argument against you That day wherein the Apostles did ordaine that Christians should weekely meete together to exercise themselues in hearing the word preached receiuing the Sacrament and giuing of Almes that same day did the Apostles ordain to be the Sabbath of Christians but the Apostle did ordaine that Christians should weekly assemble themselues vpon the first day of the weeke for the purposes before mentioned therefore the Apostle did ordaine the first day of the weeke to be the Christians Sabbath Pap. I denie the Maior for that being graunted if the Apostles did appoint moe daies in a wéeke than one for Christians to assemble themselues for the like Christian exercises by the same argument you a Non sequitur Looke the answere may likewise prooue two Sabbaths in one wéek and no doubt those Christians who liued together in the fellowship of the Apostles sold their possessions and had all thinges common b That is not their intent Act. 2.45 to the intent that they might be wholy employed in the seruice of God had moe dayes than one in a wéeke appointed for that purpose Your Minor proposition also which is that the Apostle did ordaine that Christians should assemble thēselues vpon the first day of the wéeke c. is false not warranted by either of the places of scripture by you alleaged In the 20. of the Acts the first day of the wéeke is not prescribed vnto Christians as a day whereon they ought to assemble themselues for the seruice of God but there only mentiō is made that the Disciples were assembled on the first day of the wéeke to break bread and that Paul intending to depart on the morrow continued preaching till midnight Let vs c Admit what you will yet the first of the weeke is the ordinarie appointed day admit that Saint Paul was to depart on the Tuesday and that the Christians were assembled on the Monday to breake bread and to heare Paul preach before his departure might not I in this case make as stronge an argument to prooue Monday to be the Christians Sabbath as yours is for the Sunday In the 16. Chapter of Saint Pauls 1. Epistle vnto the Corinths the Apostle doth prescribe the first day of the wéeke vnto the Corinths as a day whereon they ought to lay aside for the poore as their deuotion shall serue it is not preaching prayer or administration of Sacraments that is in this place enioyned but it is a laying aside for the poore Why doth the Apostle enioyne this contribution for the poore to be made at that time the answere followeth in the text That there be no gatherings when I come Why would the Apostle haue no gatherings when he came no doubt because hée would not haue such spirituall exercises as he determined to bestow amonge them at his returne vnto them d Then this day was not onely for collections but for spirituall exercises hindered or impeached by such collections if this were the meaning of the Apostle then is it not like that he would appoint the Sabbath for the making of such collections which is wholy e Not wholy so as no time should be spared for collections to be employed in such spirituall exercises as hée meant to vse amonge them at his returne and therefore this place would better serue a wrangler to prooue that the first day of the wéek was not appointed to be the christians Sabbath then it will serue you to the contrarie Pro. Out of this place it may be gathered that the Christians vpon the first day of the weeke did weekely assemble together for there is no time so fit for collections as generall assemblies and a weekely assembly vpon that day doth manifestly proue it to be the Sabbath Pap. You can wring no generall assemblies out of that place for the text saith Let euerie one put apart by himselfe and lay vp which argueth rather f Neither doe we imagine that all saw what euerie man gaue or tooke it from him but he himselfe layd it vp as the rest did in the cōmon purse else Paul must either gather it or tarry the gathering of it when hee came a priuate laying vp at home than a contribution in an assembly as your marginall note in the English Bible interpreteth for how can a man bée sayd to lay vp that which he doth deliuer to another in such a contribution Pro. It appeareth in the first of the Reuelation that in Saint Iohns time the first day of the weeke was called the Lords day which is as much as if hee had called it the Christians Sabbath Pap. You shall find in that Chapter that Saint Iohn was in the spirit on the Lords day whereupon you may conclude that in Saint Iohns time one day of the wéeke was called the Lords day which we doe graunt and more than that that the first day of the wéeke was then called the Lords day which would haue put you to your shifts to haue prooued out of the word yet haue you gained nothing for what consequent is this the first day of the wéeke was of the Apostles called the Lords day therefore the Iewes Sabbath is to be abolished and the first day of the wéeke is to be obserued for the Sabbath of Christians might not the first day of the wéeke be called the Lords day in regard of Christs resurrection and yet the Iewes Sabbath remaine or be abolished as other of their ceremonies were without substituting another Sabbath in place thereof Or will you rather reason thus Saint Iohn could be in the spirit but on the christians Sabbath only Ergo the first day of the wéeke is the Sabbath of christians if this be your argument you doe but clauum clauo pellere for when you shall haue prooued your antecedent by the word then will I graunt the consequent and as easily may you prooue the one as the other but let it be admitted that you can prooue by scripture that the Christians were enioyned by the Apostles to assemble themselues wéekely vpon the Sunday to ioyne together in prayer hearing the word preached yet what word haue you to prooue that g Neither doe we say neither can you proue it is all bodily labour is vnlawfull vpon that day they might well assemble in prayer vpon that day and heare 2. or 3. sermons and yet spare some time to bestowe vpon their labours and the commaundement forbiddeth labor on the seuenth day and not h The first day is now become the seuenth on the first day of the wéeke Thus you may sée while you do nodum in scirpo quaerere by séeking to prooue that by scripture which the Church doth hold by tradition how you are driuen to wrest the scripture and how weake and ridiculous your arguments be If the obseruation of the feast of Easter and other festiuall dayes prayer for the dead or the Sacrifice of the Masse had found the same entertainment
eminent day and chosen from amonge the other dayes of the weeke for the speciall seruice of the Lord so was it celebrated as an eminent day and so still kept in fresh memorie in the Churches of Asia now that this day was the first day of the weeke and no other it will bee easie to shew without shifts not onely because no other day was euer permanently kept holy but also because we may trace the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Dominica applied to this day as it were a Hare in the snow issuing out of this place of the Reuelation into all the Churches of Christendome Yea but saith your Papist Might not the first day of the wéeke be called the Lords day in regard of Christs Resurrection I say no for then it had been called the Rising day or the Resurrection day as the like dayes be namely Ascension Circumcision c. For to call it the Lords day in regard of Christs Resurrection is vtterly insensible When he demaundeth further Whether the Iewes Sabbath might not remaine or be abolished as other Ceremonies were Col. 2.16.16 without substituting another Sabbath in place thereof I answere that the Iewes Sabbath is taken away by Saint Paul so farre forth as it was ceremoniall but the morall parts thereof namely that one day in a weeke should be layd apart for spirituall meditations and exercises Exod. 23.12 and for the recreation of seruants and dum creatures was to be kept still inuiolable without any such substitution as he dreames of and so his other wranglements about bodily labour and resting the seuenth day not the first day of the weeke are cleane dasht Mat. 12.5.11 Mark 2.27 3.4 Luk. 13.14 c. Ioh. 5.8 c. 9.6.7.14 Iren. lib. 4. ca. 19. howbeit that which was the first day of the weeke is now become the seuenth day and bodily labour was neuer altogether vnlawfull no not in time of the lawe as appeareth cleerely in many places of the new Testament Now iudge you or any reasonable man else in the world whether our arguments or his answeres be weake and ridiculous as for his Tradition the more he vrgeth it the more hee confuteth himselfe and confirmeth our exposition of these three places for if the Apostles deliuered the obseruation of the Sabbath by Tradition wee may not thinke they deliuered it to some Churches and not to other some and if they deliuered it to all without exception then was it deliuered to them of Troas to the Galatians Corinthians and the Churches of Asia if to them then can it not bee denied but that these places of scripture which I haue now disputed of doe cleerely containe the practise and continuall obseruance of the Lords day as it was deliuered to these Churches by the Apostles I will not vouchsafe to answere your Papists vnpowdered talke of Iohn Caluin that worthy seruant of God and wire-whipper of popish marchants out of the house of God onely this I will say that if Iohn Caluin were not a greater mote in his eie then Popish traditions are in ours he would haue spared this idle vagarie The next point is eating blood Act. 15 2â—.29 which was forbidden in the first generall Councell the circumstance whereof you haue well set downe howbeit your Papist still calls for Scripture whereby it may be shewed him that after the decree made at Ierusalem by the Apostles it was lawfull for Christians to eate blood which hee would neuer doe if hee were learned and had read the Epistles of Saint Paul with any diligence wherefore you may stoppe his mouth for this point out of these places which I haue here quoted 1. Rom. 14.2 3 6 14 20 c. 1. Cor. 10.29 Coloss 2.16 Timothie 4.4 Tit. 1.15 Now followeth the third poynt which hangs vpon Tradition and not vpon Scripture Leui. 28. 20 Deut. 25.5 namely the forbidding of marriage within degrees of affinitie as if Leuiticus were no scripture yea but may he say Deuteronomy is scripture too as well as Leuiticus yet the brother is there commanded to raise vp seede to his brother which in Leuiticus is made vnlawfull now tell vs why you receiue the one and refuse the other here must you call for the helpe of Tradition or els lie in the dust Alas good Papist you are much deceiued for the law of Leuiticus is morall and naturally ingraffed in the hearts of all nations as appeareth euidently in the conclusion of this law in Leuiticus from the foure and twentieth verse to the end of the eighteenth Chapter for if this Law had beene peculiar for the Iewes there is no reason why the Canaaniticall nations should bee punished so seuerely as there it is described for the non obseruance of the same as for the other law of Deuteronomy it is an exception or dispensation in that particular case for the common weale of the Iewes wherein God had a speciall care of the first borne and his inheritance againe being repugnant to nature and to the explication thereof twice told in Leuiticus Cap. 18.16 cap. 20.21 it might not continue longer vnrepealed Touching the example of the incestuous Corinthian which you propound it will sticke better to your Papists ribbes then he is aware of for how can that fornication be vnheard of among the Gentiles which a man committeth with such a one as hee may lawfully marrie if then this Corinthian might lawfully marry his mother in law verily single copulation with her could not be so abominable as that the very Gentiles could not abide it should be once named amongst them and if single copulation of the mother and sonne in law was so much abhorred then was it vnlawfull they should marrie and so the law of God in Leuiticus is confirmed and so indeed your Papist gently confesseth in these words the law of the Corinths would permit no such mariage as may be gathered out of the text c. The fourth poynt followeth namely that it cannot bee shewed by scripture thas it is a greater offence in a Christian to haue many wiues then it was in Dauid howbeit we read in Scripture that God gaue him his masters wiues into his bosome 2. Sam. 12.8 Rom. 4.15 Nulla lege prohibebatur August contr Faust lib. 22. cap. 47. Matth. 19.4 c. 1. Cor. 7.2 c. Eph. 5.31 if there be no transgression where there is no law as Paul saith then verily Polygamy being neither cleerely forbidden by any law nor reprehended by any Prophet from the beginning of the world to the comming of Christ it must follow that it was eyther no transgression at all in the fathers or a farre lesse transgression then it is in Christians whom Christ Iesus himselfe and the holy Apostle Saint Paul hath so manifestly instructed that nothing can be more euident Now touching the fift and last point of punishing theft with death it is confessed by your Papist that
than one his answere hath no colour or shewe of reason for though euerie day in the weeke had beene so appointed yet had they not beene all Sabbaths vnlesse they had weekely continued as the first day did from weeke to weeke till Saint Iohns banishment at what time still wee finde that day kept holy and dedicated to the Lord as appeareth by the name which the holy Ghost giueth it in the Reuelation Cap. 1.13 Againe where he saith That the first Christians sold their possessions to the intent they might wholy bestow themselues vpon the seruice of God It would be knowne by what tradition or inspiration he found that out seeing the scriptures informe vs Act. 2.45 that their intent was to supply the necessitie of their poore brethren I trow the other Iewes that were to attend dayly vpon the morning and euening houres of praier and sacrifice did not vnload themselues of their possessions moreouer this lawe and sale of possessions though it were vsed at Ierusalem yet was it not in force in Galatia and Achaia and other Churches of the Gentiles 1. Cor. 16.2 Gal. 6 6 c. which had of their owne to put aside and lay vp for the poore And touching the Minor your Papist sayth that the Troiane Christians were assembled the first day of the wéeke to breake bread but not appointed so to doe by the prescription of the Apostles belike they came together by hap hazard or by their owne appointment howbeit hee that planted the Church of Troas cannot be so forgetfull as to leaue euery man separately to himselfe and not to appoint when they should assemble themselues for the continuall watring of that which was planted Act. 20.7 now to note what time that was Saint Luke names the first day of the weeke otherwise there is no reason why it should bee mentioned moreouer whereas Paul and his companie came to Troas the second day of the weeke and tarried there iust seuen dayes yet no day of assembly is registred but this one onely day and yet we may not think that Paul and his companie lay idle sixe daies together and forgat the worke of their calling yea but let vs admit saith your Papist that Paul was to depart on the Tuesday and that the Christians were assembled on the Monday c. Yea marry then should we be wise men but the Disciples of Troas met not to heare Paul preach for most of them had heard him preach before sixs dayes together but to breake bread which they would haue done though Paul had not beene amongst them and therefore this supposition is cloudie and riculous Touching the place to the Corinthians your Papist saith that Saint Paul doth not prescribe the first day of the week for prayer preaching and administration of Sacraments but for a laying aside for the poore according to euery mans deuotion and I graunt all this to bee true for those holy exercises were inioyned the churches of Galatia and Achaia when they were first planted and so was the collection for their owne poore for this collection for the Saimes at Ierusalem was extraordinarie but that the Apostle Paul would bee so troublesome as not to content himselfe that this collection should be made as their other collections were vpon their ordinarie meeting day but to appoint another day weeke by weeke to the hinderance of their seuerall callings is vtterly incredible nay see further I pray you how your learned Papist doubleth the power of the argument which he goeth about to weaken for when he asketh why the Apostle inioyneth this collection to be made vpon that day and answereth himselfe out of the text that there be no gatherings when I come and then asketh againe why the Apostle would haue no gatherings when he came and answereth with a no doubt because he would not haue such spirituall exercises as hee determined to bestow among them hindered by such collections what doth he else but confesse that the first day of the weeke was the day that Paul purposed to keepe holy at his comming and therefore would not haue that day bestowed vpon collections when he came but before his comming otherwise if hee had meant to bestow spirituall blessings so plentifully among them vpon any other day then gatheringes made vpon that day could not hinder him Yea but if these collections were hinderances to the spirituall exercises of the Sabbath then it followeth that the first day of the week wherin Paul would haue these collections made was not appointed to be the Christians Sabbath Well wrangled but howsoeuer this extraordinarie collection inioyned by Saint Paul might hinder Saint Paul himselfe that preached at Troas till midnight nay till the dawning of the next day Rom. 15.29 and vsed to come with abundance of the blessing of the Gospell of Christ yet their owne ordinarie ministerie being farre lesse plentifull could not be so easily hindered Apol. 2. and therefore wee read in Iustine Martyr that in his time beside preaching and administring the Sacraments collections were made vpon this verie day in Christian Churches One wrangle more remaineth against the force of this place to the Corinths namely that no generall assembly can be wrung out of it because the text saith Let euerie one put apart by himselfe and lay vp which argueth a priuat laying vp at home for a man cannot be sayd to lay vp that which he deliuereth to another Well wrangled againe but what call you this a gathering and is this kinde of laying vp at euerie mans owne home a sufficient dispatch of all gathering so as there should be no gathering at all when the Apostle should come himselfe amongst them Wherefore little wringing will serue to prooue that this laying vp is not meant of euerie mans owne purse or cupbord at home which might be done any other day as well as the first of the weeke but of some publique Chest or Boxe prouided for euerie mans free beneficence as euerie particular man himselfe found himselfe able and willing Now followeth the place of the Reuelation where Saint Iohn saith that he was in the spirite on the Lords day or Cap. 1.10 Psa 74.16 as the Rhems Testament translates it the Dommicall day Out of which we learne first that albeit all the dayes of the weeke are the Lords yet this day is so called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as being a more excellent or eminent day than the rest and so consequently a day consecrated to the seruice of the Lord. Secondly we learne that this day was famously knowne by the name of Lords day or Dominicall day in the Churches of Asia Reuel 1.4 to whome Saint Iohn dedicated his Reuelation for it had been to no purpose for him to tell them that hee was in the spirite on the Lords day if they knew not what day that was and how it was seuered by that name from the rest of the weeke and therefore as it was an
Canons c These Canons are in writing of the Apostles and to this effect could I alledge the testimony of all ancient fathers and doctors as it were with one mouth so that if you should deny S. Iohns gospell I could vse none other d The more vnwise you proofe against you for the one then I can for the other which is the testimony and consent of antiquitie and e Surety you are deceyued surely by denying of traditions you haue brought your selfe into a very intricate Dilemma for eyther you must proue f That is soone done by scripture that the first day of the wéeke ought to bee kept holy as the Sabbath of Christians c. and grant that all the ancient fathers who were Papists and held many things by tradition were damned g If they were Papists they were heretickes but they were neyther of both heretickes or else that you are hereticks your selfe The Answere NOw followeth as it were by the way a blind inartificiall proofe of Traditions out of the authoritie of men Lib. 3. cap. 2. Lib. 3. cap. 1. whereof Irenaeus is the first yet Irenaeus speaks not of Traditions but with this Preface non per alios dispositionem salutis nostrae cognouimus quam per eos per quos Euangelium peruenit ad nos quod quidem tunc preconiauerunt postea vero per Deivoluntatem in Scripturis nobis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futurum We haue knowne the manner or order of our saluation by none other men then by those by whom the Gospell came vnto vs which then indeed they preached and afterward by the will of God deliuered to vs in the scriptures to be vnto vs the foundation and piller of our faith Now hauing layd this foundation in the first Chapter and concluded withall that all heretickes dissent from the Scriptures hee begins the next Chapter after this sort Cum enim ex scripturis arguuntur in accusacionem conuertuntur ipsarum scripturarum quasi non recte habeant neque sint ex authoritate quia variè sint dictae quia non possit ex his inueniri veritas ab his qui nesciant traditionem For when they are conuinced by the scriptures they fall to accusing the Scriptures as if they were not 〈…〉 set downe or not of sufficient authoritie and because things are diuersly spoken and because the trueth cannot be found in them by those which know not the tradition These hereticks are as like the Papists as if the one had bin spued out of the others mouth I trow you vnderstand who they be that call the scriptures of God dead incke a dead and a dumbe thing dumbe iudges the blacke Gospell inckehorne diuinitie a nose of waxe c. if you know them not reade Iewels Apology and there you shall find them Part. 4. cap. 19 di 1. Sectione 23. your owne Papist saith that the Scriptures without the helpe of church fathers and councels are the fountaine of all heresie and atheisme thus heretickes doe and haue done alwaies quia ex scripturis arguuntur saith Irenaeus and so eyther the scripture or their heresie must needs fall But to proceede Irenaeus tels you why these hereticks would not be ruled by the scriptures namely because Paul saith sapientiam loquimur inter perfectos and this is Bellarmines owne reason for vnwritten verities borrowed as you see 1. Cor. 2.6 De verbo Dei non scripto lib. 4. cap. 11. Tertullian of these old heretickes and confuted by Tertullian in his Prescriptions but thus the spirite of Antichrist goeth on still in these dayes as it did in Irenaeus and Tertullians time to make way to his owne dreames It was full time for our Papist here to draw the Readers mind awry to Iohn Caluin and I wot not what appeales and imaginations and braines and such like floures of popish rhetoricke otherwise it had bin easie to see that hee and his friendes are the sonnes and heires of Valentinus Marcion Cerinthus Basilides and Carpocrates all of them or some of them as Irenaeus teacheth vs and this may be yet better seene in that Irenaeus being driuen from scripture Iren. lib. 1. cap. 23. 24. lib. 3. cap. 2. which these heretickes contemned to Traditions which before they seemed to allow of he can no way fasten vpon them neither by Scripture nor Traditions vnlesse they might be masters of both as being wiser men in their owne conceites then eyther the Apostles that deliuered them or the Bishops that kept them Now iudge who bee the heires of these heretickes Iohn Caluin as this Papist prateth or the Pope and his dependants whose religion is called by Saint Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is 2. Thes 2 7 8 Ni◠Cusanus de auth eccles supra contrascript Albert. Pighius eccles hierarch lib. 6.13 such a mysterie as will be ruled by no law a mysterie of lawlesse iniquitie and the Pope himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a lawlesse man such as will stoope neyther to Scripture nor Tradition one of his Cardinals saith Nulla sunt Christi praecepta nisi quae per ecclesiam pro talibus accepta sunt There are no precepts of Christ but these which the Church accounteth to be such so the Church of Rome is aboue the Scripture And another Champion saith Papa virtualiter est tota ecclesia the Pope is in power the whole Church and so the Pope is aboue the Church Thus the Pope must be first the Church must be next and the scripture giuen of God by inspiration Must haue the third place must consistere in tertijs and be glad of such roome as these great masters will afford it Quapropter vndique resistendum est saith Irenaeus wherfore wee must set our selues against them euerie way If scripture will not serue we vse tradition and if both be contemned wee vse all other meanes that may bee thought of to draw them ad conuersionem veritatis This is Irenaeus his conclusion whole discourse in this Chapter which makes nothing at all for Popish traditions which are not alleaged as witnesses and backes to the truth of the scripture nor yet against such as denye the perfection of the worde written Epiphanius is next who if he had sayd Oportet traditione abuti We must abuse tradition our Papist and his friends had been beholding to him but Epiphanius saith else where That he gathered the truth of the doctrine of God Ex vniuersa scriptura out of the whole scripture to be an anchor-hold vnto vs Heres 69. Epip Anchor and in the beginning of his Anchorate thus we read De vide vobis scribam quum requiratis vos fratres nostri ea quae spectant ad vestram salutem ex diuina sancta scriptura firmum fundamentum fidei de patre filio spiritu sancto de reliqua vniuersa in Christo salute de resurrectione inquam
the other why we doe not exclude them out of our Church as you haue excluded them out of yours Pro. You shall find in the Fathers as many places against those points of doctrine as you shall find for them and besides that many bookes fathered vpon the fathers are bastards Pa. It is a great argument of a y It will at length pull the crowne from your Popes head as desperate as you make it desperate cause when we sée the authoritie of any authenticke writer so plaine and direct against vs as it cannot be auoyded by any glosse or colourable interpretation to seeke to euade by carping at contrarietie in the same writer and in so doing wée shall shew our selues more desirous to obscure a truth than to bring it to light touching your last obiection I am content vpon any reasonable cause of challenge to forbeare to vouch any booke that you shall suspect of bastardy Thus haue I answered all your cauils and calumniations obiected against the auncient doctors which is your last refuge for when you cannot tell how by some cunning interpretation or glosse to vnloose the knot your manner is to cut it in sunder and to breake away The Answere WEe are come now to a great deale of void talke of the errors of the fathers and doctors and Austines retracting and wauering in the doctrine of purgatorie The first is confessed not simply but vnder hope that wee will also confesse that the doctors were not onely admired for their learning pietie but accepted also for the principall workemen next vnto the Apostles which cannot be confessed without iniurie to the Euangelists and other that had extraordinary graces and power from aboue a long time after the Apostles Iren. lib. 2. 28. lib. 5. 1. Eusebius histo eccles lib. 3. 34 lib. 5. 7. 9. as appeareth in Irenaeus and Eusebius besides that we may not thinke a few fathers whose writings remaine extant to be excellenter workemen than a thousand other whose writings are lost and their names forgotten in the world These few doctors whose bookes wee haue were worthy men yet one more worthy than another and no one of them nor all of them together to be preferred to those that were before them And heere let it be obserued that Tertullian as he is a Montanist is set down for one of of these admirable doctors of the Church for he erred not in the case of second marriages while he was a Catholicke doctor but when he was an hereticke and fallen from the Church nay see further how intollerably hee defaceth the fathers when he goeth about to magnifie for if they looke vpon them to handle high mysteries beyond their capacitie and were caried in heat against heresie to the contrary extreame verily their learning and piety may well be doubted of and if they could not see the trueth vnlesse it were called into question determined by the Church there is no great reason why they should be so highly admired and had in reuerence What man why say you so the doctors had their errors and imperfections no otherwise then Saint Peter had whom Saint Paul withstood to his face and will you not admire and reuerence Saint Peter Yes sir that I will for wee speake not here of errors in liuing which neuer any but Christ was free from but errors in writing whereof Saint Peter was neuer guiltie and therefore bethinke you how this suspicious and irreuerend calling of Saint Peters credite into question to cloake the fathers errours withall can be the part of a good Catholicke we beleeue Saint Peter neuer erred in any thing he hath written but you shal hardly driue vs with all your wharting to beleeue the like of our new writers or your old doctors much lesse the autors of prophane Histories but why keepes this man all this doe trow ye would he haue vs pinne our religion vpon the sleeues of the doctors and ciuill Historiographers too will nothing else please him Yes hee tels you he will be content if you will credit an vniforme consent and harmonie of diuers doctors producing themselues for eye witnesses and a thousand other like witnesses with them well when I heare those thousand other speake then he shall haue my answere In the meane while haue we commended to him and tell him that I cannot beleeue a million of thousands when they say nothing and heere I beseech you note how his wit ebbes and his tongue flowes beyond the bankes of all possibilitie they write saith he that praying and sacrificing for the dead was vniuersally obserued in all Churches they were present themselues and hard and saw it done and thousands moe with them c. Quid audio Did they heare and see it done in all Churches vniuersally this is no lie my Lord and that 's all that I will say to it Now touching Austine we so much the more admire him in that he retracted his former errors as many as hee could well-obserue in his owne workes neither doe wee doubt but that he would haue retracted more if he had liued longer could haue considered deliberately of all that hee had written howbeit he wrote diuers bookes after his retractations neither could he so narrowly looke into euery corner of his workes but that many things worthy to be retracted slipt through his fingers to be short his retractations do euidently shew that as he was a good and an honest minded man so he altered in opinion as hee grew in yeeres and was better instructed by long experience and trauell in diuinitie and so consequently that he is so farre forth to bee receiued as he buildeth vpon the foundation of the canonicall scripture such building will stand without retracting all other doctrine as it begins in man so man may end it neither can it stand any longer than man listeth to vphold it This wauering in the matter of Purgatorie our Papist denieth impudently cryeth in an agony shew me where Saint Austine doth deny purgatorie as I haue shewed you he hath affirmed it alas he hath shewed Austines affirmation out of the counterfeit sermons and Homilies neuer either written or preached by Saint Austine which is a most simple kind of shewing but why doth he aske where Austine denieth purgatorie and neuer asketh one word where he doubteth of it These be fine fellowes that aske after such points as they thinke they can hold talke of and can suffer other things to passe by as if they saw him not Howbeit our Protestant heere cites a place out of Austines Sermons De verbis Apostoli which is little to the purpose Serm. 4. yet notwithstanding where our Papist answereth that he knoweth no third place for infants but either heauen or hell what doth he else but disclaime his limbus puerorum which Pope Innocent the third Cap. maiores extra de bapt and most of the schoolemen place aboue purgatorie and will needs haue it to be
denie that which our Sauiour Christ hath affirmed Nemo venit ad me nisi pater meus traxerit eum No man commeth vnto me vnlesse my Father shall drawe him yet we doe say with Saint Austine that this a yet Austine elsewhere makes it to be more than perswading looke the answere drowsing is as the pleasant pasture draweth the shéepe and not a violent drawing as a Beare drawne to the stake man can doe no good workes except he be drawne vnlesse he be inspired from aboue but being b No maruell for then we are regenerate and iustified alreadie yet haue wee then no freedome to refuse so drawne and inspired it is then in the election of mans frée-will either to be obedient therevnto or else to refuse the same and to quench the spirite as Saint Paul calleth it Diabolus dat consilium saith S. Austine sed Deo auxiliante nostrum est eligere vel repudiare quod suggerit Homil. 12. If there be no power in man to repent or to doe good workes c Because God by that means worketh repentance in vs. 2. Tim. 2 25. how is it that the Scriptures doe so often exhort vs to repentance newnesse of life and good workes and threaten gréeuous punishments to those that will not doe that which as you say they d The fault is in themselues not in God This is the verie obiection of the Pelagians answered by Saint Austine lib. de grat lib. arbitr cap. 16. cannot do For your full satisfaction herein read Saint Austine sermone 7. de verbis Apostoli Irenaeus libro 4. cap. 72. Saint Hilarie vpon 118. Psal Epiphanius Tom. 1. Haeres 16. The Answere ABsolute freewill either to good or euill is hardly to be found vpon the earth yet our papist heere makes as though he had found it and might hold it by Saint Austine though Saint Iames and Saint Paul say no howbeit mans freewill may begge his bread well inough if it haue no better friends then Saint Austine for where that good father in his Tractats vpon Iohn Tract 26. saith that the father draweth vs vnto Christ as a greene bough draweth a sheepe you must vnderstād that this green bough resembleth our faith as our Sauiour expoundeth it Ioh. 6.64 c. Ad simplician lib. 1. quaest 2. and Saint Austine else where is bold to say Quis habet in potestate sua vt sua mens tali viso tangatur quid voluntas moueatur ad fidem Who hath it in his owne power that his mind might be touched with such a sight whereby his will may be moued vnto faith Againe you must presuppose that the sheepe is hungry and is not afraid of him that holdeth offereth that bough otherwise he may hold it till his armes ake Matth 5.6 1. Iohn 4.18 Ephes 3.12 and euen so it fareth with the sheepe of Christ for they are first brought to hunger and thirst after righteousnesse and to haue the loue of God which casteth out feare before they will regard the pleasant pasture that is offered vnto them and therfore the same father else where saith that the Lord draweth men De correct gratia ad Valantin cap. 14. Ibid. cap. 2. Suis voluntatibus sed quas ipse operatus est By their wils but yet such as himselfe hath wrought in them And againe Ideo volunt quia Deus operatur vt sic velint Therefore they will because God worketh that they will say so Besides this the sheepe is naturally drawen to feede vpon a greene bough whē she is hungry but our hunger after righteousnes is not naturall but Gods extraordinary and supernaturall blessing Matth. 5.6 which may not be confounded with nature vnlesse we will shake hands with Pelagius the hereticke and yet if you consider of that generall flying power to choose or refuse good or euill which the papists call grace for feare of Pelagianisme you shall hardly discerne it from nature and therefore well saith Saint Austine against Pelagius and Celestius and the papists their successors Lib. 1. cap. 10. Non satis est confiteri qualemcunque gratiam sed illam qua per sua deamur qua trahamur qua detur ipsum bonum It is not inough to confesse any kind of grace but that by which wee are perswaded by which we are drawne and by which the good it selfe is giuen Touching the place in Austines Homilies I answere in a word that eligere and repudiare consililum diaboli is nostrum the one by nature Ephes cap. 2.23 the other by grace by nature we are the children of wrath and walke after the counsell of the deuill but by grace wee haue some freedome from that captiuitie yet would I wish you to haue a more particular regard of this allegation man saith your papist can doe no good worke except he be drawen that 's true and inspired from aboue that 's true to and what then marry then after this drawing and inspiring it is in the election of mans free will either to obey or refuse and how is this prooued marry you shall heare it proued out of Austines Homilies Diabolus dat consilium Homil. 12. sed Deo auxiliante nostrum ect eligere vel repudiare quod suggerit The deuill giueth vs counsaile but it is in our power the Lord assisting vs to chuse or refuse that which he suggesteth Is not this a worthy proofe the question being of Gods worke in vs Cap. 3. he answereth that the deuill doth counsell vs and we by the freedome of our wils may either eligere or repudiare quod suggerit what dare you accuse Saint Austine of so hainous a crime they be Austines very words But by your leaue you must prooue that before it will be beleeued I am sure Saint Austine would not say that we may choose that which the deuill entiseth vs vnto by the helpe of God indeed the regenerate man may repudiare consilium diaboli by the helpe of God but I am sure God will not helpe him to yeeld to his suggestions The child of God that 's borne againe hath freewill in some measure but to good not to euill and so haue the wicked but to euill and not to good and both their wils are therefore free because neither the one is constrained to that which is good nor the other to that which is euill but farre was it from Saint Austines thought that God should affoord any helpe to choose the councels and suggestions of the deuill As for quenching the spirit 1. Thes 5.19 which Saint Paul somewhere speakes of I answere that the Greeke word signifieth keeping vnder or shaking as wel as extinguishing so the word quenching is sometime taken in our English tongue secondly the same Apostle saith else where Eph. 4.30 greeue not the spirit which may well be interpreted slake not or quench not or keepe not downe the power of the spirit yet it