harts to them and so representing them to our mindes may reuerence and vvorship them as spiritually present according to that of S. Paul I absent in body but present in spirit otherwise 1. Cor. 5. vers 3. vve Christians should not vvhiles we liued on earth adore the humanity of our Sauiour Christ IESVS because he touching his humanity is absent from vs which were most absurd and so is therefore M. PERKINS reason out of vvhich it would necessarily followe And because M. PER. confoundeth this point of worshipping of Saints with that of inuocation and hudleth them together nowe talking of the one then of the other besides al good methode and order and consequently maketh two Chapters of the same matter I will here in this former Chapter only treate of the worshipping of Saints drawing what M. PERKINS saith of this subject into this Chapter and referre the matter to inuocation vnto the next His second reason then against worshipping of Saints may be that which maketh the third in the 14. Chapter Christ refused so much as to bowe the knee vnto Satan vpon this ground because it is written thou shalt worshippe the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serue To this S. Augustine hath answered 1200. yeares agoe vpon those vvordes of Genesis Abraham adored or worshipped the people of the land Cap. 23. Quaest 61. super Genesiâ— It may be demanded saith he howe it is written thou shalt adore thy Lord God and him only shalt thou serue when as Abraham did so honour that kinde of people that he did adore them but we must obserue that in the same Commandement it is not said thou shalt only adore thy Lord thy God as it is said him only shalt thou serue which in Greeke is Latréysis for such seruice is due to God only So that in briefe this most learned Father answereth our Protestants that the seruice proper to God called Latria is to be giuen to none but to God Marry that vvorship and adoration expressed in the former part of that sentence may be giuen to others and that Abraham gaue it very well vnto the people of Heth. Nowe our Sauiour had great reason not to yeeld so much as one jote of that meaner worship to Satan because he excelled him in nothing but small reason haue our Protestants to reason thus as in effect M. PER. doth Christ would not vvorship the Deuill therefore Christians may not worship Saints as though Saints were no more to be worshipped then the Deuill a holy comparison and vvell worthy a hell-hound But he goeth forward and addeth Act. 10. that Peter would not suffer Cornelius so much as to kneele to him though saith he Cornelius intended not to honour him as God therefore neither Saint nor Angell is to be honoured so much as with the bowing of the knee if it carry but the least signification of diuine honor Answere Doe you marke vvhat vvarre this man is at vvith himselfe first he saith that Cornelius intended not to adore Peter as God after headdeth that kneeling if it carry but the signification of Godly honour is not to be given to Saints which conclusion of his we grant to vvit that no inward or outward vvorship if it proceede from a hart meaning to exhibite diuine honour is to be giuen vnto any other then to God and therefore did I declare before that by the externall kinde of worshipping we cannot discerne whether the party meane to offer diuine religious or ciuill honour to him whome he honoureth but that is to be knowne of the party himselfe or by conjecture to be otherwise collected To the purpose if Cornelius meant to adore S. Peter as some petty God as S. Hierome gathereth out of the text Lib. contra Vigil which hath that he did adore S. Peter falling at his feete and S. Peter lifting him vp said arise my selfe also am a man then is there nothing against vs who doe also forbidde all men to adore and giue Godly honour vnto any Saint or Angell If it were a lesser kinde of religious worship which was due to Saints then we say with S. Chrysostome vpon this place that S. Peter out of his humility and consideration of humane frailty refused that honour albeit it vvere due vnto his excellent piety and singular authority The like answere is to be giuen vnto that place of the Apocalipse Cap. 19. vers 10. vvhere the Angell forbadde S. Iohn to adore him vvhich M. PER. had forgot to alleage For either S. Iohn tooke the Angell to be God as he spake in the person of God and so by mistaking the person offered him diuine honour Quaest 61 â—n Genes Greg. lib. 27. Moral c. 11. Bed Anselm alij in illum locum as S. Augustine supposeth and vvas justly reprehended by the Angell and instructed that he vvas not God but his fellowe seruant or as many others ancient and learned Authours thinke S. Iohn as one that very well knewe what he had to doe did dutifully worship such an heauenly creature as Gods Ambassadour to him for otherwise he was not so dull or forgetfull as to haue the * Cap. 22. vers 8. second time fallen into the same fault Neither did the Angell reprehend him but after a most curteous manner willed S. Iohn not to doe him that honour because he knewe well howe dearely beloued S. Iohn was vnto our Sauiour and that perhaps S. Iohn was to haue a higher seate in heauen then he had vvherefore he vvould not take that honour of so great a personage To these reasons of M. PER. vve may adde some fewe scraps of authorities which he hath swept together De vera relig 53. Augustine we honour the Saints with charity and not by seruitude neither doe we erect Churches to them And they are to be honoured for imitation but not to be adored with religion Answere Marke that in both the sentences he teacheth vs plainly to honour and worshippe the Saints as we doe honour the Saints they are to be honoured Marry he addeth as we also teach after him that no diuine and Godly honour be giuen them vvhich he describeth in those wordes with seruitude and with religion The Saints saith he euen here as in many other places of his learned vvorkes are to be vvorshipped but not vvith such worshippe as seruants or creatures owe to their soueraigne Lord or creator they are to be honoured but not with religion being taken precisely for the chiefe act of religion which concerneth only the honor and worshippe of God Churches are not to be builded to Saints nor Altars erected to them nor Sacrifice offered to them All this we graunt in such sort as S. Augustine himselfe doth declare that is these diuine offices are to be performed to no other then to God alone yet all may be done in the memory and to the honour of Saints Let this one place of S. Augustine serue the turne where
vpon the earth and the same flesh he gaue vs to eate S. Cyril Patriarke of Alexandria in the declaration of the eleauenth Anatheme of the generall Councell of Ephesus doth in fewe wordes expresse the ancient faith both of the Sacrifice and Sacrament thus We doe celebrate the holy liuely and vnbloudy Sacrifice beleeuing it to be the body and bloud not of a common man like vnto one of vs but rather we receiue it as the proper body and bloud of the word of God that quickneth all thinges which he doth often in his workes repete In his Epistle to Nestorius in these wordes Epist. ad Nestoriū We doe so come vnto the mysticall benediction and are sanctified being made partakers of the holy and pretious bloud of Christ our redeemer not receiuing it as common flesh which God defend nor as the flesh of a holy man c. But being made the proper flesh of the word of God it selfe And vpon these vvordes Howe can this man giue vs his flesh to eate he saith Lib. 4. in Ioan. c. 13 Lib. 10. in Ioan. c. 13 Let vs giue firme faith to the misteries and neuer once say or thinke howe can it be For it is a Iewish word And else where preuenting our Protestants receiuing by faith alone he addeth We denie not but by a right faith and sincere charity we are spiritually joyned with Christ but to say that we haue not also a conjunction with him according to the flesh that we vtterly denie and doe auouch it to be wholy dissonant from holy Scriptures Damascene Lib. 4. de fide ortho cap. 14. Bread and wine vvith vvater by the inuocation of the holy Ghost are supernaturally changed into the body and bloud of Christ bread is not the figure of the body nor wine the figure of the bloud which God forbidde but it is the very body of our Lord joyned with the God-head See howe formally this holy and learned Doctor about nine hundred yeares agoe confuted the opinion of Zwinglius In ca. 26. Math. So doth Theophilact also about the same time writing thus Christ did not say this is a figure but this is my body For albeit it seeme bread vnto vs yet is it by his vnspeakable working transformed If I would descend a little lower I might alleadge vvhole volumes vvritten by the learnest of those times in defence of the reall presence For some thousand yeares after Christ there started vp one Berengarius of condemned memory vvho vvas the first that directly impugned the truth of Christes bodily presence in the Sacrament but he once or twise abjured it afterward and died repentantly And thus much of this matter OF THE SACRIFICE M. PERKINS Page 204. Of the Sacrifice in the Lordes supper which the Papists call the Sacrifice of the Masse TOuching this point first I will set downe what must be vnderstood by the name of Sacrifice A Sacrifice is taken properly or vnproperly Properly it is a sacred or solemne action in which man offereth and consecrateth some outward bodily thing vnto God to please and honour him thereby improperly and by the way of resemblance all the duties of the morall lawe are called sacrifices M. PERKINS definition of a Sacrifice taken properly is not complete for it may be applyed vnto many oblations vvhich vvere not sacrifices For example diuers deuout Israelites offered some gold some siluer some other thinges to honour and please God withall Exod. 25. 35. in the building of a Tabernacle for diuine seruice according to his owne order and commandement These mens actions were both sacred and solemne and some outward bodily thing by them vvas offered and consecrated vnto God to please and honour him thereby therefore they did properly offer Sacrifice according to M. PER. definition which in true diuinity is absurd or else vvomen and children might be sacrificers Againe if his definition were perfect I cannot see howe they can denie their Lordes supper to be a Sacrifice properly For they must needes graunt that it is a sacred or solemne action and they cannot denie but that in it a man offereth and consecrateth vnto God some outward bodily thing to vvit bread and vvine and that to please and honour God thereby so that all the parts of M. PER. definition agreeing to it he cannot denie it to be a Sacrifice properly We in deede that take it to be a prophane or superstitious action highly displeasing God as being by mans inuention brought in to shoulder out his true and only seruice doe vpon just reason reject it as no Sacrifice but the Protestants that take it for diuine seruice must needes admit it to be a proper Sacrifice so doe they fall by their owne definition into that damnable abomination as they tearme it of maintayning an other proper Sacrifice in the newe Testament besides Christes death on the Crosse Wherefore to make vp the definition perfect it is to be added first that that holy action be done by a lawful Minister and then that the visible thing there presented be not only offered to God but be also really altered and consumed in testification of Gods soueraigne dominion ouer vs. We agree in the other improper acception of a Sacrifice and say that al good workes done to please and honour God may be called sacrifices improperly among which the inward act of adoration whereby a deuout minde doth acknowledge God to be the beginning midle and end of all good both in heauen earth and as such a one doth most humbly prostrate honour and adore him holdeth the most worthyest ranke and may truly be called an inuisible and inward Sacrifice The outward testimony and protestation thereof by consuming some visible thing in a solemne manner and by a chosen Minister is most properly a Sacrifice OVR CONSENT MAster PERKINS would gladly seeme to agree with vs in two points First That the supper of the Lord is a Sacrifice and may truly be so called as it is and hath beene in former ages Secondly That the very body of Christ is offered in the Lordes supper Howe say you to this are we not herein at perfect concord a plaine dealing man would thinke so hearing these his wordes but if you reade further and see his exposition of them we are as farre at square as may be For M. PER. in handling this question will as he saith take a Sacrifice sometimes properly and sometimes improperly starting from the one to the other at his pleasure that you cannot know where to haue him So when he saith in his first conclusion That the supper of the Lord is a Sacrifice he vnderstandeth improperly yet it is saith he called a Sacrifice in three respects First because it is a memoriall of the reall Sacrifice of Christ on the Crosse So a painted Crucifix may be called a Sacrifice because it is a memoriall of that Sacrifice but M. PER. addeth Hebr. 13. vers 15. That it withall
right meaning of all obscure sentences as they most childishly beare their followers in hand Briefly to conclude this point a great number of them hauing Gods word corrupted for the lanterne to their feete and their owne dimme sight for their best guide no maruaile though they stumble at many difficulties in these high misteries and fall into very absurd opinions concerning the principall partes of them Nowe to make vp an euen reckoning with M. PER. Atheisme I must come vnto their diuine seruice and worship of God the third point that I promised to handle because he spared not to speake his pleasure of ours First then whereas a true reall and externall sacrifice is among all externall workes the most excellent seruice that can be done to the diuine Majestie as shall be proued in the question of the sacrifice which also hath euer since the beginning of the world beene by the best men practised to acknowledge and testifie aswell the soueraigne dominion that God hath ouer vs as our dutifull subjection vnto his almighty goodnesse the Protestantes to make knowne vnto the wiser sorte that they are not Gods true loyall people will not vouchsafe to performe to him any such speciall seruice as to sacrifice in his honour nay they are fallen so farre out with this principall part of Gods true worship that they doe in despite of it powre out most vile reproches against the daylie sacrifice of the Catholike Church which contayneth the blessed body and most pretious bloud of our redeemer IESVS Christ. Secondly of seauen Sacraments instituted by our Sauiour both to exhibite honour to God and to sanctifie our soules they doe flatly reject fiue of them And doe further as much as in them lieth extinguish the vertue and efficacy of the other two For they hold Baptisme not to be the true instrumentall cause of remission of our sinnes and of the infusion of grace into our soules but only to be the signe and seale thereof And in steade of Christes sacred body really giuen to all Catholikes in the Sacrament of the Altar to their exceeding comfort and dignity the Protestantes must be content to take vp with a bitte of bread and with a suppe of wine a most pittifull exchange for so heauenly a banquet They doe daylie feele and I would to God they had grace to vnderstand what a want they haue of the Sacrament of Confession which is the most soueraigne salue of the world to cure all the deadly and dangerous woundes of the soule Ah howe caresty doe they daylie heape sinne vpon sinne and suffer them to lie festring in their breastes euen till death for lacke of launcing them in season by true and due confession Besides at the point of death when the Diuell is most busie to assault vs labouring then to make vs his owne for euer there is amongst them no anointing of the sicke with holy oile in the name of our Lord as S. Iames prescribeth joyned with the Priestes prayer Cap. 5. vers 14. which should saue the sicke and by meanes whereof his sinnes should be forgiuen and he lifted vp by our Lord and inwardly both greatly comforted and strengthned these heauenly helpes I say and many others which our Catholike religion afford vnto all persons by which rightly administred God is highly magnified are quite banished out of the Protestant territories and consequently their religion for want of them is mightily maymed They haue yet remayning some poore short prayers to be said twise a weeke for fearing belike to make their Ministers surfette of ouer much praying they will not tie them to any daylie prayers Mattins Euensong and other set houres they leaue to the Priestes sauing that on the Sabbaoth they solemnely meete together at the Church to say their seruice which is a certayne mingle-mangle translated out of the old portaise and Masse booke patched vp together with some fewe of their owne inuentions And though it be but short yet it is the Lord he knowes performed by most of them so slightly that an indifferent beholder would rather judge them to come thither to gase one vpon another or to common of worldly businesse then reuerently there to serue God Nowe as concerning the place where their diuine seruice is said if goodly stately Churches had not beene by men of our religion built to their handes in what simple cotes trowe you would their key-cold deuotion haue beene content to serue their Lord if one Church or great steeple by any mishap fall into vtter ruine a collection throughout all England for many yeares together will not serue to build it vp againe which maketh men of judgement to perceiue that their religion is exceeding cold in the setting foreward of good workes and that it rather tendeth to destruction then to edification Againe whereas our Churches are furnished with many goodly Altars trimmed vp decently and garnished with sundry faire and religious pictures to strike into the beholders a reuerent respect of that place and to drawe them to heauenly meditations theirs haue ordinarely bare walles hanged with cob-webs except some of the better sort which are daubed like Ale-houses with some broken sentences of Scripture Besides the ancient custome of Christians being to pray with their faces towardes the Sunne rising to shewe the hope they haue of a good resurrection and that by tradition receiued euen from the Apostles as witnesseth Saint Basil their Ministers in their highest misteries De Spiritu sancto 27. looke ouer their communion table into the South to signifie perhaps that their spirituall estate is now at the highest and that in their religion there is no hope of rising towardes heauen but assurance of declining I may not here omitte that of late yeares they haue caused the Kinges armes to be set vp in the place where Christes armes the Crucifix was wont to stand the which I confesse would haue graced their Church better if it had beene else where placed But I hope they will giue me leaue to aske them howe they durst set vp any such Images in their Churches as be in that armes For they haue taught hitherto that it is expresly against the second commandement and a kind of Idolatry not only to worshippe Images but also to set them vp in Churches and yet nowe as it were cleane forgetting themselues they fall into that fault themselues that they haue so much blamed in others Neither will it helpe them to say that they reproued only the setting vp of holy pictures but not of others For the second commandement as they expound it is aswell against the one as the other forbidding generally the making of any kind of Image And is it not a pittifull blindnesse to thinke that the pictures of Lions and Liberts doe better become the house of God then the Image of his owne Sonne and of his faithfull seruants And may not simple people thinke when they see Christes armes cast downe and the Princes set vp in
shedde and it shall be shedde and a good Interpreter of Scripture may not to delude the one flie to the other but defend both because both be the vvordes of the holy Ghost And the Greeke text in S. Luke doth inuincibly confirme that the vvordes are to be taken in the present tense For it hath that the bloud as in the Chalice Luc. 22. vers 20. is powred out Toúto tò potérion tò eckynómenon This Chalice is powred out it cannot therefore be referred vnto that powring out vvhich was to be made vpon the Crosse the day following but to that that vvas powred in and out of the Chalice then presently This might also be confirmed by the bloud which was sprinkled to confirme the old TestameÌ„t vnto which it seemeth that our Sauiour did allude in this consecration of the Chalice Exod. 24. vers 8. For Moyses said This is the bloud of the Testament and our Sauiour * Hebr. 9. vers 20. This is the bloud of the newe Testament But that bloud which dedicated the old Testament was first sacrificed to God such therefore vvas the bloud of the newe Testament And to make the matter more cleare let vs heare howe the best and most judicious Fathers vvho receiued the right vnderstanding of the Scriptures from the Apostles and their Schollers doe take these vvordes of Christ Lib. 4. cap. 32. Lib. 2. Epist 3. In psa 33 Conc. 2. Hom. 24. in 1. Cor. Homil. 2. in Post ad Timoth. Orat. 1. de resur You haue heard already out of S. Ireneus That Christ taught at his last supper the newe Sacrifice of the newe Testament And out of S. Cyprian Christ offered there a Sacrifice to his Father after the order of Melchisedecke taking bread and making it his body And out of S. Augustine Christ instituted a Sacrifice of his body and bloud according vnto the order of Melchisedecke that is vnder the formes of bread and wine I adde vnto them S. Chrisostome vvho saith In steede of the slaughter of beastes Christ hath commanded vs to offer vp himselfe And againe Whether Peter or Paule or an other Priest of meaner meritte doe offer the holy Sacrifice it is the same which Christ gaue to his Disciples the which all Priestes nowe a dayes doe make and this hath nothing lesse then that had S. Gregory Nissene Christ being both a Priest and the Lambe of God offered himselfe a Sacrifice and Host for vs. When vvas this done Euen then when to his Disciples he gaue his body to eate and his bloud to drinke Isichius First Lib. 2. in Leui. c. 8. our Lord supped with his Apostles vpon the figuratiue Lambe and afterward offered his owne Sacrifice All these and many other of the most ancient Fathers could finde a proper and reall Sacrifice in Christes supper To omit S. Gregories authority and all other his inferiors for this last thousand yeares vvhome the Protestants acknowledge vâ—holy to haue beleeued and taught the Sacrifice of the Masse See Kemnitius in exam Concilij Trid. page 826. 827. I omit some other good arguments made for vs out of the newe Testament to returne vnto M. PERKINS vvho proposeth this as the fourth reason for our party out of S. Paul We haue an Altar Hebr. 13. vers 10. whereof they may not eate who serue in the Tabernacle Nowe say they If we Christians haue an Altar then must we consequently haue Priestes and a proper kinde of Sacrifice for these are correlatiues and doe necessarily depend and followe one the other M. PERKINS answereth That the Altar there is to be taken not literally but spiritually for Christ himselfe Reply Obserue first howe the Protestants are forced to flie from the plaine text of Scripture and natiue signification of the vvordes vnto a figuratiue that without either reason or authority secondly I wish that M. P. would goe through with his paraphrase vpon the whole sentence and if by the Altar he vnderstand Christ then by eating of it he will surely expound beleeuing in Christ nowe like a prety Scholler that hath learned to read let him put it all together say That we Christians haue a Christ in whome the Iewes may not beleeue which is flat contradictory to that which the Apostle in that Epistle goeth about to perswade * Lib. 6. in Leui. c. 21 Isichius an ancient and worthy Author in expresse tearmes doth expound these wordes of the Altar of Christs body which the Iewes for their incredulity were not worthy to behold much lesse to be partakers of it and therefore the Apostle to moue the Iewes the rather to become Christians signifieth that so long as they serue in the tabernacle and continue Iewes they depriue themselues of that great benefite which they might haue by receiuing the blessed Sacrament Nowe the wordes following in the text which M. PER. citeth to interprete this sentence belong nothing to it but containe another reason to induce the Iewes to receiue Christ for their Messias drawne for a circumstance of their Sacrifices thus as the bodies of their Sacrifices were burne without the Campe so Christ suffered without the gate and citty of Hierusalem and therefore Christ was the truth prefigured by their Sacrifices It hath also an exhortation to depart out of the society of the Iewes and to forgoe all the preferment and glory they might enjoy among them to be content to suffer with Christ al contumelies Briefly there is not one word in the sentence before to proue the Altar to be taken for Christ but for a materiall Altar vpon which the Christian Priestes and offer the body and bloud of Christ in the blessed Sacrament vvhich may be confirmed by that passage of the same Apostle 1. Cor. 10 vers 21. You cannot drinke the cup of our Lord and the cup of Deuils you cannot be partakers of our Lordes table and the table of Deuils where a comparison is made betweene our Sacrifice and table and the Sacrifice and table of Idols shewing first that he vvho communicateth with the one of them cannot be partaker of the other and then that he who drinketh of the bloud of the Sacrifice is partaker of the Sacrifice Nowe the comparison were improper if our cup were not the cup of a Sacrifice as theirs was nor our table a true Altar as theirs was out of all doubt And that shift of Kemnitius is not cleanely who saith That they who drinke of Christes cup are partakers of his Sacrifice on the Crosse but not of any Sacrifice there present For S. Paules comparison is taken from the cup of a Sacrifice to Idols immediately before offered so that it doth conuince our Chalice to be the cup of a Sacrifice then presently immolated and offered vp The fift objection with M. PER. which is our sixt argument is this Where alteration is both of lawe and couenant there must needes be a newe Priest and a new Sacrifice Hebr. 7. vers
againe towards the end of the said epistle he addeth thereto these two wordes to wit in those Scriptures which be properly so called he did not finde it euidently defined vvhat dayes vve are to fast Which word euidently he addeth as I take it because that els where he saith Epist 119 cap. 15. Serm. 64. de temp that the fourty dayes fast of Lent hath authority at out of the old lawe so out of the Gospell because our Lord fasted so many dayes and by his example consecrated it as he saith so that finally we find with S. Augustine M. PER. first witnesse some dayes euery weeke of set fasting and once in the yeare a solemne set fast of fourty dayes together Cont. Psychicos M. PERKINS other Authour is Tertullian in his booke against sensuall men wherein he is so farre opposite to M. PER. opinion that he runneth into the other extremity The Protestants would haue no set time of fasting not so much as one Lent Tertullian pleading for the Mōtanists would haue three Lents euery yeare and a farre stricter kinde of fasting then the Catholike Church commandeth But the goodman perhaps mistaking his Authour would haue said that Catholikes as Tertullian reporteth did argue against his errour and said that it vvas a newe doctrine which he taught and that true Christians were at their liberty and not bound to receiue such newe inuentions of Montanus about fasting though he vaunted that he had that doctrine from the holy Ghost But in this point we must not hearken vnto Tertullian a Patron of that errour nor beleeue his reportes of the Catholikes arguments against him which he after the fashion of Heretikes doth frame and propose odiously Li. 5. hist cap. 17. But Eusebius saith that Montanus was the first that made lawes of fasting See the place gentle reader either in the Greeke or Latin text except that of Basil and thou shalt finde there these only vvordes cited out of Apollonius That Montanus made newe lawes of fasting not that he vvas the first that made any lawes of fasting but was noted as an Heretike for making newe lawes of fasting Whence it plainely followeth that there were other old lawes of fasting before his time which contented not his humour but taking pride in his owne inuention as all Heretikes doe he was not satisfied with one Lent but would haue three Lents euery yeare and vpon euery fasting day commanded all his adherents to touch nothing vntill the Sunne were set and then they should eate neither flesh nor fish nor ought else hotte or moist but cold drie and hard thinges For which his ouer rigorous and stearne kinde of fasting inuented by himselfe and obstinately defended he vvas condemned for an Heretike and his newe precepts of fasting rejected by the ancient Christians and this may serue for a confutation of M. PERKINS reasons for their party Nowe I vvill briefly confirme ours vvhich he setteth downe by manner of objections First Leuit. 16. vers 28. in the old Testament there vvere prescribed and set fastes approued by God which M. PER. confesseth to haue beene part of the legall worshippe and saith That God commanded those then but nowe hath left vs to our liberty Reply God hauing commanded fasting as a part of his worshippe then as M. PER. confesseth it being no judiciall or ceremoniall part of the lawe but morall and appertayning to the mastring of euery mans owne vnbrideled concupiscence he did sufficiently teach al considerate men that it was alwayes to be vsed for part of his worshippe for that alwayes men should stand in neede of it they being alwayes subject to the same rebellion of their flesh And though we be freed from all vncleane meates of the lawe and from the Iewes set times of fasting yet the band of fasting remayneth because the reason of it is still in force and we are subject to the Pastours of the Church and bound to obey them for the time and manner of our fasting Our second argument The Gouernours of the Sinagogue had full power and authority to prescribe set times of fasting and all the people of God vvere bound to obey them therein as appeareth in the Prophet Zachary who maketh mention of the fastes of the fourth fift Cap. 7. vers 5. Cap. 8. vers 19. eight and ninth Monethes which were not commanded by the lawe but afterward enjoyned by the rulers of the Church Nowe then if the Pastours of that Sinagogue had such authority much more haue the Prelates of the church nowe since Christes time who hath indued them with much more ample authority then the Iewes had before Christ M. PER. answereth that those fastes mentioned in Zachary were appointed vpon occassions of the affliction of the Church in Babilon and ceased vpon their deliuerance Reply The Prophet in the same place hath plainely preuented this answere for he saith That they then in the beginning of that captiuity Cap. 7. Cap. 8. had already fasted seauenty yeares and addeth That they should continue those fastes vntill the Gentils should joyne with them in faith vvhich vvas for foure hundreth yeares after Adde herevnto a fast feast appointed at the instance of the most vertuous Queene Hester and good Mardocheus Hest 9. vers 31. to be alwayes afterward obserued by the Israelites in remembrance of their preseruation The third argument Although in the newe Testament there be no euident testimony for a set time of fasting as S. Augustine saith yet there is some mention made of a set time of fasting Act. 27. vers 8. Whereas nowe it was not safe sayling because the fast nowe was past True it is that some doe expound this of the Iewes set fast in the Moneth of September but that exposition is not so probable for after that time of the yeare especially in those hot countries it is very safe sailing and therefore it cannot so wel be vnderstood of that season Againe S. Luke wrote the acts of the Apostles rather for the Gentils then for the Iewes he being a companion of the Doctor of the Gentils and therefore it is more probable that he describeth the set fast of the Christian Gentils which was in the moneth of December nowe called ember dayes when ordinarily Priestes and other ecclesiasticall persons were consecrated as may be seeme in the pontiffical of Pope Damasus who liued one thousand two hundreth yeares past And this season of the yeare agreeth well with the text for about and after that time it is perilous sayling the seas and windes growing bigge and tempesteous Epist 86. The fourth argument out of S. Augustine before alleadged The Apostles instituted wensdayes and fridayes to be fasted euery weeke the which Epiphanius also confirmeth Haeres 75 and it is touched in the 68. Canon of the Apostles so that it is an Apostolicall ordinance to fast euery weeke Besides the fast of fourty daies before Easter called Lent to be an Apostolical Tradition
before I come to the full period of this worke Curteous Reader BEARE WITH THE FAVLTS IN PRINTING WHICH CAN HARDLY BE FEW CONSIDERING THE MANIFOLD DIFFICVLTIES OF THE time And yet besides the ouer-sights in pointing are not very many which be thus corrected IN THE MARGENT THESE Generally a ss is set in the quotation of Caluins Institution for the Section or Number For. Page Reade Beza in Neoph. 9. in Creophag simil ibid. Simler sess 17. 2. 11. number 1. 2. Homil. in praeâ—rat 48. In priorem ad Corint Conc. 56. Canon IN THE TEXT THESE For. Page Line Reade declared 7 15 declare Atheisme 20 9 Atheismes was this 40 35 was it pithagorically 63. 22 pithagoricall I say to solemnely 86 22 to be solemnely Euchirines 135 24 Eucherius established 145 17 establish Cesanis 155 39 Caesarius Pomachius 156 1 Pamachius demised 180 18 deuised proofe 181 16 disproofe The quotation of S. Augustine which is in psalm 33. conc 2. is omitted in the 68. page Hier. cont Lucif cap. 6. wanteth page 209. And in the Aduertisment page the 25. for apud Dionysium 1. Cor. reade apud Ludolphum de vita Christi part 1. cap. 5. pag. 17. AN ANSVVERE VNTO M. PERKINS ADVERTISEMENT M. PERKINS Aduertisement to all fauourers of the Roman religion shewing as he weeneth that the said Religion is against the Catholike principles of the Catechisme that hath beene agreed vpon euer since the dayes of the Apostles by al Churches which principles be fowre The Apostles Creede the tenne Commandements the Lordes prayer the institution of two Sacraments Baptisme and the Lordes supper 1. COR. 11. vers 23. I HAD once determined to haue wholy omitted this goodly post-script because it containeth in manner nothing else but an irkesome repetition of that which hath beene I will not say twise before but more then twenty times handled ouer and ouer in this former small treatise notwithstanding considering both howe ready many are when they see any thing omitted to say that it could not be answered and also for that these pointes here reiterated are the most odious that he could cull out of all the rest to vrge against vs I finally resolued to giue them a short answere And further also by prouing their newe religion to be very opposite vnto those old groundes of the true religion to requite him with the like that I die not in his debt Thus he beginneth The Roman religion established by the Councell of Trent is in the principall pointes thereof against the very groundes of the Catechisme the Creede the tenne Commandements the Lordes prayer the two Sacraments THE Catholike religion embraced and defended by the Church of Rome was planted and established there by the Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul fifteene hundreth yeares before the Councell of Trent and hath beene euer sithence by the Bishops of Rome their lawfull successors constantly reteined and most sincerely obserued and maintayned some articles thereof called into question by the Heretikes of this latter age were in that most learned generall Councell of Trent declared and defined And great meruaile it were if the principall pointes thereof should be against the groundes of the Catechisme which is in euery point most substantially expounded by the decree and order of the very same Councell Or is it credible that the Church of Rome with which all other ancient Churches and holy Fathers did desire to agree and which hath beene euer most diligent to obserue all Apostolicall traditions should in the principall points of faith crosse and destroy the very principles of that religion that hath beene agreed vpon by all Churches euer since the Apostles daies as he saith Is it not much more likely and probable that the Protestantes who slaunder all Churches euer since the time of the Apostles with some kind of corruption or other and who hold no kind of Apostolicall tradition to be necessary is it not I say more credible that they should shake those groundes of faith which come by tradition from the Apostles and haue beene euer since by all Churches agreed vpon I suppose that fewe men of any indifferent judgement can thinke the contrarie But let vs descend to the particulers wherein the truth will appeare more plainely Thus beginneth Master PERKINS with the Creede First of all it must be considered that some of the principall doctrines beleeued in the Church of Rome are that the Bishoppe of Rome is the Vicar of Christ and head of the Catholike Church that there is a fire of Purgatory that Images of God and Saintes are to be placed in the Church and worshipped that prayer is to be made to Saintes departed that there is a propitiatory sacrifice daylie offered in the Masse for the sinnes of the quicke and the dead These pointes are of that moment that without them the Roman religion cannot stand c. And yet marke the Apostles Creede which hath beene thought to contayne all necessary pointes of religion to be beleeued and hath therefore beene called the key and rule of faith This Creede I say hath not any of these pointes nor the expositions made thereof by the ancient Fathers nor any other Creede or confession of faith made by any Councell or Church for the space of many hundreth yeares This is a plaine proofe to any indifferent man that these be newe articles of faith neuer knowne in the Apostolike Church and that the Fathers and Councels could not finde any such articles of faith in the bookes of the old and newe Testament Answere is made that all these points of doctrine are beleeued vnder the article I beleeue the Catholike Church the meaning whereof they will haue to be this I beleeue all thinges which the Catholike Church holdeth and teacheth to be beleeued If this be as they say we must beleeue in the Church that is put our confidence in the Church for the manifestation and the certainety of all doctrine necessary to saluation And thus the eternall truth of God the creatour shall depend vpon the determination of the creature And the written word of God in this respect is made insufficient as though it had not plainely reuealed all points of doctrine pertaining to saluation And the ancient Churches haue beene farre ouer-seene that did not propound the former pointes to be beleeued as articles of faith but left them to these later times Thus farre Master PERKINS Wherein are hudled vp many thinges confusedly I will answere briefly and distinctlie to euery point The first is that in the Apostles Creede are contained all pointes of religion necessary to be beleeued which is most apparantly false as the Protestantes themselues must needes confesse or else graunt that it is not necessary to beleeue the King to be Supreame-head of the Church or that the Church is to be gouerned by Bishops or that vve are justified by Christes justice imputed to vs or that there be but two Sacramentes or that the Church seruice must be said in the
after this yea that many such speeches doe sometimes proceede from them Finally it is a grosse errour of theirs to thinke that euery meane Godly man shall be then made equall in glory with the Apostles In 1. cap. Petri 1. 1. Cor. 15. vers 42. which Luther teacheth whereas cleane contrary S. Paul declareth that as one starre differeth from another in glory so also shall be the resurrection of the dead I omit here many other particularities that I be not ouer tedious For these their bickeringes against the very principles of our Christian faith not leauing any one article of our Creede vnskirmished with all will serue any indifferent man for a warning to beware of their prophane doctrine that leadeth the high way to Infidelity They vse to crie out much against the Antichrist of Rome for corrupting the purity of the Gospell as the wicked Elders did against the adultery of Susanna but the juditious Christian may easily espie them themselues to be the true fore-runners of Antichrist in deed by their so generall hacking and hewing at euery point of the ancient Christian faith Thus much concerning the Creede nowe let vs passe to the Commandements First saith Master PERKINS it is a rule in expounding the seuerall Commandements that all vertues of the same kind are reduced to that Commandement Hence it followeth that counsels of perfection are injoyned in the lawe and therefore prescribe no state of perfection beyond the scope of the lawe Answ None of the counsels of perfection are enjoyned in the tenne Commandements though for some affinity they may be reduced to some of them For example It is commanded that I shall not steale that is to take any of my neighbours goodes against his will but to giue away all my owne to the poore is beyond the compasse of the lawe so likewise it is commanded not to commit adultery but we are not commanded to vowe perpetuall chastity and obedience Such offices only that are necessarily required to the performance of any commandement are comprehended with in the same but no others though some men take occasion of the commandement to treate of the counsels of perfection Secondly saith M. PER. the Commandement thou shalt not make to thy selfe any grauen Image c. hath two seuerall partes the first forbiddeth the making of Images the second the adoration of them He concludeth out of Deutronomy that the Images of the true Iehoua are forbidden in the Commandement and consequently the adoration of such Images Hence he will haue it to followe that to worship God in or at Images with religious worship is abominable Idolatrie Answ First if the Images of God only be there prohibited and then worship done to them according to his owne exposition then it followeth most clearely that there is no prohibition for either making or worshipping the Images of any Saints and therefore with a very euill conscience doth he wrest the commandement against them Secondly I say though God had forbidden vs to worshippe Images yet doth it not followe thereof that we must not worship God in or at Images For as God is euery where so may he be worshipped in all places and as well at or before an Image as in the Church and before the communion table Thirdly we make no Images to expresse the nature of God which is a spirit and cannot be represented by lines and colours but only alowe of some such pictures as set out some apparitions of God recorded in the Bible not doubting but that such workes of God may aswell be expressed in colours to our eies as they are by wordes to our eares and vnderstanding Lastly touching religious worship to be done to Saintes or pictures the Heretikes cauilling consisteth principally in the diuers taking of the word religious For it is ambiguous principally signifieth the worship only due to God Analogon in which sence to giue it to any creature were Idolatry but it is also with the best authors taken some other time to signifie a worship due to creatures for some supernaturall vertue or quality in them and in this sence to tearme it detestable Idolatry is either detestable malice or damnable ignorance And whereas he saith that common reason teacheth that they who adore God in Images doe bind God and his hearing of vs to certaine thinges and places I say the contrary that God may be worshipped in all places but we rather choose to worship him in Churches and before Images then in other places because the sight of such holy thinges doe breed more reuerence and deuotion in vs better keepe our mindes from wandering vpon vaine matters If we taught that God could be worshipped no where else or by no other meanes then he had not lied so loudly But let vs heare the end of his discourse thus he argueth They that worship they knowe not what worship an Idol This exposition is false vnlesse they worship it with diuine honour But goe on the Papists worship they knowe not what I proue it thus to the consecration of the Host there it required the intention of the Priest but they cannot haue any certainety of the Priestes intention wherefore they are not certaine whether it be bread or the body of Christ. ergo worshipping of it they worship they knowe not what Answ First here is leaping from the Commandements to the Sacraments which is out of order secondly I returne his argument vpon him selfe To their seruice and in the administration of the Lordes supper the Ministers intention is required for if he intend to serue the Diuell and by giuing them the communion to bind them the faster to him then doe they in saying Amen to his praiers receiuing the communion at his handes joyne with him in the Diuels seruice Nowe they haue no more certainety of their Ministers meaning then we haue of our Priests intention yea much lesse of many of them who are mad-merry fellowes and care not greatly whereabout they goe nor what they intend must they therefore flie from their diuine seruice and holy communion because they be not certaine of their Ministers intention therein Surely they should if his reason were ought worth But in such cases we must perswade our selues that Gods Ministers doe their dutie vnlesse we see great cause to the contrary and thereupon are we bold to doe our dutie to the blessed Sacrament If he should faile in his yet our intention being pure to adore Christes holy body only and nothing else there we should formally be the true worshippers of Christ though materially we were mistaken in that Host which to tearme Idolatry is to stile our Sauiour IESVS Christ an Idoll and therefore blasphemy in the highest degree His third objection is out of the fourth Commandement which as he saith giueth a liberty to worke six daies in the ordinary affaires of our calling which liberty saith he cannot be repealed by any creature the Church of Rome therefore erreth in that it