argument against you That day wherein the Apostles did ordaine that Christians should weekely meete together to exercise themselues in hearing the word preached receiuing the Sacrament and giuing of Almes that same day did the Apostles ordain to be the Sabbath of Christians but the Apostle did ordaine that Christians should weekly assemble themselues vpon the first day of the weeke for the purposes before mentioned therefore the Apostle did ordaine the first day of the weeke to be the Christians Sabbath Pap. I denie the Maior for that being graunted if the Apostles did appoint moe daies in a wéeke than one for Christians to assemble themselues for the like Christian exercises by the same argument you a Non sequitur Looke the answere may likewise prooue two Sabbaths in one wéek and no doubt those Christians who liued together in the fellowship of the Apostles sold their possessions and had all thinges common b That is not their intent Act. 2.45 to the intent that they might be wholy employed in the seruice of God had moe dayes than one in a wéeke appointed for that purpose Your Minor proposition also which is that the Apostle did ordaine that Christians should assemble thēselues vpon the first day of the wéeke c. is false not warranted by either of the places of scripture by you alleaged In the 20. of the Acts the first day of the wéeke is not prescribed vnto Christians as a day whereon they ought to assemble themselues for the seruice of God but there only mentiō is made that the Disciples were assembled on the first day of the wéeke to break bread and that Paul intending to depart on the morrow continued preaching till midnight Let vs c Admit what you will yet the first of the weeke is the ordinarie appointed day admit that Saint Paul was to depart on the Tuesday and that the Christians were assembled on the Monday to breake bread and to heare Paul preach before his departure might not I in this case make as stronge an argument to prooue Monday to be the Christians Sabbath as yours is for the Sunday In the 16. Chapter of Saint Pauls 1. Epistle vnto the Corinths the Apostle doth prescribe the first day of the wéeke vnto the Corinths as a day whereon they ought to lay aside for the poore as their deuotion shall serue it is not preaching prayer or administration of Sacraments that is in this place enioyned but it is a laying aside for the poore Why doth the Apostle enioyne this contribution for the poore to be made at that time the answere followeth in the text That there be no gatherings when I come Why would the Apostle haue no gatherings when he came no doubt because hée would not haue such spirituall exercises as he determined to bestow amonge them at his returne vnto them d Then this day was not onely for collections but for spirituall exercises hindered or impeached by such collections if this were the meaning of the Apostle then is it not like that he would appoint the Sabbath for the making of such collections which is wholy e Not wholy so as no time should be spared for collections to be employed in such spirituall exercises as hée meant to vse amonge them at his returne and therefore this place would better serue a wrangler to prooue that the first day of the wéek was not appointed to be the christians Sabbath then it will serue you to the contrarie Pro. Out of this place it may be gathered that the Christians vpon the first day of the weeke did weekely assemble together for there is no time so fit for collections as generall assemblies and a weekely assembly vpon that day doth manifestly proue it to be the Sabbath Pap. You can wring no generall assemblies out of that place for the text saith Let euerie one put apart by himselfe and lay vp which argueth rather f Neither doe we imagine that all saw what euerie man gaue or tooke it from him but he himselfe layd it vp as the rest did in the cōmon purse else Paul must either gather it or tarry the gathering of it when hee came a priuate laying vp at home than a contribution in an assembly as your marginall note in the English Bible interpreteth for how can a man bée sayd to lay vp that which he doth deliuer to another in such a contribution Pro. It appeareth in the first of the Reuelation that in Saint Iohns time the first day of the weeke was called the Lords day which is as much as if hee had called it the Christians Sabbath Pap. You shall find in that Chapter that Saint Iohn was in the spirit on the Lords day whereupon you may conclude that in Saint Iohns time one day of the wéeke was called the Lords day which we doe graunt and more than that that the first day of the wéeke was then called the Lords day which would haue put you to your shifts to haue prooued out of the word yet haue you gained nothing for what consequent is this the first day of the wéeke was of the Apostles called the Lords day therefore the Iewes Sabbath is to be abolished and the first day of the wéeke is to be obserued for the Sabbath of Christians might not the first day of the wéeke be called the Lords day in regard of Christs resurrection and yet the Iewes Sabbath remaine or be abolished as other of their ceremonies were without substituting another Sabbath in place thereof Or will you rather reason thus Saint Iohn could be in the spirit but on the christians Sabbath only Ergo the first day of the wéeke is the Sabbath of christians if this be your argument you doe but clauum clauo pellere for when you shall haue prooued your antecedent by the word then will I graunt the consequent and as easily may you prooue the one as the other but let it be admitted that you can prooue by scripture that the Christians were enioyned by the Apostles to assemble themselues wéekely vpon the Sunday to ioyne together in prayer hearing the word preached yet what word haue you to prooue that g Neither doe we say neither can you proue it is all bodily labour is vnlawfull vpon that day they might well assemble in prayer vpon that day and heare 2. or 3. sermons and yet spare some time to bestowe vpon their labours and the commaundement forbiddeth labor on the seuenth day and not h The first day is now become the seuenth on the first day of the wéeke Thus you may sée while you do nodum in scirpo quaerere by séeking to prooue that by scripture which the Church doth hold by tradition how you are driuen to wrest the scripture and how weake and ridiculous your arguments be If the obseruation of the feast of Easter and other festiuall dayes prayer for the dead or the Sacrifice of the Masse had found the same entertainment
eminent day and chosen from amonge the other dayes of the weeke for the speciall seruice of the Lord so was it celebrated as an eminent day and so still kept in fresh memorie in the Churches of Asia now that this day was the first day of the weeke and no other it will bee easie to shew without shifts not onely because no other day was euer permanently kept holy but also because we may trace the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Dominica applied to this day as it were a Hare in the snow issuing out of this place of the Reuelation into all the Churches of Christendome Yea but saith your Papist Might not the first day of the wéeke be called the Lords day in regard of Christs Resurrection I say no for then it had been called the Rising day or the Resurrection day as the like dayes be namely Ascension Circumcision c. For to call it the Lords day in regard of Christs Resurrection is vtterly insensible When he demaundeth further Whether the Iewes Sabbath might not remaine or be abolished as other Ceremonies were Col. 2.16.16 without substituting another Sabbath in place thereof I answere that the Iewes Sabbath is taken away by Saint Paul so farre forth as it was ceremoniall but the morall parts thereof namely that one day in a weeke should be layd apart for spirituall meditations and exercises Exod. 23.12 and for the recreation of seruants and dum creatures was to be kept still inuiolable without any such substitution as he dreames of and so his other wranglements about bodily labour and resting the seuenth day not the first day of the weeke are cleane dasht Mat. 12.5.11 Mark 2.27 3.4 Luk. 13.14 c. Ioh. 5.8 c. 9.6.7.14 Iren. lib. 4. ca. 19. howbeit that which was the first day of the weeke is now become the seuenth day and bodily labour was neuer altogether vnlawfull no not in time of the lawe as appeareth cleerely in many places of the new Testament Now iudge you or any reasonable man else in the world whether our arguments or his answeres be weake and ridiculous as for his Tradition the more he vrgeth it the more hee confuteth himselfe and confirmeth our exposition of these three places for if the Apostles deliuered the obseruation of the Sabbath by Tradition wee may not thinke they deliuered it to some Churches and not to other some and if they deliuered it to all without exception then was it deliuered to them of Troas to the Galatians Corinthians and the Churches of Asia if to them then can it not bee denied but that these places of scripture which I haue now disputed of doe cleerely containe the practise and continuall obseruance of the Lords day as it was deliuered to these Churches by the Apostles I will not vouchsafe to answere your Papists vnpowdered talke of Iohn Caluin that worthy seruant of God and wire-whipper of popish marchants out of the house of God onely this I will say that if Iohn Caluin were not a greater mote in his eie then Popish traditions are in ours he would haue spared this idle vagarie The next point is eating blood Act. 15 2â—.29 which was forbidden in the first generall Councell the circumstance whereof you haue well set downe howbeit your Papist still calls for Scripture whereby it may be shewed him that after the decree made at Ierusalem by the Apostles it was lawfull for Christians to eate blood which hee would neuer doe if hee were learned and had read the Epistles of Saint Paul with any diligence wherefore you may stoppe his mouth for this point out of these places which I haue here quoted 1. Rom. 14.2 3 6 14 20 c. 1. Cor. 10.29 Coloss 2.16 Timothie 4.4 Tit. 1.15 Now followeth the third poynt which hangs vpon Tradition and not vpon Scripture Leui. 28. 20 Deut. 25.5 namely the forbidding of marriage within degrees of affinitie as if Leuiticus were no scripture yea but may he say Deuteronomy is scripture too as well as Leuiticus yet the brother is there commanded to raise vp seede to his brother which in Leuiticus is made vnlawfull now tell vs why you receiue the one and refuse the other here must you call for the helpe of Tradition or els lie in the dust Alas good Papist you are much deceiued for the law of Leuiticus is morall and naturally ingraffed in the hearts of all nations as appeareth euidently in the conclusion of this law in Leuiticus from the foure and twentieth verse to the end of the eighteenth Chapter for if this Law had beene peculiar for the Iewes there is no reason why the Canaaniticall nations should bee punished so seuerely as there it is described for the non obseruance of the same as for the other law of Deuteronomy it is an exception or dispensation in that particular case for the common weale of the Iewes wherein God had a speciall care of the first borne and his inheritance againe being repugnant to nature and to the explication thereof twice told in Leuiticus Cap. 18.16 cap. 20.21 it might not continue longer vnrepealed Touching the example of the incestuous Corinthian which you propound it will sticke better to your Papists ribbes then he is aware of for how can that fornication be vnheard of among the Gentiles which a man committeth with such a one as hee may lawfully marrie if then this Corinthian might lawfully marry his mother in law verily single copulation with her could not be so abominable as that the very Gentiles could not abide it should be once named amongst them and if single copulation of the mother and sonne in law was so much abhorred then was it vnlawfull they should marrie and so the law of God in Leuiticus is confirmed and so indeed your Papist gently confesseth in these words the law of the Corinths would permit no such mariage as may be gathered out of the text c. The fourth poynt followeth namely that it cannot bee shewed by scripture thas it is a greater offence in a Christian to haue many wiues then it was in Dauid howbeit we read in Scripture that God gaue him his masters wiues into his bosome 2. Sam. 12.8 Rom. 4.15 Nulla lege prohibebatur August contr Faust lib. 22. cap. 47. Matth. 19.4 c. 1. Cor. 7.2 c. Eph. 5.31 if there be no transgression where there is no law as Paul saith then verily Polygamy being neither cleerely forbidden by any law nor reprehended by any Prophet from the beginning of the world to the comming of Christ it must follow that it was eyther no transgression at all in the fathers or a farre lesse transgression then it is in Christians whom Christ Iesus himselfe and the holy Apostle Saint Paul hath so manifestly instructed that nothing can be more euident Now touching the fift and last point of punishing theft with death it is confessed by your Papist that
than one his answere hath no colour or shewe of reason for though euerie day in the weeke had beene so appointed yet had they not beene all Sabbaths vnlesse they had weekely continued as the first day did from weeke to weeke till Saint Iohns banishment at what time still wee finde that day kept holy and dedicated to the Lord as appeareth by the name which the holy Ghost giueth it in the Reuelation Cap. 1.13 Againe where he saith That the first Christians sold their possessions to the intent they might wholy bestow themselues vpon the seruice of God It would be knowne by what tradition or inspiration he found that out seeing the scriptures informe vs Act. 2.45 that their intent was to supply the necessitie of their poore brethren I trow the other Iewes that were to attend dayly vpon the morning and euening houres of praier and sacrifice did not vnload themselues of their possessions moreouer this lawe and sale of possessions though it were vsed at Ierusalem yet was it not in force in Galatia and Achaia and other Churches of the Gentiles 1. Cor. 16.2 Gal. 6 6 c. which had of their owne to put aside and lay vp for the poore And touching the Minor your Papist sayth that the Troiane Christians were assembled the first day of the wéeke to breake bread but not appointed so to doe by the prescription of the Apostles belike they came together by hap hazard or by their owne appointment howbeit hee that planted the Church of Troas cannot be so forgetfull as to leaue euery man separately to himselfe and not to appoint when they should assemble themselues for the continuall watring of that which was planted Act. 20.7 now to note what time that was Saint Luke names the first day of the weeke otherwise there is no reason why it should bee mentioned moreouer whereas Paul and his companie came to Troas the second day of the weeke and tarried there iust seuen dayes yet no day of assembly is registred but this one onely day and yet we may not think that Paul and his companie lay idle sixe daies together and forgat the worke of their calling yea but let vs admit saith your Papist that Paul was to depart on the Tuesday and that the Christians were assembled on the Monday c. Yea marry then should we be wise men but the Disciples of Troas met not to heare Paul preach for most of them had heard him preach before sixs dayes together but to breake bread which they would haue done though Paul had not beene amongst them and therefore this supposition is cloudie and riculous Touching the place to the Corinthians your Papist saith that Saint Paul doth not prescribe the first day of the week for prayer preaching and administration of Sacraments but for a laying aside for the poore according to euery mans deuotion and I graunt all this to bee true for those holy exercises were inioyned the churches of Galatia and Achaia when they were first planted and so was the collection for their owne poore for this collection for the Saimes at Ierusalem was extraordinarie but that the Apostle Paul would bee so troublesome as not to content himselfe that this collection should be made as their other collections were vpon their ordinarie meeting day but to appoint another day weeke by weeke to the hinderance of their seuerall callings is vtterly incredible nay see further I pray you how your learned Papist doubleth the power of the argument which he goeth about to weaken for when he asketh why the Apostle inioyneth this collection to be made vpon that day and answereth himselfe out of the text that there be no gatherings when I come and then asketh againe why the Apostle would haue no gatherings when he came and answereth with a no doubt because he would not haue such spirituall exercises as hee determined to bestow among them hindered by such collections what doth he else but confesse that the first day of the weeke was the day that Paul purposed to keepe holy at his comming and therefore would not haue that day bestowed vpon collections when he came but before his comming otherwise if hee had meant to bestow spirituall blessings so plentifully among them vpon any other day then gatheringes made vpon that day could not hinder him Yea but if these collections were hinderances to the spirituall exercises of the Sabbath then it followeth that the first day of the week wherin Paul would haue these collections made was not appointed to be the Christians Sabbath Well wrangled but howsoeuer this extraordinarie collection inioyned by Saint Paul might hinder Saint Paul himselfe that preached at Troas till midnight nay till the dawning of the next day Rom. 15.29 and vsed to come with abundance of the blessing of the Gospell of Christ yet their owne ordinarie ministerie being farre lesse plentifull could not be so easily hindered Apol. 2. and therefore wee read in Iustine Martyr that in his time beside preaching and administring the Sacraments collections were made vpon this verie day in Christian Churches One wrangle more remaineth against the force of this place to the Corinths namely that no generall assembly can be wrung out of it because the text saith Let euerie one put apart by himselfe and lay vp which argueth a priuat laying vp at home for a man cannot be sayd to lay vp that which he deliuereth to another Well wrangled againe but what call you this a gathering and is this kinde of laying vp at euerie mans owne home a sufficient dispatch of all gathering so as there should be no gathering at all when the Apostle should come himselfe amongst them Wherefore little wringing will serue to prooue that this laying vp is not meant of euerie mans owne purse or cupbord at home which might be done any other day as well as the first of the weeke but of some publique Chest or Boxe prouided for euerie mans free beneficence as euerie particular man himselfe found himselfe able and willing Now followeth the place of the Reuelation where Saint Iohn saith that he was in the spirite on the Lords day or Cap. 1.10 Psa 74.16 as the Rhems Testament translates it the Dommicall day Out of which we learne first that albeit all the dayes of the weeke are the Lords yet this day is so called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as being a more excellent or eminent day than the rest and so consequently a day consecrated to the seruice of the Lord. Secondly we learne that this day was famously knowne by the name of Lords day or Dominicall day in the Churches of Asia Reuel 1.4 to whome Saint Iohn dedicated his Reuelation for it had been to no purpose for him to tell them that hee was in the spirite on the Lords day if they knew not what day that was and how it was seuered by that name from the rest of the weeke and therefore as it was an
content to loose the Scripture so you may keepe your Traditions was sometimes made of the Apocalypse of S. Iohn and of other pieces of scripture but since the one was decided by a generall Councell and both is nowe receiued and beleeued of the vniuersal Church there remaineth no more doubt in the one than in the other the tradition leading vs to the trueth of them both Thus it appeareth as cleare as the Sunne that the Apostles left many thinges which are not contained in their writings by Tradition Secondly that many traditions left by the Apostles are now abolished Thirdly that that doctrine which is practised beleeued through the vniuersall Church hauing no ground out of the writings of the Apostles and which hath béene vniuersally practised from age to age and from Bishop to Bishop is a Tradition of the Apostles and to be followed and imbraced and consequently that all the doctrine of the Catholickes which is not warranted by Scripture is f That is to say vpon a fancy of your owne grounded vpon the Traditions of the Apostles and therefore to g How long till it please you to disaâ—ull them be followed and imbraced The Answere HEere your Papist takes paines to shew vs another point of his learning namely why some Traditions bee kept and some be out of date but very simply in my opinion for antiquity appointing both wednesdaies and frydaies to be fasted let him yeeld me any colour of reason or circumstance of times or states why the Church should reiect the one and obserue the other they were both in force with like authoritie with like consent in omnibus orbis terrarum regionibus in all the countries of the world Haeres â—5 as saith Epiphanius they were agreeable in all pointes to Augustines rule which is so certaine and direct saith he that it cannot misleade vs yet for all this wednesday fast must be packing and fryday onely must continue what Church I beseech you did this and when and vpon what graue consideration was it done it is not enough for him to talke his pleasure flyingly of the communitie of all things no where practised but at Ierusalem of the office of widowes still in force where it may be had prohibition of blood rerepealed by Saint Paul and such like but hee should shew vs what eare-marke one Tradition hath more then another why it may or should be cancelled and touching not fasting vpon Sundayes in Lent or any time else in the yeere it was generally obserued in the Catholike Church as the same Epiphanius witnesseth In compend doctr eccles haeres 70. epist ad Phil. lib. de coronae militis who telleth vs also in another place out of the Apostles Constitutions that he is accursed of God that fasteth vpon Sunday qui affligit animaÌ„ suam in Dominica maledictus est Deo Ignatius calleth theÌ„ that fast vpoÌ„ Sunday 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Christicides Christ killers Wherevnto Tertullian accordeth saying Epiph. 75. die Dominico ieiunium nefas ducimus wee count it a haynous sinne to faste on the Lords day yet notwithstanding the Romanists haue found some graue consideration or other to disanull it and to agree rather in that point with Aerius and Eustathius too whereof the one was an hereticke Socrates hist eccles lib. 2. cap. 33. whatsoeuer the other was apud Aerianos studium est vt in die Dominica ieiunent Eustathius dominicis diebus ieiunandum docuit the Aerians are carefull to fast on the Lords day Eustathius taught that men ought to fast on the Lords dayes And therefore your Papist I trow will hereafter find it best for him not to vpbraid vs any more with Aerius yea but when Traditions were alledged against the old heretikes neuer any of them denied the authoritie of some because other some were not obserued a great piece of matters we may not do it because heretickes did it not but can he shew vs what hereticke euer affirmed that of one bunch or heape of Traditions some may be taken and some refused and beeing all birds of a feather some may flie away quite and the rest may in no case flie after but flutter still in their nest I wis Augustines rule will not helpe in this case for fasting vpon wednesdayes and not fasting vpon Sundayes was as generally obserued euery where as any other Tradition that can be named nay what Tradition can be more strongly fenced than that of the age of Christ in Irenaeus Iren. lib. 2. cap. 39. 40 Euangelium omnes Seniores testantur qui in Asia apud Iohannem discipulum Domini conuenerunt idipsum tradidisse eis Iohannem permansit autem cum eis vsque ad Traiani tempora quidam autem eorum non solum Iohannem sed alios Apostolos viderunt haec eadeÌ„ ab ipsis audierunt testantur de huiusmodi relatione quibus magis oportet credi ne his talibus an Ptolomaeo qui Apostolos nunquam vidit c. The Gospell and all the Elders which were with Iohn the disciple of the Lord doe testifie that Iohn himselfe did deliuer it vnto them and hee taried with them til the time of Traiane now some of them sawe not onely Iohn but other disciples also and heard the same things of theÌ„ testifie of such a report whoÌ„ then ought we to beleeue whether such men as these or Ptolomey who neuer sawe the Apostles Ioh 6.57 Here is scripture out of S. Iohns Gospell and Tradition from Iohns mouth and others of his fellow Apostles for the exposition of the same here bee all the Elders of Asia that heard it with their owne eares and liued to the dayes of Irenaeus that writes it and yet for all this I thinke the church of Rome will as soone beleeue Ptolomey the hereticke as this Tradition The like may be sayd of the celebration of the feast of Easter in the churches of Asia where the Tradition from Saint Iohn and Saint Philip the Apostles to Polycarp and so forward was fresh in memorie obserued by many Bishops and Martyrs Euseb libr. 5. cap. 22. and confidently and resolutely auouched by Polycrates then angell of Ephesus and a great multitude of Bishops gathered together in Councell vnder their hands yet Victor the Pope made no account of it and within a while after Victors death most men think it was condemned for heresie Now I pray you tell vs what the Churches of Asia should doe in this case shall they receiue and reuerence this Tradition still as left them by their Pastors for their spirituall benefite what shall they receiue and reuerence heresy crossing the decision of a generall Councell so saith your Papist if I vnderstand him yet I doubt whether Bede or Pope Gregory or Austine the Monke will make good his saying nay himselfe within three or foure lines after eats his word againe for the contrary definition saith hee was receiued and beleeued of the vniuersall Church and
eternall but to helpe out our Protestant let him take these places out of Austine against purgatorie Hypognost lib. 5. Primum locum fides Catholicocorum diuina authoritate credit regnum esse caelorum secundum Gehennam vbi omnis Apostata vel à fide Christi alienus aeterna supplicia experietur tertium penitus ignoramus imo nec esse in scripturis sanctis inueniemus The first place the Catholicke faith doth by the authoritie of God beleeue to be the kingdome of heauen the second to be hell where euery Apostota and alien from the faith of Christ shall be punished euerlastingly a third place we knew not at all neither shall we find in the holy scriptures that there is any such Againe In Ioh. tract 49. Habent omnes animae cum de seculo exierint diuersas receptiones suas habent gaudium bom mali tormenta sed cum facta fuerit resurrectio bonorum gaudium amplius erit malorum tormenta grauiora quando cum corpore torquebuntur All soules after they goe out of the world haue diuers rewardes the good haue ioy and the bad torments but when the resurrection shall come the ioy of the good shall bee greater and the torments of the bad more grieuous when they shall be tormented with their bodies Againe In Psal 32. Si texit peccata noluit aduertere si noluit aduertere noluit animaduertere si noluit animaduertere noluit punire noluit agnoscere maluit ignoscere If we haue hid our sinnes he would not see them if he would not see them he would not iudge them if he would not iudge he would not punish he would not acknowledge he had rather pardon them Againe Ad Hesick epist 80. In quo quemque inuenerit suus nouissimus dies in hoc eum comprehendet mundi nouissimus dies quoniam qualis in die isto quisque moritur talis in die illo iudicabitur In Psal 25. In what state any mans last day findeth him in the same shall the last day of the world take him because as a man dieth in this so shall he bee in that day adiudged And againe Valeat mihiad perfectionem liberationis tantum praetium sanguinis Domini mei So great a price of my Lords blood is sufficient for my perfect deliuerance Sermon 57. Adde to these if you will out of the Sermons Ad fratres in Heremo Scitole quod cum anima á corpore euellitur statim aut in Paradiso pro meritis bonis collocatur aut certe pro peccatis in inferni Tartara praecipitatur Know this that so soone as the soule is taken out of the bodie by and by it is either placed in Paradice for good deserts or else certainly cast headlong into hell for sinnes Thus haue I shewed where Austine doth denie purgatorie and though our Papist list not to heare of that side yet let me shew him likewise where Austine doubteth of purgatorie Encharid cap. 69. Tale aliquid post hanc vitam fieri incredibile non est vtrum ita sit quaeri potest That some such thing is done after this life it is not incredible and whether it be so done it is a question Ad dulcit quaest 1. lib. de fide oper cap. 16. de ciuit dei lib. 21.26 Ibid. cap. 27. Againe Siue in hac vita tantum homines ista patiuntur siue etiam post hanc vitā talia quaedam iudicia subsequuntur non abhorret quantum arbitror aratione veritatis iste intellectus huius sententiae Whether men suffer these things onely in this life or whether after this life some such iudgements follow this vnderstanding of this sentence is not without some shew of trueth as I suppose Againe Siue ibi tantum siue hic ibi siue ideò hic vt non ibi saecularia quamuis à damnatione ventalia concremantem ignem transitoriae tribulationis inueniant non redarguo quia forfitan verum est Whether things committed in this world though veniall in respect of damnation doe find a transitorie fire of tribulation here onely or here and there or therfore here because not there I seeke not to conuince because perhaps it is true And againe Quis sit iste modus quae sint ista peccata quae ita impediunt peruentionem ad regnum Dei vt tamen sanctorum amicorum meritis impetrent indulgentiam difficilimū est inuenire periculosissimum definire ego certè vsque ad hoc tempus cum inde satagerem ad eorum indagationē peruenire non potui What is this manner or what be those sins which so hinder the comming to the kingdome of heauen that yet the merite of holy friends may obteine pardon for them it is very hard to find and very perillous to determine surely though I haue laboured earnestly to search yet can I not find it out vntill this time These places be sufficient to shew Austines wauering in the matter of purgatorie and if it were not for shame I would shew also where he affirmeth it because our Papist hath shewed it so sillily yea but it were a hard matter to perswade any man to credite you herein then let him credite his owne eyes let him looke vpon the places and consider of them and they I trow will be sufficient to persuade so much as you say not so I hope for Austine was a great learned man before his conuersion and after his conuersion the most learned doctor and subtilest disputer that euer flourished in the Church what then altering in iudgement is an argument of increase in learning and our Papist himselfe told vs a while agoe that to consist in errour is brutish if therefore Austine say one thing at one time and afterward vpon better triall and trauell say otherwise at another I doe not see how it can hinder his estimation much lesse proue him to haue neither learning wit nor regard of his reputation as our Papist here without either learning or wit hath concluded What if a man set downe an errour or many errours in his young dayes doubt of them in his middle age and write the cleane contrary when he is of greater yeres and experience shall he therefore be thought to haue neither learning nor wit nor regard of his reputation No friend papist it would not hurt your reputation a whit to deny that in a new booke which you affirme in this and to affirme that which you denie here and to doubt of that whereof here you seeme to be resolute remember your owne conclusion to erre is incident to mans frailtie but to persist in error is brutish Touching the quickenesse and acutenesse of Austine in disputing I easily confesse it for hee was a learned doctor and a most subtile disputer indeed yet a quicke wit doth soonest fall into contradiction and the heat of a quick disputer carieth him sometimes as our papist telleth vs out of Erasmus De Genes ad
not condemne for such a seede of vices hath growne by custome in all Churches that now wee haue no easie recourse to a full remedie Againe Can 1. Fratrum nostrorum vel imperitiam vel simplicitatem vel etiam presumptionem damnare non possumus nec per omnes ecclesias quae sunt iam pridem male gesta corrigere Wee cannot condemne either the vnskilfulnesse or simplicitie or if ye will presumption of our brethren nor correct all the thinges that haue beene of late badly done in all Churches Againe Quod prauae consuetudinis vitio ab Hispaniensibus Episcopis factum est ita reprehendimus vt propter numerum corrigendorū Innocen prim Epist 24 ad S nod Tolet cap. 1. ea quae quo quo modo facta sunt non in dubium vocemus sed Dei potius iuditio dimittamus That which was done by the Bishops of Spaine through the corruption of euill custome wee so reprooue that because of the number of them that bee to be corrected wee call not in question the thinges that were disorderly done but leaue them to the iudgement of God And againe Mens potentiae auida Leo primus ad Anathol Constant Epist 51 nec abstinere nouit à vetitis nec gaudere concessis dum inordinato prauoque progressu impunitarum transgressionum augentur excessus crebrescunt culpae quae toleratae sunt studio fidei reparandae amore concordiae A minde that is greedie of aduancement knoweth neither how to abstaine from things forbidden nor how to vse well things that are graunted whilest excesses are increased and faults multiplyed thorough the inordinate and wicked proceding of transgressions vnpunished which were tolerated of a desire of repayring the faith and loue of concord Thus may you see that good men and worthy Fathers of Gods Church by bearing with small matters for the common peace and welfare of the Church did so multiply absurdities that in the end they might cast their caps at them sooner than represse them withall you may see what Fathers Poperie is an adherent vnto namely such as the Valentine Councell Pope Innocent and Leo speake of as for the former ages of the Church Bishop Iewell in the defence of the Apologie Challenge hath so vncased the face of Antichrist that hid it selfe vnder the visard of Fathers and Counsels that none of the Popes Adherents euer went about to couer it with any answere Moreouer whereas this fellow relies so much vpon antiquitie as if the ancient Fathers were flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones why doth not hee or some of his idle companions take Master Foxes booke in hand where the substance of all antiquitie is orderly set downe Apoc. 17.5.6 and the whole glorie and power of his Babilon that is drunken with the blood of Saints and Martyrs vtterly defaced I haue heard that there is an answere abroad called The hunting of the Fox but such lustie vnmaried Priests as bee so well fedde and fatted here in England are fitter to haunt I wote what than to hunt such a Fox as hee is to any great purpose it may well be nibled at like a great chase among mice but I perswaded that Papist liues not at this day that either hath will or can afford it a full answere But to returne to this fellow that prates so of Fathers and Counsels as though they were al in his bosome let it be obserued how cunningly hee takes that for graunted which neither hee nor any man else liuing is able to iustifie let vs admit saith he that the ancient Fathers and Doctors with their adherents did eclipse the cleere light of the Gospel which shined in the first 300. hundred yeeres Againe how can wee imagine that the Church of Christ for the space of 1300. yeres lay hidden in so secret a corner that none of the Doctors could heare of it Againe how it can bee that in all that time no generall Counsell should haue intelligence of the being of the Church that professed Christianitie in so different a manner And againe if any of the Doctors or any generall Councell had heard of them they had been put in the Catalogue of heretickes and their opinions condemned all this silly Sophistrie called petitio principij for we neither will nor doe nor euer did graunt that the Fathers eclipsed the light of the Gospell or that the Church in their time lay hidden in secret corners or that no generall Councell had intelligence of it these thinges our Pettyfogging-Papist is faine to beg and to take as granted because he can no more proue any one of them than he can eat a load of logges No no the Fathers were members of Gods Church and so were and are wee as for Poperie what is it else but a certaine scumme and froth that seethes out of the liquor of the ancient Fathers which the Scripture hath taught vs to cast into the fire And here let me set you downe Doctor Whitakers words Answere to Reinolds cap. 6. that such blind Sophisters as haue not seene them in his Booke may see them here and bee ashamed the mysterie of iniquitie saith he which in Papistrie is fully finished began to worke in the Apostles age and so continued still forward in the Fathers dayes vntill it came to his height and perfection in the Kingdome of Popery they slipt a little you are fallen headlong into the pit they were ouerseen through infirmitie you are blinde of malice they scattered some darnell in the Lords field you haue plucked vp by the roots the good corne they suffered losse of this building being not agreeable with the foundation yet are saued you ouerthrow the foundation it selfe and therefore cannot in this opinion be saued Againe the ancient Fathers holding the ground and foundation of Doctrine did oftentimes build thereon stubble and straw partly by some superstitious opinions which themselues conceiued of such inuentions and partly by the sway violence of custome wherby they were caried to a liking of those things which they saw commended and practised by others yet God forbid that because of some errours which they held wee should raze their names out of the Kalender of Gods Saints or thinke otherwise than reuerently of them Againe though they erred yet were they notwithstanding good men and holy Fathers were not the Apostles holy men when they dreamed of an earthly Kingdome in this world were they void of holynesse when they beleeued that the Gospell was to bee preached to the Iewes onely Many holy Fathers were infected with the errour of the Chiliasts who notwithstanding are worthily accounted Saints of God Cyprian and many godly Bishops with him erred about the baptisme ministred by heretickes yet lost they not for all that the opinion and name of holy Fathers c. Againe the case of the Galatians is the same with yours for as they thought to be iustified by the workes of the law so doe you