them that receiue them You quote for this also 1. Cor. 10. but you haue no such thing there And touching your argument it holdeth aswell against the working of Christes passion For how should that worke of his geue grace if faith be requisite in vs Is not this a witty demaund trowe you I haue aboue alleaged manifest Scripture Cap. eodē pag. that Christ washeth vs both by his bloud and also by baptisme Those are the instrumentes which his mercy Tit. 3. vseth in this worke As for our faith all other actions they are not instrumentes they are not workers they are onely dispositions though necessarie dispositions as the drines of the wood is a disposition but it is the fire that worketh True it is and the Scripture saith it that by beléeuing and by other good actions we worke our owne saluation Philip. 2. as by way of meriting but it saith not that we worke the effect of any Sacrament as our regeneration when we are baptized our Corroboration whē we are confirmed our cibation when we are housled though our faith and other vertues be necessary therein that by our indisposition we do not put obicem Christes passion as it did both merite and worke all so to our déedes it giueth vertue to merite to the Sacraments it geueth vertue to worke Thus the Scripture teacheth and thus the Catholike Church beléeueth what soeuer you meane by your Church Pur. 241. when being told by D. Allen that the bloud of Christ maketh mens works meritorious you tell him agayne that the Church of Christ abhorreth that blasphemy By al which is reuealed your manyfold ignorance in that you say Pu. 35.155 The meane on Gods behalfe by which we are made partakers of the fruites of Christes passion and so grafted into his body is his holy spirit of promise which is the earnest and assurance of our inheritance who worketh in vs faith as the onely meane by which the righteousnes of Christ is applyed vnto vs. Ephe. 1. And as for the Sacramentes which you seeme to make the onely condites of Gods mercy we are taught in the holy Scriptures that they are the Seales of Gods promises giuen for the confirmation of our faith as was Circumcision to Abraham when he was iustified before through faith Rom. 4. Here are diuers poyntes of Caluinisme boldly affirmed two places of Scripture quoted for them but how falsely and fondly I shall easily declare S. Paule Rom. 4. declareth that it was a seale or cōfirmation on Gods part that also the vncircūcised shall be iustified by faith because with Abraham béeing so iustified Gen. 15. he entred afterwarde Gen. 17. such a bargayne As we may likewise say Mat. 16. that it was a Seale that we are blessed by cōfessing Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God because S. Peter being for the same confession blessed had also the keyes of heauen geuen him in reward And as this would serue vs well if they which haue the keies after Peter should say that none are blessed but they so the other serued well when they which were Circumcised in flesh after Abraham did say that none were iustified but they Is this to say that all men are iustified before they come to the Sacramentes and that all Sacramentes be Seales of such a matter yea or so much as that all Iewes were iustified before they came to Circumcision and that Circumcision it selfe was to them a Seale of such a matter This is your euident Scripture this is your necessary concluding vpon it Goodly geare forsooth that for it we must leaue the Catholike Church and her guyde the holy Ghost and go to schole to Caluine Other poyntes of your ignorance are about the Holy spirite of promise You saye it is the meane to make vs partakers of the frutes of Christes passion Item the meane to graffe vs into his body Item that it worketh in vs faith By all which you declare that you know not what the Spirite of promise is and that you are no conferrer of Scriptures together how muche soeuer you bragge thereof Varietie of matter bréedeth prolixitie against my wil though of euery one I say neuer so litle which I beséech the gentle Reader to consider Otherwise in this matter I might lay together so many Scriptures as would fill the most gréedy that is Briefly Christ the day he ascēded as often afore both he The Spirite of promise Sac. of Confirmation and S. Iohn Baptist and the Prophetes namely Ioel said And I sende the promise of my Father vpon you Luc. 24. And he commaunded them not to returne home into Galilée but to exspect in Ierusalem his fathers promise which you haue hard quoth he of my mouth for Iohn baptized with water but you shall be baptized with the holy Ghost not many dayes hence to wit the tenth day off béeing Whitsonday They had faith afore and they were baptized afore and therefore graffed into his body afore though not fully baptized not fully graffed and yet they were to receiue this spirite this promise as being not the meane c. but the very greatest fruite of Christes passion the complement of baptisme the full ingraffing into his body which is his church yea the very inheritance it selfe For the inheritance is the Fathers promise Rom. 4. and so in Genesis and in all the Olde Testament And this spirite is as you heare the Fathers promise called therefore of S. Paule the earnest of our inheritance because it is the full first fruites thereof And therefore so farre as the Gospell goeth so farre alwayes goeth this spirite together with it to the Iewes Act. 2. to the Samaritanes Act. 8. to the Gentiles Act. 10. As to this day in the Catholike Church where the same Gospell continueth it is still giuen to all the baptized by imposition of the Bishoppes handes Marke it well it quite ouerthroweth your new inuented Gospell wherein after faith and after baptisme you giue not this spirite euen also your owne place to the Ephesians Cap. 1. condemneth you for there it is said to the Ephesians that first they heard the word of trueth the Gospell of their saluation then that they beleeued in Christ and then after beleeuing you were sealed with the holy spirite of promise which is the earnest of our inheritance If this be not playne ynough conferre Acts. 19. where the very storie of it is reported concerning twelue Ephesians who were baptized with Iohns Baptisme afore S. Paule came vnto them and then were taught by S. Paule that they must beleeue in Iesus Which when they heard they were baptized by some minister of S. Paules in the name of our Lord Iesus Et cum imposuisset c. And after that Paule him selfe laying his hands ouer them the holy spirite came vpon them By this litle the Reader may iudge who findeth out in déede the meaning of Scripture by plaine conference of other Scriptures who
sense but because his death was so long before preordeined of God and prefigured as the Apostles do often say to stop the mouthes of them that obiected newnesse to our Religion of saluation by a dead man As the like would be a iustification of your new Gospell if you could shew out of Scripture that Luther was preordeined for that purpose Againe in the same place you alleage that Esay speaking of the righteous that are departed out of this life saith that ther is peace and that they shall rest in their beds Esa 57. Like as he affirmeth that Tophoth which is Gehinnone or hell is prepared of old for the wicked Esai 30. Esai speaketh not of his owne time but as a Prophet of the time now since the comming of Christ who is our peace There is peace say you but he saith There shal come peace or as the Churches translation hath no lesse agreably to the Hebrew Let peace come I pray Moreouer if it were graunted that then also they did rest in their beds because the death of the Iust is but a sléepe for the assurāce of their resurrection what were this to their soules Also if their soules did rest must euery rest néedes be the blisse of heauen We say not that Limbus patrum was Purgatory but that it was a place of rest because without poena sensus though not without poena damni for the time Suppose a kings sonne and heire that by some crime deserued disheriting but the king his father of grace will let him inhirite mary not at the time he otherwise should but certayne yeres after yet during those yeres also he shall be well and honorably prouided for may we not say that this man is at ease considering his prouision and yet in punishment also considering his losse for the time Such was their case in Limbo It was not hell you say because it was not Tophet or Gehenna Why our Créede and the Scripture saith that Christes Soule was in hell Infra ca. 12. and yet no man so wicked except it were Caluine him selfe I thinke to say it was in Gehenna Therefore Gehenna or Tophet the place for the wicked was not the onely hell As vaynly and more falsely you argue that it was not hell because Luc. 16. Lazarus was caried by Angels not downe to hell but vp to Abrahams bosome Caried vp is that portari or apenechthinai But the riche man is in hell you say and he looketh vp and seeth a farre of Lazarus in the bosome of Abraham The same wise argument againe In this place this is called hel therfore no other may be called hell although the Scripture it selfe els where nameth to vs another hell The places might in situation at least in respect of the heauenly mantions being so far distant from them both be nigh together although one were vpward and also farr of both in state situation purgatorie peraduenture being betwéene them Againe if it were graunted that they were no way nigh together yet it would not follow that Abrahams bosome was heauen As neyther if Lazarus were caried vpward 4. Reg 2. For so was Elias who yet was not caried into heauen that now we speake of Another of your manifest argumentes being the last in that place If righteousnes belongeth to Abrahams children the reward of righteousnes also pertaineth vnto them Therefore Abrahams bosome was open to receiue all the children of Abrahā euen as Ioan. 1. the bosome of God was ready to receiue Abraham because he was his sonne through faith Nay you should haue said because he was That vvhich is proper to vnigenitus he maketh common to Abraham vnigenitus qui est in sinu patris The onely begotten sonne who is in the bosome of the Father and then you had saide somewhat But these your grosse ignorances in the scripture I must reserue to their own proper Chapter To your argument I say Infra ca. 12. that the reward of righteousnes may belong to one and yet not paide him as soone as he dyeth S. Paule naming both Abraham him selfe and many children of his saith expresly According to faith all these departed Heb. 11. not receiuing the promises but beholding them a farre of And againe And all these renowned by faith receiued not the promise that is the inheritance the reward of righteousnes Pur. 441.451 In two other places also you prate against Limbus but you alleage no other Scripture against it Well then you haue not proued that afore Christes comming any one went to heauen nor that all went straight to Limbus and therefore none to Purgatorie Now whether since Christes comming they all goe straight to heauen and therefore none to Purgatorie let vs likewise examine Whether since Christ all go straight to heauen There is no prayer for the dead nor Purgatory after this life you say because they that liue vnto Christ dye vnto him Pur. 451. and being dissolued are with him Ioa. 17. And in another place more distinctly Pur. 276. We beleue that the soules of the faithful the repentāt are where Christ is as he prayeth Ioa. 17. Father I will that those whom thou hast giuen me where I am they also may be with me that they may see my glory And euen so he saith to the Theefe no perfect iust man but a sinner repentant This day thou shalt be with me in Paradise Luc. 23. And S. Paul desireth to be dissolued and to be with Christ Philip. 1. That to be with Christ is to sée his Godheades glory and not onely his manheades glory would hardly be proued out of the Scripture Yet because it maketh with the foresaid definition of the Church I graunt it So then the example of the Apostle S. Paule declareth that a perfect iust man goeth straight to Christ The example of the Theefe declareth that likewise a penitent sinner goeth straight to Christ if either his penance be full and perfect or his pardon which is a remission of his penance be a plenary And the saying Ioan. 17. specially béeing illustrate with these two examples declareth as much howbeit by it self alone it declareth no more but that they which are Christes may and shall be with Christ but when it sayth not You allude there to one place more which is Rom. 14. We liue to our Lord and we dye to our Lord Whereby he meaneth not that we be with our Lorde when we dye no more then he meaneth that we be with our Lorde when we liue but that both in our life and at our death from the beginning to the end we be not our owne men but seruantes to another and that he therefore is my Iudge if I do not well and not thou also to him I my selfe must make my count and not thou for me This béeing the sense of that place you had forsooth great reason to conferre it with Apoc. 14. to controll S. Augustines sense Pur. 436.446
vnproperly because he also saith our bodies by mortification to be made a liuing Sacrifice Rom. 12. To knowe what is properly or vnproperly called this or that you should sée to the natures of the things in them selues And then séeing in Christes death open separation of his body from his bloud and in Consecration mysticall separation of them because the words do worke that which they signifie you should say in both those Christes body to be properly a Sacrifice as I told you likewise before cap. 6. pag. 47. but in perpetuall virginitie and other mortification because there is no such separation of our substantial partes but onely of our affections from vs they be called Sacrifices not properly but onely by a metaphore and similitude Well then what obiections haue you now against this Priesthood and Sacrifice of the Fathers and ours Either that it is none at all or that it is not a Sacrifice in Christes body as S. Augustine said First Out of doubt Pur. 294.295 if the bringing foorth of bread and wine had bene anye thing parteining to the Priesthood of Melchisedech the Apostle Heb. 7. would not haue omitted to haue compared it with Christ But the Apostle comparing Melchisedech with Christe in all thinges in whiche he was comparable neuer teacheth it as any part of his Priesthood If it were no part of his Priesthood what was it then It is playne by the text that Melchisedech beeing both a king and a Priest as a king liberally enterteined Abraham and his armie and as a Priest blessed him The text in our vulgar Latine translation is this Proferens panem vinum erat enim Sacerdos Dei Altissimi In your vulgar English translation this He brought foorth bread wine For he was the Priest of the most highest God And in the Hebrew the poynting declareth that also the Rabbins thēselues take it in the same sort as also the very words do signifie specially standing in such order And all our Fathers do agrée Cyp. ep 63. S. Cyprian shall suffice for all who declareth the order of Melchisedech De sacrificio illo venire to come of that Sacrifice not of euery Sacrifice but of that Sacrifice And more distinctly to descende of these thrée thinges quod Melchisedech Sacerdos Dei summi fuit that he was not a common Priest but the Priest of the highest God as S. Iohn Baptists preeminence among al the Prophets is signified by this word Propheta altissimi the prophet of the highest Luc. 1. quod panē vinū obtulit hauing said afore protulit which two you thinke cannot stand together that he offered not as other Priests but bread and wine Quod Abraham benedixit that he blessed not euery body but Abraham the father of al the faithfull of Christ And in déede who is so blinde not to sée the corresspondence in Christ but you onely that are not Abrahams children We Catholikes his children in faith and souldiers in confession of the same do sée playnly before our eyes our true Melchisedech as first by him selfe at his last Supper so stil by his ministers to bring forth bread and wine and thereof as our High Priest to offer for vs this most acceptable Sacrifice and as our king of kings who with so few loaues fed many thousands to prepare for vs this most Royal feast which we can neuer inough admire Mat. 14. 15. so singularly by this blessing both God and vs that the sacrifice and feast it selfe is named Benedictio and Eucharistia Blessing and Thankesgiuing Which S. Cyprian doth there prosecute very swéetely saying For who is more the Priest of the highest God then our Lord Iesus Christ who offered Sacrifice to God the Father and offered the same against those Aquarij who offered water in the Chalice and not wine which Melchisedeth had offered that is bread and wine suum corpus sanguinem his owne body perdie and bloud Also that blessing going afore about Abraham ad nostrum populum pertinebat belonged to our people saith he as a Bishop minister of the true Melchisedech To * The end of bringing foorth vvas to blesse as also S. Augustine said aboue the end therefore that in Genesis the blessing about Abraham might by Melchisedech the Priest be duely celebrated there goeth afore an Image of Christes sacrifice an image I say consisting in bread and wine c. Where is now your argumēt ab authoritate Heb. 7. negatiuè with your out of doubt contrarie to your owne Logike here cap. 8. pag. 134. For besides all this I aske you whether Melchisedeth were a Priest without all sacrifice at all If you say yea your Diuinity is contrary to Heb. 8. For euery high Priest is ordeined to offer giftes and sacrifices Note Wherefore it is necessary hunc habere aliquid quod offerat this Priest also to haue somwhat to offer If you say he had some sacrifice tell vs I pray you how he was comparable to Christ in his Priesthood vnlesse he were also in his Sacrifice considering that his Priesthood consisted in his Sacrifice And so you sée that he was comparable to Christ in some thing to wit in his Sacrifice supposing also that it was not the sacrifice of bread wine in which the Apostle compareth them not What a blindnes is this in you not to sée Melchisedech in his bread and wine so expresly mentioned to be comparable vnto Christ whereas by the Apostle also the very omitting of his father and mother and genealogie is in Genesis a shadowing of Christ séeing also bread and wine so notably vsed in the world by the institution of Christ Such is either your ignorance in the Scriptures or also peruersenes against your owne knowledge Your second argument may be where you take on like Caiphas Mat. 26. and say it is a blasphemie Pur. 298.299 c. for the Fathers and vs to say that we haue the Priesthood after the order of Melchisedech confirmed vnto vs by oth Psal 109. For then you saye we must be Christ him selfe with his eternall diuinitie and euerlasting natiuitie and sitting on the right hand Why syr doth not the Scripture likewise say that there is one Baptizer Ioan. 1. Mat. 3. Hic est qui baptisat and he such a one as vpon whom the holy Ghost cōmeth and abideth and to whom the Father saith This is my naturall sonne Must we then be said to blaspheme VVhat a doctor Fulke is and take al that to our selues if we say that we are baptizers You are a great Doctor forsooth so to argue No syr we are baptizers and priests Aug. de ci li. 17. c. 17. but as his ministers we offer Sub Sacerdote Christo quod protulit Melchisedech Vnder Christ the Priest saith S. Augustine and therfore he singulerly is the one baptizer and the one priest So were not all the rest in the time of the olde Testament the ministers of