their aduetsaries it is well knowne that Master Charke and the ministers of the Church are none such neither haue they anie such authoritie It remaineth then that he accounteth the Prince her councell magistrates and ministers of Iustice his aduersaries who indeede haue good cause so to be not onelie in respect of their heresyes but also in regard of their manifolde and almoste infinite practises of treason against the Prince and realme for which some of them haue suffered moste iustlie and not for offering of disputation as this traiterous heretike euerie where moste slaunderouslie doth avowe But nowe for their partes he saith they offere the best surest and easiest meanes that can be deuised or that haue bene vsed in Gods Churches for triall and they are manie in number The first is the bookes of Scripture receiued vpon the credit of the auncient Church of which we are content saith he to accept for canonicall and allowe all those and none other which antiquitie in Christendome hath agreed vpon But this is false for to omit that they receiue for canonicall such as the Church of God before Christ neuer receiued they receiue also such as the greatest and best antiquitie in Christendome receiued not as the Church in Origens time witnesse Eusebius more then the Church of Rome receiued in Saint Ieromes witnesse Ierome himselfe prologo Galeato and Ruffinus in Expossymb more then the Councell of Laodicea did receiue for canonicall as is manifest by the 59. canon The second way of trial is the expresse plaine words of Scripture wherein they must needs be farre superior for what one expresse plaine text haue they saith he in anie one point or article against vs which we doe not acknowledge liberallie as they doe and as the wordes doe lie yes we haue manie but a fewe shal serue for example God saith Exod. 20. Thou shalt not make to thy selse anie grauen image c. thou shalt not fall down to thē nor worship them Againe Matt. 4. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onelie shalt thou serue Which are moste plaine expresse and manifest against worshipping of Images and other creatures in anie vse of Religion Christ saith drinke ye all of this they be expresse and manifest wordes against the popish sacriledge of the cuppe The 14. to the Corinthians the first Epistle is expresse and plaine against publike praiers homilies lessons in a straunge vnknowne tongue 1. Tim. 4. in expresse and plaine wordes the spirite pronunceth the forbidding of marriage and meates to be the doctrine of deuilles And Heb. 13. Mariage is honourable in all men And 1. Tim. 3. Tit. 1. a Bishop Elder or Deacon must be the husband of one wife beside a great number more But the papists saith our answerer haue infinit texts against vs which we cannot admit without glosses and fond interpretations of our owne A bolde speach as alwaies he vseth but it shall alwaies be founde that if we doe in anie text departe from the grammaticall sense there is necessarie cause why as if it be a figuratiue spcach which is tried either by circumstances of the same place or by other texts of scriptures for the most parte hath the iudgement of the most auncient writers agreing with our interpretation But the most of these examples he bringeth haue nothing in shewe that the expresle wordes of scripture are with them or against vs but by their fonde false vnreasonable collections and such as they can neuer conclude in lawful true syllogismes as for example We haue it saith he for the supremacie expresselie saide to Peter that signifieth arocke vpon this rock will I builde my Church We answere that we might followe the interpretation of the most auncient and approoued fathers that the rocke here spoken of is Christ whom Peter confessed but graunting them that they could neuer euict we confesse that the Church is builded vpon the foundation of Peter the Apostle but not vpon him alone or more principallie then vpon all the Apostles who are all rockes or stones vpon whose foundation as also vpon the foundation of the Prophets the Church of Christ is builded Neither is it possible to prooue the supremacie of the Pope out of those wordes of scripture or anie other But they haue further expresselie touching the Apostles he that is great among you let him be as the younger Luk. 22. We haue no where there is none greater then other among you Neither do we holde that none ought to be greater then other among vs but that the greatest among the ministers ought to be seruant of all the rest and that none ought to exercise Dominion ouer the Lordes inheritaunce yet the primacie of order we graunt euen among the Apostles according to which Iames was president of the Councell at Ierusalem Peter the cheife Aposlle of the circumcision Paull of the gentiles all which will not serue one whit to maintaine the popish tiranny For Paul was nothing inferiour to the highest Apostles But for the reall presence they haue expreslie This is my bodie we haue no where this is the signe of my bodie Neither doe we denie the sacrament to be the bodie of Christ neither doe we affirme that it is a bare signe But that this is a figuratiue speach we haue expreslie This cuppe is the newe Testament in my blood and as expreslie the Apostle speaking of the same sacrament the rocke was Christ which prooueth that it must be vnderstoode in a sigue and after a spirituall manner and so doe al the olde Doctors interpretit as hath beene often shewed We haue expreslie saith he The bread that I will giue you is my flesh Iohn 6. they haue nowhere It is but the signe of my flesh And we confesse as much for we neuer saide that the signe of Christs flesh was crucified for vs but his verie naturall bodie which he promiseth in that text to giue for the life of the world which by faith and the spirit of God is made the spirituall foode of all the elect children of God and without eating of which none can be saued Ioh. 6. 53. But they haue expresly A man is iustified by works and not by faith onelie Iames. 2. we haue no where a man is iustified by faith alone no nor that he is iustified by faith without workes talking of workes that followe faith First we confesse the text that a man is iustified by workes As Abraham was when he offered his sonne and as Rahab was when she receiued the spies that is a man is declared to be iust in the sight of men For Abraham was iustified before God by faith before he offered his sonne whome God did not trie to enforme himselfe but to declare vnto men by the fruites of obedience that Abraham was a iust man euen so by faith the harlot Rahab perished not with the vnbeleeuers when the receiued the spies in peace but by receiuing
the scriptures of the authoritie of councels auncient fathers traditions of the Apostles and primitiue Church they binde them selues to nothing but to the present Popes authoritie and determi nation in thinges which he may choppe and chaunge at his pleasure against which they admitte neither scripture Councell Fathers nor Church For example brieflie The scripture moste plainlie forbiddeh the worshipping of Images will they giue soueraigne authoritie to the scriptures All the primitiue Church for six hundred yeares after Christ condemned the worshipping of Images euen Pope Gregorie that allowed the vse of them shall the authoritie of the primatiue Church or of Pope Gregorie in this point ouerrule them No I warrant you they will set them al to schoole and learne them a new lesson Theodoretus Bishop of Cyrus and Gelasius Bishop of Rome doe in plaine wordes affirme that the substance of bread and wine doth remaine in the Lordes supper after consecration doth either the antiquitie of these fathers or the determination of the Bishop of Rome which otherwise they affirme neuer to erre in doctrine preuaile with them against their new here sie of transsubstantiation The councells of Constantiople the first and of Chalcedon decreed that the Bishop of Constantinople should haue equall authoritie and dignitie with the Bishop of Rome The councells of Constans and Basill determined that the Councell is aboue the Pope The councels of Constantinople the sixt and Nice the second condemned the Pope for an heretike will the Papists of these daies trow you stand to the determination of these Councells you maie be assured they will not But the traditions of the Apostles they holde fast and binde them-selues vnto yea verilie as long and as much as they list What beareth a greater shew of the Apostles traditions then the Canons of the Apostles which excommunicate a Bishop priest or deacon that putteth away his wiffe vnder pretence of religion which excommunicate anie of the cleargie that is present at the communion doth not communicate except he shewe a cause whie he doth not Which admmitted him that is maimed in his eie or other partes of his bodie being otherwise worthie vnto the office of a Bishop because the maime of the bodie doth not pollute a man but the filthines of the soules These such like traditions of the Apostles how are they regarded of our Traditioners euen as much as they list and that is neuer a whit at this time and yet these men binde them selues to Councells Fathers traditions primitiue Church you see how farre Yea you see that while they raile vpon vs for appealing to onelie scriptures they themselues relie vpon the present Popes authoritie onelie Let all indifferent men therefore iudge whether it be more safe for a Christian man to bind him-selfe to the authoritie of scriptures onelie or to the Popes authoritie onelie and whether claime a priuiledge of ease they that will admitte no testimonie irrefragable but onelie the scripture or they which chattering of many other things in the end conclude vpon the Church onelie which when it commeth to triall is nothing els but the Pope onelie for if all the Church saie it and the Pope denie it it is nothing worth with them and if the Pope affirme it thoughe all the Church denie it it must stand for paiment But seeing the sense and interpretation of scripture is the cheefe matter we haue to speake of let vs consider whether Master Charke be iustlie charged by our answerer to haue abused that scripture by interpretation which is the chiefe ground of his preface and which he saith is a full and plaine rule whereby to discerne and trie the spirites namelie the text of Saint Iohn 1. Iohn 4. Euerie spirite which confesseth Iesus Christ being come in the flesh is of God and euerie spirite which confesseth not Iesus Christ being come in the flesh is not of God and this is that spirit of Antichrist c. This text Master Charke doth so expound as that it conteineth a confession not onelie of the person of Christ but also of his office for which office sake that wonderfull person of God and man Iesus Christ was ordeined and sent into the world to be a Prophet alone to teach a King alone to rule a Priest alone to sanctifie vs and to reconcile vs to his father by the obedience of faith And if any spiritte shall teach that Christ is not our onelie teacher by his Gospell but that we must admitte vnwritten beleefe and traditions from we know not whome to be of like authoritie with the written worde Secondlie if any spirite make not Christ alone our King and head to rule vs by his holie spirite but teach that a mortal and sinfull man must sit in our consciences and for hatred or gaine which is his practise binde or loose at his pleasure lastlie if anie spirite impeach the all-sufficiencie and entire vertue of Christes sacrifice offered vp once for euer and teach that themselues must enforce it from day to day by the continuance of their daylie sacrifice of the Masse offered for the quick and the deade it appeareth manifestlie that such spirits are not of God c. This interpretation of Master Charke saith the answerer conteineth manie absurdities For first the auncient fathers did expound this place as of it selfe it is moste euident against the Iewes which denied Christ to haue taken flesh also against Ebion Cerinthus and other heretikes that denied the Godhead of Christ. Note here by the aduersaries confession that some places of scripture are of them selues moste euident whereof this is one against the Iewes other heretikes that deny the godhead of Christ. And I hope you shall see it shortly as euident against the Papists that denie his offices To this interpretation of the auncient fathers we agree that whosoeuer denieth the person of Christ or any thing proper to his person is of Antichrist But none of the auncient fathers doe affirme that this text is to be vnderstood against such enemies onelie as denie the Godhead or manhoode of Christ. For Augustine and Oecumenius do interpret it against all heretikes and schismatikes which although they confesse this matter in wordes yet denie it in deedes and Oecumenius against all wicked persons which haue not the spirite of Christ mortifying their vngodlie lustes which carie not the mortification of Christ in their bodie c. Augustine also expoundeth the place against all that breake charitie Omnes negant Iesum Christum in carne venisse qui violant charitatem All they denie Iesus Christe to haue come in the flesh which doe breake or violate charitie whie so because not onelie the person that came but the end whie he came must be considered in the interpretation of this place as Saint Augustine rightlie iudgeth or els all heretikes will after a manner in tongue and wordes confesse that Iesus Christ came in the flesh But Quaeramus saith
sacrifice neither is the worde sacrifice in the Hebrew text of Daniell And therefore it is an vnlikelie place to prooue a sacrifice propitiatorie of the bodie of Christ in the Masse The prophecie of Malachie by general consent almost of all auncient fathers is expounded as I haue saide of the sacrifice of praise and thankesgiuing which is offered at al times by the faith full and especiallie in the celebration of the Lords supper But most cleerelie Instinus Martyr in his Dialogue against the Iewes speaking of the verie same text of Malachie and the sacrifices that are offered in al places by the gentiles that is the bread of thankesgiuing and the cuppe of thankesgiuing hath these wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For I my selfe doe affirme that praiers and thanksgiuing made by worthie persons are the onelie perfect and acceptable sacrifices to God For these are the onelie sacrifices that Christians haue receiued to make to be put in minde by theire drie and moist nourishment of the passion which God the sonne of God is recorded to haue suffered for them If praiers and thankesgiuing be the onely sacrifices which Christians haue receiued to offer and are the onelie perfect and acceptable sacrifices to god as Iustinus in plaine wordes affirmeth where is the vnbloodie sacrifice of the naturall bodie and blood of Christ yea of Christ him-selfe vnto god his father If praiers and thankesgiuing be the onelie pure sacrifice prophecied by Malachie then is not the naturall bodie of Christ offered in the Masse neither hath the Church anie such sacrifice And although the auncient fathers often times doe call the celebration of the Lordes supper a sacrifice yet you see by the iudgement of Iustinus how they are to be vnderstood of a spirituall sacrifice of praier and thankesgiuing for the death of Christ on the crosse and our perfecte redemption therebie which also they called an vnbloodie sacrifice sometimes as Cyrill and Nazianzen in the place by the answerer quoted but either in the same places or some other of their workes they doe euidentlie declare that they meant no sacrifice propitiatorie of the naturall bodie of Christ but of praise and thankesgiuing for tbe onelie insacrificable sacrifice of Christes passion as Gregorie Nazianzen doth call it Saint Augustine also in the place by the answerer quoted sheweth plainlie that this sacrifice of praise is celebrated by the sacrament of rememberaunce of the slesh and blood of Christ which in truth it selfe was offered in the passion of Christ. Sed quid agam c. But what shall I do and when shall I make demonstration to so great blindenes of these heretikes what force that hath which is song in the Psalmes The sacrifice of praise shall glorifie me and there is the waie where I will shew my sauing health The flesh blood of this sacrifice before the comming of Christ was promised by oblations of similitudes in the passion of Christ by the trueth it selfe it was yealded after the ascension of Christ by the sacrament of rememberance it is celebtated Whoe seeth not here a manifest opposition betweene yealding by the truth it selfe and celebrating by a sacrament of rememberance But that the sacrifice of the Masse is the same that was offered on the crosse differing but in the vnbloodie manner of oblation Saint Chrisostome saith out answerer doth prooue at large vpon the epistle to the Hebrewes Hom. 17. whome if Master Charke and his fellowes would not disdaine to reade and beleeue they would be ashamed to cauill and blaspheme gods mysteries as they do The place of Chrisostome hath bene often alledged on both partes by the Papists for a shew and a colour of the matter by the other side for a manifest demonstration that Chrisostome as he doth interpret him-selfe maketh nothing for the Popish sacrifice of the Masse but altogether against it His wordes are these after he hath shewed the imperfection of the legall sacrifices by the often repeating of them Then what do we euerie daie do we not offer yes we offer but we make the remembrance of his death and this is one sacrifice and not manie How is it one and not manie Seeing it was once offered it was caried into the holie of holies This thing is a figure or type of that sacrifice this sacrifice of that For we offer the same alwaies not now an other but alwaies the same Therefore it is one sacrifice by this reason otherwise because it is offered in manie places are there manie Christes Not so but one Chrisi euery where both here full and perfect there full and perfect one bodie Therfore as being offered in manie places it is one bodie and not manie bodies so is it one sacrifice He is our high priest which offered that sacrifice which maketh vs cleane the same do we offer now also which then was offered which can not be consumed This is now done in the remembrance of that which was then done For do ye this saith he in remembrance of me we do not offer an other sacrifice as the high Priest but the same alwaies but rather we worke the remembrance of a sacrifice These words of Chrisostome declare that the name of sacrifice is vn properly giuen to the celebration of the Lords supper which is rather a remembrance of a sacrifice then a sacrifice indeede Secondlie that reteining the name of a sacrifice there is great difference betweene it and the sacrifice of Christ for the thing here offered is a type of that which was offered there and this sacrifice is a figure of that sacrifice Thirdlie Christ offered the onelie sacrifice propitiatorie that purgeth awaie sinnes this oblation is but a remembrance of that to stur vs vp to thankfullnes for that and to confirme our faith in our spirituall nourishment by that bodie and blood which was once offered for all neuer to be repeated So that Master Charke and his fellowes haue not Chrisostome their aduersarie in this place but receaue great light by this exposition of the name sacrifice which is not properlie so to be called but rather a remembrance of a sacrifice And it is not to be doubted but that other auncient fathers vsed the name of sacrifice in the same sense that Chrisostome did The answerer referreth his reader further to Theodoret and Saint Augustine who handleth this question whie Christians do now vse to sacrifice seeing the old law with all sacrifices were abolished by the one sacrifice of Christ. You maie see by this that our answerer hath more care to point his margent with quotation of the Doctors which the ignorant can not reade then he hath iudgement to consider what the Doctors write For this place of Theodoret is cleane contrarie to the sacrifice propitiatorie of the Masse The wordes are these of the translation of Gentianus Heruetus a man not to be suspected of Papists Siergo Sacerdotium quod est ex lege finem 〈◊〉
Sacerdos qui est secundùin ordinem Melchisedech obtulit sacrificium effecit vt alia sacrificia non essent necessaria cur noui testamenti Sacerdotes mysticam liturgiam seu sacrificium peragunt Scd clarumest iis qui sunt in rebus diuinis eruditi nos non aliud sacrificium offerre sed illius vnius Salutaris memoriam peragere Hoc enim nobis proecepitipse dominus Hoc facite in meam recordationem vt per figurarum contemplationem earum quoe pro nobis susceptoe sunt perpessionum recordemur in benefactorem beneuolentiam couseruemus futurorum bonorum perceptionem expectemus 〈◊〉 therefore the priesthood which is of the law hath receaued an end and the Priest which is after the order of Melchisedech hath offered sacrifice and brought to passe that other sacrifices should not be necessarie why do the Priests of the new testament celebrate a mysticall liturgie or sacrifice But it is cleare to them that are instructed in diuine matters that we do not offer an other sacrifice but do celebrate a remembrance of that one and helthfull sacrifice For this our Lord him seife commaunded vs Doyee this in rememberance of me that by contemplation of the figures we might remember the passions that were suffered for vs and continew good will towards our benefactor and waite for the fruition of good things to come This saying of Theodoretus is a full and large answere in deede to the obiection by him made of the vnproper terme of sacrifice whereby the celebration of the Lords supper was commonlie called in his time but it is nothing fauorable to the Popish sacrifice of the Masse yea rather it sheweth the right vse and end of the sacrament which is an holie memoriall of Christs sacrifice not the same sacrifice it selfe nor anie sacrifice propitiatorie but onelie eucharistical of praise and thankesgiuing The other author to whome our answerer referreth his reader is Saint Augustine Ep. 23. ad Bonifacium who proposeth this doubt saith he how we sacrifice Christ euerie day vpon the altar seeing he is said to be sacrificed once for all vpon the crosse But in deede the question he answereth is how the godfathers in baptisme answere that the infants do beleeue whereas they do neither beleeue in deede and it is vncertaine whether they will beleeue for resolution of which question he bringeth in example of the Lords supper called the bodie of Christ and a sacrifice whereas it is not properlie either of both but a signe sacrament and memoriall of those things so is baptisme called faith and infants said to beleeue when they are baptised his wordes are these often alledged against the Papists Nempe saepe it a loquimur c. Verielie we do often times speake so that when Easter is at hand we saie to morow or the next daie after is the passion of our Lord whereas he hath sufferrd so manie yeares passed before and that passion was suffered but once in all For on the verie Sondaie we saie This daie our Lord arose againe whereas there are so manie yeares passed since he arose againe Whie is no man so foolish that would charge vs to haue lied when we speak after this manner but because we name these daies according to the similitude of those daies in which these thinges were done So that the daie is called the same which is not the same but in reuolution of time like vnto it and the thing is saide to be done on that daie for the celebration of the Sacrament which is not done that daie but was done long before was not Christ once offered in him-selfe and yes in the sacrament not onelie in euerie solemnitie of Easter but euery daie he is offered for the people neither doth he make a lye which being asked the question shall answere that he is offered for if Sacraments had not a certaine similitude of those things where of they are sacraments they should be no sacraments at all And of this similitude for the moste part they take the names euen of the things them-selues Therefore euen as after a certaine manner the sacrament of the bodie of Christ is the bodie of Christ the sacrament of the blood of Christ is the blood of Christ so the sacrament of faith is faith And to beleeue is nothing els but to haue faith And by this when it is answered that the child beleeueth which as yet hath not the effect of faith it is answered that he hathfaith because of the sacrament of faith to conuert him-selfe to God because of the sacrament ofconuersion because the answere it selfe perteineth to the celebration of the sacrament As the apostle of baptisme it selfe saith we are buried with Christ by baptisme vnto death He saith not we signifie his buriall but plainlie we are buried with him Wherefore he called the sacrament of so great a matter by none other name then of the verie thing it selfe This answer of Saint Augustine how full and large it is in that sense the Papists defend their sacrifice of the Masse or rather how directlie contrarie to the same I referre to the iudgement of anie indifferent reader that with anie conscience will consider it Neither hath Eusebius Demonstr Eua. lib. 1. cap. 6 or 10. nor Theophilact although a late writer in cap. 5. ad Heb. anie thing that maie vpholde the Popish propitiatorie sacrifice of the Masse Eusebius verilie hath these wordes to cleare him both of the heresie of transsubstantiation and of the masking sacrifice after he hath spoken of the dignitie and sufficiencie of the sacrifice of Christs passion Hauing receaued to celebrate the remembrance of this sacrifice at the table by the tokens or signes of his bodie and healthfull blood according to the rites of the new testament we are againe instructed by the Prophet Dauid to saie Thou hast prepared a table in my sight against mine enemies c. By which words it is manifest that Eusebius acknowledged no sacrifice of the naturall bodie and blood of Christ in the sacrament but a memorie of that onelie sacrifice celebrated in the symbols or tokens of his bodie and blood Likewise in the exposition of the prophecie of Malachy he saith That God by the voice of the Prophet hauing refused the sacrifices after Moses doth by oracle declare what should be done of vs saying For from the rising of the sunne vnto the going downe of the same my name is glorified among the gentiles and in euerie place incense is offered to my name and a pure sacrifice wherefore we sacrifice to god that is aboue all the sacrifice of praise we sacrifice a diuine reuerent and holie sacrifice we sacrifice after a new manner according to the new testament a pure sacrifice and the sacrifice to God is said to be a broken spirit for a contrite and humbled heart God will not dispise and we doe burne also the propheticall incense offering to him the sweete smelling fruite of the moste excellent
diuine contemplation by those praiers that are sent vp vnto him Thus much Eusebius of the sacrifice of Christians As for Theophylact in the place by him quoted wherein either his Printer or his note booke hath deceiued him hath nothing touching this matter in question but vpon the 10. Chapter he hath the verie words of Chrisostome which I haue sette downe at large before Suboritur hîc quaestio c. Here riseth a question whether we also do offer vnbloodie sacrifice whereto I answere that we do certainlie but we keepe a memorie of the Lords death and it is one sacrifice and not mante seeing he was offered vp once for all For we offer vp the same alwaies but rather we keepe the memorie of that oblation wherein he offered him felfe as if it were done euen now Thus none of the auncient writers to whome he doth referre the reader for defence of his Popish sacrifice do speake anie thing for it and some of them do write directlie against it And now the answerer thinketh he might haue ended his preface but that he promised to shew that they offer most reasonable meanes of triall and that we in deede admit none at all Of both these partes we haue spoken alreadie sufficientlie to the conscience of all reasonable men yet must we further answere to such matters as he can obiect against vs. And first he saith All the controuersie being not of the words but of the sense of the scriptures we admit no Iudge but our selues To this I answere first that all the controuersie is not about the sense onelie but some about the wordes also where we alledge the interpretation of them out of the originall tongues and they wil admit none but the vulgar translation which in manie places is false in some places also corrupted from the integritie in which it was first written Secondlie that we admit no Iudge of it but our selues it is false of vs and true of them For they admit no interpretation of the scripture but that which their Church alloweth which alloweth nothing but that the present Pope alloweth whome they make Iudge of all interpretation and to whose Iudgement they will all stand Conttariewise we take vpon vs no iudgement but that which is common to all men by reason and learning to waigh all thinges that are brought vnto vs the cheife Iudge or rule to Iudge by being the holie scriptures in places of them selues euident and confessed or to be confessed by right reason of all that acknowledge the authoritie of the scriptures by them to finde out the obscurities of such places as are hard and haue neede of interpretation But if they bring scripture saith he neuer so plaine yet will we shift it of with some impertinent interpretation whereof he bringeth two or three examples in which you shall plainlie see how like a Papist he handleth him-selfe in all kinde offalshood and treacherie The first example is this The moste of the auncient fathers write bookes in praise of virginitie aboue wedlock and vsed to prooue it by the saying of Christ There be Eunuches which haue gelded them-selues for the kingdome of heauen he that can take it let him take it Also by the words of Saint Paul he that ioyneth his virgine in mariage doth wel and he that ioyneth her not doth better Which words being alledged against M. Luther who preferred marriage yea though it were of a vowed Nunne before virginitie he answered it thus That Christ by his words terrified men from virginitie and continencie and Saint Paul by this speech did disswade them from the same Now what could be replied saith he in this case trow you He beginneth with a lie and so he holdeth on For the moste of the auncient fathers haue not written bookes in praise of virginity aboue wedlock neither is he able to prooue that the one halfe of them haue wri ten bookes of that argument although manie of them haue in their writings mentioned that comparison Secondlie in the state of the controuersie he offereth vs shamefull iniurie for we all confesse that in the respects named by our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles virginitie is better then marriage in such persons as haue the gist of continencie but not in all respects and namelie not in such respectes as the Papists do preferre it of merite for them-selues and others c. nor in persons that lack that rare gift of continencie For neither Christ nor Saint Paul do saie that virginitie meriteth more then mariage or the profession of virginitie in all men though they haue not the gift of continencie is better then a chaste life in holie matrimonie Wherefore that which we affirme against the Papists is against that which they affirme more then Christ or S. Paull spake and is more then by anie lawfull demonstration can be prooued out of their words Thirdlie in rehearsing the text against the plainnes whereof he bringeth Luthers interpretation he fraudulentlie leaueth out those wordes whereupon the exposition of Luther is grounded namely these words non omnes capiunt c. All men are not capable of this saying but they to whome it is giuen If you aske of what saying the text is plaine his disciples said vnto him If the cause of aman and his wife be so that he may not be diuorced but for adulterie it is not expedient to marrie but all men saith Christ doe not receiue or cannot take this saying For there be three kindes of Eunuches or gelded men the third onelie being voluntarie and for an excellent end is commendable so it be giuen vnto him that he maie take it He that can take it let him take it Is it not euident by this text that Christ terrifieth all such men from this high attempt to whome it is not giuen and exhorteth them onlie which haue the gift to vse it Now to come to Luthers interpretation First he saieth that Luther preferreth Marriage before virginitie yea though it were of a vowed Nunne This as it is simplie set downe is a lowd lie for Luther acknowledgeth the preferment of virginitie before mariage in persons hauing the gift and for the end and respects by Christ and Saint Paull named as by his owne wordes in diuerse places of his workes is manifest and most plainlie Exege ad Cap. 7. Ep. ad Cor. 1. Nam sicubi coniugium quis cum coelibatu conferat praestantius certè donum est coelibatus For if a man compare mariage with virginitie virginitie verilie is a better gift Concerning the mariage of a vowed Nunne if she haue the gift of continencie and will renounce the superstitious and blasphemous end for which she vowed virginitie and vse it to the glorie of God you shall heare Luthers iudgement Nec ideo caelibatum virginitatem reprobare mihi 〈◊〉 est nec inde quenquam ad iugale vinculum inuitare quisque pro dono suo diuinitus impartito vt potest feratur For
your fault At the least it is your fault that in so straunge a report you haue not sette downe his wordes in latine if euer you sawe the preface your selfe As for the corrupt edition or often chaungeing of Luthers workes by him-selfe we haue not to do with it for whie might not Luther reforme his owne workes if ought in them were erronius or offensiue But it is a cauill that you adioyne of the confession of Auspurg whereunto the Germanes perhaps ascribe too much as Alasco writeth For though there be diuers editions thereof differing in wordes yet are they not contrarie in sense as appeareth by the harmonie of confessions latelie set forth at Gencua Now sir so much as we finde sounding toward your reporte I will sette downe that the reader maie iudge how vprightlie you do charge Luther with denying three of the foure Gospells Enarrat in epist. Petri argumentum Primùm omnium notandum c. First of all it is to be noted that all the Apostles do handle the same doctrine for which cause it is not well done that men do number but onelie foure Euangelistes and foure Gospells whereas whatsoeuer the Apostles haue left written is one Gospell For the Gospell signifieth nothing els but the preaching and publishing of the grace and mercie of God by our Lord Christ deserued and purchased to vs by his death and that thou maiest take it properlie it is not that which is conteined in bookes and is comprehended in letters but rather a vocall preaching and a liuing worde and voyce which soundeth into the wholl world and is so openly blowen out like a trumpet that it may be heard euerie where neither is it a booke which conteineth a law in which are many good doctrines as it hath beene commonlie taken heretofore for it doth not commaund vs to worke any thing where by we may become iust but it sheweth vnto vs the grace of God freelie and giuen without our meritte namelie that Christ hath beene our mediatour and hauing made satisfaction for our sinnes hath abolished them and made vs iust and saued by his workes Now whoesoeuer doth either preach or write these thinges he teacheth the true Gospell that which all the Apostles and peculiarlie Saint Paull and Saint Peter in their Epistles haue performed Therefore whatsoeuer is preached of Christ is one Gospell although one handle it after one manner an other man after another in diuerse manner of wordes do reason of it For the matter may be handled either in long or in short speach and be described either streightlie or largelie But seeing all perteineth to this end to teach Christ to be our sauiour and that we are made iust and saued by faith in him without our workes it is one word it is one Gospell as there is but one faith onelie and one baptisme in all the Church of Christ. Therefore thoureadest nothing writen by any of the Aposties which is not conteined in the monuments of the other Apostles But they which haue handled this point especiallie and with greater diligence that faith alone in Christ doth iustifie they are the best Euangelistes of all And in this respect you may more rightlie call the Epistles of Paul the Gospel then those which Matthew Marke and Luke haue written For these men describe not much beside the storie of the Acts and miracles of Christ. But the grace which is wrought vnto vs by Christ none doth sette forth more fullie or more rightlie then Saint Paul especiallie in the Epistle to the Romanes Now seeing there is much more moment in the word then in the factes and miracles of Christ and if we should want the one it were much better to lacke the Acts and history then the word and doctrine it followeth that shose bookes are to be had in highest price which handle the doctrine cheeflie and the wordes of our Lord Iesus Christ. Seeing that if there were no miracles of Christ extant and we were altogether ignorant of them the words were sufficient for vs without the which we could not so much as liue Therefore hereof it followeth that this Epistle of Saint Peter is to be accounted among the most excellent bookes of the new testament and is the true and pure Gospell as in which he doth nothing els but that which Paul and the other Euangelists do teaching sincere faith that Christ is giuen vnto vs which hauing taken away our offences doth saue vs c. This that he speaketh naming Matthew Marke and Luke say you signifieth some tooth against these three Gospells And what tooth I pray you because these three Gospells speake too much of good workes As though S. Paul in his Epistles and namelie in that to the Romanes doth not speake as much of good workes as all those three Gospells and Saint Peter though breeflie doe not speake as much in effect But in the preface in question you affirme that Luther hath these wordes The Epistles of Paul and Peter doe farre passe the Gospells of Matthew Marke and Luke which yet more prooueth Luthers euill opinion of those three Gospells I doubtnot albeit I neuer sawe the preface my selfe but Luther doth plainlie expresse in what respect the Epistles of Paul and Peter doe excell the histories of the Gospell written by Matthew Marke and Luke euen as he doth in this preface vnto his exposition of Saint Peter Because these Epistles are more occupied in setting forth the Grace of Christ and the fruit and benefit of his passion which no more prooueth his euill opinion of those three Gospells then when Christ preferreth Iohn the Baptist before al the Prophets it prooueth his euil opinion of all the Prophets or when he preferreth him that is least in the kingdome of heauen before Iohn Baptist it prooueth his euil opinion of Iohn Baptist. These brutish Papists thinke all men voide of common sense when they make such impudent conclusions As for your first charge that it is a false opinion and to be abolished that there are foure ghospels For the ghospell of S. Iohn is the onely faire true and principall ghospell when you can alledge the words of Luther in latine to iustifie your report and because we know not how to come to the sight of that preface will set downe two sentences that goe before them and as manie that followe them you shall receiue a reasonable answere But vntill you haue thus much performed I am perswaded you wil be as farre to seeke as Campian was for his reporre of Luther that he should call the Epistle of Saint Iames Stramineam strawie or like strawe And yet you take vppon you to shew the intollerable impudencie of Master Chark and his fellowes in the Tower against Master Campian for that he could not presentlie shew out of their bookes where these wordes are written by Luther especiallie of Master Whitaker whoe to the admiration and laughter of all other nations hath set forth in latine that Luther neuer
acceptus est quemadmodum paulò pòst dicemus omnibus sacrarum literarum candidatis qui adhue nonnihil propter parabolae obstacula haerebant omnem nebulam discussit c. There remained yet not the lest endeuour namelie that we should bring forth examples which wereioined with no parable Therefore we began to thinke of all that we could to vnfolde all that we could but yet none other example came to minde but that is set forth in our commentarie or els whatsoeuer came to minde was like vnto those examples But when the 13. daie drew neere I tell the trueth that so true that though I would conceale it my conscience compelleth me to vtter that which the Lord bestowed vpon me being not ignorant to how great reproches and scornes I lay forth my selfe when I say the 13. daie of Aprill drew neere me thought as I was a sleepe that with great tediousnes I was againe disputing with the scribe my aduersarie that my mouth was so stopped that my tongue denying her office I was not able to speake out that which I knew to be true which trouble as dreames are wont sometimes to mocke men in the deceitfull night for here I declare no higher matter then a dreame as cōcerning my selfe although it is no light matter that I learned by this dreame thankes be to God to whose onelie glorie I vtter these thinges which vexation I saie seemed to trouble me vehementlie Then sodainlie there seemed an admonisher to be present with me whether he were blacke or white I do not at all remember for I tell a dreame which said why dost thou not thou coward answere him that which is written Exod. 12. For it is the paschall which is the passeouer of the Lord. Immediatlie as this sight appeered I awoke withall and leapt out of my bed And first I considered the place in the Seauentie Interpreters on euerie side and thereof before the wholl congregation I preached as well as I could Which sermon when it was heard as soone after we shall declare draue awaie all mist or want of vnderstanding from all those that were studentes in the holie Scriptures which vnto that time did somewhat doubt because of the obiection of the parable Thus farre Zuinglius by whose wordes you may easelie perceiue what proofes he receiued of his Doctrine of the Sacrament of a spirit by night as our defender saieth when he sheweth onelie that he was admonished by Gods prouidence in a dreame ofthat example Exod. 12. in which the trope or figure is manifest being also in the doctrine institution of a sacrament whereunto the Lords supper doth most properly answere which is vsed in the words of the Lords supper this is my body without anie such parable as was obiected vnto him in the other examples Where he saith that he remembreth not whether the aduertiser were white or blacke he meaneth no more as all men that know the prouerbe must confesse but that he remembreth not what he was whether knowne to him or vnknowne of whom he dreamed that he receiued that example The same prouerbe he vseth not long before in the same discourse of him that disputed against him who whether he was white or blacke that is what manner of man he was he would not describe Surius quarelleth against him that he would attribute so much to a dreame when otherwise he will admit nothing but holie scriptures whereas euerie reasonable man may see that he admitteth no Doctrine vpon the bare credit of a dreame or of the admonisher were he whit or blacke but is onelie put in minde by a dreame of a place of holie Scripture that serued to stoppe his aduersaries mouth and to remooue all doubt from them that were nouices in the studie of the scripture And this is a thing that manie times commeth to passe that a man which earnestlie studieth of anie matter shall in his dreame be admonished of some better waie then he could thinke of waking Which when he hath considered to be the best for anie good purpose he neede not to doubt but that it came vnto him by the prouidence of God without being afraide to follow it because he thought of it first in a dreame What Luther thought of Zuinglius it skilleth not seeing as he was stiffe in his error of the carnall manner of presence so he was apt both to thinke and speake worse then the trueth was of all them that held the contrarie The last two were Caluine and Beza of whome it is needles to saie anie more then hath alreadie beene setforth in their defense in print these two yeares with out replie of anie papist Although God be praised the Church of England dependeth neither vpon these not vpon other men further then they were faithfull interpreters of the worde of God according to which our faith is framed and not after the decrees of men Concerning the death of Martine Bucer welknown in England whome the papists abroad as they doe of the rest imagine to haue died a foule death our defender quarrelleth with Master Charke for belying of Lindan and charging him to saie that Lindan auoucheth it where he onelie reporteth as he hearde of certaine worshipfull Marchants of Colene But in trueth Master Charke saieth not that Lindan doth auouch it but onlie that by vttering his false reports he maketh Bucers death as horrible and monstrous as may be suspected Pontacus the popish historian vttereth a like report as the defender confesseth that he died a Iew denying the Messias Surius addeth another tale that he circumcised his sonne begotten of I know not what woman Thus these lying papists heape lies vpon lies and when they haue neither sufficient author nor probabilitie of trueth to beare them out then certaine worshipfull Marchauntes then a certaine graue and most excellent learned man then some of Bucers owne disciples are the reportes vnder which cloake it is an easie matter to forge anie slaunder and turne ouer the enuie of it to the man in the moone in the meane time to burthen men with suspicion of infamie among credulous persons where no proofe of their false accusations can be demaunded and obtained Touching Bucers inconstancie The defender out of Surius and other of that stampe gathereth manie thinges peruerting to vnstedfastnes of iudgement what soeuer Bucer did saie laboring to make vnitie betweene Luther and Zuinglius Charging him also to recant the article of the baptisme of infants to be vnnecessarie as he had written before vpon the third Chapter of Saint Mathewes Gospell and vpon the 26. of Mathew to aske pardon of God and of the Church for that he deceiued so manie with the heresie of Zuinglius as he calleth it Both which matters are meere forgeries for in those commentaries vpon that Gospell which we haue seene there is no such matter Finallie where he affirmeth that Caluine differed from Zuinglius which Master Fulke in all his writings most impudentlie denieth he
flatlie against you for he that doth not that which god commaundeth sinneth although in the meane time he doe some other thing that is good or not euill yea although he sleepe and doe nothing Where Master Charke doth distinguish the creatures and ordinances of God which are good from the corruption and preuarication that is in them which is euill you picke a fond quarrell to him and make him to saie that deuills and euill men doe not repugne against the law of God and that they doe not sinne properlie Which is false for he saith no such thing but that euill men as they are the creatures of God are not against the law but the euill in men and so of the rest yet euil men doe sinne properlie and repugne against the law of God by the euill that is in them as in your owne example the Phisitian cureth his patient not as he is a man but as he is a Phisitian and by knowledge of Phisicke which is in him And as for the repugnance of contrarietie whereof the question is in the definition of sin it is not in the creature of god but the corruption of that good crearure A blacke horsse is not contrarie to the colour of white but the colour of blacke so not an euil man but sin of an euil man is contrary to the iustice of Gods law So a Phitisian driueth away an ague yet aPhisitian is not contrary to an ague but thevertue of the medicine which he ministreth When euerie childe may vnderstand your cauilling it is no meruaile though you charge M. Chark with such absurditie and ignorance yea with heresie and that out of Augustine Tom. 8. fol. 665. not telling vs of what edition you speake so that it were harde to finde if it were worth the search that which you talke of but you are to be pardoned for your note was vnperfect did not expresse in what homelie vpon what Psalme The second fault of the Iesuites definition is that they call it an humane or reasonable action Master Charke would rather saie a beastly or vnreasonable action of a man indued with reason Here you take on and aske whether Master Charke be so vnlearned in all foundation of Philosophie And Aristotle and Saint Augustine are called to witnes that sin proceedeth from the minde indued with reason and what other thing I beseech you doth Master Charke saie his wordes are plaine as I haue set them downe and the same that you cite out of Augustine Now if you will defend that sinne is an action agreeable to right reason because it proceedeth frō a reasonable man he giueth you a weapon to play with al against your next encounter otherwise he hath better reformed the wordes of your definition thé you haue either wit or grace to vnderstand It hath a better colour that you obiect of the morall workes of iustice temperance other vertues in the gentils which M. Chark wil acknowledge to be sin and yet they seeme to be agreeable to right reason so they are in part so far forth as they be directed by that light which is left in men proceeding fró the eternal word of god but in so much as that light shineth in darkenes and the darkenes comprehendeth it not no acceptable worke to God can be brought forth therebie Yea for so much as all the morall workes of the gentiles respected not the right ende of obedience and glorie of God whome they knew not their wholl actions were therebie vitiated and corrupted so that they may iustlie be called sinne Euen as praier is turned into sin and the sacrifice of the vngodlie is abhomination to the Lord. And M. Charke faith truelie whatsoeuer is not of faith is sin be it reasonable as you speake or against reason And in deede against right reason it is that the gentiles in their morall workes sought not to obey God according to his lawe and therefore euen their best workes of iustice and temperance were sinne But this is so iumpe you saie that an horse might be a sinner for that his actions proceed not of faith In deed if Saint Paul had spoken of the actions of brute beastes as your Saint Francis witnes your Legend did preach to brute beastes you had iumped neere the matter but when none but an asse would vnderstand Saint Paul to speake of any other actions then such as proceede from men you iumpe as neere as Germans lippes that were nine mile a sunder But you will answere to Saint Paul with S. Ambrose that he meaneth whoesoeuer doth a thing against that which faith prescribeth that is against a mans own conscience and iudgement he sinneth The words of S. Ambrose are these Rectè peccatum appellat quod aliter fit quà m probatum est He doth rightlie call that sinne which is done otherwise then is allowed Now this allowance or approbation is not referred to euerie mans corrupt conscience or ignorant iudgement as you expound it but is measured by faith which is a certaine knowledge and perswasion grounded vpon the worde of God as Saint Paul sheweth in the 14. verse of the 14. Chap. I know am perswaded by our Lord Iesus that nothing is vncleane of it selfe which faith when the Gentiles had not in their workes their works were sinne And therfore you abuse S. Ambrose by your glose to restreine the prescription of faith onelie to that which a man doth against his conscience and iudgement But Saint Augustine you say prooueth at large against Master Charke that the morall good workes of infidels were not sinne lib. de spiritu litera cap. 26. 27. 28. In truth S. Augustine though he call such workes iustice liberalitie wrought by infidels as we doe commonlie good workes yet his iudgement is none other then I haue before expressed and that he declareth in the latter ende of the 27. Chapter for in the 26. he hath nothing sounding that wase Speaking of infidels Quaedam tamen fact a vel legimus vel nouimus vel audimus quae secundùm iusticiae regulam non solùm vituper are non possumus verumetiam meritò recteque laudamus quanquam si discutiatur quo fine fiant vix iuueniuntur quae insticiae debitam laudem defensionemue mereantur Yet some deedes we either reade or know or heare of which according to the rule of righteousnes we cannot not only dispraise but also we do worthily rightly praise them although if it be discussed with what end they are done they are scarslie found which deserue the praise or defense dew to righteousnes But most cleerelie his iudgement is for Master Charke against you sir defender as well for the allegation of the text Rom. 14. where you scornfullie iumped in your sinfull horse as for the matter in question that the morall workes of Gentiles are sin before God Contra Iulianum Pelagianum lib. 4. cap. 3. towarde the ende in these wordes Si Gentilis inquis nudum
solùm peccata omnia quorum nunc remissio fit in baptisme que reos faciunt dum desideriis vitiosis consentitur 〈◊〉 peccator verumetiam ipsa desideria vitiosa quibus si non consentitur nullus peccati reatus contraehitur quae non in ista sed in alia vita nulla erunt eodem lauacro baptismatis vniuersa pur gantur Not onelie all sinnes whereof there is no we remission in baptisme which make men guiltie while they consent to vitious desires and to sinne but euen those vitious desires also to which if consent be not yealded no guilte of sinne is contarcted which not in this life but in the other life shall be none at all are altogether purged in the same lauer of baptisme Now whether a Christian man neede to saie forgiue vs our debtes for his vitious or wicked desires although he consent not vnto them you define out of Saint Austine that he neede not And quote Ep. 200. ad Asell where he saieth that if we did not at all follow our concupiscence and although the desires of sin be in vs while we are in this mortall bodie yet if we giue consent to none of them there were not for which we should say to our Father which is in heauen forgiue vs our debtes Yet should we not be such as we shall be after this mortall hath put on immortallity for then there shal be in vs no desires of sinnes Secondly you quote conc 3. in Ps. Where he answereth this question in these words Quantum quidemegs sapere possum c. As farre as I can perceiue the whole guilt of the disease and infirmitie from whence those vnlawfull desires are mooued which the Apostle calleth sinne is loosed by the Sacrament of baptisme with all those that obeying it we haue done saide or thought neither should this disease hereafter hurt vs though it be in vs if we yealded obedience to none of the vnlawfull desires thereof at anie time either in worke speach or secretassens vntill the sicknes it selfe be healed when that which we pray for is fullfilled either when we say thy kingdome come or when we saie deliuer vs from euill Thirdlie you quote de perfect iustisiae c. vltimo Where against the Pelagians which holde that a man might be iust without actuall sinne although he could not be without concupiscence which is called sinne because it is sin to consent vntoit and is mooued against our wil he hath these words Subtiliter quidemista discernit c. He that so saith discerneth these things subtillie but let him be aduised what is done in the Lordes praier where we saie for giue vs 〈◊〉 debtes Quòd nist fallar which except I be deceiued it were no neede to saie if we did neeur consent neuer solitle to the desires of the same sinne either in slipping of tongue or in delight of thought but onelie we should saie Lead vs not into temptation but deliuer vs from euill Lastlie you quote Cont. 〈◊〉 Epist. Pel. lib. 1. cap. 13. Nec propter ipsum 〈◊〉 iam c. Neither for this concupiscence whose guilt is alreadie confumed in the lauer of regeneration the baptized saie in their praier forgiue vs our debtes c Out of all these places this I may gather First that Saint Augustine doth not so constantlie affirme as you saie as a Doctrine most certaine but modestly deliuereth his opinion saying as farre as my wisdome serueth and except I be deceiued Secondliehe speaketh not of those motions that be in vs which consent to some though not to al of thē but in case we neuer consented to anie of them Thirdly he rendereth his reason because they he alreadie forgiuen to theregenerate in baptisme And sorthlie he calleth them vnlawfull desires of sinne against which we praie to be deliuered So that all thinges weighed as you haue Saint Augustine in some sort fauorable to the wordes of your assertion in this piont yet he is not so ranke and full one your side in the sense of the matter as you would bear vs in hand Now followe a number of cauillations against M. Charkes wordes which I will brieflie runne ouer First where he saieth Are not all the first motions of iust meerely naturall and euer more of some cause giuen by vs and dwelling within vs namelie the corruption of Adam This fonde 〈◊〉 saie you includeth two contraries for of they be meerlie naturall then are they not of anie cause giuen by vs. This fonde argument saie I hath two faultes One is ambiguitie sought where it needes not in the word meerelie naturall which Master Charke sheweth to be by corruption of nature and then the consequent followeth not for to that corruption cause is giuen by vs and in vs in the sinne of Adam Secondlie you saie that it is false that all first motions of iust are meerely naturall for in lewde men they are often voluntarie Iump as you are wont to saie For if will goe before them then are they not first we speake of motions which goe before will and therefore are called first motions wherefore your example of awaking a madde dogge and distinction of naturall in the roote and voluntarie in the branch doe not excuse but increase your heape of waste words as when you be awake you maie perceiue Another cauillation you haue that Master Charke deceitfully auoideth the simulitude of first motions with the pulse because they be not like in all thinges which is vntrue but because they are not like in qualitie in the which they are compared For the first motions vnto sinne are euill vitious vnlawfull as Saint Augustine calleth them so is not the motion of the pulse therefore not like But while he reasoneth against your example of the pulse he vttereth three foúle absurdities most grosse errors if we beleeue you Which are they saie on take heed you lie not The first is that he placeth concupiscence of the flesh whereof we talke in the resonable part of the minde and 〈◊〉 in the sensitiue parte That is false for his wordes are you cannot conclud from that part of our soule whereby we haue life and sense onelie to that part where in our reason and affections are placed In these wordes he denieth not concupiscence vnto the sensitiue part but extendeth it to the reasonable parte where also the affections are where vertues and vices haue their seat in as much as the reasonable soule is distinguished into two pars the one that vseth reason the other that should obeie reason And therefore you speake verie grosselie and falselie when you saie The first motions are nothing els but the rebellions of our sensitiue partes And your reason is as grosse in diuinitie as your position is in philosophie because it is called flesh and the concupiscence of the flesh c. where flesh signifieth the whole corruption of man as it is manifest by the workes of the flesh rehearsed by Saint Paull in the text you
Apostle beginneth to speake of this place of Moses in these wordes The righteousnes which is of faith saith thus Say not in thy heart who shall go vp into heauen that is to bring downe Christ or who shall go downe into the deepe that is to cal Christ from the dead But what saith the scripture The word is neere in thy mouth and in thy heart this is the word of faith which we preach Here is the application of the text to the Gospell and not to the lawe But the text you saie is not so euident for Saint Ierome either the author or the corrector of this translation knew what the hebrew words importe and how they are applied by Saint Paul as well as William Charke Here is a vaine and an odious comparison without neede or cause For who will graunt vnto you that S. Ierome was either author or corrector of the vulgar translation that we now haue None surelie that fauoreth the credite of Saint Ierom who though he haue some in this age as well Papists as Protestantes better learned in the hebrew then he was yet was he farre better learned then that he would haue suffered either in translation or in corre ction such grosse faults as be in that vulgar translation which we now haue As for Saint Pauls application of that parte of the sentence which he toucheth you saie make eth wholy for yow as after shall be shewed Well when you shew it we shal shape you an answer But now to the very words of the text itselfe Niphleth which as you confesse that it fignifieth to be hidden so you affirme that it signifieth also to be maruelous to be hard and difficult as appeareth Psalm 13 9and 2. Sam. 1. which we do not deny so you vnderstande to be difficult and hard for want of knowledge and not for want of power For you are not hable to bring an example where this verb Phala which most properlie signifieth to be hidden or vnknowen is taken in that sense you would haue it here namelie to be harde or difficulte for lacke of strength That it signifieth to be meruelous it is because merueling is vpon causes that are hid or vnknowen The Chaldee and Greeke must either be answerable to the Hebrue or els they are to be reiected as vntrue or vnproper translations Although the Chaldee word signifieth the same that the hebrew whereunto if you ad the signification of separation yet it must be separation from knowledge and not from strength or els it answereth not vnto the originall As also the greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth as you saie exceeding immeasurable greate passing all meane c. must be vnderstood for exceeding measure in knowledge or els it is not right and so maie your latine suprate be vnderstood also as Saint Ierome translateth the same verb Ps. 139. where it is manifestlie taken for maruelous in respect of the want of knowledge And therfore none of these three wordes vsed in the three auncient tongues hauing a negation before them do expresse so much as you would gather by the vulgar translation the law is not aboue thy strength Wherefore you may take bayard whome to your owne stable that make such ignorant and impudent conclusions as an Arcadian beast that had learned but a while vnder Apuleius would not make for shame But if Saint Ierome will not satisfie vs you bid vs take Saint Austen who saie you handleth both the wordes alledged of Moses and also the application vsed by Saint Paul of parte of the sentence and prooueth out of both the very same conclusion that we do to witte that the law is not aboue our abilitie to keepe it and for confirmation thereof he addeth maenie other textes of scripture as my yoke is sweete and my burthen light also his commaundements are not heauie and the like concluding in these wordes we must beleeue most firmelie that God being iust and good could not commaund impossible thinges vnto man That you maie vnderstand how manie waies he mocketh vs with his dumme quotations and shameles collections I will sette downe the wholl Chapter which he quoteth De natura gratia c. 69. Valde autem bona sunt praecepta c. The commaundements are verie good if we vse them lawfullie Far euen by the same whereby it is moste firmelie beleeued that God being iust and good could not commaund thinges impossible hereof we are admonished both in easy things what to do and in hard things what to craue For all thinges are made easie to loue to which alone the burthen of Christ is light or that alone is the selfe same burthen which is light According to this it is said And his commaundements are not heauie that he to whome they are heauie maie consider that it could not haue beene said of God they are not heauie but because there maie be such an affection of the heart to which they are not heauie and may aske that which he lacketh that he maie fulfill that which is commaunded And that which is said vnto Israel in Deutronomie if it be Godlie if it be holylie if it be spirituallie vnderstood signifieth the selfe same thing for when the Apostle had rehearsed this testimonie The word is neare in thy mouth in thy heart which this man hath in thy hands for in the heart are spirituall hands this saith he is the word of faith whih we do preach Euerie one theresore being conuerted as there is commaunded vnto the Lord his God with all his heart and all his soule let him not accompt the commaundement of God to be heauie For how is it heauie when it is the commaundement of loue For euerie man either loueth not and therefore it is heauie or he loueth and then it can not be heauie He loueth if as Israel is there admonished he be conuerted to the lord his God with all his heart with all his soule I giue you saith he a new commaundement that you loue one another and he that loueth his neighbour hath fulfilled the law and loue is the fulfilling of the law according to this is that also spoken If they walked in good pathes they should haue found the pathes of righteousnes to be light How then is it said Because of the wordes of thy lippes I haue kept hard waies but because both is true They are hard to feare and liht to loue Therefore loue begonne is iustice be gonne loue proceeded is iustice proceeded great loue is great iustice perfect loue is perfect iustice loue I meane comming out of a pure heart a good conscience and out of faith not fained which then is greatest in this life when for it the life it selfe is contemned But I maruell if it haue not wherein to increase when it is departed out of this mortall life But where soeuer and whensoeuer it is so full that nothing can be added vnto it yet is it not spread in our hearts by
of the canonicall scripture which was receiued by Christ and his Apostles and the primitiue Church long after them But the Papists adde of their owne authoritie to the holie canon and therefore as much are they subiect to gods curse as if they did take away Neither doth Luther discredit or deface the whol epistle of Saint Iames as you saie although in comparison of some other bookes of scripture by a similitude he maketh it farre inferior to them What Doctor Fulke and Master Whitaker haue written the one of the booke of Maccaebees the other of Tobie they haue sufficientlie maintained in their replies whereunto I remit the reader and for Master Charkes reuiling of Iudith to the reporte of the disputation in which your impudent slaunder is confuted Where you conclude that no man in the world euer spake more reuerentlie of holie scripture then Iesuites do you ouer reach very much as you do very often They which teach that the holyscripture is sufficient to make vs wise vnto saluation speake more reuerently then the Iesuits whichdeny the sufficiency of the scripture for the instru ction of the Church Last of al the Censure ridiculously charged M. Charke with fraudulent translation of this worde Immaculata when he alledgeth this text psal 19. as oppo sit to your nose of waxe The law of the Lord is perfect out of the original tongue the best translations from which the greek in sense dessenteth not not out of the olde latine translation Now you trifle to no purpose about the Hebrew Greeke Latine termes which to those that are but me anelie learned are well enough knowne what they signifie And first if you should graunt al that M. Chark said you thinke he had gained nothing For you also confes that the law of the Lord is perfect but not in that sense wherein M. Chark vsech it to wit that because the law of the Lord is perfect therefore the scripture cannot be wrested And afterward when you haue tolde vs that these wordes vnde filed irreprehensible and perfect which answer the latine greeke and Hebrue wordes 〈◊〉 not much in sense for whatsoeuer is irreprehensible and vnspotted may also be called perfect you conclude that this doth not prooue the scriptures to be perfect in sense in such sort as it maie not be wrested or peruerted You say true but it is false that Master Chark maketh anie such illation as you charge him For thus he inferreth the lawe of God is perfect ergo it cannot be wrested as a nose of wax or as his owne wordes are the scripture is perfect and manteineth her perfection against all corruptions as a right line sheweth it selfe bewraieth that which is crooked The lawe of a wise man as hath beene said before may be so perfect as it cannot be wrested like a nose of waxe into anie sense that the wrester wil imagine but that his vaine cauillation shall be odious and ridiculous to al men Much rather is the lawe of God so perfect as though all the deuilles in hell should breake their braines to wrest and peruertit yet can they neuer wrest it like a nose of wax to euerie side or shape but that the perfect sense of the scripture remaineth ful constant and manifest to them that haue the spirit of God yea euen to them that will iudge but indifferentlie according to right reason By the waie you charge Master Charke with railing and inueighing against your olde translation and with running he careth not whether forging he careth not what and reprehending he careth not whome yet in all that discourse he hath no more wordes of it but these your olde translation doth goe alone In which wordes what rayling running forging reprehending inueihing may be conteined let ihe wiser sort iudge and fooles learne to be wiser But where he saith that the best translations differ from the olde translation you aske what best or better or other good latine translation hath he then the olde As though none might be good but your olde translation I perceaue you would not acknowledge any good of them that were set forth by Munster Leo Iude or anie other professed protestant yet what saie you to the translation of Vatablus a famous and learned reader of Paris How dare you condemne the translation of Pagnine of the olde testament and Erasmus of the new testament as naught which the Pope allowed as good Finallie what exceptions can you take to the translation of Isidorus Clarius censured and approoued by the deputies of the Councell of Trent maie none of these be good better or best but that your olde translation hath the prerogatiue in goodnes in all degrees that it leaueth all other behinde it as nought O waightie censure of a wise Papist But let vs see wherein the excellencie of the olde translation doth consist as you suppose First you saie it was in vse in Gods Church aboue 13. hundred yeares past as maie be seene by the citations of the fathers which liued then But euen those verie citations doe prooue the contrarie at the least that it was not in generall vse in the latine Church Saint Augustine in the place by you quoted for the bowe of heretikes where your translation hath in obscuro did reade in obscura luna and standeth much vpon exposition of the darke moone Yea throughout the wholl Psalter whosoeuer wil compare the text which Saint Augustine vsed with your olde translation shall finde great difference betweene them But this your olde translation you tell vs was afterward oueruewed and corrected by Saint Ierome we know verie well that Saint Ierome did oueruew and correct a certaine auncient translation of the septuaginta that was vfed in his time But how are you hable to prooue that this your vulgar translation is the same either corrected or vncorrected For it appeareth by the citations of diuerse of the latine Church which liued after Saint Ierome that they vsed an other text then this translation euen vntill the daies of Bernard When you saie that this your olde translati on was highlie commended by Saint Augustine you make such a shameles 〈◊〉 as you obiect without shame to M. Charke when he saith that the Septuaginta agree with the hebrue in signification of the word perfecte for they saie irreprehensible which must needes be perfect but so is not your latine 〈◊〉 vnspotted or vndefiled which you your selfe in your censure do egerlie contend to be differing from perfection You name the translation of Erasmus and Luther of which the one translated onelie the new testament which Leo. 10. and Clemens 7. did both allow the other translated not the Bible at all in latine except perhappes some partes vpon which he wrote commentaries Here your Printer will make vs beleeue that you were remooued with a writ de remouendo so as you could proceede no further but now there is a writ de renouando sued against you if you
which only meane of preaching expressed in this place you with a Marie for all that fumble vp with I cannot tell what guidance because you cannot content your selfe to be a minister a seruant a subiect but you must be a Lord a Prince a ruler But the other text of Ioh. 20. yousay doth properlie concerne the commission giuen to the Apostles for the sacrament of penaunce and remission of sins But whether I praie you in the scripture shal we read of this your sacrament or the institution thereof what is the visible worde or element thereof yet you saie that this text doth in moste cleare and vndoubted sense giue to them the like right in that case that Christ him-selfe had by the sending of God the father that is to saie the verie same authoritie that he had in respect of his mediation and manhood So that be like Christ as Mediator hath no authority peculiar to himselfe in respect of the excellency of his person but that which is communicable vnto others and is communicated to his Apostles But that is a strange doctrine neuer heard of before in the Church of God except it were from the mouth of Nestorius or any of his disciples For our sauiour Christ receiued in his manhoode that which no other man is able to receiue because he one lie is God and man he receiued the spirit not according to measure Iohn 3. 34. as all men muste do that receiue it therefore no man can receiue such power by the spirit in measure which he receiued by the spirit infinitelie or without measure But Saint Augnstine is called to witnes that this text doth giue theverie same authoritie to the Apostles that Christ had in respect of his mediation and manhoode Whereas Saint Augustines words import no such thing but onelie shew that Christ though equal to his father in respect of his Godheade yet as he is our Mediatour is sent of his father in respect of his manhood But of the verie same authoritie that Christ had in respect of his mediation giuen to the Apostles he speaketh not a word That you ioyne his māhood to his mediation as though the mediator were nothing but man or as though the man Iesus Christ which is our onelie mediator were not Immannell that is God with vs it is not without some smack of Nestorian heresie wherebie you seeme so to separate the man from God as though any thing might be verified of the man which in respect of the vnitie of person might not be verified of God or as though there were not such a perfect vnion of the two natures in one person that although they both continue vnconfounded reteining their essentiall properties yet any part of the office and authoritie of Christ which he exercised in his humanitie might as latgelie as fullie and with the verie same authoritie be committed ouer to any other mortall man to be exercised as it was by Christ himselfe But Theophilact is cited to be an interpreter of Saint Augustine whoe saith vpon these wordes as the father hath sent me c. in the person of Christ take vpon you my worke and be sure that I will be with you meaning that he committeth to them the office of teaching whereunto he was sent by his father but of equall authoritie with him he speaketh no worde Which place you haue verie licentiouslie translated to draw it to your purpose For the words are no more but these as Philippus Montanus hath translated them Meum opus inquit suscipite confidite quod vobiscum sum futurus And in the ende he willeth men to consider the dignitie of priests that it is diuine For it perteineth to God to remit sinnes so therefore are they to be honoured as God For although they be vnworthie what is that they are the ministers of Gods giftes and grace worketh by them euen as he spake by Balaams asse For our vnworthines hindreth not grace so because by meanes of priests grace is graunted they are to be honoured Thefe wordes of Theophilact declare that although he ascribe much to the dignitie of Priests yet he doth not allowe them the verie same authoritie that Christ had in respect of his mediation but a farre inferior ministerie And excellentlie to our purpose wrote the holie father Cyril as well for the dignitie of the Apostolike vocation as for the honourable legacie in these wordes Ad gloriosum Apostolalatum Dominus noster Iesus Christus Discipulos suos vocduit qui commotum orbem firmarunt sustentacula eius facti vnde per Psalmistam de terra de Apostolis dicit quia ego firmaui columnas eius Columnae enim robur veritatis discipulisunt quos ita dicit se mittere sicut à patre ipse missus est vs Apostolatus dignitatem ostenderet magnitudinem potestatis eorum aperiret These wordes and the residue following concerning the same purpose goe thus in english Our Lord and master Christ Iesus promoted his disciple to a glorious Apostleship whoe becing made the proppes and staies of all the earth haue established the wauering worlde whereupon the Psalmist sayeth thus of the earth and the Apostles I haue surelie and firmelie set the pillers thereof For the disciples no doubt be the verie pillers strength and staie of trueth whome Christ saith that he doth send euen as his father did send him that thereby he might declare to the worlde as well the dignitie of their Apostleship as open to all men their excellencie and the might of their power and no lesse signifie vnto them what way they had to take in all their life and studies For if they be so sent as Christ him selfe was sent of the father it is requisite to consider for what worke purpose the father euerlasting sent his sonne in flesh to the worlde And that him selfe els where declareth saying Non veni vocare iustos sed peccatores ad poenitentiam I came not to cal the iust but sinners to repen tance in another place it is said God sent not his sonne into the world to iudge the worlde but that the worlde shold be saued by him al these thinges and other he touched brieflie in these few wordes Sicus misit me pater ego mitto vos vt hinc intelligant vocandos esse 〈◊〉 ad poenitentiam 〈◊〉 corpore simul spiritumale habentes Like as my father sent me so I send you that sinners should be called to repentance and be healed both in bodie and soule Thus farre spake S. Cyril of the excellent calling of the disciples of the cause of their large commission not restricted by any streighter tearmes then Christs owne commission was which he receiued from his euerlasting Father FVLKE The wordes of Saint Cyrillus declare no more then I haue said before that the Apostles were sent of Christ as Christ was sent of his father to call sinners to repentance by their ministerie of preaching not
otherwise but in his right name whosoeuer shall controlle or cōremne they not onely irreuerently touch gods annointed but they sacrilegiously laie handes on ipsum Christum Domini euen on him that is annointed aboue all his fellowes Well I conclud vp this matter with these few wordes of Saint Ambrose Vult Dominus plurimum posse discipulos suos Vult á seruis suis e a fieri in nominesuo quaefaciebat ipse positus in terris Our lordes pleasure is that his disciples should haue great prerogatiue he will haue the same thinges wrought by his seruants in his name that him-selfe did in his owne person when he was in earth FVLKE He that seeth not the difference of the ministerie of man from the power of God in those actions wherein God worketh by man gropeth in the darke seeth nothing as he ought to see Therefore let vs come to the light of your logick and thereby consider if we can the distinction of the one from the other If the maior or first proposition of your former syllogisme be vnderstood of a power or commission graunted to the manhood of Christ such as might haue beene graunted by God to anie other meere man then your Minor is not true that Christ by such a power and commission onelie setting his Godhead aside though truelie and effectuallie yet not in proper forme ofspeach by his fathers sending and commission remitted sinnes for then could he not be the author of remission of sinnes but onelie a minister thereof and therefore in proper forme ofspeach he could not be said to forgiue sinnes which is proper onely to god but to preach the forgiue nes of sinnes in Gods name or to testifie that God did forgiue sinnes as the ministers of the Church do Butif the Maior be vnderstood of such power commission as was giuen to Christ as the Mediator in respect of his manhood but yet such as he couldnot receiue exercise but in respect of his godhead such as could not be graunted to any but vnto that person which is God man such is the absolute principall power of remission of sinnes then I denie that such power was giuen to the Apostles at his departure For when Christ him-selfe did truelie effectuallie and in proper forme of speech remit sinnes he did it as God hauing equal and principall authoritie with the father and the holie ghost so to do The conclusion of your second syllogisme I graunt that the Apostles were sent to forgiue sinnes but retaining the former distinction of the authoritie of God and the ministerie of man For as Christ was sent of his father to preach the remission of sinnes so were the Apostles sent by Christ to preach remission of sinnes therefore such power as he had by preaching onely of remission of sinnes to forgiue sinnes such power be graunted to his Apostles whome he ordained preachers in his place but the proper pow er of his deity he graunted not nor any power which is proper to the person of the Mediator God and man Theresore these wordes of Christ As the father sent me so send I you must not be extended further then our sauiour Christ in that place meaneth For els infinite absurdities might be concluded thereof as that he sent his Apostles to redeeme the world to die for the sinnes of the world to be sauiours of the world c. or that he sendeth all ministers of the Church to whome this commission extendeth to clense leapers to raise the dead to giue sight to the blinde and to do all other miracles that he was sent to do According to this distinction that Rhetoricall amplification of Chrisostome is to be vnderstood and doubtles wonderfull great is the authoritie that man doth exercise in the name of God although that which is peculiar to God be not attributed to men The similitude that Chrysostome vseth in the same chapter Lib. 3. cap. 5. of a King graunting power to one of his subiects to imprison men and to release them sheweth that he knew the difference of the Lord from the seruant who if he abuse the authoritie committed vnto him deserueth sharpe punishment and therefore hath not absolute authoritie to do all things as his Lord and can not transgresse in doing And in the next Chapter he sheweth that Priestes do exercise this power of forgiuing sinnes by teaching admonition and by praier Not onelie by teaching and admonishing but also by the helpe of praiers and a manifest difference sheweth Saint Ambrose when he saith Christ would haue his disciples to do in his name the same thinges which he did on earth partlie in his fathers name and partlie in his owne name The power of priesthood touching remission of sinnes prooued by the solemne action of Christ in breathing vpon his Apostles and giuing them thereby the holie Ghost THE THIRD CHAP. ALLEN THe commission and power that our Master Christ receiued of his euerlasting father being in moste ample manner communicated with the Apostles made great proofe and euidence for the right that they claime in remission of sinnes but the present power of Gods spirit breathed by Christ vpon them and giuen vnto them for the ministerie and execution of that function helpeth our matter so much that whoso euer now denieth this authoritie of the Apostles concerning the pardoning of our offences doth not so much sinne against the sonne of man which of it selfe is greeuous inough as he doth controll the worke of the spirit of Christ which is the holie Ghost in whome both he and his Church doth remit sinnes The more plaine and more exact our master Christ was in the bestowing of that power to remit and retaine sinnes the more is our contempt in the disobedience and deniall thereof He sendeth them 〈◊〉 with his owne authoritie in this case he giueth them the verie spirit of God by whose diuine power they maie execute the function to which he called them he giueth them the expresse warrant of his owne word that sinnes they might pardon and punish and yet we make doubt of their vsurpation But how they might forgiue sinnes by Christes sending we haue alreadie said Now for the holie Ghostes power and prerogatiue in the same action which was breathed on the Apostles we must further conferre with such as call in question matters so plaine And first I am in goodhope that no man will denie but Christ gaue them the holie ghost for no other purpose so much as to remit sinnes Secondlie I doubt not of their faith and beliese in this point but they will confesse the holie ghost to be of power by nature and proprietie to forgiue sinnes Thirdlie I claime of their sinceritie thus much more that Christ being as well God as man was well able for the furniture of their calling to giue them the holie ghost all which being confessed of all men and denied of no Christian aline how the conclusion so beset with all
shall accept him for their Father and mercisull redemer ALLEN There were some of olde that droue the mysteries of Christs incarnation and speaches that prooue his equalitie with his Father in Godhead to figuratiue phrases and sought for the defence of their folie the like phrases in other of Christes talkes but neuer none were comparable in this kinde to our new deuisers For by the face and crake of gods word they haue brought to passe amongst fooles that no one text of scripture which pertaineth to anie of the Sacramentes can haue his meaning and such sense as the the verie word beareth and the world hath euer taken and confirued of it The blessed and moste soueraigne sacrament of the altar instituted in a solemne action in moste carefull manner amongst his moste secret seruants the last almoste of all his workes in earth in moste euident tearmes with sore charge giuen to the Apostles of the continuance of his euerlasting memorie in the same yet must meane nothing lesse then that which our Master made it and must by a thousand figures be wrasted and writhen to what you list like so that is be not to importe that which our Master said it did and the Church hath euer beleeued of the same Wordes of the like solemnitie were vsed for the ordering of the holie vse of Baptisme to be done as the worde doth also import necessarilie in the externall element of water with certaine most holie prescribed wordes vnder paine and perill of euerlasting perishing to the neglecters thereof yet in such plainnes figures are found out by these pernicious conueiers that neither water is counted so much necessary nor the wordes of such strength but that one of these malapert fellowes was bolde to write that it was much superstition to binde the Church to the same as to the prescribed wordes of art Magike sorcerie and witchcrafie Of the honourable act and sacrament of extream vnction what can be said with more euidence of wordes then is spoken of the holie Apostle Saint Iames If any man be sicke amongst you let him cal for the Priests of the Church and let them annoynt him with oile and yet so litle matter these men make of the Apostles spirit word and writing that they haue condemned the whole vse thereof as superstitious not helping them-selues by figures but by openforce Grace is giuen to Timothie as in a sacrament when he toke orders of Paull the Apostle saith so much in expresse tearmes yet this grace and the whole sacrament of orders these holie men reiect Matrimonie to S. Paule is a great sacrament and of our ministers not misliked so faire as concerneth their fleshlie coniunction which they onelie lust after but grace they list not receiue thereby lest it should be a sacrament whereby the vnitie of Christ and his spouse the Church which in no sauce they can abide might be fullie represented and signified FVLKE It is one thing ro drawe violentlie al things expressed in the scriptures vnto alligories other figuratiue speaches an other thing not to acknowledge any figures which yet be so vsuall in the institution of sacramēts The face crake of gods word with the sequele thereof that you speake of so long as it resteth vpon your owne cracked credit shal be litle regarded by any wise man But to examine the examples you bring to iustifie your saying first you begin with the Lords supper where you saie it was instituted in most euident tearmes Wherebie you meane termes properlie vsed and without figure as though you had forgotten the wordes of our sauiour Christ perteining to the institution of the cuppe This cup is the new testament in my blood Luk. 22. 1. Cor. 11. Where I maruell whether you haue the face to saie the wordes are not figuratiue which he vsed or whether you will saie the Euangelist and Apostle did expresse the words of Christ in more obscure tearmes then he spake them or whether there be not the same sense of these figuratiue wordes This cup is the new testament in my blood and those other reported by the other Euangelists This is my blood In saying we wold haue the words of our Sauiour Christ meane nothing lesse then the sacrament that he made it you slaunder vs without measure or cause For we would haue the words of our Sauiour meane nothing more nor lesse but euen altogether as much as our sauiour Christ did meane to teach vs by them And the hyperbolic all lie of a thousand figures by which we should wrest them may in respect of greater number of figures you make in your grosse and carnall exposition be iustified of you rather then of vs whose interpretation maketh but one figure and one meaning and that warranted by the wordes of diuerse of the most auncient and Catholike Doctors In the sacrament of baptisme who make the external element of water more necessary to be vsed they that re quire water for the vse thereof or els require that the external elemét be forborne rather then that it should be chaunged into wine milke broth or any othre more vile licour of which kinde of questions other mostrous cases your treatises of the sacraméts are ful What Brentius hath written I haue not to do to answer yet it seemeth that the words of Brentius are wrested of you to another meaning rather then that he would haue them either altered or the sense of them not reteined Wherein for any thing that I can see he varieth not from the iudgement of your Master of the sentences al sententionaries which allow baptisme ministred in the name of Christ to be as good as in the name of the blessed trinitie lib. 4. distinct 3. Of extreame vnction we finde nothing in Saint Iames but of a ceremonie of annointing with oyle ioyned with the gift of healing vsed in the primitiue Church but not to be drawne into example of them that confesse they are void of that mirarulous gift The vse of which ceremonie without the gift whereunto it was annexed without any force or figure we may be bolde to condemne as superstitious The grace that was giuen to Timothie and the order of the Ecclesiasticall ministerie distinct from the common people we acknowledge and reteine But that any gift of prophesie or of any other grace is dispensed by imposition of the handes of the presbyterie in these daies as it was in the Apostles time we cannot acknowledge before we see it for he that was voide of all spirituall giftes before his taking of orders remaineth as verie an asse among you as he was before Seeing matrimonie was instituted in paradise before the fall of man we cannot accoumpt it a sacrament of the new testament by which we are assured of grace in the forgiuenes of sinnes and yet we doe howsoeuer it pleaseth you to raile vpon our ministers acknowledge that great and excellent mysterie of the spirituall vnitie
of Christ and his spouse the Church which you saie in no sauce we can abide as though wheresoeuer any mysterie is confessed to be there muste needes follow a Sacrament of the new testament ALLEN These fellowes therefore that dare be so bolde to disturbe all the orders and sacramentes of Gods Church and to mainteine their phantasies dare brust the sacred bandes of expresse scriptures in such pointes as doe directlie touch the wholl policie of our Christian common wealth and ordered waics of our saluation euen in those which Christ moste carefullie left to be practized for the vse of his louing slocke by the warrant of wordes moste plaine what shall we saie to such bold and impudent faces that thus dare doe and yet which I more mernaile at in this their vncurtesie and most vnhonest dealing will not sticke to crie and call vpon Gods worde as though they did that by scripture the contrarie whereof they expresslie finde in scripture And truelie where they be not holpen by the verte wordes vaine it shall be for them to stand with vs and with all our Fathers and with the practize of all nations and with the very expresse iudgement of the Church of God it shal not boote them I saie in their darke ignorance infinite pride to stand with vs hauing so many helpes for the true meaning and the expresse text of the worde for our selues and side FVLKE He must needes haue an impudent face and a wicked conscience that so shamefullie slaundereth vs to bereake the sacred bandes of the expresse scriptures wherunto we seeme to attribute al credit as though we denie any one word of expresse scripture do not affirme whatsoeuer the scripture doth affirme in expresse words or denie whatsoeuer the holy scripture in expresse words doth deny according to such sense and meaning as the scripture must haue as it is agreable to it selfe in all places The expresse wordes of scripture touching the Lords supper are these that it is the body blood of Christ we confesse and beleeue as much The expresse wordes of scripture concerning the Apostles authoritie in pardoning or reteining sinnes are as they haue beene often alledged we beleeue they and their successours of whome there is no expresse word haue power to remit or reteine sins The expresse words of scripture concerning the Lords supper are also The rocke was Christ we beleeue that the rocke was Christ. The cup is the new testament we beleeue that the cup is the new testament Also by expresse words to the Apostles there is graunted power to binde and to loose We confesse and beleeue that they haue power to binde and to loose And yet I trust we may be bolde to saie without breaking the sacred bondes of expresse scriptures The rocke was not Christ in nature of his humanitie and diuinitie but a sacrament of Christ. The cup is not the new couenant it selfe but that which is in the cup is an holie signe or seale thereof The Apostles had no power giuen them to binde men with chaines or coardes nor to loose the chaines coards of them that be bound by other but a spirituall authoritie to binde and loose spirituallie In like manner we doe not breake the sacred bandes of expresse scripture when we affirme that the Sacramentall bread and wine are not by transsbustantiation turned into the naturall bodie and bloode of Christ or the bodie and blood of Christ in the sacrament are not corporallie receiued but spirituallie For the contrarie of these we finde not expresselie in the scripture So when we saie the Apostles had not power to remit sinnes properlie which is peculiar onelie to God but to aslure men in Christes name whose embassadours they were of the forgiuenes of their sinnes by Christ we breake no bandes of expresse scriptures For we confesle the wordes according to their true meaning agreeable with other places of scripture that teach it to be peculiar to God to remit sinnes properlie An embassadour is said to make peace or warre when he declareth according to his commission his Princes determination of peace or warre The Kinges Liuetenant hauing such commission offereth or graun teth pardon to rebells or other offenders where he doth onelie declare the kinges pleasure in pardoning or releasing their offences As for the Popish bragge of all our fathers with the practize of all nations and the verie expresse iudgement of the Church of God to be for your assertion how vaine it is will easilie appeare when you come to cite fathers shew forth the practize of all nations declare the iudgement of Gods Church and when the contradictorie shall be manifestlie prooued and brough forth against you ALLEN Sometimes where it may appeare that the wordes and outwarde face of scripture serue not our assertions so plainlie as the holie traditions of Christes Church doe there they call vpon vs with infinite clamours to abide the iudgement of the word which they would be thought to esteeme aboue all mans meaning But whether would they now runne thinke you where all our sacraments stand vpon euident words more then words vpon the verie expresse notorious action of Christ him selfe al instituted sincerelie to be practized of the Church after his de parture hence all commended in knowne termes of greatest moste efficacie that could be not by way of preaching in which he vsed sometimes figures not at such time as he vsed other then common knowne speach but after his resurrection when he now vttered no more parables as he did before that such as faw should not see and such as were of vnderstanding might not vnderstand but did open vnto his dearest their senses that they might vnderstand scriptures and more carefullie expressed his meaning for the instruction of his holie Disciples to the better bearing of that charge which he meant to leaue them in after his departure whither will these men I saie where they see all thinges so enuironed with trueth whither will they flie The scriptures be plainlie ours the Doctors they dare not claime reason is against them there is then no waie to beare it out but with boldnes and exercised audacitie Yet here we wil assay by the notorious euidence of this one cause that we now haue in hand to breake their stonie heartes to the obedience of Christs Church word for whose faith if they haue seene great light force of argument allready shal yet see much more I trust they wil not stil with stand the knowen truth FVLKE We will runne no further for the vnderstanding of Christes wordes concerning the institution and practize of his holie sacramentes although we haue the consent of the moste auncient and approoued doctors of the primitiue Church as witnesses of the same That the sacraments are commended in knowne terms of greatest and most efficacie that could be we cofesse but therof it followeth not that they were not in some part commended by figuratiue speeches
which are often and almost alwaies if they be rightlie vsed better knowne and of greater efficacie then proper tearmes That you saie the sacraments were not commended by way of Preaching it is a grosse and impudent absurditie when they were instituted and commended to be seales of the doctrine that was preached for confirmation of faith which is builded vpon the hearing of Gods word preached As also it is a brutish assertion that Christ vsed no figuratiue speeches after his resurrection For what are these but figuratiue speeches feede my sheepe feede my lambes And what was that but a parable of Peters bandes girding him-selfe and being girded walking where he would and led whither he would not to signifie by what death he should glorifie God Neither did he affect obscurity by parables before his resurrection For his parables were vttered for better and more plaine vnderstanding of his obedient disciples although to the reprobate contemners of his doctrine they seemed hard and inexplicate and were as all things are vnto them and as Christ him-selfe was a stumbling block and stone of offence that they might fall and perish That our sauiour Christ did open the senses of his Apostles that they might vnderstand the scriptures they were the better able to vnderstand figuratiue speeches of which the scripture is full But that he did more carefully expresse his meaning for the instruction of his holie disciples I do denie for he had alwaies before as great care to expresse his meaning and without care was alwaies hable to vtter his diuine pleasure considering that he had appointed the doctrine which he preached before his resurrection to be committed to writing for the publike and perpetuall instruction of his wholl Church To the vaine insultation and boasting that followeth I answer as in the end of the last section before ALLEN All wordes then of institution of sacraments being literallie to be taken and things of so great charge not otherwise to be vnderstanded then are both by act and word of Christ sincerelie vttered we neede not doubt but the forme of Christes sentence in which he giueth the Apostles power to remit sinnes is plainly to be taken in that common sense as the same by wordes importeth and therefore that by force thereof they maie remitte sinnes And yet to make more proofe to satisfie all men I will ioyne to these wordes of our sauiour that most properlie concerne the sacrament of penance other his wordes touching our principall couclusion not vnlike whereby in conference of the like sayinges together which our aduersaries do alwaies as they would seeme well to allow trueth maie trie it selfe Therefore as our master here saith whose sinnes you shall forgiue they be forgiuen And whose sinnes you retaine they be also retained euen so said he twice before vnto the Apostles expressing in other wordes almost the same meaning and sense once to them altogether in the 18. of Saint Mathew and an other time before that in the 16. of the same Gospel to S. Peter alone To them in generall thus saith Christ If thy brother haue committed anie offence towards thee go to him admonish him priuately betwixt him and thy selfe If he take it well thou hast wonne thy brother if he regarde thee not take one or two with the that in the mouthes of two or three witnesses euerie word maie stand if he regarde not them neither then make complaint of him to the Church that is to saie as Saint Chrisostome expoundeth it to the gouernours of the Church and if he will not obey the Church then take him for no better then a Heathen and a Publicane And straight vpon these wordes lest anie man should set light by the Church or rulers thereof Christ added saith Saint Augustine a wonderfull terrour of her seuere authoritie saying Amen dico vobis quaecunque alligaueritis super terram erunt ligata in coelo quaecunque solueritis super terram erunr soluta in coelo Surelie I saie vnto you what things soeuer you binde in earth it shal be bound in heauen And whatsoeuer you loose in earth it shall be loosed in heauen This text is cleere for the Churches claime in remission of sinnes though it properlie pertaine rather to the outward power iudiciarie and court of external iudgement for open crimes and notorious contemptes then for the sinnes of the people that be secret and onelie subiect to power practized in the sacrament of penance which now lightlie is close and onelie vttered in secret to him that hath charge of his soule Neuerthelesse if the Priestes of God haue receiued power to loose and binde which is to pardon and punish open notorious crimes and contemptes which touching the guiltines of the fault doth no lesse pertaine to the power of God then the absoluing of secres sinnes doth then without question they maie pardon orretaine mans sinnes of al sortes as well in the sacrament of penance all that be confessed as in publike iudgement whatsoeuer is by witnesse prooued And as in this they maie at their pleasure where iustice requireth correct the open offender by most graue censures of Gods Church so maie the Priestes giue due penance in the sacrament for the chastisment of such sinnes as be to them confessed and for the satisfying of Gods iustice by sinne violated FVLKE If al wordes of institution of sacramets must be taken literallie then must these wordes be taken literallie This cup is the new testament in my blood The lambe is the Lordes passeouer Circumcision is the couenant and such like But as for your conclusion though inferred vpon a false principle I confesse to be true that the Apostles by force of the wordes of commission graunted to them maie remit sinnes but not properly for that the wordes do not enforce Both the places that you will ioyne to this of Math. 18. and Math. 16. are parables and figuratiue speaches of binding and loosing of the keies of the Kingdome of heauen and of a stone and buildilng of che Church thereupon neuerthelesse the text Math 18. I do acknowledge to be cleere for the Churches claime in remitting offences and that it pertaineth more properlie to the discipline of the Church then to the preaching of repentance and remission of sins whereunto the text of Iohn 21. moste properlie belongeth That you saie pennance is now lightlie close and the sinnes vttered onelie in secret to him that hath charge of his soule you do closelie confesse that otherwise lightlie you will not openlie acknowledge that your practize is contrarie to the vse of the most auncient and primitiue Church But that the ministers of the Church haue authoritie to remit sinnes as well openlie as secretlie I am content it be without question onelie this is the question whether anie thing pertaining to the proper power of God be made common to men For we holde that they do in such sorte remit sinnes as they exercise nothing that pertaineth
contrarie doings may be What Epiphanius writeth of his heresie and Saint Ambrose confuted the same is shewed before as also how truelie Caluine is charged to iumpe with Nouatus in denying repentance after Baptisme because he calleth baptisme the sacrament of repentance as before him the auncient writers vsed accustomablie whereof you maie reade in his institution the place before mentioned ALLEN Mary long before that his fall to heresie S. Cornelius writein that he was possessed in his youth with an euill spirit for which he had to do great while with coniurers that he lacked all the holie solemnitie of Baptisme and confirmation and consequentlie the Spirit of God which by them he should haue receiued and therefore tooke orders against the law vpon sinister fauour and afterward by vnlawfull artes attempted to get abishopricke with great othes protesting that he would not be a Bishop if he might But when indeede he could not attaine to that holie dignitie which he so inwardlie and intollerablie gaped for he fell in despite of Gods Church to heresie that he might get that without order whch he could not obtaine in the right manner of the Churches making And for that purpose he procured three base Bishops out of a straunge and remote part of Italie who neither knew the case the man nor his manners and them through ignorance he beguiled and by force caused them to consecrate him Bishop by the colour whereof for true imposition of hands was it none sodenlie he appeareth as a new creature a Bishop of a strange stamp apparuit Episcopus velut nouum Plasma saith Cornelius And for this attempt one of the poore Bishops did great penance the other two were deposed In the meane time this mocke Bishop vendicabat sibi euangelium challenged the word of the Lord for him-selfe denied him-selfe to be a Priest because he would not giue to the people as Theodoritus saith in their extremitie the remedie for their sinnes which is nothing els but to giue them absolution which worke he could neuer abide To be short he was so incensed against his lawful Paslour and superiour the holie Bishop of Roome that in the deliuerie of the blessed sacrament to the people he would force them to take an oth by the blessed bodie which they had in their handes readie to receiue that they should stick to him and for sake the Bishop of Rome Cornelius All these thinges in sense hath Eusebius of Nouatus the first patron of the Protestants doctrine concerning the impugning of the Churches title in remission of sins of which her right he would haue robbed her in pretence of maintenance of Gods honour Whereby he also abrogated the wholl Sacrament of penance This falsehood though it were streight with he author condemned in a great Councell holden at Rome and afterward in diuerse Prouinciall Synodes and by the holie councell of Nice it selfe repressed also Yet it spred very sort and cintinued long and was not onelie by S. Cyprian but also by Dyonisius Alexandrinus Saint Amb ose and Saint Chrysostome refused in sundrie workes written against the Nouatians By whome and other though the course of that false assertion was often broken in gods Church yet in some partes they did knit againe sometimes by certaine heretikes of Nouatus daies called Tessarescedecatitae qui auersabantur poenitentiam saith Theodoritus who did abhorre penance and sometimes by a sort called Iacobitae 〈◊〉 whiles by wrcliffe his else by the Waldenses now and than by the Anabaptistes latly by the Lutherans moste of the protestantes by the Caluinistes eueryone All which blacke band though they agree not at euery pinch of Nouatus heresit for it is not possible that such should euer fullie consent yet all these knit tailes together in this that there is no sacrament of penance after Baptisme in which the priest may forgiue sinnes and that it standeth not with gods honour so to remit the peoples offences Of other the like heresies which he lent our men as of forbidding holie Chrisme and annointing of such as were by him baptized in so much that the holie fathers were glad to make vp the lacke thereof in all such as came from their heresie to the vnitie of Christes Church I will not here speake purposing onelie because that onelie concerneth our matter to refute that olde heresie raised so long since against the prerogatiue of Gods priests and onelie helpe of our sinnes that at once both the author and the ofspring may be fullie ouer throwen FVLKE Nouatus as he is described by Cyprian but that he came too soone before the open reuelation of Antichrist had beene a man much more fit to make a Pope of the Church of Rome whereof he was mockbishop then a poore minister of the Church of England And whatsoeuer you gatherout of Euseb. Theodoret or any other writer against him declareth that he was an execrable man but maketh no resemblance of his heresie with our doctrine concerning the power of remitting of sinnes You saie that he lacked all the solemnitie of baptisme and confirmation and consequentlie the spirit of God which by them he should haue receiued Eusebius indeed out of the Epistle of Cornelius writeth that after he was helped by exorcistes he fell into dangerous sicknes and being at the point of death and not considering he receiued baptisme in his bed if it may be said that such a one receiued For after he escaped his sicknes he obtained not therest whereof he should haue bin partaker according to the canon of the Church that is to be sealed or confirmed of the Bishope and hauing not obtained this how obtained he the holie Ghost By which wordes Cornelius meant that he which was baptized in extreamitie when he knew not what was done vnto him and afterward when he was whole had no care to approoue his baptisme by the Bishoppes iudgement vpon his owne confession acknowledging of Christian Religion could not be taken for a right Christian much lesse according to the discipline of those daies might be admitted vnto the ministerie But being admitted by a singular and if you will a sinister dispensation in time of persecution he was so fearefull that he denied himselfe to be a Priest when he was desired to come vnto them and onelie by wordes to confirme them that were stricken with the terrour of the tyrant as Therdoret writeth The oathe that he exacted of such as receiued the Sacrament of the Lordes supper at his handes was more like the oath that the pope exacteth of all Bishopes at their consecration then anie ministred in the Queenes Maiesties visitation That Wickliffe the Waldenses Luther or Caluine do denie repentance or reconciliation of them that are fallen after Baptisme it is a meere slaunder although they denie the Popish sacrament of penance whereof there was no mention in the Chuch manie hundred yeares after Nouatus That the Nouatians did not anoint those that
name and authoritie shall sufficientlie beate downe these mens boldnes Saint Ambrose in this case is moste plaine and standeth with the Nouatians as I doe now with the Zuinglians euen in the verie same argument in these wordes Sed aiunt se Domino deferre reuerentiam cui soli remittend orum oriminum potestatem reseruent imò nulli maiorem iniuriam faciunt quà m qui eius volunt mandata res indere commissum munus refindere nam cùm ipse in Euangelis suo dixerit Dominus Iesus accipite Spiritum sanctum quorum remiseritis peccata c. quis est ergo qui magis honorat Vtrum qui mandat is attemperat an qui resistit Ecclesia in vtroque seruat obedientiam vt peccatism alliget laxat That is to saie These Nouatians saie that they denie penance or power to remit sinnes in earth in respect of the maintenance of such honour as is due to God to whome onely they will reserue the pardoning of mans sinnes But in deede none doe so much iniury to Gods glory as those which breake his commaundements and make a diuision of that charge and commission which he giueth For seeing our Lord Iesus by his owne mouth spake these words Receiue ye the holy ghost whose sinnes you doe forgiue they be forgiuen and whose sinnes you holde they beholden who in this case more honoureth God He that obeieth his commaundement or he that resisteth the same The Church obeieth in both as well in binding as in loosing Thus there And a litle after Looke to whome this charge was giuen and that person may lawfullie and with Gods good leaue vse the same Au l therefore the Church may lawfullie both binde and loose heresie and her attendants can rightlie doe neither This right is onelie committed to priests and therefore the Church rightlie challengeth that authoritie because shee hath lawfull priests and so heresie cannot doe because shee hath not the priests of God in her cursed congregation Thus said Saint Ambrose for the answere of the Nouatians in his daies and so say I now in the Churches behalfe against the like affected enemies of Christs honour which whiles they in face of scripture and Gods word would seeme to defend they are become sworne aduersaries of his honour and open contemners of his commaundements and holy ordinance Saint Ambrose here taketh it for a ground that it is Gods ordinance that Priests should remit sinnes he is bolde to call the contrarie doctrine heresie he maketh a principle of this that it neuer dishonoureth God that man should doe that which God giueth him either commaundement or commission to doe in his behalfe he taketh it for a knowne trueth that as the Church of God hath true and lawfull priests so shee may by them vpon Christes warrant bath loose and binde and contrariwise that heresie may well enough giue ouer that right of remission of sinnes because shee hath lightlie no lawfull priests by whome shee may practize the same FVLKE First you make a vaine exclamation or outcrie as though heresie hath spoiled the Church of her treasures vnder pretence of Gods glorie but such rhetoricall vamties all wise men will deride The Church is not spoiled of her treasures when neither Christ nor his grace is conteined in the sacraments but when Christ her onelie treasure is spoiled of his glorie of sole redemption and fatisfaction for our sinnes or of any other parte of the office that belongeth to the mediator Therefore it is her greatest honour that Christ may haue his true honour in whome with whome she hath al things not to the glory of flesh bloode but to the glorie of God to whome all glorie of right belongeth what Saint Ambrose did write against the Nouatians pertaineth not to vs who denie neither the power of remitting nor of reteining of sinnes but graunt both But that Saint Ambrose did not meane of such a power as the Papists doe claime I haue shewed before out of his owne wordes in the same place where he saieth that our Lord hath chosen such Disciples as should be interpreters of their Lordes will This power is graunted to all true ministers of the Church that they are the Legates or embassadors of god to declare his wil pleasure vnto men aswel for remitting as for reteining of sins And therefore Nouatus or Nouatianus did very absurdlie by Saint Ambrose his iudgement that did arrogate vnto himselfe power to reteine sinnes while he pronounced that they which fell into Idolatrie after Baptisme might not be receiued into the Church vpon any trial of their repentance and would not yeald that the ministers of the Church by the same authoritie might pronounce that they which were truelie penitent of their former wicked behauiour were forgiuen in the iudgement of God which was to remit their sins vpon earth with faith in Gods promise that they shall be forgiuen in heauen Thus the answere of Saint Ambrose vnto the Nouatians doth nothing in the world make against vs which denie no power that Christ hath graunted to his Church vnder collour of maintenance of Gods honour ALLEN And surelie it is a maruclous force of trueth or rather the might of Gods prouidence that driueth Heretikes to disdaine destroie and dissanull the graces and manifold giftes of Christes Church that impugning them where the verie right of such holie actes doe lie they may plainlte confesse and to their shame acknowledge that they haue none such themselues nor cannot by Gods warrant challenge any such giftes which with all their might they would wholie if they could together with Gods spirit and Church extinguish Alas into what miserie hath this forfaken flocke willfullie cast them selues and their adherentes which can forsake Gods house vbi mandauit Dominus benedictionem vpon which God hath bestowed his blessing abide there where by their owne confession there is no Priesthood no penance no host no sacrifice no remission where they can let of sinnes no grace in sacramentes nor no gift of the holie Ghost All other herisies lightlie by force of the Fathers Doctrine and iudgement lost either their Priesthood because they had no waie out of the Church to make Priestes as Saint Hierome writeth of Hilarie the Deacon or els the vse and function of Priesthood by reason the workes of God cannot be orderly nor benefi iallie vsed out of the house of God and yet they euer claimed to themselues not onlie the order but for moste parte all other functions that by Christ and his Church were annexed to that order but ours wherein they passe all their forefathers in a manner willinglie giue ouer the wholl profession freelie and without compulsion denie them selues with Nouatus to be priestes denie to sacrifice denie to enioyne penance denie to giue the holie ghost either by imposition of handes or by Chrisme or by any other solemne right of Gods Church To be short take nothing from these fellowes that belongeth
as sickenes might often take holde of men Yours is not extreame it may be repeated if it may not be repeated it is not the vnction that S. Iames speaketh of Of the sayings of Epiphanius and Lactantius we haue spoken before which it were needeles here to repeate That there was a ceremonie vsed in reconciling of publike penitents I denie not but that there was a sacrament of penance you haue hetherto brought no good euidence For your argument to prooue that they talke not of inward repentance but of an action solemnly exercised because we heare that the priest is minister is no good euidence for the priest is minister of the worde as well as of the sacraments ALLEN Which trueth Saint Cyrill vttereth most plainlie for our purpose treating thus vpon the words of institution of this sacrament Cùm ipsiremittunt aut detinent spiritus qui habitat in eis per ipsosremittit aut detinet fit autem id duobus modis primùm Baptisme deinde Poenitenita When the priestes remit sinnes or reteine them the holie ghost which which dwelleth in them doth remit or retein by them Which is done two manner of waies first in Baptisme and then afterward in penance Saint Cyprian also said that the holie ghost worketh remission of sinnes whether it be in baptisme or by other sacraments Whereby he cleerelie vttereth his meaning that there should be moe sacraments then one instituted by Christ for that purpose In all which congruitie of Gods holie working by diuerse sacraments the remission of sinnes we conclude against heresie that the priesis power herein derogateth no more to god nor our sauiour in the sacrament of penance then is doth before by baptisme or after by extreame vnction in none of al which as I haue prooued before Christ doth resigne his power and proper iurisdiction to the priestes but continuing euerlastinglie in like preheminence and power as before worketh his grace and remission of sinnes in all these Sacraments by the priests seruice and ministerie that it maybe yet as truelie as in his life time said and so shall be to the worlds ende Christ baptizeth Christ shriueth assoileth and anointeth sinners for remission of their offences Although Iesus doth none of these now nor much did in his life time but his disciples then and his disciples now doe the same holie actions in his name FVLKE There is nothing in Saint Cyrills wordes to prooue that there is a sacrament of repentance beside baptisme but that the holie ghost doth remit or reteine by his ministers by two waies namelie by baptisme by repentance after baptisme For if you will restraine the worde poenitentia to your pretended sacrament then this absurditie will follow that seeing there are but two waies by which the spirit remitteth sinnes they are not remitted without that sacrament neither by true contrition of heart without any sacrament not by receiuing the Lordes supper nor by your extreame vnction Therefore poenitentia in Saint Cyrill signifieth repentance and is necessarilie required in them that shall obteine remission of sinnes by participation of the Lordes supper or by faith without any sacrament That Cyprian maketh moe sacraments then one instituted by Christ to assure vs of remission of sinnes it is true For by the sacrament of the bodie and bloode of Christ worthelie receiued we haue this assurance also as well as by the sacrament of baptisme To conclude the power of Christ or of his ministers graunted by him we denie not but the institution of the sacrament of penance we require to be shewed out of the holie scriptures if you will haue vs to beleeue it ALLEN To conclude this matter I argue thus It is no dishonour to God for the priest to remit sinnes as well originall as actuall of all sortes and grauitie in the sacrament of Baptisme by the Protestantes owne confession nor by extreame vnction by the warrant both of scripture and Doctors Ergo remission of sinnes is not vnlawfull nor dishonourable to God to be giuen by the priest in the solemne sacrament of penance And further I ioyne with them thus The word of God is much more plaine and expresse for the priests warrant to remit sinnes in penance then in Baptisme but they may lawfullie doe it in Baptisme Ergo they may doe it no lesse lawfullie in penance Compare the wordes of institution of them both and iudge your selues of your indifferencie and sinceritie by what right you remooue the one and reteine the other I praie God you seeke not shortelie to baptize vs onely by your preaching as you now will onelie absolue vs by the same But truelie I thinke you be in the case that Saint Ambrose tooke Nouatus your forefather to haue bene in not onelie for that that he saieth Nouatus where he listed would admit power to priests of remission But where he listed not there the grace giuen to them must be dishonoured to God So that of thinges equallie commended by scripture and commaunded by God the good man must haue choise for his tooth not onelie in this point I now compare our choise men but much more in that which followeth in the saide Saint Ambrose of all Nouatians whome he trippeth pretelie with this terme delicati mei My delicate gentlemen saith he with their lustie lookes and swelling hartes can not abide in their brauerie to looke vpon a poore caitisse weeping for his sinnes abundantlie apparelled mourninglie in sad and sorowfull companie and so forth And this surelie is the disease of our daies which hath not onelie infected the vnfaithfull but also hath made these holie thinges lothsome euen to the better sorte of Gods people So much is mans will and pleasure pampered where Gods worde and writing should be onelie followed For the necessarie bearing with such frailtie euen of the good almost generallie the Church of God hath sought and allowed much more gentle remedies then the worlde had wont full gladlie to beare for their greeuous sinnes FVLKE We confesse that it is no dishonour to God that the minister lawfullie authorized should remit sinnes in such sorte as he hath commission namelie by declaring the wil of God that they are by him remitted and giuing the seales or sacraments of God for more full assurance of performance as euen the Master of the sentences teacheth out of S. Augustine and other Doctors whose words I wil set downe that the indifferent reader may see how you agree with your owne principal piller and post of Poperie who in this point seemeth to be more sound yet then you Cùm veraciter ad Deum conuerso peccata dimittuntur ab iis dimittuntur quibus ipse veraci conuersione coniungitur Spiritus sanctus ea dimittit qui datus est omnibus sanctis sibi charitare cohaer entibus siue se nouerint corporaliter siue non Similiter cum alicuius tenentur peccato ab eis tenentur quibus ille cordis prauitate disiungitur siue
to vs. So that after that daie no sinnes mortal could ordinariely be loosed but by theÌ„ that sacrament which in their ministery he then did institute FVLKE Now you come towarde the point when you promis to let vs see how your popish confession is of Christes institution It dependeth you saie directly vpon Christes owne wordes whose sinnes you doe forgiue c. That would we faine see how For you your selfe though you make a very disorderly syliogisme cannot tel which way to infer it vpon your premises But thus you reason If Christ gaue power to Priestes to forgiue or retaine sinnes then there must needes be some subiect to their power and iudgement I answere you that euery power draweth not a iudgement with it and therefore you foist in the word iudgement vnreasonablie although I graunt also a kinde of iudgement vnto them and that men are subiect to this power and iudegment of the ministers by whome is declared the infallible sentence of God Then saie you it is a cleare case that in the verie same words that power was deliuered to them the bond of obedience was also prescribed to vs. Of what obedience I pray you that we should obay them in any thing they shal speake or only when they speake in the word of the Lord If the latter only for no man wil graunt the former shew vs if you be able the Lords word and commaundement for sacramental confessoÌ„ as you terme it to be necessary Your conclusion hangeth as wel by your premises as confession dependeh vpon Christs words That after that date no sins mortall could ordinarilie be loosed 〈◊〉 by them and in that sacrament which in their ministery he then did institute All sin is mortall and deseruing death The wages of sinne saith the Apostle is death But your conclusion is confuted by your selfe afterward graunting sinnes to be remitted by baptisme and as for other sacraments I dare saie you will not exempt them but that sinnes are forgiuen by them And that which is the chiefe matter in controuersie namelie that a sacrament was there and then instituted you alwaies affirme but neuer are able to prooue And whereas you affirme that the necessitie of auricular confession standeth not vpon positiue lawes but by Christes institution it is maruell that this institution should so manie hundreth yeares be vnknowne in the Church The Master of the sentences can saie nothing for it but alledgeth diuers authorities to and froe and in the end hath no certaine argument to perswade vs that it is of Christes institution Gratian likewise in his decrees after diuers testimonies producted on both sides whether it be necessarie or no concludeth in these words Quib authoritatibus vel quibuslibetrationum firmamentis vtroque sententia satisfactionis confessionis innitatur in medium breuiter exposuimus cui autem harum 〈◊〉 adhaerendum sit 〈◊〉 is iudicio referatur viraque enim 〈◊〉 habet sarientes religi osor viros Vpon what authorites and what fundations of reasons both the iudgement of satisfaction and confession doth leane we haue briefely brought forth and declared But to whether of these we ought chieflie to sticke it is reserued to the iudgement of the reader for either of both opinions hath wise and religious men fauorers of it If the Romish Church in Gratianstime had receiued the opinion of the necessitie of shrift to a Priest to be grounded vpon the institution of Christ neither he nor the Master of the sentences would haue bin in such a mamering about it wherfore it appeereth to be but young ware the institution whereof was so vncertaine to those principal pillers of popery In so much that the glosse vpoÌ„ the 5. aistinct In penitentia was bolde to vtter these wordes which should haue prooued him an heretike if the popish Churh in his time had held that confession was of Christs institution and not vpon any positiue laws In hac distinctione in aliis duabus sequentibus agitur 〈◊〉 de illa parte poenitentiae que dicitur oris confessio operis satisfactio quà m de aliis ider videndum est 〈◊〉 oris confessio fuerit instituta virum necessaria sit vel 〈◊〉 voluntaria qualiter sit facienda cui et quando dicunt quidam institutam fuisse in Paradiso 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 peccatum dicente Donino ad Adam Adam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ideo enim 〈◊〉 vt ipso conficente peccatum 〈◊〉 sorma aliis in posterum confitendi Sed quoniam in ille interrogatione dominus minùs expressè videbatur adconfirendum 〈◊〉 idro post exquisiuit á Cain fratricida expressiâ—s vbi est Abel frater tuus Alij dicunt quód sub lege primò instituta quando Iosua percepit Aâ—hor â—rimen sâ—um confiteri â—â— lapidatus est 45. dist secundum illud Alij dicunt quód in Novo testamento á Iacobo dicente consitemini alterâ—â—â—um peccata vestra c. Sed melius dicitur eam institutam fuisse a quâ—dâ—m vniuersale Ecclesiae traditione potius quám ex nouo vel veteri testamento authoritâ—s traditio Ecclesiae obligatoria est vt preceptum ait 1.1 di in his rebus Ergo necessaria est confessio in mortalib apud nos apud graecos non quoniam non emanauit apud illos traditio talis 〈◊〉 nec confisiunt in 〈◊〉 sed in firmentatis 5. di cap. 1. si illud ergo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alteruâ—rum peccata vestra 〈◊〉 consilium primó aliâ—â—uin liâ—oret et Grecos non obstanto eorâ—â— consuetudine In this distinction and the other two that follow it is intreated as well of that part of penance that is called confession of the mouth and satisfaction of the worke as of other partes And therefore it is to be seene when confession of the mouth was instituted whether it be necessarie or onelie voluntarie How it is to be made and to whome when Some say it was instituted in paradise immediately after sin committed when the Lord saide vnto Adam Adam where are thou for therefore he enquired that he confessing his sinne a forme of confessing should be giuen to others afterwarde But because in that confession the Lord secmed not so expresselie to haue warned him to confession therefore he enquired afterward of Cain the murtherer of his brother more expresselie where is Abel thy brother Other say it was first instituted vnder the law where Iosua commaunded Achar to confesse his fault and he was stoned 45. di sed illud Other saie that it was instituted in the new Testament by Saint Iames saying confesse your sinnes c. But it is better to saie that it was institutad by a certaine vniuersal tradition of the Church rather then by authoritie out of the new or olde testament And the tradition of the Church is of authoritie to binde as it is commaunded ar 11. di in these things Therefore confession in mortal sinnes is necessarie with vs but not with the Greekes because such tradition hath
is affirmed Where you quote Damascene I finde in him nothing for nor any thing sounding that waie in the place by you noted But in the tenth Chapter where he speaketh of eight kindes of baptisme the fifte he maketh Baptisme by the holie ghost and fire Which may be saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a punishing Baptisme because of the fire to come immediatelie followeth the sixth kinde of baptisme which is verie painfall by repentance and teares So that the one beeing distinct by the author from the other I know not by what learning you doe confound to make it seeme as both were one ALLEN Neither may we thinke that this authoritie and approoued power of priests concerneth onelie the open offences which by witnesse and proofe may be conuinced and deferred to the publike Magistrates of the Church as some Protestantes confounding all places of like wordes and tearmes in scripture doe Wherein they consider not that the perfectnesse of the Gospell teacheth man willinglie to accuse condemne and iudge himselfe that he be not iudged of our Lorde Neither doe they weigh that this iudgement of our sinnes though it be ministred by man is yet the seate and court of Christ to whome it no lesse perteineth to binde and loose our secret sinnes then our open offences And he without exception committed remission of all manner of sinnes vnto the Apostles and priestes saying Like as my father sent me so doe I send you But Christ was sent to heale the contrite and sorowfull of al sinnes priuate and publike therefore al manner of offences be they neuer so secret belong to the priests not onelie pardon but also correction and punishment whereof because they be men they cannot iustlie discerne or determine to remit or reteine giue pardon or giue penance except they be confessed by the parties penitent Christ him selfe perfectlie seeing all diseases both of bodie and soule the inwarde sorow and sute of euerie mans heart yet saied to the sicke man blinde Quid vis faciam 〈◊〉 what wouldest thou haue at my hands And shal the priest being a mortall man take vpon him to giue sentence of the diseases of our soules before he knowe them or pardō him that wil not shew vnto him wherein for what sin he asketh a pardō Furthermore the sins of mans cogitation that cannot be discerned by the priest with out the confession of the partie be often no lesse greeuous dānable before God then the open offences therefore there may be no doubt but Christ hath ordeined mercie as well for them as other that be actuallie committed and subiect to the sight of the world but yet no otherwise but by the sacramēt of penance in which without exception the priests haue power to remit or reteine sinnes as well priuate as publike Therefore the same secret sinnes beeing subiect to the Churches iudgement no lesse then the open they must needes be vttered and confessed or els they cannot be realesed much lesse haue any enioyned penance for them But it is mecre wrangling of our aduersaries in so plaine a case follie in all other to doubt whether secret offences euen committed in thought onelie against the last two commaundements forbiding vnlawfull coueting and desires of the minde be properly subiect to the Priests iudgement seeing they can by no otherwise be released but in the sacrament of penance sincere confession of them For here is practized a iudgement not of ciuile Magistrates which onelie punish by laws of all nations actually committed faultes against the weale publike but of soule and conscience which properly pertaine to the cure of Priestes as they properly occupie Christes owne roome to whose pardon and punishment not onelie open sinnes but also priuate offences either in deede or thought committed doe in like perteine For external penance or publike is rather vsed to satisfie the Church of her right in which sinnes can not openlie be committed but to the great offence of her children and therefore must in her by publike penance be corrected for the example of discipline and prouiso of the like sinnes to come FVLKE I knowe no Protestantes neither I suppose you can name anie writer of them that doth think that the authoritie of sorgiuing and retaining sinnes concerneth onelie open offences and not secret But it maie be that some protestantes haue written as all I think do holde and you your selfe in the end of this section do acknowledge that open confession is most conuenient fot the satisfaction of the Church which is offended where and by whome open and notorious sinnes haue beene committed But that secret confession made to a priest is necessarie for the discharge of secret sinnes all Protestants denie neither can anie Papistes prooue it For such reasons as you bring are verie weake and friuolous The perfectnes of the Gospell teacheth man willinglie to accuse condemne and iudge himselfe that he be not iudged of our Lord Ergo he is bound to shriue him-selfe to a Priest Nay contrariewise if he be made accuser condemner and iudge of himselfe he neede not seeke anie other externall iudge but in his owne conscience accuse examine condemne and iudge him-selfe before God And this court of conscience we acknowledge to be the seat and court of Christ where no priest or other mortal man hath authoritie to sit and iudge Neither doth anie correction punishment of our sins belong to priestes by reason that Christ sent the Apostles and their successours to Preach as he was sent by his father but they may remit or retaine sinnes without hearing the particuler confession of euerie sinner by declaring the mercie of God to all that repent and his iustice to all that continue in sinne without repentance But it is a maruetlous strong argument Iweene to prooue the necessitie of confession because our sauiour Christ caused the blinde man by vttering his request in particuler to declare his faith Nay if he had caused all them whose sinnes he pronounced to be forgiuen first to make particuler confession vnto him it had beene more coloure and yet no sufficient argument to prooue the necessity of confession to be made vnto other men much lesse that he would haue the blind mā acknowledge that he beleeued that he was able to giue him sight wherfore vpon a Principle shamefully begged that confession to a priest is necessary you go about to proue that confessiō of secret faults and cogitations of mans heart is also to be made to a priest you accuse your aduersaries of wrangling in so plaine a case and all men of follie that doubt whether such secret offences be subiect to the Priestes iudgement seeing they can not otherwise be released but in the sacrament of penance and sincere confession of them but which of your aduersaries will graunt that they can not otherwise be released or how will you satisfie them that doubt out of the holie scriptures of the institution of
scelus suum faucibus contagia funesta 〈◊〉 Dominicorpus inuadunt c. Almoste yet belching out the deadly meates of their Idoles the iawes as yet breathing out their owne wickednes sauoring of the deadelie infection they set vpon our Lordes bodie And immediately before the wordes by you cited Plus modò in dominum manib atque ore delinquunt quà m cum Dominum negauerant They doe more offende now against the Lord with their hands and their mouth then at such time as they denied the Lorde These wordes declare of what kinde of men of what kinde of sinnes of what kinde of confession and of what kinde of satisfaction this Doctor doth speake whose vehemencie tendeth to the maintenance of discipline being in great daunger of decaie by the vntimelie and vngodlie lenitie of some flattering Church men in those daies that would reconcile such vnto the Church by admitting them to the communion which after their moste greeuous fall and deniall of Christ before men had not giuen sufficient tokens and testimonies of their hearty repentance before God without the which the wrath of God iustly kindled against them for their henious offences couldnot be appeased Hetherto therefore for the necessitie of auricular confession we haue seene nothing that anie learned protestant might voutchsafe of anie answere as for the scriptures giuing the Priest so plaine power as wel of binding and retaining as of loosing and remitting doe laie no necessity vpon anie man to confesse vnto them the particularities of his secret faultes nor giue any authoritie vnto the priestes to exact the same I saie not by expresse wordes but not by any necessary illation or conclusion out of the expresse words of the scripture which we holde to be of as great credit as that which is contained in expresse wordes As for the vniforme consent of all ages and the mosie notable persons in the same whereof you make your cómon vaunt can neuer be shewed for the necessitie of auricular shrift no nor for anie other point of poperie though you would make choise of the eldest error that you holde That you take the Churches practize in al ages to be the moste surest way to touch and trie truth by you declare what reuerent opinion you haue of the word of God which our Sauiour Christ saith is the truth wherin he praieth his father to sanctifie al his disciples vnto the worldes end Vnto which rule of truth al practize of mé must be exacted and by it be tried For what mad blasphemie were it to saie that the word of God which was before all practize the onelie trueth of touch hath now lost his credit or the best part thereof if practize of men in all ages be now become the most surest waie to trie and touch trueth by as if the manners of men were alwaies the best interpretation of the lawe That confession hath euer beene vsed of all mortall sins in all countries and ages since Christes time it is prooued by the witnes of moste learned fathers with an answer to such things as out of the Fathers be sometimes obiected to the contrarie THE 11. CHAP. ALLEN I Am the longer in this approoued trueth because I remember what Saint Chrysostome saith And I see by these daies that it is verie true which he writeth Multa arie opus esse vt qui laborant Christiani vltrò sibi 〈◊〉 persuadeant sacerdotum curationibus sese submittere That it is a point of high wisdome and cunning to bring to passe that Christian men which are sicke in soule would persuade themselues to submit in all causes them selues to the priests curing For indeede in Nectarius his predecessours daies there was such an offence arose in the simple sorte and such a tragedie in Constantinople Church by the naughtie fact of a deaton there that their Bishoppe was glad to make the state of penance which then was often published euen for priuat sinnes to be a great deale more free then before Whereupon the people tooke occasion of such libertie and licentious life that when their common Penitenciarie by the commaundement of Nectarius was remóoued they were exceeding loath to confesse or doe iust penance for their sinnes actuall Though that good man condescending to the peoples weaknes meant neuer to take awaie that wholl order wherein he had no authoritie because it is no politike prouision but Christes institution but onely that the penance should not be publike except the party listed of those sinnes which were to the said Penitentiarie confessed in secret Which fact of his though perchaunce it was necessarie for that time yet was not allowed of the writers of the same Historie As a thing saith Sozomenus that brought much dissolute life and alteration of the peoples manners into the Church Yet our aduersaries are in such aistresse for their maintenance of their contrarie assertion against holie confession that they be not ashamed to alledge this mans doubtfull example Which if it were good and to be followed yet made it nothing against shrift which they cal now auricular confession or if it did make against the whole Sacrament euerie waie ministered yet it could not of reason be followed being but one bishoppes compelled act and that disalowed euen of the reporters them selues and prooued to be euill by the practize of all Churches christened to the contrarie FVLKE Chrysostomes wordes by you translated if you had not falsifyed in translation by adding of your owne these wordes in all causes which are neither in the originall Greeke nor in the latine version make but a small shew for the necessitie of the auriculer confession For in that place Chrysostome sheweth how much more difficult the office of a spirituall shepard is then the charge of a bodely herdman by this that the shepperd of vnresonable sheepe may both see the diseases of his cattell and also compell them to take his medicines and diet but the spirituall shepheard cannot alwaies see with what diseases his flocke are infected neither can he compell them but must exhort them willinglie to submit them selues to his cure whereby he meaneth his doctrine of admonition reprehension and such like But because you make mention of a storie and doe not expresse it and yet excuse Chrysostome thereby in any thing that he hath written sounding against the necessitie of confessing before men of sinnes committed in secret as though he durst not fullie set downe his iudgement thereof before the peo ple. I will set forth the storie as it is reported by the Ecclesiasticall writers Socrates and Sozomenus Socrates L. 5. C. 19. writeth thus About the same time it was thought good to take awaie those elders or priests of the Churches which were appointed ouer publike repentance vpon such cause Since the time that the Nouatians were deuided from the Church for that they would not communicate with them that had fallen in the persecution that was vnder Decius the Bishops of the
man that by nature is a like sinner and by vse of hearing manie faultes can not much maruell at oures and by office there is moste secret and carefull ouer vs what should we talke of other impediments where this comfortable motion is so great What comforte can be more then to haue such a friende who for that I ioyne with him yea euen mine owne soule to his after the dearest manner and moste secret sorte must needes be to me a full staie of conscience a witnesse of my sorowfull heart an intercessour for my sinnes a suretie before God for my amending a minister in my reconciliation and one that vnder Christ as Saint Clement also saith shall both beare my sinnes vpon himselfe and take charge of me to saluation in which case me thinke surelie man is after a sorte set in maruelous quietnes and almost discharged euen of himselfe and his owne custodie whiles he giueth ouer his owne aduise and iudgement and whollie hangeth in earth vpon him whome God hath appointed to be his pastour and gouernour of his soule Therefore good reader call vpon Christ for encrease of faith and beleeue onelie this ordinance of God was of infinite wisedome and high prouidence prouided for thy sake and it can not be burdenous vnto thee Christ shal giue thee courage and heart to withstand the contrary temptations and to serue him though thou forsake thy selfe To vs therefore confusion of face for our sinnefull life and to him honour and glorie euerlasting Amen FVLKE You doe well to confesse that shame is but small ales where a man is brought into a fooles paradise of so easie remission of his sinnes for so light a confession before one man as sinfull and perhaps more sinfull then he and bounde as you saie by office to secrecie But the comforte you speake of is vaine and miserable though all confessors were learned and able to giue good counsel as not one among an hundereth of your hedge Priests fryers are For how can he be a suretie before God for an other mans amending when he cannot be surety for his owne reformation He may well beare other mens sinnes vpon himselfe and take charge of other mens saluation to his owne damnation when he preacheth not Christ the onely propitiation for our sinnes but will so be a minister of reconciliation that he will robbe Christ of his glorie and the people of their saluation In which case in deede you set men in a maruelous and mischeuous securitie and almoste discharge them euen of themselues as youre owne wordes are and of their owne custodie while you make them giue ouer their owne aduise and iudgement and wholly to hang in earth vpon you not vpon Christ whome God hath appointed to be the Pastour and gouernour of their soules euen ypon earth though he be in heauen and they vpon the earth Therefore good reader marke how blaspemoussie these Popish dogges would haue thee to hang thy selfe whollie vpon them in earth as the onelie Pastours and gouernours of their soules by which they exclude Christ altogether from any feeding or gouerning of our soules vpon earth and debar all Christians not onelie from depending whollie vpon Christ as they might and doe but from hanging any thing at all vpon him in earth seeing they will haue men to hang wholly vpon their cōfessor on earth as though god had made any such pastors gouernours of mens soules as should put Christ out of office challenge the whole trust of mens saluation vnto themselues These be the right lims of Antichrist that chalenge the chiefe honour of God vnto themselues which is faith and hope of saluation to be reposed on them for what other thing is it that a man should quiet him selfe by be discharged of himselfe his owne custodie and wholy hang vpon his gostlie Father but to beleeue in him to put his whole faith hope confidence of saluation onelie vpon him while he is vpon earth And for this matter he is content to accept onelie faith because he hath no other argument to perswade thee but remember that faith commeth by hearing of the worde of God which abhorreth and accurseth al confidence reposed in man And therfore confusion of face be to al blasphemous papists not onelie for their sinnefull life but also for their abhominable heresies and to god be al glorie honour and dominion in Christ Iesus our Lord for euer euer Amen THE SECOND PARTE OF THE TREATISE CONCERning the Popes pardons The author by iust causes was mooued to beleeue the trueth of this doctrine of Pardons before he knew the meaning of them and afterward found them of greater importance then he toke them before to be THE FIRST CHAP. ALLEN OF the high power of remission and pardoning of sinnes giuen by Christ to his onelie spouse the Church in the Church in the persons of her holy Bishops and priests as a thing annexed to the wholl order and to be exercised in the sacrament of penance vpon all men that be of their seuerall iurisdictions and humblie shall submit themselues by confession of their faultes to their iudgements I haue alreadie spoken so much as may suffice for the satisfying of the sober and iust reproofe of the contentious And now because as well the course of my former matter as the speciall neede of these daies driueth me thereunto I will make further search and triall of the right of that challenge which as well the high priest as other principall Pastours and Bishops make by the force of their Prelacie and keye of iurisdiction ouer and aboue the power of orders touching Pardons and Indulgences Whereof whiles I doe intreate the more attention and heede I require of thee gentle reader because here all the lamentable tragedie and toile of this time first did begin and here haue al those that perished in the late contradiction of Core principallie fallen And in no article of Christian faith euer more offence hath bin receiued of all sortes almoste euen of the wise then in this one of the Popes pardons FVLKE WHen you haue heard what were these iust causes which he pretendeth you shall plainlie see that the authors faith was not grounded vpon Gods word but vpon humane presumption and therefore deserueth to be called rather a fansie then a faith Likewise when you shall haue read ouer the whol treatise to the ende you shall perceiue though you read no confutation that he hath not any warrant either out of the holie scriptures or out of the auncient fathers for any Popes pardons such as he should take vpon him to defende For that the Church of God and pastours therof haue power to release them that are bounde and vpon perswasion of their repentance to remit or pardon some part of the triall appointed for them it is no question betweene vs but of the popes pardons graunted vnder his Leaden Bulls for remission of sinnes but a poena culpa
effectuall in all mens cases that no man can follow Christ herein that his blood should be shed for remission of sinnes or the paine due for the same And verie excellentlie writeth Leo the first Bishop of Rome against the blasphemies of Nestorius and Eutiches concerning the effect of martirs suffrings in these wordes Dicant quo sacrificio reconciliati dicant quo sanguine sint redempti Quis est vt ait Apostolus qui tradidit seipsum pro nobis oblattonem hostiam Deo in odorem suauitasis Aut quod vnquam sacrificium sacratius fuit quam quod verus aeternvs pontisex altari crucis per immolationem fuae carnis imposuit Quamuis enim multorum sanctorum in conspectu domini pretiosa mors fuerit nullius tamen insontis occisio redemptio fuit mundi Acceperunt iusti non dederunt coronas de for titudine fidelium exempla nata sunt patientiae non dona iustitiae Singulares quippe in singulis mortes fuerunt nec alterius quisquam debitum suo fine persoluit cum inter filios hominum vnus solus dominus noster Iesus Christus qui verè erat agnus immaculatus extiterit in quo omnes crucifixi omnes mortui omnes sepulti omnes sunt etiam suscitati de quibus ipse dicebat Cum ex altatus fuero à terra omnia traham ad meipsum Fides enim vera iustificannimpios creans iustos ad humanttatis suae 〈◊〉 a participem in illo acquit it salutem in quo solo homo se inuenit innocentem liberum habens per gratiam deide potentia eius gloriari qui contra hostem humani generis in carnis no sirae humilitate congressus his victoriam suam tribuit in quorum corpore triumphauit Let them tell by what sacrifice they be reconciled with what blood they be redeemed who it is as the Apostle saith which gaue himselfe for vs an oblation and sacrifice of sweete sauour vnto God or what sacrifice was euer more holie then that which the true and eucrlasting high Priest laid vpon the altar of the crosse by the sacrificing of his owne stesh For although the death of manie Saintes hath beene precious in the sight of the Lord yet the slaughter of no giltles person was the redemption of the world The iust men haue receiued they haue not giuen crownes and of the valeantnes of the faithful are growne examples of patience not gifts of righteousnes For the deathes in euerie one were singular nei ther did anie man by his end paie the debt of another seeing among the sonnes of men there was but one alone our Lord Ie sus Christ which was truelie the immaculate lambe in whom all are crucified all dead all buried all also raised againe Of whome he himseife said when I shall be exalted from the earth I will draw all things vnto my selfe For true faith which iustifieth vngodlie men and maketh them iust being drawne to the partaker of his humanitie obteineth saluation in him in whome alone man findeth himselfe innocent hauing libertie by the grace of God to boast of his power which encountring with the enemie of mankinde in the basenes of our flesh giueth the victorie to them in whose bodie he triumphed If the Romish Antichristes that followed Leo the Bishop of Rome in place had followed and allowed this his doctrine they would neuer haue deuised nor manteined this encrease of their treasure by the merites and sufferings of Saints whose martirdome profited the Church by the examples of patience to the confirming of faith not communicating of Iustice to the en crease of merite Whose deathes were singular and proper to them-selues to receaue the crownes of glory which Christ had merited for them not common by waie of desert to gaine crownes for other or to satisfie for the debt of other For that was the power efficacie and effect of the onelie sacrifice of our sauiour Iesus Christ to satisfie for the sinnes of his people and to purchase the crowne of eternal glory for them The conformitie therfore of the members vnto the head in suffering and the suffering of Christ in his members prooueth no satisfaction necessarie to be wrought by the members to make the passion of the head effectual for them that are saued and much lesse the want of workes satisfactorie in some to be recompensed by the aboundance of paines penance in other neither doth Saint Paul confesse anie such thing whose sufferings did otherwise benefite the Church then by satisfying for the paine due to other that wanted workes satisfactorie Neither doth the communion of Saints fauour anie such in which all power of spirituall life by ioynts and sinewes is conueied from the head to the members euerie member yeldeth to the rest the dutie of loue and seruice which is appointed vnto it But to satisfie for an others sinnes is not the office of anie member of the Church neither hath S. Paul where you quote or anie where els either the wordes or meaning of anie such merite or satisfaction of anie man for himselfe much lesse for other The ordinarie ministrie of men for such end purposes as it is ordeined of God is to be thankefully embraced but he hath no where appointed men to sacrifice or satisfie his iustice for sinne albeit he hath committed to men the worde of reconciliation the keies of the kingdome of heauen to keepe and exercise his sheep to feed his mysteries to bestowe and full power to binde and loose according to his worde and not according to their affection will and pleasure ALLEN Let no man maruell that in such a face of Gods iustice as we see by the inioyning of great penance in the Church after sinnes be remitted and by Gods own often scourgies temporal both in this world and the next let no man I saie maruell that yet there be waies of Gods mercie and meanes through the ministerie of man to turne awaie the wrath of our Lord and by other helpes to satisfie his iustice againe Onelie let the partie in all his insufficiencie be zealous deuous and diligent as he maie and God himselfe will a thousand waies seeke of his owne mercie to satisfie himselfc with his sonnes paines applied by the trauaile of other the faithfull that haue beene and be in his Church to the helpe and releife of that member that hath nothing left but loue and the felowship of holie Saints whereby he maie craue mercie and pardon Let them consider that doubt of this point howe often God hath as it were determined to plague the people of Israell which he chese to be his peculiar and yet in the midst of his decree and iustice hath giuen mercie and grace at Moses and Aarons requests Yea how often he hath as it were procured the iust to stand betwixt him and the people whome he meant to punish Mansuetum habemus dominum solùm occastonem arripere vult mox omnem praese
examples of inuocation of Saintes praier for the dead purgatorie and the like if you can winne them either by manifest wordes or by necessarie conclusion we are content you shall weare them and we also wilyeald vnto them otherwise you prate without proofe of expressed in the scripture trifling vppon the terme expressed which either we vse not in this question or els we meane therbie certainlie declared and taught in the scriptures either in expresse wordes or by necessarie conclusion But now let vs see how Master Chark is distressed in answering these twelue particulers For the first of the seauen which he acknowledgeth to be contained in the scripscripture which is that there is two natures and two wills in Christ he citeth these wordes Rom. 1. of his sonne which was made vnto him of the seede of Dauid according to the flesh Also Math. 26. not as I will but as thou wilt here you saie that the interpretation of the Church being set aside and the bare text onelie admitted these places cannot conuict an heretike yes verelie the onelie authoritie of the textis sufficient to confit me faith and to conuince an heretike For the former point thus The diuinitie and humanitie are two natures in Christ is diuinitie and humanitie ergo two natures The maior is manifest the minor is plaine by the text the sonne of God one nature the seede of Dauid an other nature For the fecond point The will of God and the will of man the one contradictorie to the other are two willes In Christ was the will of God contradictorie to the wil of man ergo two wills The minor is prooued out of the text not as I wil but as thou wilt seeing Christ was both God man That the Monothelits in the 6. Councill of Costantinople could not be conuinced out of the scriptures it is an intollerable slaunder of that reuerend assemblie for euen by this text and manie other their error was made manisest wherunto albeit the consent of the aun cient fathers was added yet is there no word in all that 4. action which you quote to prooue that they were not sufficientlie confuted out of the holie scriptures The second point is the proceeding of the holie ghost from the father and the sonne equallie for which Master Chark quoteth Ioh. 15. 26. When the holie ghoste shall come which I will send you from my father the spirit of trueth which proceedeth from the father c. Against this you cauill that it prooueth not the proceeding equallie and cite Cyril for your witnes in 15. Ioh. who out of this place prooueth that equally as wel as the proceeding seeing the heretikes might be ashamed to say that the spirit of the father was sent by the son as by a minister which also if they should saie he disprooueth for that if the sonn were as a minister he should be of an other substance then the father and the spirit proceeding from the father being of the same substance with the father should be greater in nature then the fonne whereas the sonne saith plainlie of the holy ghoste he shal glorifie me c. An other cauil you haue that this place telleth not whether he proceeded by generation or without generation from the father But it is sufficient that neither this place nor any other place of scripture teacheth that the holie ghoste is begotten therefore we beleeue without generation The third point is the vnion of the word vnto the nature of man and not to the person of man which because you did set downe obscurelie M. Charke did not rightlie vnderstand yet the text that the quoteth 1. 〈◊〉 14. The word was made flesh includeth that assertion also seeing there was no person of the man when the vnion was made vnto the nature of man but the word in taking vpon him the nature of man did vnite him selfe to it in vniting tooke it as it is euident Luk. 1. 35. Mat. 1. 20. The fourth doctrine is the baptising of infants for which Master Charke quoteth Gen. 17. 12. the infant of eight daies shall be circumcised Against this you haue manie trifling cauills that baptisme is not expressed of the sexe of the eight daie Against which I oppose the authoritie of Saint Augustine which lib. 1. cont Crescon Grammat cap. 31. confuteth the rebaptization of such as were baptized by heretikes by example of them that were circumcised by the Samaritantes whose circumcision was not to be repeated to whome the like might be obiected But it is sufficient that wherein baptisme answereth to circumsion the reason is one in both Circumcision was the sacrament of regeneration as baptisme is the one giuen to infantes ergo the other The cerimonie of the eight day had an other reason not needefull to be obserued in baptisme The distinction of the sexe is taken awaie by Christ in whome there is neither male nor female That Beza was striken dumme with this question in the conference at Poyssie it is a slaunder of Cladius de Xanctes confuted by Beza him-selfe But you had rather followe Saint Augustine who contendeth and prooueth that baptizing of infantes is onelie a tradition of the Apostles and not left vs by anie written Scripture lib. 10. cap. 23. super Gen. ad lizeram So you write but I will set downe Saint Augustines wordes that the reader may see what contention and proofes he vseth hauing protested of his ignorance how the reasonable soule commeth into the bodie he concludeth that the baptisme of infantes fauoreth their opinion which thinke that soules are procreated of the parentes And of the baptisme of infantes thus he writeth Consuctudo tamen matris Ecclesiae in baptizandis paruulis nequaquam spernenda est neque vllo modo superflua de putanda nec omnino credenda nisi Apostolica esset traditio Habet enim illaparua aet as magnum testimonij pondus quae prima pro Christo meruit sanguinē fundere Yet the custome of our mother the Church in baptizing of infantes is not to be despised nor by any meanes to be thought superfluous nor to be credited at all if it were not an Apostolike tradition for euen that litle age hath greate weight of testimonie which first obteined to shed blood for Christ. You see that here is neither contention not profe that it is onelie a tradition not leftin writing for he alledgeth one testimonie out of Scripture of gods acceptation of that age to martirdome much rather to baptisme and manie other testimonies might be brought for the same purpose as Matt. 19. 14. 1. Cor. 7. 14. c. As for Origen he doth onelie make mention of the baptisme of infants according to the obseruance of the Church to prooue originall sinne But whether it stand onelie vpon tradition and not vpon the scripture he saith not one word The 5. Doctrine is the changeing of the Sabbath into Sondaie M. Charke quoteth Apo. 1. 10. I was in the spirit on
the Lordes daie Here you cauill that there is no mention of Saturdaie or sondaie much lesse of celebration of either and least of all of the changeing of the Sabbath into an other daie But if it please your Censurship are you ignorant what day of the weeke is called dies Dominicus the Lordsday whether saturdaie or sondaie if it be sondaie as al professors of Christes name confesse here is as much mention thereof as is needfull for the daie into which the change is made Or if that be not sufficient you maie haue further Act. 20. 7. 1. Cor. 16. 2. And whie is the first of the Sabbath called the Lordes daie but in respect of the celebration there of in honour of the redemption of the world by Christ For otherwise all daies of the weeke are the Lordes daies in respect of their creation Thirdlie seeing the Lordes daie was one daie in the weeke vsed for the assemblie of the Church for their spirituall exercises of Religion it is certaine that the change of the Iewish Sabbath was made into that daie except you would be so waywatd to saie there were two daies in euerie weeke appointed by God to be celebrated whereas the lawe of God requireth but one and giueth libertie of bodelie exercise in sixe daies So that the change of the Sabbath daie is sufficientlie prooued out of the Scripture into the Lordes daie The sixt point is about foure Gospells and the Epistle to the Romanes which Master Charke saith to be prooued out of the scripture but yet he quoteth no place of scripture where onelie he saith the inscription expresseth the names of the writers But what a mocker is this you saie Are the bare names of the Apostles sufficient to prooue that they were written by them who can prooue by scripture that these names are not counterfet as in the Epistle to the Laodiceans in the Gospells of Bartholomew and Thomas c. But abide you sir your question hath two branches the one that the 4. Go spells are true Gospells the other that the epistle to the Romanes was written by Saint Paul and not that to the Laodiceans To the former it is answered that they are prooued by other vndoubted bookes of the scripture both of the olde testament and the new secing they declare that to be fullfilled of Christ which was spoken in the lawe in the Prophetes and in the Psalmes To the other it is answered that admitting the Epistle to the Romanes to be scripture the inscription of his name is sufficient to prooue that it was written by Saint Paull And so of therest Although the name of the writer is not materiall vnto saluation when the booke is receiued to be Canonicall as diuers bookes of scripture are receiued whose writer is vnknowne That Epistle which is called to the Laodicians is not receiued and therefore the inscription is vnsufficient as the Gospelles of Bartholomew and Thomas and such like which are knowne to be countefet by the dissent they haue from the other canonicall scriptures Whereas you require one place of Scripture to prooue all the foure Gospelles to be canonicall you declare your wrangling and wayward spirit But name you anie one point of Doctrine writen in anie of those foure Gospells and the same shall be aduouched by other textes of scripture and so maie eucrie point conteined in them if neede were But you affirme that Origen saith he reiecteth the Gospell of Saint Thomas onelie for that the tradition of the Church receiued it not Which is false He saith he hath read the Gospell after Thomas after Mathias and manie other Sed in his omnibus nihil aliud probamus niss quod Ecclesia idest quatuor tantùm euangelia recipienda But in all these we allowe nothing els but that which the Church alloweth that is that onelie foure Gospells are to be receiued In these wordes he affirmeth that he approoueth the iudgment of the Church he saith not that the iudgement or traditions of the Church was the onelie cause whie he reiected those Gospells for he said before they were receiued of heretikes and wherefore but in maintenance of their heresie which is contrarie to the holie scriptures That all counterfet Go spells were reiected by the Church it is confessed but the Church had this iudgement of discretion confirmed by the canonical scriptures against which Epiphanius saith nothing But when Faustus the Manichie denied the Gospell of Saint Mathew saie you saith not S. Augustine Mathaei Euangelium probatum aduersus Faustum Manichaeum per traditionem The Gospell of Mathew was alleged against Faustus the Manichie by tradition August lib. 28. Cont. Faust. c. 2. If you aske me I saie no he hath no such wordes Yet doth he auouch the Gospell of Saint Mathew in that Chapter by testimonie of the Church from the Apostles by continuall succession euen vnto his time against the Maniches but in far other words then you haue set downe in steed of Saint Augustines wordes by which the reader maie once against perceiue how impudentlie and ignorantlie you ailedge whatsoeuer the note booke which was neuer of your own gatheriug because you vnderstood it not did minister vnto you For these are the wordes of the collector of your notes not of S. Augustine Maie not the papists haue great ioie of such a Cenfure defender Yet you triumph like a Iustie champion and aske what can be more euident then all this to prooue our opinion of the necessitie of tradition to confound the fonde madnes of this poore Minister Alas poore defender what waightie euidencethou hast brought to prooue the necessity of tradition which prooueth thee to be a blind beggerlie yet a bolde brocher of other mens notes which thou vnderstandest not thy selfe The seuenth doctrine which is required to be prooued out of the scripture is that God the father begat his sonne onelie by vnderstanding him-selfe Here Master Charke in steede of these darke wordes out of Thomas how the father begat the sonne wisheth cleare and perfect wordes in so high a mysterie which you saie are plaine and vsuall to those which haue studied any thing in diuinitie As though there were no diuinitie in the holie scriptures and so many of the auncient fathers which haue neither this question nor these wordes but that al diuinity were included in the brest of Thomas Aquinas and such doctors as he was That he quoteth a place or two of the scripture to prooue that Christ was the onelie begotten sonne of God you make smal account of seeing the question is of the māner how this generation maybe which the Church de fendeth against the aduersaries And here you insult against M. chark as ignorant in those high points of diuinitie whereas Catholiks know what the Church hath determined herein against heretikes and infidels as though either of both cared for the Churches determination if the one were not vanquished by scripture the other by right reason