A MANVELL Or briefe volume of Controuersies of Religion betweene the Protestants and the Papists wherein the Arguments of both sides are briefely set downe and the Aduersaries Sophismes are plainely refuted Written in Latine in a briefe and perspicuous method by LVCAS OSIANDER and now Englished with some additions and corrections At London Printed by Humfrey Lownes 1606. TO THE READER AS their part is the chiefest in defeÌ„ding the truth vvho do sifte the full state of Controuersies explicating the question maintaining reasons for the truth and answearing the opposite arguments at large as the nature of euery one doth require for the full setling of mens iudgments vvho with singlenesse of heart desire to bee throughly satisfied so is their labour requisite also who do contract those larger disputations into a briefe and compendious summ For it helpeth the memory in calling to minde that vvhich hath beene reade in larger discourses before it furthereth the iudgment by giuing grounds of arguments answeares which may afterward by the learned Reader be further enlarged by his owne meditations as occasion shall require it may serue for some good taste in the knowledge of controuersies for such as haue not the leisure other opportunities means to read the larger disputations and lastly being coÌ„prised in a small volume it may easily be caried abroad if â—e desire to read such things vvhere wee cannot haue not the greater volumes VVhich reasons moued our Author to pen this briefe Manuell in a perspicuous methode and it vvere to be wished that some of our Countrey men whoÌ„ God hath furnished with iudgment and other necessaries for such a purpose would endeuour to do the like in our vulgar tongue in this briefe and plaine order In the meane time the translation of this present worke shall bee I trust neither vnprofitable nor vnwelcome Some things are altered vvhich I iudged might bee offensiue or othervvise hinder the Reader but they bee such aâ—d no moe than I hope who so shall compare the translation with the Originall vvith indifferencie will confesse there vvas reason to doe so Some things also vvhere neede seemed to require I haue added and vvhereas the Author in testimonies alleadged out of the Scripture quoted the chapter onely I haue generally throughout for the ease of the reader annexed the verses also as the case required The censure heereof I leaue to the indifferent reader and commend the successe to God vvhose Name be glorified for euer Amen A Table of the Chapters and Questions CHAP 1 Of the holy Scripture 1 VVhether it be vnsufficient 2 Whether it be obscure 3 Whether it be vncertaine or plyable to any sense CHAP 2 VVhether the Scripture be to be reade of the lay people CHAP. 3 Of the interpretation of the holy Scripture CHAP. 4 Of Traditions CHAP 5 Of the Letter and the Spirit CHAP. 6 Of councells CHAP 7 Of the Church 1 Whether our Church or the Church of Rome bee the true Church 2 Whether it be to be granted that there is an inuisible Church 3 Whether the church may erre CHAP 8 Of the Bishop of Rome 1 VVhether Christ haue neede vpon earth of any Vicar or visible head 2 Of the power and authority of Peter 1 Ouer the rest of the Apostles 2 In the rule and dominion of faith 3 VVhether Peter were at Rome and there instituted an ordinarie succession 4 VVhether the Bishops of Rome be Peters successors 1 In Doctrine 2 In Manners 5 That the pope is Antichrist CHA 9 Of free-will 1 VVhether vnregenerat men can of themselues by vertuâ— of their free-will bâ—gin their conuersion 2 Whether Originall sinne haue in it the nature of sinne 3 Of the workes of Infidels 4 Of Grace CHAP 10 Of Iustification 1 Of imputed righteousnesse or of the signification of the word Iustification 2 Whether the grace of Iustification bee aequally alike in all 3 Whether we be iustified by good workes 4 Whether we be iustified by Faâ—th alone 5 Whether Paul doe deny Iustification by the workes of the Ceremoniall lawe onely 1 CHAP. 11 Of the true conditions of faith 1 Whether Faith be taken respectiuely or habitually 2 Whether Faith bee onely a bare knowledge and assent 3 Whether Faith be also in wicked men 4 Whether true Faith may be voide of good workes 5 Whether Faith be informed by charitie CHAP 12 Of good workes 1 Whether good workes please God ex opere operato 2 Of Will-worship in generall 3 Of workes of supercrogation or Councells in particular 1 Of Pouerty 2 Of single life 3 Of Obedience 4 That good workes cannot be communicated to others CHAP 13 Of Renouation or imperfect Obedience 1 Whether our obedience begun in this life be perfect 2 Whether Concupisceace remaining in the regenerate be a sinne 1 CHAP 14 Of the Number of the Sacraments in generall 2 A particular examination of the fiue falsely supposed Sacraments 1 Of Confirmation 2 Of Penance 3 Of Orders 4 Of Matrimony 5 Of extreame vnction CHAP 15 Of Transsubstantiation in the Eucharist CHAP 16 Of inclosing carying about and adoring of the Sacrament 1 Whether the Eucharist out of the vse thereof bee a Sacrament 2 Whether the Eucharist be to be adored 3 Whether the Eucharist be to be inclosed caried about 1 CHAP 17 Of the Masse in generall whether it be a propitiatory Sacrifice 2 An appendix of the abuses in the masse 1 Priuate masse 2 The wresting of the masse to other affaires 3 Simonie in the Masse 4 The mingling of water with wine 5 A sinke of Ceremonies 6 The nouelty of their ceremonies 7 The errors and fooleries of the canon of the Masse 8 The masse sayd in Latine 9 Masse for the deade CHAP 18 Of Communion vnder both kindes CHAP 19 Of Purgatorie 1 Whether there be a purgatory 2 Whether the dead be relieued by the suffrages of the liuing GHAP. 20 Of Inuocation of Saints 1 Whether Latria be giuen to Saints in popery 2 Whether Saints be to be prayed vnto 3 Whether Papists commit idolatry in worshipping of images CHAP 21 Of the Vow of single life in ecclesiasticall persons 1 Whether mariage be a state that defileth a man 2 Whether single life haue any prerogatiue in Gods sight before mariage 3 Whether it be in a mans choise to vow single life CHAP 22 Of the errors of popish fastes 1 Of choise of meates 2 Of the tying of fastes to certaine and set times 3 VVhether fasting be meritorious 4 Of the fast of Lent 5 The keeping of fastes is more straightly vrged by the Papists than the keeping of Gods commandements 6 Mockeries in popish fastes 7 The iudgment of the holy ghost of the fastes of hypocrites CHAP. 23 Of Repentance and of the errours which the papists bring into this place of Repentance 1 Of the merite of contrition 2 Of the sufficiency of contrition 3 Of popish satisfaction 4 Of omission of faith 5 Of Auricular confession 2 Conclusion A Manuell or briefe
not have beene the true and Catholicke Church but the Arrians should have been the Catholick Church for that they far exceeded in nuÌ„ber the rest which were the true Christians In this sence therefore wee deny the consequence The Antecedent also is not true because as before I sayde the Church of Rome doth not consent with the Church of the Apostles nor yet with the Church of the Fathers And therefore they haue not that vniuersality of multitude whereof they boast 5 If the Church of Rome bee not the true Church then for some ages together Christ had beene without a spouse but Christ never was without a spouse Therefore c. An 1. From a speciall to a generall arguments are drawen only affirmatively It is no good consequence therefore the church of Rome consisting of Popes Cardinalls Bishops Priests and others of the same ranke who withstood the heauenly truth were not the spouse of Christ therefore Christ had no spouse 2. I deny the maior or first propositioÌ„ For there were also other Churches as the Greeke Church which alwaies gainsayd the Bishop of Rome and wherein Christ might haue his spouse The argument therefore proceedes from an insufficient enumeration or reckoning vp of the parts to the whole 3 In the visible erronious Church of Rome there was the spouse of CHRIST hidden to the eye of the World all glorious within Psal 45 13 or the inuisible companie of belieuers Ans so Christ neuerthelesse had his Spouse On the contrarie side that we haue the Church of God with vs we proue Because to us agreeth the definition of the church therefore the church which is the thing defined agreeth to vs also 1. For in our Church the vncorupt ministerie of the word and Sacraments dooth flourish for witnesse whereof wee haue the holy scripture nay our Aduersaries theÌ„selues who hither to coulde neuer shewe out the Scripture that there is any thing in our Ministerie doctrine or administration of the Sacramentes contrarie to Christ or his Apostles Therefore wee are the true Church Because our Church in respect both of the Word and Sacraments is comformable to the Church described in the writings of the New testament vnder the Apostles Contrariwise our Aduersaries do reason thus 1 The Protestants belieue not all thinges which the Church of Rome dooth Therefore they are not the true Church Ans 1. There is more in the Conclusion than in the premises For no more followeth thence than that we do not agree with the Church of Rome in all things which who will deny But wee may not for that cause be thought not to be the true Church 2 It is a begging of the question For whether they which gaine-say the Churh of Rome do gaine-say the true Church that is the thing in controversie 2 The Protestants Church dooth not agree with the Church of the Fathers in all thinges Therfore they are not the true Church of Christ Ans 1. This argument is too common and agrees to both sides For by the same reason it may be proved that the Papists are not the Church because their Church which they cannot deny hath much fallen away from the Church of the Fathers 2 the church of the Fathers is not the sampler of Churches but the Church of the Apostles to which it is sufficient that our Church is like 3 The Prodestants doctrine is new It is but few yeares agoe since it first sawe the light Therefore their Church is not the true Church Answ 1. This is a begging of the question For that same is the matter in controversie 2. Our doctrine is not new but renued 3. There are therefore foure termes in the Argument For in the Maior proposition the worde Newe is taken for that which is simply and altogether new in the Minor for the refined and renued ministerie of the Word reformed according to the rule of the most ancieÌ„t doctrine of the Prophets Christ and the Apostles 4 The Church ought to have vnitie but so hath not the Church of the Protestants for it is rent and devided into parts and schismes Ans 1 Heere be foure termes For in the Maior proposition by the word Church are meant those which in truth and deede are the Church in the minor those which are in the outward company of the Church or those which have mingled themselves amongst our Church when as in truth they be not of our opinioÌ„ And these sever themselues from the true Church of them who maintaine the truth and stirre vp Schismes Of such sort of men Saint Iohn saith They went out from vs but they were not of vs for if they had been of vs they would have continued with vs 1 Iohn 2 19 2 It is a fallacie taking that for a cause which is not a cause Because the Church is not the cause of tumults and schismes but Schismatickes are the cause therof Otherwise the Church of Corinth had not beene the true church seeing Paul writeth There must be heresies among you 1 Corinth 11 19. Question 2 Whether we must grant that there is an inuisible Church The Papists acknowledge onely a visible Church which same they tye to the Pope Cardinalls Bishops c. rather than to the hearers But wee in this visible companie of them that heare the Word and vse the Sacraments doe believe that there is an other companie inuisible to the eies of men not in respect of the members persons themselues but in respect of the inteÌ„t of their hart and their fayth which is only known vnto God And that for these reasons Because wee believe the holy Catholicke Church but faith is the ground and evideÌ„ce of things which are not seene Heb 11 1. Because those which are in the visible Church may a great part of them be hypocrites betweene such and the true beleeuers God alone doth discerne vnto vs the hearts of men are not knowne and the Church doth iudge of secret â—gings 1. Christ knowes his sheepe Ioh 10. 14 27 2 The foundation of God remaineth sure and hath this seale The Lord knoweth who are his Timo. 2. 19. Because we haue the thing it selfe the invisible Church deciphered by examples in the holy Scriptures 1 For a long time hath Israel beene without the true God and without priest to teach and without law but there Christ was not altogether deprived of his Spouse but though the ministerie were corrupted he had his invisible Church 2. Chron. 15. 3. 4. 2 I will leaue vnto me saith the Lord seven thousand men in Israel which haue not bowed the knee vnto Baal 1. Ki. 19. 18. But this company could not then be perceived with bodily eyes but was invisible and only knowne vnto God as is gathered out of verse 10 and 14. â— At the time of Christs comming into thâ— world when the publick Ministerie of the Word was corrupted God had his inuisible Church Marie Ioseph Zacharie Elizabeth the wise men that came froÌ„ the East Simeon
Anna c. He is not a Iewe which is one outward neither is that Circumcision which is outward in the flesh But he is a Iewe which is one within and the circumcision is of the hart whose praise is not of meÌ„ but of God Rom. 2 28 29. Now how God in the time of Poperie the publick Ministerie of the word being corrupted had his inuisible Church is thus declared There were a coÌ„pany of baptized Infants which were a great part of the Church but Note By this declaration it appeares tâ—at we doe not condemne our godly ancestours who liued in the time of Poperie the Church was neuer at any time without baptized children seeing that Baptisme euen vnder the raigne of Antichrist remained in the Church There were alwaies godly intelligeÌ„t meÌ„ which gaine-said the Pope sometimes openâ—y sometimes secretly See the booke intiâ—uled Catalâ—gus testium veritatis and those who gaine-said him had them which approâ—ed their iudgement although by reason of the tyrannie of the Bishops of Rome they durst not openly make profession thereof There were also many simple men whose harts were more pure thaÌ„ were the mouthes of their teachers The simpler sort had the chiefe fundamentall points of Christian Religion in the Lords praier the Creede and the ten Commaundements whereby they might bee instructed to a true faith a right inuocating of God and an holy life They heard the Passion of Christ read out of the stories of the Euangelists as also the rehearsing of the Gospels They might therfore out of the text neglecting the glosses of their Preachers learn those things which are necessarie to saluation They confirmed their faith by receauing the holy Supper of the Lord which though it was maimed of the one kinde the cup being quite taken froÌ„ them yet were not they in fault who were coÌ„strained to endure that tyrannie The Masse and other idolatrous seruice by the speciall prouidence of God were celebrated in the Latine tongue for which cause the Lay people were the lesse partakers of their idolatrie which vnderstoode not what was done They had Christ the foundation It is credible therefore that in their agonie the stubble that was built vpon the foundation was consumed but theÌ„selues saued as it were by the fire of tentation tribulation 1 Cor. 3. Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason 1 Yee are the light of the World a City that Note 〈◊〉 this 〈◊〉 our Aduersaries should proue that the church is onely visible but they proue nothing els but that the church is visible which is not questioned is set on an hill cannot be hid also no man lighteth a candle and putteth it vnder a bushell c. Mat. 5 14 15. therefore the Church is visible Ans 1. I graunt the whole reason if by the Church be meant the externall publick Ministerie 2 It is a fallacie from that which is spoken in some respect to the same taken absolutely for in that the Church is said to be visible that is true in some respect onely that is not in respect of the inward man but of the outward publick Ministerie 2 That the Church is visible and that the Church is inuisible be contradictories therefore if it be granted that the Church is visible the inuisible is ouerthrowne Ans Contradictions are not vnlesse they be spoken of the same things and in the same respect but that Church is called visible in one respect and inuisible in another for it is visible in respect of the externall companie of them that heare the Word and vse the Sacraments but it is inuisible in respect of the inward man and true faith which is knowne to God alone as before I said 3 Vnlesse the Church bee visible there will not bee an apparent and free accesse to the Church for any man which ought notwithstanding continually to be so Answer 1. There is an equiuocation in the worde Church First it is taken for the publick Ministerie of the Word and Sacraments and so I grant the whole reason Secondly it is taken for those which doe truly beleeue the Word and rightly vse the Sacraments and so the conclusion is to be denied 2 By that which hath beene saiâ— it appeareth that the Antecedent speaketh of the former the consequent of the later acceptioÌ„ of the Church and so there bee foure termes in the Syllogisme 4 Christ bids vs heare the Church Matthew 18. Which if it bee inuisible cannot bee found out Answer 1. I answere to this reason as to the former 2 Our Aduersaries haue more in the conclusion than in the premisses For thus much followeth that there is a certaine visible church or that in some meaning the church is visible but that there is onely a visible Church there is neuer a word in the place cited 5 The Fathers did oppose the authoritie of the visible Church against Heretikes therefore there must needes be a visible Church Ans 1. It is a fallacie supposing that for a cause which is not For they did not oppose the authority of the Church against the Heritikes for that it was either visible or inuisible but because at that time it preserued the sacred bookes and the sincere profession of the Doctrine 2 Neither did the Fathers seeke to represse the Heritikes by the onely authoritie of the Church but stroue against them with the authoritie of the Scripture Question 3. Whether the Church may erre Our Aduersaries denie it hoping that if it appeare as in truth it doth that the Church in ancient times was at Rome and if that the Church cannot erre that they shall easily without any adoe free themselues from all crime of falshoode by the bare name of the Church being free from all errour But we denie it for these reasons Because the promises of preseruing the purity of the Church are conditionall and not absolute as if yee continue in my word yee are verily my Disciples Ioh 8. 31. Because where the thing doth testifie the contrarie there no plea hath place But we haue examples ready at hand both in the olde and new Testament that the Church hath erred 1. The Church of the olde Testament aâ— concerning the publick Ministerie hath often erred as in the Wildernes when iâ— worshipped the Calfe in the time of the Iudges it oftentimes fell away from the true seruice of God The like happeneâ— vnder the gouernment of King Ahab iâ— the time of Ieremie and of Christs comming in the flesh 2. In the new Testament the Church erred 1 In the Church of Corinth many doubted of the Resurrection of the dead 2 The Galathians swarued from the Apostolick doctrine of Paul in the article of Iustification 3 The Church of Pergamus fauoured the Nicholaitans Reuelation 2 15. 3. At this day the Church of Rome doth erre in many things which hereafter shall be made to appeare as cleare as the noon day The particular members of the Church are not free from error as it is plaine that Peter
erred Galath 2 11 14. All admonitions and predictions of the changes of the Church of taking heede of 1 Iohn 2 18 c 1 cor 11 1â— Math 7. 15 Act â—0 28 29 c 2 Thessal â— 2. 15. false teachers of diligent keeping of sound doctrine c were friuolous superfluous if â—t were impossible that the church shold err And why aboue all other Churches the Church of Rome whereof we now treate â—hould haue this speciall priuiledge that it â—annot erre there is not one sillable or title in â—he holy Scriptures Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason thus 1 The Church is the pillar and ground of truth 1 Timothie 3. 15. Therefore it cannot erre and consequently the Church of Rome neuer did erre An. 1. There are heer foure terms because the Antecedent speakes of the true Church in which alone is Saluation to bee had and which is the keeper of the writings of the Prophets and Apostles but the consequent speaketh of the Church of Rome which is indeede the company and Church of Babilon 2 It is a fallacie from that which is spoken but in some respect onely to the same taken absolutely Because the Church is the pillar and ground of truth that is so long as it maintaineth the truth followes the direction of Gods word But and if it swarue aside from the word of God it can no longer be called the pillar of truth 2 Christ promised to the Church the Spirit of truth Iohn 14 16 17 Therefore the Church cannot erre Answer 1. This promise did principallie pertaine to the Apostles in whom it was most exactly fullfilled and secondarily to the Church which holdeth the doctrine of the Apostles such as the Church of Rome is not at this day 2 It followeth not the holy ghost was given to the Church therefore the Church shall retaine it forever Or the spirit was given to the Church therefore the Church dooth alwaies follow the direction and guiding of the Spirit For neither did Christ so promise his holy Spirit that needs it must abide with the Church howsoever the Church behaue it selfe and turne aside from the revealed Word of God For so the Church of the Galatians coulde never haue been seduced 3 Christ prayed for the Church Father sanctifie them with thy truth c Ioh 17 17. therefore it cannot err Ans 1 Here bee foure termes The Antecedent speakes of the companie of the Elect or the inuisible as is plaine by the whole text the consequent of the visible Church 2. It is a fallacie from that which is spoken but in some respect to the same taken absoly For Christ speakes so adding withall a condition Thy Word is truth Therefore this promise is tyed to the obseruance of that worde as to a certaine condition 4 My Spirit which is vpon thee and my words which I have put in thy mouth shall not depart out of thy mouth nor out of the mouth of thy seede from henceforth for euermore Isai 59 21. Ans 1 If this promise had beene made without condition then it would follow that God had not kept his promise For these words doe immediately goe before They shall feare the name of the Lord from the West and his glory from the rising of the sunne or the East but the Easterne Churches have had a most miserable downe-fall long agoe This promise therefore is condtionall as if God should say I will not forsake thee for ever if thou forsake not me It is therefore a fallacy from that which is spoken but in some respect to the same taken absolutely 2 This promise belongeth to the Church which obeieth the word of God vnto which God will never be wanting with his spirit 5 The Comforter shall abide with you for ever Ioh 14 16. therefore the Church of Rome cannot erre Ans 1 What agreement is there between the Apostles witnesses against whom no exception can be taken the present Church of Rome as now it is vnder the kingdome of the Pope which differeth so much from the Church which Paul taught at Rome as light dooth from darkenesse 2 There is no good consequence from that which is spoken indefinitely to the same spoken definitely or determinately but in the Antecedent the speech is indefinite in the consequent definite There be therfore in this reason foure termes 6 Christ sayth that hee will abide with his Church vntil the end of the World Mat 28 20. Therefore the Roman Church cannot erre Simil. The Husband promised that hee would bee faithfull to his wife all his life loÌ„g therefore she caâ—not become an adultere Ans 1 There is more in the conclusion than in the Premisses for it followeth not Christ remaineth with his Church therfore the Church can in nothing swarue from Christ 2 Besides the Argument is from that which is spoken indefinitely to the same taken definitely 3. And there bee foure termes For Christ speakes of the true Church wherewith the present Church of Rome to which our Aduersaries wrest this promise hath no agreement besides the bare and naked name onely 7 The gates of Hell shall not overcome the Church Mat 16 18. Ans 1 Heere bee foure termes In the Antecedent the Church is meant which is built vpon Christ his Word and SacrameÌ„ts but in the consequent such a Church is meant as is built vpon the Pope and Traditions of men 2 As long as the Church remaineth vpon this Rocke that is Christ it is inuincible but not so if it make defection from the Gospell of Christ CHAP 8. Of the Bishop of Rome THe Papists being driven from their holds which have now beene treated of doe flee to the authoritie of the Pope as to a sure sacred anchor For they imagine 1 that Christ appointed Peter as his Vicar in the Church 2. And gave vnto him both the dominioÌ„ over the whole Church and also the dominion of faith 3 that Peter was Bishop at Rome and gave the same authoritie of dominion to that sea or place 4 That the Bishops of Rome are his successours both in Power and Office And that therefore whatsoeuer proceedes out of their mouth of any point of Religion must needes be infallibly true and that all the faithfull or all Christians are bound to obey them From this rope platted of sand arise moreover these questions 1 Whether Christ have need of any such Vicar on earth 2 Whether Christ gave Peter authority power whereby he should beare rule over the rest of the Apostles and have the dominion of faith 3. Whether Peter were at Rome and did there constitute this order 4 Whether the Bishops of Rome be the successors of Peter the Apostle Question 1 Whether Christ have neede of any visible head or Vicar in his Church on Earth The Papists affirme and wee denie it for these reasons Christ had ill provided for his Church if he had ordained a man vniversall Vicar which might erre as beeing a man as
propitiatorie sacrifice in the supper 5 Paul bids vs to shew the Lords death not to represent it by a stagelike spectacle not to sacrifice 1 Cor. 11 26. For to shew the Lords death and to sacrifice are things altogether different The doctrine of the propitiatorie sacrifice of the Masse dooth twhart the perfect satisfaction of Christ For if CHRIST haue satisfied for the sinnes of al men with one sacrifice once offered and that propitiation of his bee sufficient what neede is there so often to iterate a propitiatory sacrifice in the Masse 1 Hee Christ not the masse is the propitiation or reconciliation not onely for our sins but also for the sins of the whole world 1 Ioh. 2 2. 2 And therefore vpon the crosse he cryed It is finished Ioh 19 30. But the masse twharteth also the priesthood The Priesthoode of Christ is not commō to him with anie man of Christ 1 For Christ alone could offer himselfe for a propitiatorie sacrifice neither could any man offer vp Christ but hee himselfe alone Therefore Popish priests vnlesse they willingly say that they are new Christs can not offer a propitiatorie sacrifice 1 Christ did it once when hee offered vp himselfe Hebr 7. 27. 2 Not that hee should offer himselfe often Heb. 9 25. 3 Otherwise the masse-priestes should bee Priests after the order of Melchifedech which agreeth to Christ alone 4 Neither doth anie man take vnto himselfe this honour but hee that is called of God as was Aaron So likewise Christ tooke not to himselfe this honour to be made the high Priest but he that sayd vnto him c Thou art a Priest for euer after the order of Melchifedech Heb 5. 4 5. c. 2 It is repugnant also to the doctrine of the Priesthood of Christ in respect of the perfect and plenarie sacrifice which is not to be iterated For herein is the priesthood of Christ opposite to the Priesthood of the olde Testament that the sacrifices thereof ought to bee iterated but the sacrifice of Christ had no neede to bee iterated 1 Christ needed not daily as those high Priests of the olde Testament to offer vp sacrifice for his owne sinnes and then for the peoples for that did hee once when he offered vp himselfe Heb. 7. 27. 2. The lawe having the shadow of good things to come and not the very image of the things can never with those sacrifices which they offer yeere by yeere continually sanctifie the commers thereunto for would they not then haue ceased to haue beene offered c. Heb. 10. 1. 2. 3. After hee had saide This is the Testament that I will make with them c. and their sinnes and iniquities will I remember no more Now where remission of these things is there is no more offering for sin Heb. 10. 16. 17. 18. 4. Christ by his own bloud entered once into the holy place and obtained eternall redemption for vs not such a redemption as is to be iterated every day Hebrewes 9. 12. 5. Not that hee should offer himselfe often as the high Priest entred into the holy place every yeere with other bloud for then must he haue often suffered since the foundation of the world but now in the end of the world hath hee appeared once to put away sinne by the sacrifice of himselfe And as it is appointed vnto men Once to die and then commeth the iudgment So Christ was once offred to take away the sins of many Heb. 9 25 26. c. 6. By the which will we are sanctified even by the offering of the body of Iesus Christ once made Heb. 10. 10. 7. And every Priest namely of the olde If our Adversaries say that they offer the same onely sacrifice of Christ here let them see that there is not granted an iteration of the same sacrifices in the new testament Testament appeareth daily ministring oft times offereth one maner of sacrifice which can never take away sinnes but this man after he had offered one sacrifice for sinnes sitteth for ever at the right hand of God c. For with one offering he consecrated for ever them that are sanctified Heb 10. 11. 12. c. The sacrificing Priests do daily as much as in them lieth kill and crucifie Christ in the Masse wherefore the Popish Masse is so much the more abhominable which is indeede harsh to mans eares but that it is true will appeare by the places of Scripture following 1. Without shedding of bloud is no remission Heb 9 22. 2. Where a Testament is there must be the death of him that made the testament Heb 9 16. 3. If Christ must bee often offered then should he haue often suffered Hebrewes 9 26. The Masse was vnknowne in the primitiue Church for some certaine ages as shall afterward bee declared in particular and as Maister Valentine Vannius hath proved in a severall booke published and to this day never touched by any of the Aduersaries Many Massing ceremonies were of a certaine blinde zeale brought in out of the olde Testament shadowes forsooth mingled with the light Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe dispute 1. It is needfull that the Church haue some visible sacrifice to helpe mans infirmitie withall Ans 1 No man denies that we need visible helps for the strengthening of our faith but to faine choose and appoint such sacrifices is not in our power but belongeth to God alone 2. Such visible helps and staies of our faith God hath given vs in the Sacraments wherewith it is meete wee should rest content and not frame new ones at our owne pleasure 2 Euery Priest is taken from among men c. that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for men Heb. 5. 1. Therefore it is needfull that the Priests of the Church haue some thing which they may offer to God for sinnes Ans 1. If the Apostle in this place had compared together the Priests of the olde Testament and the Priests of the newe Testament then the argument would followe But he makes the comparison betweene the Priests of the olde Testament and the Priest Iesus Christ which was prefigured by them This then is all that followeth that it was necessarie that Christ should offer some sacrifice for our sinnes And so there is more in the conclusion than in the premisses 2 Wee doe not reade any where in the newe Testament that there were Priests appointed who should offer visible sacrifices but there were ordained Ministers of the word and Gospell 3. Wee haue an Altar Hebrewes 13 10. therefore it is necessarie that we haue oblations also and sacrifice Ans 1. This is a Paralogisme of all Particulars thus In our Altar which is spirituall is required a sacrifice therefore it can bee no other sacrifice but that of the Masse 2 It is a fallacie from that which is spoken but in some respect to the same taken absolutelie for the Apostle doth not simply speake of euery sort of sacrifice but treateth expreslie
volume of Controuersies betweene the Protestants and the Papists CHAP. 1. Of the holy Scriptures The holy Scripture alone is the Iudge of all controuersies which arise in the Church and the most certaine rule of truth REASONS THE Prophet Isaie sendes vs in deciding of coÌ„trouersies of Religion to the law and to the testimonie Isai 8. 20. that is to the holy Scripture Christ in the controuersie of his person â—nd doctrine saith to the Pharisies Search â—he Scriptures c. they are they which teâ—tifie of mee Ioh. 5 39. Saint Paul greatly commendeth the holy Scriptures vnto vs saying The whole Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach to improue to correct and instruct in righteousnes that the man of God may bee absolute being made perfect vnto euery good worke 2 Timoth 3 16 17. The Citizens of Beraea iudged of Pauls Sermons opinions out of the Scriptures whether Paul taught such things as were agreeable to the holy Scriptures and are for that cause commended Act 17 11. Christ answered out of the Scriptures to the questions of the Pharisies Matthew 19 4 c. of the Sadducees Matth 22 31 c. of the perfect fulfilling of the law Luke 10. 26 27. of his diuinitie out of Psalme 110 Matthew 22 43 44. Whereas hee might haue confuted and confounded them with his miracles alone The Apostles confirmed all their assertions out of the Scriptures as did also the Euangelists Matthew speaketh often of the fulfilling of the Prophets and so decides the greatest controuersie that euer was concerning the Messias out of the writings of the Prophets So Peter also prooueth out of the holy Scripture that Iesus is the promised Messias the Sauiour of the worlde Acts 2 25 c. And Chapter 3. verse 18 c. and Chapter 4 verse 11 25 c. and Chap. 10 verse 43 Stephen fighteth against his aduersaries the Priests Pharisies Scribes with the weapons of the Scripture Acts 7. Paul in the controuersie of Religion which he had with the Iewes prouokes to the law and the writings of the Prophets Acts 24 14 and 26 22 27. The same Paul gathered the doctrine of Iustification out of the Scripture Romanes 1 2 3 4 and 10 Chapters Galath 3 and 4 Chapter and cleareth the controuersie of the person of our Sauiour out of the Scriptures Ephesians 4. Peter draweth Baptisme 1 Peter 3. 21 And other controuersed points betwixt the Iewes and the Christians out of the Scripture of the old â—estament The Epistle to the Hebrewesis wholly heerein occupied to proue the greatest controuersie of his time concerning Christ the only true high Priest out of the Scripture of the old Testament The same did likewise the ancient Fathers in the Church of God who confuted the Heretikes out of the holy Scripture and the ancient godly Counsels ouerthrew the Heretikes not by the opinions of men but by testimonies of the holy Scripture dulie waighed The Position of our Aduersaries The holy Scripture alone cannot be the Iudge of controuersies Their reasons are Because it is insufficient and containeth not all things which pertaine to faith Because it is obscure Because it is vncertaine and may be drawne either to this or that side Hence arise these questions following The first question Whether the Scripture be insufficient They affirme we denie that it is insufficient and that for these testimonies following These things are written saith Iohn that you might beleeue that Iesus is the Christ the Sonne of God and that in belieuing you might haue life through his name Ioh. 20. 31. Therefore those which belieue may attaine euerlasting life by those thinges which are left writteÌ„ in the holy Scriptures and so the Scripture is sufficient for the saluation of men Thou hast knowne the holy Scriptures of a childe saith Paul to Timothie which are able to make thee wise to saluation 2. Timothie 3. 15. All things that I haue heard of my Father haue I made knowne to you Iohn 15 15. The holy Scripture doth mâ—ke â—he man of God absolute and perfect to euery good worke 2 Timo 3 17. I kept back nothing but shewed you all the counsell of God Act 20 27. There can be moued no controuersie of Religion for which the Scripture hath not afore hand prouided a deciding or determining sentence therefore Saint Paul in the controuersie of Iustification calleth the Scripture prouident or fore-seeing Galath 3 8. Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason thus 1 The Apostles taught many things which are not written Answer 1. This is a begging of the question for this same thing is it which is denied Now a doubtfull thing ought not to bee proued by an other as doubtfull 2 The contrarie heereto is contained in the places of Scriptures before alleadged 3 The Apostles should heereby be conuinced of vnfaithfulnes as hauing kept back things necessary to saluation 4 Moreouer there is extant not one onely writing of an Apostle or Euangelist but more that that which is not contained in one may plainely be seene in other of the Apostles writings 2 I haue yet many thinges to say vnto you but you cannot beare them now Ioh. 16 12 Answer 1. It is a fallacie from that which is saide in some particular respect to the same spoken absolutely and generally in all respects for Christ speaketh of his Apostles not yet illuminated by his holy Spirit but he speaks not of them as beeing endued with the holie Ghost in the day of Pentecost That which the worde Now dooth plainely declare 2. While our Aduersaries argue from the Apostles not enlightened to the Church instructed by the writings of the Apostles there arise in the Syllogisme foure termes 3 Besides it was one manner of knowledge which the Apostles had before the day of Pentecost and an other after the receiuing of the holy Ghost therefore these different thinges ought not to bee confounded 3 Other thinges saith Saint Paul will I set in order when I come 1 Corinthians 11 34 therefore Paul did not write all things Answer Paul speakes of indifferent Ceremonies in the Church not of articles of Religion necessarie to saluation Their Argument therefore as the saying is is from the staffe to the corner 4 Manie thinges are not contained in the holy Scripture which are necessarie to faith Ans 1. This we denie it is the very thing in question therefore it is a begging of the question 2. Our Aduersaries play with the word Faith for they meane not a true and sauing faith whereof our question is but in a large sence they take the word Faith vnfitlie wrapping in the word Faith euery friuolous toy long after the Apostles time as it were yesterday obtruded vpon the Church of Christ and so from the two-fold signification of the word Faith there arise foure termes which hinder that there can be no iust conclusion 5 The Scripture saith nothing of Christs descension into hell Answere That is most false for the
Peter also erred Galat 2 11 14. Neither could be present in all places Christ only is the head of the Church Eph. 1 22 4 15. But the Church is not a two headed monster The Heavenly Father commended onely Christ vnto vs that wee should heare him Matt 17 5. Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason 1 From a similitude A Prince that goes into an other Countrey hath neede to leave some man behinde him furnished with full and absolute power so wee must beleeve that Christ did when he was to depart from vs. Ans Heere be manie falshoods and ridiculous toyes 1 Similes doe some times illustrate but never prove 2 If it were never so true that Christ had appointed a Vicar yet it would not follow that the Pope should be hee 3 Neither is there absolute authority such as is falsely ascribed to the Pope granted to anie vicar but authoritie onely which is bounded and limited by lawes 2 It is needefull that some one watch for the whole Church Ans 1. Christ watcheth for the whole and for the parts and speciall members let everie Bishop watch amongst his Clergie 2. It is a thing impossible that anie one man should watch over and for the whole this reason therefore supposeth an impossibility 3 In the olde Testament God appointed a Vicar in deciding controversies to wit the high Priest that hee might bee a visible head in the Church Deut 17. An 1 They argue from a type the signification whereof was accomplished ended in Christ to the Pope Which maketh foure termes in the Syllogisme for the high Priest was not the type of the Pope â—ut of Christ 2 The Priest was Iudge in civill affaires between bloud and bloud c therefore from civill affaires to Ecclesiasticall no good consequence can be drawen vnlesse perhaps from the type of Christ to the Pope 4 It is needefull that there should be some Vicar of Christ to interprete coÌ„troversies which arise or fall out in the holy Scriptures Ans If this were granted to bee never so true which yet may not be granted it wold not therefore follow that the Pope should be that interpreter 2. The Holy Ghost sendeth vs back to the Scriptures which is that our firme word of the Prophets 2 Pet 1 19. 3 Wee doo not reiect anie Interpreter which shall speake according to the law and the testimonie that is which shall interprete the Scriptures according to the Analogie of faith But the Pope will never suffeâ— himselfe to be tyed to this condition 5 It is certaine there should be one and a certaine visible heade for the preseruing of the vnitie of the Church Ans 1 Christ is that heade which governeth his Church by the Ministerie of the Word and Sacraments to whom whosoever joyneth himself is made one bodie with the Church vnder one head 2 The Pope draweth vs from this vnitie whilest he sends vs away from the Scripture to the closer of his breast which doth very often crosse the holy Scripture directly 6. A Monarchie is the best state of gouernment but we must thinke that the Church is to haue the best state of gouernment therefore a Monarchie Ans 1. As concerning a visible head there â—s great difference betweene Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall gouernment And Christ himâ—elfe sheweth a very great vnlikenes between â—hem when he saith The Kings of the Genâ—iles raigne ouer them but you shall not be so Luk 22 25 26. 2 But as concerning an inâ—isible head we haue Christ the only true Monarch of his Church 7 In the Church all things ought to bee done Corinth 1. 14 40. â—â— order but all Ecclesiasticall Order is contaiâ—ed vnder the Pope Ans In the Antecedent proposition Paul â—eats not of the order of inferiour or superiâ—ur persons but of the outward order of Ceremonies which is to be obserued in the â—ssembly of the Church for comlinesse sake Such an order euery Church ought to obserue as the circumstances of time person and place shall require though they submit not themselues to the yoke of the Bishop of Rome The alleadging therfore of that saying of Paul makes nothing at all for the establishing of the Monarchie of the Bishop of Rome and so heere be foure termes in this argument Question 2. Whether Peter receiued 1 power of Dominion ouer the rest of the Apostles and 2 the dominion of faith We denie both and first we denie that Peter receiued Dominion ouer the other Apostles for these reasons Because it is no where taught in the holy Scriptures Because Peter doth no where testifie that hee receiued such power but behaued himselfe as equall to the rest in power 1. I which am a fellow-elder Consenior and witnes of the sufferings of Christ 1 Pe. 5 1. 2. Not as Lords ouer gods heritage but that yee may be ensamples to the flocke 3. Therefore he suffered himselfe to be sent of the other Apostles into Samaria with Iohn as his fellow equall Act. 8. 14. 4. He suffers himselfe to be accused for that hee had gone in vnto the Gentiles as being their equall cleareth himselfe before them Act 11. 2 3 c. 5. Hee endured himselfe to be reproued of Paul Galat 2 11 14. 6 Who is Paul who is Apollo 1 Cor 3 5 which wordes doe shew that there was no authoritie no superioritie among the Apostles one ouer another 7. When Iames and Cephas Iohn knew Note 1. Paul placeth Iameâ— in the first place 2 Hee saith not pillar but pillars 3. Hâ— calleth theÌ„ fellows of the grace of God that was giuen vnto me which are counted to be pillars they gaue to mee and to Barnabas the right hands of fellowship c Galat 2 9. Christ saith the Kings of the Gentiles raigne ouer them but yee shall not bee so Luk 22 25 26. When the Apostles stroue for superioritie Christ neuer preferred Peter but exhorted all and so Peter also to equalitie humilitie Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe reason 1. Math 10 2. Where the Apostles are reckoned vp in order Peter is said to be the first Ans There bee foure termes in the Antecedent the word first is taken for the order of counting or reckoning and in the Consequent for the order of dignitie or authoritie 2 Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will build my Church therefore Peter is the foundation of the Church and thereupon hath power ouer the rest Ans It is a fallacie of Composition because in the Papists argument those thinges iointly are spoken of Peter which Christ spoke distinctly and seuerally of himselfe of Peter 2 Because Christ spoke to all the Apostles vnder the person of Peter it would follow arguing as the Papists doe that euerie one of the Apostles was the Prince of the Apostles Nowe what an absurditie were this 3 Christ saith to Peter feede my sheepe c. Ioh 21 17. Therefore hee made him head of the Apostles Ans 1. Heere is the changing of an
indefinite proposition which in this place is but a particular into an vniuersall thus feede my sheepe therefore feede all my sheepe 2 Heere are foure termes The word feede in the Antecedent is to do the office of a Minister of the Gospell but in the Consequent it is to be a Prince and to exercise dominion 4 Christ payed tribute for Peter and not for the rest of the Apostles Matth 17 27 Therefore Peter was Prince of the Apostles An. This is a Doctor like exposition to pay tribute that is to make a Prince for Peter that is Peter These dotages of the Papists declare how absurdly for want of proofes they scrape together any thing to bleare the eies of the vnlearned 5 Peter after the manner of a Prince lifted vp his voice on the day of Pentecost when the rest of the Apostles held their peace as it were for reuerence sake to him Act 2 14 4 8. Ans This is a fallacie putting that for a cause which is not a cause because the Apostles might giue Peter this honour either for his age or eloquence and not because they acknowledged him for their Prince and head 6 In the Counsell of the Apostles Peter first of all gaue his voice Act 15 7 Therefore he was Prince of the Apostles Ans 1 The voice of Peter is described but whether he first of all gaue his voice or some other before him that is not written therefore there is more in the Consequent than in the Antecedent on this wise Peters voice is the first that is mentioned therefore no man gaue any voice before him 2 It seemeth rather that others spake before him by these words next going before When there had been great disputation c. Whence it appeareth that some had spoken their mindes before Peter 3 out of this place it might rather be proued that Iames was the Prince of the Apostles for that he their voices being gathered gaue the definitiue sentence the argument therefore of the Papists is most fond 7. The Fathers and Writers of the Church haue acknowledged Peter to bee the Prince of the Apostles Answer If any of them did so they had it frō vncertaine reports contrarie to the meaning of the Scripture Neither ought the error of a few to be any preiudice to the truth 2 They gaine-saide the Primacie of Peter Augustine on the 16 of Matthew Cyprian in his Epistles Gregorie the great others Now in the second place let vs treate also of Dominion of faith with the Papists is that power or prerogatiue whereby the Pope may as please him determine and iudge of articles of Religion the power of knowledge or dominion of faith Wee denie that such a power was granted by Christ to Peter or any other man and that for these reasons Because it is Christ alone of whom the heauenly Father hath said heare him Math. 3 17 and 17 5 and there is one Maister or Doctor Math 23 8. Though that we or an Angell from heauen should preach vnto you otherwise than that which we haue preached vnto you let him be accursed Galat 1 8. Christ and Paul had not done well in sending their hearers vnto the Scriptures wheras rather they should haue sent them vnto Peter if wee must stand to the Popes iudgement Peter himselfe sends vs to the word of the Prophets and teacheth vs to attend to the word and not to himselfe as for any personall priuiledge 2 Pet 1 19. Peter in his Sermons and Epistles neuer taught any thing by such an absolute peculiar power or authoritie but confirmed all his assertions out of the holy Scripture as is to be seene Act. 2 4 10 and 15 Chap. By this meanes there had beene no neede of the Counsell of the Apostles but Peter alone should haue beene asked what hee would infallibly define Paul would not seeme to haue receiued anie thing from Peter as concerning his doctrine wherein hee had offended if the dominion of faith had beene committed to Peter Galat. 1 11 12 c. It may not be thought that such a dominion on of faith was committed vnto Peter because that hee was blame worthie and went not the right way to the truth of the Gospel Galat. 2 11 14. Contrariwise our Aduersaries reason thus 1 I will giue vnto thee the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen Matth 16 19 Therefore Peter had the key of knowledge and the dominion of faith Ans 1. There is more in the Consequent than in the Antecedent for it followeth not the keyes were given to Peter therefore power was given him to appoint and constitute what he pleased in doctrine faith 2 There are foure termes In the Antecedent the keyes are taken for that part of the ministery which consisteth in binding and loosing of sinnes in the consequent it is mistaken for authority to determine and constitute any thing what seemeth good in doctrine 3 The keyes did not only belong to Peter but to the rest of the Apostles also vnto whom Christ promised the keyes vnder the person of Peter who had answered for all And Christ gave authority alike to all to retaine to remit sinnes Mar 18 18 Ioh 20 23 which Panormitan also doth aduertise vs of 2 Christ prayed for Peter that his faith should not fayle Luke 22 32 therefore Peter received the Dominion of fayth Ans 1 Christ speaketh of Peters denying of him from which by his prayer for him he reclaimed Peter and did not suffer him to perish with Iudas To argue then from a particuler case to all the actions of Peter is very absurde 2 If to pray for a mans perseverance be all one as to give him the dominion of faith then because Christ prayed for the perseverance of all those that should heare and believe in him through the preaching of the Apostles Ioh 17 20 it would follow that he had committed vnto all them the dominion of faith which is absurde There are therefore in this argument foure termes 3 Christ sayd to Peter when thou art conuerted strengthen thy brethren Luke 22 32. Therfore the dominion of faith was given to Peter Ans 1 Christ speakes of such a strengthening whereby he that hath beene tempted knowes how to strengthen them which are tempted in the like manner But concerning the dominion of Faith there is not one title Againe therfore heer are foure terms 2 Every man that strengtheneth his brother should by the same reason as the Papists heer argue have the dominion of faith assured vnto him 3 And so also Peter could not have beene blame-worthy if hee had Gal 2 11 14. obtained the dominion of faith but hee ought rather to have chid Paul that reproved him 4 Vpon this Rocke I will builde my Church and the gates of hell shall not overcome it Math 16 18. Therefore it must needes bee that Peter received an infallible dominion of Faith Ans 1 If Peter had beene that most firme and sure Rock then
Peter neither can they certainly say who was his successor the different opinions are these 1. Platina Sabellicus Epiphanius reckon thus 1. Peter 2 Linus 3. Cletus 4. Clemens 5. Anacletus 2 Eusebius Irenaeus Hierom reckon them thus 1. Peter 2. Linus 3. Anacletus 4. Clemens 5. Of Cletus they say nothing 3. Damasus the Tomes of the Counsels Mariaâ—â— Scotus Caranza doe reckon them thus 1 Petrus 2 Clemens 3 Anacletus 4. Onuphrius reckoneth them thus 1 Peter 2 Linus 3 Clemens 4 Cletus 5 Anacletus Caranza saith In a matter so intricate I leave the defining therof to the iudgment of the Reader Summa concil pa 13. Amongst the Ecclesiasticall Writers some doe reckon fewer some reckon moe Bishops so that they agree not in the nuÌ„ber Because the Church of Rome in respect of this succession hath not anie where in â—he holy Scriptures any prerogative given her aboue other Churches They are not the sonnes of the Saints as â—he Canon lawe confesseth which possesse â—he roomes of the Saints but they that pracâ—se their works nether doth the See make a Biâ—â—op but a Bishop maketh the See as also the â—ace doth not sanctifie the man but the man both sanctifie the place Distinct 40 cap â—ulti Sacerdotes c. But the Pope is not the â—ccessor of Peter neither in doctrine nor in â—anners 1. Not in doctrine Peter taught thus There is giuen no other name vnder heaven whereby we must be saued but by Iesus Act. 4 12. The pope hath other names that men may bee saued by the merites of Saints the virgin Mary Iohn Baptist the holy Martyrs as also Francis Dominicus c. Peter To him that is Christ gaue all the Prophets witnesse that through his name all that belieue in him shall receiue remission of sinnes Act 10 43. The pope Sinnes committed after Baptisme are not remitted but are recompenced for by vs not because we belieue in Christ but in our works Peter acknowledgeth one onely foundation of the Church euen Christ the corner stone Math 16 16 1 pet 2 6 The pope placeth himselfe for the foundation and corner stone of the Church Peter Submit your selues to all manner of ordinance for the Lords sake whether vnto the King or vnto Gouernours c 1 peâ— 2 13. The pope would haue all Kings and Emperours subiect to him Peter ascribes vnto Christ that hee is the Shepheard and Bishop of our soules 1 Pet. 2 25 and the chiefe or head Shepheard 1 Pet. 5 4. The pope takes it to himselfe that hee is the pastor of all soules and the head Shepheard Peter Baptisme is the stipulation or taking to witnesse of a good conscience 1 pet 3. 21. The pope The state of Monkerie is equall See Aquiâ— as lib 4 〈◊〉 distinct 4 art 3. to Baptisme and Christians that haue fallen into any sinne after Baptisme cannot comfort their consciences by their Baptisme although they repent Peter If any man speake let him talke as the words of God 1 pet 4 11. The pope If any man speake let him speake our Traditions of men Peter Feede the flock of God not for filthie Venalia nobis Templa Sacerdotes Altaria Sacra Coronae Ignis Thura preces Coelum est venale deusque Mautuâ—n lukers sake 1 pet 5 2 The Pope Wares of all sorts are heere to be sold Buy what yee will for money downe told Churches Priests Altars Offerings Crowns We passe for quicke sale all Cities and townes Fire frankincense Dirges pardons froÌ„ paine Hell HeaveÌ„ God the Devil we give al for gain 1 Peter not as though ye were Lords over Gods heritage 1 Pet 5 3. The Pope will bee Lord over Angells Church and Christian Monarchies c. Peter Resist the devill steedfast in the faith 1 Pet 5 9. The Pope Resist him by consecrated candles holy water the signe of the Crosse moonkish weede c. Peter Make your calling and election sure by holines and good workes 2 Pet 1 10. The Pope seeke for your iustification before God by good workes Peter we followed not deceivable fables when wee opened vnto you the power and comming of our Lord Iesus Christ 2 Pet 1 16. The Pope hath canonized the fabulous Bookes of Dominick and the conformitie of Saint Francis as also the lying Legends are yet set abroade to sale And more over hee hath gone about to confirme the most of his trash by fables Peter we haue a most sure word of the Prophets to which ye do well that yee take heede 2 Pet 1 19. The Pope dooth no otherwaies runne away from the scripture than the devill is supposed to doe from the signe of the crosse But and if we would further compare the Popes decrees with the doctrines and writings of the other Apostles we should finde that they differ as farre as Heauen and hell 2 Peter and the Bishops of Rome differ very much in manners Peter inueigheth against them which live luxuriously delighting themselues in their deceiuings c. having eyes full of adulterie 2 Pet 2 13 14. The Pope feedes a great number of such massing seruants of his owne Peter lived in humilitie The Pope in more than Ruffian-like ryot Peter carried himselfe as a Minister or seruant to others The Pope behaueth himselfe as Lord of Lords Peter caried about a wife with him i. Corinthians 9 5. The pope abhorreth mariage in priests Peter condemned Simonie Act. 8 20 c The pope for money selleth Indulgences Bishoprickes Palles Bulls and all thinges are ordered for the scraping of money and the wiping of others of their substance See the popes a A book openly set to sale wherein is the price of absolutioÌ„ for most hai nous sinnes whereof Espencaeus coÌ„plaineth most pittifuâ—ly in Tit. cap. 1. Digress 2. taxa paenitentiaria 6 Peter was godly holy honest chaste c. The pope hath in the Genealogie of his succession Thieues Magicians Southsaiers Witches Adulterers WhoremoÌ„gers Warriours and what not Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe reason The Fathers called the Bishops of Rome the successors of Peter Answer 1. They were better Bishops then than they bee nowe a-daies The ancient Bishoppes of Rome the most of them were holy Martyrs the late ones voluptuous persons 2 And all godly and good Bishops are the successors of the Apostles in office not only the Bishop of Rome if he were good and godly 3 The Fathers also called Rome the purple colored whore Hieron to Marcella and Augustin â—â— Ciuit. Dei lib 8 cap 22 and other An other or the first Question coincident with the former Who the Pope is I Answere He is Antichrist Because all things which are foretolde of Antichrist in the holy Scriptures are fulfilled in the Pope Hee is called in the Scriptures an Aduersarie that opposeth himselfe against Christ Now the Pope opposeth himselfe against Christ manie wayes as for examples sake 1. Christ commends the holy Scripture Ioh 5 39. The Pope calleth it the matter of
thing be required but faith alone why I say is it not once so much as in one word at the least insinuated by so great and worthie Authors in so many and so serious sayings of theirs therefore faith alone doth iustifie Contrariwise Infidelity alone is the cause that sinners doe not obtaine forgiuenes of sinnes and so are condemned whereas no sinne is vnpardonable where faith is 1 He that beleeveth not is condemned alreadie because hee beleeveth not in the name of the only begotten sonne of God Ioh 3 18 2 He that obeyeth not the sonne or that * The word in the latine translatioÌ„ is incredulus that beleeueth not the originall Hâ— Apâ—â—thoÌ„ signifieth hâ— that beleeueth not or he that obeieth not how soeuer it bee taken heere it is certaine it is opposed to faith and beleeuing as appeareth by the wordes next going before beleeveth not on the sonne shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him Ioh 3 36 3 Except yee beleeve that I am hee yee shall die in your sinnes Ioh 8 2. 4. The holy ghost shall reproue the world of sinne as if this were the sinne by an excellencie aboue other because they beleeue not in me Ioh 16. 8 9. 5 If any man heare my words and beleeue them not c. hee hath one that iudgeth him Ioh 12. 47 48. 6. Hee that will not beleeue shall be condemned Mark 16. 16. 7 The sinne of the Iewes for which they were reiected was their vnbeliefe Rom. 11. 20. 8. Christ is to them that beleeue not a stone to stumble at and a rock of offence 1 Pet. 2 8. 9 He that beleeueth not God hath made him a lyar 1 Ioh. 5 10 10 Hee that hath not the sonne now the sonne is had by faith hath not life 1 Ioh. 5 12. 11. Without faith it is vnpossible to please God Heb 11 6 Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe argue 1 As a gift is receaued not with one finger but with the whole hand so we doe not receaue iustification by faith alone but by hope charitie together with fairh Ans Similitudes haue no force to proue a thing And yet a gift may be receiued with one finger too as for example a gold chaine may This is therefore a most fonde argument although it were sometime alleadged in a famous place and companie by a Iesuite a man of no small authoritie and account 2 We are saued by hope Rom 8 24. Therfore we are not saued by faith alone Ans 1 Paul speakes not of iustification but of the future possession of euerlasting life which in this life wee possesse in hope only and this is all he saith that we are truly blessed through faith but we doe waite for the reuelation of that our blessednesse in hope And therefore because to bee saved is in this place taken of S. Paul in one sense and of our Aduersaries in an other sense in the conclusion there arise in the argument foure termes 3 Goe and teach all nations c. not only to belieue but to obserue all things whatsoeuer I haue commanded you Math. 28. 20. Therefore faith alone sufficeth not Ans Vnto Renouation whereof Christ speaketh in the obseruing of those things hâ— Our Aduersaries make no difference betweene SanctificatioÌ„ iustification commanded it sufficeth not onely to believe but to worke is required also But as concerning iustification in the very same instruction of the Apostles Christ sayth he that shall believe and be baptized shall be saued without making mention of charitie or any other workes Marke 16 16. 4 It was not enough for the blinde man that his eies were annoynted but it was needfull Eckius that he should goe to the poole Siloam Ioh. 9 6. 7. that is faith sufficeth not but workes are required also to iustification Ans Wee may not determine of controuersed points by such Allegories as haue no ground in scriptures 5 If I had all faith so that I could remoue mountaines and had not loue I were nothing c. 1. Cor 13 2. Ans 1 Paul speaketh of the necessitie of loue or charitie not as pertaining to iustification but to vnitie and the profite of the Church It is therefore a fallacie from that which is spoken in some respect to the same taken absolutely and this saying of the Apostle is wrongfully wrested to iustification 2 Neither doth he speake of iustifying faith but of the faith of miracles Heere be therefore fiue termes in this argument 6 To you it is giuen for Christ that not onely yee should belieue in him but also suffer for his sake Philippians 1 29. Heere Paul ioyneth faith and workes together Answ 1 Heere is not anie thing meant of iustification onely the Apostle sheweth that they that belieue should beare all things patiently for Christs sake and that it is the gift of God and not of the strength or abilitie of man that they doo patiently suffer aduersitie for Christs sake 2 He speaketh that of those that be iustified which our Aduersaries expound of them that are to be iustified There are therefore fowre termes 7 Faith is effectuall or worketh by loue Gal 5 6. therefore faith alone doth not iustfie but loue or charitie together with faith An 1. There is more in the conclusion Roffensis faith ful of good workes doth justifie before it bringes forth the good workes than in the premisses For there dooth no more follow but that faith which is voide of charity is a dead faith but that charity which follloweth faith doth iustifie here is not one sillable 2 The question is not what vertues are linked or ioyned with others but what is the peculiar propertie of euerie one of it selfe Heere is therefore a fallacie in workes making manie questions for one 8 Seest thou not that the faith wrought with his workes and through the works was the faith made perfect Iames 2 22. and yee see then that of workes a man is iustified and not of faith onely Verse 24. and faith without workes is dead Ver 26 Shew me thy faith by thy workes I will shew thee my faith by my workes Verse 18. Ans 1. Hee speaketh of a dead faith which we reiect in the article of iustification also 2 The meaning is that our iustification is to bee delared before men by our workes according to that which our Sauiour sayth Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good workes c. Mat 5 16 3 works are not good vnlesse they be done by them which are iustified 9 This word Onely by faith or by faith alone is found no where in the Scripture Therfore we are not iustified by it alone Answ Exclusiue particles equiualent to the word alone are found in the holy Scripture 1. The word Grace Ephes 2 8 Rom 11. 5 6. Tit 3 7. 2 Timo 1. 9. 2 The word freely with other of the same signification Roman 3 24 charisma a gifte freely
what is this to the purpose 5 Manie things are held and defended in the Church that is of Rome which are not in the Scriptures Answ For this verie cause they are forgeries deseruedly for the reasons before alleadged to be reiected 6 There are in the most auncient Councels which are approved and allowed on both parts constitutions which are not comprised in scripture but are receiued as being deâ—â—uered by the Church Ans 1 These constitutions belong to order and comelinesse and are not matters of faith Therfore this is nothing to the purpose 2 Neither are they proposed by the Councells as meritorious of eternall life but as things indifferent 3 And in Councells which wee approue of wee receiue those things onely which are not contrarie to the Word of God 7 Christ never commanded to abstaine from that which is strangled which notwithstanding the Apostles commanded Acts. 15 29. Nay they were abrogated and afterward brought vp by the Apostles Answ It is a fallacie from that which is spoken in some respect to the same taken absolutely and in all respects For the Apostles did not require this as a thing necessarie to saluation but did ordaine in some respect according to the rule of charitie in favour of the weake ones who might bee offended at Christian libertie vsed vnseasonably But the Papists contend for such constitutions as they make necessarie It is therefore an argument from that which is necessarie by an accident and speciall occasion to that which is of it selfe absolutely necessarie QVESTION 3. The question is what kinde of workes those bee which our Aduersaries doe call workes of supererogation Our Aduersaries commende them highly as making men perfect but wee haue some things to except against them both in generall and in particular as That which they presuppose as a grounde is Error 1 false that is that we can performe more than is required of vs by the lawe When yee haue done all things which are commanded you say wee are vnprofitable seruants Luke 17 10. It is contrarie to the article of sanctification which dooth not grant to any man in this life a perfect plenarie fulfilling of the lawe much lesse anie workes of supererogation Whereof wee shall speake in the next Chapter following Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe reason thus 1 Christ sayth if thou shalt supererogate anie thing c. Luke 10 35. Therefore he had reference heere to workes of supererogation Ans 1 In controuersed points of Religion wee may not play with allegories which haue no ground in Scripture 2. Christ doth there extoll the charitie of the Samaritanâ— who before had giuen money to the hoste to make prouision for the wounded man and with all promised him that if heâ— spent more in prouiding for him hee would repaie it But what is this to workes of supererogation 2 I fulfill the rest of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his bodies sake which is the Church Colos 1 24. Ans He speaketh nothing of the perfecte keeping of the lawe much lesse of workes of supererogation but of that parcell of the Crosse which God layeth vpon the shoulders of the Church and the members thereof to bee borne of them that they may bee made like to the image of his Sonne Romans 8 29 For the meaning of Paul is onely this since that certaine afflictions are allotted to the CHVRCH that himselfe beareth a great part of them that the measure of sufferings may bee fulfilled in the mysticall bodie of Christ And what is this to the works of supererogation They faine that Christ hath brought vs a Error 2 new and more perfect lawe by adioyning Euangelicall councells to the lawe which is very false Because manie of those things which they call councells are indeed commandements and the explication of the morall law wherof manie also are comprised in the Lawe of Moses where the tenne Commandements are explained Christ was not a Lawgiuer but a Mediatour 1 The Lawe was given by Moses but grace and truth by Iesus Christ Ioh 1 17. 2 And therefore that hee should not seeme a Law giuer Christ iudgeth no man Ioh 8 15. 3 Therefore the preaching of the Gospell not of the Lawe is called the preaching of Christ and the Ministerie of reconciliation 2 Corinthians 5 18 19 20. This false assertion of our Aduersaries savoureth of Mahometisme For Mahomet in his Alcoran saith that Moses gave not so perfect a law that Christ gaue a more perfect law for that no man could bee saued by the â—awe of Moses but that Mahomet hath giuen a most perfect and absolute law Change this last name of Mahomet into the name of S Francis Saint Dominicke c. and it wil be the verie same thing Our Aduersaries reckon Povertie amongst Euangelicall Councells and workes of supererogation 3 Pouerty but falsely Because it is not a councell but a commandement that when neede so requireth we Mat 8 19 20 c 10 37 38 c. Lu 18 29 c. should part with al the goods of this life nay life it selfe for Christs sake But the Moonkish pouertie is farre from this The Moonkish pouertie is but a mockerie For therein the sweate of the browes layed vpoÌ„ everie man in his calling is changed for yearely and most certaine renenews and pensions for terme of life Contrariwise our aduersaries doe reason 1 CHRIST sayd to the young man who asked a councell of perfection If thou wilt bee perfect goe and sell all c Matt 19 21. Marke 10 20. Ans The whole text doth make it plaine that Christ woulde represse and pull downe the proude yong Pharisee that swelled with perswasion of his owne perfection and that he meant nothing lesse than to teach that perfection did consist in povertie Neither would Christ by this answer prescribe a common rule of attaining to perfection But as God prooued Abrahams obedience when he commanded him to offer his sonn which yet he would not haue done so Christ by enioining the young man poverty would bring to light his disobedience and idolatrous worshipping of money That so it might appeare that hee loued riches more than God and that therefore he lyed in bragging that he had kept the lawe They ground the counsell of vowed chastitie 4 Chastitie vpon the words of Paul Concerning virgins I haue no commaundement of the Lord but I give counsell 1. Corint 7 25 and he thas is able to receaue this let him receaue it Matthew 19 â—2 Ans 1. Pauls counsell in this place was not concerning perfection or of obtaining of eternall life but his counsell was fitted to the present necessitie that is for feare of persecution it is not then to the purpose 2 Paul left this counsell free at their owne choise neither did he lay a snare on their coÌ„sciences Wherein there is no agreement with the moonkish vowed chastitie 3. Christ Matthew 19 handleth nothing of the perfection of man but onely teacheth that
the sacrifice of Abel and Meschizedeck If our Aduersaries referre these words to the olde accustomed offerings they make mockeries seeing this manner is now ceased amongst them and they pray for that which is no where But if they refer them to the present sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ in the masse what is this else but to make intercession to the heauenly Father for his Sonne Christ Againe how absurdly is that most precious sacrifice of Christs own body bloud compared with the sacrifice of Abel which it may be was a Lambe or a Goate but these witlesse men make no more reckoning of Christs sacrifice than of a goate or a Lambe There is comparison made with the sacrifice of Melchizedeck whereas yet there is An error in the sacrifice of Melchizedeck who did not sacrifice but brought forth bred and wine nothing in Scripture as hath alreadie beene shewed that Melchizedeck did offer breade and wine The sacrifice of Christ is compared with that sacrifice which is not neuer was and neuer shall be The Canon sayth that they offer the bread of life to the heauenly Father But where are they bid to offer the breade of life Whereof we reade nothing in the whole course of the scripture but that the bread of life should be eaten not offered The Canon is contrarie to the article of Christs ascension when it commandeth the Angels to carie the hoste before the face of God to the high altar What And did not Christ ascend vnto his Father And is there neede that he should now after all appeare before his Father that he should be caried from the earth aboue to his Father Againe seeing Christ is neuer in his glorifyed bodie absent from his Father what do the Angels carie according to the Canon of the masse if breade then they commit idolatrie if his body then hath Christ two bodies one whereof is present in Heauen with the Father and the other is now after all caried from the earth by the Angels And lastly that we may not seeme heere to make a large refutation of the Canon whatsoeuer praise prayer thankesgiuing was wont to be vsed in the primitiue Church in the celebration of the Supper and offerings of charity all that though the manner of those offerings bee abrogated with which that part of the seruice should rightly haue beene abrogated too all that I say our Aduersaries do so retaine that they haue of a foolish ordinance trasferred to the bread of the Eucharist present in the Supper all those which formerly belonged to an action altogether different from this As anie man may easily finde moe than be heere alleadged if hee doo but onely reade the Canon of the masse In the meane while the Councell of Trent striketh all them with acurse which say there be errors contained in the Canon of the masse But it is â—uident how it wanteth no errors but abouÌ„deth with them This is also one of the Abuses of the masse that 8 Abuse Masse sayd in Latine it is celebrated not in a knowen tongue and such as the people vnderstand but in a strange and indeed only in the latine tongue which we reproue for these causes Because in the supper there ought to bee a coÌ„memoratioÌ„ of the death passioÌ„ of Christ which how can it be done in a tongue which the people vnderstand not And how shall he that occupieth the roome of the vnlearned say Amen at thy giuing of thankes seeing he knoweth not what thou sayest 1 Corin 14 16. Paul writ the institution of the Lords Supper to the Corinthians rather in their mother tongue than in an other Before the receiuing of the Supper to the fruitfull vse thereof it is needfull to admonish and exhort the communicants before hand that the people may examine themselues This admonishing hath no place where the holy Supper is celebrated in a strange tongue Paul though hee commend the gifte of tongues yet woulde haue all thinges in the Church ordered to edification but by a strange tongue he that vnderstandeth it not is not edified neither can the hearers faith be strengthened by that speech which hee knoweth not what it meaneth I had rather in the Church saith Paule speake fiue words with mine vnderstanding that I might also instruct others than tenne thousand worâ—s in a strange tongue 1 Cor 14. 19. for this purpose reade that whole chapter Paul had rather in the publike congregation of the Church speake so that hee might bee vnderstoode but the Papists had rather in the meeting of the Church speake that they be not vnderstood Contrariwise our Aduersaries do reason thus 1. Masse is to be saide in Latine that they which come to vs out of France Italy England may vnderstand it and thereby set the vnitie of the Church Ans 1 By the like reason wee should not preach in the Dutch tongue but in the Latine amongst Dutch men that strangers which come vnto vs may vnderstand and heare the consent of our doctrine 2 The whole flocke and company of the godly are not to bee neglected for the cause of a stranger or two whereas notwithstanding there is often times never a one present 3 If there be a necessitie that all strangers should vnâ—erstand Masse how much more needefull â—â—at the whole Church at home should vnderstand 4 It is not certaine that all strangers doe vnderstand the Latine tongue 2. The words of some one language for example of the Dutch tongue are in sundâ—y places of the land different and disagreeing which falleth not out in the Latine tongue Answere 1. The Papists may bee ashamed of such sencelesse Paralogismes for by the same reason it should bee vnlawfull to preach in Dutch 2. And why doe not the Iesuites at this day for the same reason cease to publish their writings in the Dutch tongue But a fit cover for such a pot such as is the Popiâ—â— Religion such are the Popish reasons 3. If service should be said in the vulgar tongue then there would be a prophanation of the mysteries of Religion Answere 1. This is the sore that our Aduersaries cannot abide should bee touched for they are afraide least the grosse absurditities of the Canon of the Masse should bee espied even of the Laicks 2 By the like reason it should not bee any more lawfull to reade the Gospels appointed for Sondaies wherein are many high Mysteries of faith contained in the vulgar tongue before the people but mysteries of Religion whiles they are proposed to the Church and explaned are nothing at all by this meanes prophaned vnlesse they account the Church as Swine and Dogges before whom it is not lawfull to cast sacred things 4. Strangers which vnderstand not our vulgar tongue would laugh at our service which they vnderstand not Answer 1. And what if the common people deride the Masse because they vnderstand it not being saide in Latine 2. And what if those strangers vnderstand not the
Latine tongue neither will they not therefore deride it too If when the whole Church is come together in one all speak staÌ„rge languages that is if nothing be done in the vulgar tonge there come in they that are vnlearned or they which beleeue not will they not say that ye are out of your wits as Paul saith 1 Cor. 14 23. Note that what is here spoken of the saying of Masse in Latine may also bee vnderstood of praiers rehearsed in Latine onely It is an abuse of the Masse also that they â— Abuse Masse for the dead offer the Masse not so much for the living as for the dead residing as the Papists thinke in Purgatorie and that they perswade them selues that the Masse doth profit the dead and that they are helped by the multitude of Masses the vanitie whereof how great it is shall bee declared afterward in the question of Purgatorie and therefore we will surcease from that labour now let it suffice that wee haue rehearsed now some fewe errors and abuses of the Masse in steede of many CHAP. 18. Of Communion vnder one kindâ— THE Antichrist of Rome hath moreover mangled the holy Supper of Christ and hath bereaved the people of the one part or kind of the Supper namely the Cup which hee pretendeth to appertaine not to the lay people but to the Priests onely but wee greatly reproue this mangling of the Supper as a kinde of sacriledge and that for most iust reasons Because it doth directly oppugne the sacred first institution of the Supper by our Lord Iesus Christ 1. For Christ instituted an entire whole Sacrament consisting of two kindes or rather of two parts and not a maimed Sacrament 2. Neither did hee institute two Sacraments of the Supper whereof the one which is for the Priests should consist of two parts or as they speake of two kinds the other for the people but of one This maiming of the Supper is repugnant to the expresse words of Christs Commaundement 1. Drinke yee a word of the Imperatiue Moode all of this Math. 26. 27. 2. And all of them drank of it according to his commandement Mar. 14 23. This was not barely commanded but in the vertue of a Testament which no man may disanull 1. For the Cup which our Aduersaries bereaue the people of is the Cup of the new Testament 1 â—oâ— 11. 25. Luk 22 20. 2. This is my bloud of the newe Testament Math. 26. 28. Mark 14 24. The Lord tyed the commemoration of his death to the Communion of the holie Cup also therefore the commemoration of the bloud Christ shed belongeth equally vnto all and consequently the Cup also As Christ ordained the bread as a means to partake his body which was given for vs that receaving the bread according to his ordinance we should therewith by â—aith receaâ—e his body also so hath hee ordained the Cuppe as a meanes for receaving his bloudâ— therefore seeing the lay people haue neede to receaue the bloud of Christ shedd for their sinnes it is needefull also to receaue it in the Cup the ordinarie meanes thereof and not in the bread Those thinges which Christ by the great wisedome of his Father did sever from them selues in the bread and the wine those doe our Aduersariâ—s confound together It is prooued that the ancient and Primitiue Church did communicate vnder both â—indes 1. By the example of the Corinthians to Note The B b in the counsell of Constance coÌ„sesse that the CoÌ„munion vnder one kinde was neither instituted by Christ nor vsed by the faithfull of the Primitiue Church those Papists the whom Paul prescribes the entire institution of the Supper equally to all 1 Corinth 11. 26 27 28. 2 By the Ecclesiasticall Histories in the times of the Fathers 3 By the confession of our Aduersaries in the Canons of the counsell of Constance which haue these words Though Christ did administer to his Disciples this venerable Sacrament vnder both the kindes of bread wine yet notwithstanding this the Communion vnder which would proue the CoÌ„munion vnder one kind by the Scripture doe reproue the counsell of CoÌ„stance for a lie and doe hold that the Counsell may erre one kinde onely is to be held for a law And againe Although in the Primitiue Church this Sacrament was receaved of the faithfull vnder both kindes yet notwithstanding this the custome being brought in c. 8 Seeing therefore that the Communion vnder one kinde was neither ordained by Christ nor vsed of the Apostles this constitution of Communion vnder one kinde onely can neither be Divine nor Apostolick but Antichristian as having had no place in the Church of Christ for many hundred yeares And when as afterward it crept into the Church by little and little in some places not every where it was at length confirmed brought in publickly by the counsell of Constance The lightnes of those reasons which they bring for the mangling of the Supper ought This booke was published by Gerson in the yeare 1417. August 20. to make it iustly hated of godly men Now wee will very briefly note the reasons of the counsell of Constance as Gerson hath explaned them in a particular booke for that purpose and these be they 1 If the cuppe were granted to the people there were danger of sheading 2 Danger in carying it from place to place 3 In the siâ—â—inesse of the vesselles which should bee Sacred and not commonly handled and touched by the Laickes 4 In mens long beards 5 In the reseruing of it for the sight For vineger might be generated in the vessell add moreouer that in summer time flyes might breedâ— in it some times the wine might puâ—rifie 6 Manie would abhorre to drinke it when manie others had drâ—nkâ— before them 7 In what vessell could there bee so much wine consecrated as would bee required at Easter time for some thousands of CoÌ„municants 8 There would bee losse in the chargeable prouiding of wine For in some places it is hardly gotten other where it is sould deere 9 There would be danger least it should congeale 10 Hereof would arise a danger of a false conceit as if there were as great worthinesse in the Laickes about receiuing Christs body as is in the Priests 11 It would be thought that the Communion of the cuppe hath beene heretofore and now were necessarie and so all the Doctors of the Cleargie and the Prelates which haue not opposed themselues against the contraâ—ie custome by their preâ—ching writing should haue offended 12 The power vertue of this sacrament would be deemed to be more in the receiuing than in the consecration of it 13 It woulde follow that the Church of Rome did not iudge soundly of the sacraments neither were herein to be imitated 14 It would follow that the Councell of Constance did erre in faith good manners 15 It would beâ— an occasion of Schismes in Christianity Had it beene
argument then is this hunger is alaied with bread therefore the lay-people may communicate vnder one kinde onely 10. In the Church of the Apostles the faithfull communicated vnder one kinde of bread onâ—ly Act. 2 42 Ans 1. The breaking of bread in that somwhat The connsel of CoÌ„stmâ—e doth conâ—es in expresse words that in the Primitiue Church this Sacrament was vsâ—d to be receaved of the faith full vnder both kinds obscure place may as well bee vnderstoode of the communitie of goods and rereceaving the poore into their fellowship as of the Communion in the Supper for by the circumstances it should rather be meant that their bread was broken in their houses and not in the Church that is that the Christians lived of their goods in common neither is this interpretation or sence absurd 2 But bee it granted that the speach is there of the Supper yet it being a Synecdochicall speach where the whole is signified by a part it will not exclude the Cup. 11. Christ bad vs pray Giue vs this day our daily bread c. therefore the lay people ought tâ— communicate vnder one kinde Answere 1. The Priests say the same prayer let them then abstaine also from the Cup. 2 The word Bread in the Antecedent is taken for food and rayment in the consequent for Communion vnder one kinde so there are foure termes 12. The Fathers when they speake of the Supper doe oftentimes mention the bread onely and not the Cup also Ans 1. They name the Supper so by a figure Synecdoche from the more principall part signifying the whole but the figure Synecdoche hath not an exclusiue power but vnder one part includeth the other two â— The counsell of CoÌ„stance doth grant that in the Primitiue Church in the time of the Fathers the Communion was vsed vnder both kindes 3 If such sayings of the Fathers doe exclude one part of the Sacrament why doth this exclusiâ—e belong to the Laicks onely and is not extended to the Priests also 13. The ancient Canons did thrust bad Priests downe to the Communion of the Laicks therefore Communion vnder one kindâ— for the Laicks was then in vse Answer The Communion of the Laicks was a punishment for evill Priests because Thâ— a godly Laicke a evill Priest are esteemed of the Papists alike they were suspended from their office the power of consecrating whereby they did minister and distribute in the holy Supper was taken froÌ„ them and a place was appointed for them amongst the Laicks In which signification the Communion of Laicks is taken in the Antecedent because therefore it is taken otherwise in the consequent there are foure termes 14. In ancient time they caried the consecrated bread home with them but there is nothing saide of the carying of the Cup therefore c. An. The question is not what was done but whether it were rightly done and according to the rule of Christs institution 15. The Communion vnder one kinde is an ancient Tradition Ans 1. The counsell of Constance saieth no as hath beene said sundry times 2 The Tradition of Christ and the Apostle Paule concerning the Supper is farre more ancient Let this tradition then which is of no such antiquitie giue place to the more ancient 16. The Church hath power to change the Sacraments because at this day all holde that thaâ— change is lawfull whereby the Supper is translated from the evening to morning meetings Answere 1. The change of the circumstance of time in the celebration of the Lords Supper belongeth not to the substance of the Sacrament but to the accidents and circumstances to reason then from these to changes in the substance is against art and reason 2 And that was spoken to the Church Turne not aside to the right hand nor to the leaâ—t Deut. 5 32. 17. Of the sonnes of Eli it is written Appoint â—e I pray thee to one of the Priests offices that I Eckius in his Enchiridion may eate a morsell of bread 1 Samuel 2 36 therefore the Communion vnder one kind is due to the Laicks Answere I will onely reckon vp the severall Termes that bee in this argument 1 The sonnes of Eli. 2 Lay Christians 3 The Priests office or maintenance by the revenues of the Priesthoode 4 The Lords Supper 5 The repulse from the Priests office 6 Admission to the Supper 7. A morsell of bread 8 The Sacrament vnder one kinde Is not this a verie fertill argument of many termes and how prodigall are our Aduersaries in termes CHAP. 19. Of Purgatorie OVr Aduersaries lay it for a ground that as there bee three sorts of men some good some bad and some of a meane sort betwixâ— both so there shall be three estates of mens soules after this life that they are either altogether blessed or â—uerlastingly damned or else in the temporall punishment of Purgatorie And this last sort of soules to wit those that bee in Purgatorie hath much augmented their rents and revenues for the Papists â—each that those soules may â—e hâ—lpen by the prayers of the liuing purchased by golde and siluer yea by lands and other revenues also of these things then let vs treate briefelie Question 1. Seeing that which is not hath no proprieties first the question is whether there be a Purgatorie Our Aduersaries say there is we say no for these reasons Because the Scripture teacheth vs nothing of Purgatoriâ— neither in the letter nor in the sence thereof but the Scripture containeth all things necessarie to salvation Yea aâ— often as Christ and the Apostles speake of the estate of soules after this life they mention onely two estates either of eternall life or of hell torments 1 Hee that shall beleeue and be baptized shall bee saved but hee that will not beleeue shall be damned Mark 16 16. 2 Verily verily I say vnto you hee that heareth my word and beleeveth in him that sent me hath euerlasting life and shal not come into condemnation but hath passed from death vnto life Ioh. 5 24 3. Hee that beleeveth in the sonne hath euerlasting life and hee that obeyeth not the sonne shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him Ioh 3 36. 4. He that believeth in him shall not bee condemned but hee that believeth not is condemned already Ioh. 3 18. 5. So in the parable Luke 16 there are onely two places after death mentioned euerlasting life wherein was Abraham and Lazarus and eternall damnation wherin was the glutton neither is there granted any passage from the one to the other 6. Christ at his comming maketh onely two flockes to wit the blessed and the damned Matthew 25 and Christ saith nothing of the purging of them which are of the meane sort betwixt the other two by Purgatorie whereas notwithstanding in that congregation of all men the three sorts of men the good the bad and those of meane sort betwixt both shall all appeare before the tribunall seate of Christ 7 So
three sonnes Shem Ham and Iapheth c. Genes 6 9 10. 3 Abraham the Father of the faithfull was Will any man say that any vnmaried man is more pure than was Abraham beeing maried maried as were also the other Patriarches 4 Dauid a man after Gods owne heart was maried and in state of wedlocke composed Psalms most acceptable to God being indued in a principall measure with the Spirit of God 5 Ezechiel the Prophet was maried Ezech 24 16. 18. 6 The high Priest who offered holy oblations to GOD might by the lawe of God marie a wife neither was he polluted by mariage bed to be made thereby vnfit for the Priests office And Aaron was commanded by God to burne sweetâ— incense euery morning in the tabernacle before the Arke of the Couenant as it is Exodus 30 7. Neither did the vse of mariage bed hinder him in this behalfe For he begate sonnes 7. And so were the rest of the Priests maried also 8. Zacharie and Elizabeth were both iust before God and walked in all the coÌ„maundements and ordinances of the Lord without reproofe and yet they were man and wife had Iohn Baptist to their son Luk 1 6. 2 In the newe Testament also there were Ecclesiasticall persons holy and religious that lived in wedlock 1 Peter had a mother in law and therefore a wife Math. 8 14. 2 Haue wee not power to leade about a wife being a sister as wel as the rest of the Apostles and as the brethren of the Lord and Cephas 1 Corinth 9 5. 3 Philip the Evangelist which was one of the seaven Deacons had foure daughters which did prophecie Acts. 21 8 9. 4. A Bishop must be vnreproveable the husband of one wife c. having children vnder obedience with all honestie 1 Tim. 3 2 4. 5. Let Deacons bee the husbands of one wife and such as can rule their children well and their owne housholds 1 Timo. 3 12. 6. The like appeareth by the examples of Spiridion and of others in the Primitive Church who being holy men and indued with singular gifts of the Spirit were maried and begat children And often times the legitimate sonnes of Bishops succeeded their Fathers in the Bishopricks Paul doth sharply reproue them which disgrace mariage saying In the latter daies some shal depart from the faith and shal giue heede vnto spirits of error and doctrines of Devils which speake lies through hypocrisie haue their consciences burned with an hot iron forbidding to marie 1 Tim. 4 1 2 3. Finally if matrimonie be a Sacrament if it do confer grace and that grace of the Sacrament causeth as Eckius saith the bed to bee vndefiled why are Ecclesiasticall persons polluted thereby Or why is a state otherwise impure and defiled reckoned among the Sacraments as matrimonie in the opinion of the Papists is Contrariwise our Aduersaries do dispute 1 The vse of Mariage bed after the fall is impure and not without lust Therfore priests who ought to bee pure must abstaine from wedlocke Ans 1 If the speech bee of the motions of concupiscence remaining after Originall sinne whereof the Psalmist maketh mention in his conception Psal 51 5 then is it a fallacie of an accident and that which agreeth to the accident to wit Originall sinne is transferred to the vse of Mariage bed which of it selfe is right lawfull and ordained by God And if because of this accident men should abstain from mariage as froÌ„ an impure state then should they abstain from all other states and workes because in all of them there concurreth somewhat of Originall sinne And because purenes becommeth all Christians therefore all should abstaine from mariage 2 But if the vse of mariage bed bee compared to vnlawfull lusts and aequall thereunto it is manifestly repugnant to these sentences of Scripture 1 In the Scripture the vse of mariage bed lust are opposed as contraries but contraries seeing they destroy one another are not the same 2 To auoide fornication let euery man haue his wife 1 Cor 7 2. and what may the remedy of lust impuritie be called lust Sâ— the sâ—n beames which are as it were the remedy of darknes should be called darkenes and impurity 3 Paul saith let the Husband giue vnto the wife due beneuolence he bids them also come together again 1. Cor. 7. 3 5. And what dooth Paul bid them follow after impuritie dooth he egge them forward to sinne 4 The bed betwixt the godly maried couple is vndefiled Heb. 13. 4. 2 If Mariage bed were so pure then would not Paul bid them abstaine in the time of prayer and fasting Answ 1 Hee speaketh not of all sorts of prayers but of solemne prayers 2 Neither doth he bid them therefore abstaine because the vse of mariage bed is impure and would pollute their prayers but that they may giue themselues to prayer and their prayers may be the more feruent c. Euen as in the time of solemne prayers we leaue of the exercise duties of our proper honest calling that wee may attend to prayers and sermons Heere is then committed a fallacy taking that for the cause which is not the cause 3 I was borne in iniquity c. Psalm 51 5. There Dauid confesseth the impuritie of mariage therefore c. Answ 1 Hee speaketh not of the vse of mariage bed in his parents as if that were of it selfe a sinne but he sheweth that lumpe or masse so to speake of which he was created euen then to haue been polluted with sin for the whole substance of man was corrupt with sinne not by reason of the act of mariage bed but by reason of originall sinne which doth accidentally concur there with heere is then committed the fallacy of an accident 2 Whereas our question heere is not concerning originall sinne whether it be in the regenerate and doe concurre also in their good workes but whether there be in matrimony of it selfe anie impurity our Aduersaries change the state of the question play the Sophisters 4 They that are in the flesh cannot please God Rom 8 8. But those which are maried are in the flesh Therefore c. This is pope Syricius his argument Answ 1 What it is to bee in the flesh Paul expoundeth Gal 5 19. Where he reckoneth vp the fruites of the flesh to wit sins and crimes but there is no mention of mariage but of the contraries thereto 2 To liue in the flesh with Paul is to liue in sinne but with our aduersaries to liue in the flesh is to liue in the state of matrimony Therefore there are foure termes in this argument 5 Yea but many doe vse mariage bed intemperately which is not without impurity Answ 1 This is the fallacy of an accident For this is a thing that accidentally agreeth to mariage besides the right vse and that but amongst some onely â— Neither is a thing which is of it selfe laweful to be condemned because some vse it
cannot be broken vpoÌ„ any preâ—ense of not being able to containe Answer 1 It cannot by any one word bee prooved that these widowes made vowes that they would not afterward marrie this place then is wrongfully wrested to Popish vowes of continencie 2 These widowes are not reproved for that they marrie but for that they secretly play the harlots and then seeke for marriage for a pretense to cover their naughtinesse 3 The first faith is not any vowe but the first faith that was given to Christ in Baptisme this is the first faith which they breake while they make the members of Christ the members of an harlot 4 And Paul biddeth these younger widowes marrie in the same place hee should then bid them breake their vowe if these widowes had made any vow which our Aduersaries will not willingly graunt 5 If this place be vnderstood of vowes it followeth against the Papists that they offend in laying vowes vpon theÌ„ which are not yet come to threeâ—core yeeres of age for Paul would haue such chosen as be threescore yeeres old 4. The vowe which Priests make of chastitie is a free vow of their owne accord neither doth any man compell them to it Ans 1. This wee denie for those that will be admitted into holy Orders haue none other entrance but by vowing A man that is admitted if he marrie is removed from his calling and is punished in his body what a kinde of liberty is this It is therefore a loud lie 5 Paul 1 Timo. 4 1 3. doth not speake of the Pope that he holdeth the doctrine of Devils but he meaneth the Tatianâ— and Encrâ—tiâ—ae herâ—tikes Ans 1. Paul saith of them forbidding to marrie but the Pope forbiddeth to marrie therefore c. 2 It followeth not the Tatiani forbad marriage therefore the Pope which forbiddeth it too is not to bee reprooved There is the like iudgement of like things 3 Though the Pope doe not forbid mariage to all persons yet hee forbiddeth it and therefore hee is rightly condemned by Paul with the Tatiani and Encratitae CHAP. 22. Of the Popish Fastes IN this chapter the controuersie is not whether Christians ought to fast For none of our side doth denie that but the question is whether the popish fastes such as are in vse amongst our Aduersaries bee to be approued and necessarie to be obserued But because so many things meete together in the popish fastes which are repugnant to the holy Scripture let vs treate of them all seuerally 1 Error 1 And first of all our Aduersaries do place their fastes not in sobriety or temperance in meate and drink neither in a totall abstaâ—ing from all meate and drinke for a certaine time which was vsed of the Auncients but in abstinence from flesh and white meates c. onely putting a difference betwixt meates And they presse that difference to be obserued with such seuerity that amongst them he is accounted to commit a more hainous crime who should taste flesh vpon the dayes forbidden than hee that should be taken in adulterie or other wickednesse And in some places especially of Italy and Spaine men are in greater danger for tasting flesh vpon the dayes inhibited than for committing capitall crimes Wee disallow and reiecte this obseruation and preposterous choise of meates for these reasons Because there is not any either commandement or example in the whole Scripture of the new Testament of this difference and choise of meates and therefore it is rightly reiected as a meere will-worship 1 Teach them to obserue all things that I haue commanded you Matt 28 20. 2 Of such like obseruations Christ sayth In vaine they worship mee teaching for doctrines mens precepts Matth 15 9. In the Newe Testament those Leuiticall differences of meates are taken away which after a sorte are brought in againe of our aduersaries 1 The things that God hath purified pollute thou not Act 10 15. 2 Whatsoeuer is set before you eate 1 Cor 10 27. 3 That which goeth into the mouth defileth not the man Matth 15 11. 4 Meate maketh vs not acceptable to God for neither if we eate haue we the more neither if we eate not haue we the lesse 1 Cor 8 8. 5 The Kingdome of God is not meate nor drinke but righteousnesse and peace and ioy in the Holy ghost Rom 14 17. 6 It is a good thing that the heart bee stablished with grace and not with meates which haue not profited them that haue beene occupied therein Heb 13 9. By this difference and choise of meates layed vpon the Church as if it were necessarie Christian libertie is impugned 1 In the latter times some shall departe from the faith and shall giue heede vnto spirits of errours and doctrines of deuills which speak lyes through hipocrisie and haue their consciences burned with an hote iron forbidding to marrie and commanding to abstaine froÌ„ meats which God hath created to be receiued with giuing thaÌ„ks of theÌ„ that belieue know the truth for euery creature of God is good and nothing ought to bee refused if it be receiued with thankesgiuing 1. Tim 4 1 2. c. 2 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not let not him that eateth not iudge him that eateth Rom 14 3. 3 Let no man condemne you in meate or in drinke c. Colos 2 16. 4 If ye be deade with Christ from the ordinances of the World why as though yee liued in the World are ye burdened with traditions As touch not taste not handle not Which all perish with the vsing and are after the commandements doctrines of men which things haue indeed a shew of wisdome in voluntary religion and humblenes of minde and in not sparing the body neither haue they it in any estimation to satisfie the flesh Coloss 2 20 c. 5 Vnto the pure are all things pure Titus 1 15. 6 Whatsoeuer is soulde in the shambles eate yee and aske no question for conscience sake 1 Corinth 10 15. Contrariwise our Aduersaries doe reason 1 Obedience is due to the Church but the Chuâ—ch hath ordained such fasts Therefore c. Answer 1 In customes and indifferent ceremonies for orders sake obedience is to be performed to the Church but not in matters of necessity and articles of our beliefe vnlesse it be vpholden by the authority of the scripture whereof we haue spoken in the beginning of this booke Thither we referre the Reader 2 Neither is that rightly ascribed to the Church which is tyrannously obtruded to be obserued of Christians by superstitious men vnder the name of the Church 2 Hee that is weake eateth herbes Rom. 14. 2. Therefore the eating of flesh may rightly be forbidden for the weake ones sake Answ 1 Paul speaketh of those that be weake but the Church respecteth not the weake but onely their owne tyranny which they would establish by such superstitious precepts 2 Paul addeth presently vpon it let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not