doe rather call for our care and diligence to suppresse them For answer unto this I grant that the prevailing errours of the times are mainly to be opposed yet as our Saviour said in another case this ought to be done and the other not to be left undone Yea Popery is the grand evill that doth infest the Church and by how much it is the more inveterate the more diffused by so much the danger of it is the greater and it requires the more opposition There is also a speciall warning to come out of Babylon Revel 18. 4. and certainly it will availe us little to come out except we also keepe out of it And if we would keep our selves out of Babylon we must keepe the Babylonish Doctrine from finding entertainment with us This will aske no little care no humane policy in the world I think being greater then that which is used either for the supporting of that doctrine where it is or the introducing of it where it is not embraced Shall we thinke that the Romanists are idle in these busy times Though few doe shew themselves as the Marquesse did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with open face yet we may well suspect that many are working so as that by how much they are the lesse conspicuous by so much they are the more dangerous And as David in a certaine case said to the woman of Tekoah Is not the hand of Joab with thee in all this So in respect of that heape of heterodox opinions that is among us may it not be said Is not the hand of a Iesuite in all this Diverse Pamphlets in these times have admonished us to beware and among the rest one intituled Mutatus Polemo what ever the Authors designe were doth speake not a little to this purpose Before these trouble some times began some have either expressed as Mr. Archer or intimated as Mr. Mede that in their opinion Popery shall yet againe for a while universally prevaile in those Countries and Nations out of which it hath bin expelled If this be so as for any thing I see I may hope the contrary may it not be feared that as those many Antichrists as they are called 1 Joh. 2. 18. that is those many heretikes that were in the primitive times did make way for the rise of that great Antichrist so these in our times may make way for the restauration of him And whereas we have heard long since of Romes Master-peece I see not how any Romish designe can better deserve this title then so to debase the Ministery and to decry learning as the practice of many is in these times Hoc Ithacus velit hoc magno mercentur Atreidae The Chieftaines of the Church of Rome can desire nothing more then that among their adversaries the Ministery should be cast down and learning overthrown For then why should they doubt but that they may soon reduce all unto them none being now of any competent ability to oppose them It is observed by those that are acquainted with Ecclesiasticall History that when Learning was the lowest then Popery got to be highest as the one decayed so the other was advanced and on the otherside that the restauration of good literature did make way for the Reformation of Religion Surely if Popery overspread againe barbarisme and illiteratenesse is a most likely means to effect it Neither are the Papists I suppose lesse politick and wise in their generation then Julian the Apostate was who could see no fairer way whereby to re establish Gentilisme then by indeavouring to devest Christians of Learning a thing so vile and odious that Ammianus Marcellinus himselfe though a Pagan and a great admirer of Julian was ashamed of it and shewed great dislike of Julian for it calling it a cruell part and a thing to be buried in perpetuall silence But I have held Thee Reader longer then I did intend I will preface no further but praying unto the Lord to preserve his Church from errors without and to purge it from errors within I rest Thy Friend and lover in the truth C C. The CONTENTS of the FIRST PART OF THE REIOYNDER 1 OF the marks of the true Church which they of the Church of Rome assigne as Universality Antiquity Visibility Succession of Pastors unity in Doctrine and the Coversion of Nations Page 107 to 114 2 Of having recourse unto the Scriptures in matters that concern Religion 114 115 116 3 Of relying either on Fathers singly and severally considered or on a generall Councel 116 117 118 119 4 That the Apostles as Pen-men of the Holy Ghost could not erre 120 5 Of the easiness and plainness of the Scriptures 120 121 6 Of the presence of Christ in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper 122 to 140 7 Whether the Church hath any infallible rule besides the Scripture for the understanding of Scripture 140 to 147 8 Againe of the Scriptures being easie to be understood 147 148 9 Whether the Church can erre or not 148 to 152 10 Againe of the Visibility of the Church 152 153 11 Of the Universality of the Church 153 to 158 12 Of the unity of the Church in matters of faith 158 159 13 Of Kings and Queens being Heads or Governours and Governesses of the Church within their Dominions 159 160 14 Of the Ministers power to forgive sins 159 as 't is misprinted to 162 15 Of confessing sins to a ghostly Father 162 to 172 16 Of works of Superogation 172 to 176 17 Of Free-will 176 to 195 18 Of the possibility of keeping the Commandements 196 to 201 19 Of Justification by faith alone 201 to 211 20 Of Merits 211 to 216 21 Whether justifying faith may be lost 216 to 221 22 Of Reprobation 221 to 239 23 Of assurance of Salvation 239 to 251 24 Whether every Believer hath a peculiar Angel to be his guardian 251 to 254 25 Of the Angels praying for us and knowing our thoughts 254 255 256 26 Of praying to the Angels 256 to 261 27 Whether the Saints deceased know our affairs here below 261 to 266 28 Of the Saints deceased praying for us 266 to 269 29 Of praying to the Saints deceased 269 to 276 30 Of Confirmation whether it be a Sacrament properly so called 276 to 281 31 Of communicating in one kinde 281 to 287 32 Of the sacrifice of the Masse as they call it or whether Christ be truly and properly offered up and sacrificed in the Eucharist or Lords Supper 287 to 296 33 Whether Orders or rather Ordination be a Sacrament of like nature with Baptisme and the Lord Supper 296 to 301 34 Of Vows of chastity and of the Marriage of Ecclesiastical persons 301 to 318 35 Of Christs descending into Hell 319 to 340 36 Of Purgatory 340 to 355 37 Of extreme Unction 355 to 363 38 Of the saying of Austine Evangelio non crederem nisi me Ecclesiae Authoritas commoveret I should not believe or should not have
of God as Aaron was This you deny and not onely so but you so deny it as that your Church hath maintained and practiced it a long time for a woman to be head or supreme Moderatrix in the Church when you know that according to the Word of God in this respect a woman is not onely forbidden to be the head of the man but to have a tongue in her head 1 Tim. 2. 11. 1 Cor. 14. 34. Yet so hath this been denyed by you that many have beene hang'd drawn and quarter'd for not acknowledging it The Fathers are of our opinion c. All this is but to strike at the Title which hath beene given to our Kings and Queens viz. Supreme Heads or Governours and Governesses of the Church within their Dominions We know our Adversaries have much stomack'd and opposed this Title but we know no just cause that they have had for it We never made Kings or Queens Ministers of the Church so as to dispense the Word and Sacraments only we have attributed unto them this Power to look to and have a care of the Church that the Word be Preached and the Sacraments Administred by fit persons and in a right manner This is no more then belongs unto Kings and Queens as both Scriptures and Fathers doe informe us We see in the Scriptures that the good Kings of Iudah as Asia Iehoshaphat Hezekiah and Iosiah not to speak of David and Solomon who were Prophets as well as Kings and so may be excepted against as extraordinary persons did put forth their power in ordering the Affaires of the Church as well as of the Civill State Asa put down Idolatry and caused the People to enter into Covenant to serve the Lord 2 Chron. 15. Iehoshaphat took away the High Places and the Groves and made the Priests and Levites to goe and teach the People 2 Chron. 17. Hezekiah reformed what had been amisse in matter of Gods Worship caused the Priests and Levites to do their Duty and the Passeover to be solemnly kept 2 Chron. 29. 30 31. So Iosiah also destroyed Idolatry repaired the Temple and kept a most solemne Passeover causing both Priests and People to performe their Duty Austine acknowledgeth this power to belong unto Kings In this saith he Kings as they are commanded of God doe serve God as Kings if in their Kingdome they command good things and forbid evill things not only which belong unto humane Society but also which concerne Divine Religion And the same Father speaking of Christian Princes makes their happiness to lie in this That they make their power serviceable to Gods majesty in enlarging his worship as much as they are able This power also Christian Princes have exercised and have not been taxed for it as Constantine Theodosius c. See Mason de Minist Anglic. lib. 3. cap. 4. The exercising therefore of this power which we ascribe to Kings and Queenes is no taking that Honour to themselves which is spoken of Heb. 5. 4. Neither is it any teaching or speaking in the Church which the Apostle will not allow unto a woman 1 Tim. 2. 11 12. and 1 Cor. 14. 34. Neither is this crosse to what the Fathers whom the Marquesse citeth say which amounts to this that Ministers are to doe those things which belong unto Ministers and that in those things which concern their Ministery all even Kings and Queens are subject unto them All this is nothing against Kings and Queens having a power over Ministers so as to see them perform the Offices which belong unto them And it may seeme strange that the Marquesse should now so lately with so much eagernesse inveigh against that Title and Power given to that Queen of happy memory Q. Elizabeth as most unmeet for her when as Hart a Papist stiffe enough living in the Queens time by his Conference with Doctor Rainolds and Doctor Nowels Book against Dorman was so convinced that he confessed himself satisfied in this point and acknowledged that we ascribe no more unto Princes then Austine doth in the words before cited We say that Christ gave commission to his Disciples to forgive Sinnes you deny it and say that God onely can forgive sins we have Scripture for it Joh. 20. 23. Whosesoever sins ye remit they are remitted and whosesoever sins ye retain they are retained And Joh. 20. 21. As my Father hath sent me even so send I you And how was that viz. with so great power as to forgive sins Mat. 9. 3. 8. where note that S. Matthew doth not set downe how that the people glorified God the Father who had given so great power unto God the Son but that he had given so great power unto men loc cit The Fathers are of this opinion c. It is strange that the Marquesse should say that we deny that Christ gave Commission to his Disciples to forgive Sinnes We confesse that the Scripture is clear for it that he did give them such a Commission onely the question is how the Commission is to be understood and what power it is that the Disciples had and so other Ministers have to forgive Sinnes It 's true we hold that God only can forgive sins and yet withall that men may forgive sins These are not contradictory the one to the other because as all Logitians know except the propositions be understood of one and the same thing in one and the same respect there is no contradiction Now when we say that onely God can forgive sins it is meant in one respect and when we say that men may forgive sinnes it is meant in another respect As the sin is against God so properly and authoritatively God alone can forgive it And this God doth challenge unto himself as his prerogative I even I am he that blotteth out thy transgressions c. Isai 43. 25. And therefore the Scribes were right in this Who can forgive sins but God onely Mar. 2. 7. They were right in the Doctrine though wrong in the Application their position was good that God only can forgive Sins but their supposition was naught that Christ was but a meer Man and had not power to forgive Sins as he did This saith Hilary troubles the Scribes that a man doth forgive sin for they took Christ for a meer Man It is true none can forgive sinne but God only and therefore he that forgiveth is God because none forgiveth but God The same also is clearly and fully acknowledged by Gregory whom amongst other Fathers the Marquesse alledgeth against us He writing upon the second Penitentiall Psalme that is the 32. Psalme upon those words Thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin he saith thus Thou who alone sparest who alone doest forgive sinnes For who can forgive sinnes but God onely And with these agreeth Irenaeus whom also the Marquesse bringeth in as a witnesse on his side He speaking of Christs forgiving of sinnes saith That thereby
c. It is answered that there were two conversions the first of the Brittains the second of the Saxons we onely require this justice from you as you are English not Welch-men for the Church of England involves all the Brittains within her Communion for the Brittains have not now any distinct Church from the Church of England Now if Your Majestie please I expect your further Objections King My Lord I have not done with you yet though particular Churches may fall away in their severall respects of obedience to one supreme Authority yet it follows not that the Church should be thereby divided for as long as they agree in the unity of the same spirit and the bond of peace the Church is still at unitie as so many sheaves of corne are not unbound because they are severed Many sheaves may belong to one field to one man and may be carryed to one barne and be servient to the same table Unity may consist in this as well as in being hudled up together in a rick with one cock-sheave above the rest I have an hundred pieces in my pocket I find them something heavie I divide the summe halfe in one pocket and halfe in another and subdivide them afterwards in two severall lesser pockets The moneys is divided but the summe is not broke the hundred pounds is as whole as when it was together because it belongs to the same man and is in the same possession so though we divide our selves from Rome if neither of us divide our selves from Christ we agree in him who is the Center of all unitie though we differ in matter of depending upon one another But my Lord of Worcester we are got into such a large field of discourse that the greatest Schollers of them all can sooner shew us the way in then out of it therefore before we goe too far let us retire lest we lose our selves and therefore I pray my Lord satisfie me in these particulars Why doe you leave out the second Commandement and cut another in two why doe you with-hold the Cup from the Laytie why have you seven Sacraments when Christ instituted but two why doe you abuse the World with such a fable as Purgatory and make ignorant fooles believe you can fish soules from thence with silver hookes why doe you pray to Saints and worship Images Those are the offences which are given by your Church of Rome unto the Church of Christ of these things I would be satisfied Marq. Sir although the Church be undefiled yet she may not be spotlesse to severall apprehensions For the Church is compared to the Moon that is full of spots but they are but spots of our fancying though the Church be never so comly yet she is described unto us to have black eye-browes which may to some be as great an occasion of dislike as they are to others foyles which set her off more lovely We must not make our fancies judgements of condemnation to her with whom Christ so much was ravished For Your Majesties Objections and first as to that of leaving out the second Commandment and cutting another in two I beseech Your Majestie who called them Commandments who told you they were ten who told you which were first and second c. The Scripture onely called them words those words but these and these words were never divided in the Scriptures into ten Commandments but two Tables the Church did all this and might as well have named them twenty as ten Commandments that which Your Majestie calls the second Commandment is but the explanation of the first and is not razed out of the Bible but for brevitie sake in the manualls it is left out as the rest of the Commandment is left out concerning the Sabbath and others wherefore the same Church which gave them their Name their Number and their Distinction may in their breviats leave out what she deems to be but exposition and deliver what she thinks for substance without any such heavie charge as being blottable out of the booke of life for diminishing the word of God For withholding the Cup from the Laytie where did Christ either give or command to be given either the Bread or the Wine to any such Drink ye all of this but they were all Apostles to whom he said so there were neither Lay-men or women there If the Church allowed them afterwards to receive it either in one or both kinds they ought to be satisfied therewith accordingly but not question the Churches Actions She that could alter the Sabbath into the Lords day and change the dipping of the Baptised over head and eares in water to a little sprinkling upon the face by reason of some emergencies and inconveniencies occasioned by the difference of Seasons and Countries may upon the like occasion accordingly dispose of the manner of her Administration of her Sacraments Neither was this done without great reason the world had not wine in all her Countries but it had bread Wherefore it was thought for uniformity sake that they might not be unlike to one another but all receive alike that they should onely receive the Bread which was to be had in every place and not the Cup in regard that Wine was not every where to be had I wonder that any body should be so much offended at any such thing for Bread and Wine doe signifie Christ crucified I appeal to common reason if a dead body doth not represent a passion as much as if we saw the bloud lie by it If you grant the Churches Power in other matters and rest satisfied therein why do you boggle at this especially when any Priest where Wine is to be had if you desire it he will give it you But if upon every mans call the Church should fall to reforming upon every seeming fault which may be but supposed to be found the people would never stop untill they had made such a through Reformation in all parts as they have done in the greatest part of Germany where there is not a man to Preach or hear the Gospell to eat the Bread or drink the Wine you never pickt so many holes in our Coates as this licentiousnesse hath done in yours For our seven Sacraments she that called the Articles of our Faith 12 the Beatitudes 8 the Graces 3 the Virtues 4 called these 7 and might have called them 17 if she had thought it meet A Sacrament is nothing else but what is done with a holy mind and why Sacrament either in Name or Number should be confin'd to Christs onely Institution I see no cause for it If I can prove that God did institute such a thing in Paradise as he did Marriage shall not I call that a Sacrament as well as what was instituted by Christ when he was upon the Earth If Christ institutes the Order of giving and receiving the holy Ghost shall not I call this the Sacrament of Orders If Christ injoynes us all repentance
shall we not say repentance is a Sacrament If Christ blesseth little children and saith Suffer them to come unto me and forbid them not shall we not say that such confirmation is a Sacrament Truly I doe not understand their meaning They have taken away five which five either by God or Christ or the holy Ghost who are all one were instituted and yet they say they are not Sacraments because they were not instituted by Christ And the two that are left viz. Baptisme and the Lords Supper for the first you hold it necessary to Salvation and for the second you do not admit the reall presence so that of the two remaining you have taken away the necessity of the one and the reality of the other so farwell all Now for Purgatory I do believe we have as good ground for it out of this place of Scripture viz. He shall be purged yet so as if it were by fire as you can prove a Hell out of this place of Scripture He shall be cast into utter darknesse and into the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone where shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth Neither can you make more exceptions to our inference out of this place of Scripture to prove Purgatory then the Atheist if wits may be permitted to roame in such things as these once setled and believed generally will find ground enough to quarrell at your burning lake and the vaine Philosopher Contradictions enough in the description of the effects of those hellish Torments viz. weeping and gnashing of teeth the one having its procedure from heat the other from cold which are meer Contradictions and therefore fabulous take heed we doe not take away Hell in removing of Purgatory You see not how your laughing at Purgatory hath caused such laughing at Hell and Devils untill at last you shall see them bid the Heavens come down and pluck the Almighty out of his Throne If a Text of Scripture with the Churches Exposition be not sufficient for a man to rest both his Science and Conscience upon I know not where it will find a resting place it may shoot at Randome but never take so right an ayme and for the silver hooke you talk'd of I do not justifie the abuse of any I know there is a great difference betweene the Court of Rome and the Church of Rome and if these Errours were in the Church it selfe yet the tares must not be hastily pluckt out of the field of the Church lest the wheat be pluckt up with it Now for our praying to Saints there is no body that prayes to any Saints otherwise then as we on earth desire the benefit of one anothers prayers We do not believe that they can help us of themselves or that they have power to forgive sin but we believe that they are nearer to God his favour and more deare unto him and therefore we believe that he will heare them with or for us sooner then he will hear us when we pray upon our own account as we desire the prayers of some good and holy man whom we believe to be so hoping it will be a benefit unto us All that can be said against it is that they do not hear us I will not trouble Your Majestie with the Schoolmens Speculum Creatoris but I shall desire to be plaine When there is joy in heaven over every sinner that repenteth do you think that the Saints which are there are ignorant of the occasion of that joy or do they rejoyce at they know not what If the Saints in heaven do crie How long Lord how long holy and just dost thou not avenge our bloud upon them which dwell upon the earth if they know that their bloud is not yet avenged do they not know when a sinner is converted and if they know the time of conversion do they not know the time of prayer If Abraham knew that there were such men as Moses and the Prophets who was dead so many hundreds of years before their time can we say that they are ignorant think ye that those ministring Angels who are called Intelligencers give them no intelligence or that they gather nothing of intelligence by looking him in the face who is the fulnesse of knowledge and to all these the practice and opinion of so Catholick a Church God can onely forgive sins Christ can onely mediate but Saints whether in heaven or on the earth may intercede for one another Lastly for our worshipping of Images confounded be all they that worshipped them for me God is onely worthy to be worshipped but if I kneel before the Picture of my Saviour I worship him kneeling before his Picture the worship is in the heart and not in the knee and where the true God is in the intention there can be no Idolatrie O Sir Christian Religion is not a Protestation but a Gospel it would better consist with unity then opposition we hold it a peece of popery to knock our owne breasts with the fists of constitution whilst we hold it most Evangelicall to knock at our neighbours with a Cunstables staffe a pious care in a Mother Church labours to educate her own daughter and having fed her at her owne breasts all the gratitude she returns her mother is to call her whore Antichrist Babylon and all the spitefull and vile names that can be imagined they forget that saying of the Apostle St. James If any man among you seeme to be religious and bridleth not his tongue but deceiveth his own heart that mans Religion is in vaine Pure Religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this to visit the fatherlesse and widows in their affliction and to keep himselfe unspotted from the world What should I say more the Scriptures are made a nose of wax for every bold hand to wring it which way he pleaseth they are rejected by private men by whole books The Articles of our Creed are said not to be of the Apostles framing the Commandments not belonging to Christians impossible to be kept the Sacraments denied Charity not onely grown cold but quite starved and they will be sav'd by meanes quite contrary to what the Gospel which they seeme to professe sets down viz. by Faith without good works onely believe and that 's enough whereas the holy Apostle St. James tells us that faith profiteth nothing without good works Here the Marquesse was going on and His Majestie interrupted him King My Lord you let a flood-gate of Arguments out against my naked breast yet it doth not beare me any thing backwards you have spoken a great many things that no way concerns Us but such as we find fault with as much as you and other things to which I could easily give answer If I could take but some of that time and leasure that you have taken to compose your Arguments It is not onely the Picture of our Saviour but the Pictures of Saints which you both worship and adore
Saint Chrysostom saith Omnia clara sunt plana ex scriptur is divinis quaecunque necessaria sunt manifesta sunt yet no man ever hath yet defined what are necessary and what not What points are fundamentall and what are not fundamentall Necessary to Salvation is one thing and necessary for knowledge as an improvement of our faith is another thing for the first if a man keeps the Commandments and believes all the Articles of the Creed he may be saved though he never read a word of Scripture but much more assuredly if he meditates upon Gods word with the Psalmist day and night But if he meanes to walk by the rule of Gods word and to search the Scriptures he must lay hold upon the meanes that God hath ordained whereby he may attaine unto the true understanding of them for as Saint Paul saith God hath placed in the Church Apostles Prophets Evangelists Pastors and Doctors to the end we should be no more little children blown about with every wind of Doctrine therefore it is not for babes in understanding to take upon them to understand those things wherein so great a Prophet as the Prophet David confessed the darknesse of his owne ignorance And though it be true the Scripture is a river through which a lambe may wade and an Elephant may swim yet it is to be supposed and understood that the lambe must wade but onely through where the river is foordable It doth not suppose the river to be all alike in depth for such a river was never heard of but there may be places in the river where the lambe may swim as well as the Elephant otherwise it is impossible that an Elephant should swim in the same depth where a lambe may wade though in the same river he may neither is it the meaning of that place that the child of God may wade through the Scripture without directions help or Judges but that the meannest capacitie qualified with a harmelesse innocence and desirous to wade through that river of living waters to eternall life may find so much of Comfort and heavenly knowledge there easily to be obtained that he may easily wade through to his eternall Salvation and that there are also places in the same river wherein the highest speculations may plunge themselves in the deep mysteries of God Wherefore with pardon crav'd for my presumption in holding Your Majestie in so tedious a discourse as also for my boldnesse in obtruding my opinion which is except as incomparable Hooker in his Ecclesiasticall pollicy hath well observed the Churches Authority be required herein as necessary hereunto we shall be so far from agreeing upon the true meaning of the Scripture that the outward letter sealed with the inward witnesse of the Spirit being all hereticks have quoted Scripture and pretended Spirit will not be a warrant sufficient enough for any private man to judge so much as the Scripture to be Scripture or the Gospell it selfe to be the Gospell of Christ This Church being found out and her Authority allowed of all controversies would be soone decided and although we allow the Scripture to be the lock upon the door which is Christ yet we must allow the Church to be the Key that must open it as Saint Ambrose in his 38. Sermons calls the agreement of the Apostles in the Articles of our beliefe Clavis Scripturae one of whose Articles is I believe the holy Catholick Church As the Lion wants neither strength nor courage nor power nor weapons to seize upon his prey yet he wants a nose to find it out wherefore by naturall instinct he takes to his assistance the little Jack-call a quick sented beast who runs before the Lion and having found out the prey in his language gives the Lion notice of it who soberly untill such time as he fixes his eyes upon the bootie makes his advance but once comming within view of it with a more speed then the swiftest running can make he jumps upon it and seizes it Now to apply this to our purpose Christ crucified is the main substance of the Gospell according to the Apostles saying I desire to know nothing but Iesus and him crucified This crucified Christ is the nourishment of our soules according to our Saviours own words Ubi Cadaver ibi aquilae Thereby drawing his Disciples from the curious speculation of his body glorified to the profitable meditation of his body crucified It is the prey of the Elect the dead Carkasse feedeth the Eagles Christ crucified nourisheth his Saints according to Saint Iohns saying except we eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his bloud we have no life in us him we must mastigate and chew by faith traject and convey him into our hearts as nutriment by meditation and digest him by Coalition whereby we grow one with Christ and Christ becomes one with us according to that saying of Tertullian Auditu devorandus est intellectu ruminandus fide digerendus Now for the true understanding of the Scriptures which is no other thing then the finding out of Iesus and him crucified who is the very life of the Scriptures which body of Divinity is nourished with no other food and all its veines fil'd with no other bloud though this heavenly food the Scripture have neither force nor power to seize upon its prey but is endued with a lively spirit able to overcome the greatest ignorance yet there is a quick sented assistant called Ecclesia or Church which is derived from a verbe which signifies to call which must be the Jack-call to which this powerfull seeker after this prey must joyne it selfe or else it will never be able to find it out and when we are called we must go soberly to work untill by this means we have attained unto the true understanding and sight thereof and then let the Lion like the Eagle Maher-shalal hashbaz as the Prophet Esay cap. 8. v. 3. tells us make hast to the prey make speed to the spoile Saint Paul confirmes the use of this Etymologie writing to the Corinthians viz. To the Saints called and the Ephesians cap. 4. he tells us if ye would be in one body and in one spirit and of one mind you must be as you are called in our hope of your vocation and in his Epistle of the Colossians cap. 3. he tells us that if we will have the peace of Christ to rule in our hearts that is it by which we are called in one selfe body where we must allow a constitution or Society of men called to that purpose and whose calling it is to procure unto us this peace and unitie in the Church or we shall never find it Thus when dissention arose between Paul and Barnabas concerning Circumcision their disputations could effect nothing but heat untill the Apostles and Elders met together and determined the matter there must be a society of men that can say Bene visum fuit nobis Spiritui sancto or
Augustin sayes kept him in that Church viz. a succession of Priests from the very seat of Peter the Apostle to the present Bishop of his time And Optatus Milevitanus reckons all the Romane Bishops from Saint Peter to Syricius who then was Pope and by this he shewed and made it his Argument that the true Church was not with the Donatists bidding them to shew the originall of their Chayre this no Protestant did or ever can doe The Romane Church gave the English Bishops Commission to preach the Doctrine of Christ as they have delivered it unto them but they never gave them any Commission to preach against her Religion which Bishops being turned out for observing the depositum wherewith they were instructed and new Bishops chosen in their room by her who not contenting her selfe with being a nursing mother thereof must needs be head of the child and moderatrix in the same Church wherein by the Apostles precept she is forbidden to speak the succession was broke off the branch cut off from the body becoming no part of the tree fit for nothing but to be chopt into smaller pieces and so fitted for the fire this proofe of succession the Bishops of England thought so necessary for proving their Church to be the true Church that they affirmed themselves to be consecrated by Catholick Bishops their Predecessors which never proved argues the interruption and affirming it shews how that in their owne opinion the succession could not hold in the inferiour Ministers as indeed it cannot for as there is a continued supply of Embassadours in all places yet the succession is in the royall race so though all vacancies are replenished by Ministers of the Gospel yet the succession of the Authority was in the Bishops as descended to them from the Apostles according to our Saviours rule I will be with you alwayes unto the end of the world Which Affirmation of theirs argues that their calling is sufficient without it and in that they would faine derive it from the Church of Rome it argues that that is the true Church and yet they would forsake her supposing her to have errors when that Reformation it selfe was but a supposition for seeing they hold that their Church may erre they can be certain of nothing and whilst for errors sake they forsake the Church of Rome the Church of England in forsaking her may be in the greatest error of all where there is neither Succession nor assurance I must leave her to her selfe and your Majestie to judge Next I prove the Romane Church to be the true Church by her unity in Doctrine for so the Apostle Paul requires all the Churches children to be of one mind viz. I beseech you that all speak one thing Be ye knit together in one mind and one Judgement 1 Cor. 1. Endeavouring to keep the unitie of the Spirit in the bond of peace Ephes 4. 3. The multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul Act. 4. 32. Continue in one Spirit and one mind of one accord and one judgement Phil. 1. 27. Phil. 2. 2. So our Saviour prayeth that they may be one So Joseph forewarned his brethren that they should not fall out by the way knowing that whilst they were with him he could order them when they came to their father he could order them but having no head they should be apt to be dissentious This Unity I find no where but in the Church of Rome agreeing in all things which the Church of Rome hath determined for Doctrine whereas the Protestant Doctrine like the heresie of Simon Magus divided it selfe into severall Sects and to that of the Donatists which were cut into small threds in so much that among the many Religions which are lately sprung up and the sub sub sub-divisions under them each one pretending to be the true Protestant excluding the other and all of them together no more likely to be bound up in the bond of peace then a bundle of thornes can expect binding with a rope of sand In vaine is their excuse if non-disagreement in fundameatalls for they dis-agree amongst themselves about the Sacrament for the Lutherans hold Consubstantiation but the Church of England no such matter Some that Christ descended into hell others not The Church of England maintain their King to be the head of the Church The Helvetians will acknowledge no such matter the Presbyterians will acknowledge no such matter the Independent will acknowledge no such matter Concerning the Government of the Church by Bishops some Protestants maintaine it to be Jure Divino others to be Jure Ecclesiastico others no such matter Some think that the English translations of the Bible in some places takes away in other places addes and other some places changes the meaning of the holy Ghost and some think it no such matter or else the Bishops would not have recommended it unto the people Lastly they are so far from agreeing about the true meaning of the word of God that they cannot agree upon what is the word of God For Lutherans deny the second Epistle of Saint Peter the second and third Epistle of Saint John the Epistle to the Hebr. the Epistle of Saint James and Saint Jude and the Revelation The Calvinists and the Church of England no such matter they allow them And I believe that these are fundamentalls If they cannot agree upon their Principalls how shall they agree upon the deductions thence If these be not fundamentall points how come Protestants to fight against Protestants for the Protestants Religion The disagreement is not so amongst the Romane Catholicks for all points of the Romane Religion that have been defined by the Church in a generall Councell are agreed upon exactly by all nations tongues and people uibicunque terrarum but in those points which are not determined by the Church the Church leaves every man to abound in his owne sense and therefore all the heat that is either between the Thomists and the Scolists the Dominicans and the Jesuits either concerning the Conception of our blessed Lady or the concurrence of Grace and free-will c. being points wherein the Church hath not interposed her decrees is no more prejudicall or objectionall against the Church of Romes Unitie then the disputations in the Schools of our Universities are prejudiciall to the 39. Articles of the Church of England But in each severall Protestant Dominion there are certain severall Articles of beliefe belonging to severall Protestant Dominions in which severall agreements not any one agrees with any of all the rest neither is there any possibility they should being there is no means acknowledged nor power ordained whereby they should be gathered together in one councell whereby they might be of one heart and of one soule neither is there this Unitie in any one particular Dominion as is in the Dominion of the Roman Church for they are all in pieces amongst themselves even in
of witnesses to the divine truth and be no more prejudicicall to their generall determinations then so many exceptions are prejudiciall to a generall rule Neither is a particular defection in any man any exception against his testimony except it be in the thing wherein he is deficient for otherwise we should be of the nature of the flies who onely prey upon corruption leaving all the rest of the body that is whole unregarded Secondly Your Majesty taxes generall Councels for committing errors If Your Majesty would be pleased to search into the times wherein those Councels were called Your Majesty shall find that the Church was then under persecution and how that Arrian Emperours rather made Assemblies of Divines then called any Generall Councels and if we should suppose them to be generall and free Councels yet they could not be erroneous in any particular mans judgement untill a like generall Councell should have concluded the former to be erroneous except you will allow particulars to condemne generalls and private men the whole Church all generall Councels from the first unto the last that ever were or shall be makes but one Church and though in their intervals there be no session of persons yet there is perpetuall virtue in their decretals to which every man ought to appeale for judgement in point of controversie Now as it is a maxim in our law Nullum tempus occurrit regi so it is a maxim in divinity Nullum tempus occurrit deo Ubi deus est as he promised I will be with you alwaies unto the end of the world that is with his Church in directing her chief Officers in all their consultations relating either to the truth of her doctrine or the manner of her discipline wherefore if it should be granted that the Church had at any time determined amisse the Church cannot be said to have erred because you must not take the particular time for the Catholick Church because the Church is as well Catholick for time as territory except that you will make rectification an error For as in civil affairs if that we should take advantage of the Parliaments nulling former acts and thereupon conclude that we will be no more regulated by its lawes we should breed confusion in the Common-wealth for as they alter their laws upon experience of present inconveniences so the Councels change their decrees according to that further knowledge which the holy writ assures us shall encrease in the latter daies provided that this knowledge be improved by means approved of and not by every enthusiastick that shall oppose himselfe against the whole Church If I recall my own words it is no error but an avoidance of error so where the same power rectifies it selfe though some things formerly have been decreed amisse yet that cannot render the decrees of generall Councels not binding or incident to error quoad ad nos though in themselves and pro tempore they may be so As to Your Majesties objecting the errors of the holy Apostles and pen-men of the holy Ghost and Your inference thereupon viz. That truth is no where to be found but in holy Scripture under Your Majesties correction I take this to be the greatest argument against the private spirit urged by your Majesty its leading us into all truth that could possibly be found out For if such men as they indued with the holy Ghost inabled with the power of working miracles so sanctified in their callings and enlightened in their understandings could erre how can any man lesse qualified assume to himselfe a freedome from not erring by the assistance of a private spirit Lastly as to Your Majesties quotations of so many Fathers for the Scriptures easinesse and plainnesse to be understood If the Scriptures themselves doe tell us that they are hard to be understood so that the unlearned and unstable wrest them to their owne destruction 2 Peter 3. 16. and if the Scripture tells us that the Eunuch could not understand them except some man should guide him as Acts 8. 13. and if the Scripture tells us that Christs owne Disciples could not understand them untill Christ himselfe expounds them unto them as Luke 24 25. and if the Scriptures tell us how the Angel wept much because no man was able either in heaven or earth to open the Book sealed with seven seals nor to look upon it as Apoc. 5. 1. then certainly all these sayings of theirs are either to be set to the errata's that are behind their books or else we must look out some other meaning of their words then what Your Majesty hath inferr'd from thence as thus they were easie id est in aliquibus but not in omnibus locis or thus they were easie as to the attainment of particular salvation but not as to the generall cognisance of all the divine mystery therein contained requisite for the Churches understanding and by her alone and her consultations and discusments guided by an extraordinary and promised assistance onely to be found out of which as to every ordinary man this knowledge is not necessary so hereof he is not capable First we hold the reall presence you deny it we say his body is there you say there is nothing but bare bread we have Scripture for it Mat. 20. 26. Take eat this is my body so Luke 22. 19. This is my body which is given for you You say that the bread which we must eat in the Sacrament is but dead bread Christ saith that that bread is living bread you say how can this man give us his flesh to eat we say that that was the objection of Jews and Infidels 1 John 6. 25. not of Christians and believers you say it was spoken figuratively we say it was spoken really re vera or as we translate it indeed John 6. 55. But as the Jews did so doe ye First murmur that Christ should be bread John 6. 41. Secondly that that bread should be flesh Iohn 6. 52. And thirdly that that flesh should be meat indeed John 6. 55. untill at last you cry out with the unbelievers this is a hard saying who can heare it Iohn 6. 60. had this been but a figure certainly Christ would have removed the doubt when he saw them so offended at the reality John 6. 61. He would not have confirmed his saying in terminis with promise of a greater wonder John 6. 62. you may as well deny his incarnation his ascention and ask how could the man come down from heaven and goe up againe if incomprehensibility should be sufficient to occasion such scruples in your breasts and that which is worse then naught you have made our Saviours conclusion an argument against the premises for where our Saviour tels them thus to argue according unto flesh and bloud in these words the flesh profiteth nothing and that if they will be enlivened in their understanding they must have faith to believe it in these words it is the Spirit that quickneth
he did declare who he was For if none can forgive sinnes but onely God and the Lord Christ did forgive them then it is manifest that he was the Word of God made the Son of Man c. and that as God he hath mercy on us and doth forgive us our debts which we owe unto God our Maker Accordingly also Ambrose another of those Fathers whom the Marquesse maketh to be of their opinion Whereas saith he Iewes say that onely God can forgive sinnes they doe indeed confesse Christ to be God and by their judgement bewray their perfidiousnesse c. They have a testimony for Christs Divinity they have no Faith for their owne Salvation Therefore great is the madnesse of the unbelieving people that when as they confesse that it belongs onely unto God to forgive sinnes yet they doe not beleeve God when he forgiveth sins So by this Argument the same Father proves the Holy Ghost to be God because he forgiveth Sins For that none can forgive sinnes but onely God as it is written Who can forgive sinnes but only God Thus Ambrose cites that saying of the Scribes as a most undoubted truth How then have Ministers power to forgive Sins In that the word of reconciliation is committed unto them 2 Cor. 5. 19. in that they are to preach remission of sinnes in Christs name Luk. 24. 47. Be it known unto you that through this man viz. Christ is preached unto you forgivenesse of sinnes said Paul Act. 13. 38. Ambrose observes that Christ first said to his Apostles Receive ye the holy Ghost and then Whose sins ye remit they are remitted Whence he gathers that it is the holy Ghost that doth indeed forgive Sins Men saith he doe onely afford their Ministery for the forgivenesse of sinnes they doe not exercise the authority of any power Neither doe they forgive sins in their Name but in the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the Holy Ghost Lombard called the Master of the Sentences and of School-divinity disputing this Question and shewing diverse Opinions about it determines thus That God only doth remit and retain sins and that yet God hath given power to the Church to bind and loose But that God himself doth bind and loose one way and the Church another way That God by himself alone doth forgive sinne so as to clense the soul from staine and to free it from the guilt of eternall death That he hath not given this power to Priests to whom yet he hath given power to loose and bind that is to declare men to be loosed or bound Whence our Lord first by himselfe made the Leper sound and then sent him to the Priests that they might declare him to be clean And hence he inferres that a Minister of the Gospell hath such power in remitting or retaining sins as the Priest in the Law had in clensing a Leper The Priest was said to make the Leper clean or unclean so the words are in the Originall Levit. 13. when he did pronounce and declare him to be clean or unclean So Ministers remit or retain sinnes when they pronounce and declare that sins are remitted or retained of God And in this Lombard followed Hierome who as his words cited by Lombard doe shew by this very similitude of the Leviticall Priest dealing with a Leper illustrates and sets forth the manner how a Minister doth now remit or retain sins Thus then I hope it may sufficiently appear that in this point both Scriptures and Fathers are for us and not against us as the Marquesse would have it We hold that we ought to confesse our sins unto our ghostly Father this ye deny saying that ye ought not to confesse your sins but unto God alone This we prove by Scripture Mat. 3. 5 6. Then went out Jerusalem and all Judea and were baptized of him in Jordan confessing their sinnes This confession was no generall confession but in particular as appeares Acts 19. 18 19. And many that beleeved came and confessed and shewed their deeds The Fathers affirme the same c. For Confession of Sinnes Protestants doe not say that they ought not to confesse to any but God onely though they hold that ordinarily it sufficeth to confesse onely unto God and that there is no necessity of confessing to any other whereas they of the Church of Rome will have it necessary for every one man to confesse unto a Priest all his deadly sinnes and such indeed are all sinnes whatsoever without the mercy of God in Christ Rom. 6. 23. Gal. 3. 10. which by diligent examination he can find out together with all the severall circumstances whereby they are aggravated Thus hath the Councell of Trent decreed it And nothing will suffice to procure one that is Baptized remission of Sins without this Confession either in Re actually performed or in Voto in desire as Bellarmine doth expound it Who also stickes not to say that in all the Scripture there seems not to be any promise of for givenesse of sinnes made to those that confesse their sins unto God Which is a most impudent Assertion For David having said I acknowledged my sinne unto thee and mine iniquity have I not hid I said I will confesse my transgressions unto the Lord and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sinne he addes immediately for this shall every one that is godly make his prayer unto thee c. Psal 32. 5 6. Besides Aquinas and Bonaventure two prime Schoolemen hold that under the Law it was not ordinarily required of people to confesse in particular unto a Priest Bonaventure also cites Austine saying Oblatio sacrificiorum fuit confessio peccatorum The offering of sacrifices was the confession of sinnes whence hee inferreth that therefore it seemes there was no other confessing of sinnes but the offering of Sacrifices For those two places of Scripture cited by the Marquesse neither they nor any other doe speake of such a confession as they of the Church of Rome doe contend for Bellarmine holds that their Sacramentall confession as they call it viz. that confession which they make a part of the Sacrament of penance was not instituted till after Christs Resurrection and therefore he sayes it is no marvell if as Ambrose observes we reade of Peters teares but not of his confession That the Jewes therefore when they were baptized of Iohn confessed their sinnes Mat. 3. 5 6. is not enough to prove that confession which we now dispute of although it did appeare that the confession there spoken of was a particular confession which yet appeares not Cardinall Cajetane saith it was but a generall confession Neither indeed in probability could it be any more for how should Iohn have been able to heare such multitudes as came unto him to be baptized Ierusalem and all Iudea and all the region round about Iordan Mat. 3. 5. confesse all their sinnes in
is this which as I conceive the Marquesse aimed at Esau was not willing and did not run but if he had been willing and had run by the help of God he had obtained God would have given him both to will and to run except by contemning Gods Call he would be a Reprobate For God doth otherwise give us that we may will then he doth give us that which we have willed For that we may will God would have both to be his work and ours his by Calling ours by Following when we are called But that which we have willed God alone doth give that is to be able to do well and for ever to live happily Here I confesse Austine doth seeme to shew himself a patron of Free-will and we could not easily judge otherwise of him if we should look meerly upon these words and take them as his positive sentence But if we consider what Austine saith both before and after we shall see that he spake thus rather by way of objection then by way of determination Before these words he saith thus A wheel doth not therefore run well that it may be round but because it is round So no man doth therefore work well that he may receive grace but because he hath received it Austine therefore was not of that minde that Esau of himself by his free-will could have been willing and have run or that any when he is called and incited by Grace can by the power of Free-will follow and obey but it is grace that must work this in him To this purpose againe before the words objected If saith Austine Iacob did therefore believe because he would then God did not bestow faith on him but he by willing did afford it unto himself and so he had something which he received not Which is contrary to the words of the Apostle What hast thou that thou hast not received 1 Cor. 4. 7. But a little after those words that seeme to make for Free-will Austine expresseth himself more fully For having cited that of the Apostle Phil. 2. 12 13. Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling for it is God that worketh in you both to will and to doe of his good pleasure he addes The Apostle there sufficiently shewes that a good will it self is wrought in us by God For if therefore only it be said Rom. 9. It is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy because the will of man alone is not sufficient that he may justly and rightly except it be helped by the mercy of God then by this reason it may be said It is not of God that sheweth mercy but of man that willeth because the mercy of God alone is not sufficient unlesse the consent of our will be ad ded But that is manifest that we will in vain except God shew mercy This I know not how it can be said that God doth shew mercy in vain except we be willing For if God shew mercy then we are willing seeing it belongs to that same mercy to make us willing For it is God that worketh in us both to will and to doe of his good pleasure Again a little after having said by way of objection Free-will availeth much he answers Nay it is indeed but in those that are sold under sinne as all are till they be fred by Grace what doth it avail And againe when those things delight us whereby wee profit towards God this is inspired and given unto us by the grace of God it is not gotten by our consent industry or the merits of our workes because the consent of the will the industry of indeavour and workes fervent with charity are all the gift of God Thus then it is most manifest that in the place pointed at by the Marquesse Austine was most farre from maintaining such a Free-will as we oppose There is also a passage in Austines second book to Simplicianus quaest 1. which may seeme to make against us viz. That to will any thing is in the power of every one but to be able to doe any thing is not in the power of any But let Austine explain himself and shew his own meaning and that he doth in his Retractations That saith hee was spoken because we doe not say that any thing is in our power but that which is done when wee will Where first and chiefly is to will it selfe For immediately without any distance of time the will it selfe is present when wee will But this power also to live well wee receive from above when the will is prepared of the Lord. Thus carefull was that good Father to prevent the mistaking of his words lest any should thinke that hee did ascribe any thing to the power of Free-will in that which is good So much for Austine the next Father alledged is Ambrose who in the place cited viz. in Luk. 12. hath nothing above Free-will that I can finde After him followes Chrysostome who indeed in the place that is alledged goes far in his expressions concerning Free-will as if God onely did afford meanes and so leave it in the power of man to use them or not as hee pleaseth If therefore I except against his testimony in this point I have no meane men of the Church of Rome to beare mee out I know Bellarmine seemes to take it as a matter of great advantage that Calvin stands not here so much upon Chrysostome as one that did too much extoll the power of Free-will But was this onely Calvines judgement of Chrysostome Did not some of the Romanists themselves also think thus of him S. Chrysostom saith Alvarez a Romish Archbishop and a great Schoole-man sometimes doth wonderfully extoll the power of our Free-will speaking as it were hyperbolically whiles hee strives to impugne the errors of the Manichees and of the Gentiles who held that Man is still by nature as hee was first created of God or that by the violence of fate he is compelled to sinne So also Iansenius a Romish Bishop to whom also Alvarez doth referre us haveing mentioned something of Euthymius and Theophylact hee saith that those passages were taken from Chrysostome and that except they be warily read and understood they may give occasion of falling into the error of Pelagius who held that the beginning of faith and justification is from our selves and the consummation from God c. Chrysostome he saith meant well concerning the grace of God yet he wrote many things against the Manichees in commendation of Free-will attributing most things unto it without making any mention of Gods Grace which things he would not have written in that manner if hee could have foreseene that Pelagius his heresie would arise which as then was not risen or not known unto men Thus were see how these Authors though they excuse Chrysostomes meaning yet dislike his expression But some amongst those of
the Roman Church have gone further in their censure of Chrysostome as Alvarez relates viz. that he held that election whereby we first accept those things that are good and resolve to doe them is before the grace of God and that then grace doth follow after whereby we are helped and God doth co-operate with us To this pur-pose I finde Tolet a Jesuite first and afterwards a Cardinall cited by Chamier though I have not his Booke now at hand to peruse And this may suffice for answer to Chrysostome yea and to those other two Fathers also that follow viz. Irenaeus and Cyrill the latter of these being by name and both of them implicitly excepted against by some of the Romanists themselves as appeares by what is cited in the margent as also by the reasons alledged by Alvarez and Iansenius why Chrysostome did exceede at least in his expressions viz. because he was so earnest against the Manichees and others and knew nothing of the contrary errour of the Pelagians which reasons might transport the other Fathers also It is true saith Alvarez that S. Chrysostome and other Fathers that wrote before the Heresie of Pelagius was risen up did speake little of the grace of Christ and much for the confirming of the liberty of the will against the heresie of the Manichees He addes that Austine also in his writings against the Pelagians did observe this and hee cites his words to this purpose Yea hee shewes that Austine in his Retractations was faine to answer in like manner for himself when as the Pelagians did make use of his former writings against the Manichees thereby to maintaine their opinion concerning the power of Free-will in opposition to the necessity and efficacy of Gods Grace Thus likewise Iansenius saith that after the Pelagian heresie was risen then Austine spake more exactly and more expresly of the Grace of God The Jesuit Maldonate doth tell us that Ammonius and Cyrill Theophylact and Euthymius so expound that No man commeth unto me except the Father draw him that they come too nigh the error of Pelagius viz. that all are not drawn because all are not worthy as if saith he before a man be drawn by grace unto grace hee could deserve grace which is to be worthy to be drawn But though Irenaeus and Cyrill be liable to these exceptions yet I see nothing in the places cited by the Marquesse wherein they make against us Irenaeus saith thus If it were not in us to doe these things or not to do them why did the Apostle and before him the Lord himself counsell us to doe some things and to abstaine from other things Here Irenaeus indeed sheweth that it is in us to doe or not to doe but hee doth not say that it is in nobis ex nobis in us of our selves by the power of our Free-will to doe things truly good He addes immediately that man from the beginning is free as God after whose likenesse hee was made is free Now this doth rather make against our adversaries then for them for it shewes that the freedome of mans will doth not consist in this that hee is free either to doe good or to doe evill seeing that God is not free in that manner hee being onely free to doe good but altogether uncapable of doing evill So man being determined by grace to that which is good yet is free because not constrained nor forced against his will in the doing of it and so on the other side hee is free in doing evill though of himselfe without grace he can doe nothing but evill As for the other Fathers viz. Cyrill that which hee saith in the place alledged is this wee cannot according to the doctrine of the Church and of the truth by any meanes deny the free power of man wich is called Free-will This is nothing against us who doe not as hath beene shewed before simply deny Free-will but onely so as our adversaries of the Church of Rome doe maintaine it To that which is in controversie betwixt us and our adversaries Cyrill here saith nothing and therefore his testimony is not to the purpose And so much for Free-will In the next place we hold it possible saith the Marquesse to keepe the Commandements you say it is impossible Wee have Scripture for it Luke 1. 6. And they were both righteous before God walking in all the Commandements and Ordinances of the Lord blamelesse And 1 Joh. 5. 3. His Commandements are not grievous For keeping the Commandements we hold not that it is simply impossible but that according to that measure of grace which God doth ordinarily bestow upon men here in this life it is not possible to keep them viz. so as not to be guilty of the breach of them If a man could fully and perfectly keep the Commandements then he should be without sin for sinne is nothing else but a transgression of the Law as Saint Iohn defines it 1 Iohn 3. 4. But the Scripture shewes that no man in this life is so perfect as to be without sinne There is not a just man upon earth that doth good and sinneth not saith Solomon Eccles 7. 20. If we say that we have no sinne we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us saith Saint Iohn 1 John 1. 8. In many things we offend all saith Saint Iames Iam. 3. 2. And Christ hath taught all to pray for forgivenesse of sinnes Mat. 6. 12. which supposeth that all even the best that live upon earth have need of it that they are guilty of sinnes and so consequently come short of the full and perfect keeping of Gods Commandements Bellarmine thinks to elude these places by saying That we cannot indeed live without Veniall sinnes but that Veniall sinnes are not sinnes simply but onely imperfectly and in some respect and that they are not against the Law but only besides it But first Veniall sinnes are against the Law as being transgressions of it for else they are no sinnes at all that being the very nature of sinne to be a transgression of the Law 1 Iohn 3. 4. 2. There are no sins so veniall but that without the mercy of God in Christ they are damnable It being written Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the Law to doe them Gal. 3. 10. And thirdly no man living upon earth is free from such sinnes as that he is able to stand if God shall enter into judgement with him If thou Lord shouldest mark iniquities O Lord who shall stand Psal 130. 3. Enter not into judgement with thy servant for in thy fight shall no man living be justified Psal 143. 2. The Fathers here are on our side Hierome having cited that of our Saviour Out of the hearts of men proceed evill thoughts adulteries fornications murders thefts covetousnesse c. addes Let him come forth that can testifie that these
sacifice I answer doubtlesse Bellarmines reading was sufficient to informe him that diverse ancient Writers call Baptisme a sacrifice Oecumenius upon Heb. 10. 26. saith that the meaning of those words there remaineth no more sacrifice for sinnes is that there is no second Baptisme to be expected For by sacrifice hee saith is there meant the crosse Christs Sacrifice on the crosse and Baptisme wherein that sacrifice is represented After the same manner and almost the same words writeth Theophylact upon that place to the Hebrewes Estius also upon the place saith that Chrysostome and his followers by sacrifice there understand either Baptisme or rather the death of Christ as it doth operate in Baptisme And Melchior Canus affirmes that most of the ancients did call Baptisme a sacrifice saying that there remaines no sacrifice for sinne because Baptisme cannot be repeated And he gives this reason why they spake so viz. because in Baptisme we die together with Christ and the sacrifice of the crosse by this Sacrament is applyed unto us for full forgivenesse of sinnes Therefore saith he by a metaphore they called Baptisme a sacrifice and said that after Baptisme there remaineth no sacrifice because there is no second Baptisme Thus then it may sufficiently appeare that there is nothing either in the Scriptures or in the Fathers to prove that in the Eucharist Christ is offered up unto the Father a sacrifice properly so called but that both Scriptures and Fathers are against it In the next place VVe say saith the Marquesse that the Sacrament or Orders confers grace upon those on whom the hands of the Presbytery are imposed you both deny it to be a Sacrament notwithstanding the holy Ghost is given unto them thereby and also you deny that it confers any interior grace at all upon them VVe have Scripture for what we hold viz. 1 Tim. 4. 14. Neglect not the gift that is in thee which was given thee by prophecy and with laying on the hands of the Presbytery So 2 Tim. 1. 6. Stir up the gift of God which is in thee by the putting on of my hands S. Aug. lib. 4. Quaest. super Num. S. Cypr. Epist ad Magnum Optat. Milevit the place beginneth Ne quis miretur Tertull. in Praescript the place beginneth Edant origines Answ That Orders or the Ordination of Ministers is a Sacrament truly and properly so called of the same nature with Baptisme and the Lords Supper they of the Church of Rome do hold and the Councell of Trent hath denounced Anathema against such as deny it Protestants on the other side though they doe not deny but that the name of Sacrament largely taken may be given to Ordination yet they deny that it is a Sacrament in that sense as Baptisme and the Lords Supper are Sacraments A Sacrament properly so called as the name is attributed to Baptisme and the Lords Supper is a Signe and Seale of the covenant of Grace confirming unto us that Christ is ours and we his that in him we are justified and through him shall be saved Thus circumcision was a Sacrament in the time of the old Testament a token of the Covenant betwixt God and his people Gen. 17. 11. a Seale of the righteousnesse of Faith Rom. 4. 11. So now is Baptisme Mat. 28. 19. Acts 22. 16. And so the Lords Supper 1 Cor. 11. 24 25. But thus Ordination is not a Sacrament not serving to signifie and seale the covenant of Grace as Baptisme and the Lords Supper doe Bellarmine saith that Calvin doth acknowledge Ordination to be a true Sacrament But Calvin so grants it to be a Sacrament as that he plainly shewes it to be no such Sacrament as Baptisme and the Lords Supper are As for the true office of a Presbyter or Elder saith hee which is commended unto us by the mouth of Christ I willingly account it a Sacrament For there is a ceremony first taken from the Scriptures and then also such as Paul doth testifie not to be empty and superfluous but a faithfull token and pledge of spirituall grace But presently after hee addes Christ hath promised the grace of the holy Ghost not for the expiating of sins but for the right governing of the Church Thus much also is yeelded by Chemnitius whom yet Bellarmine would make to dissent from Calvin There is saith hee a promise added that God will give grace and gifts whereby they who are lawfully called may rightly faithfully and profitably performe and execute those things which belong unto the Ministery Joh. 20. Receive the holy Ghost And afterwards againe This serious prayer saith hee used in the Ordination of Ministers because it builds upon Gods Precept and Promise is not in vaine And this is that which Paul saith The gift which is in thee by the laying on of hands Hee addes immediately If ordination be thus understood viz. of the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments the Apology of the confession at Auspurge hath long agoe declared what our Churches hold viz. that we are not unwilling to call Order a Sacrament And there it is added neither will we stick to call Laying on of hands a Sacrament For we have shewed before that the word Sacrament is of a large acception Thus Chemnitius whereby it may appeare that neither doth he dissent as Bellarmine pretends he doth from Melancthon the Author of the Apology of the confession at Auspurge though I have not now liberty to consult that Author And thus also it appeares that though Protestants deny Ordination to be a Sacrament of the same nature with Baptisme and the Supper of the Lord and that justifying and saving grace is either conferred or confirmed by it yet they doe not deny but that it may be called a Sacrament and that some interiour grace is conferred by it and that because of those very words of the Apostle which our Adversaries stand upon the gift that is in thee by the laying on of hands But Bellarmine will easily prove he saith that Ordination is a true Sacrament For saith hee the grace that is promised unto it is no common gift as Prophecy or the gift of Tongues but justifying Grace And this he proves by that Ioh. 20. Receive yee the holy Ghost For that gift which may be in the ungodly is never hee saith in the Scriptures called absolutely the holy Ghost He addes also that the gift spoken of 2 Tim. 1. 6. viz. which was given to Timothy in his Ordination was the spirit of love and of power and of a sound minde as it followes vers 7. I answer the places alledged doe not prove that justifying grace is promised or by promise annexed unto Ordination For 1. It is not true that the gift which may be in the wicked is never in the Scripture called the holy Ghost For Acts 19. 6. it is said of some that when Paul laid his hands upon them the holy Ghost came on them
Church Yea hee saith that many whose Fathers were Priests were promoted to be Popes and that they were not to be thought borne of fornication but of lawfull wedlock Cassander also acknowledgeth it to have beene but a constitution of the Church and that though for a while it was expedient yet afterwards it became a snare to many He saith that by the rigid and unseasonable exacting of this constitution most grievous and abominable scandals are in the church For that the causes which moved them in former times to make that constitution are not onely now ceased but even turned quite contrary That by this decree chastity and continency is so far from being confirmed that thereby a window may seeme to be set open unto all kinde of lust and lewdnesse And that it fares so now with some Priests that the society of their godly wives is not onely no hinderance but it is a helpe and furtherance unto them in respect of their Ecclesiasticall functions and imployments as Gregory Nazianzen testifies of his parents It remaines therefore he saith that henceforth this statute be released and that according to the custome of the ancient Church and of the Easterne Churches unto this day honest married men may be admitted to the Ministery of the Church c. There are weighty causes hee saith why this constitution should be released And he cites Panormitan a Cardinall and great Canonist observing and admonishing that experience shewes that a quite contrary effect hath followed by that Law of continency when as now they doe not live spiritually nor are pure but defiled with unlawfull copulation to their most great sinne whereas with their own wives they might live chastly That the church therefore ought to doe as a good Physician doth who if he finde by experience that the medicine doth more hurt then good hee will prescribe it no longer He goes further yet and holds that not onely they who were married before may be ordained and yet still keepe their conjugall society but also that such as are allready ordained may afterwards marry and yet still continue their Ministery though Bellarmine doth call this an errour much more grievous then the other that not onely before Ordination but even after Ordination it is lawfull to marry But surely both Scripture and reason shewes this as lawfull as the other And to returne to Cassander hee testifies that marrying after Ordination is onely forbidden by humane statute and that ancient examples doe shew that such Statutes are not precisely observed but that when the necessity of the Church doth require it they are dispensed with and therefore so it ought to be now hee saith in this case there being so great neede of it And hee gives this reason why they that are ordained should be permitted to marry because not onely no offence but much benefit is to be expected by it For that scarce one of a hundred is to be found who doth wholly abstaine from women and the people are so affected that if a Priest be a fornicatour or keepe a concubine they will either altogether condemne his Ministery or make lesse account of it and will rather suffer a Priest that is married it being now known even to the people that Marriage is honorable in all and that Whore-mongers and Adulterers God will judge Wherefore he saith if ever it were time to change an ancient custome then certainly these times call for a change of this custome though it be ancient when as all most good and religious Priests acknowledging their weakenesse and abhorring the filthinesse of continuall Fornication if they dare not doe it publikly yet privately doe marry Hee concludes that the matter being brought almost to this that a Priest must either be married or have a concubine every one must needs see that though there be some inconvenience in this Marriage yet it is to be chosen as a lesse evill then the other This was the judgement of Cassander a man of such note and eminency in his time that two Emperours viz. Ferdinand the first and Maximilian the second made choyce of him above all as a man most meete to compose if it might be the differences betwixt Protestants and them of the Church of Rome Now whereas the Marquesse saith that Protestants hold it unlawfull to make vowes of chastity it is true such vowes of chastity as are made maintained in the Church of Rome which as hath beene shewed by the testimony of Cassander prove snares and occasions of much unchastity such vowes I say Protestants doe indeed and that most justly hold unlawfull None ought to vow that which is not in his power to performe this is granted by all Now it is not in every ones power to live unmarried nor in the power of any but to whom God is pleased to give it I would that all men were even as I my selfe saith S. Paul but every man hath his proper gift of God one after this manner and another after that 1 Cor. 7. 7. And when the Disciples said If the cause of the man be so with his wife it is good not to marry our Saviour answered All men cannot receive this saying but they to whom it is given Mat. 19 10 11. And againe v. 12. having said There be Eunuches which have made themselves Eunuches for the Kingdome of Heavens sake hee addes immediately He that is able to receive it let him receive it Maldonate though hee would wrest the words another way yet hee is forced to confesse that generally all do expound them thus All are not able to performe that which you speake of viz. to be without a wife because all have not the gift of continence but onely they to whom it is given And though any see no necessity of marrying for the present yet they know not what necessity there may be of it afterwards and therefore to vow against it must needes be rash and dangerous The Apostle bids to avoide Fornication let every man have his own wife and let every woman have her own husband 1 Cor. 7. 2. And is it lawfull then for any to vow never to marry when as they know not but that thereby they shall expose themselves to the danger of Fornication Even as they of the Church of Rome by their vowes doe very few being free from Fornication as I have shewed before by the confession of Cassander and so of the Glosse upon Gratian. So also againe the Apostle speaking to the unmarried saith If they cannot containe let them marry for it is better to marry then to burne 1 Cor. 7. 9. But the vowes of chastity which the Romanists speake of and contend for presuppose that it is in any ones power to containe and that there is no feare of such burning as the Apostle speaks of And whereas the Apostle would not have any under 60. years old to be chosen into the number of widdowes though without any vow that
only in respect of infants The Marquesse it seems considered that there are expresse testimonies of Antiquity for the salvation of some of years that die unbaptized 2. And why is there not the same hope for infants Why must Baptism be more absolutely necessary for them then for others The Romanists themselves distinguish of baptisme and tell us of the baptisme of water of the Spirit and of blood or martyrdome and hold either of the two last to be available unto salvation without the first Is not God able to baptize Infants with his Spirit though they want the baptisme of water And where hath he said that he will not do it It is without doubt saith Bellarmine that true conversion doth supply the want of the baptism of water when any not through contempt but through necessity die without it Now it is without doubt that God can if he please work spiritual regeneration in Infants that are not baptized with water and that if they die without that baptisme it is on their part meerly of necessity and not of contempt And if children dying unbaptized do necessarily perish for want of baptisme then Christian parents must sorrow for the death of such children as they that have no hope whereas the Apostle forbids Christians to sorrow for the dead in that manner 1 Thess 4. 13. Bellarmine also confesseth that divers great eminent writers of the Church of Rome as Cajetan Gabriel and others have thought it not agreeable to the mercy of God that innumerable infants should perish without any fault of theirs meerly for want of that outward baptisme which it was not in their power to have And Cassander testifieth that in his time many very learned men did hold that though children died without baptism yet the desire of the Church and especially of their parents to procure them baptisme if it could have been is accepted of God and available to those children as if they had been baptized 3. The Ancients were as much for the necessity of Infants receiving the Eucharist as for the necessity of their being baptized Austine as Maldonate relates in many places makes the Eucharist so necessary as to deny that Infants can be saved without it For which opinion also the same Jesuite cites Pope Innocentius and saith that for 600. yeares it did prevail in the Church Yet the Romanists have taken leave to depart from the Ancients in this therefore in reason they may give us leave to depart from them in the other except the authority of Scripture can be proved to be against us 4. Concerning the estate of Infants dying unbaptized the Romanists themselves generally recede from the opinion of Austine whom here the Marquesse doth alledge against us For he saith that there is no middle place for Infants but that either they must inherit the kingdome of Heaven or else must endure everlasting fire and this latter he makes to belong unto all that die without baptisme But they of the Church of Rome are of another mind For they make the damned to be in one region of Hell where they are in torment and Infants that die unbaptized in another region of Hell where they suffer no pain but only the losse of Heaven and that happinesse which the Saints enjoy They have no reason therefore to urge us with Austin when as themselves do not accord with him The Church held then saith the Marquesse divers Degrees in the Ecclesiastical regiment to wit Bishops Priests Deacons Sub-deacons the Acolythe Exorcist Reader and Porter Here are eight several sorts of Ecclesiastical officers which are reckoned as so many several orders For so presently after the Marquesse addes And in the Episcopal order acknowledged divers seats of jurisdiction of positive right c. Thus he makes Episcopacie and so the rest each of them a distinct order and that as it seems of divine right But 1. for Episcopacie the School-men hold it to be no distinct order Lombard the Master of them reckons but seven distinct orders to wit all these here mentioned excert Bishops and sayes that anciently Bishops and Presbyters were the same So also Bonaventure whom the Church of Rome hath canonized for a Saint and stiles the Seraphical Doctor he also I say professedly disputing the question whether Episcopacie be an order concludes that it is not but only a dignity and that a Bishop is in that respect of like nature with an Archpresbyter or Dean an Archbishop a Patriarch and a Pope And he cites also Hugo de S. Victore who was somewhat more ancient then Lombard as being of this opinion Cassander saith that the Divines and Canonists do not agree in this whether Episcopacie be to be reckoned amongst orders But all he saith agree in this that in the Apostles time there was no difference betwixt Bishops and Presbyters but that afterward for the keeping of order and the avoiding of Schisme a Bishop was set over the Presbyters and the power of ordaining was reserved unto himonly Hierome is plaine to this purpose to wit that at first Bishops and Presbybyters were the same and he proves it by Phil. 1. 1. Act. 20. 28. Tit. 1. 5 6 7. 2. For the last five orders to wit Subdeacons Acolythe Exorcist Reader and Porter they have no foundation at all in Scripture we finde there no mention of them And Lombard confesseth that the office of Deacons and of Presbyters are by way of excellency called holy orders for that the primitive Church had onely those two and the Apostle gave precept concerning them onely So also Cassander saith it is manifest that Deacons and Presbyters are properly called holy orders for that the primitive Church had those onely And this he saith is testified by Pope Urban and noted by Chrysostome and Ambrose And as for the five lesser and inferior orders he saith that now in the Church of Rome they are altogether confused and almost abolished The Marquesse saith that anciently the Church had one Supereminent by Divine Law which was the Pope without whom nothing could be decided appertaining to the universal Church and the want of whose presence either by himself or his Legats or his confirmation made all Councels pretended to be universal unlawful 1. The name of Pope anciently was common to all Bishops Hierome calls Alipius an African Bishop Pope Alipius So also he stiles Austine in divers Epistles which he wrote unto him 2. That the Bishop of Rome to whom the name of Pope in after times came to be appropriated is Supereminent by divine Law was no part of the Ancients Creed Indeed of old the Bishops of Rome by reason of the wealth and glory of the City did live in a very pompous and stately fashion so as in their feasts to exceed Kings And thereupon there was great striving for the place when Damasas whom the Marquesse here points at as so highly honoured