dayes and three dayes and an halfe should signifie the same time Secondly with much better sense are these times applied by our learned and painfull countreyman Master Fox to the great persecution vnder the Emperours which continued 294. yeeres which time is mystically signified by 42. moneths taking euery moneth for a sabboth of yeeres And the rest of the numbers agree hereunto for 1260. dayes make three yeeres and an halfe that is moneths 42 and three daies and an halfe make houres 42. So taking euery houre in the dayes and euery moneth in the yeeres for a sabboth of yeeres there ariseth 294. yeeres which was the iust time of the persecution from the death of Iohn Baptist vnto the end of Licinius the tyrant persecutor This account I say better agreeth with the truth of historie then their imagined computation Thirdly if it should be taken as they expound it for so short a time then very little of the prophecie in the Apocalyps is yet fulfilled which we doubt not but is most accomplished as it may appeare in comparing the visions reuealed in that booke together And agayne there is no prophecie beside this of 42. moneths which can bee applyed to the great persecution in the Primitiue Church wherefore it is not like that the Lord would leaue his Church without some comfort in forewarning them of those great troubles which immediatly ensued But if these prophecies which are wrested by the Papists did noâ— foretell of those persecutions then are they vtterly forgotten in that booke which is not like it being the greatest triall that euer the Church had 4 We say then that wee are not curiouslie to search into times and seasons which the Lord hath not reuealed Onely this wee learne that the time of affliction being set downe by dayes and monethes the faithfull should hereby bee comforted knowing that the time of their trouble is limitted of God and is but short in respect of the kingdome of Christ. 2 The Lord sayth Math. 24. that those daies shall be shortned lest no flesh should be saued But how can the time bee short if it should last some hundreds or a thousand of yeeres Bellarmin cap. 8. Rhemist annot Matth. 24. sect 6. Answere First that place vers 22. is properly vnderstood of the calamitie of the Iewes which if it had continued any longer the nation of the Iewes had bin vtterly destroyed Secondly yet notwithstanding the raigne of Antichrist is short in respect of the eternall kingdome of Christ yea the whole time from his ascension vntill his comming agayne is counted but short Apocal. 22.20 I come quickly and S. Peter sayth That a thousand yeeres before God is as one day and one day as a thousand yeeres 2. Pet. 3. 3 Christ preached but three yeeres and an halfe therefore Antichrist shal be suffered to preach no longer Answere First yet Christ was thirtie yeeres old when he began to preach and shewed himselfe before though not so openly as when he was twelue yeere old he disputed with the Doctors in the temple he was also acknowledged for the Messiah in his natiuitie If Antichrist then must in this respect be correspondent to Christ he must also be knowne to be thirtie yeeres vpon earth before he be fully manifested Secondly though Christ himselfe preached no longer yet he sent his Apostles who preached many yeeres after we doe not therefore oppose the person of Antichrist whom we denye to be a singular man to Christ but the kingdome of the one to the other Now by their owne reason it followeth that because the kingdome of Christ endured many yeeres and yet doth that therefore Antichrists kingdome must likewise Other demonstrations the Iesuite hath to prooue that Antichrist is not yet come as because the Gospell is not yet preached to all the world cap. 4. Bellar. Helias and Henoch are not yet come who are certainly looked for cap. 6. There shall bee a most grieuous and terrible persecution vnder Antichrist which is not yet past cap. 7. But these arguments shall bee answered in another place towards the end of this worke when we come to speake of the appearing of Christ to iudgement The Protestants THat Antichrist shall raigne but three yeeres and an halfe we take it for a meere fable and a very popish dreame whereas on the contrarie side wee are able to shewe both that Antichrist is alreadie come and hath tyrannized in the world these many yeeres 1 We will make it plaine by demonstration that Antichrist hath been in the world many yeeres agoe by the propheticall places of scripture First it is sayd the number of Antichrist is 666. Apocal. 13.18 So anno 606. or thereabout Boniface the 3. obtayned of Phocas the Emperour to be called vniuersall Bishop Thus sayth Illyricus Chytraeus Also beginning at the yeere of the Lord 97. at which time Iohn wrote the Apocalyps and counting 666. yeeres we shal come to the time of Pipinus whom the Pope made King of France and he agayne much enlarged the iurisdiction and authoritie of the Pope And yet more euidently about the yeere of the Lord 666. the Latine seruice was commanded to be vsed in all countreys subiect to the See of Rome by Pope Vitalianus and about the same time Constantius the Emperour remoued the ancient monuments of the Empire to Constantinople and left the citie to the Popes pleasure Fulk annot in 13. Reuel sect 10. Another prophecie we haue Reuel 20.3 that after one 1000. yeeres Sathan must be let loose Euen so a thousand yeeres after Christ Pope Siluester a great coniurer hauing made a compact with the Diuell obtayned the Papacie and not long after him came in Gregorie the 7. a great Sorcerer also and Necromancer sic Lutherus But because it is not to be thought that Sathan was bound during that great and long persecution vnder the Romane Emperours wee must begin the account of the 1000. yeeres from the end of the persecution which continued 294. yeeres vnto that adde a thousand so haue we the yeere of our Lord 1294. About which yeere Boniface the 8. made the sixt booke of the Decretals confirmed the orders of Friers and gaue them great freedomes with this number agreeth Daniel his 1290. dayes Dan. 12 1â— Also somewhat before this time anno 1260. the orders of Dominicke and Franciscane Friers began first to be set vp by Honorius the 3. and Gregorie the 9. and so haue we the 1260. daies which are set downe Apocal. 12. plura apud Fox pag. 398. 2 If Antichrist should raigne but three yeeres and an halfe as our aduersaries teach and then immediatly that time being expired the world should end then it is possible to assigne the time of our Lord Christ his comming to iudgement so soone as Antichrist is reuealed But the Gospell sayth that of that day and houre knoweth no man no not the Angels in heauen Math. 24.36 yet these good fellowes take vpon them to be wiser then the
more then was in the fountaine or originall seeing he receiued all from thence 3 What maketh this place I pray you for the power of externall iurisdiction Here it is saide that God gaue of his spirit to seauentie Elders and rulers of the people and enabled them for their office endued them with wisdome and knowledge and dexteritie in iudging of the people this maketh nothing for their purpose vnlesse they will also say that there is a secret influence of knowledge and wisdome deriued from the Pope to all other Bishops whereby they are made able to execute their office but I trow they will not say so for Alphonsus de castro truly saith of the Popes of Rome constat plures eorum adeo esse illiteratos vt grammaticam penitus ignorent it is certaine that many of them were so vnlearned that they hard and scant knew their grammar 4 The argument followeth not from one particular countrie as this was of the Iewes to the vniuersal Church that because the seauentie Elders receiued iurisdiction from Moses yet that cannot be proued out of this place for they were rulers before and commaunders of the people the were now but inwardly furnished and further enabled yet it were no good reason that therefore the Ecclesiasticall Ministers ouer the whole Church should receiue their power from one 5 Neither doth it follow that because the Prince and ciuill Magistrate may bestowe ciuil offices create Dukes Earles Lords constitute Iudges Deputies Lieutenants by his sole authoritie that by the same reason Ecclesiasticall ministers should receiue their power office from their superiors for although the Church from ancient time hath thought it good to make some inequalitie and difference in Ecclesiasticall offices for the peace of the Church yet the superiors haue not such a soueraigntie and commaunding power ouer the rest as the Prince hath ouer his subiects The Protestants THat Bishops haue not their Ecclesiastical iurisdiction from Rome but do as well enioye it by right of their consecration election institution in their owne precinctes circuites prouinces cities townes yea as the Pope doth in his Bishopricke and by much better right if they be good Bishops and louers of the truth thus briefely it is proued 1 The Apostles had not their iurisdiction from Peter but all receiued it indifferently from Christ this the Iesuite doth not barely acknowledge but proueth it by argument against the iudgement of other Papists cap. 23. Ergo neither Bishops are authorised from the Pope though he were Peters successor for if he were to graunt it for disputation sake he is no more to the Bishops of the Church then Peter was to the Apostles If hee gaue not the keyes to the Apostles neither doth the Pope Saint Peters successor to the Bishops the Apostles successors for they may with as great right challenge to bee the Apostles successors as he can to be Saint Peters Nay the Apostles gaue no power or iurisdiction to the Elders and pastors whom they ordained Act. 20.28 Take heede to the flocke ouer the which the holy Ghost hath made you Bishops or ouerseers and Ephes. 4.11 Hee hath giuen some to bee Apostles some Prophets some pastors and teachers so then the pastors and teachers though ordained by the Apostles yet had their calling and office frō God and not from the Apostles much lesse now can they receiue their power from any no not from the Pope for he is no Apostle no nor Apostolike man hauing left the Apostolike faith 2 Augustine saith Solus Christus habet authoritatem praeponendi nos in ecclesiae suae gubernatione de actu nostro iudicandi de baptis 2.2 Onely Christ hath authoritie saith hee to preferre vs to the gouernement of the Church and to iudge of our dooings the pastors then of the Church haue the keyes of the spirituall regiment from Christ himselfe not from the Pope or any other THE EIGHT QVESTION OF THE temporall iurisdiction and power of the Bishop of Rome THis question hath two partes first whether the Pope in respect of any spirituall error 51 iurisdiction haue also the chiefe soueraigntie in temporall and ciuill matters and so to be aboue Kings and Emperors secondly whether the Pope or any Bishop may be the chiefe Lord and prince ouer any Countrie Citie or Prouince THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE Pope directly or indirectly haue authoritie aboue Kinges and Princes The Papists THe Papists of former times were not ashamed to say that the Pope is the Lord of the whole Church as Panormitane in the Councell of Basile Fox page 670. Yea Pope Innocentius the third said writing to the Emperor of Constantinople that as the Moone receiued her light from the Sunne so the imperiall dignitie did spring from the Pope and that the papall dignitie was seuen and fortie times greater then the imperiall yea Kinges and Emperors are more inferior to the Pope then lead is to golde Gelasius distinct 96. But our later papists ashamed of their forefathers arrogancie in wordes seeme to abate somewhat of their proud sentence but in effect say the same thing For they confesse that the Emperor hath his office and calling of God and not from the Pope neither that the Pope directly hath any temporall iurisdiction but indirectly hee may depose Kinges and princes abrogate the lawes of Emperors and establish his owne he may take vnto himselfe the iudgement of temporall causes and cite Kings to appeare before him yet not directlie saith the Iesuite as hee is ordinarie Iudge ouer the Bishops and whole Clergie yet indirectlie as hee is the chiefe spirituall Prince hee may doe all this if hee see it necessarie for the health of mens soules And so in effect by their popish indirect meanes they giue him as great authoritie as euer hee vsurped or challenged Bellarmine lib. 5. cap. 6. 1 The Ecclesiasticall and ciuill power doe make but one bodie and societie as the spirite and the flesh in man Now the Ecclesiastical power which is as the soule and spirite is the chiefe part because it is referred to a more principall end namely the safetie and good of the soule the other is as the flesh to the spirite and respecteth but a temporall end as the outward peace and prosperitie of the common-wealth Ergo the spirituall power is chiefe and may commaund the other Bellarm. cap. 7. Ans. First it is a very vnfit and vnproper similitude to compare these two regiments to the soule and the bodie for by this meanes as the spirite giueth life to the bodie and euery parte thereof so the ciuill and temporall state should receiue their office and calling from the Ecclesiasticall which the Iesuite himselfe denieth and so directly the one should rule the other for the soule directly I trow not indirectly moueth the body and gouerneth it But if wee will speake as the Scripture doth we make all but one bodie and it is the spirit of Christ who is the head that giueth
effectuall power to euery parte Ephes. 4.15.16 2 It is false that the ciuill magistracie onely concerneth the outward and temporall commoditie onely for vnto Princes also is committed the chiefe care of religion and the worship of God They are to see true religion aduaunced yea to watch ouer Ecclesiasticall ministers and to charge them to looke to their offices the Prince is Gods minister for the wealth both of the soules and bodies of his subiects And therefore Saint Paul exhorteth to pray for Kings and gouernours that wee may liue not onely a peaceable life but in all godlines and honestie 1. Timoth. 2.2 Ergo it is parte of the magistrates office as to procure the peace of the people so to haue a care of their godlie life Wherefore it is false as the Iesuite supposeth that the chiefe ende of the ciuill gouernement is onely outward and temporall Ergo his argument is nothing worth 2 Azariah the high Priest droue Vzziah the King out of the temple when hee would haue burned incense and caused him to goe out of the citie and dwell apart 2. Chron. 26. Iehoiada likewise deposed Athalia 2. King 11. Ergo the Pope may depose wicked and vngodly Princes Bellarmine cap. 8. Answere First wee denie that there is now or ought to bee any such high Priest in the Church of God to haue the chiefe authoritie in spirituall matters as there was in the lawe for hee was the type and figure of Christ who is our high Priest and chiefe Bishop Secondly these examples doe not excuse the Popes tyrannie who hath deposed rightfull Kinges and Emperors and better then himselfe as Pope Zacharie deposed Childericus the French King and set vp Pipinus Gregorie the seuenth set vp Rodolphus against Henricus the fourth the Emperor Pope Paschalis set vp the sonne of the saide Henricus against his father But we will answere more particularly to these examples To the first First it was not the sole act of Azariah the high Priest but there were 80. Priests that ioyned with him beside and they all spake to the King this example therefore maketh nothing for the sole authoritie of the Pope who saith that he may depose the Emperor himselfe without any Councell Innocent 4. Secondly they did not depose Vzziah they onely withstoode him according to the lawe of God because hee vsurped the priests office so ought faithfull Bishops and pastors euen to reproue the greatest Magistrates for the manifest contempt and open breach of Gods lawe Neither did they constraine the King to goe forth before they saw the iudgement of God vpon him for the text saith they compelled him to go forth because the Lord had smitten him they saw the leprosie to rise vp in his face vers 20. This therefore was the extraordinarie iudgement of God and not of the high priest Thirdly he was not deposed from the Kingdome though he dwelt alone his son did execute the office only for him and raigned after him for being a leper by the law he was to dwell apart Leuit. 13.46 Here was nothing done we see by the sole authoritie of the high Priest but they had the manifest and direct lawe of God vnto the which their Kings also were subiect To the second example we answere First Athaliah was a tyrant and an vsurper and ought not to raigne and therefore was iustly deposed Secondly Iehoiada did it not by his owne power but assembled the Fathers and Princes of the land 2. Chron. 22.2 He shewed them the young King and they made a couenant with him Iehoiada onely gaue directions the King being now knowen vnto them vnto the Captaines and gouernours Thirdly they had the flat word of God for that action The Kings sonne must raigne as the Lord hath saide concerning the sonnes of Dauid ver 3. So when the Pope hath any such warrant from God he may doe as Iehoiada did The Protestants THat the Pope or any other person Ecclesiasticall hath no manner of temporall iurisdiction either directly or indirectly ouer Kings Princes Emperors but ought of right to bee subiect to them and their lawes it is thus proued 1 By the same reason whereby the Iesuite proueth that the Pope directlie hath no temporall iurisdiction we will conclude that neither indirectlie can he haue any and so none at all Christ while he liued vpon earth tooke vpon him no temporall iurisdiction either directly or indirectly he refused to bee a King Iohn 6. Nay hee would not bee a Iudge in ciuill matters as in deuiding the inheritance being thereto required Luke 12.13 Hee payed poll money Matth. 17. hee did submit himselfe to the iudgement of Pilate an heathen Iudge therefore seeing Christe vsed no such temporall iurisdiction neither can any Minister of Christe for the seruant is not aboue the Master Onely Antichrist dare presume beyond the example of Christ. 2 The Fathers of Basile doe vrge that place of Saint Peter 1. Epist. 5.2 against Panormitane who had vnaduisedly sayd that the Pope was Lorde of the Church But the Apostle saith Feede the flocke of Christ not by constraint but willinglie not as Lordes ouer the Lordes inheritance verse 3. But the Pope contrariwise vseth all forceable constraining and tyrannicall meanes killing slaying imprisoning deposing those that will not obey him who calleth himselfe chiefe Lorde and Magistrate of the whole Worlde Surely this is Antichrist and not the Minister of Christ or successor of Saint Peter whose counsaile he refuseth to followe and obey 3 Let but the stories of former times bee searched there wee shall finde how wickedly and insolently the Popes behaued themselues towards Kings and Emperors Pope Alexander caused Henry the second to doe penance for Beckets death and to bee displed of the Monkes Innocent the third caused King Iohn to kisse the feet of the Bishop of Canturburie his own subiect Alexander the third did tread vpon Emperor Frederick his neck Pope Innocent spoyled Frederick the second of his Empire caused him to bee poysoned and his sonne Conradus to be beheaded and these Emperors were deposed by the Popes in order Henricus 4. Henricus 5. Frederick 1. Philippus Otho the 4. Frederick 2. and Conradus his sonne It is not good they say to put a sword into a mad mans hand and thinke you not that these Popes vsed the temporal sword very discreetely which they thus vsurped making fooles and slaues of Emperors as Pope Adriane did that rebuked Frederick the first because he held his stirrup on the wrong side and did excommunicate him for setting his name before the Popes in writing Thâ— very insolent diuellish and Antichristian practise of this their temporal power sheweth from what originall it commeth euen from the father of pride Lastly Augustine saith writing vpon those words Rom. 13. Let euery soule be subiect to the higher powers Si quis putat quia Christanus est non sibi esse vectigal reddendum aut tributum aut non esse exhibendum honorem debitum
eis qui haec curant potestatibus in magno errore est If any man thinke because he is a Christian that he is not bound to pay tribute and taxe and yeelde due honor to the temporall powers for of such Augustine speaketh he is in a great error If all then are subiect to the temporal magistrate that are Christians then all Bishops and Ecclesiastical persons yea the Pope himselfe if he be a Christian. Ergo the Emperor is not subiect to him THE SECOND PART OF THE QVESTION concerning Saint Peters patrimonie whether the Pope may be a temporall Prince The Papists THey say that it is not against the word of God that the Pope should bee error 52 both a temporall and Ecclesiasticall Prince and that both the swordes of spirituall and Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction doe belong vnto him and that hee is the right heire of Saint Peters patrimonie to him belongeth as chiefe Lorde the Imperiall citie of Rome the pallace of Laterane Capua also and Apulia are his distinct 96. Constantin 1 Moses saith the Iesuite was both priest and Prince so was Heli 1. Sam. 4. He iudged Israel fortie yeeres so were also the Macchabees Iudas Ionathan Simon yea Melchisedech long before Moses was Priest and King Ergo the Pope is lawfullie both chiefe Bishop and chiefe Prince also and Lord of that which he now possesseth Bellarmine cap. 9. Ans. Concerning Melchisedech Who knoweth not that hee being King and Priest was a liuelie figure of our Sauior Christs spirituall Kingdome and Priesthoode Heb. 7. And as yet the offices of the spirituall and temporall gouernement were not distinguished for all the Patriarkes Abraham Isaack Iacob the rest were sacrificers therefore wee cannot borrow any examples from them for this matter Moses also did offer sacrifice to God and was chiefe iudge both in spirituall and temporall affaires vnto the people vntill such time as when by Gods commaundement Aaron was chosen to the priesthood vnto whome the charge of sacrifices and vnto his sonnes was committed so Moses remained still Prince of the people whom Iosua succeeded and Aaron was inuested to the priesthoode and so the offices were distinct this example therefore of Moses is extraordinarie and proueth not Concerning the time when Ely iudged Israel which was in the dayes of the iudges we must vnderstand that the gouernement of Israel was very dissolute and men were left to themselues to doe almost what themselues listed as Iud. 17. we reade that Micah set vp an Idoll in his house and the reason is rendered there was no King in Israel but euery man did that which seemed good in his owne eyes Likewise the tribe of Dan offered violence to Micah and robbed him Iud. 18. For there was no King in Israel vers 1. The Leuites wife was most shamefully abused by the Gibeonites for there was no King chap. 19.1 The men of Beniamin tooke them wiues by force for they had no King chap. 21.25 So you see that both religion was corrupted and the maners of the people grew to be outragious and all because there was no perfect distinct gouernement there was no King in Israel In Elie his time the word of God was precious 1. Sam. 3.1 Great was the ignorance of the whole land the licentiousnesse also of his sonnes was a great offence to all Israel and brought a great decay of godlines with it 1. Sam. 2.17.23 Yea they caused the people through their euill example to sinne verse 24. Wherefore Elie his house was iudged of GOD for his remisnes in gouernement in not correcting his sonnes chapter 3.13 And hee that cannot rule his owne house how should hee care for the Church 1. Timoth. 3.5 It cannot now bee proued by the example of Elie that the ciuill gouernement was annexed to the priesthoode by the Lordes appoyntment but it is rather to bee ascribed to the corruption of those times for hauing no King nor Captaine ouer them they were driuen of necessitie to come to the high Priest vnto whome the iudgement of many matters was committed by the lawe of God Deuter. 17.8 Leuit. 13.2 But the priesthood and the ciuill magistracie were two distinct things alwaies from the time of the lawe established It is then no good argument which is drawne from the practise and example of those corrupt times And yet wee say not that these offices were so distinct but that the Lorde might rayse vp some extraordinarie prophet as hee did Samuel who to restore iustice and religion decayed might for a time both iudge the people and offer sacrifice as wee see hee did As for the examples of the Maccabees they moue vs not you must bring better scripture for your purpose the authoritie of those bookes binde vs not and againe we see they did contrarie to the lawe in taking vppon them both offices for the priesthood was annexed to the posteritie of Aaron for euer Numb 3.10 And the scepter was not to depart from Iuda till Christ came Genes 49.10 As the Lorde also had promised to Dauid that the Kingdome should remaine in his seede 2. Chron. 22.3 2 Constantine the great gaue vnto the Pope the chiefe gouernement of the Citie of Rome and other Lordships in Italie yea the soueraigntie ouer the West parts why then is it not lawfull for him to enioy his gift Bellarmine lib. 5. cap. 9. Ans. First the donation of Constantine seemeth to be forged for if Constantine resigned to Siluester the politicall dominion of the west partes how could he then haue distributed his Empire amongst his sonnes as the West part to one the East to the second the middle part to the third Againe the donation saith that Constantine was baptised at Rome by Siluester before the battaile against Maximinus and that then the patrimonie was giuen but it is certaine by stories that he was baptised at Nicomedia by Eusebius Bishop there in the 31. yeere of his raigne wherefore it seemeth to be a forged and deuised thing plur apud Fox pag. 105. 2 Aeneas Siluius saith that Mathilda a noble Dutches in Italie gaue those landes to the Pope which are called S. Peters patrimonie how then can it be true that they were giuen by Constantine Thirdly the popish doctors and Canonists confesse that Constantines grant is not so much to bee counted a donation as a restitution of that which tyrannouslie was taken from him but hee hath his power spirituall and temporall immediatly from Christ you see then that they themselues make no great reckoning of Constantines donation Antoni summa maior 3. part 4 Yet if Constantinus that good Emperor had been so minded to haue bestowed the imperiall dignitie vpon the bishop of Rome there remaineth a great question whether he ought to haue accepted of it or not nay hee should haue refused it for the temporall sword belongeth not to spirituall gouernors At the least it had been a charitable part not to haue suffered the Emperor to disinherite his
the Prophets and Apostles to write S. Paule saith that what soeuer is writtē is written for our learning that through patience and cōsolation of the scriptures we might haue hope Rom. 15.4 The Lord saw in wisedome that his people could not be without the Scriptures which are necessarie for their learning for their comfort and to strengthen their hope how then dare our aduersaries say that the scriptures are not necessarie seeing these things wrought in vs by the scriptures knowledge consolation hope are most necessarie 4 Let Augustine now put in his verdict Illud credo quod etiā hinc diuinorū eloquiorum clarissima authoritas esset si homo illud sine dispendio salutis ignorare non posset de peccator merit remiss lib. 2.36 I thinke saith he that euen concerning this matter speaking of the originall or beginning of the soule the Scriptures would not haue bene silent if we might not safelie be ignoraunt of this matter without daunger of saluation Ergo whatsoeuer is necessarie to saluatiō is onely to be found in scripture for other matters there not expressed there in no daunger in not knowing them therfore the Scriptures by this Fathers iudgement are most necessary THE SECOND PART OF THE SEVENTH question of the sufficiencie of Scripture The Papistes THey do straungely affirme that the Scriptures conteine not all things necessarie error 12 to be knowen cōcerning faith and manners and that they are not sufficient without traditions Bellarm. cap. 3.4 Lindanus a Papist saith that the scriptures conteine not all things necessarie to saluation Andradius that their approued traditions are of equall authoritie with the Scripture Ex Tilman de verbo error 2. 1 First the Iesuite thus reasoneth against the sufficiencie of Scripture There are diuerse bookes of canonicall Scripture lost and perished Ergo that part of canonical scripture which remaineth is not sufficiēt that much is lost he thus proueth 1. Chron. cap. vlt. mention is made of the bookes of Nathan Gad. 2. Chron. 9. of the bookes of Ahiiah Ieedo in the new Testamēt Col. 4. of the Epistle of S. Paule to the Laodiceans all those bookes are lost We aunswere First we denie not but that some bookes are now wanting which were part of canonicall scripture yet that which remaineth is sufficiēt as some of Solomōs bookes are perished which he wrote of herbes plāts and many of his Prouerbes the Lord saw that they were not so greatly necessarie for vs to saluation Secondly there is not so much wanting as the Iesuite would beare vs in hād for the books of the Prophets which he nameth are the same with the bookes of the Chronicles of the Kings which no doubt were writtē by those Prophetes And as for the Epistle of S. Paule to the Laodiceās there was neuer any such the text is written from the Laodiceans it was the Epistle rather of the Laodiceans to S. Paule vnto the which he partly maketh aunswere in the Epistle to the Colossians and therefore he would haue it read also in their Church 2 If the Apostles had any such meaning to contriue in the scriptures the summe of faith and all necessarie knowledge it is very like Christ would haue geuen them some expresse commaundement so to do but we read not of any such strict commaundement Ergo they had no such purpose Bellarmine We aunswere First they them selues dare not denie but that the Apostles wrote by the instinct of the spirite what is that els but the commaundement of God Actes 16.6 Paule was forbidden of the holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia and ver 10. when he had seene a vision of a man of Macedonia appearing vnto him the Apostle concludeth that they were called of God wherefore what they did by the secret mouing of the spirite was done at the cōmaundement of God Secondly Apocal. 11.1.14.13 Iohn is biddē to write that which he saw no doubt the other Apostles had the like cōmaundement 3 There are many points which we ought in no wise to be ignoraunt of which the scriptures speake either obscurelie of or not at all First these things are obscurely and doubtfully set downe in Scripture the equalitie of the persons in Trinitie the proceeding of the holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne the doctrine of originall sinne We aunswere First if these things be found at all in the Scriptures it is sufficient concerning the question we haue in hand Secondly the Scripture doth manifestly declare the truth in all those points the equalitie of the persons is directly proued 1. Iohn 5.7 the procession of the spirite Iohn 15.26 the spirit is there said to be sent frō the Father the Sonne And Ioh. 14.26 Original sinne is described plainly by the Apostle Rom. 5.12 though the name be not found in Scripture Secondly there are diuerse things necessarie to be knowen not at all declared in Scripture First as that Marie continued a perpetuall Virgine We answere the Scripture saith euery where she was a Virgine neither maketh mention of any children she had and therefore out of the Scripture we gather that she continued Secondly Basile saith that it is sufficient to know she was a Virgine before the birth of Christ. Secondly to know that the Pasch or Easter must be kept vpon the Lordes day is necessarie Aunswere there is no such necessiitie in it to saluation neither needed the Church so much to haue contended about it in times past these are the mightie weapons which our aduersaries vse The Protestantes WE do not affirme as our aduersaries charge vs that all things necessarie to saluation are expressely conteined in scripture that is in so many words but this we hold that all things which are necessarily to be knowen of vs are either expresly declared in Scripture or necessarily concluded out of Scripture and so conteined in them We also graunt that it was not Gospell onely which was written but all that Christ and his Apostles taught by liuely voyce the whole summe whereof and substaunce is conteined in the written word and so we conclude that nothing necessarie to saluation either concerning faith or manners is els where to be found but in the holy Scriptures 1 S. Paule saith if we or an Aungell preach vnto you otherwise then that which we haue preached let him be accursed Ergo the Scripture conteineth all things necessarie First the Iesuite aunswereth that S. Paule speaketh not onely of his writings but also of his preachings which were not written We aunswere that the summe of all S. Paules preachings is conteined in his Epistles and other holy writings for S. Paule confirmed his doctrine out of the scriptures as Act. 17.10 the Berrheans examined his doctrine by the scriptures and found it to be consonant and to agree in all things Secondly he condēneth those which preach any thing not besides or otherwise but contrarie and therefore not any other doctrine besides Scripture is forbidden but that
Church Actes 15. when they came to Ierusalem they were receiued of the Church Philip. 3.6 Paule persecuted the Church how could the church be persecuted how could it receiue the Apostles if it were not visible Bellarmin cap. 12. We answere what goodly reasons here be a particular church such as was at Ierusalem may be seene Ergo the catholike and vniuersall Secondly a particular church may be sometime visible Ergo alwayes Thirdly the church is visible vnto the faithfull as in time of persecution for to Paule it was not knowen when he persecuted it but onely to the brethren Ergo it is visible to the world For these three points they must proue that the catholike church not a particular is visible that the Church is not sometime but alway visible yea and to the world or else they say nothing for shame masters make better arguments 3 He hath set his tabernacle in the sunne Psal. 19. The Church is as a Citie vpon an hill Math. 5. Ergo it is alwayes visible Bellarmin ibid. Rhemist Math. 5. Sect. 3. We answere First the Apostles them selues euen at this time when Christ spake these wordes vnto them were not so in sole or in monte in the sunne or vpon the hill that they were seene of the world nay they were not seene nor acknowledged of the Scribes and Pharisies in Iewrie the Church is seene of the faithfull it is visible to them that search for her out of the Scriptures they that caÌ„ see the mountaine shal see the Citie the mountaine is Christ the Citie is the Church No marueile if the Church be not alwayes visible to the world for they see not neither do they know Christ. Secondly the church is said to be on a hill because the truth seeketh no corners heretikes and false tâ—achers flye into the desert and into secret places Math. 24. ver 26. But the truth is not ashamed the Apostles confessed Christ eueÌ„ before Kings and Princes Marke 13.19 so Augustine expoundeth it Cont. Faustum lib. 13. cap. 13. The Protestantes COncerning the catholike church we hold that because it is an article of our faith it is alwayes vnto the world inuisible and not to be espyed but by the eyes of faith Fulk Math. 5. Sect. 5. Concerning particular churches if by visible they vnderstand that which may be seene so we graunt they are alwayes visible Fulk Act. 11. v. 24. If for that which is actually visible we say it is not so alwayes visible to the world nay it may sometimes be so hid and secret that the members know not one another Fulk in Math. 5. Sect. 3. 1 To the Hebrues it is thus written cap. 13. v. 18.23.24 you are not come to the mouÌ„taine which might be touched but to the Citie of the liuing God the celestiall Ierusalem c. Ergo the church is inuisible and here opposed to the visible hill of Sinay Bellarmine answereth that this is vnderstood of the triumphant church in heauen not of the militant vpon earth To this we make answere the Apostle vnderstandeth the whole vniuersall church in heauen and earth which both make but one familie Ephe. 3.15 for here he nameth not onely the spirites of iust men which are in heauen but the faithfull vpon earth whose names are written in heauen the congregatioÌ„ saith he of the first borne the wordes are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a gathering together collection or coÌ„gregation which must needes be vnderstood of men vpon earth Againe saith he ye are come not ye shall come they had now left the smoking mountaine Sinay and were come to Sion the church vnder the Gospell Wherefore this is a most firme and inuincible argument the catholike church is the vniuersall number of Gods chosen in heauen and in earth Ergo inuisible 2 We will giue an instance In the dayes of Elias the church was not visible for he camplaineth and saith that he was onely left alone 1. King 19.10 Ergo the church is not alway visible The Rhemistes answere First at that time the church was visible in Iudaea the souldiers were numbred to 1000. thousand 2. Chron. 17. We aunswere againe First belike they haue taken a more exact account of them then the Lord him selfe for he saith he had reserued 7000 1. King 19.18 that had not bowed their knees to Baall they say there were ten huÌ„dred thousand Againe Elias if he had knowen such a number could not haue bene left so comfortlesse as in grief of hart to desire to dye But be it graunted that the church was visible in Iudaea at this time though it were not so to Elias yet where was that visible church in the dayes of Achaz and Manasseh when Iudaea fell also to Idolatrie Thirdly to beleeue that there is an holy catholike church is an article of our faith Ergo it is inuisible Bellarmin answereth First the holinesse of the church is inuisible We reply so the church is partly visible partly inuisible by his confession First why theÌ„ do ye define the catholike church to be a visible coÌ„gregatioÌ„ if it be not wholly altogether visible they know that difinitio must coÌ„uenire definito the definitioÌ„ must agree wholly to that which is defined but now it is not for they say the catholike holy church is partly visible as it is a church partly inuisible as it is holy Secondly do we not say in the Creede Credo Catholicam as well as Credo Sanctam I beleeue a catholike church as well as I beleeue the holy church then it is also inuisible as it is catholike because this also is part of the article see I pray you what shifting is here Secondly he answereth that some thing is seene in the church some thing beleeued for we see that visible companie of men which make the church but whether that companie be the true church we do not see it but beleeue it We reply againe First the Iesuite hath not yet proued that some thing is seene in the church some thing beleeued but one thing is seene namely the congregation as they are men another thing is beleeued that they are the church the sight and beliefe now by his owne confession are not both in the church Secondly we denie that the vniuersall coÌ„panie of the catholike church which is the number of the predestinate can be seene therefore all is beleeued and nothing seene Thirdly he saith that by faith we know which is the true church Ergo by faith we know which are the members of the church Ergo by faith the meÌ„bers do know them selues to be of the Church therefore faith is requisite in the true members of the church theÌ„ vnfaithfull men can not be true members of the church which point the Iesuite strongly before maintained against vs. Mendacem oportet esse memorem a lyar had need haue a good memorie lest he tell contrarie tales and so hath the Iesuite here for before he denied
resurrection of Christ. Bellarmine aunswereth first that the Pharisies were priuiledged not to erre onely till the cōming of Christ. We replie againe First after Christ was come they sate in Moses chaire and Christ biddeth they should be heard Math. 23.2 if they erred not afore neither could they now for they were not displaced out of Moses chaire but the truth is they neuer had any such priuiledge not to erre Secondly if the Pharisies were now prone to error then by our aduersaries owne confession they ceased to be the church Ergo the church was not now visible for in them it was not and the Apostles fled from Christ and shifted for them selues how could then the church be visible to the world Secondly the Iesuite aunswereth concerning the Apostles First the Apostles were not yet entred into their office and Bishoprike but onely appointed to it and therefore they might erre We replie againe First they were not onely appointed Apostles but partly already they had exercised their Apostleship for they were sent forth to preach the Gospell and had power and commission to worke miracles and heale diseases Math. 10 how then is not the Iesuite ashamed to say that they were not yet Pastors nor Apostles Secondly if the Pharisies erred and the Apostles erred then all the world was in error Ergo by their saying at this instant there was no church vpon the earth which is a great absurditie for the church erreth not they say Secondly saith the Iesuite the Apostles erred not in faith they were reproued for not beleeuing the resurrection which beliefe because they had not yet receiued they could not loose it We reply First though they had not erred in any materiall point yet if there were any error at all in them it is sufficient for our purpose that they erred it is manifest for they fled away from Christ. Secondly he excuseth them for their infidelitie concerning the resurrection because this faith they had not yet receiued But had not Christ I pray you often instructed them of this matter and if this were no such error in them then Christ was to sharpe in reprouing them for their infidelitie Thirdly it appeareth that they wholly were deceiued concerning the Messiah Luke 24.21 the two Disciples say they trusted that it had bene he that should haue deliuered Israell see then what weake aunswers these are did these felowes thinke that their gloses should not be examined or that their dreames should be taken for oracles 2 The church of the Iewes erred before our Sauiour Christes comming Ergo the true church may erre The proposition is proued In the time of the raigne of good kings they did offer sacrifice vpon hill altars but onely to the Lord which was an error 2. Kings 12.3.14.4 The feast of the Passeouer was not kept so precisely according to Gods word at any time before no not in the raigne of the best kings as it was in the 18. yeare of Iosias raigne 2. King 23.22 The feast of Tabernacles had not bene so solemnly and truly kept from the dayes of Iosua as it was in Nehemiahs time Nehem. 8.18 Ergo all this while the church of the Iewes erred somewhat in the externall worship of God Fulk Ephes. cap. 5. Sect. 4. 3 Augustine saith Quomodo erit Ecclesia in isto tempore perfecta sine macula ruga cuius mēbra non mendaciter confitentur se habere peccata How can the church be perfect in this life without spot or wrincle whose members do truly confesse that they are not without sinne Ergo the church sinneth and is imperfect and why not subiect to error But in the Councell of Basill it was denied as ye heard that the church could sinne THE SECOND PART WHETHER THE visible Church may fayle vpon the earth The Papistes error 17 THey hold that it is impossible that the visible church should vtterly fayle vpon the earth and fall from God but that there shall alwayes be a visible and knowen church vpon the earth hauing a perpetuall succession of Pastors and Doctors where the true worship of God shal be preserued and kept Bellarmin lib. 3. de Eccles. cap. 13. 1 These and such places of Scripture they stand vpon Math. 16. the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it Math. 28. I wil be with you to the end of the world Psal. 88. his throne shal be as the Sunne and endure as the Moone Ergo the visible church shall not fayle vpon earth Bellarmin We aunswere that these places must be vnderstood of the catholike and vniuersall church whereof we denie not but euery true particular church is a part This church is the spouse of Christ this church shall not perish this is the kingdome of Christ with this church will he alway be present to the end of the world we denie not but that the inuisible church shall continue vpon the earth so long as the world endureth Secondly those places are vnproperly vnderstood of the visible church for therein are both good and bad how thē can that be the spouse of Christ where there are many infidels and wicked ones which haue not espoused themselues vnto him how can it be called his kingdome whereas it is not of all acknowledged But in the true catholike church all and euery one are espoused to Christ all and euery one haue the kingdome of God within them as it is Luke 17. ver 21. 2 They do abuse that place of S. Paule Ephe. 4.11 he gaue some to be Apostles some Euangelistes some pastors and teachers for the gathering together of the Saints Ergo the church shall alwayes be visible till all the Saintes are gathered together Bellarmin cap. 13. Rhemistes Ephes. 4. Sect. 5. We aunswere this place proueth that the church hath neuer wanted pastors and teachers for the continuance of the truth neither shall euer be without them as the Lord said by the Prophet Isay. 59. ver 21. My spirite which is vpō thee my words which I haue put into thy mouth shall not depart out of thy mouth nor the mouth of thy seede for euer We therfore denie not but that in all ages yea in the most ignoraunt times of Poperie God raised vp faithfull teachers vnto his church although they were not mitred and croziard Bishops neither could shew any outward pompe or boast of any glorious successiō Such were Gulielmus de S. Amore Arnoldus de noua villa an 1240. Berengarius Ioachim Abbas in the time of Innocentius 3. Wikclef Bruto Swinderby Badby and others about anno 1400. with many which were not knowen to the world for the truth neuer in any age wanted witnesses By the continuance of the truth and right faith we gather that there haue bene alwayes faithfull teachers though not notorious to the world and shal be but who they were and where they liued what pompe what authoritie they were of it is not materiall to know wherefore an outward visible succession
bee much desired and conueniently expected that is such a Councell where euery man franke free may vtter his minde without feare an holy Councel where euery mā may goe about to set vp godlines not to oppresse the trueth Such a Councell King Henrie the eight of worthie memorie in his protestation for the Church of England for not comming to the Councell of the Pope truely affirmeth that he desired and craued nothing so oft of God but because there is no hope of any such Councel seeing the Pope would be the chiefe doer in it and it is too vnreasonable that the same man should be both a partie and a iudge we doubt not but that it is lawfull by the word of God for euery Prince Duke Lord within his owne seignorie without any further delay or expectation by the aduice and Counsaile of the learned and godlie of the land according to Gods Lawe to reforme their Church First because all delay in matters of the Church are dangerous and inconueniences are at the first hand to be met withall as we see Act. 6. and Act. 15. immediatlie when any question did arise the Apostles assembled together In the Councel of Basile where it was decreed that the Pope was subiect to the Councels Panormitane a stiffe champion on the Popes side would haue the decree stayed till the returne of the Princes Embassadors But Arelatensis that worthy Cardinall stepped vp and shewed what danger there might be in a small delay by the example of Hannibal who deferring his going but one day to Rome was driuen cleane out of Italy hauing been very like to haue taken the citie if he had vsed the opportunitie But without all controuersie matters of faith ought not to be delayed which could not be auoyded if a generall Councel should alwaies be waited for Secondly a Prince hath the like authoritie in his dominion as the housholder hath in his house But euery man ought to reforme his house without any further delay aduisement or consultation as Iosua sayth I and my house will serue the Lord 24. vers 15. Wherefore the Prince may and ought to performe the like in his countrie Lastly we finde by experience that the Lord hath blessed such reformations which haue been made by Princes in their owne territories as that in Zuricke anno 1523. at Berne 1528. and the most happie reformation of our Church of England begun by King Henrie the 8. encreased by that most vertuous Prince King Edward the 6. and prosperouslie continued and established by our gracious Soueraigne Queene Elizabeth I will adde the testimonie of Augustine who answering to the Pelagians which obiected that they were condemned by certaine single Bishops in their owne Diocesse without a Synode he sayth thus Ac si congregatione synodi opus erat vt aperta pernicies damnaretur quasi nulla haeresis aliquando nisi synodi congregatione damnata sit c. cont 2. Epistol Pelag. lib. 4. cap. 12. As though saith he a Synode or Councel were alwayes necessarie to condemne a knowne heresie Nay wee finde that more heresies without comparison haue been in the same places condemned where they first sprang without any such necessitie more so then otherwise THE SECOND QVESTION BY WHOSE AVthoritie Councels ought to be called The Papists THey doe generally hold that generall Councels ought onely to be called and appoynted by the Popes authoritie or his assignment their goodly reasons error 30 are these 1 Councels ought to bee congregate in the name of Christ that is by him that hath authoritie from Christ so to congregate them see here is a goodly exposition to assemble in the name of Christ is to assemble by the authoritie of the Pope so belike where Christ saith wheresoeuer two or three are gathered together in my name c. Christ will not bee present with them vnlesse we send vp to Rome for license that two or three may come together 2 Generall Councels should be appoynted by them that haue generall authoritie to commaund men to come to the Councell but this authoritie ouer the whole Church neuer any Emperour had in such ample manner as the Pope hath Ergo. Answere first it is a great vntruth that the Popes spirituall iurisdiction which he falsely challengeth was at any time greater then the Emperours dominion for Constantine ruled ouer both the West and East Churches but the Churches of Greece were neuer nor are not to this day subiect to the sea of Rome For Pope Eugenius would haue dissolued the Councell of Basile vnder this pretence because the Greekes which should come vnto the Councell for the vniting of their Church would not passe the Alpes but this vniting neuer went forward Anno. 1431. Agayne if the commaundement of one Emperour or Potentate bee not large enough to appoynt a generall Councell as in these dayes it is not it may bee done by the consent and agreement of Princes The Protestants WE hold it as a fond and ridiculous assertion that generall Councels should be ruled at the Popes becke but that this authoritie is due and hath been of olde vnto Christian Princes and Magistrates and the Pope in so doing doth but vsurpe vpon their right 1 That the Pope hath not absolute authoritie to call remoue dissolue or establish Councels it is proued out of scripture for Act. 6.2 the twelue Apostles and not Peter onely whose successor the Pope doth falsely chalenge to be called the multitude together about the election of Deacons 2 The Councels in times past were sommoned by the Emperours which our aduersaries themselues cannot denie as the Nicene first by Constantine the great Constantinopolitane 1. by Theodosius the elder Ephesin 1. by Theodosius the younger Chalcedonens by Martianus But say our aduersaries these Councels were not appoynted without the consent of the Bishops of Rome I meruaile they are not ashamed so to say for when Theodosius called the Councell of Chalcedon Leo then Bishop of Rome neither liked the time for hee would haue had it deferred nor the place being desirous to haue it in Italy yet he was content to obey the Emperours commaundement and sent his Agents to the Councel there to appeare for him Epist. 41.47.48 ad Martianum This was alleadged by Tonstal and Stokeslie two archpapists in their Epistle to Cardinall Poole 3 It is a good reason which was alleadged in the Councell of Basile that if Popes onely should call Councels there should be no meanes left to withstand a wicked and vicious Pope Who would thinke say they that the Bishop of Rome would congregate a Councel for his owne correction or deposition 4 The Pope hath no more authoritie nor by their leaue nothing like as Peter had but he challenged not this dignitie amongst the Apostles to summon Councels We reade of foure onely Councels of the Apostles say the fathers of Basile for this also is their argument the first was for the choosing of Matthias Act. 1. congregate at the
Prophet in the midst Euen thus with the like spirite of blasphemie doo the Iesuites crie out that the Pope is the chiefe shepheard steward husband and head of the Church vpon earth But we will leaue to charge them so deepely with blasphemie which notwithstanding they cannot auoyde Let vs heare what the fathers of Basile say to this poynt Bellarmine saith the Pope is the husband but they reason cleane contrarie the Church say they is the spouse of Christ the Pope make the best of him you can is but a Vicar but no man dooth so ordaine a Vicar that hee maketh his spouse subiect vnto him but that the spouse is alwaies thought to be of more authoritie then the Vicar forsomuch as she is one body with her husband but the Vicar is not so thus haue they to the full answered the Iesuite ex Aenea Syluio Better arguments they haue none for the Popes prerogatiue then we haue seene The Protestants THat the Pope is by right and ought to be subiect to generall Councels and that they haue authoritie to iudge examine suspend punish depose him if there be iust cause it is proued thus This matter was pithilie disputed vpon by the Fathers of Basile some of whose reasons it shall bee sufficient heere to followe 1 They proue this conclusion out of Scripture First whereas Panormitane had saide that the Pope was Lorde of the Church vnto him Segouius answered that it was the most honourable title of the Bishop of Rome to be called the seruant of the seruants of God and Peter saith hee forbiddeth pastors to behaue themselues as Lords ouer the Clergie 1. Pet. 5. And if Christ the sonne of God came not to be ministred vnto but to minister and serue how then can his Vicar haue any dominion So was Panormitane answered Againe the Diuines thus argued Christ saith to Peter dic Ecclesiae Peter is sent to the Church or Councell Ergo the veritie doth remit the Bishop of Rome to the Councell But to this the Iesuite saith that Peter was not yet entred into his office to bee chiefe Bishop but was as a priuate person So then belike this rule of our Sauiour Christ dic Ecclesiae tell it to the Church did but binde Peter till Christ were ascended and he receiued his Vicar-dome This cauillous answere the Fathers of Basile wisely foresaw and preuented it for they shew how Peter was subiect to Councels euen after the ascension as Act. 11. Peter is rebuked say they by the congregation because he went to Cornelius an heathen man as if it had not been lawfull for him to attempt any great matter without the knowledge of the congregation but that seemeth to make more for the purpose Galath 2. where Paule rebuked Peter to his face because contrarie to the decree of the Councell of the Apostles hee did cogere gentes Iudaizare hee would constraine the Gentiles to doe like the Iewes Ergo Peter was subiect vnto the Councell ex Aenea Syluio Other reasons many were alleaged by the Fathers of Basile First the Bishop of Burgen As in euery well ordered Kingdome the whole realme should be of more authoritie then the King so the Church ought to be of more authoritie then the Pope though he were Prince thereof The Diuines brought these argumēts the Church is the mother of the faithfull and so of the Pope if he be a faithfull man the Pope is then the Churches sonne as both Anacletus and Calixtus Bishops of Rome confessed Ergo how much the sonne is inferiour to his mother so much is the Church superiour to the Pope Secondly the Pope is inferiour to Angels he is not greater then Iohn Baptist of whom it is said that the least in the Kingdome of God is greater then he but the Angels doe reuerentlie accord vnto the doctrine of the Church Ephes. 3.10 Ergo the Pope is bound to doo the same who is lesse then the Angels These Fathers thought none so absurd to denie the Pope to be inferiour to Angels and therefore labour not to proue it Yet Antoninus an olde Papist saith Non minor honor datur Papae quà m Angelis there is no lesse honour due to the Pope then to the Angels Nay another saith I thinke it be Pope Paschalis Datur Episcopis quod ne Angelis vt Christi corpus crearent it is graunted to Bishops which is not giuen to the Angels to create the bodie of Christ. But the Fathers of Basile thought not these men worthie the answere no more doe we and so let thē passe Thirdly the Pope say they being the Vicar of the Church for he is more truely so called then the Vicar of Christ he may be deposed of the Church for a Lord may put out his Vicar at his pleasure Ergo the Pope is vnder Councels 4 If the Councels might not ouerrule the Pope there were no remedie left to resist a wicked Pope Shall we suffer all things say they to run into ruine and decay with him for it is not like that hee would congregate a Councell against himselfe To this the Iesuite answereth that there is no remedie left but to pray to God in such a case who will either confound or conuert such a Pope Here is goodly diuinitie we know that Antichrist shall at length be destroyed at the comming of Christ but if he should be let alone in the meane while and not be bridled he might doe much hurt as he hath done too much alreadie Yet the Iesuite confesseth that a wicked Pope may bee resisted by force and armes and why not I pray you as well by peaceable meanes these sayings are contrarie Bellarm. cap. 19. So then this is Popish diuinitie that be the Pope neuer so wicked doe he neuer so much harme hee is not to bee controuled of any mortall man Such doultish schoole poynts maintained especially by begging friers the fathers of Basile complained of As that they should say that no man ought to iudge the high and principall seate that it cannot be iudged either by Emperour Clergie King or people Other affirme that the Lord hath reserued to himselfe the depositions of the chiefe Bishop Others yet more mad are not ashamed to affirme that the Bishop of Rome though hee carrie soules in neuer so great number to hell yet is he not subiect to any correction or rebuke For all these straunge and blasphemous positions the fathers concluded as yee haue heard that the Pope ought to obey generall Councels 4 Lastly I will adioyne the iudgement of Augustine who writing in his 162. Epistle concerning the Donatists whose cause was heard and determined by the Emperours appoyntment at Rome before Miltiades then Bishop there and other Bishops assistants and yet for all this the Donatists would not bee quiet Thus he saith Putemus illos iudices qui Romae iudicauerunt non bonos iudices fuisse Restabat adhuc plenarium Concilium c. Put case saith hee that the Bishop of Rome
sometime in Rome also tribuni plebis the officers for the people had the chiefe authoritie Now of all these in common-wealth matters the first kinde is the best and safest the Monarchical or princely gouernement The question now is whether the same forme ought to bee reteyned in Church-gouernement and in this question certaine things are to bee obserued First that wee haue not to deale in this place with that part of Ecclesiasticall regiment wherein the prince hath interest as in ordayning Ecclesiasticall Lawes and seeing to the execution thereof but the question is onely of that regiment Ecclesiasticall which is proper to the gouernors of the Church which consisteth in the ministerie of the word and Sacraments in ordaining and electing of Church-ministers in the dispensing of the keyes of the Church in the Ecclesiasticall censures and discipline and such like whether in the Church there ought to bee one chiefe Bishop from whom all other receiue this power in the premisses Secondly the question is not of the spirituall gouernement of Christ who is the chiefe Monarch and King of his Church but of the outward and externall regiment vpon earth Thirdly wee speake not of the state of any particular Church either nationall prouinciall or oppidall but of the generall state of the Church whether ouer all Churches there ought to be one chiefe Bishop These things premised wee come now to the question The Papists THat there ought to bee one chiefe Monarch and high Bishop ouer all the Church in all Ecclesiasticall matters for the deciding of controuersies preseruing the vnitie of the Church from whom all other Ecclesiasticall Ministers doe receiue their power and authoritie they thus would proue 1 The militant Church is in all things answerable and correspondent to the triumphant companie in Heauen as Heb. 8.5 Moses was bid to make all things according to the paterne shewed in the Mount But in heauen there is beside God himselfe a Monarch and chiefe commaunder of the Angels euen Michael the Archangel Reuel 12.7 Michael and his Angels fought Ergo it ought to be so vpon earth We answer First the Church vpon earth neither is nor can be altogether like to the celestiall congregation for there is no temple Reuel 21.22 There shall enter no vncleane thing and many such like differences there are We are bid to follow them in holines and obedience so farre wee must imitate the Angels as in the Lords prayer 3. Petit. As for imitation and conformitie in other things we haue no such commaundement we are promised hereafter to be like them but that is not yet Neither doth that place proue any such thing Heb. 8. For how followeth it Moses was shewed a paterne to make the Tabernacle by Ergo the Church hath a paterne of her gouernement from Heauen When they can shew any such paterne reuealed in the word for their dreames and phantasies we wil not beleeue for the Church as Moses had for the Tabernacle then they shall say somewhat 2 It is a vaine controuersie so to descant of the Angels as to appoynt them a Captaine and commaunder and to make nine orders or bands of them as our Rhemist annot 1. Ephes. vers 21. These are but their dreames they haue not a worde in Scripture for it And concerning Michael they are much deceiued for in that place Apocal. 12.7 Christ is called Michael Michael and his Angels fought against the Dragon And who I pray you is the chiefe Captaine of the Church against the diuell and his hoast but Christ And so is it expounded verse 10. Now is saluation in Heauen and the strength and Kingdome of our God and the power of his Christ Here hee is called Christ who before is Michael In other places also Michael is vnderstood to be Christ as Dan. 10.21 there is none that holdeth with mee but Michael your Prince here Michael is the prince of the Church and not of the Angels And that Michael is not the prince of the Angels as our aduersaries meane taking Michael for an Angell it is proued out of the 13. verse Michael one of the chiefe princes the Angels are all called princes and not one to bee prince aboue them Likewise the nature and signification of the word Michael agreeth hereunto for it is compounded of three hebrue particles as much as to say one that is equall vnto GOD which name in that sense cannot bee giuen vnto any creature Further Epistle Iud. 9. there is mention made of Michael the Archangell who stroue against the diuell and saide the Lord rebuke thee Sathan where the Apostle alludeth to that place of Zacher 3.2 where the very same words are found but there the prophet calleth him Iehouah that spake those words and here the Apostle calleth him Michael so that in this place it must needes bee vnderstoode for Christ. But to conclude we denie not but that Michael may bee the name of some glorious Angell but out of these places it cannot bee proued And againe we will not stand with them but that there may be degrees of excellencie amongst the Angels as there shall be amongst the Saints but that any one hath any such soueraigne and commaunding authoritie ouer the rest it is a curious and presumptuous surmise 2 The Church of the olde Testament was a figure of the Church vnder the New but they had a high Priest aboue the rest Ergo there ought to be now We answere First we graunt the high Priest was a figure but neither of Peter nor Pope but onely of Christ for in two things did the high Priest resemble Christ in offering of sacrifice so hath Christ offered vp himselfe Heb. 7.27 and in entring into the sanctuarie to make attonement for the people so Christ is entred into the Heauens to appeare in sight for vs before God as the apostle saith Heb. 9.24 I trow in neither of these the high priest could be a type either of Peter or Pope 2 Neither doth it follow because there was an high priest in one countrey therefore there ought to bee one ouer the Churches in al countries as the Iesuite frameth an other argument by a comparison because a bishop is ouer his diocesse a Metropolitane ouer his prouince there may bee as well a Pope ouer the whole Church For by the same reason because a Lorde may bee the chiefe in his seignorie a Duke in his prouince a Prince in his Kingdome therefore there ought to bee an Emperour ouer all the world or as Master Caluine saith because one fielde is committed to one Husbandman to dresse and to till therefore the whole Worlde may which were a thing impossible The Protestants THat there ought not to be any one chiefe Bishop Pope or prelate to exercise iurisdiction ouer the whole Church wee doe thus make it good 1 We acknowledge no head of the Church but Christ neither doth the Scripture attribute this title of Maiestie ouer the whole Church but onely to Christ. If
and therefore hee loued much To the third wee answere that by the Iesuites owne confession Iames who was as they say Bishoppe of Ierusalem had the primacie there how then can they now giue it to Peter The Protestants THat Peter had no such iurisdiction ouer the Apostles as to bee called the head and Prince of them but that to them all indifferentlie were the keyes committed and did all faithfullie execute their Apostleship without any subiection of each to other but ioyned the right hands of fellowship together we thus confirme it out of the holy Scripture and necessarie arguments deriued out of the same 1 Ephes. 2.20 Apocalips 21.14 The Church is said to bee built vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Ergo no primacie of power amongst the Apostles they all founded the Church Bellarmine confesseth that in respect of their doctrine there was no difference betweene Peter and the rest for they all were first planters of Churches they all preached the Gospell by reuelation But in respect of gouernement they were not equall they had chiefe authoritie committed to them as Apostles and Embassadors of Christ But Peter as ordinarie pastor Wee answere First by his owne confession the Apostles had chiefe authoritie as Apostles but there was no higher authoritie or power then of the Apostleship but as they were Apostles they were equall saith the Iesuite Ergo there could be no superioritie for the calling of the Apostles was the highest in the Church 2 To preach the Gospell and to haue iurisdiction of gouernement do both belong to the power of the keyes but the keyes were equallie committed to all Ergo they had all equall power both to preach and to gouerne That they all had the power of the keyes equallie graunted vnto them wee haue proued before out of Matth. 18.18 2 Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that Iames was Bishop and ordinarie pastor at Ierusalem and saith with Anselme and Thomas Aquinas that therefore he is named first by Saint Paule Gal. 2. Bellarm. cap. 19. Therefore at Ierusalem Peter was to giue primacie to the ordinarie pastor there If they answere that Rome was then the chiefe citie and therefore Peter being Bishop of Rome was to haue the preeminence To this we replie that Ierusalem was rather to be preferred in respect of place which was chosen by the Lord himselfe to be the chiefe citie of his Church But Rome through the tyrannie and vsurpation of the Romans ouer other countries was aduanced to that dignitie not by the election of God But Bellarmine answereth that Peter was Bishop of the whole Church and so of Ierusalem too We answere he now saith lesse for Peter then if hee called him as he was the Apostle of the whole world for it was more to be an Apostle thā a Bishop Diuers were called in the Apostles times episcopi ouerseers or Bishops that were not Apostles as the pastors of Ephesus Act. 20.28 Wherefore now hee hath saide iust nothing in seeking to aduance Peter hee hath disgraced him in pulling him downe from his high Apostleship to the chaire of a Bishop 3 Peter had no superioritie ouer Paul for they ioyned right handes of fellowship and this allotment was made betweene them that Paule should bee the chiefe of the Gentiles and Peter of the circumcision Galath 2.9 Ergo. Bellarmine answereth First they were ioyned as fellow-laborers in the preaching of the Gospell but Peter might for all this bee greater in the office and power of gouerning Wee answere yea but the text saith that Paule onelie was not appointed to preach to the Gentiles but hee had the chiefe Apostleship Now to the Apostleship belongeth not onely the function of preaching but the whole vse of the keyes and power of iurisdiction Ergo in all respects Saint Paule ouer the Gentiles had the chiefe Apostleship But let any man say that this was a humane compact amongst themselues and Paul had his lotte at Peters assignement the text sheweth that the Lorde himselfe had made this distribution For when they sawe saith Saint Paul that the Gospell ouer the vncircumcision was committed to mee verse 7. So then the Apostles did but confirme by their consent that distribution which they sawe the Lord himselfe had appoynted Further saith the Iesuite the diuision was not so made but that it was lawfull for Peter also to preache to the Gentiles Wee answeare wee graunt it and for Paule to preache to the Iewes yet that distinction remayned still that Peter was chiefe of the circumcision Paule of the vncircumcision Againe saith hee but Peter had the more excellent lotte for Christ himselfe first preached to the Iewes Wee answere wee denie not but that hee had the first lotte in order for to the Iewes was the Gospell first offered but Paul had the larger and more glorious lotte the Church of the Iewes now decaying and the Gentiles beginning to be planted in their roome But howsoeuer it was it cannot bee denied but that Paule was chiefe towards the Gentiles And therefore the Church of Rome might with better right haue deriued their authoritie from S. Paul then from Peter Both of them they cannot make patrons of their See seeing by their owne rules the Pope cannot be successor to them both Further out of the same place Galath 2.11 an other thing commeth to bee obserued that Peter was rebuked of Paule and in such sort that it appeareth there was no great inequality between them for he doth it to his face openlie before all men and at Antioch in Peters owne Bishopricke as they say can it be now thought that Paul was any thing inferior to Peter Bellarmine and the Iesuits answere that the Pope may bee rebuked of an inferior and ought to take it patiently if it be done in zeale and loue Aunswere First wee doe not simplie thus conclude because Paul reprehended Peter therefore he was not his superior but because of the manner as we shewed it was done in such sorte so plainely so openly without any submission or crauing of pardon that there can appeare no inequalitie at all betweene them Secondly although they seeme heere to graunt that the Pope may be rebuked yet is it otherwise in their Canon lawe which saith that though the Pope doe leade innumerable soules to hell no mortall man may presume to reprooue his faultes part 1. distin 4. cap. Si Papa Fulk Annot. in Gala. 2. sect 8. 4 Lastlie what reason was there why Christ should giue the supremacie to Peter ouer the rest Christ was no acceptor of persons if hee had bene Iohn should haue bene preferred whom he loued most If deserts be weighed I think Peter deserued no more then the rest of his fellowes Nay I thinke the wisedome of the Spirit foreseeing the questions that should afterward arise in the Church about Peter hath so disposed that this Apostles infirmities both in number more and weight greater then any of the rest should be euidentlie set forth in
chiefe citie in all the world this reason was rendered in the Councel of Chalcedon Can. 28. An other cause thereof was the ample priuiledges and immunities which the Emperours endued it withall as Constantine the great and Gratianus the Emperour made a lawe that all men should reteyne that religion which Damasus of Rome and Peter Bishop of Alexandria did hold A third cause was the vnquiet estate of the Greeke Church who often voluntarily referred their matters to the Bishop of Rome as being lesse partiall and a more indifferent Iudge they themselues being diuided and rent into sects And hereupon and other like causes it came about that the Bishop of Rome a little stepped aboue his fellowe Patriarkes but yet had no such preeminent authoritie as to commaund them Fourthly the Pope of Rome being thus tickled with vayne glorie because they were reuerenced of other Churches many matters were committed vnto them and their consent required vnto the decrees of Councels when they were absent Hereupon they laboured euery day more and more to aduance that See taking euery small occasion that might helpe forward their ambicious desire till Anno. 606. or somewhat after Boniface the 3. obtayned of wicked Phocas the Emperour who murthered his master the Emperour Mauritius and his children to come to the Empire and was after slaine himselfe of Heraclius that succeeded him of him I say Boniface for himselfe and his successors obtayned to bee called vniuersall Bishops ouer the whole Church and the See of Rome to haue the preeminence aboue all other Churches in the world Afterward in Pope Zacharie his time the proude and insolent iurisdiction of Rome was established by Pipinus King of France who aspired to the Crowne and obtayned it by the sayd Popes meanes first deposing Childericus the rightfull King and dispensing with the oath which the French men had made before to Childericus Calum Institut 4. cap. 7. sect 17. Thus then it sufficiently appeareth that the primacie of Rome which it now vniustly challengeth ouer other Churches is not of any such antiquitie as they would beare the world in hand neither that it had the beginning from Christ but both the time when and the authors by whom it began may bee easily assigned 2 Wee neede no better argument to proue that the primacie of Rome hath not his originall from Christ then the Iesuites owne confession First he sayth that it doth not depend of Christs institution but ex Petri facto of Peters fact that the Bishop of Rome should bee rather Peters successor then the Bishop of Antioch or any other It is not iure diuino saith he by Gods lawe neither is it ex prima institutione pontificatus quae in Euangelio legitur of the first institution whereof wee reade in the Gospell And agayne Romanum pontificem succedere Petro non habetur expresse in scripturis It is not expressely set downe in scripture that the Bishop of Rome should succeede Peter but it is grounded onely vpon the tradition of Peter Nay he saith further that Peter needed not to haue chosen any particular place for succession and he might as well haue chosen Antioch as Rome Ergo neither is the succession of Rome grounded vpon scripture neither any commandement of Christ for then Peter could not haue had free choyse to appoynt his successor where he would himselfe as the Iesuite saith if he had had any especiall direction or commaundement from Christ. So then marke I pray you they cannot proue out of scripture that the Bishop of Rome ought to succeede Peter in the chiefe Bishopricke but onely that Peter had the chiefe Bishopricke committed to him and his successors in generall whosoeuer they should appoynt Ergo the Bishops of Rome by their owne confession can alleadge no scripture institution or commandement of Christ for the primacie of the Church to bee annexed to the See of Rome and yet agaynst their knowledge they will alleadge scripture to colour the matter withall Bellarm. lib. 2. de pontif ca. 17. 3 Augustine saith Secundum honorum vocabula quae iam ecclesiae vsus obtinuit episcopatus presbyterio maior est The office of a Bishop is aboue the office of a Priest according to the names of honour which the Church by custome hath obtayned If then the difference of those two offices both named in scripture did arise rather and spring of the custome of the Church which thought it good to distinguish them for auoyding of schisme and is not grounded vpon the authoritie of scripture much lesse can the Pope whose neither name nor office is expressed in scripture fetch from thence any shew of proofe for his vsurped primacie THE SIXT PART OF THIS QVESTION CONCERning the proud names and vayne glorious titles of the Pope The Papists BEllarmine setteth downe to the number of fifteene glorious names which error 46 haue been of old giuen as he saith to the Bishop of Rome whereby his primacie ouer other Bishops is notoriously knowne but the principall are these He is called the Pope and chiefe Father the prince of Priests or high Bishop the Vicar of Christ the head of the Church the Prelate of the Apostolike See vniuersall Bishop These sixe names or titles they doe appropriate to the See of Rome Bellarm. de Roman pontif lib. 2. cap. 31. The Protestants WE will shewe by Gods grace that these sixe seuerall titles and names aforesayd are either such as ought not in their sense to be attributed to any Bishop nor any mortall man or els were common in ancient times as well to other Bishops as to him of Rome 1 For the first name of Pope it is deriued from the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in the Syracusane language is as much as Father which name was indifferently giuen to other Bishops which were famous in the Church for their vertue and learning As Cypriane Epiphanius Athanasius were called Papae Popes Augustine saluteth Aurelius President of the 6. Councel of Carthage by the name of Pope Epistol 77. Likewise those two epithetes of the Pope as to bee called Beatissim sanctissim pater most holy and blessed father were vsed in the stile of other Bisshops Prosper in his Epistle to Augustine twise calleth him Dominum beatissimum papam Lord most blessed Pope Tom. 7. Hierome calleth Epiphanius Beatum papam blessed Pope Ad Eustach Fabiol Augustine writing to Petrus the Presbyter or Priest being no Bishop yet thus saluteth him Ad sanctitatem tuam scripsit he hath written to your holines Nay in his booke dedicated to Renatus a lay man neither Priest nor Bishop thus he writeth Hinc angor quòd sanctitati tuae minus quà m vellem cognitus sum This grieueth me that I am not so well knowne to your holines as I desire If then these titles of holinesse and blessednesse were not onely giuen to Bishops but Priests also yea vnto lay men of vertuous and holy life what colour or
for not doing the things commaunded which he durst not say As when the Magistrate for some profitable and politike end commaundeth vpon some dayes abstinence from flesh it is not the eating or not eating of flesh that simplie displeaseth and offendeth God but the contempt of the lawe and wilfull and obstinate disobedience to the magistrate for otherwise the vse of the creature is free and indifferent 2 Wee will beate the Iesuite with his owne staffe hee saith not that all lawes doe binde the conscience but onely iust lawes in the which fower cōditions are required First that they be made for some profitable end so are not popish lawes which nourish superstition and haue no edifying and some of them doe commaund plaine idolatry open impietie as the worshipping of images the adoration of the Masse such like Secondly saith he they must not be contrarie to Gods law but such are many of their ordinances yea the most of them Thirdly they must be made by him that hath authoritie therefore none of the Popes lawes binde the vniuersall Church for it is not subiect to him Fourthly the forme and manner of imposing such lawes must be orderly but their lawes are most disordered imposed vpon the Church violently without their consent or any good proceeding Thus you see euen by their owne confession their lawes cannot binde One thing more I must needes tell them of If they would needes haue their lawes to binde men in conscience they should haue made fewer of them now they are so many that if the breach of them were an offence of conscience doe men what they could they should dailie make shipwrack of their conscience It is a true saying that is reported of one Thomas Arthur a good Christian it is an homely speech because the matter was somewhat homely yet hee did hit the marke Like as saith he crosses were set vp against the walles of London that no man should pisse there and while there were but a few men for reuerence of the crosses would not pisse against the wall but when in euery corner they set vp crosses men of necessitie were faine to pisse vpon the wall and crosses too So saith he if there had been fewer lawes of the Church they would haue been better kept but now they are so manie that men cannot chose but breake them 3 The Pope hath no power to correct the transgressors of his lawes ouer the whole Church Ergo hee cannot make lawes to binde the whole Church The argument followeth for hee that hath absolute power to make lawes hath also power to commaunde obedience to the lawes so made The first is thus proued the Pope indeede hath taken vppon him many times to thunder out his excommunication against other Churches but it was an vsurped and tyrannicall power and many times resisted and controuled Pope Victor Anno 200. would haue excommunicate the East Churches about the keeping of Easter but hee was stayed by Irenaeus The Councell of Constance did sende out excommunications against Pope Benedict sess 36. In the Councell of Basile Pope Eugenius cited Cardinall Iuliane with the rest of the fathers there assembled to come to Bononia vnder great penaltie they likewise cited Eugenius vnder the like penaltie either to come or send to Basile Fox pag. 668. Pope Leo the tenth in his fumish Antichristian Bull excommunicated and condemned Luther Luther with better right pronounceth sentence of excommunication against him being an aduersarie to Christ in these words according to the power and might that the spirit of Christ and efficacie of our faith can doe in these our writings if you shall persist still in your furie we condemne you together with this Bull and all the decretall and giue you to sathan to the destruction of the flesh that your spirit in the day of the Lord may be deliuered in the name which you persecute of Iesus Christ our Lorde Fox page 1286. Thus you see what small force there is of these popish leaden Bulls and presumptuous excommunications for it falleth out iustlie by them as the wise man saith As the Sparrow and the Swallowe by flying escape so the curse causelesse shall not come Now seeing therefore the Pope fayleth of power and strength to see his lawes executed in the vniuersall Church it cannot bee that his lawes should vniuersally binde Lastly let Augustine speake he thus defineth sinne peccatum est dictum factum vel concupitum contra legem aeternam Dei sinne is any thing done saide or coueted against the Lawe of GOD therefore the transgression simplie of the lawe of man is not sinne but as thereby also the Lawe of God is transgressed Ergo simplie it bindeth not the conscience for sinne onely bindeth and toucheth the conscience THE SECOND PART OF THIS QVEstion whether all Bishops doe receiue their Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction from the Pope The Papists THey denie not but that the power of order as they call it which consisteth error 50 in the administration of the Sacraments is equallie distributed to all Bishops and that they as well as the Pope doe receiue it immediatly by their consecration of God but the power both of externall iurisdiction which standeth vpon Ecclesiasticall censures constitutions and decrees and internall iurisdiction which is exercised in binding and loosing is deriued say they from the Pope to all other Bishops 1 God tooke of the spirite that was in Moses and distributed it among the seuentie Elders that were chosen to beare the burthen of gouernement with Moses and to bee his helpers the Lorde tooke of his spirite not by diminishing it but by deriuing of his vertue to the rest but the Pope is now in the roome and place of Moses in the Church Ergo from him to the rest is this an authoritie deriued Answer First Moses example was extraordinarie he was a figure of Christ not of the Pope Deuteron 18. vers 15. The Pope might with better right stand vpon Aarons example who was high Priest not lay claime to Moses office who was the Prince and Captaine of the people for the Pope I trow would be chiefe Bishop and not Emperor too Secondly the meaning is not that God deriued Moses spirit to the rest but bestowed the like gift of prophesying vpon them as Moses had surely neuer any mortall man had the spirite in such aboundance that it could bee deuided into seuentie portions and one Prophet to make many The like phrase is vsed 2. King 2.15 Where the Prophets saide that the spirit of Eliah did rest on Elisha that is God endued him with an excellent spirit of prophesying as Elias had If they will vnderstand this place also of deriuing of spirits how then shall that be taken in the 9. verse where Elisha praieth that this spirit might be doubled vpon him If his spirit were deriued from Eliah how could it be doubled vpon him How could it be multiplied and increased how could he haue
deserue greater punishment then Iewes or Gentiles that they are more straightly obliged and bound by their couenant vnto God then the other and not onely as the Iesuite sayth because they haue tasted more of the goodnesse of God and so are more vnthankfull for there are two parts of the couenant betweene God and vs The Lord sayth Thou art my people and so enricheth them with knowledge and euery good thing The people say Thou art my God Hosh. 2.23 And thus as the Lord doth couenant with them so they doe binde themselues vnto God The breach of which couenant is that which stirreth vp principally the anger of God against vs. 2 Augustine vpon the 75 Psalme writeth thus Vouete reddite domino de◠vestro omnes communiter Quid debemus vouere credere in illum sperare ab illo vitam aeternam bene viuere secundum communem modum Make your vowes and pay them vnto God generally altogether What must we vow to beleeue in him to hope for eternall life to liue honestly not to steale not to commit adulterie These then are the common and generall dueties of Christians no other then we promised and vowed in baptisme THE THIRD PART CONCERNING VOLVNTArie vowes whether they be any part of the worship of God The Papists error 86 AL voluntarie vowes say they made by Christians as not to eate flesh not to drinke strong drinke or to liue vnmarried doe concerne the worship of God and thereby men are made more acceptable vnto him Bellar. cap. 16. 1 Iacob vowed to pay tithes Genes 28. Dauid to build a temple vnto God Psal. 131.2 But neither of these two were commanded them and yet they were properly referred to the seruice of God Ans. First we denye not as we haue sayd but that in the law and before there might be such voluntarie vowes yet it followeth not that there should bee any such now Secondly both those dueties were necessarie and commanded in generall though not in particular As first Iacobs vow was that the Lord should be his God vers 21. No man can denye but this was necessarie and a commandement Then seeing the Lord is his God it is also necessarie that he should acknowledge him by some externall worship as by appointing the Lord an house in that place and bringing oblations vnto his altars these are but particular duties that doe followe that generall commandement Secondly Dauid did vow that he was bound to doe being King of Israel namely to haue a care of the temple of God for thus he sayth to Nathan the Prophet I dwell in an house of Cedar trees but the Arke of God remaineth within the curtaines 2. Sam. 7.2 This belonged to the King of duetie as it was generally commanded all Israel Hagg. 1.4 but that Dauid was discharged of this care by the especiall warrant of God by the Prophet 2 Hebr. 13.16 To doe good and to destribute forget not for with such sacrifices God is pleased Intelligitur sayth Bellarmine de eleemosyna non praeceptae it must be vnderstood of almes which is not commanded Ans. As though all kind of almes and releeuing of the poore be not commanded for the works of charitie and to doe good are alwaies enioyned vs. Againe this place serueth nothing at al for vowes It seemeth he was hard bestead that had no better choise of places The Protestants WE grant that there are other kind of vowes then before we spake of which doe not directly concerne the worship of God neither are of things commanded vs nor yet is God thereby the better pleased but they serue onely as helps to make vs more fit vnto Christian dueties As a man that seeth he is by nature giuen to dronkennes doth vowe that he will take no strong drinke lest he should offend that way Another purposeth to fast thereby to tame his flesh and the more feruently to pray As Iob made a couenant with his eyes not to looke vpon a maide 31.1 But these things of themselues by the outward act are not the more acceptable vnto God neither is God by eating or not eating or looking or not looking the better worshipped as these things are considered in themselues Wherefore by the word of God we condemne all voluntary and superstitious vowes of men inuented to serue God by as vowes of chastitie of going in pilgrimage offering to Images and such like 1 S. Paul condēneth al voluntary worship of God which is inuented by man as vnprofitable though it haue a shew of wisedome in humblenes of mind and not sparing the bodie Coloss. 2.23 As such are the ordinances of the world in worshipping of Angels and in abstinence Touch not tast not handle not But such are all popish vowes a voluntary seruice of God euen in the same things which the Apostle taketh exception against for they make vowes to Angels to Saints vowes to keepe daies holy and to fast in them Ergo they are vnlawfull 2 Rom. 14.23 Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne that is grounded vpon knowledge out of the word Ergo all voluntarie vowes made to serue God by are to be abandoned because they haue no warrant out of Gods word Bellarmine answereth that the place is not so to be vnderstood but rather by faith is meant the conscience of man and so whatsoeuer is done against the conscience is sinne Ans. By faith is not vnderstood any conscience but the assurance of a right conscience which must needes be builded vpon the word for vers 22. S. Paul saith If thou hast faith haue it with God This cannot be spoken of a corrupt conscience which is not able to abide Gods trial but a right conscience established out of the word 3 Let vs heare Augustines iudgement Sunt multi qui vouent alius pallium alius oleum alius ceream ad luminaria noctis alius vt vinum non bibat per aliquot annos alius vt ieiunia certo tēpore faciat alius vt carnes non comedat Non est istud votum optimum neque perfectum adhuc melius volo non eligit Deus nec speciem tuam nec oleum tuum nec ieiunium tuum sed hoc quod hodie redemit ipsum offer hoc est animam tuam There are many that vow one a cloake another oyle another a waxe candle another that he will drinke no wine another that he will fast another that he will eate no flesh This is not the best kind of vowing God neither careth for thy comely apparell nor for thy oyle nor for thy fasting but offer that vnto him which he hath redeemed that is thy soule De tempor ser. 7. We see by this what account Augustine maketh of superstitious voluntarie vowes made with an intent to please God thereby THE FOVRTH QVESTION CONCERNING Monasticall vowes in particular THere are three kinds of vowes which belong vnto Monkerie the first is the vow of voluntarie pouertie the second the vow of obedience vnto the Monasticall presidents
congregate or called to condemne such open wickednes as if neuer any heresie had been condemned but in a Synode or Councel Cont. 2. epistol Pelag. lib. 4. cap. 12. This is that heretical opinioÌ„ as they call it which the Councel of Constance condemned in Iohn Husse him together with it because he said That an heretike whatsoeuer he be ought first to be instructed and taught with Christian loue gentlenes by the holy scriptures by reasons drawn out of the same before he suffer corporall or bodily punishment Fox pag. 610. articul 18. Which his saying is grounded vpon that rule of the Gospell Math. 18.15 That if we see one offend we should first tell him priuatly then before 2. or 3. lastly declare it to the Church and if he will not heare the Church that is by scripture conuincing him then continuing obstinate let him be as a publicane This rule the papists kept not in their bloudie persecutions here in England They put many hundreds to death were not able to coÌ„uince any one of heresie but in disputation were themselues put to silence and made ashamed Their onely arguments were the fire and fagot 3 Againe they vsed vnlawfull waies and vniust in sifting and examining by error 104 cruel tormeÌ„ts the poore innocents brought before them neither shewing accusers nor witnesses Iohn Browne Martyr appearing before Warrham and Fisher two bloudsuckers was burned with hot coales his bare feet being set vpon theÌ„ Fox p. 1292. Cutbert Symsons fingers were grated with an arrow and he himself piteously racked to be made betray his innoceÌ„t brethren p. 2032. Tomkins hand was burned by Bonner till the sinewes sparkled againe pag. 1533. And these were the witnesses and accusers that were brought against them This was cleane contrarie to the law of Moses At the mouth of two or three witnesses shall he that is worthie of death dye Deuteron 17.6 Augustine saith Quis iudex accusantis sumat personam c. What Iudge would take vpon him to be an accuser Our Lord Christ knewe Iudas to be a theefe sayth he yet because he was not accused he did not cast him off He counteth it a very vnnaturall thing for the Iudge to be an accuser and to proceede without witnesses which although in some criminall cases is more tolerable yet in the cases of life and death ought in no wise to be vsed The same iudgement also Augustine giueth of that cruell custome of tormenting men to conuince them by their own mouth which was inuented by the heathen but neuer more cruelly practised then among the papists Hoc intolerabile est saith he rigandum fontibus lacrymarum cum propterea torqueat iudex accusatum ne occidat nesciens innocentem fit per ignorantiam vt tortum innocentem occidat quem ne innocentem occideret torserat How intolerable a thing is it and to be much lamented that while the Iudge tormenteth the partie accused lest vnwittingly he should put an innocent man to death it falleth out that he adiudgeth to death a man both innocent beside tormented whom lest he should slay as an innocent he before put to torment His meaning is that when a man is put to the racke or otherwise tortured that he might confesse the truth and cleere himselfe it commeth to passe that through extremitie of the payne he maketh himselfe guiltie and so the innocent is both wrongfully tormented and vniustly put to death Which kind of forcing men by torture though in some dangerous cases as of high treason and such like where there is great perill in the concealing of the truth and no other way to sift it out may be admitted yet to vse it as an ordinarie course as the papists did and in causes of religion it is to too shameful and of all Christians to be abhorred 4 Where haue they learned so hotly and fiercely to pursue simple men and women to death for none or very small offences which they notwithstanding error 105 falsely called heresie Was it heresie for Iames Brewster to heare one Sweeting to reade many good things out of a certaine booke or for the same Sweeting when as the sayd Iames should say Now the sonne of the liuing God helpe vs to answere Now almightie God so doe yet for these heresies were they both condemned and burnt in Smithfield Anno. 1511. Fox pag. 818. A woman of Auspurge had like to haue been burned for asking a priest that carried the Host to a sicke man with Taper-light what he meant to goe with a light at noone day if Mary the Emperours sister had not made sute for her Anno. 1550. Anno 1525. a Monke burned in France because he had forsaken his abominable order and married a wife pag. 896. Iohannes de Cadurco being at a feast where it was agreed that euery one should bring forth this posie or sentence because he brought forth this Christ reigne in our hearts and prosecuted it out of the scriptures was burned Anno. 1533. pag. 897. A Tailour burned at Paris anno 1549. for working vpon an holy day ex Iohan. Crispin Fox p. 903. Ralfe Hare constrained to abiure for saying before the Bishop of Winchester The Lord is my witnes It is Symbolum Haereticorum saith Winchester a marke to know heretikes by to say the Lord the Lord page 1225. One Thomas Sanpaulinus Matyr because he rebuked a man for swearing was thereupon suspected to be a Lutheran examined condemned and burned at Paris anno 1551. pa. 904. Many such like examples might be produced of holye Martyres which for these and such other great heresies were put to death And as the offences were very smal as we see so their maÌ„ner of proceeding was most cruell void of all humanity They spared not women with childe We haue not forgotten that famous example of their crueltie which shall be remeÌ„bred to their perpetuall shame and infamie Howe they burned 3. simple women in the Isle of Garnsey anno 1556. which had submitted theÌ„selues to their mercie one of the three was great with childe which brast out of her wombe in the midst of the fire and was throwne in againe pa. 1944. They had no compassion of the tender age of children In the towne of Byrbroke while Richard Chapman did pennaunce in the Church beeing inioyned to kneele barefoote and bare legged all the sermon while vppon the colde steps of the Church a little boy for giuing him his hat to kneele vpon was had into the vestrie and piteously scourged pa. 1047. Cruel Bonner burned Richard Mâ—kins a childe of 15. yeeres for speaking against the sacrament of the aultar who notwithstanding at the stake was taught to speak much good of the B. of London and so did pa. 1202. John Fâ—ttie his childe being of 8. yeere oulde for saying to one of the Bishoppes Chaplens that he had Balaams marke was scourged so cruelly that within 14 dayes hee died Nay such was their cruelty they
them selues to looke into the heart as into a glasse but by reuealing such thinges when the Lord seeth it expedient Neither had the prophets an inherent gift and dwelling in them to know secrets but the worde of God was inspired into them at times as they had neede as we see in Nathan 2. Sam. 7.3.4 in Elisha 2. King 2.15 in Isaiah 2. Kin. 20.4 And though Paul was taken vp into heauen and sawe many secrets yet he knew not all for thus he saith of him selfe If I knew all secretes 1. Corinth 13.2 Ergo no man euer receiued this gift to search the heart but it is proper vnto God who will not giue his honour to another 2. Augustine saith Nescire mortuos quid hic agatur dum hic agitur that the dead know not what is done here while it is in doing But they vnderstand either by relation of those that departe this worlde or els by the Angels Non quidem omnia sed quae sinuntur indicare sicut Prophetae nec hic omnia cognoscebant sed quae illis essereuelanda dei prouidentia iudicarat de cura pro mortuis cap. 15. Neither do they know all things but what God suffereth to be knowen as neither did the Prophets knowe al things while they liued but what God in his diuine prouidence thought good to reueale vnto them I note out of this saying of Augustine three thinges FIRST What great vncertaintie of opinion heere is Howe the dead should come by the knowledge of humane affaires the Papists think they haue it by Gods gift otherwhile they say they see all thinges in God as in a cleare glasse Augustine sayeth they knowe them by the Angelles or by men newly departed this lyfe so that it appeareth to bee but a meer conceit and imagination that they haue any such knowledge whereof there is no surer ground Secondly Augustine saith they know not things presently done but afterward contrarie to the Papists Thirdly they know not all things as the Prophets also did not but what the Lord reuealeth vnto them wherein also he is contrarie to our aduersaries THE THIRD QVESTION CONCERNING THE worship of Angels first in generall then in particular of inuocation The Papists THey say that the diuine honour and adoration due vnto God alone is not to be giuen to Angels But there is a religious reuerence honour and adoration which is not to be denyed to Angels and Saints Rhemist annot Apocalyps 19. sect 4. 1 Iosua fell downe before the Angel and worshipped Iosua 5. Rhemist Ans. He worshipped not an Angel but the Lord Christ himselfe the captaine of the Lords armie for it was a diuine worship He is bid to put off his shooes as Moses was when God appeared out of the fierie bush Exod. 3. But a diuine worship by your owne confession is due onely to God Fulk annot Coloss. 2.3 2. 1. Timoth. 2.21 I charge thee before God and the Lord Iesus Christ and his elect Angels that thou obserue these things Ergo Angels may be adored and reuerenced Rhemist Ans. Saint Paul maketh here the Angels witnesses of his waightie charge so Moses calleth heauen and earth to witnesse Deut. 30.19 may we therefore conclude that he yeelded any religious worship to heauen and earth Fulk ibid. The Protestants AS for due reuerence which is of loue not of any seruice there is no question but we ought to yeeld it vnto the Angels But all religious seruice or worship is due onely to God and whosoeuer man or Angel requireth or receiueth any religious worship or seruice vsurpeth that which is due vnto God Fulk Apocal. 19. sect 4. 1 Apocal. 19.10 and 22.9 Iohn fell downe to worship the Angel but the Angel suffered him not See thou doe it not saith he for I am thy fellowe seruant and of thy brethren worship God Ergo Angels are not to be adored with any religious worship Rhemist First he forbiddeth him onely to worship him with diuine adoration Ans. The words are generall he sayth not worship God with this kind of seruice but worship God Rhemist Secondly you say that Iohn so worthie an Apostle was not ignorant of that poynt that Angels were not to be worshipped as God we may replye also that if Iohn had knowne that this other kind of seruice was vnlawfull he would not haue done it Ans. Iohn sinned not of ignorance but of forgetfulnes in this extasie of his mind while he beheld the glorie of the Angel as likewise through his frailenes and forgetfulnes he committeth the like againe cap. 22. which Iohn would not haue done being once before admonished had he not presently forgotten himselfe But the other error of worshipping the creature for the Creator was too grosse an error for the Apostle Rhemist Thirdly he was deceiued in the person taking the Angel for Christ and therefore was not culpable at all in this fact in giuing diuine honour to the Angel for he sinned onely materially not formally Ans. First Iohn was not ignorant that he was an Angel and not Christ for he sayth he was one of the seuen Angels that had the seuen vials Secondly though he sinned of ignorance yet was it a sinne for the Prophet which beleeued the olde Prophet sinned grieuously as it appeared by his punishment though he did it ignorantly 1. King 13. Wherefore it is a grosse error of your Schoolemen that say a man sinneth not if he worship the diuell in the shape of an Angel ignorantly Rhemist Fourthly the Angel would not receiue this worship at Iohns hand whom he knew to be in great fauour with God and greater then some Angel Ans. First though hereafter the childrē of God shal be made equall to the Angels in glorie yet in this mortall life they must needes be inferiour seeing Christ himself in respect of his passion was inferiour to the Angels Heb. 2.9 Secondly the Angel would not haue taken this homage at any other mans hands beside Iohn for he giueth a reason that he is not only his fellow seruant but also of his brethren So for al their shifts and cauils we strongly conclude by this example that no religious honour ought to be giuen to Angels 2 Honoramus Angelos charitate non seruitute sayth Augustine nec eis templa construimus We honour Angels with the duetie of loue not of seruice neither doe we build temples vnto them Quod ergo colit summus Angelus id colendum etiam est ab homine vltimo That therefore which is worshipped of the highest Angel the man of lowest degree ought also to worship De vera religion cap. 55. Ergo no worship due vnto Angels but all vnto God THE SECOND PART OF THE INVOcation of Angels The Papists THey hold that it is lawfull to direct our praiers vnto Angels Rhemist Coloss 2. sect 3. Yea and because they pray for vs and deale with God to procure mercie for vs they may iustly be called our aduocates Angels are deputed for our protection
a goodly opinion these fellowes haue of heauen making a prison of it Rhemist annot Apocal. 6.9 Argum. 2 They follow the Lambe whither so euer he goeth Ergo they may be euery where Ans. That place Apocal. 14. is vnderstoode of al the elect yea of those that do imitate follow Christ liuing vpon earth 2 If the souls are euery where because the lamb is euery where then Christ in his humanitie is euery where and so the Papists are become Vbiquitaries Argum. 3 The deuils are of great dexteritie and celeritie in passing from one place to another Ergo much more the Saints Ans. 1 The argument followeth not for deuils by property of nature together by the sufferance of God do wander vp and downe the worlde beeing thereto appointed of God but the soules of saints haue no such office as wee read in scripture to be cursory spirites in the worlde 2 Though it should bee graunted that in a short time they are able to change their places yet it is vnpossible they should be in so many places to heare the prayers euerye where made vnto them vnlesse they could be in diuerse places at once Fulke Apoca. 6. sect 1. The Protestants FIrst it is a great vntruth and blasphemie to say that the saintes do know our thoughts inward repentance prayers as the Rhemistes affirme Argum. 1 God onely is the knower of the heart neither doth he communicate this property of the Godhead to any creature hee may reueale what hee thinketh good vnto them but for them when they wil them selues to know our secret praiers and meditations for this is the question it is impossible Argum. 2 Augustine Out of those wordes of the Prophet Isay 63.16 Abraham is ignorant of vs and Iacob know vs not concludeth thus Si tanti patriarchae quid erga populum ex his procreatum ageretur ignorauerunt quomodo mortui viuorum rebus atque actibus cognoscendis adiuuandisque miscentur If so great Patriarks were ignorant what became of the people which was borne of their loynes how is it like that other dead can be present to vnderstand and be helping to mens affaires Secondly We acknowledge no patrones protectors or captains in heaueÌ„ but our Lord God and Sauiour Christ. 1 Psalme 73.25 The Prophet Dauid saith Whome haue I in heauen but thee and Iacob calleth only vpon the Lord God to be the guide of his iourney Gen. 28.20 2 By appointing saintes to be patrones of places and countries at length they brought in a multitude of popish saintes and were not in superstition farre behinde the Gentiles who gloried in the number of their gods For haue they not alloted some to countries as S. George for England S. Andrew for Scotland S. Denis for Fraunce S. Patrik for Ireland So likewise diuerse saintes were called vpon for diuerse diseases as S. Rombal for the tooth-ach S. Petronil for the Ague One for horse as S. Loye S. Antony for Pigges S. Gregorie for Schollers S. George for souldiers Euen thus the heathen inuented diuerse gods Neptune for the sea the Satyrs for the woods the Nymphes for the water Ceres for corne Bacchus for wine Venus for the Troians Pallas for the Grecians Iupiter stator for the Romanes Nay they were yet more ridiculous they appointed many Goddes for one thing As for Infantes Vagitanus that made them to crye CuCuninus that kept them in their Cradle Adeona Abeona to teach them to goe So for the entrie of the house they had Limentinus the God of the thresholde Cardea the God of the hinges Forrulus that kept the dore for their corne they had the Goddesse Seia when it was sown Proserpina wheÌ„ it sprouted Nodotus when it knotted Hostilina when it â—ared Flora when it waxed white Runcina when it was cut downe The like superstition almost raigneth in poperie But what need we run to so many for these things when as at the Lords hands we are promised as king in the name of Christ to receiue al things we neede This great folly of theirs sheweth what good commeth by the deuised patronage of Saints Thirdly it is also another popish fable and dreame that the Saints may be present euery where as it pleaseth themselues at their tombes and sepulchers and wheresoeuer els they are called for Argum. 1 Acts 3.21 The heauens containe the humanity of Christ it hath pleased him there to rest himselfe vntill his comming to iudgement Ergo much more are the saints kept in their resting places Argum. 2 The Saints are at rest they do cease from the affaires of this life Apocal. 14.13 They rest vnder the Altar in the peace of Christ Apocal. 6.9 there expecting and waiting the comming of Christ to iudgement Ergo they do not wander nor stray abroad in the world neither do entermeddle with humane affaires Augustine saith Si rebus viuentium interessent animae mortuorum meipsum pia mater nulla nocte desereret quae terra marique secuta est vt mecum viueret de cura pro mortuis If the soules of the dead were present at the affaires of the liuing my deuoute mother would neuer a night be from me who when she liued followed me by sea and land to haue my company and to liue with me Ergo the saints departed are not present with vs when they would THE FOVRTH QVESTION CONCERning the reliques of Saints THis question hath 4 partes 1 Whether the reliques of saintes are to bee worshipped 2 Of the translation of reliques 3 Of the keeping and preseruing of reliques 4. Of the miracles wrought at the tombes and reliques of Martyres THE FIRST PART CONCERNING the worshipping of Reliques The Papists THe reliques of saintes that is their bodies and bones and sepulchres where error 31 they are buried are to be adored and reuerenced Trident. concil sess 25. though with lesse honour somewhat then the Saints themselues Bellarm. de reliquijs sanctor lib. 2. cap. 21. And not onely their bodies say they are worthie of due reuerence but other monuments of theirs as S. Peters chaire at Rome Rom. 16. vers 16. the prison wherein S. Paul was kept in Malta Rhemist Act. 28.1 the chaine that S. Paul was bound with at Rome Act. 27.4 the stone that hit Saint Stephen vpon the elbowe now to bee seene at Ancona in Italy Act. 7. sect 6. Ans. As for S. Peters chaire and S. Pauls chaine they are neither able to shew that Peter sate in such a chaire or that it is the very chaine which they shewe wherewith Paul was bound Concerning the prison house at Malta they shew that which neuer was Paul was a prisoner but not in prison there that of the stone that smote Stephen vpon the elbow is a meere fable See Fulk vpon that place Argum. 2. Iosias when he caused the bones of other dead to be burned yet he commanded them to let the Prophets bones alone Bellarm. cap. 3. The disciples of Iohn came and buried his bodie an example of duetie
worshipped their images as Gods But so doe not they they make no account of them as they affirme for their matter or forme but for that relation they haue to the things whose images they are Rhemist Philipp 2. sect 2. Ans. First the Iewes also in their golden Calfe had a relation to that God that brought them out of the land of Egypt Exod. 32.4.5 The like relation had Ieroboam in setting vp of his Calues 1. King 12.28 for they were not so mad as to thinke that a Calfe brought them out of Egypt And it appeareth yet more plainly for Exod. 32.5 Aaron sayth To morowe shall be the Lords holy day the word is Iehouah which name the Iewes only ascribed vnto God So Iudg. 17.3 Micah his mother sayth that she had consecrated the shekles of siluer to the Lord Iehouah to make a molten Image wherefore in their Images they had relation to God and yet were they reproued for their idolatrie The like relation the Gentiles also had in their Idols as Augustine witnesseth Non ego illum lapidem colo c. adoro quem video sed seruio ei quem non video Quis est ille Numen quoddam inuisibile quod praesidet illi simulachro I doe not worship that carued stone or Image I reuerence that I see but I serue or worship that I see not that is a certaine diuine spirit which is president in that image Wherefore popish idolatrie can no more be excused by this shift of reference or relation then either the Iewes or Gentiles that pretended the same colour 2 It may be proued by the practise of the popish Church in England that simply without any such relation or signification they commanded Images to be worshipped Thomas Man Martyr troubled because he beleeued not in the Crucifixe Robert Raue of Dorney molested because he sayd that an Image grauen with mans hand is neither God nor our Ladie but made for a remembrance of Saints nor wee ought to worship any thing but God and our Ladie and not images of Saints which are but stockes and stones Mistresse Alice Dolie brought into trouble for saying We should not worship that thing that hath eares and eyes and can neither see nor heare These good men and women we see were persecuted in those daies for denying worship to Images as they were Images So then the popish doctrine was as it appeareth that Images were simply to be worshipped Argum. 2. Apocalyps 9.20 Worshippers of Idols of siluer and gold are there condemned which can be no other but the Papists for that prophecie is to be fulfilled in the latter times towards the end of the world after the opening of the seuenth seale and blowing of the sixt trumpet But there is no knowne nation in the world nor hath not been many a day that worshippe Images but the popish Synagogue Argum. 3. Man is the image of God and yet is not worshipped how much lesse ought we to worship carued images which are but made with mens hāds As Augustine saith Opera hominum non colenda meliores sunt artifices The handie workes of men are not to be worshipped the workmen themselues are better and yet not worshipped What foule idolatrie is this to preferre the workes of mens hands before the worke and image of God to despise men and haue in so great regard dead stockes and stones Argum. 4. Augustine sayth Noui multos esse sepulchrorum picturarum adoratores I know there are many which worship sepulchres and pictures Of these he warneth men to take heed Noli consectari turbas imperitorum Followe not such vnlearned and vnskilful multitudes Bellarmine answereth that Augustine wrote thus when he was a young man and not fully conuerted cap. 16. A sillie shift yet we will vouchsafe an answere though it be worthie of none Let vs heare what Augustine thought when he was old and stayed in iudgement Iam verò artifex melior est eis quem te tamen puderet adorare melior tu quamuis ea non feceris quoniam quae illa non possunt facis melior bestia The workman is better then the image who gaue fashion and shape vnto it yet thou wouldest be ashamed to worship him thou thy selfe art better for thou canst doe many things which that cannot nay a bruite beast that heareth and seeth is better By this we may see what Augustine thought of worshipping of Images THE FOVRTH ARTICLE WHAT MANNER OF worship is to be giuen to Images The Papists BEllarmine who is the mouth of the rest setteth downe these two positions First that Images though they are not properly to be worshipped with diuine error 41 honour neither is it safe so to teach in the hearing of the people yet improperly they may haue the same worship which properly belongeth to the Saint whose image it is Secondly there is a religious worship properly due vnto images as they are considered in themselues non solum vt vicem gerunt exemplaris and not onely as they represent another thing Bellarm. de imaginib sanctor lib. 2. cap. 21.23 The Protestants WE haue shewed before that Images ought not to be worshipped at all and that all religious worship is due onely vnto God wherefore to vs this question is superfluous with what religious worship Images are to be adored for no religious worship at all is due vnto them yet let vs vouchsafe the while to see the contradictions that are amongst them and the absurdities that they are driuen vnto 1 Our Rhemists confesse that Images are not at all to be worshipped with any diuine honour Act. 17. sect 5. But it was decreed in the idolatrous Councel of Nice the second and maintained by Thomas Aquinas Bonauentur Caietanus and other papists that the image of God is to bee worshipped with the same worship that is due vnto God And Bellarmine commeth not much short of them that sayth improprie improperly Images may haue the same worship as the Kings ambassadour improperly is honoured as the King I pray you how farre are these men from making their Images Gods for they say they are the Lords deputies and Vicegerents as the ambassadour is for the King Againe the Rhemists affirme that the Images of Christ are not to be honoured or accounted of but for the respect and relation they haue to our Sauiour Annot. Philipp 2.2 So the Tridentine Councel determineth Sess. 25. Honos qui eis debetur refertur ad prototypa quae illae repraesentant The honor due vnto them is to be referred vnto those things which they represent But Bellarmine teacheth cleane contrarie that they haue not onely a respectiue honour as representing other things but properly and in themselues considered are to be worshipped We may see by this how handsomely they agree together 2. Let vs see their absurdities First they hold that all images are not to be worshipped alike for they make 3. degrees of religious worship the