antecedent or preiacent matter He created man in such state as he neuer needed to haue sinned and consequently as he might haue liued for euer although he were indeede mortall For as by eating of the tree of knowledge hee sinned and consequently died euen so by eating of the tree of life he might haue preserued his life from time to time The meate of other trees yeelded food to man the tree of life as an wholesome medicine defended him from all corruption which vertue was either in the tree by some supernaturall inherent qualitie as sun drie of the auncient fathers holde or els the tree was a sacrament of Gods diuine grace by which man might haue liued eternally if he had neuer sinned as other learned writers think Which latter opinion I preferre for the better as which I iudge to be saint Austens yet the former is probable and can not easily be refeiled The second Section of mans sustentation Meate was necessarie for mans sustentation euen in the state of innocencie and it should euer so haue continued albeit man had neuer sinned for to this end did God plant so many trees in paradise giuing man leaue to eate thereof neither after sinne came any newe necessitie to eate but a speciall modification of eating was annexed thereunto for before sinne man did eate without labour but after sinne he was appointed to eate with the sweate of his browes The third Section of eating flesh Albeit the eating of flesh before the floud was not in vse as not then approued for good yet after the floud to eate flesh was granted vnto man Why it was then prohibited and after the floud granted no infallible reason can be alleaged yet two probable coniectures may be yeelded in that behalfe the one because in the beginning mens bodies were stronger and so needed lesse norishment the other because in those dayes the earth brought foorth better and more wholesome fruits CHAP. II. The first Section of the ages of the world and the duration thereof THe Iewes had a prophecie of Elias not Thesbites but one of their own Rabbins a Cabbalist mentioned in their Talmud or canon-law that the world should continue six thousand yeeres that is to say two thousand yeeres before the written setled law published by Moses two thousand yeeres in the time of circumcision and two thousand yeeres after Christs incarnation Which opinion wanteth not learned patrons for defence of the same albeit in my iudgement it cannot stand as shortly shall appeare The second Section of the ages of the world There be sixe ages of the world designed by all approued antiquitie After saint Austen the first age is from Adam to the floud the second to Abraham the third to Dauid the fourth to the captiuitie the fift to Christ the sixt to the end of the world which sixt and last age saith he cannot be measured with anie number of generations because the Father hath reserued in his owne power the knowledge of the last day This diuision of ages which saint Austen assigneth may wel be holden neuertheles because the diuision of ages into sixe before Christs first sacred aduent bringeth greater perspicuitie to the vnderstanding of the scriptures I will followe that course with other skilfull writers and make a pithie briefe declaration of the same The varietie of writers concerning the yeeres of the world vntil Christs holy incarnation is wonderfull euen so many opinions almost of those that I haue read and I haue read a good many as there be writers that handle the same After Eusebius Caesariensis the duration of the world till Christ is 5199 after the Hebrewes 3962 after the Septuagints 5328 after others 4121 after others 3929 after others 3969 after others more after some lesse This being true as it is most true indeede commendable must that labor be if any such can be found which in such different confusion shal deliuer a plaine manifestation of the trueth And because the trueth ought euer to be embraced by what mouth soeuer it be vttered albeit I seeme to swarue both from old and later writers yet let the gentle Reader affoord me his indifferent censure at least so far foorth as my iust and irrefringible probations shall euidently conuince and deserue Marke therefore my discourse attentiuely gentle Reader and then I trust this great and mighty controuersie will be plaine and easie to thee The first age The first age from the creation of the world to the floud containeth 1656. yeeres whereof for the Readers better satisfaction I put downe this plaine demonstration Adam was made of the dust of the earth in the end of the sixt day Genes 1. vers 27 31. Adam begate Seth when he was 130. yeres old Gen. 5. v. 3 Seth begat Enosh when he was 105. yeres old Gen. 5. v. 6 Enosh begat Kenan when he was 90. yeres old Gen. 5. v. 9 Kenan begat Malaleel being 70. yeeres old Gen. 5. ver 12 Malaleel begat Iared being 65. yeeres old Gen. 5. ver 15 Iared begat Henoch being 162. yeeres old Gen. 5. ver 18 Henoch begat Methusalem being 65. yeres old Ge. 5. v. 21 Methusalem begat Lamech being 187. yeeres olde Gene. 5. verse 25. Lamech begat Noah being 182. yeeres old Gen. 5. ver 28 Noah was 600. yeres old when the floud came Gen. 7. v. 6 The whole summe of yeeres is 1656. and six dayes 130 105 90 70 65 162 65 187 182 600 1656 Make addition and this summe will amount to 1656 to which adde sixe dayes before Adams creation The second age The second age from the deluge to the birth of Abraham containeth 353. yeres and ten dayes whereof this is a plaine demonstration The floud indured one whole yeere and ten dayes Gene. 8. verse 4.13 14. Sem the son of Noah begate Arphaxad two yeeres after the floud when himselfe was 100. yeeres old Gene. 11. verse 10. Arphaxad begat Shale or Shelah when he was 35. yeeres old Gen. 11. verse 12. Shale begate Heber when he was 30. yeres old Gen. 11. verse 14. Heber begat Peleg being 34. yeres old Ge. 11. verse 16. Peleg begat Rehu being 30. yeres old Gen. 11. verse 18. Rehu begat Sarug when he was 32. yeeres old Gen. 11. verse 20. Sarug begat Nahor being 30. yeres old Ge. 11. ver 22. Nahor begat Thare or Terah at 29. yeres Ge. 11. v. 24. Thare begat Abraham when he was 130. yeres old Gen. 11. verse 26. though it seemeth by the text that he was but 70. yeeres old This difficultie shalbe solued by and by The whole summe of yeeres is 315. 1 2 35 30 34 30 32 30 29 130 353 Make addition and this wil be the summe 353. A graue obiection against the supputation last rehearsed It is written Genes 11. verse 26. that Thare begat Abraham when he was but 70. yeeres olde therefore three score yeeres must be substracted from the number abouesaide that is from the
still the naturall dimensiue quantitie Ergo it is impossible that it bee conteined vnder the forme of a little round cake For the manifestation of this argument I note first that all learned men aswell papistes as others agree in this that God by his absolute power cannot doe those thinges which implie contradiction in the doing the reason wherof I haue yeelded in my booke of Motiues in the 12. preamble I note secondly that it is essentiall to quantitie to haue one part without another as the great philosopher Aristotle doth auouch See the 2. part book 2. chap 6. and note it well I note thirdly that the whole demensiue quantitie of Christes naturall body which he had here visibly on earth and still retaineth in heauen is togither with his body in the eucharist as all learned papistes graunt And so by popish docrine a body being foure cubites long and two cubites broad remaining stil so long broad must perforce be conteined vnder another body which is neither two cubites long nor one cubite broad but it is impossible as implying flat contradiction When occupatiō of place is taken away from a body it then ceaseth to be and is no body at all But Christes body occupieth no place in the Eucharist as learned papistes graunt Ergo Christes body is not corporally there And least any man distrust the proposition Saint Augustine hath these expresse wordes Cum ergò sit corpus aliqua substantia quantitas eius est in magnitudine molis eius sanitas vero eius non quantitas sed qualitas eius est Non ergo potuit obtinere quantitas corporis quod potuit qualitas Nam ita distantibus partibus quae simul esse non possunt quoniam sua quaeque spatia locorum tenent minores minora maiores maiora non potuit esse in singulis quibusque partibus tota vel tanta sed amplior est quantitas in amplioribus partibus breuior in breuioribus in nulla parte tanta quanta per totum Infra Nam spatia locorum tolle corporibus nusquam erunt quia nusquam erunt nec erunt When therfore any substance is a body the quantitie therof is in the magnitude of the bignesse but the health is not the quantitie but the qualitie thereof Therefore the quantitie of the body could not attaine that which the qualitie could For y e parts being so distant which could not be togither because al seuerally keepe their spaces of places the lesse lesser places and the greater greater there could not be in al the places seuerally the whole or so much but there is a larger quantitie in the larger partes a shorter in shorter partes and in no part so much as in the whole For if spaces of places be taken from bodies they shalbe in no place and because they shalbe in no place neither shall they haue any being at all Out of these wordes I note first that euery quantitatiue bodie hath one part distant from another I note secondly that the same partes occupie distinct places I note thirdly that two quantities cannot be in the same place at one and the same time I note fourthly that a greater quantitie must haue a greater place and that it cannot be conteined in the lesser I note fiftly that no one part can conteine so much as the whole I note sixtly that when bodies are without places they lose their natures and beings I therefore conclude that it is impossible for Christs natural body to be contained in a little round cake and his whole bodie in euerie little part thereof all which the papists impudently and blasphemously do auouch Guiliel Ocham and Durandus two popish doctours do both subscribe to S. Austens reason If it were possible for Christs bodie to be in diuers places at once the angel of God should haue made a foolish reason to the women that came to see Christ in the sepulcher for the angell prooued Christ not to be there bicause he was risen These are the words Hee is not here for he is risen as he said But if Christs body could bee in many places at once as the papists would haue vs beleeue then doubtlesse did the angel reason childishly For the women might haue said though he be risen yet may hee be here also Yet the angel who was not to be instructed of the papists but from heauen affirmed that hee could not be there because he was risen For he said not Christ is risen and is not here but he is not here because he is risen Lo his rising is the cause that he coulde not be there Marke this reason well for it doth conuince Peruse the twelfth preamble in my first booke of Motiues and the first replie of the seauenth obiection in the first paragraph The fourth Paragraph Of the originall of transubstantiation Transubstantiation is not onely repugnant to all philosophy but so absurd also in al christian speculation as it was vnknowne to the church of God and to all approued writers the space of one thousand two hundred yeres after Christs sacred incarnation For it was first hatched by pope Innocentius the third of that name in the council of Lateran which was holden 1215. yeeres after Christ. Yea the determination of this synode was reputed of so little force that the zealous papist and famous schoole-doctour Durandus boldely published the contrarie doctrine euen after the flat resolution of the same councell Whose doctrine doth so gall the papists that the Iesuite Bellarmine vnwilling on the one side to oppose himselfe against Durand rigorously and on the other side not knowing what to say in defense of the Romish synode maketh as it were this mitigation betweene them Itaque sententia Durandi haeretica est licet ipse non sit dicendus haereticus cum paratus fuerit ecclesiae iudicio acquiescere Therfore the opinion of Durand is hereticall though himselfe may not be called an hereticke because he was readie to giue place to the decree of the Church thus writeth our Iesuite Out of whose words I note first that a man may steale an oxe proclaime the same to the world without any remorse and yet be no theefe at all for Durand held an hereticall opinion published the same in print constantly and yet as the Iesuite telleth vs was no hereticke for so doing I note secondly that Durand liued more then threescore yeares after the popish Councell of Lateran I note thirdly that he neuer retracted his opinion notwithstanding the decree and censure of the popish Synode and therefore vainely and without reason sayth our Iesuite that Durand was willing to obey the decree of their Church for if he were willing to obey their church heerein how came it to passe that he liuing so long after he knewe their Churches minde did commit that to print wittingly and willingly which is altogether against the same for no man doubtlesse impugneth
difficultie In Ester the Prouinces are reckoned to be 127. but in Dan. cap. 6. verse 1. reckoning is made onely of sixe score seuen wanting of the number in Ester The answere I answere that the vsual maner and course of the holy scripture is this to recite the perfect number and to omit the odde and vnperfect Euen so Daniel expressing the perfect number was carelesse for the odde CHAP. IIII. Of the weekes mentioned in Daniel The first section The Monarchie of the Persians conteined the kingdomes of the Persians of the Medes of the Assyrians of the Chaldeans a great part of Asia and of other regions adiacent It began in the age of the world 3425. In the 20. yere of Darius Longhand aliâs Darius Artaxerxes beganne the seuentie weekes foreshewed by Daniel cap. 9. See the fourth section No place of holy scripture is more excellent more worthie or more necessarie to be vnderstood of euerie christian man then the 70. weekes reuealed by the angel to Daniel For no place in all the old testament doth more cleerely set Christ with al his glory and manifold giftes before our eies no place doth more firmely strengthen our faith no place doth more effectually conuince the Iewes no place doth more strongly confute all heresies all phantasticall opinions and all pestilent errors against our Sauiour Christ then this place of Daniel Worthily therfore ought we to employ our whole care studie and industrie for the exact vnderstanding of the same The second section All writers agree in these two points First that weeks in the ninth chapter of Daniel are not taken for common weekes but for weekes of yeares euen as we finde in Leuiticus cap. 25. verse 8. where it is thus written Thou shalt number seuen Sabbothes of yeeres vnto thee euen seuen times seuen yeare and the space of the seuen Sabbothes of yeares will be vnto thee nine and fortie yeares Secondly that the 70. weekes make seuentie times seuen according to the phrase of Leuiticus and so the iust number must be 49. yeares In this point the very Rabbins of the Iewes doe agree with our Christian interpreters and historiographers And necessitie without more adoe enforceth vs to admit this glosse and exposition of the weekes because otherwise the assertion of the angel of God notified to vs by the Prophet Daniel shoulde be absurd and vtterly swaruing from the trueth The third section Of the probation for the exposition of the seuentie weekes Dan. 9. verse 24. That 70. weekes doe neither signifie weekes as a weeke importeth seuen daies neither yet 70. weekes only as weekes be taken for yeares I prooue sundry waies First because an angel needed not to haue been sent from heauen to instruct Daniel if the 70. weekes had no mysticall nor secret meaning far aboue the common and literall signification of the wordes Secondly because the vision which Daniel had and which the angel came to expound conteined the duration of the second and third monarchies as appeareth in the eight of Daniel Which farre exceedeth both the number of 70. weekes and 70 yeares Thirdly because Gods mercie doth seuen fold exceed his iudgment which mercy he promiseth to his people who were 70. yeares in captiuitie and that it shalbe accomplished in the aduent of the true Messias Christ Iesus By whom and through whom wickednesse shall be finished sinnes sealed vp iniquitie reconciled and our righteousnesse purchased euerlastingly Fourthly because no other interpretation of the 70. weeks can possibly accord the wordes of Daniel Fiftly because albeit S. Hierome Clemens Alexandrinus Tertullianus Africanus and others doe muche dissent in determining the beginning of the 70. weekes that is in what yeare of what king we must beginne the supputation yet doe they all iumpe in the signification of the 70. weeks as who al do constantly write that they connotate 490. yeares Sixtly because the supputation of euerie writer bringeth vs to Christ which is the scope intended and plainly expressed in Daniel and consequently no other exposition can be true Obserue well the second section The fourth section Of the varietie in writers touching the time of the 70. weekes Some writers beginne the supputation of the 490. yeares in the second yere of the 80. Olympias which was in the 7. yeare of Darius Artaxerxes Longimanus Some beginne in the 32. yeare of Darius Histaspis Others begin in the first yeare of Cyrus Others sooner others later Some end their supputation in the birth of Christ some in his baptisme some in his preaching some in his death So that all agree in the substance of the thing though they dissent in the modification of the same Affricanus whose opinion I preferre beginneth the supputation in the twentieth yeare of Artaxerxes Longhand because then receiued Nehemias commandement to build vp the walles of the Citie of Hierusalem and to consummate the whole worke of the temple walles and cittie Nehe. 2.1.8 from which time if we reckon saieth he vntil Christ we shall find the 70. weekes But if we beginne out computation from anie other time neither the times wil be consonant and many absurdities wil insue thereupon And we must saith Affricanus reckon our yeares after the supputation of the Hebrewes who doe not reckon moneths after the course of the Sunne but of the Moone for from the 20. yere of the said Artaxerxes that is from the fourth yere of the 83. Olympias vnto the 202. Olympias and second yeere of the same Olympias and 18. yeare of Tyberius Cesar in which yeare Christ was crucified are gathered 475. yeares which doe make 490. yeares after the supputation of the Hebrewes and course of the Moone Whoso listeth may reade this matter handled at large in Saint Hierome in his excellent Commentaries vppon the ninth of Daniel where hee citeth the variaable opinions of Hippolitus Tertullianus Clemens Affricanus Eusebius and others and seeing the difficultie to bee great referreth the iudgement to the reader although hee seeme indeede to preferre the opinion of Affâ—icanus before the rest That this opinion of Affricanus is grounded in the true meaning of the prophecie of Daniel I will prooue by sundrie important reasons First because it agreeth verie fitlie with the supputation of the Persians and Romain monarchie Secondly because from the twentieth yere of Artaxerxes Longimanus vntill the passion of Christ be iust 490. yeares according to the course of the Moone or after the supputation of the Hebrewes Thirdly because no other opinion doth either iumpe with the death of Christ or with the computation of the monarchies Fourthly because the prophet speaketh expressely of the death and passion of Christ Iesus These are the words And after threescore and two weekes shall Messiah be slaine so then the true account of the weekes must so beginne as they may end iust with the death of Christ but so it is that no account saue onely this of Affricanus which I preferre doth or
of 30. dais This persecution indured sundry yeres to which the faithful soules seemed to allude in the Reuelatiō when they desire God the iust iudge to auenge their innocent blood Dioclesianus restored Egypt to the empire and when hee perceiued his authoritie to be weakened by reason of tumults and dissentious he sought to strengthen himselfe by ioyning Maximianus vnto him whome he made equall to himselfe in imperiall regiment These two Dioclesianus and Maximianus being nowe equall in authoritie were called Augusti they both afterward gaue ouer the administration of the empire and betooke themselues to the quiet state of a priuate life Dioclesianus chose Galerius to supply his place and Maximianus appointed Constantius in his stead Galerius and Constantius were not equal in power and authoritie but as viceroyes and substitutes and therefore they were not called Augusti but onely Cesars Maximianus would afterward haue returned to the administration of the empire to the end that he might haue aduanced his sonne Maxentius to the imperial regiment for which cause Constantius his sonne in law caused him to be slaine Dioclesianus hauing liued many yeares as a priuate man at length slew himselfe so to auoid the displeasure of Constantius and Licinius to whom hee was suspected to take part with Maxentius their enemie Constantinus surnamed the Great succeeded his father Constantius when hee had reigned foure yeares after the death of Dioclesianus This Constantinus was the first christian Emperour a zealous fauourer of Christes gospel and the onely patrone of Christianitie CHAP. IIII. Of the siege of Hierusalem by Titus Titus the sonne of Vespasianus the Emperour of Rome was a man of such valure prudence and humanitie so beautified with all kinde of heroicall vertues that he was commonly named in the mouth of euery man Amor delitiae humani generis the onely delight of mankinde In the second yeare of Vespasianus in the moneth of Aprill when the Iewes did celebrate their Passeouer at which time great concourse of people was assembled from euery coast hee besieged the citie of Hierusalem and the eight day of September he conquered the same by force and assault Although the citie of Hierusalem was fiue times taken and destroied before by Nabuchodonozor Asocheus Antiochus Pompeius and Herodes yet was there in the siege made by Titus such famine sedition and domesticall desolation as the like hath not been knowne in any citie The mothers murthered their owne naturall children and that done boiled them so to saturate their insatiable hunger This seemeth incredible but holy writ reporteth no lesse as I haue prooued in the first book and the eight chapter of the former part The wiues snatched meate out of the mouthes of their husbandes the children from their parentes and the mothers plucked it out of the mouthes of their infantes When they killed their children and one another for want of foode they could not doe the fact so secretly but it was espied taken from thē by others of greater force for so soone as their doores were shut others suspecting that they were eating meate came violently vpon them and tooke from them the meat alreadie chewed in their mouth Yea it is incredible to be tolde saith Iosephus what tortures and afflictions many suffered to enforce them to disclose where they had hid but one loafe of bread Iosephus being a Iew himselfe and greatly fauouring his countrey men being taken prisoner of the Romaines long before and at that time in great credite both with Titus and Vespasianus his father laboured by all meanes possible to perswade the Iewes that they well considering their own distresse and the mightie force of the aduerse part woulde in time while there remained place for mercie yeeld themselues to Titus and giue vp their citie into his hands But in vain was his oration he had not eloquence to perswade them From king Dauid to the siege made by Titus were 1179 yeares from the building of the city to the destruction therof 2177. yeres Yet such was the deformity of their sins and their ingratitude in Gods sight as neither the antiquitie of their Citie neither their wōderful riches neither their renown throughout the world nor the glorie of their religion was able to defend it from vtter desolation A noble woman Marie by name daughter to Eleazer dwelling beyond Iordan and flying to Hierusalem for aide was there besieged with others In the time of the great famine she killed her own son and when she had eaten part she reserued the rest Others perceiuing that shee had gotten some meate did manace death vnto her vnlesse shee woulde tell where it was hidde Which shee doing for feare they were all astonied at the sight thereof It is my sonne saith the woman eate thereof for I haue eaten before you I woulde neither haue you more effeminate then a woman nor more pitifull then a mother O horrible monster of the worlde What can bee more vnnaturall then the fact What more cruell then the wordes Ouer and besides those that were slaine in the famine plague and the sworde sixteene thousand were sent by Titus to Alexandria there to doe seruile workes as bondmen Two thousand hee carried with him for a triumph whom in publicke spectacles hee proposed to be deuoured of wilde beastes CHAP. V. Of Constantinus surnamed the Great COnstantinus for his pietie and heroicall vertues surnamed the Great was the first Cesar that professed Christ and christianitie He was a right christian in deed as who for a manifest signe of his true zeale in religion had the gospel of Christ Iesus caried publickly before him He commanded the holy Bibles to be copied out of his owne priuate charges and to bee sent into all partes of Christendome He called togither the learned men from all partes of the world to consult and giue their opinions concerning controuersies in religion During which time of disputation as also for their iournies to and fro hee graunted them free allowance of all necessarie prouision He withstoode the tyrannie of Maxentius and restored peace vnto the Church He builded the citie of Constantinople terming it by his owne name where was before a goodly mart towne then called Bizantium Thither was the empire translated and the citie called new Rome For he enuironed it with large walles and added magnificall building thereunto The obseruation The papistes here babling after their woonted maner tell vs a tale of Robin hoode and little Iohn that forsooth Constantine was baptized in Rome of Siluester that the very font in which he was christened is this day to be seene there and many other fabulous illations grounded thereupon To which I answere first with their owne deare frier and learned schooleman Victoria that such doctrine was first inuented by their flattering and beggerly Canonistes I say secondly that their owne canon law in the 96. distinction termeth this kinde of doctrine false counterfeite and not worthy of any
deliuer man from the curse of the lawe The 13. day after Christs natiuitie certaine wise men came a long iourney out of the East to adore the Sauiour of the world And albeit Epiphanius affirmeth constantly that this comming was the second yere after Christs birth yet S. Hierome S. Augustine and other learned writers receiue the former opinion as most authenticall and they haue great reason so to do because the scripture seemeth to say no lesse For first the wisemen or astronomers are said to come when Christ was borne Which phrase can not be fitly verified but of a thing present or lately done Againe the wisemen found the babe in Bethlehem and consequently they came before the day of the purification for after that time Christ is not knowne to haue bin in Bethlehem And though the papists hold by a vain tradition that these wise men were three kings of Cullen Gaspar Melchiâ—r and Baltasar yet is it neither certaine that they were kings neither yet that they were no more but three And their owne reason thereof is very friuolous because their bodies are chalenged to be as well at Millaine as at Colen But here I must answer to some obiections which seeme to fortifie Epiphanius his opinion The first doubt The parents of Christ were so poore at the day of purification that they were not able to offer a lambe according to the law for rich men but were enforced to offer a paire of Turtle doues or two yong pigeons and therfore doubtlesse they had not receiued the rich treasures which the wise men brought to Christ. I answer that the blessed and humble virgin as shee was free from all pride and ostentation so was she not willing to change her poore state and condition which she knew well pleased her sonne the sonne of God The second doubt King Herod slew all the male children in Bethlehem and in all the coasts thereof from 2. yeeres old and vnder according to the time which he had diligently learned of the wisemen Among the rest he slew his owne sonne as writeth Macrobius who therefore wished rather to be Herodes hog then his child which certes he would neuer haue done if there had bene but 13. daies betweene the apparition of the starre and the comming of the wisemen I answer which is the opinion of saint Austen and saint Chrysostome that the starre appeared so long before the natiuitie of Christ as was sufficient for the wise men to dispatch their iourney and to adore Christ shortelie after he was borne Neither is it of force to obiect as some do that the wise men could not come so farre in so short a space for first whether these wise men were of the posteritie of Balaam and so came from Mesopotamia as saint Chrysostome saint Ierome and saint Ambrose thinke or they came out of Arabia which is the constant position of Iustinus or they were Persians or Chaldeans which the very name seemeth to prognosticate yet might they haue dispatched their iourney in lesse then tenne dayes For Hierusalem is distant from Aram from whence Balak brought Balaam but 72. miles from Vr of the Chaldees 212. miles Againe the starre appeared long before Christs birth so that they might be there in time conuenient Thirdly in those countries they haue plentie of dromedaries one of which wil carie a man as writeth Philostratur 1000. furlongs in one day that is 125. English miles CHAP. III. Of the perfect age of Christ. IEsus Christ when he was 30. yeeres of age left Galilee and came to the floud Iordan where he was baptized of saint Iohn his precursor By which act he sanctified our baptisme in himselfe the outward signe whereof putteth vs in minde that we must change our liues and become better assuring vs as by a seale that we are ingraffed into Christ whereby our old man dieth and the new man riseth vp againe So soone as Christ was baptized a voice came downe from heauen saying This is my beloued sonne in whom I am wel pleased This done he was teÌ„pted in the wildernes of y e deuill Christ hauing fasted 40. daies and being tempted of the deuil returned by the power of God into Galile after that a great fame was spread abroad of him in all the region hee came to Nazareth where he had beene brought vp and as his custome was went into the synagogue on the sabbaoth day to expound the scriptures Christ the third day after he came to Cana a towne in Galile was present at a marriage where he made water wine the first myracle that euer he wrought After Christ was baptised he began to preach the Gospell being 30. yeares of age as is already saide Which holy exercise hee practised almost three yeares before his passion his preaching was in the yeare of Iubilee because he preached the glad tidings of the gospell the remission of sinnes the saluation of his people CHAP. IIII. Of Christs death and passion CHrist called twelue vnto him whom hee named Apostles and sent them into the whole world to preach the gospel to al nations that so they might be witnesses of his doctrine confirmed with many myrracles Which doctrine being accomplished hee offered vp himselfe an vnspotted sacrifice vpon the altar of the crosse for the expiation of the sinnes of the worlde And this he did the 18. yeare of Tiberius Cesar in the eight Calends of Aprill if wee follow Tertullians supputation against the Iewes Christs passion began not onely in his taking and deliuerie vnto death but euen from the verie instant of his conception and continued vntill hee yeelded vp the ghost For as Ludolphus writes learnedly when Christ as God foresaw in his diuine wisedome the cruell and bitter torments which hee was to suffer infallibly hee coulde not but naturally sorrow for the same as which were throughout all his body throughout all the members of his body and throughout all the inferior powers of his soule He suffered in all his time in all his body in all his works In time of his infancie basenesse of his mothers womb pouertie asperitie vilitie in the manger persecution of y e aduersarie flight into Egypt In time of his adolescencie frequent disputations painful peregrinations lothsome precipitations In his iuuenile age most bitter cruell death for in his whole body he sustained paines intollerable in his eies the effusion of teÌ„der teares in his delicate eares the hearing of contumelies and execrable blasphemies in his eie-lids the pangs of buffetting in his nostrils the stinch of vglie spitting in his sweete mouth the bitternesse of vineger and gall in his hands the prints of the nailes whipping and oft scourging throughout his blessed bodie What he sustained in his works cannot easily be expressed by the tongue of man For they reuiled his diuine preaching his most sacred conuersation his miraculous operation He was led as a lambe to
vnderstand by the rocke Peters faith and the confession which he made Panormitan and Syluester both being great papists are of the same opinion The tenth replie Christ prayed for Peter that his faith should neuer faile therefore the Pope cannot erre The answere I say first that the Popes faith both may faile and hath failed de facto as I haue proued at large in my booke of Motiues I say secondly that the insuffiencie of this consequent is vnfolded in many places of this chapter I say thirdly that as Christ prayed for Peter so did he also for the rest of the Apostles for the whole church And this I do not barely say but I wil proue it by the verdicte of the holy fathers as also of your own doctors first by Christ Iesus his own declaratiō Concerning your Pope all wise men in the world worthily deride you papists for your vaine ridiculous and fabulous conceits of his faith For first the truth enforceth you to grant as I haue proued in my Motiues that your Pope may holde false opinions in matters of faith either sitting in his chaire or walking in his garden or looking about him in his Bel-vidêre or riding on his white palfrey or lying in his bed waking or at the table eating or while he giueth pardons and Iubilees Secondly that hee may vtter the same errour and false faith secretly to his friends Thirdly that he may publish the same in his Extrauagants Epistles and printed bookes Which 3. grants sufficiently ouerthrow your popes supposed priuilege if nothing else could be said against the same Concerning Peters faith it is certaine that Christ prayed as well for al the elect as for Peter and directed his words not to Peter as to one priuat man but as to one representing the whole church and consequently whatsoeuer Christ said or did touching Peters faith must perforce bee vnderstoode of the faith of the whole church which as is proued shall neuer faile indeede This being once made good your mightie obiection wherin ye glorie much wil bee of no force at all My first reason is contained in Christs owne words which are these I pray not for the worlde but for them which thou hast giuen mee for they are thine In which words it is cleare that Christ praieth onely for Peter but for al his disciples as wel as for him and he sheweth the equitie of his petition by sundrie reasons First because hee prayeth for Gods friends Secondly because he prayeth for Gods elect Thirdly because of the vnspeakeable vnion betweene his father and himselfe Fourthly because he is glorified in them so is his father also Fiftly because they are enuironed with many tentations of this wicked world Againe Christ saith I pray not for these only but for them also that shall beleeue in me through their word In which words his former praier which seemed to be made for his disciples only is nowe extended to all the faithfull vntil the worlds ende a sentence doubtlesse replenished with all solace towardes vs and the whole Church of God as which is the onely foundation of our saluation to witte that Christ did no lesse pray for vs then he did for his owne apostles And this reason is confirmed in an other place where Christ promiseth to be among those that are gathered in his name though they be but two in number Which words as our Iesuite Bellarmine doth grant are meant aswel of the Laicall as Ecclesiasticall sort My second reason is grounded vpon the interpretation of the ancient fathers S. Austen hath these expresse words Et Petro dicit Ecce Satanas expostulauit vt vos ventilet sicut triticū ego autem rogaui pro te vt non deficiat fides tua tu tandem conuersus confirma fratres tuos Quid ambigitur pro Petro rogabat pro Iacobo Ioanne non rogabat vt caeteros taceam manifestum est in Petro omnes contineri quia in alio loco dicit ego pro his rogo quos mihi dedisti pater volo vt vbi ego sum ipsi sint mecum And he saith to Peter Behold sathan hath desired to winnow you as wheat but I haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not therefore thou once conuerted confirme thy brethren What doubt is there Did hee pray for Peter and did he not also pray for Iames and Iohn to say nothing of the rest It is plaine that in Peter all the rest are meant because hee saith in an other place I pray for these O Father which thou hast giuen mee and desire that they may be with mee where I am Origen who liued manie yeeres afore saint Austen affirmeth in a large discourse vpon saint Matthew that all things spoken of Peter touching the church and the keyes are to be vnderstoode of all the rest And the collection of Origen is euident euen by natural reason For if Christ prayed not as well for the rest as for Peter of small credite were a great part of the holy scripture A reason doubtlesse insoluble for all papists in the worlde For if they coulde faile in their faith they could also faile in their writing and yet that they could not so faile was by vertue of Christs prayer My third reason is the flatte opinion and constant doctrine of great learned papists Panormitanus was their skilful Canonist their religious abbot and their renowmed archbishop and consequently his authority must needs gall and confound them all his wordes are these Et pro hac tantùm Christus in euangelio orauit ad patrem ego rogaui prote And for this he meaneth the vniuersall church Christ onely prayed to his father in the gospel when he saide I haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not Behold here gentle Reader and yeelde thine indifferent censure When Christ saith the great papist Panorm prayed that Peters faith should not faile hee prayed for the faith of the vniuersall church whose faith shal neuer faile indeede And the said Panormitan prooueth his opinion directly by many texts of the popes Canon law de Elect. cap. significasti Alphonsus à Castro a religious popish Carthusian hath these wordes Non dubitamus an haereticum esse papam esse coire in vnum possint infra Non enim credo aliquem esse adeo impudentem papae assentatorem vt ei tribuere hoc velit vt nec errare nec in interpretatione sacrarum literarum hallucinari possit Wee doubt not whether one man may be a pope and an heretike both together For I beleeue there is none so shamelesse a flatterer of the Pope that will ascribe this vnto him that he can neither erre nor be deceiued in the exposition of the scriptures The eleuenth reply All Christs sheepe are committed to Peter and consequently to the pope Ergo The answer I say first that the bishop of Rome is not saint
taught to pardon in the Lords praier saying and pardon vs our trespasses as we pardon or forgiue them that offend against vs. I say fourthly that the renowmed popish Thomist Syluester Prierias sometime maister of their so termed sacred pallace confesseth plainely according to right and reason that popish pardons were neither knowne to vs by this place of S. Paul neither yet by any other place of the whole scripture these are his expresse words Indulgentia nobis per scripturam minimè innotuit licet inducatur illud 2. Corin. 2. si quid donaui vobis sed nec per dicta antiquorum doctorum sed modernorum Dicitur enim Gregorius indulgentiam septennem in stationibus Romae posuisse quia ecclesia hoc facit seruat credendum est ita esse quia regitur spiritu sancto The popes pardons saieth frier Syluester their surnamed absolutus theologus were neuer knowne to vs by the Scriptures although some alledge S. Paul to the Corinthians for that purpose neither were they knowne by the ancient fathers but onely by late writers For Gregorie is said to haue appointed seuen yeeres of indulgence in his stations at Rome And because the church of Rome this doth and thus obserueth we must beleeue it to be so for the church is gouerned by y e holy ghost Out of these words I note first that this frier Syluester was a man of great fame among the papists for his singular learning reputed an absolute diuine and therefore that his testimonie must needs be very authenticall among the papists I note secondly that Antoninus a learned papist who was the archbishop of Florence euen in the altitude of popedome holdeth the selfe same opinion and hath the very same wordes now recited out of Syluester I note thirdly that popish pardons can neither be proued by the scriptures nor by the ancient fathers and consequently that pope Boniface the eight of that name was the first founder thereof as is already proued For albeit Syluester seemeth here to ascribe the originall of some kind of pardoning to Gregorie yet doth he onely tel that by heare-say and besides that Gregorie either gaue no pardons in deede which is very probable or at the most he pardoned after saint Paules manner some part of seuerity inioyned by the church I note fourthly that the chiefest ground vppon which Popish pardoning is built is the bare and naked commaundement of the pope For whatsoeuer the church saith that is to say the pope that must be beleeued because forsooth the pope cannot erre but yet that he both may erre and hath alreadie erred de facto I haue prooued aboundantly in my Booke of Motiues where the gentle Reader shall finde the opinions of other popish doctors most fit for this end and purpose Shamelesse and impudent therefore are the papists when they blush not to father their Romish pardons vpon saint Paul The reply In the councell of Laterane which was almost an hundred yeeres before pope Bonifacius mention is made of pardons with good liking of the same yea S. Gregorie appointed stations and granted pardons for frequenting them The answere I say first that in processe of time when sinne increased and the people waxed slow in accomplishing ecclesiasticall satisfaction inioyned redemptions and commutations succeeded in the place thereof and canonicall discipline began to decay as their owne Burchardus writeth about the yeere of Christ 1020. I say secondly that by little and little after such redemptions commutations superstitious opinions were instilled into the minds of the vulgar people as that the fulfilling of the multe inioined by the church was necessarie for saluatioÌ„ able to satisfie the iust iudgement of God that god required much more satisfaction then was so inioyned and that for the same they must either satisfie in this life or afterward in purgatorie if they were not pardoned by the pope I say thirdly that albeit penance satisfaction or canonicall discipline vsed in the olde church and auncient councels which was nothing else but a ciuill multe imposed to publike offenders not to satisfie Gods iudgement but to bridle ill life and to keepe comely order in the church was by little and little changed into superstitious popish satisfaction yet had not that execrable doctrine gotten place in the church in the time of the Lateran councel I proue it because that councel maketh mention onely de poenitentiis iniunctis of penance inioyned which was holden Anno Dom. 2215. I say fourthly that the bishoppe of Rome now called Pope 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might haue released or pardoned in his owne churches and iurisdiction as Cornelius and other good bishoppes did such ligaments mults or canonicall corrections as he had inioyned to publike offenders and perhappes Gregorie the Great granted some such pardons indeede but that hee gaue pardons for sinne and to satisfie Gods iustice as Popes this day doe it can neuer be proued out of his works The fourth obiection The blessed virgin Marie holy Iob and manie others haue suffered much more then was needefull for their owne sinnes And saint Paul saith of himselfe that he supplied the wants of Christs passion for his church which super abundant satisfactions of S. Paul and others bicause they were not determined by themselues to this or that particular person it pertaineth to the supreme pastour the popes holines to make application thereof as he seeth cause Which application is termed pardoning for that when the pope applieth twentie degrees of the satisfaction of Christ or of S. Paul or some other saint to one of his nunnes monkes or iesuites then so many degrees of satisfaction are pardoned to such a nunne monke or iesuite which the saide nunne monke or iesuite should otherwise haue done either in this life or else in purgatorie The answer I say first that no saint did or can suffer so much as is sufficient for his sinnes And I prooue it euidently because the best learned papists graunt freely and truely that euery mortall sin hath in it infinite deformitie as which is an auersion from God of infinite maiestie and consequently that God requireth infinite satisfaction for the same yet so it is that pure man is vncapable of euery infinit action for otherwise he should be an other God and consequently mans actions of which no one among all can be infinite can not yeeld condigne compensation for one only mortall sin and yet is euery sin mortall indeed as I haue prooued in my Motiues euen by popish doctrine Pervse the eight article of Dissention in the second Booke of the said Motiues and thou shalt see euidently that not only Gerson Durand Baius Roffensis and Almayn who al were renowmed papists but euen the common schooles of late dayes doe holde the same opinion I say secondly that God hath alreadie rewarded euerie saint in heauen as he will also in time rewarde euerie saint nowe on earth fâ—r aboue their deserts Which I prooue
being free from sinne no need at all to suffer for her selfe The answere I say first that what the late churche of Rome beleeueth is not much materiall because it is become the whore of Babylon as I haue prooued copiously I say secondly that though the blessed virgin had great grace and sanctification bestowed on her as who was not onely the mother of man but of God also yet was she conceiued in originall sinne vndoubtedly For so the holy scripture doth conuince so the auncient fathers affirme so the best approoued popishe doctors graunt and so right reason doth euidently conclude As by one man saith the apostles sinne entered into the world and death by sinne and so death went ouer all men in whom all men haue sinned Againe as by the offence of one the fault came on all men to condemnation so by the iustifying of one the benefite abounded towarde all men to the iustification of life And in another place there is none righteous no not one Againe in another place the scripture hath concluded al vnder sin y t the promise by the faith of Iesus Christ should be giuen to them that beleeue And the holy Psalmographe saith Enter not into iudgement with thy seruaunt for in thy sight shall none that liueth be iustified All which textes and such like are generally spoken of all no one nor other is exempt S. Ambrose hath a long discourse in which he prooueth that none but onely Iesus Christ is void of sinne These among others are his wordes Omnes intra retia erant imò adhuc intra retia sumus quia nemo sine peccato nisi solus Iesus quem non cognoscentem peccatum peccatum pro nobis fecit pater Infra venit ad laqueos Iesus vt Adam solueret venit liberare quod perierat Omnes retibus tenebamur nullus alium eruere poterat cum seipsum non possit eruere All were in the nettes yea we are yet in the nets because none is without sinne but onely Iesus whom when hee knewe no sinne the father made him a sacrifice for sinne in our behalfe Iesus came to the snare that hee might loose Adam he came to deliuer that which was lost We were al taken in the net we could not deliuer one another when no man could deliuer himselfe S. Augustine teacheth the same veritie in many places of his workes but I wil content my selfe with one or two Thus therfore doth he write vpon the 34. Psalm sic ergo peccatum domini quod factum est de peccato quia inde carnem assumpsit de massa ipsa quae mortem meruerat ex peccato Etenim vt celerius dicam Maria ex Adam mortua propter peccatum Adae Adam mortuus est propter peccatum caro domini ex Maria mortua est propter delenda peccata Euen so therefore is it called the sinne of the Lord which is made of sinne because hee tooke flesh from thence of that masse which had deserued death by reason of sin For to speake more brieflie Mary descending of Adam is dead by reason of Adams sinne Adam is dead for his owne sin and our Lords flesh of Mary is dead to put away sinne S. Augustine in another place hath these wordes Proinde corpus Christi quamuis ex carne foeminae assumptum est quae de illa carnis peccati propagine concepta fuerat tamen quia non sic in ea conceptum est quomodo erat illa concepta nec ipsa erat caro peccati sed similitudo carnis peccati Therefore Christes body although it were assumpted of the flesh of a woman which was conceiued of the stocke of the flesh of sinne yet because it was not so conceiued in it as it was conceiued therefore was it not the flesh of sinne but only the similitude of the flesh of sinne The same S. Augustine in another place writeth in this maner Sine dubio caro Christi non est caro peccati sed similis carni peccati quid restat vt intelligamus nisi ea excepta omnem reliquam humanam carnem esse peccati hinc apparet illam concupiscentiam per quam Christus concipi noluit fecisse in genere humano propaginē mali quia Mariae corpus quamuis inde venerit tamen eam non traiecit in corpus quod non inde concepit Doubtlesse Christes flesh is not the flesh of sinne but only like to the flesh of sinne what therefore must wee vnderstande but that all other mens flesh besides it is the flesh of sinne And heereuppon it is cleare that that concupiscence by which Christ would not be conceiued dispersed sin throughout mankind because the body of Marie though it came from thence yet could it not conuey that into the bodie which was not conceiued thereupon but of the holy ghost These words of S. Austen and Saint Ambrose are so plaine and easie as they neede no declaration Thomas Aquinas albeit hee constantly defendeth that the blessed virgin was neither borne in sinne nor yet sinned actually after hir birth more or lesse graunteth for all that that shee was conceiued in originall sinne and hee prooueth it by two euident reasons whereof this is one Sanctificatio de qua loquimur non est nisi emundatio à peccato originali culpa autem non potest emundari nisi per gratiam cuius subiectum est sola creatura rationalis ideo ante infusionem animae rationalis B. virgo sanctificata non fuit Sanctification whereof we now speake saith the cheefest popish doctour is nothing else but a clensing from originall sinne but sinne cannot bee purged without grace whose subiect can be nothing but a reasonable creature and therefore the blessed virgin could not be sanctified from sin before a reasonable soule was infused into her bodie This argument of Aquinas is so inuincible in popish manner of proceeding as no Iesuite in the world though they all hold the contrarie can inuent a sufficient solution for the same Deuout and holy Bernarde whose authoritie is great with all Papists holdeth the same opinion with Aquinas For albeit hee sharply reproue the practise of the cathedrall church of Lions for keeping the festiuitie of the conception of the blessed virgin calling that practise the noueltie of presumption the mother of temeritie sister of superstition and the daughter of leuitie yet doth he hold that shee was borne without sinne and 〈◊〉 continued all her life All learned men that euer wrote before our seditious lately hatched Iesuites confesse the conception of the blessed virgin to haue beene polluted with sinne and I prooue it by an irrefragable demonstration First because the blessed virgin if she had euer beene free from sinne should haue needed no Sauiour nor had anie Sauior and so Christ should not haue bin her Iesus which to say is both against the scripture and against the honour of that holy virgin Bernardus
is that the sacrifice of the holy masse is a signe and commemoration of the sacrifice of the crosse but withall wee tel you that as it is the signe so is it the thing signified also Neither is that with vs anie absurditie as ye grossely fondly imagine For Christ is the figure of his fathers substance as the apostle witnesseth and yet if ye deny him to be the same substance with his father yee prooue your selfe an Arrian so a loafe of bread in the bakers window is both a signe of bread to be sold and also the bread it selfe But your dull heades cannot conceiue these scholasticall distinctions The answer I say first that how dull soeuer our wits bee yet doe wee well perceiue your opinatiue diuinitie I say secondly which is a receiued maxime in the schooles that nullum simile est idem no similitude is the selfe same thing whereof it is a similitude For to be a relatiue and the correlatiue of the same at the same time and in the same respect is flat contradiction I say thirdly that though Christ be the same substance with his father as he is God yet is he termed the figure of his substance as he is man because the diuinitie is hid in the humanitie as vnder a figure or vaile So saieth the apostle in another place For in him dwelleth the fulnesse of the godhead corporally And the same answere serueth to your loafe For it is neither idem numero with the other loaues as you imagine and affirme of your putatiue sacrifice neither doeth the loafe of it selfe so signifie but the people by the modification of the loafe are brought into the notice of the sale of bread I say fourthly and this confoundeth you all your sottish imagination that y e veritie is more excellent then y e figure the bodie then the shadow the thing signified then the signe For your owne selues labour by this means to prooue the sacrifice of your idolatrous masse These are the wordes of your Iesuite Bellarmine Figurae necessariò inferiores esse debent rebus figuratis Figures of necessitie must be of lesse value then the thinges that are figured by the same The 4. conclusion The Eucharist or holy communion which the papists terme the sacrament of the altar is a commemoration representation signe or sacrament of Christes body bloud offered and shed vpon the crosse for mans redemption but not the reall substantiall and naturall bodie of Christ Iesus which was crucified for our sinnes This conclusion that it may be exactly vnderstood of the vulgar sort and euerie popishe conceite therein plainly discouered and effectually confuted shalbe prooued by way of certaine briefe paragraffes The first paragraffe of the forme of consecration The papistes defending the bread to be made Christes naturall body by vertue of consecration are at variance among themselues and cannot tell in the world which are the precise words of that their putatiue consecratien For the common opion among the papists to which their practise agreeth holdeth the consecration to consist in these words This is my body But their learned pope Innocentius telleth them another tale to wit that Christ consecrated by the power of excellencie which is not tied to the Sacramentes and consequently that hee first consecrated it and afterward pronounced the words which the other papistes will haue to be essentiall to the consecration Iosephus Angles telleth vs very grauely that this opinion of Innocentius is not hereticall although it cannot be defended without great temeritie But by our friers good fauour if the wordes of the consecration be as they defend then must the bread perforce be broken before it be Christes body then did Christ breake bread and not his body then did Christ deliuer bread and not his bodie For Christ first blessed the bread then brake it then gaue it to his apostles and after said This is my body So that against their willes they graunt vnwittingly that that which Christ gaue to his disciples was substantially bread and not his body This point is handled more at large in the 12. preamble in the booke of my Motiues The 2. Paragraffe Of the validitie of consecration The papistes teache that these wordes this is my body doe change and transelementate the substance of bread into the substance of Christes reall substantial and naturall body and that the bare formes of bread and wine doe after consecration existe without any subiect But this doctrine doth confute it selfe For first if the wordes of supposed consecration doe worke transubstantiation then must euery worde haue his due operation in that kinde of worke For otherwise some of the wordes should be frustrate and needlesse as which could haue no proper effect And yet dareth no papist assigne any effect to euery worde because it would follow thereupon that Christes body should be made by diuisible partes Secondly if the fourth word meum concurre essentially to the consecration then is Christes body either made by successiue operation which Aquinas and all learned papistes denie or the whole effect proceedeth totally of the fourth word without the actiuitie of the other three The sequele is euident because the prolation of the words is with succession and not in an instant Thirdly if the wordes of consecration be of such force as the papistes teach then must both Christes body and bread be vnder the forme of bread at once or els the forme of bread must for a certaine time be aswell without the substance of bread as without the body of Christ. I prooue it because as Christes body is made present vnder the forme of bread in an instant so doth the substance of bread cease to be in instant and consequently since two instantes cannot be immediate they must both either be togither in the same instant or both absent for the time mediate Fourthly the popish supposed transubstantiation is very ridiculous and absurd I prooue it because when the priest saith this my bo hee then either holdeth in his handes substantially bread or corporally Christes body if substantially bread then are their wordes of consecration not of force if corporally Christes bodie these three absurdities doe insue First Christes body is made by succession Secondly the sillable bo which by it selfe signifieth nothing is made significant Thirdly the last sillable die which is commonly deemed to accomplish their consecration is become officiperda redundant and superfluous Fiftly if the wordes of consecration be operatiue as the papistes holde then if the priest chaunce to die in the midst of the prolation Christes body shalbe left mangled and vnperfect for otherwise halfe of the consecratory wordes shall stand for cyphers and haue no effect at all The 3. Paragraph Of the impossibilitie of transubstantiation When two vnequall dimensiue quantities are placed togither it is vnpossible for the conteined to bee bigger then the conteiner but Christes body in the eucharist reteineth