelie for that the tradition of the Church receiued it not Which is false He saith he hath read the Gospell after Thomas after Mathias and manie other Sed in his omnibus nihil aliud probamus niss quod Ecclesia idest quatuor tantùm euangelia recipienda But in all these we allowe nothing els but that which the Church alloweth that is that onelie foure Gospells are to be receiued In these wordes he affirmeth that he approoueth the iudgment of the Church he saith not that the iudgement or traditions of the Church was the onelie cause whie he reiected those Gospells for he said before they were receiued of heretikes and wherefore but in maintenance of their heresie which is contrarie to the holie scriptures That all counterfet Go spells were reiected by the Church it is confessed but the Church had this iudgement of discretion confirmed by the canonical scriptures against which Epiphanius saith nothing But when Faustus the Manichie denied the Gospell of Saint Mathew saie you saith not S. Augustine Mathaei Euangelium probatum aduersus Faustum Manichaeum per traditionem The Gospell of Mathew was alleged against Faustus the Manichie by tradition August lib. 28. Cont. Faust. c. 2. If you aske me I saie no he hath no such wordes Yet doth he auouch the Gospell of Saint Mathew in that Chapter by testimonie of the Church from the Apostles by continuall succession euen vnto his time against the Maniches but in far other words then you haue set downe in steed of Saint Augustines wordes by which the reader maie once against perceiue how impudentlie and ignorantlie you ailedge whatsoeuer the note booke which was neuer of your own gatheriug because you vnderstood it not did minister vnto you For these are the wordes of the collector of your notes not of S. Augustine Maie not the papists haue great ioie of such a Cenfure defender Yet you triumph like a Iustie champion and aske what can be more euident then all this to prooue our opinion of the necessitie of tradition to confound the fonde madnes of this poore Minister Alas poore defender what waightie euidencethou hast brought to prooue the necessity of tradition which prooueth thee to be a blind beggerlie yet a bolde brocher of other mens notes which thou vnderstandest not thy selfe The seuenth doctrine which is required to be prooued out of the scripture is that God the father begat his sonne onelie by vnderstanding him-selfe Here Master Charke in steede of these darke wordes out of Thomas how the father begat the sonne wisheth cleare and perfect wordes in so high a mysterie which you saie are plaine and vsuall to those which haue studied any thing in diuinitie As though there were no diuinitie in the holie scriptures and so many of the auncient fathers which haue neither this question nor these wordes but that al diuinity were included in the brest of Thomas Aquinas and such doctors as he was That he quoteth a place or two of the scripture to prooue that Christ was the onelie begotten sonne of God you make smal account of seeing the question is of the māner how this generation maybe which the Church de fendeth against the aduersaries And here you insult against M. chark as ignorant in those high points of diuinitie whereas Catholiks know what the Church hath determined herein against heretikes and infidels as though either of both cared for the Churches determination if the one were not vanquished by scripture the other by right reason
peece of Gods worde and traditions are an other peece and this peece must be added to that or els it is not a perfect or sufficient instruction of itselfe for Gods Church The comparison you make of ioyning S. Lukes Gospell to that of Saint Matthew or Saint Paules epistles to them both to resemble your patching of traditions to the written word of God is both odious and vnlike and without begging the wholl matter in question gaineth nothing For the adding of the writings of one Euangelist to another or of an Apostle to the Euangelistes is but the heaping of heauenlie treasure to the further inriching of the Church in all light of spirituall knowledge so the accession of the bookes of the new testament is as it were the vnfolding or laying open of the same diuine riches that was perfectlie contayned in the olde testament for the saluation of all Gods elect that liued vnder that discipline But your traditions as you maintaine them argue an insufficiencie of the holie scriptures which allso you confesse your selfe and are not a more plaine or plentifull application of the mysteries comprehended in them Therefore though you can for manners sake otherwhile forbeare odious speeches aginst the dignitie of holie scriptures yet euen that odious conclusion gathered by Gotuisus must needes follow of your doctrine concerning the insufficiencie of scriptures and the necessitie of traditions That your traditions are Gods word and of equall authoritie with the scriptures you promise to shew more largelie in the twelft article together with certaine meanes how to know and discerne the same Sed haec in dicm minitave Parmeno You haue taken a pretie pause of three yeares long since you were interrupted as you 〈◊〉 in the end by a writte de remouendo But the daie will come that shall paie for all Whether anie cause or matter hath beene ministred by you of odious speeches against the dignitie of holie scriptures Mastet Charke declareth by one example out of Hosius which with all the rest that he saith you omit to answer as trifling speech to litle purpose So whatsoeuer by anie colour of reason you can not auoid by your censorious authoritie you maie contemne and passe ouer But his conclusion seemeth worthie the answer which he maketh in these wordes To conclude it is a great iniquitie to adde traditions or your vnwritten verities to the written word of God whereunto no man maie adde because nothing is wanting from which no man maie take because nothing is superfluous But to him that addeth shall the curses written in the booke be added for euer Against this conclusiō you note in the margent great iniquitie to adde one veritie to another or to beleeue two verities together A fine ieste but a grosse begging of the wholl cause For who shal graunt that your vnwritten vereties be truth and not falsehood falselie by you termed verities vnwritten There is no veritie of matters necessarie to be knowne vnto saluation which is not written in the holie scriptures that are hable to make vs wise vnto saluation But good Lord what a sturre you keepe because M. Chatk noteth in the margent Apoc. 22. ask how this place is alledged against you c. As though that which is true of one booke yea of euery booke of the scripture maie not iustlie be verefied of the wholl bodie and boke of the the Bible Because adding to the word of god argueth imperfection in the word of god Your stale obiection of Saint Iohns Gospell written after the Reuelation is alreadie answered For al bookes of scripture that haue beene written since the fiue bookes of Moses are no addition to the word of God but a more cleere explication of the 〈◊〉 first com mitted to writing by inspiration of God Neither do they teach an other waie of saluation then Moses did but set forth the same more plainlie by demonstration by examples of Gods iustice and his mercie by threatenings by exhortations by explication of his promises by shewing the accomplishment and the manner of perfourmance of them in Christ and his Church And this they do moste absolutelie sufficiently and plentifully to the saluation of Gods people These things saith S. Iohn are written that you should beleeue that Iesus is Christ the sonne of God and that beleeuing you maie haue euerlasting life in his name Here you maie as well cauill that not onelie the Gospell of Saint Iohn or the miracles written in the same is necessarie to be beleeued vnto saluation but all the rest of the scripture also foolishlie opposing thinges that are no waie repugnant but the one including the other For the beleeuing of Saint Iohns Gospell doth not exclude but include all other bookes and partes of holie scripture which teach the same meane of saluation or any thing thereto pertaining But how holdeth this argument saie you no man maie adde to the booke of Apocalips ergo no man maie beleeue a tradition of Christ or his Apostles Maie we not as well saie ergo we maie not beleeue the actes of the Apostles No sir for we make our argument in this man ner No man maie adde to the booke of the Apocalips much lesse may anie man adde to the wholl Bible of the olde and new testament And consequentlie there are no traditions of Christ and his Apostles to be credited as needefull to saluation which are not contained in the holy scriptures Thus we alledge scriptures and thus we argue vppon them not as it pleaseth you to deseant vpon our allegations and to dissigure our arguments But it is lamentable you saie to see the 〈◊〉 dealings of these men in matters of such importance It is verie true vnderstanding you and your complices to be the men that vse such fleightes in 〈◊〉 waightie causes As for our doctrine is plaine without any seame that the scriptures are sufficient to saluation therfore al tradition besides them are 〈◊〉 to that purpose But let vs see who 〈◊〉 sleightes by your iudgement First you aske Master Charke what he 〈◊〉 by adding Who doth adde Or in what sense as though his meaning and sense of adding were not manifest as also his accusation that the I suites the Papistes do adde to the word of God their traditions a necessarie to saluation yet not expressed or contained in the word of God But if God saie you left anie doctrine by tradition vnto the Church and our ancetours haue deliuered the same vuto vs especiallie those of the 〈◊〉 Church what shall we do in this case Shall we refuse it It seemeth dangerous and I see no reason The question is not whether we should refuse anie thing that God hath left but whether God hath left anie such tradition to be beleeued vnto salua tion which is not contained in the holie scriptures But if our ancetours of the primitiue Church haue deliuered anie such tradition vnwritten as left by Christ what shall we doe you
see no reason to refuse it But if you will learne reason when it is shewed you maie see more then you do now Are your ancetors of the primitiue Church greater then Saint Paull Is there anie testimonié of man greater then the witnes of an Angell from heauen yet if Saint Paull him selfe or an Angell from heauen should preach an other Gospell then Saint Paull had preached and is contained in the holi scriptures that false Gospell were to be resused and the author thereof to be accursed Now that Saint Paull preached nothing beside the doctrine conteined in the scriptures he is a sufficient witnes himselfe Act. 26. 22. But why see you no reason to refuse such traditions so obtruded Forsooth because the same men that deliuered vnto you the scriptures and saide this is Gods writen worde and saide of other forged scriptures this is not Gods written worde the same deliuered to you these doctrines saying this is Gods wordes vnwritten So that by this reason you haue no other foundation of your faith but the testimonie of men who as they may speake the truth in one matter so they may lie or be deceiued in an other As euen by your owne reason the Grecians the Armenians the Georgians the Moscouites and all other sectaries are bound to beleeue all that to be the word of God vnwritten which the same men affirme to be such that deliuered the canonicall scriptures to them and said it was the word of God written But in steade of this vnsure and sandie ground the children of God haue a more firme rocke to builde their faith vpon namelie the spirit of trueth sealing in their heartes the testimonie of men concerning the truth of Gods worde written In which the same spirit also testifieth of the sufficiencie of the word written vnto saluation in such sort as if we receiue the word written for truth we must needs condemne for false what word soeuer speaketh either the contrarie or addeth any thing as wanting and not set forth in the word written And this I say not as though the primitiue Church or the godlie fathers of the same haue brought in any thing vnder the name of tradition of Christ or his Apostles as necessarie to saluation although some of them in matters of rites ceremonies haue alledged tradition beside the scriptures yet in such things as are now for the most part abolished either because they were not deliuered by the Apostles as it was pretended or els because such matters are mutable and not perpetuall though they were receiued from the Apostles But let vs examine the examples that you ioyne to your reason First Saint Augustine and Origen doe teach vs that baptizing of infantes is to be practized in the Church onelie by tradition of the Apostles For which you quote August lib. 10. ad gen lit cap. 23. Origen in cap. 6. Epist. ad Rom. What Saint Augustine saieth and how the baptisme of infantes is practized by authoritie of the scripture I haue shewed before sect 11. As for Origen in the place quoted hath neuer a word to any such matter But of these impudent allegations we haue had too many examples alreadie The second example is Saint Hierome and Epiphanius tell vs that the faste of the lent and oher the like is a tradition of the Apostles Hierom. Epist. 54. ad Marcella Epiphann Haer. 7. 5. Hieromes wordes are these against the Montanistes Nos vnam quadragesimam secundùm traditionem Apostolorum toto anno tempore nobis congruo ieiunamus 〈◊〉 tres in anno faciunt quadragesimas quasi tres passi sunt saluatores non quòd per totum annum excepta pentecoste ieiunare non liceat sed quòd aliud sit necessitate aliud voluntate munus offerre We fast one lent or fourtie daies according to the tradition of the Apostles in the wholl yeare in a time conuenient for vs they make three lentes or fourtie daies fast in a yeare as though three sauiours had sussered not but that it is lawfull all the yeare long except in the pentecostor fiftie daies but that it is one thing to offer a gift of necessitie an other thing to doe it of free will Here Hierome saith that one fourtie daies fast is of the tradition of the Apostles but other writers say otherwise For Damasus in his Pontificall saieth that Telesphorus Bishope of Roome did institute this seauen weekes faste before Easter Telesphorus him-selfe in his decretall Epistle saith that he and his fellow Bishoppes gathered in a Councell at Roome did ordeine this fourtie daies faste onelie for clerkes and contendeth in manie wordes that there must be a difference betweene clerkes and laie men as well in faste as in other thinges If you saie these authorities are counterfet 〈◊〉 as I thin 〈◊〉 you may truelie though you will not willinglie yet what saie you to 〈◊〉 an elder witnes then Hierome whoe testifieth out of yeares that two hundered 〈◊〉 before his time there was great controuersie betweene the next successours of the Apostles concerning the daie of the celebration of Easter and that the coutrouersie was not onelie of the daie but also of the fast some fasting one daie some two dates some more So that of the Apostles tradition we haue no certaintie in any monument of antiquitie Againe it is to be noted that Hierome holdeth it vnlawfull to faste betweene Easter and Whitesontyde which he calleth Peatecoste by the same tradition of the Apostles which yet in the Popish Church is not obserued at this daie for beside the fridaie fast they haue also the gang weeke fast in that time which in Saint Hieromes age was accounted vnlawfull to fast in Your other witnes Epiphanius speaketh not of your fourtie daies lent but of a shorter and yet a streighter For these are his wordes Aquo verò non assensum est in omnibus orbis terrarum regionibus quòd quarta prosabbato ieiunium est in Ecclesia ordinatum Siverò etiam oportet constitutionem Apostolorum proferre quomodo illic decreuerunt quarta prosabbato ieiunium per omnia excepta pentecoste de sex dieb paschatis quomodo praecipiunt nihil omnino accipere quà m panem salem aquam qualemque diem agere quomodo dimittere in illucescentem dominicam manifestum est And of whome is it not agreed in all regions of the world that one wednesdaie and fridaie fast is ordeined in the Church But if we must also bring forth the constitution of the Apostles how they haue there decreed one the wednesdaie and fridaie a fast thoroughout all except pentecost and of the six daies of Easter how they commaund to take nothing at all but bread and salte and water and how to spend the daie and how to giue ouer against the dawning of the Lords daie it is manifest Here he speaketh but ofsixe daies before Easter daie and of an other manner of diet then the Popish Church holdeth to be necessarie
the sense and true meaning of thinges them-selues And this is Chrisostomes meaning not of traditions altogether without the compasse of the scriptures and yet held necessarie to saluation For of the sufficiencie of the scri ptures he speaketh in diuers places and namelie vppon that cleere text 2. Tim. 3. Hom 9. of the scripiure he saith Siquid vel diseere velignorare opus sit illic addiscemus If anie thing be needefisli to know or not to know in the scriptures we shall learne But because you saie those wordes of Saint Paulare cleere 2. Thess. 2. for vnwritten tradititions I praie you what argument can you conclude out of them Saint Paul deliuered to the Thessalonians something by preaching and something by writing ergo he deliuered something that is not contained in the holie scriptures written either by himselfe or anie other of the holie men of God appointed for that purpose Who is so childish thinke you to graunt you this consequence therefore for anie thing you haue brought or can bring or anie thing that the fathers haue said or can saie the word of God writ ten is perfect and hable to make a man wise to saluation by faith in Iesus Christ which is to be had sufficientlie in the holie scriptures as Christ him-selfe doth witnes Iohn 5. 39. And so the former conclusion doth still stand It is great iniquitie to receiue traditions altogether beside the holie scripture as necessarie to saluation which must needes argue the holie scriptures of imperfection and vnsufficiencie Neither doth the consent of Antiquitie refute this assertion of Master Charke seeing the auncients as it is said spake either of doctrine not expressed in word but contained in deede in the scriptures or els of rites and ceremonies the perpetuall obseruation where of is not necessatie to eternall life as is prooued by the discussing of manie of them which the elder fathers do father vpon the tradition of the Apostles as much as anie other that they name And if you saie they were deceiued in such as are abolished how shall we know that 〈◊〉 not in such as are retained For in their 〈◊〉 they were all generallie receiued as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well such as are discontinued as those 〈◊〉 remaine 〈◊〉 if any man will aske you what be these Apostolicall 〈◊〉 in particuler you could alleadge him testimonies 〈◊〉 auncient fathers for a great number But you referr 〈◊〉 Saint Cyprian Serm. de ablut pedum Tertullian 〈◊〉 milit and Saint Hieron dialog contra Luciferianos 〈◊〉 say he shall finde store Belike your note booke 〈◊〉 you thither although you listed not to take so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your selfe but turne it ouer to your 〈◊〉 Howbert he that is disposed to read the sermon 〈◊〉 Cyprian shall finde no store at all but of the necessitie of washing offcete which ceremonie was taken by the example of Christ yet is not thought necessarie in the Popish Church at this daie Tertullian in deede hath some prety store yet not to mantaine popish traditions so much as to ouerthrow them For he 〈◊〉 some things that are taken out of the scripture as to renounce the deuill in Baptisme c. some that are growne out of vse manie hundred yeares agoe as that the baptized should taste of milke and honie that they should abstaine from washing seauen daies after That men should signe their forheade at euerie steppe and proceeding going forth and comming home at putting on of apparell and at pulling on of shooes at washings at table at lighting of candells at beddes at stooles at all times and places Saint Hierome also in the person of the heretike rehearseth traditiones and among them such as Papistes do not obserue namelie the mixture of milke and honie geuen to them that are newlie baptized On the Lords daie and during the wholl time of Pentecoste neither to kneele in praiers nor to fast These are parte of those Apostolical traditions in particular which if they had beene necessary to saluation must haue beene perpetuallie continued If they were vntruelie ascribed to the Apostles what wartant can we haue of any other seeing the most auncient writers commend these as much as anie other for Apostolicall traditions Yet a few other examples you wil adde out of Saint Augustine whoe prooueth baptisme you sare by tradition of the Church lib. 10. de gen ad lit cap. 23. to this answere hath beene made sufficientlie in the 11. section that Saint Augustine doth not defend baptisme of infants onelie by the custome of the Church but also by the scriptures Likewise you saie he prooueth by the same tradions that we must not rebaptize those which are baptized of heretikes lib. 2. de bapt capt 7. lib. 1. cap. 23. lib. 4. cap. 6 It is true that he perwsadeth him selfe that this custome of not rebaptizing came from the Apostles tradition yet doth he by many arguments out of scripture prooue that such are not to be baptized againe which haue beene once baptized although by heretikes and therefore he saith of the same matter Hoc planè verum est quia ratio veritas consuetudini praeponenda est Sed cùm consuetudini veritas suffragatur nihil oportet firmius retineri This is plainlie true that reason and truth is to be preferred before custome but when truth consenteth with custome nothing ought more steadefastlie to be 〈◊〉 You see therefore that he buildeth not onelie vppon custome or tradition which is the matter in question but vppon trueth and reason which is founded by the holie scriptuers Your middle quotation de bap lib. 1. cap. 23. you may correct against your nextreplie for there are but 19. Chapters in that booke Againe you saie He prooueth by tradition the celebration of the Pentecost commonlie called Whitsontide ep 11 c. 1. If it were as you saie it is but a matter of ceremony not necessarie to saluation but in the power of the Church to alter as many like which are abrogated But in trueth he prooueth it not as you say by tradition For these are his wordes Illa autem quae non scripta c. But those thinges which are kept beeing not written but deliuered which are obserued thoroughout all the worlde it is giuen to be vnderstoode that they are retained as commended and decreed either by the Apostles them-selues or by generall Councells the authoritie of which is moste whollesome in the Church as that the passion of our Lord and his resurrection ascension into heauen and the comming of the holie ghoste from heauen are celebrated with yearelie solemnitie You see by his owne wordes that he is not certaine whether he should laie this ceremoniall celebration vpon deliuery of the Apostles or vpon decrees of general coun cells And whencesoeuer they came the matter is not great in such thinges as of their owne nature are indifferent and therefore alterable by discretion of the Church in all times Whether the Apostles were baptized which is
creature can haue except he be also creator and God himselfe therefore Christ truelie as man receiueth that which is giuen but in respect and right of his godheade he is able to receiue and exercise that power which none can haue but God onelie These thinges indeede maie seeme vnto the simple to be farre fetched and farre from the question of priests power to remit sinnes but they are much farther from the truth of our Catholike faith and Religion that our sauiour Christ in respect of his Diuine nature should be spoiled of his authority or els should thereby worke nothing in a manner in the cheife most necessarie partes of our redemption that Popish priests might be made equall or not farre vnlike him in the power of pardoning sinnes ALLEN For as the due consideration of Christes authoritie and excellent office touching his manhood will helpe vp the decaied honour and iurisdiction that the guides of Gods Church by the right of his high calling do iustlie challenge so it shall expresse the boldnesse of certaine miscreants of this age who to further their sundrie euil in tents and detestable doctrines haue dishonoured Christes dignitie touching his incarnation and office of his redemption exceeding much both in himselfe and in persons of his Pristes and substitutes some of them fearing as I take it lest the honour and office of Christes Priesthood might by participation descend to the Apostles and Priestes of the Church letted not to hold that Christ was his fathers Priest according to his diuine nature of which blasphemie Iohn Caluine was iustlie noted wherein the wicked man whiles he went about to disgrace the dignitie of mortall men became exceeding iniurious to the second person in Trinitie One other of that schoole and of his owne neast denied that Christ in his manhoode should iudge the world lest there might seeme to be some force of punishment and correction of wickednes practized by mans ministerie in this life for the resemblance of Christes iudgement to come And so taught one Richerius of a Carmelite a Caluinist Other deny Christ being now in heauen to make praier for vs according to his manhoode because it tendeth towardes the intercession as Saint Paulin expresse wordes recordeth of him Quòd saluare in perpetuum potest accedens ad Deum per semetipsum semper viuens ad interpellandum pro nobis That for euer he is of power to giue saluation hauing accesse to God by him-selfe and alwaies Iiuing to make intercession for vs. Yea most of the Sacramentaries for the aduantage of their vngodlie assertion that Christ in his owne person as he is God and man should not be present in the sacrament doe couertlie blaspheme the blessed and highlie sanctified fleshof our sauiour auouching it to be vnprofitable whereby they vnaduisedlie dishonour the dreadfull incarnation of Christ and all the workes wrought by the meane of his flesh and blood and ministerie of his manhoode for the remission of our sinnes and purchasing saluation to his Church FVLKE The due consideration of Christes authoritie and excellent office touching his manhoode will nothing helpe to restore the decaied honour and iurisdiction of Popish priesthoode except you can both prooue your Popish priests capable of such honour and power as the sonne of God is and also bring forth the recordes out of the holy scriptures for that high calling whereof you boast That any faithful Christian whome you to maintaine an Antichristian authoritie call Miscreantes haue dishonoured Christs dignitie touching his incarnation and office of his redemption it is a slaunder stronglie aduouched but slenderlie prooued For first Caluine affirming Christ to be a priest in his wholl person God and man derogateth nothing from that dignitie neither is he iniurious against the second person in trinitie for Christ is an high priest after the order of Melchesidech and our redeemer not as a minister and seruant onelie but as the sonne as the King os peace and righteousnes without father without mother without genealogy hauing neither beginning of his daies nor end of his life al which things can not be restrained to the humanitie of Christ but are proper to him as he is equall and eternall with his father That Richerius should denie that Christ in his manhoode should iudge the world it might well be a slaunder of that grosse potheaded Cyclops Villegagnon which when he durst not abide the inuasions of the barbarous people in Gallia antarctica where he had enterprised a conquest he quarelled with Richerius and other godlie persons to haue a colour of returne and a wellcome of the Papists And as touching his slaunderous libell that you send the reader vnto I referre you them to the answere confutation of Richerius Thirdlie that Christ doth make praiers for vs according to his manhoode it is not sufficiently prooued by the text of the Apostle to the Heb. 7. because he may and doth make continuall intercession for vs by the vertue and worthines of the sacrifice of his death although he conceiue no prayers for vs in forme of wordes as men vse vpon earth And if it be graunted that Christ so praieth for vs yet it tendeth nothing towardes the intercession of Saints but rather against it because the interceffion of Christ is sufficient without them yea if the intercession of Saints were prooued it draweth not of necessity praier vnto Saints after it and therefore there were smal purpose in them that denie Christ in such forme to praie for vs to controul the inuocatiō of Saints which thing being either graunted or denied prooueth neither too nor fro that Saints are to be praied vnto or 〈◊〉 That any one of those whome you cal Sacramentaries doth either ouertly or couertly blaspheme the blessed flesh of our Sauiour auouching it to be vnprofitable otherwise then our sauiour Christ himselfe auouched if it were separated from his diuine and quickening spirite doth profitte nothing you are not able to iustifie and therefore you send vs in the margent to Cyrill vpon Iohn lib. 4. Cap 14. whoe sheweth in deede that the flesh of Christ as it is the flesh of the sonne of God hath quickening vertue and power in it to our eternall redemption but otherwise affirmeth nothing thereof that we all are not readie to subscribe vnto ALLEN Let vs therefore Christianlie confes with the scripture and with the Church of Christ that our sauiour not onelie by power equall to his father concerning his diuine nature but also by the sending and graunt of his father and vnction of the holie spirit beeing farre vnder them both in his humane nature doth remit sinnes Whereupon it orderlie followeth that whosoeuer denyeth man to haue authoritie or that he maie haue power graunted him by God to forgiue sinnes he is highlie iniuriouse to our sauiours owne person dispensation of his flesh and mysterie of his holie incarnation For though there be great diuersitie betwixt his state and others because
For at this daie the Bishops that be throughout all Christendome how rose they to that roome The Church calleth them fathers and yet shee did beget them and she placed them in that roome of their fathers Non ergo reputes desertam quia non vides Petrum quòd non vides Paulum quòd non vides illos per quos nataes de prole tua tibi creuit paternitas pra patribus tuis natisunt tibi filij constitues eos principes super omnem terram Do not therefore think thy selfe desolate because thou hast not Paull because thou hast them not now present by whome thou wast borne of thy owne issue fatherhood is growne to thee and for thy fathers thou hast brought forth sonnes them shalt thou make the rulers ouer al the earth Thus much out of Saint Augustine By whome you maie perceaue the great prouidence of God that euerlastinglie vpholdeth the ordinance of his sonne Christ Iesus as well now by the children borne from time to time in the Churches lap as before in the spring of our faith by the Apostles sent and appointed in person by Christ him-selfe FVLKE I suppose the title of your booke will admonish you not to restraine this office onelie to Bishops which so often you haue made common to all priestes For Gregory also in the same homyly nameth often times all pastours of the Church to whome the power of binding and loosing doth appertaine which are many other beside Bishops Moreouer inueighing against the ignorance and vnworthines of them that occupied such places which take vpon them to loose where God doth binde and binde where God doth loose he concludeth that then the absolution of the gouernours of the Chuch is true when it followeth the will of the eternall Iudge By which saying and more to the like effect in that place he declareth his iudgement of the kinde of power or authoritie which the Church hath that it is not absolute but subiect vuto the will of God and is an expressing of Gods forgiuenes or retaining not a proper forgiuing or retaining The saying of Saint Augustine prooueth in deede a continuance of the ministery of the Apostles in the office of Bishops but hereof it followeth not that onelie Bishops as they are distinct from priestes haue this power for not onelie Bishops be the children of the Church but all faithfull men to whome the inheritance of the world is like wise appointed ALLEN And here you must know that not onelie Bishops who succeede the Apostles in all kinde of power and regiment but also all other inferiour Priestes to be compted with them as successors in ministring diuerse sacraments as baptisme penance the reuerend Sacrament of the Aultar and such like but looke what power either Apostle or Bishop hath in remission of sinnes in consecrating Christes bodie in baptizing the same hath the wholl order of holie Priesthood by the right of their order and maie practize the same vpon such as be subiect vnto them in all causes not exempted for reasonable causes by such as haue further iurisdiction ouer the people Wherof I will not now talke particularlie the learned of that order know the limits of their charge and commission better then I can instruct them and the simpler sort must seeke for knowledge of their duetie by the holie Canons of Councels and decrees of Bishops made for that purpose I can not now stand thereon meaning at this present onelie to defend the holie order and challenge for it such right as the scripture and Chistes owne word giueth which in this contempt of vertue and religion is moste necessarie for all men to consider FVLKE There is no power or authoritie graunted by our sauiour Christ to preach the word of God or to minister anie sacrament but the same is common to euerie one of the Pastoures of the Church and not onelie lawfull but also necessarie for them to exercise in their seuerall charges Wherefore that ministering of some sacraments is permitted to them and of other denied them it is beside the word of god Againe the word of god that giueth them general power whose sinnes soeuer whatsoeuer you shal bind or loose is directlie against al exempted cases which sauor of nothing but of Antichristian tyrannie As for the cannons of Counceles and decrees of Bishoppes whether you send the simple to learne the limites of their charge can not restraine that Christ hath enlarged and therefore if your meaning were as your wordes professe to defend the holie order and challenge for it such right as the scripture and Christes owne worde geueth you would enueigh against the pride and ambition of the Pope other prelates that exempt anie cases from the Priests power and authoritie which the holie scripture and the expresse wordsof our sauiour Christ doth in such ample manner graunt vnto them ALLEN Therefore vpon our large discourses for this last point I now deduct the particulars to this summe which maie stand for a certaine marke as well for the good to discerne the trueth as for the aduersaries to shoote at whiles they liue Alpower and euery iurisdiction or right of Christs Church remaineth as amplie and in as full force and strength at this daie and shall till the worlds end so continue as they were by Christ graunted first in the persons of the Apostles or other instituted But the power of remission of sinnes was giuen properlie and in expresse termes to the Apostles Ergo the same remaineth still in Gods Church Whereupon it is so cleare that the Priestes at this day haue as ful power to forgiue sins as the Apostles had And this argument of the continuance of all offices and righte of the Church is the moste plainest and readiest waie not onelie to helpe our cause now taken in hand but vtterlie to improoue all false doctrines and detestable practises of heretikes For they must here be examined diligentlie what common wealth that is what Church that is in which Christ doth prescrue the gouernment giuen to the Apostles where it is that the power not onely os making but also of practizing al sacraments hath continued still what companie of Christian people that is wherein the Apostles Doctors preachers ministers through the perpetuall assistance of Gods spirit be continued for the building vp of Christes bodie which is the number of faithful people What Church that is which bringeth forth from time to time sonnes to occupy the romes of their fathers before them It is not good reader the pelting packe of Protestants It is not I saie and they knowe it is not their petie congregations that hath till this daie continued the succession of Blshoppes by whome the world as Saint Augustine saith is ruled as by the Apostles and first Fathers of Religion Surely our mother the Church hath hene long baren if for her Fathers the Apostles who died so long since she neuer brought forth children til now to occupie their roomes and
great lacke ofrulers if she haue made her onelie contemners to be her owne gouernours No these sellowes holde not by her but they holde against her these sit in no seat Apostolike but they by all force dishonour the seat Apostolike these are not they qui pro patribus nati sunt tibi filij but these are the sonnes quos enutriuisti genuisti ipsi spreueruntte If you aske of these men how they holde they seeke no Fathers after whome they maie rightly rule they seeke no large rew of predecessours in whose places they may sit they aske no counsell of Gods Church by whose calling they should gouerne but they make a long discourse of statutes and temporall lawes to couer their ambitious vsurpation that in great lacke of Christes calling their vniust honour may be approoued by mans fauour Thereby let them holde their temporall dignities their landes their liuelihoodes their wiues also if ther can obtaine so much at the commō wealthes handes but their spiritual functions their ministering of Sacraments their gouernance of our soules and what els soeuer they vsurpe without the warrant of Gods Church the longer they exercise them the farther they be from saluation and the neerer to eternall woe and miserie But to come to our purpose it is our Church Catholike in which all holie functions haue bene practized after Christes institution euer since his ascension vp to heauen And therefore this principall power of remitting and retaining sinnes must needes be contained in the Church by her ministers and priests as it was begonne in the Apostles before FVLKE I like well your pretence after a large discourse to knit vp your whole entent in a Syllogisme which you set as a matke for vs to shoote at while we liue verilie your argument if one word were awaie I would willinglie graunt but the word properlie you are neuer able to prooue while you liue nor all the papists in the world after you are dead therefore in respect of that word I denie your Minor And yet I graunt that you inferre vpon it your conclusion in such termes as you haue set it downe that lawfull Priestes Elders or ministers of Gods Church at this daie haue as fullpower to forgiue sinnes in their seuerall charges as the Apostles had in their gener all commission But here you will needes examine vs what Church that is in which Christ doth preserue the gouernment giuen to the Apostles The Catholike Church forsooth 2. Where the power of ministring the sacraments if you meane that by your termes of making and practizing hath continued still in the Catholike Church 3. What companie of Christ an people that is wherein the Apostles Doctours preachers ministers through the perpetuall assistance of Gods spirit be continued for the building vp of Christes bodie which is the number of the faithfull Still I answere the companie of the Catholike Church 4. What Church that is which bringeth forth from time to time sonnes to occupie the romes of their Fathers before them Here I answere manie hereticall and malignant Churches but onelie the Catholike Church hath continued from the beginning in such propagation You answere your selfe and saie it is not it is not the pelting-packe petrie congregation of the Protestants to your double negatiō a single affirmation may serue It is the Church of them you cal Potestantes in Europe which is a part of the Catholike Church dispersed ouer all the earth which Church of the Protestantes I see not why you should so pelt at it with your pettierhetorike It is God be thanked as great and as glorious at this time in the eies of the world as the Romish rable except that the ministers thereof be not so prowde nor so gorgeous That whore of Babilon your dame whome you would haue to be accepted for the Catholike Church of Christ which boasted her selfe that she was no widow is now of manie forsaken of her spirituall for nication begetteih but feew bastardes in comparison of that she was wont to doe Therefore it is not no no that wil be able to pul vs out of the Apostolike chaires in which we teach nothing but the Doctrine of the Apostles consonant vnto the Doctrine of the Prophets These Fathers we seek to holde of and all other that holde of the same line we hold with them as for large view of predecessours we know it must necessarilie insue the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles because of the perpetuall continuance of the Church And therefore we take not vp olde mouldie and mothen parchementes to seeke our progenitours names but by consanguinitie of Doctrine with the Apostles as Tertullian calleth it knowe we are Apostolike and set in Apostolike places As for the long discourse of statutes temporall lawes that you talke of we claime no spirituall inheritance thereby although we accept the confirmation of temporall lawes for the better execution of our offices What I pray you Sir had not you Papists in Queene Maries time as large a discourse of statutes and temporal lawes as we haue for the maintenance of your popish superstition and all thinges thereto belonging and yet you would procure enuie to vs of statutes and temporall lawes as though wee helde onelie by them As for temporal dignites landes lieuely hodes I knowe not how they shoulde be mainteined but by temporall lawes Out wiues we holde by the law of God against which there is no temporal lawe of the land by infinit better right then you doe hold your stewes and other remedies of your incontinencie and as for spiritual functions we holde them by the same right that they were first giuen to the Church and haue therein continued euen to this daie An answer to such as denie this power to passe from the Apostles to al other Priests because many of them beeing euill men may be thought not to haue the holy Ghost whereby they should effectuallie remit sinnes THE SIXTH CHAP. ANd to Caluin or other of his secte that require the like vertue and force of the holie Ghostes assistance in all men that take vpon them to remit sinnes as it was giuen to the Apostles who first receiued that power I answer that the same gift of the holie Ghost is yet in the ministers of the same Sacrament no lesse then in the Apostles For though they had more plentifull sanctification whereby they were in all their life more holie and more vertuous then lightlie anie other either Priestes or laie men were after them yet the giftes of the holie Ghost touching the ministerie and seruice of Gods Church which were not so much giuen them for their owne sakes as for the vse of the common wealth and for the right of practizing certaine holy functions requisite for the peoples sanctification as they were also giuen to diuers that were neither good nor vertuous and therefore lacked that which properlie is that grace of the holie Ghost that is called of our schoole men
contrarie doings may be What Epiphanius writeth of his heresie and Saint Ambrose confuted the same is shewed before as also how truelie Caluine is charged to iumpe with Nouatus in denying repentance after Baptisme because he calleth baptisme the sacrament of repentance as before him the auncient writers vsed accustomablie whereof you maie reade in his institution the place before mentioned ALLEN Mary long before that his fall to heresie S. Cornelius writein that he was possessed in his youth with an euill spirit for which he had to do great while with coniurers that he lacked all the holie solemnitie of Baptisme and confirmation and consequentlie the Spirit of God which by them he should haue receiued and therefore tooke orders against the law vpon sinister fauour and afterward by vnlawfull artes attempted to get abishopricke with great othes protesting that he would not be a Bishop if he might But when indeede he could not attaine to that holie dignitie which he so inwardlie and intollerablie gaped for he fell in despite of Gods Church to heresie that he might get that without order whch he could not obtaine in the right manner of the Churches making And for that purpose he procured three base Bishops out of a straunge and remote part of Italie who neither knew the case the man nor his manners and them through ignorance he beguiled and by force caused them to consecrate him Bishop by the colour whereof for true imposition of hands was it none sodenlie he appeareth as a new creature a Bishop of a strange stamp apparuit Episcopus velut nouum Plasma saith Cornelius And for this attempt one of the poore Bishops did great penance the other two were deposed In the meane time this mocke Bishop vendicabat sibi euangelium challenged the word of the Lord for him-selfe denied him-selfe to be a Priest because he would not giue to the people as Theodoritus saith in their extremitie the remedie for their sinnes which is nothing els but to giue them absolution which worke he could neuer abide To be short he was so incensed against his lawful Paslour and superiour the holie Bishop of Roome that in the deliuerie of the blessed sacrament to the people he would force them to take an oth by the blessed bodie which they had in their handes readie to receiue that they should stick to him and for sake the Bishop of Rome Cornelius All these thinges in sense hath Eusebius of Nouatus the first patron of the Protestants doctrine concerning the impugning of the Churches title in remission of sins of which her right he would haue robbed her in pretence of maintenance of Gods honour Whereby he also abrogated the wholl Sacrament of penance This falsehood though it were streight with he author condemned in a great Councell holden at Rome and afterward in diuerse Prouinciall Synodes and by the holie councell of Nice it selfe repressed also Yet it spred very sort and cintinued long and was not onelie by S. Cyprian but also by Dyonisius Alexandrinus Saint Amb ose and Saint Chrysostome refused in sundrie workes written against the Nouatians By whome and other though the course of that false assertion was often broken in gods Church yet in some partes they did knit againe sometimes by certaine heretikes of Nouatus daies called Tessarescedecatitae qui auersabantur poenitentiam saith Theodoritus who did abhorre penance and sometimes by a sort called Iacobitae 〈◊〉 whiles by wrcliffe his else by the Waldenses now and than by the Anabaptistes latly by the Lutherans moste of the protestantes by the Caluinistes eueryone All which blacke band though they agree not at euery pinch of Nouatus heresit for it is not possible that such should euer fullie consent yet all these knit tailes together in this that there is no sacrament of penance after Baptisme in which the priest may forgiue sinnes and that it standeth not with gods honour so to remit the peoples offences Of other the like heresies which he lent our men as of forbidding holie Chrisme and annointing of such as were by him baptized in so much that the holie fathers were glad to make vp the lacke thereof in all such as came from their heresie to the vnitie of Christes Church I will not here speake purposing onelie because that onelie concerneth our matter to refute that olde heresie raised so long since against the prerogatiue of Gods priests and onelie helpe of our sinnes that at once both the author and the ofspring may be fullie ouer throwen FVLKE Nouatus as he is described by Cyprian but that he came too soone before the open reuelation of Antichrist had beene a man much more fit to make a Pope of the Church of Rome whereof he was mockbishop then a poore minister of the Church of England And whatsoeuer you gatherout of Euseb. Theodoret or any other writer against him declareth that he was an execrable man but maketh no resemblance of his heresie with our doctrine concerning the power of remitting of sinnes You saie that he lacked all the solemnitie of baptisme and confirmation and consequentlie the spirit of God which by them he should haue receiued Eusebius indeed out of the Epistle of Cornelius writeth that after he was helped by exorcistes he fell into dangerous sicknes and being at the point of death and not considering he receiued baptisme in his bed if it may be said that such a one receiued For after he escaped his sicknes he obtained not therest whereof he should haue bin partaker according to the canon of the Church that is to be sealed or confirmed of the Bishope and hauing not obtained this how obtained he the holie Ghost By which wordes Cornelius meant that he which was baptized in extreamitie when he knew not what was done vnto him and afterward when he was whole had no care to approoue his baptisme by the Bishoppes iudgement vpon his owne confession acknowledging of Christian Religion could not be taken for a right Christian much lesse according to the discipline of those daies might be admitted vnto the ministerie But being admitted by a singular and if you will a sinister dispensation in time of persecution he was so fearefull that he denied himselfe to be a Priest when he was desired to come vnto them and onelie by wordes to confirme them that were stricken with the terrour of the tyrant as Therdoret writeth The oathe that he exacted of such as receiued the Sacrament of the Lordes supper at his handes was more like the oath that the pope exacteth of all Bishopes at their consecration then anie ministred in the Queenes Maiesties visitation That Wickliffe the Waldenses Luther or Caluine do denie repentance or reconciliation of them that are fallen after Baptisme it is a meere slaunder although they denie the Popish sacrament of penance whereof there was no mention in the Chuch manie hundred yeares after Nouatus That the Nouatians did not anoint those that
were by them Baptized it seemeth they take it of their Master Nouatus who because he had contemned he ceremonie vsed in that time of the Church him-selfe taught his schollers to doe the same left it should hawe beene reputed a want in him Although not the omission of the ceremonie but the contempt of the vsage of the Church being not impious in it selfe was chiefelie condemned in him For at such times as he was ordained Elder or Priest of the Church of 〈◊〉 it was thought by the Bishope a matter that might be remitted in him that for other respectes seemed meete for the office neither was it thought necessarie that he should receiue that cerimonie so by him omitted but not yet as it was thought in despight of the Church refused The Fathers oflater time as Theodoret writeth decreed that such as came from his heresie and would be incorporated into the Church should by receiuing that cerimonie which in time of their heresie they despised declare that they were truelie conuerted from it and willinghe submitted themselues to the Catholike Church and her Doctrine But of late daies when that ceremonie of anointing hath beene accounted a Sacrament yea and a greater Sacrament then Baptisme and thought necessary to eternall saluation whereas yet it hath no institution of Christ set forth in the holie Scriptures the reformed Churches haue iustlie abrogated that custome according to that libertie which the Church hath in all ceremonies not commaunded by God according to the example of the Church in former ages which hath abrogated manie ceremonies vsed of auncient times aswell as that of anointing with oile them that are Baptized ALLEN And first because generallie all the foresaid ioyne together against the trueth in this argument that it is dishonour to god and great presumption in a mortall man to claime the power so proper to God let the studious reader well consider that no function power ne dignitie be it neuer so peculiar to God him-selfe by naturaii excellencie but the same maie be occupied of man secondarilie as by the waie of seruice ministery or participation so that man challenge nor vsurpe it not as of him selfe or when it is not lawfuliie receaued nor orderlie giuen All the workes that extraordinarilie and miraculouslie were wrought either by Christ in his humanitie or by the Prophets or Apostles wordes or by their garments or by what other instrumēt so euer they were donne were the works of god no lesse then to remit sins yet al these things other the like brought to passe by man through the power of god that worketh by mans ministerie the same nothing derogateth to gods glorie but infinitelie augmenteth his honour euen so the power of pardoning mans sins being emploied by God the father vpon Christ his sonne by Christ vpon his Church ministers practized by them not of their owne might heades but in the 〈◊〉 of the holie ghost which by the sonne of god was 〈◊〉 vpon them this authoritie I saie is no derogation but an euident signe of his mightie power of saluation left for the faithfulls sake in the Church When the person that was lame from his birth begged of Peter and Iohn somewhat for his reliefe at the Temole dore as his manner was Peter answered him that golde and siluer he had none to giue but that which he had he would willinglie bestowe which was power to heale him of his incurable maladie for proofe whereof he bad him arise and walke and so he did at his word in the sight of all that there were gathered which being done and the people wondering thereat the Apostle thus instructed them Brethren faith he why wonder you at vs as though we had brought this strange worke to passe by our owne strength and power it is the God of Abraham Isaac Iacob that hath glorified his sonne Iesus whome you refused and betraied to Pontius Pilatus to be crucified in his name and faith this poore man is recouered Marcke well that the same thing which peter said him selfe had to giue quod habeo tibi do the same yet he professeth that he holdeth not as of his owne right or might but as of Christ Iesus in whose name he willed the lame to walke euen so the the power of pardoning sinner is truely and properly in the Priestes as the power of working miracles is properly in Peters hands neither the one noryet the other holden as of their owne might and power but both practized for the glory of God in the name of Iesus of Nazareth by their appointed ministery And as truly as Peter might saie to the feeble in body that which I haue I giue thee rise and walke in the name of iesos of Nazareth so surelie may the Priest saie to the sicke in souie that which I haue I giue thee in the name of Iesus thy Ennes my sonne be forgiuen thee No lesse is the one the peculiar worke of God then the other no more doth one dishonor god then the other FVLKE Nothing that is proper or peculiar to God can be communicated to man but it ceaseth to be proper to God For it is against the nature of properties to be made common to any other subiect then to that whereof they are proper adiuncts And yet I denie not but that which is proper to God he doth exercise often times by the seruice or ministery of men in which they are but instrumental causes he him selfe is the principal efficient otherwise man maie not occupie or execute secondly or thirdly or last of all by waie of participation that which is proper or peculiar to God So that it remaneth still an vndoubted truth that God onelie doth forgiue sinnes properlie and man doth not forgiue sinnes properlie but is the instrument of God to vtter and declare the good pleasure of God in forgiuing sinnes to all and euerie one that repent and beleeue the Gospe ll Your general negatiue that there is no function power nor dignitie be it neuer so peculiar to God by naturall excellencie but it maie be occupied of man secondly as by the waie of seruice ministery or participation if it were vrged against you would breed horrible absurdities To omit all other the power of creating thinges of nothing by what meanes maie man be partaker thereof occupie it or exercise it But let vs consider your induction All Miraculous workes worught by Christ in his humanitie the Prophets or Apostles were no lesse proper to God then the power to remit sinnes Yes verilie for manie miraculous workes that God did by Moses the inchaunters of Egipt did the like by the power of the deuill whereby it appeareth that although ail power be deriued from God as from the first cause thereof euen that power which the deuill hath yet it is otherwise communicated to creatures then the power of remission of sinnes is For that remaineth onelie in the hande of God and is not properlie
dare saie of all other actes that be exercised in Christes name in the Church doth not onelie no whit abase Gods excellency but was purposelie instituted to honour the maiestie of God in the face of all people and to set out the glorie of his house how dare any man for feare of Gods high indignation controlle the worke of Christ in remitting mans sinnes by such a visible sacrament as to the honour of God is most conuenient and to our saluation most necessarie If they will not let pristes remit sinnes for feare of offending God and dishonouring his name then let them not baptize not preach not teach not doe miracles not giue the holie ghost not correct faultes not giue orders nor doe any other functions For these euerie one be no lesse proper to God then remission of sinnes FVLKE You ground your argument vpon a sacrament before you haue prooued any The power of remitting sinnes is graunted to be perpetual in the Church and nothing derogatorie to the honour of God But that there is any other sacrament whereby men are assured of the forgiuenes of their sinnes by any externall ceremonie except the sacraments of Baptisme and of the Lordes supper which is the cheife matter in controuersie you goe not once about to prooue If Christs Church were like your Popish Church wherein all thinges are taught by Images dumme ceremonies and the worde of God neuerpreached it might come to passe as you say that it would be forgotten that such power is giuen by God to Christ. But in the Church of God many thinges are remembered by meanes of preaching the Gospell and word of God whereof there is no visible sacrament or ceremony although to helpe our weakenes the mercy of God hath by his sacraments sealed vp the moste necessarie and generail pointes of doctrine of our regeneration to be the Children of God and of our spirituall feeding or norishment to continue vs perpetuallie in the same But whereas you saie that if both sinnes of mans soull and sores of his bodie could not visiblie by externall meanes he healed in the glorious inuoration of Gods name it would surclie be forgottenin the Church of Christ that such power is giuen by God the father to his onelie sonne c. I praie you what externall meanes haue you visiblie to heale the sores of mans bodie by inuocation of Gods name lest it should be forgotten in the Church that the father hath giuen such power to his sonne Will you now send vs to the mocke miracles lying signes regestred in your Legendes wrought at your pilgramages Idolls or in an other worlde by the Iapponical Iesuites These because they are not seene mooue nothing the inwarde man whose minde you saie ful learnedlie will not reach to that inwardelie whereof he hath no proofe nor assurance outwardelie As though faith were not a substance of things that are hoped for and an euidence of things that are not seene Where of the minde of man hath no assurance outwardelie For the sacramentall seales but by faith make no assurance outwardelie Can I gather an assurance but by faith of Gods promise that my bodie being washed outwardelie my soull is clensed inwardelie Is it the receiuing of the outward elements in the Lordes supper that assureth me of my spirituall nourishment to eternall life or faith graunted vpon the worde which comming to the elements maketh them the seales of assurance of gods promises The question you aske of the Prophets foreseeing of things so long before things that afterwarde did fall whether it was graunted with dishonour of God or to his glorie I answere that the propertie of God alone to whome all things are present was not ne could not be communicated to men But God to his glorie by the instrument of their mouth did foreshew those things which he had reuealed vnto thē by his spirit in prophetical vision or dreame Neither could Elizeus see the heart inward thoughts of Gihezei his seruant which is gods onelie propertie but God did reueale and declare vnto him what hipocrisie was hid in the heart of Gihezei so that Elizeus knew no more properlie what was in the heart of Gihezei then any other man to whome Gihezei him-selfe might open his thoughtes sauing that Elizeus knew more certenlie and by 2 more wonderfull meane For to man Gihezei might ly but god who onely searcheth the heart the reines reuealed the truth to Elizeus Neither was Peter and the rest hable by laying on of handes to giue the holy ghost that is the visible gists of the holv ghost but according to gods good pleasure will For Acts. 8. Peter and Iohn sent by the Apostles into Samaria praied for them that were baptized that they might receiue the holie Ghost and after laide their hands vpon them and they receiued from god the sensible graces of the holie ghost as speaking with tongues interpretation of tongues healing of sicknes casting out of deuills and such like Therefore in such wonderfull effects as followed laying on of hands nothing that is most proper to god passed to men But it pleased God who is the onelie author of such graces and gifts to bestow the same by his faithfull stewards at their praier whereunto they were mooued and assisted by him and with that visible sacrament or ceremonie But such ceremonies we haue not for remission of sinnes or reteining of them by Gods institution Therefore no sacrament but a doctrine of remitting or reteining of sinnes ALLEN O heresie most shamefull that then goeth about to dishonour God most when she most pretendeth gods honour whereof shee is so tender and so carefull that shee hath barred his owne spouse of his blessed bodie of remission of sinnes of the spirit of God of all sacraments of all holie ceremonies of memories of miracles of all holie functions and to be short of all gifts and graces and all this for Gods honour so honourable a thing it is for Christ to be the king of so beggerlie a common wealth as they make of the Church such glorie it is for Christ to haue his onelie spouse robbed of the treasures of his giftes and graces so comelie it is for Christ to haue such sacraments as neither conteine him-selfe nor his grace so worthie a thing it is for Christ to haue ministers that vpon his owne warrant can neither pardon nor punish mans misdeedes Gloriosa dicta sunt de te Ciuitas Dei Glorious thinges haue beene reported of thee thou Citie of God and how arte thou now so barrenne and so contemptible that thy honour must needes redound to the dishonour of him by whome all thy honour onelie standeth But I cease to pursue the Churchces enemies now in mine owne wordes I will rather ioyne with the holie fathers for their ouerthrow whose not onelie reason and sufficient answere to this their vaine replie founded on the pretence of Gods honour but also their onelie
in this age by the singular mercie of God to the vndoubted saluation of many thousands The outward preaching of Christes Doctrine is not the proper worke of Christ but common to all his true and faithfull seruantes the Prophettes Apostles and their successoures Bishopes Pastours and teachers It is Christ as Austine saieth that teacheth inwardly by his spirit from heauen and is the author of the doctrine that is taught on earth in which respect he saith He that heareth you heareth me c. But it is the voice of man that vttereth this Doctrine in the outward eares of men and not the voice of Christ. ALLEN But to beare downe the aduersaries of trueth fullly we will ioyne with them touching the sacrament of extream vnction the sacrament of baptisme and such other in which they cannot nor doe not denie concerning one of them but man without all derogation to Gods honour remitteth sinnes And how can it here seeme strange that in the sacrament of penance God should by mans office remit mortall crimes seeing it cannot be denied but God vseth not onelie mans ministerie but also the externall seruice of bare and base water which is much inferiour by nature and dignitie to a Priest or anie other man to take awaie sinnes both originall and actuall in the sacrament of baptisme in which sacrament seeing aswell the Priest is the minister as the water an instrument whereby God remitteth all sinnes be they neuer so many and grieuouse whether they be committed by their owne acte or by our fathers ofspring why doth it dishonour God any more that the Priest should be the minister of remission in the sacrament of penance then it doth by as great an office almoste in remitting of sinnes in the sacrament of baptisme Againe read the Epistle of S. Iamer and you shall finde the Priest made a minister the oile an instrument in the extreamitie of sicknes to forgiue sinnes how much more is the priest without anie imparing of Gods power the worker vnder him of our reconciliation and pardoning in the sacrament of penance in which especiallie the grace of God is giuen aboue all other sacraments to that onlie end and purpose I may be more bold to vse this comparing of sundrie Sacraments together because not onely Saint Ambrose refuteth the Father of this fond heresie by the same reason but also because moste of the Doctors of the Church doe confesse that she euer had these waies to remit mans sinnes by without derogation to Christes soueraigntie herein of whome onelie she holdeth her right as well in the sacrament of penance as in baptisme or extreame vnction Saint Chrysostome saith Neque enim solùm cùm nos regenerant sed postea etiam condonandorum nobis peccatorum potestatem obtinent infirmatur inquit inter vos aliquis Accersat presbyteros Ecclesiae Neither haue Priests power in baptisme onelie but afterward also they haue good authoritie to forgiue our sinnes Is any man feeble amongst you saith he Call for the Priests of the Church let them saie praiers ouer him annoint him with oile and the praier of faith shall saue the sicke and if he be in sinnes they shall be forgiuen him But this sacrament instituted by Gods word and Christes authoritie vsed of olde and well knowne to all the Fathers is now become nothing in our building Sinne is now a daies so fauored that no sacrament may be abiden for the release thereof The verie expresse wordes of Scripture can take no place where flattering of wickednes and phantasie ruleth to the contrarie FVLKE Touching extreame vnction we shall speake anone but of baptisme we saie that to speake properlie man baptiseth with water vnto repentance as an outward seale of the forgiuenes of sinnes Christ onelie baptizeth with the holie Ghost and with fire actuallie and effectuallie to purge and clense our sinnes Of the sacrament of penance we must first be resolued before we can acknowledge any office of man to remitte mortal crimes therein If Christ had instituted a sacrament of penance as he hath of baptisme we wold acknowledge the like effectes in the one that we doe in the other Concerning the anointing with oile spoken of in Saint Iames whereunto besides bodelie health remission of sins was promised it was a sacrament while that special gift of healing continued but no instituriō of perpetuall continuance Chrysostome citeth this text of Saint Iames to prooue that not onelie in the sacrament of regeneration but afterwards also the Priests hath power to remit sinnes not onelie by teaching and admonishing but also by helpe of praier But of anie perpetuall sacrament there is no mention in him neither was it instituted by our sauiour Christ with anie commaundement of perpetuall continuance as babtisme the Lordes supper are but onely so long as the gift should continue Neither doth Saint Iames giue it in charge as a perpetuall sacrament but onelie admonisheth the Church to vse that benefit of healing so long as it should remaine with men ALLEN There be some that affirme this annoiling to haue beene a miraculous practise to take awaie the diseases of the sicke and therefore that it did decaie with the working of other the like miracles which after the spring of our religion were not vsual But that is a fond glosse For I aske of thē whether the people then Christianed were instructed or rather commaunded to call for the Apostles or others to heale them miraculously of their diseases or whether all Priestes had the gift of working miracles in the Primitiue Church If they saie yea touching the first piont then as well were they charged to send for them to reuiue them after they were dead because the Apostles so could doe when they same occasion and so did by some But that is plaine absurde and false that euer Apostle gaue in charge to anie man much lesse to make a generall precept as S. Iames here doth to seeke after miracles for that were to tempt God And for the second they are not so vnreasonable to answere me that all Priestes could worke miracles which is a seuerall gift of the holie Ghost from the power of their ministerie and therefore Saint Iames would not haue charged the sicke persons to haue called indifferentlie for Priestes to heale them miraculouslie the gift of miracles being not common to them all nor perpetuallie promised to anie of them all Againe I would knowe of them whether there was anie miraculous healing that had the remission of sinnes ioyned vnto it or to the externall creature by which they healed any person If they saie yea then it followeth that the Priestes might by the office of that creature heale a man of his sinnes which they affirme to be blaspemie and dishonour to God But to what absurditie so euer you bring them they will not confesse mortall men in externall Sacraments to remit sinnes FVLKE You are better aduised now concerning Caluines iudgement of the oile where
of Saint Iames speaketh then you were when you wrot your defence of purgatorie for there you were not ashamed to affirme that Caluine did expound it for a medicinable salue or ointment to ease the sicke mans sore But now let vs see how you will prooue his interpretation to be a fond glosse First you aske whether the people then christianed were instructed or rather commaunded to call for the Apostles or others to heale thē miraculouslie of their diseases I answere they were admonished by the Apostles that they might vse the benefit of that speciall gift of healing and that is manifest by the wordes of Saint Iames. Secondlie you aske whether all Priests had the gift of working miracles in the primitiue Church I answere I cannot tell of euerie one but that in euerie Church some had the gift of healing it is most probable in the Apostles time And therefore Saint lames willeth not one Priest but all the Priests or Elders of the Church to be called for But against my first answer you obiect that by like reason they were charged to send for them to reuine the dead that to seeke after miracles were to tempt God I replie the gift of raising the dead was verie rare insomuch as we read but of two that were raised by the Apostles them selues Tabytha by Peter and Eutycus by Paul And Saint Iames willeth not the Apostles which were not in al places hand but the elders of the Church which were in euery Christian congregation to be sent for Neither is it a tempting of God to seeke after miracles of healing at their hands to whome God hath giuen that gift To your second obiection I answere that albeit euerie Priest had not that gift whereof as I cannot affirme so cannot you denie of certaintie yet it is certaine that in euerie congregation of the dispersed Iews to whome 〈◊〉 writeth there were some that had that gift as it is manifest by the promise that he maketh that the praier offaith shall giue health to the sicke man and the Lord shall raise him vp But howsoeuer it be if there were anie miracles of healing that had remission of sinnes ioyned to it or to the externall creature the Priests might by that office of that creature heale a man of his sinnes which they affirme to be blasphemie c. I answere Saint Iames his wordes are plaine from whence remission of sinnes commeth properlie The oile was a seale of assurance both of bodelie health and of remission of sinnes with are the cause often times that man is visited which sicknes and bodelie infirmite but not allwaies as our sauiour Christ sheweth of the blind man therefore he saith if he haue committed sinne it shal be forgiuen meaning if he had this bodely infirmitie laid vpon him for some greiuos sinne For otherwise there is no man but sinneth and whome God may iustly punish for his sinne although he deal more mercifully with his children who though they want not his fatherly chastisement yet he doth not alwaies laie vpon them the crosse of bodely affliction ALLEN In the sacrament of baptisme they will not stand with me openlie for they will seeme to acknowldge the forgiuenes of sinnes thereby and I thinke by the Ministerie of man to though in their priuat schooles yea and in their open blaspemoous bookes the whole packe of Protestantes and Zuinglians denie that sacrament also to remit sinnes both acknowledging that children may be saued and be receiued to heauen without it auouching that sinne remaineth still in the children after their Christendome though God will not impute the same vnto them for the hinderance of their saluation Which false Doctrine is the ground of their more subtill opinions touching onelie saith and imputed iustice and other their pelting paradoxes concerning mans iustification which I cannot now stand vpon Would God the ignorant sort of their followers could see through the dunghil of this confuse Doctrine For these haue euer besides the florish of their faith that they make abroad amongst fooles an other more improbable which they keepe for the strong ones at home that will no more be offended to heare the Turkish then the christian faith And so had the Epicure as Tullie teacheth For pleasure of the minde gathered by contentation and contemplation of heauenlie thinges was his chiefe God and extreame end of his endeuours abroade but his dearlinge◠at home had the pleasures of the bodelie lustes and wantonnesse for the end of all goodnes Well but I will reason with them vpon the ground of their outward profession that baptisme is a sacrament in which truelie sinnes be remitted by the ministerie of men and without all dishonour of God seeing it was Gods owne ordinance appointment But heare S. Ambrose againe I praie you encountering in this matter with our mens masters Cur baptisatis saith he per hominem peccata dimitti non licet in baptismo vtique remissio peccatorum omnium est Quid interest vtrum per poenitentiam an per lauacrum hoc ius sibi datum sacerdotes vendicent vnum in vtroque ministerium est Sed dices quia in lauacro operatur mysteriorum gratia quid in poenitentia non Dei nomen operatur Why do they baptize if man may not remit sinnes for surelie in Baptisme all sinnes be remitted and what difference I beseech you whether Priestes chalenge this gift to be theirs in baptisme or in pennance The ministerie of man is like in both But you will replie perchaunce that in baptisme the grace of the ministeries worketh And what worketh I praie you in penance Doth not Gods name bring all to passe there also Thus he But here good reader marke diligently in this doctoures words as also in other the like of all auncient Fathers that penance is not here taken for anie vertue either morall or theologicall which is in a priuat man when he amendeth or changeth his purpose or former euill life to the better whereof there was some shade amongst the heathen is now both commended in scripture and giuen man by Christes graces not onelie afore the remitting of the sacrament of baptisme if the party were in case of actuall deadly sinne but also goeth alwaie as a neccssary preparatiue before sacramentali confession and is called in our tongue properlie repentance this Doctor therefore speaketh not of this kinde of penitence but of a publike act of the Church touching the reconciliation or repayring of mans state defiled after his baptisme by greeuous crimes in which by Priestes iudgement the sinnes committed be either pardoned or punished And this must be called repentance onely or the amendement of life as Heretiques do tearme it to confound the Doctrine of Gods trueth Sacraments but it is an externall and visible act-on appointed by Christ in the 20. of Saint Iohn to reconcile sinners by that forme of absoluing which the Church vseth in the name and inuocation of God for
be found in the scripture it is most cleere that God forgiueth our sinnes otherwise then by externall orders or sacramets Againe the sacrament of Baptisme is a seale and assurance vnto vs of the forgiuenes of our sinnes not onely such as are com mitted before baptisme receiued but euen vnto our liues end whensoeuer we are truelie penitent for the same Also the sacrament of the Lords supper in which we are spirituallie fed with the bodie of Christ which was giuen for vs and with his blood which was shed for the remission of our sinnes is a sure pledge token and seale of the remission of our sinnes committed after baptisme that we neede not the Popish sacrament of pennance for the same ALLEN As for my selfe good Christian Reader I am not so free from sinne wo is me therefore nor so void of mans affection but as often I heare in the sacrament of penance the Priest who to me then is Christ in full power of pardoning saying the wordes of absolution ouer me me think truelie I heare the sweete voice of Christ saying with authoritie thy sinnes be forgiuen thee Whereof no mortallman shall euer forbid me to take hope and singular trust of remission of sinnes with the passing comfort that thereon ensueth All these that are without Christes folde seeke not to heare his voice for all their load of sinne from the heauenlie and intire ioy whereof they be as farre as from the conceiuing of of the felicitie to come in heauen it selfe But let them assure themselues that Christ writeth with his holie finger all their sinnes though to Christ they will not now confesse them whiles they refuse the power ofremission that he both had aud hath in earth to the worldes end without which outward solemne act of penance man should either dispaire of Gods mercie and liue in feare intollerable of euerlasting perishing which often fall to timerous consciences or els which is now of daies more common men would liue in such passing presumption and vaine securitie of heauen that they should neuer till the very last breath of their euill time either be sorie for sinne or seke to do any good worke at al. This time shall testifie with me herein and the verie diuersitie that is betweene these our corrupt conditions and the holy studies and endeauours of our forefathers shalltestifie but the daies that yet are to come must need most feele the smart of it when these that now haue the direction of other mens steppes shall be gone by whome for olde discipline wherein they were brought vp Some signes and remnantes of vertue be continued in the world For when they be spent and our yonkers that neuer heard of the Churches discipline but haue had their full swinge in sinne with the instruction of a most wanton doctrine shall be the principall of the people if this diuision so long continue which God forbid into what terms shal trueth and vertue be then brought Me think I see before hand the lamentable state of things and in a manner beholde the fruit of our onelie faith of this bolde presumption of Gods mercie of remouing the discipline of penance of refusing the onely ordinance of God for remission of our mortall sinnes Euil are we now but a thousand partes worsse shal they be then which in long nouseling in this naughtie learning of libertie shall be in perpetuall wo and haue no feele nor sense thereof And all this must needs follow vpon the lack of these outward acts external waies of pardoning punishing offences and intended either for mans present comfort and solace or els to keepe in awe the wantons of the world by the rodde of outward discipline which in the Church hath euer especiallie beene obserued in the sacrament of penance FVLKE When we heare the authorized embassadours and messengers of reconciliation pronounce in the name of Christ according to the scriptures and promises of God that our sinnes are forgiuen vs whensoeuer we be hartilie sorie truely penitent for the same we haue sufficient warrant out of Gods word to assure our selues of remission of them with inestimable ioy comfort of conscience But for the sacrament of penance or the Priest to be Christ vnto vs in fullpower of pardoning or to haue anie wordes of absolution said ouer vs because we haue no ground in Gods word whatsoeuer imaginarie pleasure you haue therein we finde nothing that is of force to staie a weake conscience to comfort a troubled spirit or to heale a broken heart To confesse our sinnes to Christ who onelie knoweth whether our repentance be vnfained God forbid that we should refuse But to confesse them to a Popish Priest or anie lawfull minister if they be secret there is no law or commaundement of God to require vs. If our conscience be not satisfied about anie offence that we haue committed how we should declare our vnfained conuersion or repentance we maie vse the aduise of the Godlie and learned pastor who is able out of the word of god toresolue our doubts and quiet our conscience That the want of Popish pennance will driue all men either to desperation or securitie and presumption it is affirmed without anie proofe God be praised experience cryeth out of the contrarie side But rather the doctrine of poperie concerning the pretensed sacrament of penance is manifest occasion of securitie in them that are carnallie minded of desperation in them that haue a tender conscience For the one thinketh he hath an easy remedy for his sinnes to discharge them into a priestes eare the other considering the impossibilitie of confession and vnsufficiency of the satisfaction that be parts of this counterfet sacrament can finde smal comfort in the priests absolution Your blasphemous rayling at the doctrine of God iustifying by faith onely which you cal the instruction of a most wanton doctrine and the naughtie learning of libertie is sufficiently confuted by the examples of many thousands of Gods Saints who acknowledging that they are iustified in the sight of God by faith onelie in the merites of Christ are more fruitfull in good workes then all the popish hypocrites in the world Where you terme your popish penance to be the onely ordinance of god for remission of our mortall sinnes you vtter not onelie a grosse contradiction of the trueth taught in the holie scriptures but also directlie contrarie to the doctrine of all Papists and euen of your selfe For what saie you M. Allen were you wel aduised when you said that penance is the onely ordinance of God for remission of our mortal sins If it be as you saie then the sacrifice of the masse is not the ordinance of God for remission of our mortall sinnes as al Papists beside you do holde and mantaine and extreame vnction wherof you haue latelie affir med the contrarie is not the ordinance of God for the remission of our mortall sinnes The discipline of the Church wherby wantons are kept in
Christes owne person Which prouing and iudging of mans selfe to be meant by the diligent dif cussing of our consciences sinnes and misdeedes by contrition and confession of them to our ghostlie Father the practise of the Church doth most plainlie prooue which neuer suffered any greeuous sinner to communicat before he had called him selfe to a reckning of his sinnes before the minister of God and so iudged him selfe that he receiue not to his damnation that which to euery worthy person is his life and saluation Whereof S. Augustine or the authour of the booke de Ecclesiasticis dogmatibus set forth with his name giueth vs good notice for his time Quem mortalia crimina post Baptismum commissa premunt hortor priùs publica poenitentia satisfacere ita sacerdotis iudicio reconciliatum communioni sociari si vult non ad iudicium condemnationem sui Eucharistiam percipere sed secreta satisfactione solui mortalia crimina non negamus I exhorte euerie man saith this holie doctour that is burdened after his baptisme with mortall sinne to satisfie for the same by publique penance and to be reconciled by the priests iudgement to be restored to the communion of saints if he meane to receiue the holy Sacrament not to his iudgement and condemnation And I denie not in this case but deadly sinnes may be remitted by secret satisfaction Thus he By whose wordes you see in what a damnahle state men now of daies stand seeing that whosoeuer receiueth the sacrament of Christes bodie and blood before he be reconciled by a priestes sentence and assoiled of his sinnes he doth receiue it to his euerlasting damnation Vnto whose iudgement I ioyne Saint Cyprian in this same matter complainig verie earnestly vpon certaine Conuersies in his daies that would aduenture vpon Christes bodie and blood ante exomologesim factam criminis ante purgatam conscientiam sacrificio manu sacerdotis Before their sinnes be confessed and their consciences purged by sacrifice and the Priests hand Al these thinges might be at large declared and confirmed farther by the iudgement of mostauncient Fathers but because I haue bene verie long and enough alreadie maie seeme to be said for such as by reason will be satisfied a great deale more then anie Protestant will answere vnto and also the scriptures them selues giuing the Priest so plaine power of binding and retaining as wel as of remitting and loosing will do more with these that haue charged themselues with the beleefe of nothing that is not in expresse writing of Gods word then the vniforme consent of all ages and the moste notable persons in the same In respect of their humor therefore I will not saie much more for this point then I haue said onely my meaning now is for the Catholikes comfort to repeat a few such euident sentences out of moste authentique authors by whom we take a 〈◊〉 not onely of their meaninges which is much for the matter but especiallie of the Churches practise in all ages and moste countries christened since the Apostles time which I account the moste surest waie to touch trie truth by that by the example of al our forefathers euery man may willingly learne to submit him selfe to the sentence of such as God hath made the iudges of his soule and sinnes FVLKE Yf Saint Poul had meant Popish shrift he could and would haue said Submit your selues to the examination iudgement of the Priest and not as he hath said Let a man trie him selfe Iudge your selues brèthren Yf auricular confession be necessarie vnder paine of damnation for euerie one that receiueth the sacrament of Christes bodie and bloode immediately before it many thousandes of your priests which saie masse euerie daie without shriuing themselues are in a damnable case I or there passeth no day of mans life without some deadelie sinne if not in deede not word yet at the least in thought but that you popish hypocrites by your distinction of veniall sinnes flatter your selues to be cleare when you are moste foull and filthie but the perpetuall practize of the Church you saie prooueth the necessitie of auricular confession whereof you take witnes the author of the booke de Ecclesiasticis dogmatibus for his time which you doe honestly not to father vpon Saint Augustine being a man of much later time lesse learning and more corruption of doctrine but you do fraudulentlie cut of his saying in the waste because that which followeth declareth plainlie that either he meaneth not of mortall sinnes as the Popish Church now doth holde or else his opinion for secret satisfaction is farre differing from that you would haue men weene that he meaneth namely such as you vse to inioine in your confession fiue Ladies Psalters fiue fridaies fast fiue pence groates or shillings to so many poore men in remembrance of the 5. wounds and such like stuffe but these authors wordes require another manner of satisfaction Sed secreta satisfactione solui mortalia crimina non negamus sed mutato prius secularihabitu confesso religionis studio per vitae correctionem iugi immò perpetuo luctu miserante Deo it a duntaxat vt contraria pro his quae poenitet 〈◊〉 eucharistiam omnibus dominic is diebus supplex submissus vsque ad mortem percipiat Poenitentia vera est penitenda non admittere admissa deflere Satisfactio paenitentiae est causas peccatorum excidere nec eorum suggestionibus aditum indulgere But also that by secret satisfaction mortall crimes may be loosed we doe not denie but so that the secular habite be first changed and the studie of religion confessed by amendment of life and by continuall yea perpetuall sorow God being mercifull so onelie that he doe the contrarie things to those for which he doth penance and humblie and lowlie receiue the Euchariste euerie sondaie to his dying day It is true repentance not to committe things to be repented and to bewaile such as are committed The satisfaction of repentance is to cut of the causes of sinnes and to yeald no entrie vnto their suggestions Wherefore it is plaine that in this writers time there was no auricular confession but an open confession and publike penance for open and hainous offences and that none was admitted to secret satisfaction except he changed his habite became a Monke performed other conditions by him required by which it is manifest that the iudgement of this writer though corrupt yet is contrarie to the practize of the popish Church at this daie But Saint Cyprian is a better witnes I trow for the necessitie of auricular cōfession of secret sins sauing that he speaketh of them that had openlie fallen to Idolatrie and without open confession of their fault and publike satisfaction of the Church by some vndiscreete pastours were admitted to the Lordes table describing them he saith Mortiferos Idolorum cibos adhuc pene ructantes exhalantibus etiamnum
of the Primitiue Church or to disprooue Beatus Rhenanus which denieth the same accusing both the noueltie and and the tyranie thereof and the danger that mens consciences haue beene in through it beside manie other knowne inconueniences ALLEN But now if you conferre with the Fathers of all ages and of euerie notable Church touching this confession to Gods Priests you may beginne if you list euen at this daie and driue vp both the trueth of the doctrine and the perpetuall practise thereof euen to the Apostles time In the late holie Council holden at Trent both the doctrine is confirmed and declared with all grauitie and also the aduersaries of that sacrament and the misconstructers of Christes wordes of remission to pertaine to preaching of the Gospell not to the verie act of absolution be by the consent of all Catholike states of the Christian world accursed excommunicated It was at Furence also decreed in a most generall assemblie of both the Latine and Greek Church that as wel the whol sacrament of penance as that especiall part which is called confession was of Christes institution In the great councell holden at Lateran there is so plaine charge giuen to euerie Christian to confesse his sinnes either to his owne ordinarie Parochian or to some other Priest that hath by him or otherwise authoritie and iurisdiction ouer the penitent that Protestantes affirme albeit verie false'y that confession was first instituted in the said Councel and this was more then three hundred yeares since And foure hundred yeares before that in a Prouinciall Councell that was kept at Vormacia there is a Canon made concerning the qualities of the priests that are constituted to be confessours and Penitentiaries where it is commaunded that they be such Qui possunt singulorum causas originem quoque modum culparum sigillatim considerare examinare That can particularlie trie out and examine the causes of euerie offender the manner and ground of their faultes FVLKE We are so well accquainted with your often bragges of Fathers and Councells that we neuer start for them seeing we knowe you haue nothing but the drosse of the latter times to cast at vs. For the Councell of Trentes decree we esteeme it as it is worthie being made by a few buckeram Bishoppes of Italie and some other Epicurian prelates of other countries to patch vp rather then to repaire the ruines and decaies of the kingdome of Antichrist In the late Councel of Florence I remember nothing decreed of this matter neither doe you note where we should finde it In the Lateran Councell that was kept litle more then 300. yeares since the Protestantes doe trulie affirme that the necessitie of auricular confession was first imposed vpon men of the Romish Church For in the councell of Wormes which you saie was 400 yeares elder there is neuer a word of confession or confessor but of wife consideration to be had of them that did penance by which are ment open offenders that did open pennance neither are you able to prooue the contrarie Paenitentibue saith the Canon serundum differentiam peccatorum c. To the penitents or such as doe penance let penance be decreed by the iudgement of the Priest according to the difference of their sinnes Therefore in giuing penance the Priest ought seuerallie to consider the causer of euerie one the beginning also manner of the faulies and diligentlie to examine and manifestlie to know the affection and sighings of the offenders also to consider the qualities of the times persons of the places ages that according to the consideration of the places ages or times or according to the qualitie of the offences the groning of euery offendor he turne not his eies from the holie rules Thus sarre the Canon after which follow the rules of penance to be apointed for diuers kindes of offences as for him that hath killed a Priest a pagane his parents or brother or for him that hath slain a man in his madnes or against his will and such like whereby it appeereth that the Canon was made for penance to be enioyned to publike offenders and not to compell men to confesse their secret sinnes ALLEN Which decree is borowed word for word almoste out of the last Canon of Constantinople Councell called the sixth generall which was long before all the forsaid Synodes Their discourse is long vpon the Priestes dutie which shoulde sitte on confessions whome they instruct by these wordes Oportebit qui facultatem absoluendi ligandi à Deo receperunt peccati qualitatem speculentur peccatoris promptitudinem ad reuersionem vt sic medicamentum admoueant aegritudini aptum ne si de peccato sine discrimine statuant aberrent à salute aegrotantis Those that haue receiued of our Lorde power to loose and binde must trie out the qualitie of euerie fault and the readines of the offender to returne vnto vertue that they maie prouide a medicine meet to the maladie lest if they should without distinct knowledge of their sinne giue iudgement they should erre in poruiding health for the sicke person By which Councell kept in Constantinople you maie easelie gather that neither confession was euer omitted by the lawe nor the common Penitentiarie long abrogated out of Constaninople Church And when I name these decrees of so manie generall Councels in diu rfe ages I do not onelie call them generallie to witnesse for my cause which were inough seeing euerie determination there passeth as by the sentence of the holie Ghoste and Christes owne iudgement of whose presence such hotie assemblance is assured but I appeale to eueric holy Bishop Priest and Prince of the world that agreed to the same and were there assembled euerie of which was of more experience learning and vertue or at the least of more humilitie then all our aduersaries aliue But now if you go to trie other the learned writers of all times for the practize of this point then our labour shall be infinite but our cause more strong and 〈◊〉 aduersaries sooner confounded I need not for that practize name the learned schoolemem of excellent capacitie in deepe mysteries because they were so late and because Heretikes can not denie but they are all vndoubtedlie against them and euerie one for vs Thomas Aquinas is ours Dionysius is ours I meane the Carthusian If anie man doubt of Saint Bernard let him reade the life of Malachie whome he praiseth sor bringing into vre the most profitable vse of confession in the rude partes of Ireland Saint Bede is prooued before not onelie to haue allowed confession to the Priest but to haue expounded Saint Iames wordes of confession for the sacrament of pennance and vttering our sinnes to Gods Ministers And he recordeth that in our Countrie of England before his daies confession was vsed to a Priest Whereof as also os pennance and satisfaction there is an example or two in the
from the paine and from the fault some plenarie of al their sinnes some partial of part of their sins some for a number of daies some for many thousands of yeares which euery one that paieth mony for them shall haue the benefit of them or which he giueth to such an hospitall gylde or brotherhoode or to him which saith such a praier or goeth on such a pilgri mage such like wherunto may be added his dispensations absolutiós exemptions lycenses these are the popes pardons of which the controuersy is between vs of which he cānot prooue that there was either vse or approbation no not in the Church of Rome for a wholl 1000. yeares after Christ. And these when he hath saied as much as he hath learned to saie for them out of the decretalls Clementines and Extrauagants you shall finde to be by his their owne determination nothing ells but as they are called in Latine Bullae Bubles great in appeerance but altogether emptie and voide of profit The attention of the gentle reader I do likewise require beccause he may see what good occasion Luther had to seperate himselfe from the Popish Church as from the whore of Babylon which so obstinately defended such abhominable blasphemies which all wise and reasonable men haue either abhorred or as he confesseth beene offended at them And yet let the reader marke how boldlie he calleth this article of the popes pardons an article of Christian faith whereof the Church of god neuer heard for a thousand yeares more since Christs assension before the loosing of Satā out of the bottomles pit when Antichrist was bolde to set abroad al his impieties and to sit not in a mysterie of iniquitie but openlie in the sight of al men in the temple of God and to exalt him-selfe aboue all that is called God or worshiped ALLEN And to be plaine in the matter where sinceritie is moste required two causes mooued me to beleeue like and allow of the power of pardons and indulgencies long before I either knew the commodities of them or had sought out the ground and meaning of them The first was the Churches authoritie which I credited in all other articles before I knew any of them or could by reason or scripture mainteine them Whose iudgement to follow by my Christian profession in all other pointes and to forsake in this one of Popes pardons had beene meere follie and a signe of phantasticall choise of things indifferent which is the proper passion of heresie Neither did I then know that the Church of Christ had allowed such thinges because I had read the determination of any generall Councells or decrees of some chiefe gouernours of the saide Church touching such pardons or because I had by histories and note of diuerse ages seene the practize of the faithfull people herein by which waies her meaning of doubtfull things is most assuredlie knowne but onelie I deemed that the Church allowed them and misliked the contrarie because such as bare the name of Christian folke and Catholike did approoue them and sometimes lamented the lacke of them And surelie for an vnlearned man I count it the briefest rule in the worlde to keepe him selfe both in faith and conuersation euer with that companie which by the generall and common calling of the people be named Catholikes For that name kept Saint Augustine himselfe in the trueth and true Church much more it may doe the simple sorte who is not hable to stande with an heretike that will challenge the Church to himselfe by Sophisticall reasons from the Christians that for lacke of learning can not answere him Well this companie of Catholikes brought me to know the Church and my creede caused me to beleeue the Church no lesse concerning the Popes Pardons then any other article of our Christian profession which though it were not of like weight yet it was to me of like trueth and all in like vnknowne at that time FVLKE Your pretence of plainnes sinceritie is but craft and sub tiltie to deceiue the simple and ignorant that they might please themselues in their blindenes and by your example thinke themselues at ease in their ignorance For what reasonable man will be perswaded that you could beleeue like and allow that thing whereof you know no vse nor whence it came or what it meaned But here you shew what faith is accounted among the Papists a fond perswasion of any thing that is tolde them by their teachers although they neither knowe what commoditie it bringeth nor what ground of trueth it hath nor finallie what it meaneth But howsoeuer it was two causes mooued you whereof you professe that hearing of the worde of God was neither The first was the Churches authoritie which you credited in all other articles before you knew any of them or could by reason or scripture mainteine them So by your owne confession you did as many papists doe beleeue you knew not what which faith would neuer bring you to eternall life which consisteth in knowledge of God and Iesus Christ according to that which is writen that wee might beleeue and be saued But seeing you could neither by reason nor by scripture mainteine those articles to be true which you beleeued how could you be perswaded that this companie was the Church of Christ the piller of trueth rather then the Church of Antichrist the mother of heresies and errors For all swarmes of heretikes challenge vnto themselues the name of the Church and require credit to be giuen vnto them and the more heretikes the lesse care they haue to make any triall of their doctrine to be trueth what had you more to perswade your conscience that you were in the right waie then a lew or a Turke hath which crediteth the companie amongst whome he is bred and borne without examining by reason or the scripture whether those thinges which they teach them be the trueth or no But it had beene a signe of phantasticall choyce of thinges indifferent you saie which is the proper passion of heresie to follow the Churches iudgement in all other points and to forsake it in this one of Popes Pardons Where you saie the phantasticall choice of things indifferent is the proper passion of heresie I know not what you meane except you thinke that heretikes are deceiued onelie in the choise of thinges indifferent or that whosoeuer maketh some phantastical choise of thinges indifferent is an heretike neither of which opinions I trowe you are able to mainteine For though some heretikes make a phantasticall choise of thinges indifferent I suppose it is not proper onelie to heretikes for some schismatikes that be not heretikes make such a phantasticall choise and the phantastical choise of heretikes is most occupied about principall groundes and articles of faith not about thinges indifferent onelie Moreouer I would know whether you account the Popes pardons to be things indifferent or necessarie for the Church for if
but the promise of truth which indeed if it be shewed so manifest that it cannot come in doubt it is to be preferred before all those things by which I am holden in the Catholike Church But if it be onelie promised and not exhibited no man shall mooue me from that faith which bindeth my minde with so manie and great knottes vnto Christian religion Let vs see therfore what Maniche doth teach me c. These wordes declare that setting aside the wisdom of the Church grounded vpō the scriptures which the heretikes would not acknowledge there were manie other things that might iustlie holde him in the Catholike Church among which the name of Catholikes was but one and serued onelie at that time when the Catholike religion was moste commonlie imbraced therefore he denied not that the name of Catholike onelie was sufficient to teach a man to knowe the Church and the trueth by it but acknowledgeth that all these motiues of vniuersalitie consent miracles succession name of Catholike must giue place to the trueth when it is plainlie shewed out of the canonicall scriptures as in the chapter following he vrgeth them to shew out of the gospells of Christ wher it is writen that Manicheus was an Apostle of Christ as his sect affirmed and his epistle pretended As for the reason you alledge that vnlearned men are not able to stand with heretikes in disputation which wil challenge the Church to themselues is of no force for the vnlearned man ought to know the Church by the true notes thereof conteined in the scriptures which is sufficient for to satisfie his conscience although he can not cunninglie auoide all the Sophisticall arguments that the aduersarie bringeth whereas theonelie name of Catholikes can breede no true faith or quietnes of minde which is not obteined by the peoples iudgement but by authoritie of the worde of God And seing the people are commonlie deceiued in many matters of difficultie and moste of all in misnaming of things what assurance shall the vnlearned haue that they be not deceiued in this so weightie a matter and wherein their speach may so easilie be abused But howsoeuer it was the common calling of the people brought you to know Catholikes Catholikes to know the Church and the creede taught you to beleeue the Church rules in Popes pardons then in other articles Thus is your faith builded altogether vpon humane presumptions the ladder whereof is this you beleeue Popes pardons because the Church of Rome alloweth them you beleeue the Church of Rome because it is the Catholike Church you beleeue that it is the Catholike Church because the people commonlie call it so But of Christian faith Saint Paull describeth another ladder faith commeth by hearing hearing by the worde of God preached by ministers sent of God so that against the authoritie of god who giueth both his worde and preachers and by them true faith you haue the generall and common calling of men which giue authority to that companie to be the Church which is surnamed Catholike which company so called may cause you to beleeue what they list and this indeed is the ground of al your heresies if you had gone one step lower that the Deuill inspireth ignorant and wicked men to call his fowle blouse the Romish synagogue by the name of the beautifull spouse of Christ his Catholike Church ALLEN The second cause that mooued me to reuerence the power of pardoning in the high Bishup and to like his Indulgences was the verie persons of them which first reprooued the same In whome because I saw the worlde to note and wonder at other manie moste blasphemous and inexcusable heresies I verilie deemed though I was then for my age almoste ignorant of all thinges that this opinion and impugnation of Pardons could neither be of God nor of good motion that first began in them begate such a number of most wicked cōtentio is opinions as streight vpon the controlling of the Churches power herein did ensue not onelie against Christs officers in earth but against his Saints in heauen against himselfe in the blessed Sacrament This extreame intollerable issue mee thought verilie could haue no holie entraunce and therfore with the other named cause stayed me in the Churches faith euen then when I had no feeling nor sense in the meaning of these matters FVLKE You were a wise young man in those daies when being almost ignorant of all things as you confesse you would follow the iudgement of the worlde in condemning the persons of them that reprooued pardons and were not able to iudge whether they were iustlie condemned of other blasphemous inexcusable heresies Nay at this presēt time as great a cleark as you are taken to be among your friends you are not able to conuince thē of such blasphemous inexcusable heresies as you prate of And yet if you had bin thō as able iustly to haue reproued thē by the scriptures of such monsters as the world did wonder at in them yet you staied vpō a weake staffe except this be a good atgumēt with you heretiks hold manifest false opinions therefore they holde no true opinions Much more wiselie and soundlie you should haue sought the true Church as Saint Augustine teacheth out of the scriptures and thereby iudged of the worldes noting and wondring which because it consisteth moste of wicked men doth commonlie condemne Christ and his Gospell Out of the same scripture you should haue learned who were Christes officers and whoe the limmes of Antichrist what honour is due vnto the saints in heauen and what manner presense there is of Christ vpon earth But as your faith was thē grounded vpō simple sophistrie in supposing that which no wise man will graunt so is it not now much differing from the same although you haue learned with more craft to peruert a few scriptures and to wrest the sayinges of some dctors for a florish hauing no more substance of true faith which is builded vpon the word of God then you had before For if your shameles principle be denyed that you are the Church of Christ then you come back to these beggerlie motyues as in your articles and Bristowes motyues is manifest being not able either to finde the notes of the true Church in the synagogue of Rome nor to iustify the doctrine of the Church of Rome to be builded vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles when triall is to be made by their writings ALLEN But afterwad reading the historie of the pitifull fal of our time and there considering the sinister intent and occasion of the first improofe of Pardons and all the strange endeuours of Luther whose name is cursed to all good men who first in all mans memorie sauing one Wicleffe who was condemned in Constance Councell for the same was so bolde onelie vpon contention and couetousnes to condemne that which himselfe in Conscience knew to be true and lawfull I could not
but much be confirmed in my faith thereby And yet all this while though the matter of pardons seemed to me to be more and more sound in it selfe and as true as the Spirit of God is true who was the author thereof in the Church yet I did not then consider of it as a thing of anie great importance but I conceiued it to be a small matter subiect to a certaine iugling in reason such as wicked men lightlie make their close and craftie entrance by to more mischiefe and further attemptes against the common faith of the Church I could not then conceiue which I after ward so plainlie and now more and more by the better surueie of the cause do perceiue that in this one falsehood there was couertlie conteined the verie pith of falsehood and improofe of the greatest matters which life and faith doth stand vpon FVLKE Your first motiues to this faith of yours were not more feeble then your confutations in the same were fond and foolish You did reade the storie of the alteration in religion that hath fallen in our time But of whose writing I praie you euen of such as were proctors for the Popes pedlarie ware or pillers of his pretensed power which was none other but according to the prouerb before mentioned aske my fellow if I be a thiefe If you had read the storie written indifferentlie without partialitie to either partie you might haue iudged better of the wholle matter Some perhapes are liuing that can testifie of the things that were done publike monuments are extant totestifie the same so much more intollerable is your arrogancie to iudge vpon the onelie sinister report of the aduersaries of Luther of holie and blessed memorie with all true Christians that onelie contention and couetousnes mooued him to condemne that which himselfe in conscience knew to be true and lawfull Like boldnes you shew in affirming that Luther was the first in all mans memorie sauing one 〈◊〉 that despised pardons forgetting the Waldenses that were long before Wiclefe and the Bohemians that were after him before Luther who condemned popish pardons as much as Wiclife or Luther For they condemned the Pope to be Antichrist as much as these did But now let vs examine the storie as it is knowne to be moste true in Saxonie where Luther first found fault with pardons When Pope Leo. 10. had sent abroad his pardons which were preached by Terelius a Dominike frier in such impudent manner that they seemed to serue for no end but the Popes couetousnes and the licentiousnes of the people Luther at that time hauing a zeale of God but not according to knowledge did mildelie and modestlie admonish the people of the deceites and abuses of pardons and pardoners which long before his time were reprooued in the Councells of Latrean and Vienna he complained to the Archbishoppe of Ments to the Bishop of Branderburg to the prouinciall of the Augustine friers and to the Pope him selfe in all thinges submitting him selfe to the Pope and Church of Rome so it were not against the holie scriptures When he could finde no equity nor redresse of these abuses which euen Surius the papist confesseth to haue bene iustlie complained of by him and vniustlie manteined or dissembled by the prelates he proceeded farther as God gaue him knowledge and at length compelled by intollerable iniurie and neglect of manifest trueth and reformation of lise did cast of the Anrichristian yoke of the Popes obedience Now whereas you charge him with contention and couetousnes the world your iudge before maie gather whether Luther if against his conscience he would haue set forth the Popes pardons especiallie at such time as the Pope had great neede of monie for warre against the Turkes might not haue made a more easie waie for him selfe to honour and ri hes then by setting himselfe against them But howsoeuer it was your fault faith was thus confirmed and that to such blasphemous boldnes that without authoritie of the holie scriptures the matter of pardons seemed to you as true as the spirit of God is true and hauing none other arguments to perswade you but that Papistes called them selues the Catholike Church and condemned Luther of manie heresies and write in their stories that Luther was mooued by contention and couetousnes to oppose him selfe against them you nothing doubted but that the spirit of God was author of popes pardons in the Church Beeing now resolued of the substance you were not yet perswaded of the quantitie but thinkeing the matter at the first was but small at length you came to a perfect knowledge how great and weightie it is and how it draweth with it all other waight in so much that the verie pith of the greatest matters of popish life and faith doe stand vpon it If then the pith of the greatest matters of poperie doe stand in Popes pardons and this pith hath no ground either in the scriptures or the fathers of the Church for a thousand yeares after Christ we maie the more easily see that the plant of poperie whereof pardons is the pith is not of Gods owne planting and therefore shal be plucked vp by the rootes ALLEN Thou wouldest not thinke I dare saie into what a summe and abridgment heresie hath by the Deuilles deuise and Luthers seruice drawne her selfe into For by this one false conclusion and for maintenance thereof this man and his posteritie haue taken awaie all penance and satisfaction for sinne haue spoiled the Church of her iust and and moste necessarie discipline controlled Gods owne holie vsage incorrection of his children haue entered into his secrets of the next world and there abandoned the place of his iustice and iudgement for sinnes that be remitted but not enough to his wisdome and will corrected haue robbed the holie Saints of all their merites that is to saie Christ of his giftes and grace whereby onelie they besosoneraigne and satisfactorie haue imbarred the bodie mysticall of Christ of the benefit which the wholl and euerie member thereof should receiue by the satisfaction and holie workes of the common head which is Christ haue broken the communion of Saints and the sweet felowship of all the holie members of Gods Church and the benefit which riseth frometh to other by mutuall participation of their good works and desertes and to be short haue by this one falsehood preached against pardons done iniurie to Christ to his Church to his Saints and to his sacraments and haue mightelie shaken the whole frame of Christian religion and doctrine I doe not here riot in wordes to ouerrunne my aduersaries in talke or to make more of the matter then it is but assuredlie without destruction of all these so necessarie articles of our faith there can no man defend Luthers doctrine against Indulgences I knowe he fumbled at the beginning otherwise then his fellowes and followers to disgrace the same sometimes by holding the pardons to be lawfull but not
time it selfe doth mooue them FVLKE These arguments I like well for they bewraie your infirmitie moste of al. And now for answere I saie that your Maior is false as weil as your Minor for the common Popish sense of pardons is as the wordes of them pretend that is to giue pardon not onelie of penance enioyned but also of sinnes Againe the gouernours of the Church as your Maior should haue beene framed but that you dare not come within the compasse of a lawfull syllogisme haue no power either to enioyne penance for sinnes remitted or to remit penance enioyned for sins remitted but of time of penance enioyned for satisfaction of the Church as we heard latelie out of Saint Augustine when the Church may be satisfied in shorter time Your Minor which you knew would not be admitted you take vpon you to prooue but you come nothing neere the matter for this is the point of your Minor which we denie that the Pope is the principall gouernour of Gods Church yea that he is any gouernour of Gods Church But if he were a Bishop of Rome as many were whose successour he claimeth to be he might be allowed in his Church of Rome to binde and loose enioyne and remit so farre as Christian discipline will beare but not to claime tiranie ouer all Churches as he doth Now you in your mishapen syllogisme in which you fumble diuerse matters together to deceiue the ignorant prooue that the Church and gouernours thereof haue power to release that which they haue power to enioyne which is not the matter in controuersie But whether they haue power to enioyne penance for sinnes remitted to answere Gods iustice or whether the Pope be a lawfull gouernour of the Church these and such like be matters of controuersie which you are neuer able to conclude in any lawfull and true syllogisme ALLEN And this argument shal be vnmooueable except they reiect with the Popes Pardons all manner of discipline as well of excommunication as other lesser satisfactions whereof we haue allreadie spoken as in deede to mainteine their falsehoode they must needes doe as also they shall be enforced to reprooue both the Councell of Nice all the holie Fathers and the generall practize of the Church and with them the expresse scriptures in which the worthie fruites of penance sharpe discipline iudging our selues obedience to our Prelates binding reteining of sinnes excommunicating and deliuering vp to Sathan be so often condemned It must needes be a miserabe doctrine of these Protestants which cannot be vpholden but by so shamefull shiftes and when we driue them into such straites in a matter where they thinke most may be saied for themselues and lest for our defence where shall they stand in our plaine causes in which almost our aduersaries confesse vs to haue the vantage of antiquitie and the preheminence of all 〈◊〉 Councells in the world But surelie I thinke falsehood hath so litle holde in all matters that it standeth onelie vpright whiles the contrarie is not seene or not vnderstanded which shee seeketh euer by all meanes shee may to couer and keepe close For the night shee loueth and in darkenes shee delighteth Doe but open the true sense of anie article by them impugned and it is more then halfe prooued and the enemies without argument vpon the sight of trueth in a manner discomfited So it fareth with them in our present cause which they haue long toyled and troubled in the mist of their phantasies and vpon false interpretation discharged amongst the simple sorte that that thing which in this sense as Gods Church that hath the ruling of the matter taketh it is so sure and so cleare in it selfe that I thinke they shall neuer be hable with honestie to speake against in any one parcell thereof FVLKE A boy that hath studied Logicke halfe a yeare may be ashamed to make such syllogismes and yet you are not ashamed to affirme before the worlde that this argument is vnmooueable except we reiect with the Popes pardons all manner of discipline And though it be manifest vnto the worlde that we practize all Godlie discipline which is according to the scriptures in requiring the worthie fruites of repentance iudgeing of our selues obedience to Christian Prelates practizing also the binding and reteining of sinnes excommunication and deliuering vp to Satan giuing that reuerence we ought to the holie Councell of Nice to all holie fathers and to the generall practize of the Church yet you blush not to write that we shall be enforced to reprooue all these It is not these beggerlie arguments M. Allen that shall enforce vs to these absurdities If you haue any better stuffe in store for Pardons bring it out for shame or ells talke no more of enforcement except it be in shrift where no man can controll you The rest to the ende of this Chapter conteining nothing but generall rayling and arrogant boasting after your accustomed manner I passe ouer as needelesse to be answered 〈◊〉 wise then it doth discouer it selfe in any wise mans iudgement That there be diuerse waies of temporall punishment remaining after sinnes be remitted euery of which waies may be in some cases released in parte or in wholl by the Pardons of Popes and Bishops THE SIXT CHAP. ALLEN ANd yet to giue more light to the matter and the greater ouerthrow to falsehood let vs driue the cause forward and weigh with our selues the wholl state of things in this order First that there be three waies of punishment of mans sinnes after they be released in the sacrament of Penance besides the fruites of repentance which man chargeth himselfe withall and besides the punishment appointed for offences by the ciuill or temporall lawes whereof I now speake not the first the easiest is that penāce which is in secret confessiō inioyned by our Confessor which is lightlie as these times be much lesse then the nature of the offence for which it was prescribed requireth Yet because it is taken obedientlie and by our iudges prescription and in a sacrament in which God alwaies worketh much more grace then he doth by the selfe same things without the sacrament and because the penitent is readie to take more if more had beene prescribed in all these respects it standeth often if it be any thing correspondent to the crimes for which it was inioyned for a ful satisfaction before god when it is accomplished FVLKE In the first Chapter of this booke you charged the reader to abide the orderlie methode and compasse of this cause but the methode you follow is such as becommeth your cause namelie the methode of deceitfulnes which is that you call the compasse of your cause For true methode requireth to proceede from things more better knowne to things lesse knowne as it were to build vpon a good foundation but your manner is to assume that which is the chiefe matter in controuersie and thereupon to builde as it were vpon an imaginarie
Purgatory could not at al belong to the iurisdiction of the Church nor 〈◊〉 person therein yet in the life of the party some peece of the debt thereof oral may be released afore hand whiles the partie is in the power of the Church and her discipline ad so it must needs be at euerie time that the Church pardoneth the partie of all satisfaction or anic portion there of recompensing the same by application of Christes satisfaction and his saints For the bond of Purgatory riseth as I haue said vpon some satisfaction and penance to be fulfilled or done in this life the which 〈◊〉 bue either by our paines accomplished to the satisfying of Gods righteausnes or o therwise pardoned there is no debt or bond of purgatorie at all the which is so cancelled by thy Church our Mother that it can not be required of God our father FVLKE The Popish Church 〈◊〉 more sabtillie if shee take not vpon her at all either directlie or indirectlie to heale bodilie sicknes by pardons not because men can not iudge so well for what cause they are laid vpon the diseased but because shee knoweth right well that though shee may in the darke bregg of such a matter yet hath shee in deede no such power nor authoritie neither in the fortaken or reprobate nor in any of Gods elect But the bonde of Purgatorie where of there is neither argument nor experience shee may be bolde to deale with al at her pleasure either in preuenting or releasing Wherein I maruell you make the matter so deintie seeing it is holden on 〈◊〉 side that the Pope hath authoritie by his pardon 〈◊〉 onelie to release some out of the paines of purgatorie but also to spoile all Purgatorie and to leaue it 〈◊〉 Your example of the paines of hell that can not neither by God nor man be helped or released hath an instance in your owne schoole of the Emperour Traiane eased of hell paines at the praier of Saint Gregorie if the tole be true Beside Augustinus de Ancona disputeth earnestlie that the Pope hath power in hell to mitigate or release the paines of the damned or at the lest of some of them and that the Church praieth for that ende Wherfore you agree not with your fellowes nor with the Popish Church which praieth for the deade vt liberentur de ore Leonis de profundo lacu that they be deliuered from the mouth of the Lion and from the deepe lake But be it as you saie yet your argument of the similitude of hell and Purgatorie is of no force because we know certainlie by the scriptures that there is hell but Purgatorie we finde not in the holie scriptures as Saint Augustine saith of any third place But by the scripture we finde the ende wherefore Purgatorie is imagined to be forged false blasphemous against the sacrifice of Christ his death and satisfaction which was once perfectlie performed by himselfe and not committed to the application of any other man ALLEN And this mooued alwaies the Church of God diligentlie to prouide of her tender mercie toward her louing Children that they should neuer departe out of this life in any debt of penance knowing well that the residue not satisfied here should be required at their handes afore God in the next life And therefore though many yeares of penance were prescribed to all such as did notorious crimes yet there was made euer lightlie a prouiso that at the houre of their extremitie they should haue peace and pardon and the Churches blessing in the holie sacrament and so departe free from bond of the Churches discipline as far as in her laie might be also discharged of the temporall scourge in the next life as no doubt they were if their remained no other impediment in thēselues So doth Nice Councell moste mercifullie prouide and so doth Ciprian and other fathers of the Primitiue Church that saw in their high wisedome the temporall paine to come much to hang on the parties satisfaction and the bond of the Churches enioyned penance And euen at this daie prouision is also made that no penance be giuen but vpon condition of his recouerie to any man that lieth at the extremitie of death lest he depart hence Ligatus bounde as Saint Augustine tearmeth it whereby the debt of his enioyned satisfaction might be required in Purgatory And nothing in the world prooueth more the Churches doctrine of purgatory Pardons then doth the continuall concorde and moste agreeable practize of these holie acts of binding and loosing vsed in her gouernement FVLKE The auncient Church in deede not acknowledging that shee had any authority to release any punishment to be suffered after this life determined alwaies the times of Canonicall penance with the ende of mens liues as I haue shewed before now you do acknowledge no lesse But if the Church had power after men were deade to release them of any paines shee needed not to haue beene so carefull in that point as shee was willing to comfort the penitent offenders at their depar ture as for the cancelling of all debt due for the satisfying of gods righteousnes which you did ascribe vnto the Church was the proper office of our sauiour Christ who performed that most necessarie worke to our eternal benefit once for all when he did put out the handwriting that was against vs in decrees and vtterlie abolished it nayling it to his crosse Finallie if nothing in the worlde prooueth more the Popish Churches doctrine of Purgatorie and pardons then the continuall practize of binding and loosing iustlie vsed in gouernement as you doe constantlie affirme it will easilie appeare that nothing in the world can prooue at all your blaspemous heresies of Purgatorie and pardons seeing the right vse of that power can be none other then according to the authoritie graunted by our sauiour Christ of binding and loosing but neither purgatorie nor pardon out of that authoritie in any lawful forme of argument can euer be concluded howsoeuer in loose talke or scribling ignorant men may be caried awaie with the flow of wordes where there is no pitho argument How the practize of pardons of these late hundred veares differeth from the vsage of the primitiue Church and in what sense such great numbers of yeares and daies be remitted by the Popes pardons THE 8. CHAP. ALLEN BVt here we muste note some diuersitie in giuing Pardons and preuenting Purgatorie paines betwixt the primitiue Church of olde and ours of these latter hundred yeares which did moste iustlie rise vpon the alteration of ment manners state of things For in the primitiue Church enioyned penance was so large for euery mortal crime that it might seeme verie answerable vnto the nature of the faulte And doubtlesse it may not otherwise be thought but the spirit of God did limitate satisfaction by the Canons as agreeable in all pointes to the debt of sinnes forgiuen which God
homini Christtano indulgentia potest dari qui firmiter credat Papam posse dare se posserecipere habeat charitatem in affectu vt sit verè contritus confessus Of the parte of him that receiueth ae pardon it is required that he haue faith in vnderstanding because a pardon cannot be giuen but to a Christian man which steadfastlie beleeueth that the Pope is able to giue and he able to receiue and that he haue charitie in affection that he be truelie contrite and confessed More then this beside the fulfilling of the cause for which the pardon was graunted he doth not require In so much that he alloweth that a man maie receiue a pardon for his father and mother whether they be liuing or dead if the Pope doe so applie his pardon that he which will goe ouer the sea or to S. Iames in his fathers or mothers name shall inioie it for them and the receiuer doth performe as much for them The iust cause of graunt in the giuers is determined by the glosse aforesaid to be the honour of God and the exaltation of faith by such profitable workes as are expressed and required in the pardons as pilgrimage saying of such a praier giuing to such a fraternitie c. in which not the quantitie but the kinde of the worke is to be considered so that for a verie small worke maruelous large pardon maie be graunted if it please the Pope to whome the dispensation of the treasure of the Church is principallie committed for Bishops which are able to giue but fortie daies out of that treasure are but pettie baylies whome if you will accuse for lauishing the treasure in graunting of ouer large pardons you break the Canon lawe which telleth you that you must not call him to an account for his doings ALLEN Neuertheles the causes of giuing indulgencies may be more or lesse reasonable according to the state and varietie of thinges which to the wisdome of Gods Vicar in earth is best seene whome Christ so ruleth in that case that he maie be most beneficiall to his holie houshold in so much that it is not to be doubted but in these daies and in this great contempt of deuout and religious exercises the moouing onely of the people to prayer to holie peregrinations to the obedience of the Church may be a sufficient cause why there should be to praiers said vpon bookes beads or sanctified creatures for such purpose annexed great remission For looke what thinges be moste condemned of heretikes those things must Christian men be induced to reuerence with moste singular zeale religion Neither can there be anie thing in the worlde so necessarie for vs christian men of these times that be so voide of good workes as by deuotion and entire zeale to ioyne with our elders that in the holy communion of Sainctes we may be partakers of their vertuous deedes And that is the verie ende of all the Popes Pardons to make vs in our lake of satisfaction for our sinnes felowes and coparteners of the abundance that was in Christ first and then by him in our holy brethren departed before vs. FVLKE Throughout this chapter hitherto you haue disputed against the power of the Pope and the force of his pardons now it is time for you to coie him againe and to raise vp his pardons which you haue pressed downe so lowe Now the wisdome of Gods vicar is sufficient to iudge the causes of giuing indulgences and Christ so ruleth him in that case that he maie be moste beneficiall to his houshold in so much that it is not to be doubted but in these daies the Popes large pardons for litle workes may be of great force Then belike your former discourse serueth not for these daies that men muste fulfill their penance if they maie notwithstanding anie pardon that a pardon doth not remit anie good worke inioyned in penance that if a man lack power to fulfill this penance he must supplie it with other workes counteruailable or els the Popes pardons shall not be beneficiall to them at all or nothing so much as they seeme to sound But why saie you that in these daies Christ ruleth his Vicar in this case that he maie be most beneficiall to his holie houshold Hath not Christ as great care of his holy houshold the Church in all times and in all cases as in these daies and in this case Yes verilie But Christ hath not alwaies and in all cases ruled the Pope as it might be moste beneficiall to his Church for then his key of iurisdiction should neuer haue erred nor his life bene wicked to the great hurte and shame of his Church that I speake not of his criors in doctrine which you will not graunt as you doe the other Therfore it followeth that the Pope is not Christes vicar in earth appointed for the most benefite of his Church Your principle that thinges which heretikes doe hate must be moste reuerenced is false For nothing is to be esteemed more then the nature of the thing requireth whether it be loued or hated of heretikes The Anabaptists hate the wearing of armour it followeth not therefore that the wearing of armour should be counted a religious thing or more reuerenced then as a lawfull vsage and sometimes necessarie among Christians The verie end of the Popes pardons is well known to be the maintenance of the Popes pride and couetousnes the pretended end is wicked blasphemous derogating from the sacrifice of Christs death which is a full satisfaction and purging of all our sins the participation wherof is through faith wrought in our hearts by the spirite of God and not by the Popes application or coupling of anie Saintes merites with the onelie and omnisufficient sacrifice of Christ. ALLEN Vpon all which it is verie plaine that euerie man can not beneficiallie receiue the fruite of a Pardon this at least being requisite in euery man that listeth to attaine benefite thereby that he be in state of grace aud in earnest intent to continue in the knot of Christ his Church with loue and liking of the holie workes of his Christian brethren and accomplishing at least that small worke which commonlie now is ioyned to the Pardon for increase of Christian deuotion The continuance of which deuotion that more and more decaieth maketh the Pardons to be more common at this daie of late yeares then they were in the primitiue Church when moste men in the spring of Christian religion and feruour of faith sought to satisfie exactlie the debt of the penance or else which was a common case then recompensed it by Martyrdom though S. Gregorie the first of that name more then nine hundered yeare since in the ordering of the slations at Rome is knowne to haue giuen Pardons for yeares or daies in like forme as now is vsed And cleare it is that the thing it selfe being found lamfull no Protestant aliue can euer be able
none can be bound or absolued but of his owneiudge we thinke that the foresaid remissions doe profit them onelie to whome that they might profit their owne iudges haue spirituallie or speciallie graunted Also the glosse vpon this decretall the author whereof liued after the Later an Councell saith that it was an olde complaint and yet in his daies verie doubtfull to what purpose these remissions or pardons were profitable remissiones ad quid valeant vetus est querela adhuc tamen satis dubia and rehearseth foure seuerall opinions concerning the validitie of them Some saie they auaile onelie towarde God but not toward the church Secondlie other saie that they auaile toward the Church but not toward God Thirdlie other saie that as they are giuen they auaile both toward God and toward the Church And the fourth saith that they auaile onclie to the remission of that penance which is negligentlie omitted To which the glosse addeth his opinson agreeing fullie with none of them all nor with the later Canonists Among which opinions you haue patched vp your wauering sētence of the validity or inualidity of pardons in this Chapter This diuersity of opinions among the Papists themselues argueth that the doctrine of pardons was verie raw and not halse digested in those daies The agreeablenes thereof with the worde of God and the practize of the primitiue Church when it shall be shewed we shal thinke better of them in the meane time you must bring better proofe out of the scriptures for them then you doe for Popish Bishops blessing out of the 10. of Saint Matthew or ells we shall haue litle cause to esteeme them more then it ALLEN Truelie that holypeace which Christ gaue to his Apostles at his comming into them at his departure from them and ells as 〈◊〉 entreth vpon any holie action signified nothing ells but an agreement and peace of mans soull with God and did no doubt purge them from their dailie infirmities which we call veniall sinnes and the bonde of all paine as it may be thought due for the same that in the presense of Gods maiestie sinne might cease and the parties appeere cleane afore his face that had nospot of sinne in himselfe at all as by the saied peace yet giuen to the worthie receiuers by holie Bishopps ministerie some like effect doth surelie ensue I vse this terme of peace when I speake of pardons not because they are preciselie meant in the action of giuing peace common to Christ his Apostles but because I see the olde fathers lightlie call that peace which we now call pardoning and perchance they did allude to that which Christ willed his Disciples to bestow on euerie householde for a kind of blessing Which no doubt was some great benefite and so great that our Master signified vnto them that many should be vnworthie of it and that the fruite thereof should redound to them-selues Which caused both Bishops of olde for Saint Augustine maketh mention therof to giue their blessings and euerie man humblie to require the same on their knees whereby surelie some spirituall grace was receiued and remission either of veniall trespaces or paine due vnto for̄mer sinnes giuen Let apish Camites here mocke and mow at their Mother as they customablie doe whiles the obedient children the discreete and deuout of Gods Church thinke it an high point of wisedome onelie to consider the maruelous direction of our fathers waies in the doctrine of discipline and awe of Gods relgion FVLKE That peace which Christ gaue to his Apostles was the quietnes of conscience reconciled to god and discharged of all sinnes and the paine due to satisfie gods righteousnes for them and the same peace did Christ send his Apostles to offer preach and wish to all them that would receiue it which if they refused became vnprofitable to them But the Popish Bishops blessing which consisteth in shaking his fingers and murmering some wordes perhapps not vnderstood of the people whome they neuer teach what the peace of conscience meaneth is no better then a vilde mockery of the peace that Christ gaue and willed his Apostles to offer where they became Whereas you alledge Saint Augustine for the antiquitie of the Bishops blessing it is a friuolous matter For he maketh no other mention but that after earnest praierhad bin made for patience and constancie of faith in one that was the next daie with daunger of his life to be cut for a fistula both by the partie himselfe a Bishop and many other Godlie persons then present that they arose from praier accepta ab episcopo benedictione discessimus and hauing receiued blessing of the Bishop we departed How can the superstitious blessing of Popish Bishops be resembled to this but onelie in the name of blessing For here is no requiring of it on knees nor any opinion of remission of sinnes by it but onely a Christian salutation or farewell by praier mentioned which all Godlie Bishops and elders doe in our Church vse euen at this daie speciallie in dimission of a Godlie congregation gathered to heare the preaching to praier or participation of the sacraments or such holie purposes which all Christians do esteeme as it becommeth them without making an Idoll of the minister or trusting in the ceremonie confirming their faith in God by the praior and blessing of his seruants in his name in whome is all their hope trust and ioye reposed That the Bishops beeing the highest ministers of Gods Church and namelie the Pope as the principall of the rest may onelie lawfullie giue Pardons and in what sense the soules depatted may be releiued by the same THE 11. CHAP. ALLEN OF the necessarie disposition of them that should effectuallie receiue benefit by the pardons of the Church and of the right intent of them that should giue the same wee haue already sufficiently spoken And now perchance some may thinke it necessarie that it should be opened brieflie in whome this authoritie of releasing the paines inioyned for sinne doth principallie consist Whereof I shall with better will bestow a few wordes because we shall haue occasion thereby to open the common sense of a wholl Councel both learned and godly touching the matter of Pardons in the iudgement whereof assuredlie proceeding from the holy ghost we may with safetie take our rest Of the lawfull minister therefore of these remissions the scripture in precise tearmes prescribeth nothing though the power of binding and loosing whereupon the matter standeth is prooued properlie to be an act of the keie namelie of iurisdiction and externall regiment which agreeth not to the simple Priestes hauing no further iurisdiction but in the secret court of mans conscience Wherupon as also by the vsage of all ages and by the prescription of the lawe it is prooued that Bishops onely or such as haue their authority for the execution of their office may lawfullie giue remission of satisfactions appointed for sinnes remitted Neither were it
soules of that parish so well hang to gether these blasphemous dreames of Saints merites and Christes satisfaction seperated from the act of his passion claimed to be at the Popes and prelates disposition The aboundance of one releiuing the lacke of another whereof Saint Paull speaketh is no communication of merites nor anie thing like vnto it but a participation of the gifts of God in this life As for merites of Saintes what should we speake of thē or whence should they haue them when mercie is their crowne as Saint Ambrose saieth Finallie howsoeuer you abase the dignitie and authoritie of inferrior ministers in graunting of pardon the auncient Church admitted them to reconcile in the absence of the Bishoppe or in case of necessitie as diuerse Cannons doe shew Wherefore if this power of pardoning were anie such a thing as the auncient discipline the popish Priestes should not be wholie excluded from it ALLEN And yet the Bishops themselue haue not in this case so full power and prorogatiue being but rulers of portiones of Christs Church as he hath whome Christ appointed to be his owne Vicare through his whole dominion For as Christ tht head of the whole bodie is annointed farre more plentifullie then all his bretheren so doubtles he that occupieth his seat of iudgement throughout the whole earth to whome not onelie the affaires of all priuat men but also the confirmation and gouernement of all his brethren Bishops of what dignity so euer they be doth belong Vpon whome Christ hath laide the foundation of his Church and to whome he seuerallie gaue the keies of heauen with moste ample authoritie both to loose and binde feede and gouerne all the sheepe of his folde It is this man no doubt that hath the full treasure of the holie communion of Saints to bestow with maruelous authoritie ouer mans soule with wonderfull might in binding and exceeding grace and mercie in loosing This is the man of whome Saint Bernard saith alluding to Iosephs preheminence in Pharos house constituit eum Dominum Domus suae Principem omnis possessionis suae He hath made this man the Lord of all his house and the Prince of his wholl possession This man therefore representing Christs owne person through the wholl Church and hauing the cure and regiment of euerie one of Christs sheepe may moste lawfullie donare aliquid in persona Christi shew mercie to any man in Christes behalfe none being exempted from his iurisdiction nor any of the churches treasure restreinea from his disposition FVLKE The Pope graunteth to the Bishops as it pleaseth him a shadow of this power of pardoning reseruing the rest to himselfe for his owne aduantage and pre ferment The reasons here alledged to prooue that no Bishop hath so great preheminence in pardoning as the Pope are all petitions of principles which as they are here barelie affirmed so it shall be sufficient for me flatlie to denie them as that the Pope is Christs Vicar heade of the Church occupieth Christs seate of iudgement hath the foundation of the Church laied vpon him hath the keies of heauen seuerallie and so of all the rest Neither is S. Bernard a late writer sufficient to giue the Pope the steuardship of Gods house as Ioseph had of Potiphar the Egiptian therefore he hath no more power to pardon then any other Bishop admitting he were Bishop of Rome and not Antichrist which hath no power at al but vsurped tyrannie ouer Gods house ALLEN But because I cannot ground this my meaning better then vpon a generall Councell I will reporte the decree of the moste holie assemblie holden at Lateran more then three hundreth yeares since vnder Innocentius the thirde by which not onelie this doctrine of Pardons is approoued but also the superfluttie thereof and such disorder as was therein through couetousnes of euill persons or lacke of authoritte in the giuers is corrected with a declaration who be the onelie lawful ministers in such remissions of inioyned penance Thus goeth the decree Quia per indiseretas indulgentias atque superfluas quai quidam Ecclessarum Praelati facere non verentur claues Ecclesiae contemnuntur poeniientialis satisfactio eneruatur decernimus vt cum dedicatur Basilica non extendatur indulgentia extra annum siue ab vno solo siue à pluribus Episcopis dedicetur ac deinde in anniuersario dedicationis tempore quadraginta dies de iniunctis poenitentiis indultaremissio non excedat intra hunc quoque dierum numerum indulgentiarum literas praecipim is moderari quae pro quibuslibet causis aliquoties concedantur cùm Romanus Pontisex qui plenitudinem obtinet potestatis hoc in talibus moderamen consueuerit obseruare That is to saie Because the keies of the Church be contemned and sacramentall satisfaction is much weakened by certain indiscreete and superfluous Indulgences the which certain Prelates of the Churches are ouer bolde to bestowe we decree that hereafter at the dedication of any Chappel no pardon be giuen more then for one yeare whether it be dedicated by one bishop or moe the that there be noremissions afterwarde in the yearelie celebrating of the said dedications more then of fourtie daies of enioyned penance The like also to be obserued in all other common instruments by which for other good causes and holie purposes pardons shall be giuen seeing the Bishoppe of Rome himselfe who hath the fullnes of power herein vseth customably so to moderate the letters of pardons that proceede from him By which holie Councell you may perceiue not onelie that the Bishoppes of Gods Church may giue pardons but that the Bishoppe of Romesright is much more ample in this case then theirs can be and especiallie how carefull the Church euer hath beene to purge all corruption of doctrine or vsage crept into the worlde thorough the disorder of mans misbehauiour how wicked the indeuours of some euill disposed persons be who cease not vnhonestlie to attribute that to the Church of Christ which shee hath euer sought to redresse in the euill manners of them that haue disgraced the doctrine of trueth and made contemtible the moste profitable practize of holie thinges by their misuse of the same FVLKE Seeing you can ground your meaning no better as you your selfe confesse then vpon this popish Lateran Councell all indifferent readers may see how weake and latelie laid ground and foundation it hath To omit your translation of Basilica for a Chappell which rather signifieth a Cathedrall or Princelie Church I will consider what you gather out of this Councell First that Bishops may pardon nay rather that Bishoppes then did pardon Secondlie that the Bishop of Romes right is more ample nay rather that euerie Bishoppe of olde did graunt larger pardons then the Pope vsed to graunt who vsed not to passe one yeare in dedication and 40 daies in all other occasions For according to that moderation the Bishop of Rome did vse all
manie suppose doth not extend past the compasse of this worlde and therefore that he cannot exercise the acte of binding or loosing which be proper to his power and gouernment ouer anie in the next life though to make sute for them before God he maie applie some portion of Christes copious redemption and Saints satisfaction by the vse of his keyes which there make forcible intercession though they cannot giue iudiciarie absolution FVLKE If the Pope haue not meere iurisdiction in Purgatorie how could Clement graunt the release of soules to be at other mens arbitrement by his pardon Againe how could he be able to spoile all purgatorie which is affirmed to be possible to his absolute power But for plainer vnderstanding of this mysterie of iniquitie and abhominable blasphemie you consider two thinges in a pardon the absolution and the application which later you saie maie be made for them that be not vnder their power whereof it will follow that all Bishoppes hauing the dispensation of the treasure committed vnto them as well as the Pope maie graunt pardons to them that be none of their iurisdiction which by application maie be profitable to them though they be not by absolution But what is this application You answere it is not by regiment but by aide of sute A grosse deuise to turne a pardon or remission into a sute or request for a pardon when in the pardon there is no wordes of praier or request but of concession and graunt But by this pardon you saie the Pope offereth to God the price of Christes passion and the satisfaction of Saints Then haue we a new oblation neuer before heard of proper to the Pope in graunting of pardons Or if it be a prerogatiue of the Pope that he maie be saide to praie when he doth graunt or commaund and offer a bargen ofre compence where he can doe no more but entreate the iudge to accept it no passe ouer all other blasphemies conteined in this chaffer with god I demaund why the Popes praier should be heard rather then the praier of other Byshops and priests You answere no doubt for his reuerence blasphemouslie applying to the Pope that which according to the volgar translation is alledged to be the cause why Christ was heard of his father You 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because he representeth Christes person Why how farre is Christ from Gods presence that he hath need to be represented by the Pope The scripture indeed doth often allow that the minister of Christ doth represent the person of Christ vnto men because his person is not visible nor his humanitie present vnto them But that anie mortall man should represent the person of Christ before God and by the vertue of that representation applie the merites of Christ otherwise then he applied by his passion it is straunge and intollerable blasphemie and such as none but a limme of Antichrist would vtter As also it is hòrrible to heare that the Popes keies in porgatorie should make forcible intercession where they can not giue iudiciarie absolution Before we had but two keies the one of order the other of iurisdiction Now commeth in the third keie of suffrage by application which is rather a picklock then a keie because it maketh a forcible entrie where the key hath no lawfull Iurisdiction ALLEN And al this that the follie os manie men so much wondereth at is nothing else but to set before God the Father the death of his owne Sonne and his grace in all Saintes for to procure mercie for their poore breethren in miserie in the next life as the like is done with great pietie in manie other holie actes of religion continuallie practised in the Church for the mutuall helpe one of another And in deede the Church hath vsed these manie yeares to put this clause in such Indulgencies as did in unie parte concerne the departed per modum suffragy as Sixtus the fourth Innocentius the eight and now of late both Pius the fourth and the fifte and all other lightlie in the like grauntes Whereby it is plaine that we are not charged by the Church further to beleeue then that the Pope maie assuredlie release the departed of some parte of their paines or all by the waie of suffrage and sute as other holie workes of Christianitie applied vnto them by their brethren aliue maie doe For it were no reason that priuate persons should as it were communicate and send vnto them their fastes almes and praiers for the release of their paine and he that representeth Christes person should not in Christes name and the wholl Churches applie vnto them some part of the common wealthes treasure to sue for their deliuerie and help to satisfie for them in their lacks This therefore they call a Pardon per modum suffragy as by way of aid of request Which doctrine is most true in it selfe and agreable to the practise of the Church and forme of Indulgences alwaies vsed and maie assuredlie relieue such as departed hence in grace and zeale of Gods house which I count disposition enough in the partie and haue friendship in the world of such as for their sakes will be content to accomplish the appointed worke of the Pardon FVLKE So long as you maie be allowed to saie what you list without profe you may say all this is nothing els but to set before God c. or what you will beside The clause you speake of per modū suffragy hath not bin added of many yeares seing Sixtus the fourth the first that added it liued not 100. yeares before you did wright of this mat ter The cause of this addition was a certaine booke set forth by one Petrus Oxoniensis doctor of diuinitie in the vniuersitie of Salmantica in Spaine containing diuers conclusions contrarie to the Popish Churchs doctrine which by the Archbishop of Toledo Alphonsus Cirillus were committed to be disputed discussed in a congregation of 52. doctors in diuinitie Canon law The first of which conclusions was that deadlie sinnes as touching the fault and the punishment of the other world are put away by only cōtrition of the heart without order vnto the keies The fift that penitēts are not to be absolued before their penance inioyned be performed The sixt that the Pope can not pardon any mā aliue the paine of purgatorie The discussing of these conclusions caused Pope Sixtus the rest to deuise this new clause interpretation of their pardons per modum suffragii whereas before there was neither any such words nor meaning in their pardons but the contrarie to be gathered verie plainlie that the pope had iurisdiction in purgatory in so much that Augustinus de Ancona which liued before this time doubteth not to conclude that the Pope by his absolute iurisdiction may spotle all purgatorie of all those persons which are subiect to his iurisdiction which are all except they that lack merit conditionall and such as may do for them those things for which
the head of the house But if he will saie this other man was no frier then he must shewe what he was whoe was the testator what fraude Luther and his Prior vsed to deceiue him and bring good proofe thereof or els who is bound to beleeue him But to goe forward other estate or degree or Apostleshippe he knoweth not that Luther had anie what then was not this sufficient calling for him that was a Doctor of the Popish Church to preach against the abuses and errors thereof and when his doctrine and conclusions were vndoubtedly agreeable to the holie scriptures might he not iustlie affirme that they were from heauen And that he was sent from heauen to teach the Germanes the trueth of the Gospell which of long time had beene hidden from them For that he was their first Apostle or that before his daies they neuer had any true religion or Christian doctrine he neuer said Neither did he make more account of himselfe then of Saint Augustine and all other Fathers of the Church although in the booke quoted by Frarine he preferreth that doctrine which is agreeable to the holie scriptures before the iudgement of Augustine and all men that euer were As for the familiar conference and talke with the Deuill which Frarine affirmeth that he reporieth of himselfe And that Cocleus and al his enemies doe gnaw so much vpon to prooue that he was set on by the Deuil to gainesaie the masse Is nothing but a ridiculous cauill For Luther speaketh of a spirituall conflict that he had with Sathan for saying masse so long which at length he acknowledged to be blasphemous against the death of Christ. Not of any bodelie appeerance of the Deuill or familiar talke with him as the malice of the Papists doe expound him Next Luther our Orator will examine Caluins vocation Caluine saith he was borne at Nouiodunum in Picardie What of that He was banished from his countrie for his wicked behauiour That is false For he liued in his countrie in good credit both of learning and honestie till the crueltie of the Papists caused him to seeke the libertie and profession of religion abroad which he could not haue at home That he was the veriest vnthrist naughtiest varlet of all his companions when he was in his countrie is an impudent slaunder for at Orleans he red the lawe lecture oftentimes in the place of Petrus Stella the publike reader and was so well accounted both for his learning and vertue that the degree of Doctorship in that facultie with full consent of all the teachers was offered him without anie expences as one that had verie well deserued of the vniuersitie Afterward at Paris he set forth that notable commentary of his of Seneca de Clementia He was of great familiaritie with Nicolaus Copus Rector of the vniuersitie of Paris and in good credit with the Queene of Nauarre sister vnto King Frauncis He had conference with Iacobus Faber Stapulensis in Aquitanes and after he had set forth that worthie booke of his called Psychopanuchia at Orleans against them which taught that the soules departed doe sleepe vntill the resurrection without sense of good or euill he came to the Citie of Basill This course of his life as it is written in his storie with much more to this effect doth witnes that he was euen from his youth a man indued with singuler modestie temperance and godlines whatsoeuer his aduersaries without all proofe or shewe of truth are not ashamed to inuent and brute against him When he was at Basill he did not hide his head as the slaunderer saieth but desired in deed to be priuate that he might better applie his studies and especiallie the Hebrew tongue But such was his excellencie that he could not be hid from the principall learned men of that vniuersitie and so litle was he hid that there he first set forth his Institution dedicated to King Frauncis Our declaimer saith that from Basile he passed to Strasburg and there began to shew his head and preach to the Runnagats But that is false for from Basill he went into Italie to visit the Duchesse of Ferrara from whence he returned into Fraunce where hauing set all his affaires in order he brought away his onely brother AntonieCaluine intending to settle him selfe either at Basill or at Strasburg But al other passages being stopt he was forced to trauaile thorough Sauoye and comming to Geneua onely to visite Farellus and Viretus by whose zealous earnest labours Popery being banished and the Church there reformed he was staied by the terrible obtestation of Farellus and by the Presbyterie and Magistrates chosen to be a teacher and intepreter of the Scriptures in that Church But that he put out the deputie of the citie expelled the Bishops and Popish cleargie reigned there like a conquerour by the law of ireason and force of armes as Frarine saieth it is a moste impudent lie though an hundred Lindanes had sworne that it was true For the Bishoppe with his Popish cleargie was departed out of the citie and the Religion reformed by publike authoritie receiued long time before Caluines first arriuall thether Of like trueth it is that Beza in his baudie and filthie epigrames as it pleaseth Frarine to call them farre passeth the wanton Pagan Poetes Martiall and Tibullus For in the moste licentious of these epigrames first condemned by Beza himselfe there is not one word of obscenitie although they were made in a fained argument after the immitation of those Poets And if they had bin as full of baudie tearmes and matters as Martiall himselfe Yet so long as Beza cōtinued in popery where they were freely printed selde they were catholike enough What should I speake saith he of Bernardinus Ochinus the preacher of Polygamie Verelie there is no cause why he should speake of him seeing both the man and the doctrine are detested in our Churches and by our writings confuted He nameth also Bernard Rotman and Iohn of Leyd authors of the Anabaptisticall sedition at Monster as though wee had any thing to doe with them Yes saith he they conquered the field against the Lutheranes by pretence of scripture onelie as Rotman before vanquished the Papists The storie is written who list to reade wherein may be found they vsed other craftes beside force of armes then pretence of scripture onelie to compasse their diuelish attempts And what if they had vsed the pretence of scripture onelie as the diuel did in tempting our sauiour Christ was the scripture onelie of lesse force to confute their false pretence then when it was vsed by our Sauiour Christ against the Deuill He telleth vs of Hosiander reprooued of vs for heresie of Carolostadius who thorough folly madnes became a ploughnian The names also of Peter Martyr Illiricus Musculus Farellus Viretus and Bucer a gainst whom he hath nothing to say besides I know not what Marote Malote And that these should vsurpe