the lawe eternall is that it is sinue to transgresse the rule And this is the common opinion as I haue proved out of Iosephus Angles Neither will it helpe the papistes to say as the Thomistes doe that veniall sins are praeter non contra legem besides the law but not against the law 1 First because saint Augustine defineth sinne generallie to be a gainst the law of God writing in this manner Peccatum est dictum vel factum vel concupitum contra legem aeternam dei Sinne is a saying or doing or coveting against Gods eternall lawe Secondly because as Iosephus Angles their owne doctor saith everie venial sinne is against right reason and to doe against right reason is to doe against the law of nature which commaundeth not to depart from the rule of right reason 3 Thirdly because we must give an accompt of euerie idle word in the general day of iudgement as Christ himselfe telleth vs for no-other end doubtlesse must this accompt be made but onely because everie idle word is against the law of God This the papistes can never denie and yet must they likewise confesse that idle wordes bee those sinnes which they tearme venialles and consequently that veniall sinnes be against the lawe of God Secondly that no mortall sinne can be forgiven in purgatorie is confessed of all papistes without contradiction Thus writeth Bellarminus Manet vltima sententia vera catholica purgatorium pro ijs tantum esse qui cum venialib culpis moriuntur rur sum pro illis qui decedunt cum reatupaenae culpis iam remissis The true and catholike opinion remaineth that purgatorie is only for those that die with veniall sinnes and againe for those that die with the guilt of sinne after their sinnes bee forgiven And with Bellarminus doe all other papistes agree that such as die in mortall sinne goe incontinently to hel Thirdly that sundrie having venial sinnes abide the paines of purgatorie appeareth by Bellarminus his wordes before alleaged and by Dominicus So to in these wordes Qui dixerit verbum contra spiritum sanctum nō remittetur ei in hoc seculo neque in futuro Vbi Gregorius lib. 4. di alogorum adnotavit aliqua leuia peccata remitti in futuro seculo per ignem purgationis He that shall blaspheme the holie Ghost shall neither be forgiven in this vvorld neither in the vvosld to come In vvhich place Gregorius pope of Rome noted certaine light sinnes to be forgiven in the world to come by the fire of purgation And their Aquinas saith thus Secundum enim quod peccata venialia sunt maioris vel minoris adhaerentiae vel gravitatis citius vel tardius per ignem purgantur For veniall sinnes are purged by fire sooner or latter according to their greater or lesser adherence or gravitie And for a full accomplishment of this conclusion Iosephus Angles vttereth the great perplexitie of papistes concerning this their purgative imagination These are his vvords Quo igitur modo remittuntur venialia in purgatorio varij sunt modi dicendi Scotus dicit in instanti mortis idest in primo non esse hominis propter merita quae homo habuit in vita Dur andus dicit remitti quoad culpam in purgatorio propter displicentiam quam habent illic animae venialium cum sint in charitate Soto asserit remitti quoad culpā in purgatorio propter actum chariiatis continuam patientiam quam dum cruciantur habent Hovv then are veniall sinnes forgiven in purgatorie diverse hold diversly Scotus saith they are forgiven in the instant of death that is vvhen man first beginneth not to be by reason of his merits in his life time Durand saith the fault is remitted in purgatorie for the displicence of venials vvhich the soules haue in that place and that because they be in charity Soto saith the sinne is remitted in purgatorie for the act of charitie and continuall patience vvhich they have in ther torments VVhom vvill not this discordant theologie vtterly dissvvade from papistrie The sixt Conclusion THe booke of Machabees which is the sole and onely foundation of popish purgatorie is of no force at all to establish the same This conclusion shalbe evidently prooved when I shall effectually disproove the authoritie of the said booke of Machabees wherewith many have a long time beene most miserably seduced Marke therefore my discourse herein To prove that the 2. book of Machabees out of which prayer and sacrifice for the dead and consequently purgatory is gathered is not Canonicall that is not penned by the assistance of the holy ghost I say first that it is not in the canon of the Hebrewes neither did the Iewes or Hebrewes at any time repute it as a part of holy divine scripture This S. Hierome witnesseth in these wordes Sicut ergo Iudith Tobiae Machabaeorum libros legit quidem Ecclesia sedinter Canonicas scripturas non recipit sic haec duo volumina legit ad aedificationem plebis non ad authoritatem Ecclesiasticorum dogmatum confirmandam As therefore the Church readeth the bookes of Iudith of Toby and of the Machabees but receiveth them not amongst the Canonicall scriptures so doth it read also these 2. volumes for edification of the people but not to confirme any Ecclesiasticall doctrine S. Cyprian hath the very same wordes in effect in Symb. expositione S. Augustine doth testifie the same when he thus writeth Hanc scripturam quae appellatur Machabaeorum non habent Iudaei sicut legem prophetas Psalmos quibus dominus testimonium perhibet tanquam testibus suis dicens oportebat impleri omnia quae scripta sunt in lege Prophetis in Psalmis de me Sedrecepta est ab Ecclesia non inutiliter si sobriè legatur vel audiatur maximè propter illos Machabaeos qui pro Dei lege sicut veri martyres à per secutoribus tam indigna atque horrenda perpessi sunt This scripture which is of the Machabees the Iewes repute not as they do the law the Prophets Psalmes to which the Lord gave testimonie as to his witnesses saying It behoved all things to be fulfilled which are written in the law in the Prophets and Psalmes of me but it is received of the Church not without profite if it bee read or heard soberly especially for those Machabees who for the lawe of God as true martyrs suffred of their persecutors so unworthy horrible torments And their owne deare fryer Bryton telleth vs that neither is it knowne who was the author of these bookes neither did the east Church ever receive them I say secondly that this second booke out of which purgatorie is collected was never in Hebrew and consequently never authenticall among the Iewes I say thirdly that many things found affirmed in the bookes of Machabees proove the same to be of no credit at
by equivocation denie them selves to bee Christians as their deare brother Iohn Mushe confesseth in his answere to my addition whose wordes Irehearsed at large in my counterblast against him and his adherents The sixt Article ALL the Romish Iesuites and other papistes now adaies avouch obstinately that matrimonie is a sacrament and conferreth grace ex opere operato but their owne Durandus and Gaufridus affirme boldly the contrary Durand hath these expresse wordes Praeter duo praedicta sunt alia duo circa matrimonium circa quae sine periculo haeresis licitū est contraria opinari quorum unum est theologicum videlicet vtrum in matrimonio confer atur gratia ex opere operato sicut in aliis sacramentis novaelegis Secundum est logicum videlicet vtrum matrimonium habeat plenam vnivocationem cum alijs sacramentis Besides these two there bee other two things to bee considered in matrimonie wherein we may without daunger of heresie thinke the contrary The one is theological to wit if in matrimony be conferred grace ex opere operato as in other sacraments of the new law The other is logicall to wit if matrimony be a sacrament properly and univocally so called And Durandus avoucheth Gaufridus with other Canonists to be of his opinion So then matrimony neither giueth grace nor yet is properly a sacrament THE SEAVENTH ARTICLE of their Dissention SYlvester Prieras hath these words Papa est imperatore maior dignitate plus quà m aurum plumho The pope doth more excell the Emperour in dignitie then gold excelleth leade Againe he saith thus Donavit Constantinus papae in vener ationem recognitionem Dominij administrationem temporalem imperij eandem immediatè Papa conceait imperatori in vsum stipendium officij pro gubernatione defensione pacifica ecclesiae The Emperour Constantine gave the pope temporall administration of the Empire in token of his reverence and homage and the pope gaue the Emperour the same againe as the stipend of his service for his peaceable protection of the church And a litle after he hath these wordes Vnde dico quod de plenitudine potestatis ex causa rationabili potest omnes leges civiles evertere alias condere nisi in quantum spectant ad ius naturale aut divinum nec imperator cum omnibus legibus populis Christianis possent contra eius voluntatem quicquam statuere VVhere vpon I saie that of the fulnes of power vpon reasonable cause the pope may dissolve all the ciuill lawes and make others neither can the emperor with all lawes and consent of Christendom determine anie one iote against his mind Archidiaconus and Augustinus de Ancona are of the selfe same opinion with Sylvester But other papists are ashamed now thus to hold and therfore write sharply against this opinion Bellarminus saith thus Christus vt homo dum in terris vixit non accepit nec voluit vllum temporale dominium summus autem Pontifex Christi vicarius est Christum nobis represent at qualis erat dum hîc inter homines vlveret Igitur summus Pontifex vt Christi vicarius at que adeo vt summus Pontifex est nullum habet temporale dominium Christ as man while he lived on earth neither had nor would haue any temporal dominion but the pope is Christes viear and representeth Christ to vs in such sort as he lived here among men therefore the pope as Christes vicar and consequently as pope hath no temporal dominion Victoria hath these words Potest as temporalis non dependet a summo pontifice sicut aliae potestates spirituales inferiores Et paulo post licèt assertores alterius partis communiter dicunt quòd papa instituit omnem potestatem temporalem tanquam delegatam subor dinatam sibi quod ipse constituit Constantinum imperatorem sedtotum hoc est fictitium sine quacunque probabilitate nec innititur vel ratione vel testimonijs vel scripturae vel saltem alicuius expatribus vel verè theologis sed glossatores iuris hoc dominium de derunt papae cum ipsiessent pauperes rebus doctrina Temporall power doth not depend vpon the pope as inferiour spiritual powers doe although others of the other part commonly say that the pope ordeined all temporall power as delegate and subordinate to himselfe and that he made Constantine emperoure But al this is a meere fable and voide of all probabilitie neither hath it any ground either of reason or of scripture or of ancient fathers or good deuine yet the glosses of the canons gaue the pope this preheminence because themselues were beggerlie followes and vnlearned Behold here the liuely originall of popedome euen by the testimonie of the best learned popish doctor The eight article of Dissention THe papistes this day do constantly hold and teach as a necessarie doctrine of faith that there be veniall sinnes which doe not dissolve the amitie betweene God and man because they are not say they contra but praeter legem dei which distinction Thomas Aquinas vttereth verie plainly in these words Peccatum veniale dicitur peccatum secundùm rationē imperfectam in ordine ad peccatū mortale sicut accidens dicitur ens in ordine ad substantiam secundum imperfectam rationem entis non enim est contra legem quia venialiter peccans nō facit quod lex prohibet nec praetermittit ia ad quod lex per praeceptum obligat sedfacit praeter legem quia non observat modum rationis quā lex intēdit A venial sin is termed sin after an vnperfect maner way to a mortal sin euen as accidens is called ens in order to substantia after an vnperfect reason of ens For it is not against the law because hee that sinneth venially doth not that which the lawe forbiddeth neither doth omit that to which the law by precept doth oblige but doth besides the law because it doth not observe the maner of reasō which the law intendeth But this opinion is sharply reproved and flatly confuted by many learned papistes For Michael Baius apud Bellar. Ioannes Gerson de vita spirituali lect 1. circa med Roffensis artic 32. cont Luther affirme that every sin is mortall of it owne nature therefore may iustly be punished eternally Durandus proueth by manie reasons that euerie sin is against the law of God Ioannes Gerson Almain hold the same For thus speaketh Ioseph Angl. of them Tertia opinio est Gerso Almaini asserentium venialia mortalia non differre ex natura rei sed tantum ex divina misericordia eo quod placuit divinae maiestati imputare ad paenam aeternam mortale veniale autem ad temporalē vtrumque tamen ex natura sua cum sit in Deum esse dignum poena aeterna The third opinion is Gersons and Almains affirming that veniall and mortall sinnes do not differ
in the nature of the thing but only by the mercie of God in that it pleased the maiestie of God to assigne eternall paine for the one and temporall for the other For both of them deserve eternall paine of their owne nature because they are against God And in another place the same Iosephus writeth in this manner Durandus tamen alij permulti hanc sententiam impugnant affirmantes peccata venialia esse contra mandata haec opinio videtur modò in scholis communior But Durand and many others impugne this opinion auouching veniall sinnes to be against the commaundement and this opinion now adaies seemeth to be more common in the scholes where note by the way out of the word modo now adaies the mutabilitie of tomish religion THE NINTH ARTICLE of Dissention THe councell of Trent Thomas Aquinas Bellarminus and manie other papistes affirme matrimonie to be properlie a sacrament of the new testament and to conferre grace But Durand denieth it either to give grace or to be properlie a sacrament So Alphonsus a Castro and Petrus a Soto denie it to bee properlie a sacrament of the new Iawe And Melchior Canus having sundrie others of his opinion as he saith holdeth matrimonie to be a sacrament yet not everie matrimonie to be so but only that matrimonie which is celebrated a ministro ecclesiastico sacris et solennibus verbis by the minister of the church in sacred and solemne words The like dissention is among Papistes about the matter and forme of the said sacrament For Iosephus Angles reciteth fiue severall opinions for and concerning this one point of popish doctrine And Melchior Canus beholdeth such varietie in this matter as he reputeth him a mad man that wil beleeve their sayings whose words for better credite sake are these Lege magistrum D. Tho. Scotum Bonav Richard Palud Durand caetero sque scholae theologos nisi statim eorum pendentes ac vacillantes animos deprehenderis tum vero me aut stultum aut temerarium iudicato Nam cum quaerunt an matrimonium conferat gratiam id quod maxime eo loco finiendum erat non definiunt tamen sed in his referunt quae in hominum opinione sunt posita In materia item forma huius sacramenti statuenda adeo sunt inconstantes varij adeo incerti ambigui vt ineptus futurus sit qui in tanta illorum varietate discrepantia rem aliquam certam constantem exploratam conetar efficere Read the master S. Thomas Bonaventure Richardus Paludanus Durandus and other schoole divines if by and by thou doest not perceiue their wavering and doubtfull mindes then iudge me either a foole or a rash fellow For when they enquire if matrimonie confer grace that which was especially to be defined that define they not at all but onely tell what others thinke therein and in determining the matter and forme of this sacrament they are so unconstant and various so uncerten and ambiguous that he may be deemed a foole who in such their variety and dissent will establish any constant doctrine Here gentle reader thou maiest behold the dissention of papistes even in their sacraments and matters mostimportant The tenth Article of dissention PAnormitanus Abulensis Gerson Almaine Cusanus with all the fathers of the counsell assembled at Constance affirme every generall councell to be aboue the Pope as I haue proved in the 4. chapter and third conclusion But all our Dominicanes Iesuites and seminaries doe with open mouthes avouch the contrarie as their writings and experience this day teacheth vs. The eleventh article of dissension THe Iesuites and seminaries tell us that the Church consisteth in those popes who sit by materiall succession in Peters chaire at Rome how badde soever their lives be and how erroneous soever be their private opinions but their owne great doctour Nich. Lyranus doth sharpely impugne that their sottish assertion telling them that many popes have forsaken the christian faith and become atheists therefore that the church doth not consist in the materiall succession of men but in the faith of Peter and doctrine which he preached Read his words in the third chapter and fourth conclusion The like dissention is amongst papists about the popes dispensation in matrimonio ratonon consummato as is alreadie prooved in the fifth chapter read and peruse the chapter The twelfth Article of dissention MAny papists as Aquinas Richardus Paludanus Marsilius pope Gregorie all his canonists do hold that a simple priest by vertue of the popes dispensation may lawfully and effectually minister their sacrament of confirmation VVhich opinion Covarruvias recordeth and iustifieth in these wordes Tertio probatur simplicem sacer dotem posse ex Rom. pontificis dispensatione sacramentum hoc confirmationis ministrare auctoritate D. Gregorij qui permittit vere concedit licentiam presbyteris ubi desunt Episcopi ministrandi sacramentum confirmationis quod si fieri iure non posset vir doctissimus sanctissimus minime permisisset It is prooved thirdly that a simple priest may vpon the popes grant administer this sacrament of confirmation by S. Gregories authoritie who permitteth and indeed giveth license unto priestes where bishops want to doe the same But his opinion and practise is stoutly impugned by other great papistes to wit Bonaventura Alphonsus Durandus Scotus Maior and pope Hadrian who all avouch that pope Gregorie was a man and therefore might erre and erred indeed egregiously what greater and more important dissention can be then this for confirmation is a sacrament with the papistes The thirteenth article of dissention ALbertus Magnus Thomas Aquinas Ioannes Maior Bonaventura Almain Richardus and other papistes affirme that every of their 7. orders is a sacrament VVhereupon I might inferre right consequently that the papistes have by iustnumber 13. sacraments in all But their Durand doeth reiect this common opinion as foolish and improbable Yea Victoria Iosephus Angles Caietanus and Petrus Lombardus their master of sentences are no small patrones of Durandus his opinion Iosephus Anglus writeth thus Non est erroneum affirmare cum Dur ando solam or dinationem sacerdotis esse sacramentum ordinis reliquas vero ordinationes sacramentalia esse quia Ecclesia hactenus non declaravit oppositum neque eius opinio scripturae sacrae sanctorum auctoritatibus contradicit It is not erroneous to affirme with Durande that onely priesthood is a sacrament and that the sixe other are meere sacramentals because the Church hitherto hath not declared the contrarie neither is this opinion contrary to holy scripture or to the doctrine of the fathers Victoria hath these wordes Sienim aliqui ordines non sunt iuris divini ut certo constat deminoribus non est dubitandum quin collatio illorum committi possit non Episcopo For if some orders be not de iure divino as it is certen of
pope hath given this auctoritie to the priest But alas that can not possibly be graunted For this is a constant axiome with the papists par in parem non habet potestatem When two are of equall auctoritie the one can not make a law for or against the other Well since none of these waies can content his holines let vs heare what his owne deare vassals can say in his defense Iosephus Angles vnfoldeth this great difficultie at large when he thus writeth Canus affert tres opiniones prima est S. Thomae D. Bonaventurae quibus adhasit Turrecremata Secunda opinio est Paludani asserentis habere authoritatem absolvendi non à Papa sed à Christo. Tertia est Caietani dicentis iurisdictionem quam habet sacerdos absolvendi Papam nec esse à Christo neque à Papa neque ab ecclesia sed solum ex electione per hoc scilicet quod papa se subiicit illi illumque eligit Est quarta opinio qua tenetur quod quemadmodum in receptione ordinis datur vnicuique simplici sacerdoti potest as iurisdictionis respectu venialis mortalis quae poenitens alias confessus est etiam respectu cuiuscuÌ„que peccatoris in articulo mortis ita datur tunc iurisdictio eidem sacerdoti absolvendi papam Master Canus bringeth three opinions the first is of S. Thomas and S. Bonaventure to whome agreeth Turrecremata The second is the opinion of Paludanus who avoucheth that the Priest receiveth his authoritie not from the Pope but from Christ him selfe The third opinion is Caietans who affirmeth that the Priest hath authority to absolve the Pope neither from Christ nor from the Pope nor from the Church but onely by election to wit in that the Pope submitteth him selfe to the Priest and chooseth him And there is yet a fourth opinion which holdeth that as in receiving of priesthoode power of iurisdiction is given to every simple priest in respect of veniall sinnes and of those mortalls which the penitent nath otherwise confessed and also in respect of every sinner in the point of death so is iurisdiction then given to the said Priest that he may absolve the Pope Thus saith our reverend bishop and worthie fryer Ioseph Out of whose words I note 1 First that since our Lord is the God of peace and not of dissention as recordeth his holy Apostle in many places it must needes follow that this popish doctrine is not of God which is so devided against it selfe and therefore said Caietain truely though vnwittingly and to another ende when he denied the priest to have his authoritie from Christ or from his Church 2 I note secondly that their doctrine is meere opinative as which is onely grounded vpon mans invention 3 I note thirdly that as the priestes iurisdiction is vncerten so is the Popes absolution also as which is consectarie therevnto and consequently that the Pope standeth in daunger of his salvation And so if I be not deceived the obscuritie of this conclusion is made evident The Corollarie FIRST therefore since auricular popish confession is not commaunded by Christ secondly since it was not practised by the Apostles thirdly since it was instituted onely by the positive lawe of man fourthly since the Greeke Church never admitted that lawe fifthly since it is contrarie not onely to the fathers but to popish doctours also sixtly since it bringeth the Pope him selfe to the hazard of his salvation I conclude that it is a sufficient motive for me to renounce the Romish religion as false erroneous and pernicious doctrine Thus much of the tenth and last Motive Peroratio I HAVE in this discourse gentle Reader briefly confuted ten special articles of popish faith and religion 1 First I haue shewed the insufficiencie blasphemie and absurdities of popish pardons 2 Secondly that the Pope both may erre and hath erred defacto not only as a priuate person in priuate opinion but euen as Pope and publike person in iudicial definitions 3 Thirdly that generall councels in these latter daies are nothing els but a meere mockerie sophistical subtiltie to deceiue Gods people withal 4 Fourthly that the Popes dispensations are wicked licentious and intollerable 5 Fiftly that Kings are above Popes that their power is independent that they are subiect to none but to God alone 6 Sixtly that popish dissention is of matters most important and incredible to such as are not wel acquainted with their bookes 7 Seaventhly that the writings of the auncient fathers are to be received with great reuerence yet so as we acknowledge them to be men to haue their errours and to binde vs to their authorities no further then they accord with the holy Scriptures 8 Eightly that all things necessarie for our salvation are conteined in the holy Scriptures and that popish traditions are so vncerten as the best learned papists can not agree therein 9 Ninthly that after this life there is neither merite nor demerite nor satisfaction to be made and that the booke of Machabees can not establish popish purgatorie 10 Tenthly that the specificall enumeration and confession of all our sinnes is not onely not commaunded by the Scriptures but repugnant to the same and impossible to be accomplished by the power of man All which points I have prooued not onely by Scriptures authorities and reasons but euen by the expresse testimonies of best learned papists A thing heretofore never performed by any to my knowledge and yet so forceable against the papists if I be not deceived as nothing can be more My desire was to content all to offend none to confirme the weake to instruct the ignorant to reclaime the seduced and to confound all arrogant disloyall subiects If â—ffect succeede correspondent to my option God be thanked for it who is the chiefe worker of every good act to whome with the Sonne and the holy Ghost three persons and one God be all honour power glorie and dominion nowe and ever AMEN 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sapient 8. 1. Dionys. Arâ—â— pag. de divinis nominibus c. 4 2. Thess. 2. v. 4 5 6 7 8 9. 1 Greg. 9. lib. 1. decret tit 33. cap. 6. Glossa ibid. Gregor ubi supra Glossat lib. 1. decretat tit 7. cap. 3. Gerson de potestat eccles consider 12. part 3. Gerson ubi supra Bellarminus de Rom. Pont. lib. 5. cap. 8 1 2 3 Secundò principalitèr Bernar. ad Gaufridum epist. 125. 3 Robertus Bellarminus lib. 5. de Rom. Pontif. cap. 7. Bellarm. cod cap. Bellarm. cap. codem Bellarm. ubi supra 1 2 3 Prou. c. 8. 15. Rom. c. 13. v. 1. 4 Sylvest de papa para 2. 5 Bellar. derom pontif lib. 5. cap. 7. Luc. 12. 2. Mat. 16. 13. Mat. 23. 3. Mat. 15. 3. Mat. 15. 9. 1. Ioh. 4. 3. Roffensis cont assertion Luther art 18. prope initium Deut. cap. 2. vers 4. 2. Machab. cap. 12. vers 26. Matt. cap. 11. vers 25. Bellar. lib.