the workes of nature or will which are in vs but by the he lie ghoste which is geuen vnto vs which both helpeth our infirmitie and worketh with our health for that is the grace of God by Iesus Christ our Lord. to whome with the father and the holie ghoste be ascribed eternitie and goodnes for euer In this discourse of S. Augustine is declared that the commaundements of God are made possible and not heauie to be fulfilled by the grace of God nor by the strength of man either of nature or will and that by two meanes faith and loue Faith by which we craue obtaine forgiuenes of our imperfection and loue by which we cherefully endeuour to accomplish in work so much as we can which we can not do perfectly in this life in as much asno mans heart is pure in this life no mans loue is perfect in this world yet faith purifying our harts that by themselues are vnclean obtaineth as the same 's Augustine saith that which the law commaundeth But how far is this from the popish assertion to wit The law is not abooue our abtlitie to keepe it The cursse that you cite out of Augustine Serm. 191. and Ierorme explan Symb. ad Damasum is but a crack of a broken bladder in stead of a thunderbolte For both the sermon and the explanation are counterfeit stuffe being all one word forword except a litle 〈◊〉 flue in the beginning and the end and yet are most impudentlieascribed both to Augustine and Ierome But that ne ther of both is author of that sentence I wil prooue by 〈◊〉 of Saint Ierome who expresselie affirm ah that which the sermon and explanation accurseet We cursse the blasphemie of them saie the counterfeiters which saie that anie thing impossible is commaunded by God to man and that the commaundements of God cannot be kept of euerie one but of all in common Saint lerome dialog aduers. Pelag. lib. 1. saith Possibilia praecepit 〈◊〉 ego fateer Sed haec possibilia cuncta singuli habere non possumus non imbeciliitate naturae ne calumniam facias deo sed animilassitudine quae 〈◊〉 simul semper non potest habere virtutes God commaunded things possible and that I confesse But all these possible thinges euerie one of vs can not haue through weakenes of nature lest thou shouldest slaunder God but through wearines of minde which can not haue all vertues together and alwaies And his whole discourse in that dialogue is to prooue that no man can be without sinne the contrarie whereof is flat Pelagianisine He expoundeth also at large how the commaundements of God are possible and how vnpossible which maie be seene of anie man that will read his writings against the Pelagians and therfore it is very iniurious vnto him to make him a patrone of that sentence which he put posedlie and plentifullie impugneth To conclude Chrysostome and Basile meane not that a perfect obseruation of Gods law is possible in this life but that God geueth grace in some measure to keepe them to those that are borne 〈◊〉 in Christ in whome onelie is performed that which was impossible by the law as the A postle saith These fathers and diuerse other whose authority the Pelagians abused as you do to vpholde their heresie by such speeches meant to accuse the negligence and slothfulnes of men in keepeing Gods commaundements not to extoll the power and abilitie of mans free will to keepe them as Saint Augustine prooueth by manie testimonies taken out of their writinges in his treatises against the Pelagians The eleuenth section of de facing the scriptures and doctrines by tradition THe Iesuites you saie do not vse these termes of defacing that the scripture is imperfect maimed or lame and thereof I will not contend but the same in effect they holde as Master Charke saith when they affirme that all things necessarte to saluation are not contained in the scripture Your similitude of a marchant leauing his commaundements partelie in writings and partelie by word of mouth and referring the resolution of doubtes vnto his wife is not sufficient in this case For our Sauiour Christ liueth for euer whereas his seruants and the men of whome his Church which is his spouse consisteth are changed in euerie generation So that there can be no certaintie of his commaundements but onelie by his writings which if they containe not all thinges necessarie to saluation they are imperfect lame and maimed And where you saie that Saint Augustine prooueth the contrarie at large lib. 1. cont Cresc c. 32. it is vtterlie vntrue For he saith expresselie concerning the question of rebaptising them that were baptized by heretikes Sequimur sanè nos in hac re etiam Canonicarum authoritatem certissimam scripturarum We truelie doe follow in this matter also the most certaine authoritie of the Canonicall scriptures whereunto he adioineth the consent of the Catholike Church after some disceptation about the matter whose counsell agreeable to the holie scripture no man doubteth bur it is to be followed Theverie same doctrine you saie teacheth the said father lib. de side operibus cap. 9. and also ep 66. ad Don. In the former is no worde to the purpose he speaketh of the Eunuch whome Philip baptized whose confession of Christ being verie shorte some thought to be sufficient for anie man that should receaue baptisme whereas there is a more distinct knowledge and particuler explication of this faith in other places of scripture set downe that is to be required of them that are catechised and come to baptisme In the last quotation I thinke there is a faulte either in your Printer or in your notebooke which setteth downe ep 66. for ep 166. which is directed to the Donatistes whereas the other is to Maximus But in this epistle to the Donatistes there is nothing that prooueth this matter that the scriptures containe not all things necessarie to saluation Onelie he exhorteth the Donatistes to vnitie shewing that out of the same scriptures which teach Christ to be the head his bodie the Church is to be discerned and learned Touching the twelue pointes of doctrine set downe by the Censure as not conteined expresselie in the scripture and yet to be beleeued Master Charke answereth that seuen of them are in scripture the rest not necessarie to be beleeued But here you saie the question is of expresse scripture and not of any farre fet place that by interpretation may be applied to a controuersie If you meane by expresse scripture that which is expressed in so many wordes as the thing in cōtrouersy we deny that we haue anysuch question with you For we holde that any thing which by necessary demonstration can be concluded out of the scripture is as true as necessary to be beleeued as that which is expressed in plaine wordes And so we meane when we saie all thinges necessarie to saluation are conteined in the holie scriptures And as for your
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
FVLKE In that you allow no necessitie that should driue any man to take any sacrament of such as you count heretikes but onelie the sacraments of baptisme and penance in present perill of death and yet account the receiuing of sacraments so necessarie you insinuat whereunto you would bring the matter if it laie in your power and perswasion Your late attemptes by excommuncations and inuasion haue made open your meaning But he that sitteth in heauen shall laugh you to scorne the Lord him-selfe shall haue you in derision and all reasonable men shall thinke you ridiculous while by declaming generallie against heresie and the hurt that cometh thereby you labour to bring your falsehood into credit and the trueth into disdaine It is a great part of popish rhetoricke in these daies to enueie mightelie and eloquentlie against schisme heresie salsehood errors c. let the triall goe whether partie maie be iustlie charged with these crimes But Master Allen albeit he liketh that kinde of disputing and vseth it much him-selfe yet his purpose is in this treatise to examine the matter so throughly that men shal be able not onelie to vnderstand the trueth in their mindes but also to feele it with their handes Of which trueth he hath so great assurance that he sweareth as deepelie as anie Christian man can doe not onelie that he doubteth nothing but also that he can neuer mistrust anie point of that faith in which he was new borne baptized How wel he performeth this large promise as also of such moderation as he wil vse in touching the inmous persons of his aduersaries the booke following will declare wherein if auricular confession be so sensi blie prooued out of the holie scriptures as he maketh vaunt it shal be I my selfe will ioine with him that if it were ten times as burt henous as it seemeth to be no Christian man ought wilfully to omit it in paine of eter nall damnation but if the scriptures of God will afford no commaundement for it and the moste auncient Catholike Church on earth neuer thought it necessarilie to be required I maie reasonablie require that such as thought it needles before this treatise was written when they see as much as can be said for it to be disprooued they will acknowledge that without tyranie to mens consciences it cannot be imposed That Christ did forgiue sinnes not onelie by proper power and nature as he was God but also by ministerie as he was a man and as he was a Priest and head of the Church and that vpon that ground the priests power in remitting sinnes in the Church doth stand THE FIRST CHAP. ALLEN CHrist Iesus the Sonne of the liuing God being euerlastinglie of the same substance power and nature that his Father and the holie Ghost be of as being equall and one God with them both worketh mightelie all thinges in heauen and in eartb iointlie with them both and therefore by excellencie of power propertie of nature and by full and perfect dominion ouer his owne creature he remitteth mans sinnos by the same soueraingne right that they do Who being thus in all excellencie equall with God hath notwithstanding vouchsafed of his singular bountifullnes ioined with maruelous humilitis to abase him-selfe to the receiuing of our nature in which now he hath wrought the same thinges in earth by seruice sute and commission which before he onelie did by might and maiestie of his owne power procure Euen the selfe same God that by will and commaundement might most iustly both haue punished and pardoned whome he list of loue and wisdome infinite continuing alwaies in like excellencie as before became the minister of our reconcilement to God In which state he offereth sacrifice as a Priest for sinne he vseth sacramentes for the remission of sinne he praied to God his Father for the sinnefull he is made the head of the Church the Gouernour of the Church and the iudge of the Church All which functions perteine to our Sauiour in respect and consideration of his humane nature according vnto which power is giuen him of the Father thorugh the holie Ghost to practise the same FVLKE THat the ignorant be not ouertaken with the subtiltie of this Sophister which to deriue his popish absolution from the perso of our sauiour Christ plaieth on while the Nestorian another while the Eutichian It shal be good for them to remember what they are taught in their Creed concerning the person of Christ which is verie God and verie man consisting of two moste diuers natures so vnited into one person as they maie neither be deuided nor confounded without horrible blasphemie In which person ech nature so retaineth the essentiall proprieties of it selfe vnconfounded or destroied that he is but one person our Lord and sauiour Iesus Christ. Whereupon it followeth that some actions arepeculiar to his godhead some proper to his manhood and some proceeding iointlie from him as he is God and man As God he worketh euen as his Father he knoweth the th oughts of mens heartes he knoweth the last daie whereof he is ignorant as man Againe that he did eate drinke sleepe sorrow die it was proper to his humanitie Finallie that he preached the Gospell wrought miracles offered sacrifice for our sinnes rose againe c. and such like thinges he did as the Mediatour God and man And although by reason of the vnitie of the person that is often spoken of the whole person which is peculiar to either nature or of God which is proper to man or of man which is proper to God yet to preserue the essentiall properties of ech nature we must wiselie distinguish that which is proper vnto the diuinitie from that which is proper vnto the humanitie whereof we see Master Allen hath small regard while he affirmeth that all these functions of Christ whereby he offereth sacrifice as a Priest vseth sacramentes praied to God is made the head of the Church the gouernour of the Church and the iudge of the Church pertaine vnto him in respect and consideration of his humane nature For of the sacrifice ofhim-selfe the Apostle expresselie affirmeth that it was made by his eternall spirit which being offered by an inferior nature could not haue beene acceptable vnto God Heb. 9. 14. Also that Christ God and man is the head of the Church and aduanced in his humanitie to be iudge of the worlde it is in respect and consideration ofhis godhead vnto which his humanitie is vnited For as he is the image of the inuisible God by whome all thinges are created in heauen and earth he is the head of his bodie the Church Col. 1. 15. c. And the Apostle Phil. 2. 10. shewing his exaltation from the base shape of a Seruant to be the most honorable iudge of the world vsing the words of the Prophet Esaie cap. 45. in which God challengeth the iudgement to him selfe sheweth plainelie that Christ hath this honour in respect
the sonne of man which was proper to him-selfe so he might well giue the other Your argument in à posse adesse which is not worth a strawe among them that knowe that argumentes doe meane That power which God might giue to meere mortall men whoe doubteth but God might also giue to Christ his sonne to exercise according to his humaine nature but that he did exercise the same onelie as man not as God by what argument is it prooued we knowe that in casting out of deuilles he vsed his diuine authoritie and in his owne name commaunded them to come forth and they obeied Marke 1. 27. he raised the dead by his owne authoritie as God and in his owne name Luke 7. 14. Saint Iohn restifieth that of the eternall worde which was made flesh and dwelt among vs he and his fellowe Apostles did see the glorie as the glorie of the onelie begotten Jonne of God full of grace and trueth From whence come you therefore with a Ghospell to teach vs that Christ did forgiue sinnes heale the sicke cast out deuills and doe miracles but as a man onelie by power receiued from God whereby you shew your selfe to be a good procter for the Arrians if those works which were proper to Christ in respect of his diuinitie you wil draw downe to his humanitie so that he raised the dead clensed the leapers c. not otherwise thē by power receiued frō god as Elizeus did or as anie of his Apostles which did al things in his name whose dignitie you are so careful to further that you care not how you abase the honour of their Master al to bring in a popish that is an Antichristian tyrannie ouer mens soules which is blasphemous against the authoritie of God For if the plaine text of the scripture Iohn 20. 23. whose sinnes you forgiue they are forgiuen c. would yeald you so much authority as you would gladly excercise you would not trouble your selfe to make such impertinent and inconsequent collections by which you would haue it seeme as though Christ in respect of his diuine nature was vnoccupied as concerning the worke of our redemption in the world but that he did all thinges in respect of his humane nature by power receiued from God But Saint Augustine you saie prooueth that by the spirit of God in respect of his manhood Christ wrought miracles which although it be not the matter in question yet you drawe S. Austen to another matter then euer was in his meaning For although it be true that Christ did cast out Deuills in the spirit of God as man yet it followeth not that he did not cast out deuills by his owne authoritie as God seeing the workes of the Trinitie are vndeuided and Saint Augustine in the place by you quoted distinguisheth between those sayings that speake of him as in the forme of God and those that pertaine vnto him in respect of the shape of a seruant But an other argument you haue of that the Iewes which seeing themselues thus ouercome in their vaine cogitations waxed afraid and glorifyed God who gaue such power to men That the Scribes and Pharises which first mooued the question of forgiuenes of sinnes were mooued with reuerence of our sauiour Christ or yealded glorie God I finde not but that al the rest of the people glorifyed to god which had giuen such power to men What power saie you to forgiue sinnes The text saith not so but of working such miracles to heale the man sicke of the palsie so that he was presentlie changed from extreame weaknes to perfect strengh whereof as S. Luke reporteth they said we haue seene sirange things to day and as S. Marke rocordeth it they said we neuer sawe it thus But as for the ordinarie power of making attonement for sinnes which the Priests vsed according to the lawe it was no strange thing vnto them and they had seene it often times before These therefore are the best interpreters of S. Math. which did write by the same spirit But because mans authority with you is many times preferred before god you shal heare what S. Hilarie saith in that place which ere while you affirmed to make nothing against your meaning his interpretation of the text Et honorificauerunt deum quòd tantā dedit potestatem hominib c. is this Conclusa sunt omnia suo ordine cessante iam desperationis timore honor Deo redditur quòd tantam dederit hominibus potestatem sed soli hoc Christo erat debitum solide communione paternae substantiae hoc agere erat familiare All thinges are concluded in due order and the feare of disperation now ceasing honour is rendered to God because he hath giuen so great power to men But this was due onelie to Christ to him alone it was familiar or accustomable to doe these thinges by the communion of his fathers substance These wordes doe plainelie shew that Saint Hilary dissenteth euerie whit from your meaning and that you arme your schollers with no armour of proofe when you wil them to looke for the like power of remitting sins in Christs humanity which he did exercise according to the authoritie of his diuinitie ALLEN Let the proud cogitations of men here attend that so highlie disdaine the ministerie of mortall men in the remission of their sinnes let them controulle the wounderfull wisdome of God which would no otherwise saue the pitifull sores of our soules but by the seruile forme of our owne nature ioined meruelouslie in our person to the worde and eternall Sonne of God the father let them reprehend the vnsearchable secret councell of the holie Trinitie which being of power infinite to worke their wil in al creatures yet would not repaire the world nor remit our sinnes anie otherwise but by the seruice of the Sonne of man let them mislike that flesh blood and the soule of our blessed sauiour being al creatures should ioyne with the onelie almightie creator of all thinger in the remission of all our offences let the presumptuose thus doe and let vs humblie reuerence Gods ordinance and glorifye him in his Sonnes high calling in our kinde through whose singular prerogatiue we shall vndoubtedlie finde exceeding power to be giuen to his bodie and brethren in earth to his moste deare spouse the Church FVLKE The ministerie of mortall men in remission of sinnes no man I hope is so madde to disdaine when Christ him-selfe in so plaine termes hath authorized the same But where you saie that the wisdome of God would no otherwise salue the pittifuli sores of our soules but by the seruile forme of our nature ioined meruelouslie in one person to the word and eternall sonne of God I cannot but maruaile at your Nestorian blasphemie For although it be moste certaine that in the forme of a seruant the wisdome of God preformed that which to the glorie of his iustice was expedient yet that the deitic was altogether idle
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
proofe on euerie side standeth not let the aduersaries tell me In the Apostles there can be no lack touching that officie for the execution whereof they receaued both Christes commission first and the holie spirit of God afterwarde In Christ there can be no default who was well able to giue and in deade did giue the holie ghost In the holie ghost there can be no let nor lacke whose power is infinie and his verie proprietie to remit sinnes All thinges then standing on so safe and sure groundes the giuer the gift and the receiuer competent and fullie answereable each to other on euerie side let the discontented ioyne in argument let him alledge why the Priests so authorized by Christ and so assured of the holie Ghost maie not either pardon or forgiue penance Neuer man auouched that he exercised the high action vpon his owne authoritie but that he maie not as a minister and seruant practize it vpon the warrant of Christ and present power of the holie Ghost that no faithfull person can affirme nor anie reasonable man stand in FVLKE The commission that our sauiour Christ receiued in his manhood to preach remission of sinnes was by him committed to his Apostles but in such ample manner as Christ had power to remit sinnes it is not prooued that Christ did communicate the same with his Apostles The visible signe of breathing by which our sauiour Christ testified that he did giue them the holie Ghost declareth that they were enabled with spirituall giftes to exercise their function the chiefe and principall end whereof was to pronounce in his name remission of sinnes to the beleeuers of the Gospell and condemnation to the contemners And this authoritie of the Apostles concerning the pardoning of our offences I know no man that denieth And therefore you spend vainlie the one halfe of your booke'in proouing that which no man doth denie namely that the Apostles and their lawful succesiours had and haue power by Christes graunt to remitte or to retaine sinnes The matters in question are these 1. Whither Popish Priestes be the lawful successours of the Apostles 2. What manner of power is this which is graunted and thirdly How it is to be exercised by Preaching the gospell or by Popish absolution and pardons For we denie your shauelings for the most part vnlearned to be the Priests or elders of the Church of god towhome this power is deriued from the Apostles we denie an absolute power to be graunted but a ministerie of testification and assurance of that which God onelie doth properlie and principallie Thirdly we deny that by Popish shrift absolution and pardons this power is to be exercised but by preaching of the Gospell whereunto are annexed the sacraments as seales of the doctrine These questions would haue beene directlie handled without such a tedious discourse to prooue confuselie the power that is graunted by Christ to his Apostles which is not denied but the kinde of power about which you wander vncertainly somtimes making it to be a meere ministery seruice vnder god the onelie worker therein sometime more then obscurelie insinuating that it is the verie same authoritie and none other but the same which Christ did exercise vpon earth and now hath committed it ouer or communicated it to Priestes as though he were bound to stand to their sentence in remitting or retaining sinnes or that they might remit as well as he and he must accept whatsoeuer they do in that case But seeing you wil not go directlie to worke we must follow you in your crooked path as well as we maie And for the first part of your conference where you are in good hope that no man wil deny but Christ gaue them the holy ghost for no other purpose so much as to remit sinnes I must say vnto you for my parte that forasmuch as remission of sinnes is the principall scope of preaching the Gospel they were indued with giftes of the holie ghost especially to call men to repentance forgiuenes of sinnes and to assure the repentant and beleeuers of the remission of sinnes by that authoritie and commission which they receaued of Christ. But if you meane that Christ gaue them the holie ghost for no other purpose so much as that they should heare mens shrift and giue them absolution in such forme of wordes as your Popish Priests do vse without preaching the gospell to them and setting forth the grace of god in Iesus Christ I denie that they receaued the holy ghost for any such purpose The other two partes I graunt but I know not what is your conclusion If you wil conclude that they haue power to remit sinnes I graunt it neither do I know anie man that denyeth it But if you meane to conclude thus because the holy Ghost which was giuen to the Apostles is of power by nature proprietie to forgiue sins therefore the Apostles did as properlie forgiue sins as god himselfe I denie your consequence And it seemeth you meane such a matter when you saie In the holie Ghost there can be no let nor lacke whose power is infinite and his verie propertie to remit sinnes which is verie true but yet it followeth not thereof that whosoeuer is endued with the holie Ghost hath infinite power and maie properlie remit sinnes For the holie Ghost is giuen in measure to all men not that his substance is diuisible that it maie be apportionated but that his gifts are distributed by him selfe in such measure as the wisdome of God seeth to be moste conuenient His essence is infinit and incomprehensible but he is said in Scripture to be present with them or in them on whome he bestoweth his graces and giftes Therefore I see not what consequence can be made of the holy ghostes infinit power and verie propertie to remit sins to conclude that the Apostles which receiued the holie Ghost rereiued infinite power or the verie propertie to remitre sinnes Where you will the discontented to ioyne in argument why the Priest so authorized by Christ and so assured of the holy Ghost may not either pardon or giue penance Thus I ioyne with you For remitting of sinnes I see authoritie but for giuing of penance none therefore I graunt the former and denie the latter For if by penance true repentance be vnderstood god onelie can giue repentance who onelie can turne the heart of man to feare him If you meane popish penance that is enioyning of satisfactorie works or punishment I denie that it is mentioned in the scriptures neither can it be contained in retaining of sinne Where you saie that neuer man aduouched that high action vpon his owne authoritie it is vntrue for Antichrist that lifteth him-selfe to be equall with God and Christ auoucheth vpon his owne authoritie although to cloke his manifest impietie that he might deceiue the simple he pretendeth the name authoritie of God Christ. But that the Apostles and their true successours by the
holie ghost was God by whose authoritie and proper power they did alwaies since Christs word was spoken remitte the same The which beeing true as it cannot be false that is so agreeable both to scriptures and to all our fathers faith the heresy of our time must needes directly impugne the vertue and power of Gods owne spirit For as the proofe of mans ministerie in this foresaid function induceth the true and euerlasting Godhead of the holy ghost by whome they practize that power so the denial thereof and robberie of priesthoode of this their moste iust claime doth directlie spoile God of his honour and of the euerlasting right that he hath in remission of sinnes So whiles these goodmen seeke to abase man vniustlie they blaspheme God highlie and together with mans ministerie they bring vnto vtter contempt Gods owne authoritie FVLKE Your deifying of popish priests doth altogether weaken the force of that argument which our fathers vsed against the auncient heretikes to prooue the diuinitie of the holie Ghost For it were an easie matter for Eunomius Macedonius or anie other heretike that was against his godhead to replie that by ministerie of God the holie Ghost might as properlie forgiue sinnes as Priestes do by the ministerie of Christ and of the holie ghost yea so farre forth as thereby they are made halfe Gods yea deified and made Gods in deede But you vtter repugnancie when you saie that by Gods authoritie and proper power Priestes do forgiue sinnes Where you make it not proper to God which is common to others with him Therefore you should speake more properlie to saie that God the holy ghost by his owne authoritie and power proper to the deitie doth forgiue sinnes in their ministery men thereto authorized do no more in proper speach and sense but testifie and declare what God doth for which declaration and testification seeing they are the embassadours and messengers of God vnto the world to declare his pleasure of reconciliation or condemnation they are said to forgiue sinnes or to retaine them which they do not properlie but pronounce the sentence of God concerning the remission or retention of mens sinnes And that this was the meaning of the Auncient fathers concerning the authoritie and power of Gods ministers it is moste manifest by this argument whereby they choke the enuier of the holie ghostes diuinitie from which you cutte of all the sinnewes and force it hath to prooue it when you communicate to men that which is proper to God and aduance men aboue the nature of meere men when you deifie their persons by meanes of the giftes of the holie Ghost giuen to them and make them of abilitie to exercise the proper workes of God As for the deniall and robberie that you ascribe I can not tell to what heretikes of this time we detest as much as ye not seeking to abase man beneath the nature and condition of man norseeking to extoll him by robbing God of his glorie and proper effects to magnifie menne to deifie the persoas of men as you do in plaine termes Whereby it is manifest we are as far from blaspheming god or making mans ministerie contemptible which he exerciseth in the name of God as you are from sobrietie thus to iudge if your meaning be of vs or thus to reason if you would defend the argument of the auncient fathers against the auncient heretikes ALLEN But for the readersease and more light of our cause I ioyne thus in argument with them againe vpon the second part of Christes owne wordes and action had in the authorizing of his Apostles Whatsoeuer the holie Ghost maie doe in this case by the proper power of his Godhead that may the Apostles and Priestcs do by seruice and ministerie through the power of the holie Ghost But the holie Ghost properlie and rightlie doth remit sinnes Therefore the Apostles doe rightlie remit sinnes by their ministerie in the said holie Ghost All partes of this conclusion stand vpright and feare no falsehood they be guarded on euerie side by Christes action by wordes of scripture by the Doctors plain warrant and by all reason With all which whosoeuer is not contented but will needes extinguere spiritum extinguish Gods spirit and violentlie take from the Church the greatest comfort of all mans life that in this infirmitie of our flesh standeth in moste hope by his gift in remission of sinnes for which especiall cause the said spirit was mercifullie breathed vpon the Apostles peculiarly before the mare common sending of the same from heauen aboue If all this reason and iust demonstration of trueth will not serue them I will charge them with this graue conclusion of S. Augustine vttered partlie against the Nouatians especallie against the desperate that would not seeke for Gods mercie by the Churches ministerie in the sacrament of penance To be briefe I will speake it in English Whosoeuer he be that beleeueth no mans sinnes to be remitted in Gods Church and therefore despiseth the bountifulnes of God inso mightie a worke if he in that obstinate minde continue til his liues end he is guiltie of sinne against the holie Ghost in which holy ghost Christ remitteth sinnes FVLKE I doe greatlie commend you that you haue such regard of the readers ease and it seemeth you haue good confidence of your cause that you flie not the light of Logicall iudgement by which the trueth shall more plainelie appeere to all sortes of men then by anie discourses at large vnder which many great errors may be often couered vnder sophistical cloudes ambiguity of words which in a briefe syllogisme is soone and easilie espied To answere your argument therefore First I distinguish of your Maior for if you meane by seruice and ministerie the expressing and declaring of the will and pleasure of the holy ghost wherunto they are authorized I acknowledge your Maior proposition to be true whatsoeuer the holie Ghost maie doe in this case by the proper power of his godhead that maie the Apostles and Priestes doe by seruice ministerie through the power of the holie Ghost But if you meane by seruice and ministerie that the proper power of God is communicated to men I denie your Maior as false and absurde For the Apostles and Priests maie not by seruice and ministerie through the power of the holie Ghost forgiue sinnes properlie which the holie ghost by proper power of his godhead may doe for this is a proper power not com municable vnto any creature but a declaration of the will of him that hath such power is the ministeriall authoritie by which men forgiue sinnes Secondlie I answere that your conclusion is deceitfull For your Minor Extreame or Assumption is not perfectlie ioyned with your Maior or Proposition in the conclusion For your Minor is that the holie ghost properly rightlie doth remit sinnes So your conclusion should be therefore the Apostles properlie and rightlie doe remit sinnes by their ministerie
gratia gratum faciens such a grace as maketh a man acceptable to God Therefore the holie Ghost breathed vpon the Apostles then by Christ and giuen yet to Priests in their ordering by Bishopes is a gift of God and a grace of the holy ghost not whereby man is made rertuous or cunning or happie before God but it is a gift onelie of God whereby man is called aboue his owne nature and dignitie to haue power and authoritie to doe and exercise anie function in Gods Church to the spirituall benefit of the people which is not onelie not alwaies ioyned to vertue and holie knowledge but it full often by calling due to them which are moste wicked persons without anie impaire of their authoritie And these kinde of giftes and graces of the holie Ghost be called gratiae gratis datae certaine giftes giuen to men for no desertes of their persons but freelie for the vse of other men to whome they be beneficiall euen there where they be hurtfull to the bestowers In which sense Saint Paule numbreth a great sorte in the fourth to the Ephesians and the first Epistle to the Corinshians and he calleth them not onelie the graces of the spirite but also the diuisions of functions and ministrations as the gift of working of miracles the gift of tongues the gift of prophecying the gift of preaching and so foorth all which being the giftes and graces of the spirit for the Churches edifying and of Saint Peter being called the holy Ghost in the Actes yet they were giuen to euill men often as well as to good without all imparing of Gods honoure yea with the great encrease of God glorie that euen by the wicked is able to worke his wil and holie purpose for the benefit of his Elect. And in this sense the spirite of God breathed vpon the Apostles was a gift of the holie Ghost whereby man should remit by lawfull power the sinnes of the people Whereupon Theophilact sayeth that Potestatem quandam donum spirituale dedit Apostolis vs remittant peccata ostendens quod genus spiritualium donorum eis dederit inquit quorum remiser it is peccata remittuntur eis that is to saie Christ gaue to his Apostles a certaine power and spirituall gift whereby they might remit sins for he shewed what power of the spirit it was that breathed on them when he said whose sinnes you doe for giue they be forgiuen Whosoeuer shall vndoubtedlie remit sinnes and absolue sinners must haue the same gift of the holie Ghost which the Apostles had whereby he cannot erre And this gift no man denieth but it maie be in a wicked and vngodlie man For euen such an one may preach the doctrine of Christ of remission of sinnes publikelie and priuatlie if he haue the calling that is required to that office Neither doth Caluine or any other that are of his iudgement otherwise require the like force of the holie ghostes assistance in al men that take vpon them to remit sinnes For there is not onelie a power but a knowledge required in him that shall assuredlie and vndoubtedlie forgiue sinnes And therefore the papistes doe vnreasonably make a diuorse of the keie of power from the keie of knowledge which power if it be no guided by knowledge doth nothing but insteade of opening and shutting with the keies committed to the Church throw forth the keies as the blinde man casteth his staffe which cannot happen so right in to the locke that they should open it to the penitent sinners For it is not the Priestes authoritie that can open the dore of comforte to a sinners conscience except he can declare vnto him out of the word of God how and by what meanes he maie be reconciled vnto God That the holie Ghost is giuen by Bishopes to Priestes in their ordering it is more boldlie affirmed then euer it can be prooued for Christ onelie hath authoritie to giue the holy Ghost and therefore to declare that it commeth from him alone among men he breathed vpon his Apostles which though the Bishops doe vntill their longues ake yet can they not furnish their parties by them ordered with giftes meet for their calling as Christ did his Apostles They must make choise therefore according to the Doctrine of the Apostle of those that haue those gratious and necessarie giftes of God before and to them they must commit the power and authoritie to exercise the same to the publike benefice of the Church But if they wil giue authoritie to them that haue no wisdome to exercise the same they make the most foolish iudges of all the world and such are worthelie contemned Therefore howsoeuer you distinguish grace you must not seeke to winne credit to them which haue nothing but pretense of authoritie when they be voide of all vnderstanding how to vse it as manie hundreds yea thousandes of your hedge Priests are if their calling were neuer so good as it is moste corrupt and vnlawfull ALLEN If our aduersaries be ignorant of these thinges which be so common in schooles of diuinitie yet we think they should remember that Saint Paul did not dissalow the authoritie nor power of preaching in such as were euil men and taught for emulation and not of sincere zeale of the Gospell and that Christ him-selfe stopped not such as cast out deuilles in his name and therefore were not without the gifte of workeing miracles though he professed that manie of them at the date of iudgement challenging some right of heauen vpou that acte should not be receiued to glory how the gift of prophecy was common in the olde 〈◊〉 not onelie to the wicked but to such as willinglie would deceiue the people And Caiphas he prophecied by the spirit of God as by force of his office being yet in purpose to worke wickednes against Christ himselfe for whose trueth he then by force of the spirit prophecied But of the Sacramentes of Gods Church euerie one that they may beministred beneficiallie to the receiuing in much wickednes of the giuer there is no man can be ignorant For it is a rule and a principle moste certaine that God worketh his will in them by the ministerie of men be they neuer so euill For elle they were mans sacraments and not Gods and we could not be certaine neither of our baptisme neither of right receiuing of Christes bodie in the holie sacrament of his eultar nor of any other spirituall benefit that we now by mans ministery receiue in the Church Much cōsort it were for al Christian people to hauesuch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then soules and such disposers of Gods mysteries as would could in all sinceritie and faithfulnes worke Gods 〈◊〉 and that would alwaies vse the high power giuen them to 〈◊〉 and neuer to destroie and that they would so doe both S. Peter and S. Paule doe often exhort them But neither the miserie of mans sinsull nature can suffer that nor our wickednes can
creature can haue except he be also creator and God himselfe therefore Christ truelie as man receiueth that which is giuen but in respect and right of his godheade he is able to receiue and exercise that power which none can haue but God onelie These thinges indeede maie seeme vnto the simple to be farre fetched and farre from the question of priests power to remit sinnes but they are much farther from the truth of our Catholike faith and Religion that our sauiour Christ in respect of his Diuine nature should be spoiled of his authority or els should thereby worke nothing in a manner in the cheife most necessarie partes of our redemption that Popish priests might be made equall or not farre vnlike him in the power of pardoning sinnes ALLEN For as the due consideration of Christes authoritie and excellent office touching his manhood will helpe vp the decaied honour and iurisdiction that the guides of Gods Church by the right of his high calling do iustlie challenge so it shall expresse the boldnesse of certaine miscreants of this age who to further their sundrie euil in tents and detestable doctrines haue dishonoured Christes dignitie touching his incarnation and office of his redemption exceeding much both in himselfe and in persons of his Pristes and substitutes some of them fearing as I take it lest the honour and office of Christes Priesthood might by participation descend to the Apostles and Priestes of the Church letted not to hold that Christ was his fathers Priest according to his diuine nature of which blasphemie Iohn Caluine was iustlie noted wherein the wicked man whiles he went about to disgrace the dignitie of mortall men became exceeding iniurious to the second person in Trinitie One other of that schoole and of his owne neast denied that Christ in his manhoode should iudge the world lest there might seeme to be some force of punishment and correction of wickednes practized by mans ministerie in this life for the resemblance of Christes iudgement to come And so taught one Richerius of a Carmelite a Caluinist Other deny Christ being now in heauen to make praier for vs according to his manhoode because it tendeth towardes the intercession as Saint Paulin expresse wordes recordeth of him Quòd saluare in perpetuum potest accedens ad Deum per semetipsum semper viuens ad interpellandum pro nobis That for euer he is of power to giue saluation hauing accesse to God by him-selfe and alwaies Iiuing to make intercession for vs. Yea most of the Sacramentaries for the aduantage of their vngodlie assertion that Christ in his owne person as he is God and man should not be present in the sacrament doe couertlie blaspheme the blessed and highlie sanctified fleshof our sauiour auouching it to be vnprofitable whereby they vnaduisedlie dishonour the dreadfull incarnation of Christ and all the workes wrought by the meane of his flesh and blood and ministerie of his manhoode for the remission of our sinnes and purchasing saluation to his Church FVLKE The due consideration of Christes authoritie and excellent office touching his manhoode will nothing helpe to restore the decaied honour and iurisdiction of Popish priesthoode except you can both prooue your Popish priests capable of such honour and power as the sonne of God is and also bring forth the recordes out of the holy scriptures for that high calling whereof you boast That any faithful Christian whome you to maintaine an Antichristian authoritie call Miscreantes haue dishonoured Christs dignitie touching his incarnation and office of his redemption it is a slaunder stronglie aduouched but slenderlie prooued For first Caluine affirming Christ to be a priest in his wholl person God and man derogateth nothing from that dignitie neither is he iniurious against the second person in trinitie for Christ is an high priest after the order of Melchesidech and our redeemer not as a minister and seruant onelie but as the sonne as the King os peace and righteousnes without father without mother without genealogy hauing neither beginning of his daies nor end of his life al which things can not be restrained to the humanitie of Christ but are proper to him as he is equall and eternall with his father That Richerius should denie that Christ in his manhoode should iudge the world it might well be a slaunder of that grosse potheaded Cyclops Villegagnon which when he durst not abide the inuasions of the barbarous people in Gallia antarctica where he had enterprised a conquest he quarelled with Richerius and other godlie persons to haue a colour of returne and a wellcome of the Papists And as touching his slaunderous libell that you send the reader vnto I referre you them to the answere confutation of Richerius Thirdlie that Christ doth make praiers for vs according to his manhoode it is not sufficiently prooued by the text of the Apostle to the Heb. 7. because he may and doth make continuall intercession for vs by the vertue and worthines of the sacrifice of his death although he conceiue no prayers for vs in forme of wordes as men vse vpon earth And if it be graunted that Christ so praieth for vs yet it tendeth nothing towardes the intercession of Saints but rather against it because the interceffion of Christ is sufficient without them yea if the intercession of Saints were prooued it draweth not of necessity praier vnto Saints after it and therefore there were smal purpose in them that denie Christ in such forme to praie for vs to controul the inuocatiō of Saints which thing being either graunted or denied prooueth neither too nor fro that Saints are to be praied vnto or 〈◊〉 That any one of those whome you cal Sacramentaries doth either ouertly or couertly blaspheme the blessed flesh of our Sauiour auouching it to be vnprofitable otherwise then our sauiour Christ himselfe auouched if it were separated from his diuine and quickening spirite doth profitte nothing you are not able to iustifie and therefore you send vs in the margent to Cyrill vpon Iohn lib. 4. Cap 14. whoe sheweth in deede that the flesh of Christ as it is the flesh of the sonne of God hath quickening vertue and power in it to our eternall redemption but otherwise affirmeth nothing thereof that we all are not readie to subscribe vnto ALLEN Let vs therefore Christianlie confes with the scripture and with the Church of Christ that our sauiour not onelie by power equall to his father concerning his diuine nature but also by the sending and graunt of his father and vnction of the holie spirit beeing farre vnder them both in his humane nature doth remit sinnes Whereupon it orderlie followeth that whosoeuer denyeth man to haue authoritie or that he maie haue power graunted him by God to forgiue sinnes he is highlie iniuriouse to our sauiours owne person dispensation of his flesh and mysterie of his holie incarnation For though there be great diuersitie betwixt his state and others because