needlesse which God appointeth to be done The replie Like as nobles and magistrates bring vs to the presence of an earthly king euen so doe saintes by their holy praiers bring vs to the presence and fauour of God the king of heauen The answere Saint Ambrose shall answere as who precisely and fully resolueth this question These are his wordes Ideo ad regem pertribunos aut comites itur quia homo vtique est rex nescit quibus debeat remp credere ad dominū autem quem vtique nihil latet omnium enim merita nouit promerendum suffragatore non opus est sed mente deuota Vbicunque enim talis locutus fuerit ei respondebit illi We are therefore brought to the presence of kinges by Lords and officers because the king is a man and knoweth not to whom he may commit his realme But to win Gods fauour from whō nothing is hid for he knoweth what euery man is meet to haue we need no spokesman but a deuout minde For wheresoeuer such a one speaketh to God God will answere him And this answere of S. Ambrose is consonant to the holy scripture For Christ himselfe saith Come vnto me all ye that are weary and laden and I will ease you Againe we must not iudge what is the wil of God by the similitudes of earthly thinges departed through sinne but by his sacred word reuealed from heauen The 2. obiection God saith by his prophet that though Moses and Samuel stood before him and praied for the people yet woulde not hee heare them Whereupon we may gather that saintes vse to pray for vs and that God heareth their praiers though neither at all times nor for all persons The answere I say first that conditionall propositions proue nothing but when the condition is put I say secondly that by popish doctrine Moses and Samuel did not then stand before God and consequently they did not then pray for the people For as the papists hold they were in Limbo vntill Christes ascension I say thirdly that the meaning of the text is no other then this to wit that if there were any man liuing so zealous as Moses and Samuel who shuld pray for that people yet would not God graunt his request This interpretation is most certaine as may most euidently be gathered out of these wordes of Ezechiel Though these three men Noah Daniel and Iob were among them they should deliuer but their owne soules by their righteousnesse As if he had said thus though most godly men Noah Iob and Daniel were now liuing togither and shoulde pray for this wicked people yet woulde not I heare them By which wordes it is manifest that God both before in Ieremie and now in Ezechiel speaketh of the praiers of the liuing for Daniel was now with Ezechiel aliue in captiuity and yet doth the scripture speake of them all indifferently The third conclusion To pray to be holpen for the merites of Saints departed is very superstitious and plaine diabolicall I prooue it because Christ is the lambe that taketh away the sins of the world because Christ is our aduocate the reconciliation for our sins because Christ only Christ is the mediatour between God vs Because Christ is our high priest the author of our saluatiō because Christ hath offered himself a sacrifice for our sins hath therewith sanctified vs for euer because Christ and onely Christ is hee in whose name wee must be saued Because Christ is hee in whose name we shall receiue whatsoeuer wee aske Because Christ is he through whose merites wee haue peace in God Because Christ is he that suffered for vs that we might be the righteousnesse of God in him Finally because the spirite of God enforceth the papistes themselues to conclude their publique praiers in this maner per dominum nostrum Iesum Christum through the merites of our Lord Iesus Christ. The obiection The fathers of the olde testament did often alledge and oppose against Gods wrath the names and merites of the holie patriarches Remember thy seruantes Abraham Isaac and Iacob For thy seruaunt Dauids sake refuse not the face of thine annointed Why may not wee therefore stand vpon the merites of Christes deere mother and of others his holy saintes The answere I answere that these and like inuocations very frequent in the scriptures do not depend vpon the merites of Gods saints but vpon his couenant and promise made to them and their posteritie So saith holy Moses Remember Abraham Isaac and Iacob thy seruantes to whom thou swarest by thine own selfe and saidst vnto them I will multiply your seed in which wordes he opposeth not their merites but Gods othe and promise So saith Salomon O Lord God of Israel thou hast kept with thy seruaunt Dauid my father that thou hast promised to him for thou spakest with thy mouth and hast fulfilled it with thine hand In which wordes holy Salomon vrgeth Gods promise not the merites of his father Dauid So saith God himselfe to Isaac dwell in this land and I will be with thee and will blesse thee and I will performe the othe which I sware to Abraham thy father Loe hee remembreth and respecteth his owne othe but not Abrahams merites No no for as I haue prooued alreadie copiously the most holy saintes in heauen are rewarded farre aboue their deserts and merites It is I say not for the merites of the godly but for Gods holy couenant made with them that God dealeth mercifully with their posterity For thus is it written in Gods own book howbeit the Lord will not destroie the house of Dauid because of the couenant that he made with Dauid because he had promised to giue a light to him and to his sonnes for euer The fourth conclusion The honor due to saints in heauen and which they require is not religious inuocation or adoration but holy imitation here on earth I proue it because God will not giue his honor to any other I am the Lord saith he this is my name and my glorie will I not giue to another And that inuocation is the peculiar worship and honour due to God S. Paul declareth euidently in these words for whosoeuer shall cal vpon the name of the Lord shall bee saued but howe shall they call on him in whome they haue not beleeued Austen prooueth this conclusion effectually in sundrie places of his works Non sit nobis religio inquit cultus hominum mortuorum Infra honorandi sunt propter imitationem non adorandi propter religionem Let not saith S. Austen the worship of dead men be our religion they are to be worshipped for imitation but not to bee adored for religion Againe in another place Nos autem martyribus nostris non templa sicut Diis sed memorias sicut hominibus mortuis quorū apud deum viuunt spiritus fabricamus nec ibi erigimus
learned and ancient father to teach vs to adore saints religiously for ciuilly I graunt it may be done is to induce vs to erre with Eue. S. Ambrose is consonant to Epiphanius as who hath these expresse wordes Age numquid tam demens est aliquis aut salutis suae immemor vt honorificentiam regis vindicet comiti cum de hac re si qui etiam tractare fuerint inuenti iure vt rei damnentur maiestatis isti se non putant reos qui honorem nominis Dei deferunt creaturae relicto domino conseruos adorant quasi sit aliquid plus quod reseruetur Deo Go to is any man so mad or so carelesse of his life that he will giue to a Lord the honour of the king or soueraigne when such as are knowne to deale in such a matter are iustly condemned of treason and yet these men doe not thinke themselues guiltie who giue the honour of Gods name to a creature and leauing God adore their felow-seruants as though there were any thing els reserued for God Out of these words I note first that S. Ambrose after hee had sharpely reprooued such as worshipped images affirmeth them to forsake God that adore his saintes their fellow-seruantes I note secondly that such as adore Gods creatures be no lesse guiltie of treason against God then they that rebel against their earthly prince I note thirdly that religious worship is so proper to God as if it be giuen to his creatures nothing is reserued for himself S. Augustine agreeth iumpe with S. Epiphanius and S. Ambrose and vttereth his minde plainly in these wordes Non sit nobis religio cultus hominum mortuorum quia si pie vixerunt non sic habentur vt tales quaerant honores sed illum à nobis coli volunt quo illuminante laetantur meriti sui nos esse consortes Let not the worship of dead men be our religion for if they liued well they are not of that account that they seek such honour but they would haue vs to worship him by whose inlightning they reioice that we be their fellow-seruants in well doing The good Iew Mardocheus would not adore Haman the kings lieutenant and that not of pride malice or presumption but lest he should giue that to man which was due to God alone I say secondly that there is great disparitie betweene the adoring of a footestoole and adoring before a footestoole for your owne pope Gregorie the great sharply reproued and bitterly condemned the worshipping of Images and for all that allowed prayer and worship done before the same I say thirdly that the place truely translated is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Hebrew Bow downe your selues at the footstoole of his feet he is holie so that the sence is not to adore the temple which is meant by the word Footestoole but to adore and worshippe God in his temple at Ierusalem the place which God had appointed for his worship and therefore it is not said It is holy but He is holy Yea so is it also in the greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because he is holy I say fourthly that Saint Augustine and Saint Hierome doe expound this text of Christs sacred humanitie which is as the footestoole of his diuinitie These are Saint Hieromes expresse wordes Multae sunt de scabello opiniones sed hic propheta corpus dominicum dicit in quo maiestas diuinitatis tanquam super scabellum stat There are many opinions of the footestoole but the prophet heere vnderstandeth Christs body or humanitie in which his diuinitie standeth as vpon a stoole Yea S. Austen was so far from the opinion of our late Papists and Iesuites that hee was troubled howe to vnderstand this text and that for this respect onely because it seemed to command him to adore some creature which he durst not doe these are his owne words Terra scabellum pedum meorum anceps factus sum timeo adorareterram ne damnet me qui fecit coelum terramâ—rursum timeo non adorare scabellum pedum Domini mei quia Psalmus mihi dicit adorate scabellum pedum eius The earth is my footestoole I am doubtful what to doe I feare to adore the earth least hee condemne me that made both heauen and earth On the other side I feare not to adore his footestoole because the Psalme saith adore yee his footstoole Loe S. Austen found in the prophet Esay that the earth was Gods footstoole and hee knew well that it was not lawfull to adore creatures and consequently neither the earth least he should be damned in so doing as himselfe here saith and therefore was hee sore troubled what to vnderstand by the word footstoole in the Psalme But if he had been a Romish Iesuite hee woulde neuer haue stumbled at any such thing Whether therefore we interprete the word footestoole by the literall Hebrew phrase or with S. Austen and S. Hierome it will not follow thereupon that any pure creature may be adored I say anie pure creature because Christes body or humanitie is a creature but not a pure creature For the vnspeakable hypostaticall vnion maketh it to subsist in the person of God by which Christ is aswel God as man The fift conclusion The inuocation this day common in the Romish Church is the selfe same which the Gentiles in old time did vse when they did inuocate their false Gods I prooue it because they haue peculiar saintes for their seuerall necessities to wit S. Loy for their horses S. Anthonie for their pigges S. Roch for the pestilence S. Stephen for the night S. Iohn for the day S. Nicholas for their studies S. George for their warres S. Cosma and Damiais for their sores S. Apolonia for their teeth S. Agnes for their virginity and others innumerable for the like end They erect churches to their saintes they frame images to them they carrie their images about in procession they coÌ„secrate altars to them they dedicate holy daies to them they make vowes in their honour they offer presentes to their altars and images they bestowe more y t way in one houre then on poore folkes in a whole yeare they place lampes tapers torches and lightes before their images and thinke them the most happie that so bestow the most They kneele downe before their images they touch them they embrace them they kisse them they speake vnto them they intreate them as if they were yet liuing Yea they seeme to passe the folly and impietie of the Gentiles They ascribe their saluation to their saintes and to such saintes as of whose sainthood wee may well stand in doubt They inuocate Campion Sherwin Ballard Hart Nelson and the rest of that seditious faction Alphonsus the Iesuite and late rector of the Englishe Colledge in Rome caused the organes to be sounded and all the Students to come to the Chappel and himself hauing on his backe the white
is not in another yet god is neither circumscriptiuely nor definitiuely in place because he is euerie where And Damascenus agreeth with Aquinas affirming that angels while they are in heauen are not on earth I say secondly that the angels as S. Paul saith are indeed Gods ministring spirits sent forth for their sakes which shalbe heires of saluation And the angels as Moses saith went vp and down by Iacobs ladder which reached from earth to heauen that the angels as Daniel writeth are defeÌ„ders of y e church vnder Christ for that purpose are sent vnto vs. But neuerthelesse they are but in one onely place at once while they see what is done in one place they are ignorant what befalleth to another for they passe to fro from affaires to affaires from place to place from person to person from heauen to earth and from earth to heauen again according to their appointed seruice so that no one angel doth or can know the hundreth part of our petitions much lesse the saints in heauen who haue no such appointed ministerie The third replie The saints are equall to the angels and are the sons of god since they are the children of the resurrection therfore they are present and see our affaires euen as doe the angels The answere I answer that the time by Christ named is after y e resurrection neither is the equalitie he speaks of general but particular to wit in that y e saints shal haue no more need or vse of mariage then y e angels But that the saints shalbe sent as the angels for y e seruice of the church the ministerie of the faithful it is nether recorded here nor in any other place of y e scripture For Christ here only answered to the captious Saduces who denying the resurrection asked whose wife she should be in y e resurrection that had bin maried to 7. brethren al dying without issue The 4. replie The angels in heauen reioyce when sinners repent heere on earth which they could neuer do if they did not vnderstand our affaires our prayers and our penitent hearts The answere I say first that Saints in heauen do not know what we doe on earth for as the Prophet recordeth Abraham was ignorant what the Israelites did and Iacob knew them not I say secondly that the text doth not say that the angels in heauen reioyce but simplie that the angels reioyce and so the reioycing which the text speaketh of may bee vnderstoode to bee done on earth while the angels are present I say thirdly that the angels which are appointed for our seruice on earth and thereby know our affaires on earth may make relation thereof in heauen and so the whole companie of angels in heauen may reioyce thereat together or it may please God sometime to reueale the conuersion of some sinner to the saints or angels in heauen But hereupon will it neuer be concluded that either the saints or the angels do knowe the secrets of our hearts or our petitions vniuersally as is alreadie said The fift replie To do myracles is as proper to God as to know the secrets of our hearts therefore since God hath communicated the one to his seruants so may he without contradiction do the other The answere I say first that God himselfe did euer worke the myracles and did onely vse the ministerie of his apostles and seruants in the externall act I say secondly that God can hath de facto reuealed the secrets of mens hearts euen to his holie prophets yet hee neuer did that generally but in measure at certaine times to speciall persons for the good of his church The sixt replie Although God cannot giue anie inherent qualities to the saints in heauen by which they may knowe all the desires and prayers of the liuing heere on earth because no creature is capable thereof yet may God from time to time reueale all such prayers to his Saints The answere I say first that it is not impossible for God so to doe though God should be so driuen without need to worke innumerable miracles that almost euery houre I say secondly that thogh god shuld bestow such reuelations on his saints yet would many absurdities folow therupon For first these reuelatioÌ„s must follow the prayers and not goe before them and so my conclusion is still in force Secondly thus to require myracles at Gods hands were to tempt God grieuously Thirdly such prayers should be a flat mockerie in Gods sight because God must first reueale the prayers to his Saints then must he giue eare to the saints while they inculcate the same prayers lastly he may grant theÌ„ if he list Fourthly in this maner of praying they leaue God whom they should inuocate they run to theÌ„ at whom they should not come Fiftly they do al this of infidelitie because they haue no warrant from God so to make their prayers The 7. replie Yee cannot denie but that the liuing may pray one for another and also desire one an others prayer therefore since the faithful departed loue vs as much as before are as mindful of vs as before and are as deare in Gods sight as before we do no more iniurie or dishonour to God in praying now to them then when they were liuing here among vs. The answere I say first that we haue coÌ„mandement promise examples to pray one for another while we are yet liuing on earth but we haue no such thing in the holy scriptures neither in the olde nor in the new testament concerning the inuocation of saints departed I say secondly that if the saints departed could heare and vnderstande our prayers as the liuing do then might wee without dishonour and iniurie to God desire them to pray for vs as wee doe the liuing neuerthelesse such kind of praying should be in vs great temeritie and presumption because wee haue neither coÌ„mandement nor example in gods word so to do I say thirdly that if the liuing should desire the prayers one of another as the pâ—pists desire the prayers of saints they shoulde not onely derogate greatly from Christs holy mediatourship but withal commit flat idolatrie For the papists desire as is alreadie proued to be saued by the merites and blood of saints for the coÌ„plement wherof I wil here adde a memorable testimonie The vsual practise of the papists especially of the Iesuites is to adde in the ende of their absolution these words Passio D.N.I. Christi merita B.V. Mariae omnium sanctorum quicquid bonifeceris vel mali sustinueris sit tibi in remissionem peccatoruÌ„ tuorum in augmentum gratiae praemium vitae aeternae The passion of our Lord Iesus Christ the merits of the blessed virgin Mary and of al saints all the good thou shalt do and punishment thou shalt suffer be to thee for the remission of thy sins for increase of grace for
humanitate foeliciter sancti quiescunt in quam nimirum desiderant etiam sancti angeli prospicere donec veniat tempus quando iam non sub altare collocentur sed exaltentur super altare In the meane season the saints rest happily vnder Christs humanitie which doubtlesse the holy angels desire to behold vntil the time come wheÌ„ they shalbe no longer hid vnder the altar but exalted aboue the altar So then not only the ancient fathers but holy and deuout Bernard with others of late yeres were and continued in this grosse error to wit that y e souls of the faithful dying in the Lord shal not be admitted to the vision and fruition of God to the sight of his diuine essence clearely to behold his deity vntil the general resurrection of our bodies Further theÌ„ this which is a scourge to the papists Pope Iohn the 22. of that name professed this heretical doctrine and commanded al the diuines in Paris to teach the same His wordes with all the due circumstances thereof are cited at large in my booke of Motiues These two Canons well marked will serue for many good purposes and especially at this time to prooue that the opinion of the fathers are of no more force for the inuocation of saints theÌ„ for these other important matters already in these Canons named For as we ouerrule them in these pointes by Gods sacred word so must we still ouerrule them by the same word if at any time they swarue from it either for the inuocation of saints or for praying for the dead or for marriage of priestes or for whatsoeuer els And so to ouerrule them is consonant to their owne doctrine as is already prooued The third Canon The primitiue church for the space of two hundreth thirty yeares after Christ liued vtterly destitute and vnacquainted with the merites suffrages intercession and inuocation of the saintes in heauen after which time this cacozeale by degrees proceeded till it became perfect and consummate idolatry as this day is seene in the church of Rome For before this time the papistes cannot alledge any one authenticall writer for the inuocation of saintes in heauen The first obiection Irenaeus who liued within one hundreth and nintie yeares after Christ affirmeth expressely that the virgin Mary was the aduocate of the virgin Eue. The answere I answere that S. Irenaeus had a farre other meaning then such popish friuolous collection would enforce vpon him which I prooue first indirectly because the virgin Mary was not born or conceiued much lesse a saint in heauen for the space almost of foure thousand yeares after the virginitie of Eue and so doubtlesse Eue neither did nor possibly could inuocate the holy virgin Mary Neither will it helpe to say that though Eue could not then inuocate the holy virgin Mary yet did the holie virgin pray for her and so became her aduocate For besides that the virgin Marie is there said to be Eues aduocate when she was a virgin at which time Marie the virgin was not born the same Eue was either a Saint in heauen as soone as the virgin Mary or a damned soule in hell Againe I prooue it directly because Irenaeus compareth the virgin Mary with the virgin Eue to insinuate vnto vs that we receiue no lesse good by the virgin Mary in that she bare Christ then euill by the virgin Eue in that she transgressed Gods holy lawes For thus doth Irenaeus interpret himselfe in another place in these words Sicut Eua inobaudiens facta et sibi vniuerso generi humano causa facta est mortis sic Maria habens praedestinatum virum tameÌ„ virgo obaudiens sibi vniuerso generi humano causa facta est salutis As Eue being disobedient was the cause of deathed her selfe and to all mankinde so Mary hauing a predestinate husband and withal an obedient virgin was the cause of saluation both to her selfe and to all mankinde in that shee bare Christ the true and only sauiour of the world The second obiection S. Iames in his Masse which the sixt general councel holden at Constantinople admitteth teacheth vs to inuocate the virgin Mary and all Saintes and to hope for mercie by their praiers and intercessions The answere I say first that that councell of Constantinople saith indeed that S. Iames did deâ—iuer a certain form of the masse in which hee shewed the custome of mingling water with the wine but of praying to Peter or to Paule it hath not one worde at all I say secondly that pope Gregorie who liued well neere an hundred yeares before that councell either knewe no such masse deliuered by S. Iames or at least reputed it for a counterfait and forged thing For the same Gregory auoucheth as shalbe prooued when I come to speake of the Masse that the Apostles did celebrate the holy communion onely with the Lordes praier and their owne deere frier Carranza witnesseth the same while he confesseth that there is no such tradition extant as that whereof the councell speaketh Whereby it well appeareth with what intolerable burdens and counterfaite bookes the papistes doe this day oppresse and seduce the simple people For this disholy Masse is currant euery where and my selfe haue one of the bookes The fourth Canon In the daies of Origen who liued about the yeare of our Lord 233. the first seede of the inuocation of Saintes began to be sowen Which seed so sowen by Origen was but a step or degree to popish inuocation For besides that Origen onely taught this that saintes in heauen doe pray for vs and not that we on earth should pray to them this his doctrine was not definitiue and resolute but doubtfull opinatiue and disputable This Canon Origen himselfe hath deliuered to vs whose expresse words are these Sed requiris qui sunt isti qui pugnant quae est illa pugna quam illi gerunt Ego sic arbitror quod omnes illi qui dormierunt ante nos patres pugnent nobiscum adiuuent nos orationibus suis. Ita namque etiam quendam de senioribus magistris audiui dicentem But thou requirest who they are that fight and what that battaile is which they fight I am of this opinion that all the fathers which are before vs and are dead doe fight with vs and doe helpe vs with their praiers for so I heard one of our old maisters say Againe in another place thus Sed omnes sancti qui de hac vita decesserunt habentes adhuc charitatem erga eos qui in hoc mundo sunt si dicantur curaÌ„ gerere salutis eorum iuuare eos precibus suis atque interuentu suo apud deum non erit inconueniens But also all saints which are departed hence and haue still charitie towards them which are in this world if wee say they haue care of their saluation and help them with their praiers and
intercession before God it shal not be a thing inconuenient Out of which sayinges of Origen I note first that he speaketh only of the praiers which saintes in heauen make for vs and not one word of our praying to them I note secondly that to holde that the saintes in heauen doe pray for vs is not a constant position in Origens doctrine but only an opinion and disputable question I proue it because he saith arbitror I think Again because he saith non erit inconueniens it shal not be incoÌ„uenient Thirdly because he saith audiuâ— ita dicentem I heard one say so The fiâ—st obiection Origen in his book de paenitentia saith y t he will fall prostrate on his knees and inuocate all the saintes in heauen that they will helpe him because he dare not pray to God for himselfe The answere I say first that this assertion fathered vpon Origen will confute it selfe for how could Origen or anie faithfull christian be in feare humbly to inuocate our most mercifull God who willeth all to come to him that are in distresse who promiseth to heare all those that in their trouble call vpon him Who graunteth to vs whatsoeuer we aske in his sonnes name who hath appointed his sonne to make intercession for vs. I say secondly that this booke alledged in the obiection is not Origens but a plaine counterfeit And I prooue it effectually because their owne pope Gelasius hath so resolued The 2. obiection Origen saith that the fathers of the churche appointed the feast day of the holy Innocentes and that by the will of God that so their intercession might profite their parentes The answere I say first that if all this were graunted it could but at the most proue that the saints pray for vs which in a good sense may be admitted For I willingly graunt that the saintes in heauen doe in generall maner and termes pray for vs that is that they wishe vs to perseuere in the true faith and feare of God and y t in the end we may be partakers with theÌ„ of eternal glory I say secondly that sundry learned men doe thinke these homilies from whence this obiection is taken not to be any part of Origens workes I say thirdly that if Origen doe make that a constant doctrine in one place which he graunteth to be a disputable question in another place what remaineth but to thinke his opinion therein to be of no force I say fourthly that the papistes as their Ruffinus recordeth will admit nothing in Origen which disliketh them but reiect all such stuffe as infarsed into his workes by the heretickes Let them therefore giue vs leaue also to reiect in Origen if in any place he seeme to approoue inuocation of saintes as that which is infarsed by the heretickes specially because in other places he teacheth the contrary doctrine The fift Canon About 20. yeares after that Origen had doubtfully disputed the praying of saintes for vs S. Cyprian and S. Cornelius set down that point resolutely as standing no longer in doubt therof to wit that the saintes in heauen doe pray for the liuing here on earth For they made this couenaut that whether of them soeuer should die the first should pray for his brethren and sisters yet liuing These are S. Cyprians owne wordes Et si quis istinc nostrum prior diuinae dignationis celeritate praecesserit perseueret apud dominum nostra dilectio pro fratribus sororib apud misericordiam patris noncesset oratio And if either of vs shall through Gods mercie die before the other let our loue continue still in Gods sight let vs not cease to desire the fauour of God for our brethren and sisters yet liuing Thus saith S. Cyprian Out of whose wordes I note first that to be established in his time which was but in opinion and doubtfull case in the daies of Origen To wit that the saintes in heauen pray for vs here on earth I note secondly that the inuocation of saintes in heauen was neither established in saint Cyprians time neither once called into question I note thirdly that popish inuocation of Saintes sprung vp by little and little from one degree to another The sixt Canon About an hundreth yeares after S. Cyprian which was about 350. yeares after Christ some of the fathers by rhetoricall apostrophees did applie their orations to the dead as if they had been liuing Of which sort were S. Basill and saint Gregory Nazianzene who though they did but inuocate the saints figuratiuely and of a certain excessiue zeale yet did such their inuocations minister occasion to the papistes of all their superstition in that behalfe These are the wordes of S. Gregory Nazianzene Audite populi tribus linguae homines omnes cuâ—usuis generis aetaetis quicunque nunc estis existetis Infra audiat quoque Constantini magni anima si quis mortuis sensus est omnesque eorum qui ante eum imperium tenuerunt piae Christique amantes animae Heare O people kinreds tongues nations ages whosoeuer are now liuing or shalbe borne hereafter Let also the soule of Constantine the Great heare all the christian godly soules of the Emperors before him if the dead perceiue any thing at all And againe in another place he thus writeth At ô pascha magnum inquam sacro sanctum pascha totiusque mundi piaculum te enim quasi vita praeditum alloquor But O Passeouer the great I say and sacred Passeouer and the purgation of the whole world For I call vpon thee as if thou hadst life Thus writeth Nazianzene by whose wordes we may measure both the rest of his sayings and of the other fathers First therefore I note that hee doth inuocate aswell senselesse thinges as reasonable soules Secondly hee calleth vpon the soules of all the people in the world whereof some were damned in the bottome of hell and so could not heare as euery learned papist will admit Thirdly he inuocateth those that are yet vnborne Vpon these sandie foundations are built all popish superstitious inuocations The 7. Canon Catholique doctrine is that as Vincentius Lyrinensis who liued aboue a thousand yeares agoe defineth it which hath been receiued constantly of al the faithful at al times and in all places Which Vincentius is and euer was of great reputation with and amongst al learned papists and consequently since popish inuocation of Saintes neither was constantly receiued of all the faithfull neither in all places neither at al times as which was not heard of for many hundreth yeares after Christ it cannot be deemed catholicke doctrine no not by popishe proceeding This Canon ought to be well remembred as which of it selfe ouerthroweth al Romish religion An obiection S Chrysostomes Masse which was generally vsed in the Greeke church maketh expresse mention of the inuocation of Saintes and the same doctrine is taught in sundry places of his workes The
that a riche man may dine when he list a poore man when he can get meate The religious fast is abstinence with a penitent heart and true faith not onely from all meates and drinkes but euen from all thinges whatsoeuer that may any way nourishe or delite the bodie The forme of which fast is abstinence the matter is meate drinke and whatsoeuer bringeth corporall oblectation the efficient cause is faith and repentance for our sinnes the end is to appease Gods wrath and either to procure deliuerance from our miseries or some mitigation thereof For which cause fasting in the Scriptures is continually ioyned with praier and being vsed as is said God doth accept it for the merites of Christ Iesus not for anie worthinesse in it selfe The third proposition To fast rightly and christianly is to absteine from al meates all drinkes and from all corporall pleasures vntill the end of the fast and to bestowe the whole time in praying in lamenting our sinnes and in hearing the worde of God especially godly sermons For the externall affliction of our bodies by abstaining from meates and drinkes hath no other end effect or vse but to dispose prepare vs as is already said This proposition is prooued by the vsuall practise of holy people in all ages recorded in holy writ for our instruction holy king Dauid so soone as he vnderstood that his childe shoulde die for his sinnes gaue himselfe to fasting and praier and neuer ate while the childe was aliue 2. Sam. 12.5.17 The Niniuites vnderstanding Gods commynations and wrath for their sinnes sate in ashes put on sackcloth gaue themselues to earnest praier and absteined from all meates and drinkes vntill God shewed mercy towardes them Ion. 3.5.7 Holy queene Hester when she ioyned fasting with praier neither ate nor dranke at all vntil the end of her fast Ester 4. verse 16. Neither can it euer bee prooued by the authoritie of holy writ or by the practise of the primitiue Church or by the testimonie of the auncient fathers that Gods people did in any age at any time in any place or countrey vse either to eate or to drinke before the end of their fast whereby appeareth the absurditie of all popishe fasting which thing is most euident by the story of S. Spiridion handled in the next proposition The fourth proposition Popish choice of meates in their late inuented fastes is wicked and intollerable I say first popish choice because to put merite or religion in abstaining from one meate more then another is the peculiar badge of papistes or at least common to them with the Eucratites with the Tatians with the Catherans with the Manichies or like heretiques I prooue it because the Apostle saith plainly that all thinges are pure to the pure but the papistes and other olde heretiques tell vs that certaine meates at certaine times as in Lent in the imber dayes and Fridaies are vnpure and polluted yea so vnpure that they pollute all the eaters thereof and make them guiltie of eternal death Yet the Apostle auoucheth boldly and expresly that euery creature of God is good and that nothing ought to be refused if it bee receiued with thankesgiuing In the first verse of the same chapter he telleth vs that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith and giue heede to the doctrine of diuels In the third verse he sheweth what doctrine of deuils he meaneth To wit prohibition to abstaine from meates which God hath created to bee receiued with giuing of thankes Out of which wordes I note first that no creature of God is impure at anie time which is appointed for the nourishment of man I note secondly that no meate ought to bee refused in Lent or at other times if it be receiued with thankesgiuing I note thirdly that prohibition from certaine meates was not in the apostles time but inuented by heretiques of latter daies I note fourthly that such prohibition is of the diuell I say secondly late inuented fastes because Spiridion who was not only a bishop but also a man so holy that he wrought myracles and was in his life time reputed a Saint did not refuse to eate flesh in the time of Lent and that in his owne house yea he did not only eate fleshe himselfe but withall he intreated a stranger that lodged with him to doe the same And when the straunger refused to eate fleshe with him saying that hee was a christian and so prohibited to eate flesh at that time S. Spiridion replied vpon him and said that the rather he ought to eat flesh because he was a christian for all thinges were pure to the pure Thus did the blessed bishop and man of God renowmed for his rare gift of working miracles Whom the pope would burne for an hereticke with fire and fagot if he were this day liuing in Rome and woulde not retract his opinion For first hee eate fleshe himselfe contrary to popish doctrine Secondly he vrged the stranger to do the same Thirdly he auouched his fact to be the part of a christian Fourthly he signified y t to make conscience in choice of meates was the badge of an infidell Which fourth obseruation I gather out of the word rather Fiftly the fact of Spiridion prooueth that to make choice of meates was deemed superstitious not onely in the Apostles time but many hundred yeares after their departure hence I say thirdly wicked and intollerable first because popishe choise of meates taketh away christian libertie and maketh christian slaues to mans traditions For to the pure all thinges are pure by the libertie of Christes gospel I am perswaded saith the Apostle that no meate is vncleane And he addeth the reason because the kingdome of God is neither meat nor drinke Wherefore we ought not to destroy the worke of God for meates sake In another place he saith that if he should please men he were not the seruant of Christ. To please men is good and godly so long as their pleasure is measured with the holy will of God but when men would spoile vs of our christian libertie then must we fight against their wicked pleasures So S. Paul expoundeth himselfe in these wordes The false brethren creâ—t in priuily to spy out our liberty which we haue in Christ Iesus y t they might bring vs into bondage And why ye are bought with a price be not the seruauntes of men Christ himself forewarned vs to beware of the hypocriticall doctrine of the Pharisies because they corrupted the pure word of God with the mixture of their owne foolish traditions Secondly because the apostle teacheth vs that nothing ought to be refused if it be receiued with giuing of thankes Thirdly because no power on earth can alter the word of God Which worde telleth vs that all meates are alike lawfull Fourthly because to commaund the choice of meates for religion sake is to appoint a newe God For
worship them And in Mathew Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onely thou shalt serue For which cause S. Iohn could not be permitted to adore the Angel but was bidden to worship God For which cause Moses cast the Tables out of his hands brake them in peeces beneath the mountaine burned the calfe in the fire and grounded it vnto pouder For which cause the holy ghost commendeth Ezechias for breaking in peeces the brasen serpent For which cause Marcellina was condemned as an hereticke who worshipped as S. Augustine recordeth the Images of Iesus of Paul of Homere of Pythagoras For which cause S. Epiphanius seeing the image of a saint hanging in the Church tare the same in sunder and aduised the wardens to bury some poore body with the vaile and that no more any such vailes should be hanged vp in the Church Yea the same Epiphanius will not haue the blessed virgine Mary to be adored much lesse her image And if her image must be excluded what image I pray you can be approued for which cause the councill of Elibertine decreed grauely that nothing should be painted on the church walles which is adored of the people For which cause Lactantius pronounced freely that where images are there is no religion Neither will it help the papists to answer after their woonted manner that Lactantius speaketh of such images as are adored for gods For Lactantius maketh the selfe same obiection in the person of the Gentiles and inueyeth against it bitterly as a vaine friuolous and ridiculous thing And because I wil proceed sincerely in this point as in all other matters I thinke it conuenient heere to alleadge his expresse words which are these Non ipsa inquiunt timemus sed eos ad quorum imaginem ficta quorum nominibus consecrata sunt nempe ideo timetis quod eos in caelo esse arbitramini neque enim si dij sunt aliter fieri potest curigitur oculos in caelum non tollitis â—â—ur ad parietes ligna lapides potissimum quam illò spectatis vbi eos esse creditis We feare not say they the pictures or pourtraies but them after whose images they be made to whose names they are consecrated Doubtlesse ye therefore feare them because ye thinke they are in heauen For if they be gods it cannot otherwise come to passe Why therfore do ye not lift vp your eyes to heauen why doe ye rather looke vpon the walles vpon stockes and stonâ—s then thither where ye think they are In which words I note first that the Gentiles did not adore the images but the persons represented by the same for of fearing and adoring Lactan. speaketh indifferently throughout the whole chapter yet are they sharply reproued for their fact I note secondly that we must not adhere and fix our minds vpon stocks stones and the images of saints but lift vp our hearts to heauen where the saints now are Worthily therefore doe we condemne the Papists who do not only make images but also adore the same and that with the selfe same worship which is due and proper to God alone for so much auoucheth their owne deare doctor and canonized saint Aquinas of the image of our Sauiour Christ. For which respect Gregorie surnamed the Great who himself was a bishop of Rome sharply reproued the adoration worship of images albeit he admitted wel liked y e ciuil vse therof The second Booke of Christs birth baptisme preaching passion resurrection and ascension into Heauen with other things coincident CHAP. I. Of Christs birth ABout the time that Elias the Cabbalist foretolde in the age of the worlde 3969. the eight calends of Ianuary in the third yeere of the 194. Olympiade the 32. yeere of king Herode and the 42. yere of Augustus Cesar was our Lorde and Sauiour Christ Iesus borne into this world For albeit the 4000. yeres were not complete fully ended yet was his prediction true as some report it because he added that God would shorten the time for his elect Our Lord and Sauiour was conceiued by the holighost taking flesh blood bone of the blessed virgin Mary made like vnto vs in all things sinne onely excepted true man and true God hauing two perfect natures subsisting in one diuine person by reason of which hypostaticall vnion his holie mother was truely called deipara and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well the mother of God as of man Christ assuming the perfect nature of man lost no part of his nature diuine and consequently he must haue two willes diuine and humane of God and of man Christ assuming the perfect nature of man must needs haue euery thing pertaining to the perfection thereof among which the sensitiue appetite is one which wee call sensualitie yet in Christ Iesus there was no motion of sensualitie which was not ordered by reason and wholy obedient to the same For the sensitiue appetite to be moued according to the course of it owne nature was nothing repugnant to the diuine and reasonable humane wil of Christ. The blessed virgin being 14 yeres of age conceiued Christ her son by the power of the holie ghost the 25. day of March He was before all worlds and by him al things were made yet was he incarnat in the end of the world borne after a new and miraculous maner of the virgin Marie who was Saint Iosephs lawfull wife Christ the sonne of the euerliuing God tooke vpon him the forme of a seruant was poorely borne in a stall and made him selfe of no reputation and all this he did for the loue of man to teach man humilitie and to abase himselfe as Christ his Lorde and master gaue him ensample In those dayes Cyrenius being gouernour of Syria Augustus Cesar sent out an edict to taxe all that were subiect to the Roman empire Then Ioseph being of the house and linage of Dauid went vp from Galile to be taxed in Bethlehem with Mary his wife being then big with childe where she brought forth Christ and wrapping him in swadling clothes laide him in a cratch bicause there was no roome for them in the Inne So soone as Christ was borne the angels of God nothing regarding the pride of mightie men declared to the poore shepheards the godhead and office of the childe lying in the cribbe how that he was borne to be the sauiour of the world After the departure of the angels the shepheards went to Bethlehem where they found Marie Ioseph and the sweete babe lying in the cribbe at their returne they published abroad that which was tolde them of that childe CHAP. II. Of the infancie of our Sauiour Christ. WHen Christ Iesus was but eight dayes olde he was circumcised euen then beginning to spend his blood for the loue of man for albeit he was the head of the church yet was he subiect to the law to
that the ternarie number doth not determine the apparitions in themselues but the diuersitie of dayes and times in which they were made for al apparitions made in one the same day are reputed named one The second doubt It is saide in these apparitions that Christ came into the middes of his Disciples and stoode among them euen when they were within the house the doores closely shut Wherby it appeareth euidently that Christs body may be both in heauen and in the sacrament at one and the same time for it no more repugneth for one bodie to bee in diuers places at once then for diuers bodies to be in one place at once Which latter is here verified of Christs body and the doore or walles of the house The answere I answere that God cannot by his absolute power make Christes body to be in diuers places at once not because there is any defect in God who is omnipotent but because contradiction is implied in the thing which should be done Which point I haue prooued euidently in the 12. preamble of my Booke of Motiues For the reasons there alleadged are effectuall if they be applied to this purpose In like maner I say that two bodies cannot be in one place at once because to haue parts without parts and to occupie place is of the formall and intrinsecall conceit of euery organicall and quantitatiue bodie such as Christes true body is Whereupon S. Augustine said truely and learnedly that if occupation or spaces of places be taken away from bodies they shall lose their essence and be no bodies at all So then the entrance of Christ into the house when the doors were shut and also his comming out of the sepulchre when the stone was vnrolled away neither doth nor can prooue that two bodies were in one place at once but that the doore and the stone gaue place for the time to Christes mightie power like as the red Sea gaue place to the Israelites and they passed through the middest thereof And as S. Peters chaines gaue place to his handes and as the Iron gate opened to him of it owne accord Furthermore if Christes bodie can be in ten thousand places at once as the papistes impudently auouch it must also follow that it may be in infinite places at once which is the heresie of the Vbiquitaries For after this maner did S. Hierome reason against Iohn the Bishop of Hierusalem when hee laboured to prooue that our bodies may liue without meate after the resurrection If a man may liue fourty daies without meate saith S. Hierome as Moses and Elias did by the power of God then doubtles may he liue eternally by the same power of God In fine this veritie is made euident by that argument which Gods angel made to Mary Magdalen and the other Mary comming to see the sepulchre And because the argument is of force to confound all papistes in the world if it be well vrged I will alledge the argument as it is in the originall and then make effectuall application thereof These are the expresse wordes of the holy Euangelist Saint Matthew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hee is not heere for he is risen as he saide Where I obserue first the assertion simplie in it selfe Secondly the cause and reason of the same assertion The assertion is this Christ is not in the sepulchre the reason heereof is this because Christ is risen Nowe then since Christ cannot be in the Sepulchre because he is risen it followeth of necessitie that either the angel of God inspired with Gods holy spirite made a very foolish and friuolous argument which to affirme is void of all christianitie or els that Christes body cannot be in two places at once which is that that I intend to proue For if it were not as I say the women might haue replied effectually against the angel thus albeit Christ be risen as you say yet may he be in the sepulchre also because his body may be in two places at once but the angel reputing it a thing cleere and euident that Christes body could not be in two places at one the selfe same time concluded directly and forcibly as hee thought Christes absence in the sepulchre bicause he was risen againe See the 3. part 10. chapter 4. conclusion and 3. paragraphe CHAP. VII Of Christes ascension and being in heauen CHrist hauing presented himselfe by many infallible tokens after that hee had suffered his passion conuersing visibly with his disciples by the space of fourtie daies in which time he spoke of thâ—nges pertaining to the kingdome of God told them that they should be his witnesses in Hierusalem al Iudea in Samaria and vnto the vttermost part of the earth he commanded them that they should not depart from HierusaleÌ„ but shuld wait for the promise of the father which things when he had spoken hee was taken vp in a cloud out of their sight While they looked stedfastly toward heaueÌ„ two men stood by them in white apparel said to them ye men of Galilee why stand ye gazing into heauen this Iesus which is taken vp fro you into heuen shal so come as ye haue seen him go into heuen Then y e disciples returned to Hierusalem froÌ„ the mount Oliuet which is neer to HierusaleÌ„ being froÌ„ it a sabaoths dayes iorny which is about 2000. paces or two English miles While the Apostles whose names are Peter Iames the son of Zebedeus Iohn Andrew Philip Thomas Bartholomew Mathew Iames the sonne of Alpheus Symon Zelotes and Iudas Thaddeus expected the comming downe of the holy ghost at Hierusalem there abode with them certain women and Mary the mother of Iesus and his brethren that is his kinsfolkes For it was as well behooueable to haue the wiues confirmed as the husbandes because they were afterward to be partakers of the daungers with them All which praied with one accord not onely for the sending of the holy ghost but also for deliuerance from present daungers wherewith they were beset Christ ascended vp into heauen must there remaine vntill his second aduent the day of doome general And so he neither is nor can be in the round cake as papistes impudently contend After Christes ascension and comming of the holy Ghost his apostles went abroad preaching the gospel to all nations whose limites actes and death the next chapter in particular maner shall describe CHAP. VIII Of the seuerall precinctes liues and deathes of the Apostles taken out of Epiphanius Tertullian Optatus Eusebius Oecumenius Nicephorus and others Of Peter and Philip. S. Peter after that hee had preached the gospell of Iesus Christ in PoÌ„tus Galatia Cappadocia Bithyma Italy was crucified at Rome with his had downward vnder the emperour Nero and buried there the third Calendes of Iulie S. Paul the chosen vessel of God omnipotent and the immoueable piller of his church was beheaded the same yere the
same day at Rome and S. Philip that blessed disciple of Christ was about the same time crucified at Hierapolis a citie in Asia Of Andrew and Bartholomew S. Andrew preached the gospel in Scythia Thracia Macedonia Thessalia and Achaia At the length the proconsul Aegaeas caused him to be crucified because he perswaded Maximilla his wife and Stantocles his brother to detest his vnchristian impietie and to embrace the faith of Christ Iesus Hee was buried in Achaia with his auncestors S. Bartholomew after he had preached the gospel to the Indians was at length rewarded with the cruell torture of the crosse and buried in Armenia the great Of Iames the sonne of Zebedee S. Iames the sonne of Zebedeus preached the gospel to the twelue tribes which were in dispersion and for his paines was at the length beheaded of Herod the Tetrarch who was also called Agrippa He was buried in the citie Marmarica and king Herod who beheaded him was eaten vp with wormes Of Iohn S. Iohn his brother preached the gospel in Asia and being driuen into exile in the Ile Pathmos by Domitian the emperour he there both wrote the gospel and had his reuelation He died at Ephesus in the time of Traianus the Emperour Where note by the way to auoid the varietie which seemeth in some of the auncient fathers and historiographers that albeit Domitian banished S. Iohn into Pathmos yet did S. Iohn suruiue Domitian and died in the daies and reigne of Traian Of Thomas S. Thomas called also Didymus after he had preached to the Parthians Medes Persians and Indians was wounded with dartes in his sides and so being buried in Calamina a citie in India came to him whose sides he before had felt Christ Iesus Of Mathew S. Mathew of a publican became an Apostle preached the gospel of Christ zealously and conuerted many to the christian faith Hee wrote the gospel in the Hebrew tongue and was buried in Hierapolis Where note by the way that although many of the old writers affirme S. Mathew to haue written in Hebrew yet some learned do think that he wrote in greeke which opinion I preferre as more probable but how soeuer that be it skilleth not much for the Greeke which now is only exstant is admitted of all as authenticall Yea as Theophilactus recordeth they that holde saint Mathew to haue written in hebrew do not denie but Saint Iohn translated it into greeke and consequently since S. Iohn was no lesse inspired with the holy ghost then Saint Mathew it must needes follow that the greeke copie is as authenticall as the Hebrew if any such could be found Of Iames the sonne of Alphee Saint Iames the son of Alpheus the brother of our Lord surnamed Iustus after he had preached at Gaza Eleutheropolis and other countreyes adiacent was made the Bishop of Hierusalem where he was stoned to death of the Iewes and buried in the temple Of Iudas Thaddaeus Saint Iudas Thaddeus called also Lebbeus preached in Iudea Galilea Samaria Idumea Arabia Syria and Mesopotamia at the length he came to Edessa where preaching the gospel of peace he died in peace Of Symon Zelotes Saint Symon surnamed Zelotes for his great zeale towards his master Christ Iesus called also Cananeus bicause he was borne in Cana Galilea after he had preached the gospell in Egypt Africa Mauritania Lybia and in the occidentall parts and had confirmed the same with many myracles he was crucified vnder Traianus being 120. yeares of age Of Matthias Saint Matthias one of the 70. disciples was reckoned with the eleuen in stead of Iudas Iscarioth He preached in Ethiopia where he suffered many tortures was almost stoned to death and then beheaded An addition for the complement of this chapter Saint Iames the Great and Saint Iohn the Euangelist were the sonnes of Zebedeus the husband of Salome Saint Iames the lesse surnamed Iustus and the brother of our Lord Saint Iudas Thaddeus and Symon Zelotes were the sons of Cleophas the husband of Mary who was sister to the blessed virgin Mary CHAP. IX Of the three sonnes of Constantine COnstantine when he had raigned 38. yeares appointed by his last will and testament that his three sonnes Constantinus Constantius and Constans should rule the Empire in seuerall parts seuerally to wit Constantinus in France Spaine and Germanie Constantius in the East Constans in Italie and Illyricum Constantinus was not content with partiall assigned gouernment but desired to haue the sole and onely administration of the Empire for which cause hauing too much confidence in the power of man specially in an euil cause he made warres against his brother Constans in Italie but by that occasion he was slaine and so his brother Constans possessed al the West Empire CHAP. X Of Iulianus apostata IVlianus Apostata was nephew to Constantius and brother to Gallus he was so excellent wel learned that in his youth he read the scriptures publikely in the church of Nicomedia afterwards he went to the famous vniuersitie of Athens and studied there but after the death of his brother Gallus Constantius sent him into France and Germanie Not farre from Argentoratum hee put to flight 30 thousand Almains for which cause by the fauour of the souldiers he was sodainely at Argentoratum designed Emperour At such time as great dissention arose among christians through diuersitie of opinions in Religion in so much that some dispaired and other some fell to Idolatrie then the new Emperour Iulianus preferring his owne sonne before the true worship of God and thinking that to abandon the christian religion was to aduance his royall and imperiall estate forsooke the Christian faith denied Christ openly and became an Apostata He inhibited christians to serue in warres amongst the Romaines he ouerthrew the schooles of learning and spoyled the churches of their treasures Which thing hee did in derision telling the Christians that hee fauoured them in so doing because through pouertie they might sooner come to heauen CHAP. XI Of the Manichees THe Manichees began their heresie in the dayes of Aurelianus Emperor of Rome whose grand-master was Manes a Persian borne This Manes dispersed his poyson in very large circuits First in Arabia after that in Africa This heresie increased so mightily as it coulde not be quenched by the space of two hundred yeares this was the fundamentall ground of their false and hereticall doctrine that there are two Gods the one good and the other bad and yet both to be eternall This doctrine seemed plausible to mans reason at the first publishing thereof for since God is good of his owne nature and yet euill aboundeth in the worlde it seemeth to followe necessarily that as there is a good God so there must also bee a peculiar euill God equall to the good God in power and eternitie The Manichees will neither eate flesh neither egges neither milke neither doe they drinke wine albeit they will
eate grapes they thinke that hearbes trees and plants haue life in such manner as they feele great paine when one cutteth or plucketh them vppe by the rootes or otherwise for this respect they deeme it an heynous offence to purge the field from thornes and thistles and so they condemne husbandrie the most innocent art of all as guiltie of many murders yet they thinke husbandrie or tillage of the grounde to bee pardonable in their auditors because by that their labor they bring foode to their elect in whose bellies the substance is purged and the offence taken away And consequently although themselues do no murders actually as they preteÌ„d yet do they liue of manifest murders practised by others really Where note by the way that the church of the Manichees consisted of two sortes of people their elect and their auditors They held this fantasticall opinion that whosoeuer did eate flesh should be made the same thing which he did eate As for example if a man did eate an hogge he should be made a hog if a bull he should become a bull if a bird he should be a bird if a fish a fish and so in the rest The Manichees held also that if any man marry a wife that same man so soone as he passeth out of this life is changed into another bodie and becommeth a woman Yea they say further that if a man kil a man an asse or other liuing thing that man straight after his death is changed into that liuing thing which he killed be it a mouse serpent or whatsoeuer else The Manichees vse to blesse their meates in this manner O bread neither did I reape thee neither did I grinde thee neither did I make thee neither did I bake thee but an other did al these things and brought thee to me my selfe therefore do eate thee without offence These and other like monstrous assertions did this heresie bring forth This is the grace that they vse CHAP. XII Of the Pelagians taken out of Saint Augustine PElagius sometime a monke and a Brytan borne extolled free-will so much that hee ascribed little or nothing vnto grace He affirmed that man may keepe all Gods holy commaundements without his diuine grace and being reprooued saith saint Austen for derogating so much from the grace of God he answered with vnchristian subtiltie that grace was therefore giuen to man that hee might keepe Gods lawes with more facilitie That grace saith Pelagius without which wee can doe nothing that good is is onely in our free-will which free-will God ingraffed in our nature without any our deserts so that God helpeth vs by his law and doctrine to this end onely saith Pelagius that wee may learne what to hope for and what to do but not to do what we know ought to be done The Pelagians hold saith S. Austin that infants in their carnall natiuitie are so pure and free from originall sinne that they neede not the second and spirituall regeneration of water and the holie ghost Now if any man would aske the Pelagians to what end infants are baptized They will answere forsooth saieth saint Austen that by this externall regeneration they may haue accesse into heauen and not thereby to be absolued from the guilt of sinne For if they die without Baptisme yet do they promise them eternall life but without the kingdome of heauen This is the heresie of Pelagius which I haue sincerely recited out of saint Augustine that excellent writer and immoueable pillar of Christs church because many talke thereof who seem not throughly to vnderstand the same With which heresie how the papists agree and how they dissent from the same shall God willing bee shewed when I come to the next Booke in the chapter of mans Iustification CHAP. XIII Of the Arrian heresie ARrius the heretike was the reader of diuinity in Alexandria a man of great learning and eloquence but withall prowd and ambitious He denied the diuinitie and godhead of Iesus Christ affirming him to be pure man and a meere creature Which his blasphemous doctrine was dispersed throughout Egypt Lybia Alexandria Thebais and many other prouinces Alexander a godly bishop laboured by all meanes possible to dissuade Arrius from his pestiferous and execrable heresie but all his trauell was in vaine because many other bishops and cleargie men embraced the opinion of Arrius and obstinately defended the same The most christian emperour Constantinus worthily surnamed the Great deepely lamenting the church of God to be diuided with schisme and dissention sent Hosius the Bishop of Corduba in Spaine to Alexander and Arrius with his owne hand-writing earnestly exhorting them to set all dissention aside and to agree in vnitie peace and trueth But when the blessed Emperour could not preuaile in his holy purpose hee commaunded al christian bishops to resort at a certaine day designed to Nice a citie in Bithynia where this great controuersie was decided before Constantine himselfe and Arrius with his complices driuen into exile The Emperour Constantinus sent for Arrius into his pallace so meaning fully to make trial of his opinion who when he asked Arrius if he were of the same opinion with the councill of Nice Arrius without all deliberation and stay subscribed in the presence of the Emperour to the decrees of the saide councill Then the emperour greatly admiring that fact willed Arrius to confirme his subscription with an othe to which Arrius yeelded deceitfully as he had done before insomuch that the Emperour being perâ—waded that Arrius was an orthodox and good christian charged Alexander the bishop of Alexandria seuerely to receiue Arrius againe into his woonted place and dignitie Yet Alexander knowing Arrius to be an enemy to God and his holy religion and suspecting his dissimulation with the Emperour his soueraigne fearing God on the one side and reuerencing his soueraigne on the other gaue himselfe to deuout and earnest prayer so commending the whole cause vnto God While Alexander was thus deuoutly occupied behold news came vnto him that as Arrius came from the emperours pallace the worme of conscience did wonderfully trouble him and solubilitie of body did so vehemently assault him that hee was inforced sodainely to withdraw himselfe to a common place where while he sought to haue the ordinary course of nature blood gushed but all his inwards fell from him and so he perished most miserably The secret subtiltie wherwith Arrius fought to deceiue the godly and most christian Emperor was this Arrius wrote his execrable opinion of Christ in a peece of paper kept closely vnder his arme holes that 〈◊〉 hee subscribed in the presence of the Emperour then the Emperour maruelling that he would so doe vrged him to confirme the same with an oath Arrius roundly tooke an oath that he thought as he had written meaning indeede of his first writing which hee kept secretly vnder his arme-hole Where euerie one may see how grieuous a sinne it is to dissemble with God
when before Constantinople wrote her selfe the chiefe of all Sigebertus Gemblacensis an other of their monkes writeth in this expresse maner Post quem Bonifacius Romanae ecclesiae praesidet Hic obtinuit apud Phocam imperatorem vt ecclesiae Romana caput esset omnium ecclesiarum quia ecclesia Constantinopolitana scribebat se esse primam omnium ecclesiarum After whom Bonifacius gouerned the church of Rome and he obtained of the emperor Phocas that the church of Rome should be the head of all churches and that because the church of Constantinople wrote it selfe the head of all churches Palmerius hath these words consentiente Phoca institutum fuit vt ecclesia Romanae caput esset ecclesiarum omnium cum prius Constantinopolitana id vsurpare tentasset It was ordained by the consent of Phocas that the Church of Rome should be the head of all churches whereas the church of all Constantinople had before vsurped that dignitie The other writers haue wordes of like force which I omit for breuitie sake Peruse Martinus Polonus and Philippus Bergomensis who both teach the same doctrine The first obiection Phocas did not giue the primacie to the church of Rome but only declared by his decree that authoritie which of right pertaineth to the same The answere I answere that neither Scripture councell nor any authenticall wâ—iter can be alledged who before the said constitution of Phocas did at any time ascribe the headship and vniuersall gouernment of all Churches to the Church of Rome For first S. Policarpus woulde not yeeld to Anicetus bishop of Rome in the coÌ„trouersie about Easter as witnesseth Eusebius Secondly Irenaeus and other bishops of Fraunce reprooued Victor the bishop of Rome very sharply bidding him to haue respect to peace and vnitie of the church Thirdly Polycrates and many bishops of Asia did stoutly withstand Victor in his proceedings touching Easter Fourthly S. Cyprian rouÌ„dly opposed himselfe against Stephanus the bishop of Rome contemned his decree and derided his reasons Fiftly the Apostles at Hierusalem sent Peter and Iohn to confirme the faithfull in Samaria And consequently if the pope be not aboue Peter he may be sent as an inferiour or at least as an equall euen as Peter was Sixtly the fathers of the Affrican councell would not yeeld to Celestine the bishop of Rome in the controuersie of appeales concerning Appiarius And when pope Celestine alledged that the counsell of Nice gaue libertie to appeale to Rome the fathers of the councell answered that the true copies of the decree were otherwise Seuenthly the famous generall councell of Chalcedon gaue the bishop of Constantinople equall authoritie with the bishop of Rome in all ecclesiasticall affaires Eightly the Councel of Nice prescribed limites aswel to the bishop of Rome as to other Patriarkes Hereby then is it euident that the lordly vsurped primacie of the church of Rome was only giuen by the cruell tyrant Phocas Which conclusion is prooued more at large in the sixt chapter of my second booke of Motiues The second obiection You are not able to name the pope and time that first swarâ—ed from the doctrine of his auncestors The answere I say first that many thinges haue bin done in your church which your selues can neuer proue when where by whoÌ„ they were done this is euident by the 2. Prelude and 1. chapter of this third and last part I say secondly that Pope Boniface the third of that name did degenerate from Gregorie his predecessor as is alreadie proued I say thirdly that the absurditie of this obiection shal be discouered throughout the chapters following The third obiection You confesse in your Motiues that in the church of Rome for many yeares together were sundrie learned and godly bishops who liued orderly preached the word of God sincerely and fed their flockes carefully but wee are able to shew a lawfull succession of our Bishops euen from saint Peter to him that now sitteth in his chaire And therefore granting the former you seeme impudent to denie the latter The answere I answer that the succession of your Romish bishops is not so certaine as yee would beare the worlde in hand it is For first many graue and learned writers do varie exceedingly in setting downe that succession wherein you so glory S. Clement whose epistles the papists magnifie when they seeme to make for their purpose testifying for himselfe that S. Peter appointed him to be his successor Irenaeus Epiphanius Eusebius and the canon of the popish masse doe all with vniforme consent place Linus and Cletus before the said Clemens yet Sophronius Metâ—phrastes and the Popish Pontifical that cannot lie affirme roundly that Saint Peter liued after Linus Secondly many schismes haue bin in the church of Rome and amongst our romish bishops euen for many yeares together so that the succession of the latter can neuer bee proued constantly to haue descended without interruption from the former Their owne Onuphrius Panuinius reckoneth vppe thirtie schismes in the church of Rome but I will content my selfe with two onely whereof their owne deare frier Bartholomeus Carranza can instruct them sufficiently The former schisme endured for the space of 64. yeares during which time their godly popedome was at Auinion in France and not one onely day at Rome though at Rome as they prate God placed their holy seate In the latter schisme of the twaine rehearsed three of their holy bishops were popes at one the self same time to wit Iohannes the foure twentie of that name Benedictus the thirteenth and Gregorie the twelfte From which three striuing and grinning as dogs for a bone I wold learne howe they can deriue their holy so supposed succession Thirdly a woman as Saint Paul teacheth vs is not capable of ecclesiasticall function And so the succession deriued from our holy mistris Iohn pope cannot possibly be of force which storie of Pope Iohn the woman if it be true let the Papists for euer holde their peace and bragge no longer of their succession And that the said storie of their woman pope Iohn is true indeede I will proue by the testimonie of such writers as the Papists hitherto haue euer thought well of and reputed for their owne that is by Sigebertus Marianus Scotus Palmerius Martinus Polonus Phillippus Bergomensis Bapt. Platina and Bartholomeus Carranza For all these sing one and the selfe same song that pope Iohn was a woman though not an holy nunne The first replie These writers liued long after Pope Iohn and therefore knew they nothing but by report of others The answere I say first that these seauen writers liued longer one after another then Sigebertus and Scotus liued after Pope Iohn I say secondly that all Historiographers write for the most part by the report of others I say thirdly that so many writers otherwise of good credit with you may well bee credited of vs in a matter
concerning your owne proceedings especially since sundry of them be your owne holy friers I say fourthlie that this storie of Pope Iohn is publikelie painted and this daie to bee seene in your owne Cathedrall churches of Syenna Which painting our newly hatched Iesuites sought earnestly to haue had defaced in the late repairing of that church but the bishop would not suffer them to preuaile I say fiftly that these seuen writers who were all papists and liued so long one after another would neuer haue published one and the selfe same thing to the world if any one of them could in his life time haue learned the contrary to be the trueth The 2. replie They say onely and barely vt ferunt as men say And other graue writers that liued before them all and neerer the time of pope Iohn make no mention thereof The answere I say first that to reason ab auctoritate negatiue is not holden good in schooles and your selues doe often condemne in others that kinde of disputation I say secondly that if these writers had not been perswaded of the trueth of the storie they would neuer haue published it to the worlde because it maketh so much against Romish Religion to which they were addicted whollie I say thirdly that the said authors write of this matter euen as they doe of other thinges Palmerius and Segebertus both haue these expresse wordes Fama est hunc IohanneÌ„ faeminam fuisse vni soli familiaritantum cognitam qui eam complexus est grauis facta peperit papa existens Quare eam inter pontifices non numerant quidam ideo nomini numeruÌ„ non facit The report is that this Iohn was a woman and knowne onely to one that was her familiar friend By whose familiaritie she became with childe and was deliuered euen while she was pope of Rome For which cause some doe not reckon her amongst the popes and so shee maketh not vp the number Marianus Polonus Bergomensis Platina and Carranza alreadie named teach the same doctrine writing vpon the same Iohn And note wel that M. Scotus affirmeth the storie constantly without al ands or ifs And so doth also M. Polonus who was the popes owne penitentiarie To these I may fitly adde that which your L. Abbot Bernard saith the beast saith he mentioned in the reuelation to whom was giuen a mouth speaking blasphemies and to make warres with the Saintes sitteth in Peters chaire His wordes are cited verbatim in the preface to my booke of Motiues The third replie S. Austen auoucheth plainly that the succession of the Bishops of Rome was one of the chiefest motiues that kept him in the catholicke church The answere I answere that succession is of two sorts materiall and formall Materiall is the succession of persons one after another in the same place Formall is the succession of persons one after another in the same doctrine in what place soeuer Now S. Austen in deede writing against the Manichies saith that succession of priestes from S. Peters seate kept him in the vnitie of the church And no maruell because the Bishops of Rome vntill the daies of S. Austen and long after were verie godly men and taught the same doctrine that S. Peter had done before them and so they ioyned succession formall with materiall which if the bishops of Rome would this day performe all godly christians would now ioyne with them as S Austen did in his time For as S. Irene saith wee ought to obey those priestes that with succession keepe the word of trueth The third obiection S. Paule saith plainly that there must be bishops and pastors in the church euen vntill the worlds end Whereupon it followeth that you protestantes haue no church at all For before Luther departed from vs all bishops and priestes for many yeares togither as your selues can neuer denie imbraced our Romish religion This obiection doth so gall you all as ye cannot tell in the world what answere to frame thereunto The answere Gentle wordes I pray you the matter is not so daungerous as ye thinke I therefore say first with saint Paul that pastors and doctors haue euer been in the church since Christs ascension are at this present and shall bee vnto the worldes end I say secondly that albeit the visible church cannot want materiall succession yet cannot that succession without formall yeelde anie sound argument of true faith and religion In regard hereof your owne doctor Nicolaus de Lyra after he hath told vs that many Popes haue swarued from the christian faith and become flat apostataes concludeth in these wordes Propter quod ecclesia consistit in illis personis in quibus est notitia vera confessio fidei veritatis by reason whereof the church consisteth in those persons in whome there is true knâ—wledge and confession of the faith and of veritie So then by the confession of your owne approoued doctor not they that sic in saint Peters chaire at Rome are the true and lawfull successors of Saint Peter but they that confesse and preach saint Peters doctrine I say thirdly that our reformed churches in England are this day able to shew succession both materiall and formal euen from the apostles themselues And therefore our succession is and ought to be reputed farre better then yours The first reply Howsoeuer you wrangle about your formall succession yet is it cleare to all that haue eyes that you haue no materiall succession at all vnlesse you tearme it materiall succession when lay persons possesse the roomes of lawful Bishops For I pray you good sir who ordered your Bishops and Priests in king Edwardes dayes Who sent your Ministers that this day preach and minister your sacraments Can you for shame deny that they were ordered by such as were runnagates from vs in Queene Maries time All the world knoweth yee cannot doe it And yet must you bee sent by ordinary vocation or else confesse that you most shamefully vsurpe that holie function For as saint Paul saith How shall they beleeue in him of whome they haue not heard And how shall they heare without a preacher And how shall they preach except they be sent The answere Our succession is both materiall and formall christian and apostolical as which is consonant to the holy scriptures and to the vsual practise of the primitiue church For first our bishops can proue their doctrine by the scriptures and by the testimonies of best approued writers as I haue alreadie proued in my Motiues and shall by Gods assistance proue more at large in this discourse Secondly our bishops haue mission and imposition of hands according to the practise apostolicall and of all approued antiquitie Thirdly our bishops are made in such forme and order as they haue euer beene accustomed a few popish superstitious and beggerlie ceremonies omitted which of late yeeres had crept into the church that is to say be free election of the Chapiter by
consecration of the archbishop and other his associates by the admission of the prince The second replie S. Epiphanius inueyeth bitterly against one Zachaeus who being but a â—ay man presumed impudently to handle the holie mysterieâ— And saint Ierome saieth of Hilarius the heretike that he could neither baptize nor administer the eucharist because he was but a deacon when hee went out of the church And therefore the man being dead the sect also died with him And what are you but deacons Nay what are you but meere lay men For you are neither consecrated after the old maner nor confirmed by the Pope but ye are accursed long sithence by his holie anathematismes The answere I say first that if meere lay men should presume in our churches to handle the holie mysteries they could not escape condigne punishment according to their demerites I say secondly that the want of your greasing and other your beggerly ceremonies can not make the consecration of our Bishops vnlawfull I say thirdly that our bishops are consecrated and confirmed according to the auncient maner of the primitiue church For three thinges onely are necessarie all which are this day God be thanked for it practised in the church of England to wit election of the whole congregation confirmation of the Prince and consecration with godly praiers and imposition of handes Of the imposition of handes mention is made to Timothie Of praiers with laying on of handes S. Luke speaketh in the Actes Of election by voyces of the people S. Peter maketh relation but of popish paltry ceremonies I finde no where any word at all That election ought to be by consent of the people S. Augustine shewed plainly in a most godly and prudent epistle wheÌ„ in the presence of Religianus and Martinianus bishops and of Saturninus Leporius Barnabas Fortunatianus Rusticus Lazarus and Eradius priestes he humbly requested of all the people that by their consentes Eradius might be chosen bishop after his death I wishe the reader to peruse the whole epistle as which is replenished with all spirituall sweetnes But S. Cyprian is so plaine and copious in this point of doctrine as who soeuer shal once reade him with iudgement can no longer stand in doubt thereof And that which I say of S. Cyprian in this behalfe must also be vnderstood of Caecilius Primus Polycarpus and other bishops of Africke assembled togither for this purpose For the Bishops and people of Spaine wrote letters by Felix and Sabinus to the African bishops requiring their aduise concerning the factes of Basilides and Martialis The bishops of Africa with S. Cyprian among other things answered to the churches of Spaine in these words Quando ipsa plebs maximè habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi quod ipsum videmus de diuina authoritate descendere vt sacerdos plebe praesente sub omnium oculis deligatur dignus atque idoneus publicâ— iudicio ac testimonio comprobâ—tur Because the people hath proper power to elect worthy priestes or to reiect the vnworthy which thing we see descendeth from Gods owne authoritie that when the people shal be present then the priest be chosen before all their eies and so be proâ—ued woorthie and fit by their publique iudgement and testimonie Out of these wordes I note first that the people may chuse or refuse him for their bishop whome they like or dislike I note secondly that the people haue this libertie de iure diuino granted from God himselfe and consequently that it cannot be altered by the power of man which is a speciall point wel worthy the obseruation I note thirdly that the people must giue publique testimonie to the election of their bishop I note fourthly that all this freedome is graunted to the people for the due triall of the life and conuersation of that person whome they must haue to be their bishop Yea this case is so cleere that the great Papist Iacobus Pamelius is enforced to graunt that this was the practise of the primitiue church and continued many hundred yeeres to witte vntill saint Gregory the first of that name who liued aboue fiue hundred and ninetie yeeres after the incarnation of our Lorde and Sauiour Iesus Christ and so long by Pamelius his graunt this was the practise of the primitiue church Yea this practise was of force indeede vntill our disholie father Pope Boniface the third inuaded saint Peters chaire from whome proceeded all idolatrie To this Pamelius obiecteth first that though the voyces of the people were required yet did they not subscribe to the election I answere that that skilleth not because the subscription was not anie purpose vnlesse it had the consent of the people But Pamelius replieth that the bishops were not enforced to admit whomsoeuer the people did require To the which I answere that neither were the people enforced to receiue whomsoeuer the Bishops would intrude vpon them This practise of the ancient Church will some men say is not this day obserued in our reformed Churches of England I answere that it is virtually obserued though not formally For after the election is made by the Deane and Chapiter libertie is granted to the whole congregation freely to declare their like or dislike and what exception they can giue against the partie which their freedome and liberty therein is made knowne by letters affixed in publike place Now that the Bishop ought to bee confirmed by the letters patents of the Prince and not of the Pope which is the third and last thing to be proued I will vnfold to the gentle reader by three important and irrefragable reasons grounded in the verie bowels of that selfe same practise which the papists will they nil they must perforce admit for good The practise whereof I speake is euident in the confirmation of these three Popes Pelagius the second Seuerinus and Benedictus the second For al these three and al other Bishops of Rome till the said Benedict inclusiue were euer elected and confirmed by the emperours commandement Which veritie is freely confessed in expresse tearmes by foure famous popish writers who therefore are and ought to be of more credite and force against the papists then any other authours whosoeuer the names of the Popish doctors are these Bapt. Platina Barâ—hol Carranza Anastasius Bibliothecarius and Onuphrius Panuinius Platina writeth thus touching the creation of Pelagius Nilenim tum in eligendo pontifice actum erat nisi eius electionem imperator approbasset For at that time which was after the incarnation of our redeemer 579 nothing was done effectually about the election of the Pope vnlesse the Emperour had confirmed the same Touching the creation of Seuerinus the same Platina writeth in this manner Vana tunc enim habebatur cleri ac populi electio nisi id imperatores auteorum exarchi confirmassent For the election of the cleargie
and not of the pastors as you papists doe these are his expresse words quippe veritas ecclesiae columna firmamentum est for the veritie of the church is both the piller and the firmament And Anselmus holdeth flatly the opinion of Saint Austen expounding the words of Saint Paul so plainly of the elect as no papist is able to auoide the same vnlesse they will reiect Anselmus because they cannot answere him and yet they cannot so do without blushing because they haue hitherto reputed him for their owne these therefore are his expresse words Domus in qua Deus habitat ecclesia est ex multis collecta fidelibus qui variis modis sunt docendi ipsa eius ecclesia est in perfectis columna id est sublimis recta inconcussibilis sustentans iuniores atque sustollens in eisdem perfectis est ipsa firmamentum veritatis quia verbis exemplis firmat in cordibus infirmorum veritatem fidei mandatorum Dei. The house in which God dwelleth is the whole congregation of the faithfull who are to be taught diuersly and the same church is in the perfect a piller that is sublime straight inconcussible supporting and lifting vp the yonger sort and in the same perfect it is the firmament of truth because both by words and examples it confirmeth in the hearts of the weake the veritie of faith and Gods commandements Out of these words I gather first that the house of God whereof the Apostle writeth to Timothy is not the rable of Popes and popish prelates but the congregation of the faithfull I gather secondly that it is meant as well of the laytie as of the clergy and my reason is founded in these words of Anselmus who are to be taught for the pastors ex officio must teach the flocke and not bee taught of the flocke I gather thirdly that it is meant specially of the elect my ground is this because Anselmus saith it is a piller in the perfect For if there be anie perfection it is doubtlesse in the elect and none else The Popes owne Doctours Panormitanus and Syluester doe tell vs in plaine and manifest tearmes that it is the whole congregation of the faithfull that cannot erre these are Syluesters words Et sic intellige glossam dicentem quòd ecclesia quae errare non potest dicitur non papa sed congregatio fidelium quae scilicet tenet fidem quam Petrus cum aliis populis docuit And thus must the glosse be vnderstood which saith that the church which cannot erre is not the pope but the congregation of the faithfull that is such as hold firmely that doctrine which Saint Peter with other godly people taught Panormitan writeth thus Ecclesia vniuersitatis errare non potest scilicet in fide vel articulis fidei pro hac tantum Christus in Euangelio orauit ad patrem in aliis autem non solum ecclesia particularis verum etiam vniuersalis id est collectiâ— fidelium seu concilium generale errare potest The church vniuersall cannot erre that is to say in the faith or in the articles of our beliefe and for this church onely was Christs praier when he prayed to his father in the gospel yet in other things not onely the particular church but the vniuersal likewise may erre that is to say the collection of the faithfull or a generall councell Yea the Popes own decrees affirme so much to wit that the church is catholicorum collectio the congregation of the faithfull catholickes And the popes own deare glosse vppon his own decrees doth most liuely describe that church which cannot erre to be the congregation of the faithful thus is it there written in expresse tearmes Quaero de qua ecclesia intelligas quod hic dicitur quod non possit errare si de ipso papa certum est quod papa errare potest respondeo ipsa congregatio fidelium hic dicitur ecclesia talis ecclesia non potest non esse I aske thee O Pope Luci of what church thou vnderstandest that which thou tellest vs in this place to wit that the church cannot erre For if thou vnderstandest it of the Pope himselfe it is verie certaine that the Pope may erre I answere therefore that the church is heere taken for the congregation of the faithfull and such a church can neuer erre indeede Out of these words of Pope Lucius I note first that when the Pope affirmeth that the church cannot erre then his own deere and faithful interpreter answereth roundly that that priuiledge is not granted to the Pope but to the whole congregation of the faithfull I note secondly that the saide glosse proueth by sundrie chapters of the Popes owne cannon-law that the Pope both may erre and hath alreadie erred de facto I note thirdly that that church in which the truth alwaies abideth is the multitude of the faithfull I therefore conclude with S. Paul S. Augustine Saint Chrysostome Anselmus Syluester Panormitanus the Popes owne canon-law and popish interpreters vpon the same that the congregation of the faithfull is the piller and ground of truth and that church which cannot erre The seauenth replie Christ promiseth to bee with his disciples vntill the worlds end but the Apostles departed hence long sithence therfore as the fathers truely gather he meaneth of being with the catholike byshops the true successours of the Apostles The answere I say first that your popish Bishoppes of late yeares are neither catholike bishops nor successours of the Apostles as I haue alreadie proued I say secondly that Christ promiseth his spirituall and inuisible presence not onely to the Apostles for their time but also to the congregation of the faithful til the worlds ende and I proue it by the testimonie of the holy fathers Saint Chrysostome and Saint Augustine Saint Chrysostome hath these expresse words Nam cum dicit ecce ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus vsque ad consummationem seculi noÌ„ ad eos tantummodo loquitur sed per eos ad vniuersum prorsus orbem For when he saith behold I am with you alwaies vntil the ende of the world hee speaketh not onely to them but to all doubtlesse that are in the whole worldâ— which assertion he hath in many other places of his works Saint Augustine hath words so important for this end and scope as more shall not neede to be alleaged Thus doth hee write in flat tearmes Non itaque fiâ— dictum est apostolis eritis mihi testes in Hierusalem in tota Iudaea Samaria vsque in extremum terrae tanquam ipsi foli quibus tunc loquebatur tantum munus fuerint impleturi sed sicut eis solis videtur dixisse quod dixit ecce ego vobiscum sum vsque in consummationem seculi quod tamen eum vniuersa ecclesiae promisisse quae aliis mortentibus aliis nasâ—eâ—tibus hic vsque in
Peters sucâ—essor and I haue already prooued it effectually I say secondly that all Christs sheepe were committed to all the apostles in like manner For Christ gaue all his apostles charge and authoritie to go into all the worlde and to teach all nations Which answer saint Austen sheweth excellently in the person of saint Peter to be accomplished his owne words are these Ecclesiae catholicae personam sustinet Petrus cùm ei dicitur ad omnes dicitur amas me pasce oues meas Peter representeth the person of the church catholique and when it is said to him it is said to all Louest thou me Feede my sheepe Loe the popish bulwarke is battered downe CHAP. III. Of the marriage of priests and ministers of the church The first Proposition AL Ministers which are not papists nor subiect to the lawes and rules of Poperie may lawfully marry euen by the doctrine of the Church of Rome albeit the vulgar sorte of Papists most bitterly exclaime against the same I proue it because all such ministers are meere lay men by the iudgement of the church of Rome which church for all that onely debarreth persons ecclesiasticall from the freedome of honourable wedlocke This probation is so euident as no learned papist can or will denie the same Peruse the end of the seauenth proposition following and it will satisfie thee in all respects The second Proposition Marriage was lawfull for all priests and other ministers of the church during all the time of the olde Testament This proposition is cleere to all such as diligently reuolue the holie Bibles neither doe I know any learned papist that by worde or writing denyeth the same For the holie prophet Ieremie was the son of Helkiah who was one of the priests that were at Anathoth Hophni and Phinehas were the sonnes of Heli the priest Sephora was the daughter of Iethro the priest of Midian and Saint Iohn Baptist was the sonne of Zacharias the priest to whome the angell of God was sent to bring him glad tidings The tidings were these that Elizabeth his wife should beare him a sonne albeit she was barren and well stricken in age And he receiued the message while he was occupied in prayer and in burning of incense at the right side of the alâ—are Whereby it clearely appeareth how acceptable the marriage of priests was then in Gods sight For first Saint Iohn was a very holie man and the precursor of our Sauiour Christ. Secondly Zacharias and Elizabeth his wife were both iust and walked in Gods commaundements without reproofe Thirdly the angell of God was sent to Zacharias to tell him that his wife should conceiue and beare him a sonne Fourthly this message was brought him euen then when he executed his priestly function All which circumstances well obserued do proue vndoubtedly that the marriages of priests are honourable in Gods sight The third Proposition Marriage is lawfull for priests and other ministers of the church euen now in the time of the new testament Where by the word priests I vnderstand all such as are admitted to preach Gods worde and to administer the holy sacraments This proposition may be prooued by many waightie and important reasons First because no text in the new Testament can be alleadged which debarreth the ministers thereof from the benefite of marriage graunted in the olde If any Papist will say that there is some such text in the new testament let him shew that text and wee will beleeue him In the meane season hee must pardon vs if wee giue not credite to his words Secondly because the apostle prooueth in two seuerall places that all priests may be married Where what I meane by priests is already shewed The first place is that reason which Saint Paule maketh to Timothie and is contained in these wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Bishop therefore must be vnreproueable the husband of one wife This text of holy scripture if it be throughly marked doeth plainely conuince that it is lawfull for a Bishop to marry Let vs therefore exactly examine the true meaning and sense thereof The Papists to maintaine their diabolicall doctrine of single life would rack this text to those wiues which bishops had before they were admitted to ecclesiasticall function but that is a forced and violent exposition contrary to the true meaning of the apostle For Saint Paule among other vertues conuenient for a Bishoppe requireth this for one that hee bee not coupled to more wiues then one at once Nneither is it possible to imagine any other true sense of this present text For first it is not of necessitie that a bishop haue a wife and yet doth the Apostle say that hee must be the husband of one wife For both they and wee agree in this that one may be a lawfull bishop and yet liue vnmarried Againe the apostle speaketh in the present tence must be the wife and not must haue been the wife so that the glosse of the papistes must needes be false who expound the wordes of the time already past Thirdly the Apostles wordes must needes be verified of mariage in some sense But first it cannot be meant of mariage already past because the verbe is of the time present Again it cannot be meant of the necessitie of marriage because a Bishop may lawfully liue vnmarried Therefore thirdly this must needes be the true meaning thereof to wit that a bishop may marry if he list but yet not haue many wiues at one and the same time as the Iewes and the Gentiles had And to this exposition doe accord not only S. Chrysostome and Theophilact but also their owne deere Cardinall Caietane S. Chrysostome hath these expresse wordes Non hoc veluti sanciens dicit quasi non liceat absque vxore episcopum fieri sed eius rei modum constituens Iudaeis quippe licitum erat etiam secundo matrimonio iungi duas itidem simul habere vxores honorabiles enim nuptiae He saith not this meaning to establish a law as though none could be a bishop who hath not a wife but his purpose is to appoint a measure in that behalfe For the Iewes might not only be twise married but also haue two wiues at once For marriage is an honourable thing The apostle therefore speaketh against Polygamie Yea S. Hierome confesseth that sundry writers expound this place against the Polygamie of the Iewes The same S. Chrysostome in another place hath these golden words Obstruere prorsus intendit haereticorum ora qui nuptias damnant ostendens eam rem culpâ carere imo ita esse pretiosam vt cum ipsa etiam possit quispiam ad sanctum episcopatus solium sâ—buehi The Apostle intendeth to confound the heretiques that condemne marriage declaring that it is faultlesse and a thing so pretious as a man may with it be promoted to the holy function of a bishop Thus saith S. Chrysostome whose wordes are so
plaine and pithie as no papist is able to wrest and writhe them to serue his turne For first S. Chrysostome prooueth marriage to be honourable and holy against the heretickes that condemned it and that because a Bishoppes function is honourable and holie who for all that may bee a married man Which argument were vaine and friuolous if Saint Chrysostome should speake of a Bishops marriage while he was a meere lay man For hereupon would it follow necessarily that tyrannie persecution adultery and murder should be honourable aswell as honest wedlocke I prooue it because no disparitie can be giuen betweene S. Chrysostomes reason and this of mine For first as the function of a bishop is honourable so is the function of an Apostle so is the function of a prophet Againe as a married man may be a bishop so may a persecutor of Christes church be an apostle for S. Paul was both so may an adulterer so may a murderer be an holy prophet for good king Dauid was all three Thirdly as tyrannie is a great sin â—lbeit once a tyrant may afterward become an apostle and as adultery and murder be greeuous crimes although once an adulterer and once a murderer may afterward bee an holy prophet euen so doubtlesse marriage may be an vnlawfull thing albeit once a married man may afterward be an holy bishop And so S. Chrysostome coulde not well conclude marriage to be lawful because once a married man may be a Bishop S. Chrysostome saith yet further that euen with it eumeâ with holie wedlocke one may be made a bishop euen while hee is a married man For as the father and the sonne so also the husband and the wife be relatiues and correlatiues whose nature is as all Logicians graunt to place and displace be and not be liue and die all at once For so soone as a man beginneth to be a father so soone hath he a childe and so soone as hee ceaseth to haue a childe so soone ceaseth he to be a father although he still remaine a man And euen so is it with the husband and the wife Adde hereunto that S. Chrysostome should not say with wedlocke but after it if he meant as the papistes woulde haue him to doe I therefore conclude that if S. Chrysostome meane not of a Bishoppes marriage during the very time hee is a bishop his argument is vaine and friuolous And in this argument Theophilactus subscribeth to S. Chrysostome The second place is that reason which S. Paule maketh to the Corinthians and is conteined in these wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Haue we not power to leade about a sister a wife aswel as the rest of the apostles and as the brethren of the Lorde and Cephas By this it appeareth manifestly if it be well marked that S. Peter and other of the apostles were married and that they did leade their wiues about with them when they went abroad preaching the holy gospel For first the Greeke worde in the originall signifieth a wife as well as a woman Secondly the word carrying about argueth a certaine interest and right in the partie that is carried about Thirdly it had been a very scandalous thing that the apostles being single men shoulde carry strange women about with them Fourthly this place cannot be vnderstoode of riche matrones because such women would haue relieued the apostles and not haue suffered them to be chargeable to their auditors and yet doth the apostle here speake of such women as were relieued by the preaching of the Gospel Fiftly if the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be not here taken for a wife but for a woman it must needes be a vain and childish addition because euery sister is a woman Sixtly because S. Clâ—ment and Eusebius Caesariensis expound this place of S. Paules wife and not of any other woman Iohannes Christophorsonus a great papist alledgeth S. Clements wordes out of Eusebius in this maner Clemens deinceps apostolos qui matrimonium contraxisse reperiuntur enâ—merat Ãdque contra eorum sententiam qui nuptias tollere abrogareque instituerent Numinquit sunt apostolos improbaturi Petrus enim Philippus liberos procrearunt Philippus filias viri collocauit in matrimonium Paulus etiam non veretur in quadam epistola contugis suae mentionem facere quam eò minime secum circumduxit quò facilius liberiusque suo fungeretur ministerio Clement afterward reckoneth the apostles who are knowne to haue been married men and that against their opinion who endeuoured to abrogate and take away marriage Will they saith he condemne the apostles for both Peter and Philip begat children and Philip bestowed his daughters vpon husbandes in marriage Paul also blusheth not in one of his Epistles to make mention of his wife whom he woulde not carrie about with him to the end hee might preach the gospel more freely See the first proposition following The first obiection It is cleere that S. Paul would not marry his owne sister and therefore the woman he speaketh of could not be his wife The answere I answere that the names of brother and sister in the primitiue church were proper to the faithfull and true beleeuers Sundrie wiues also in those daies were of a dissonant religion from their husbands S. Paule therefore to shew his wife to be a christian and a true beleeuer calleth her a sister As if he had said the woman I speake of is not only my wife but withall a christian and a true beleeuer The 2. obiection These women that S. Paul speaketh of were not the wiues of the apostles but cerâ—aine deuout women that followed the Apostles for zeale of the gospel as we reade of many women that followed Christ and did not thereby commit any scandall at all The answere I say first that the women S. Paule speaketh of were the wiues of the apostles as I haue proued I say secondly y t it is one thing to follow voluntarily as the women did our sauiour Christ and another thing to be led about as were the women of whom the apostle speaketh I say thirdly that it was an vsual and ordinary thing aswell for women as for men to resort to Hierusalem whither these women followed Christ. I say fourthly that these womâ—n were many togither and went in the company of their husbandes and neighbours and so they could not be subiect to any scandal at al. But if the Apostles were single men and went into seuerall partes of the worlde and led single women about with them so must they then needes be subiect vnto scandall vnlesse they were as is said their lawfull wiues indeed I say fiftly that if they were old women they could not endure the labours of so painfull and long iournies And if they were yong women or vnder threescore they ought to marry according to Paules doctrine The 4. proposition Marriage was deemed lawful for all sortes of people aswel
for ecclesiasticall persons as others that for many hundreth yeares togither after Christes glorious ascension into heauen This proposition I prooue many waies First because Peter Iames Paul Philip and the rest of the apostles were all married as is already prooued Secondly because sundrie of the holy fathers had wiues and children S. Gregory Nazianzene was a bishops sonne and admitted to the pastorall charge by his father in his life time S. Cheremon the bishop of Nicopolis in Egypt was a married man and a stout confessor For both he and his wife being wel stricken in yearâ—s fled from persecution to a mountaine in Arabia from whence they neither returned neither were after that seene of any man S. Philogonius so highly commended by S. Chrysostome was a married bishop and had a daughter S. Spiridion who wrought wonderfull myracles in his life time was the bishop of Cyprus and a married man he had a daughter Irene by name who being full of pietie and sanctimonie of life died a virgine This married bishop liued about 350. yeares after Christ. Eupsychius the bishop of Caesaria was a married man and soone after his marriage martyred for Christ Iesus For as Nicephorus and Cassiodorus report in their ecclesiasticall histories he was put to death being as yet in manner a new married man Thirdly because the Popes owne canon lawe telleth vs that many Popes were the sons of priests to wit Bonifacius Agapitus Theodorus Syluerius Foelix Hosius Gelasius Deusdedit and many others But perhaps our papists will say that all these were bastards and answer with their glosse that vitium tollitur per successionem the fault is taken away by succession Oh what will not poperie doe But yet wee may put them in mind of another canon which telleth them that al these Popes aforenamed were legitimate children because in those dayes Popes and Bishops might marrie lawfully Which assertion proueth exactly my proposition Fourthly because many councels haue decreed this veritie and the Apostles themselues in their canons haue set down this decree Episcopus aut presbyter aut diaconus vxorem suam praetextu religionis non abiicito si abiicit segregator à communione si perseuerat deponator Let neither Bishop nor Priest nor Deacon put away his wife vnder pretence of religion if hee so doe let him be excommunicate if he contâ—â—ue let him be deposed Out of these words I note first that in the dayes of the Apostles it was lawfull for Bishoppes Priests and Deacons to haue wiues I note secondly that if either Bishop priest or Deacon shoulde put away his wife vnder pretence of holynesse or religion for that his offence hee ought to bee excommunicated I note thirdly that if the Bishoppe priest or Deacon would not receiue his wife againe whome he had put away vnder pretence of holinesse which the Pope this day so straitly commaundeth then such Priest Bishoppe and Deacon ought to bee depriued of his liuing I note fourthly that these Canons how soeuer they be indeede are highly magnified of the papists and therefore must they of necessitie be a forceable testimonie against them In the councell of Ancyra it was decreed that the deacons who in the time of their orders saide they woulde marrie shoulde continue still in the ministerie euen after the celebration of their marriage Where note that this councell was holden about three hundred and eight yeeres after Christs incarnation The councel of Gangra accursed him that thought a married priest might not minister the holy communion The third councell of Constantinople the sixt generall synode so called decreed that Priests Deacons and subdeacons should continue with their lawfull wiues and begeâ—te children at al such time times as they were not in actual execution of the ministerie albeit they knew the church of Rome to haue another custome This famous generall councel was holden about the yere of our Lord 681. where were present two hundred eightie and nine bishops al which though so many in number and liuing so manie yeeres after Christ confessed neuerthelesse that the marriage of Priests was a lawfull thing The fift Proposition The prohibition of marriage in ecclesiastical persons is not onely against Gods holy ordinance but withall the flat doctrine of the deuill The former part of this proposition I proue sundrie waies First Saint Paul willeth euerie man to haue his wife and euery woman to haue her husband and that for this end and purpose to auoid fornication Out of which words I note first that where euerie man is named there doubtlesse no man is excepted I note secondly that marriage is a soueraigne medicine against fornication and therefore ought to be vsed of all such as finde themselues grieued with that disease And consequently since that disease is as well incident to persons ecclesiasticall as secular the medicine is as necessarie and as lawful for the one sort as it is for the other For which cause Paphnutius spake openly in the councel of Nice that it was vnlawfull to debarre Bishops and Priests from their wiues but hereof more at large heereafter Secondly S. Paule hauing commended the estate of the vnmarried and widowes as more conuenient and profitable doth forthwith wish those that cannot abstaine to vse the remedie of marriage And hee yeeldeth this reason because it is better to marrie then to burne Thirdly marriage is honourable among all and the vndefiled bed but whoremongers and adulterers God wil iudge Out of which words I note first that since marriage is honourable in all sorts of men it ought not to be blamed in persons ecclesiasticall vnlesse happily which the Apostle perceiued not their function taketh from them the nature of men I note secondly the antithesis which the Apostle here maketh for as adulterie shal be punished in all sorts of people none at all excepted euen so must marriage bee honourable in all sorts no one or other exempted from the same And where the wound is common to all there the medicine must not be applied onely to some few For as Haymo gathereth learnedly adulterers are therefore iustly punished because the remedie of wedlocke is granted to them nowe if this learned writer who liued aboue 700 yeeres agoe conclude effectually out of S. Paul as euerie indifferent reader will say hee doth then doubtlesse must it folow necessarily that either ecclesiastical persons may as lawfully marrie as others or else that they cannot bee so iustly punished for fornication as other men ought to be This illation is so euident as none with right reason will denie the same Fourthly Saint Paul confesseth plainely that hee hath no authoritie to command single life or verginitie therefore the Pope chalengeth greater authoritie then the Apostle when he commandeth to abstaine from marriage Fiftly Christ appointeth marriage for all such as are neyther eunuches made by men nor by the
were married to wit that they would be louing diligent carefull obedient to their husbands and aboue all the rest keep their coniugall faith The third faith was that which these widowes made to the bishop the whole church to wit that they would execute their deaconship honestly faithfully constantly perseuer therein to the end The yonger widowes waxing wanton against Christ did not only breake their last promise forsaking the ministery of the church but their first and most holy promis made in baptisme while they departing from the purity of honest life and religion consecrated themselues to paganisme and infidelitie and so purchased to themselues Gods wrath eternal damnation Therefore the apostle maketh no mention of any vow but only reproueth vnconstant women who being relieued a long time by the common tresure of the congregation to minister to the sicke persons did afterward both forsake their promise Christ too and became heathens running after satan For this is euident by the words of the 15. verse of the 5. chapter from whence the obiection is taken where the apostle saith that some widowes are already turned back from Christ their guide to whom they had dedicated theÌ„selues in baptisme folowed after satan It wil not serue the papists to say after their wonted maner that marriage breaketh not our promise made in baptisme For albeit the faith of baptisme be not brokeÌ„ by marrying absolutely and simply yet is it indeede broken by marrieng against Christ that is by marrying in such maner as they renounce christianitie And this my answer is confirmed because if the apostle had meant otherwise he would haue called it the last faith and not the first I say fiftly that these words for when they shall wax wanton against Christ they wil marry do euidently proue that S. Paul meaneth the promise made in baptisme and I desire the gentle reader to marke my discourse attentiuely for this obiection is the bulwarke to defend this article of poperie I therefore note first that these foure things are really distinguished in S. Paul to wit the waxing wanton of the widows the marriage of the widowes the damnation of the widowes and the breach of their faith I note secondly that the wantonnes of the widows was before their marriage for so the apostle saith expresly I note thirdly that the widowes promised in their baptisme to keepe Gods holy commaundements among which one is this Non concupisces Thou shalt not lust I note fourthly y t the breach of euery commandement deserueth eternal death For so saith the apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for y e reward of sin is death And another scripture saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Accursed be he that confirmeth not the words of this lawe in doing them for as saint Iames saith though a man keep all the residue of the law yet if he offend in any one point he becommeth guiltie of all I note fiftly that by Gods law we are bound to refer all our workes all our words and al our thoughts to his honour and glory for so teacheth his apostle and consequently that the wantonnes of the yonger widowes was a breach of Gods holy laws These points obserued I conclude that the yonger widows had damnation not for marrying but for being wanton before their marriage For in being wanton against Christ they brake their first faith made in baptisme that is they performed not that obedience they promised in baptisme in not performing that obedience they deserued eternal death and so they had damnation bicause they were wanton against Christ. S. Paul saith not that they had damnation bicause they married which must be wel marked but bicause they made voide their first faith in breaking Gods coÌ„mandements as ye haue heard I say sixtly that saint Paul is so far from condemning marriage in the yonger widowes after their promise or vow which the papists would most willingly father vpon him as he exhorteth them to marry euen after such their promise or vowe I prooue it note wel what I say because so soone as hee hath willed the yonger widowes to marry in the 14. verse foorthwith in the 15. verse he yeeldeth the reason of that his aduise to wit because certaine are already turned backe after Satan Now in the 15. verse he must needs speake of such widowes as were receiued into the ministerie of the church because none could be turned backe from that to which they neuer were admitted he therfore speaketh likewise of the betrothed widows in the next verse before which I make euident three wayes first because otherwise his illation in the 15. verse shoulde be foolish friuolous foolish because it could haue no connexion with the 14. verse friuolous for that it could not conclude his purpose secondly because he had already in the 11. verse charged the bishop Timothy not to receiue any widow vnder the age of 60. yeeres This conclusion therefore being made touching the widowes not yet admitted he goeth forward and giueth his aduise for the yonger widowes then receiued of the church as if he had saide for as much as some of the yonger sort haue alreadie beene wanton and followed sathan and there is also danger in the rest I decree that hereafter none vnder 60. yeares be receiued and I exhort the yonger alreadie receiued and desirous to marrie to betake themselues to holie wedlocke to bring forth children to be housewiues and so to giue no occasion to the aduersarie to speake euill Thirdly because otherwise Saint Paul should equiuocate verie grossely in one and the selfe same reason giuing one signification to the same word in the premisses an other in the consecution Thus much of this obiection in special and of the mariages of Bishops priests deacons and religious persons in generall as also of the first â—rohibition against the same It nowe remaineth for the complement of this discourse that I solue certaine obiections made generally against this doctrine for which shalbe assigned the next chapter CHAP. IIII. Of certaine generall obiections against the marriages of Priests with briefe solutions of the same The first obiection BE sanctified therefore and be holy for I am holy your lord and God I answer that al the Israelits were commanded to be sanctified to be holy aswel as were the priests and so if this argument were of force in popish sence al people aswel as priestes shoulde abstaine from the vse of holy wedlocke yea the priests were euen then married as is already proued The second obiection I would haue you without care the vnmarried careth for the things of the lord how he may please the Lord but he that is married careth for the things of the world how hee may please his wife therefore priests ought not to be married The answere I say first that S. Paul preferreth the state of the vnmarried before the
to beleeue Therefore by due application the monasticall vow is a wicked and damnable thing I say seauenthly that euerie vowe must bee de meliori bono of a better good or of that which is a more holy thing so writeth their approued doctour and canonized saint Aquinas in his theological Summe and therfore because the popish perpetuall vowe of single life is not of such a better good it must needs be a wicked vnlawful act To prooue the saide popish vow is not of a better good the reader must diligently obserue these points first that it is one thing to speake of virginity in it selfe or as it is compared with wedlocke and another thing to speake of it as it is perpetually vowed in such such a person secondly that to leade a single life is indifferent to such persons as haue the gift of continencie but not to others thirdly that such intangle themselues in snares by Saint Paules doctrine as do not know their future continuance and for all that make a popish vow of single life for euer fourthly that it is a great sinne to do any thing which is not of faith for so saith the apostle Hereupon it followeth first that the vow of single life or virginitie is vnlawfull the reason is euident because it is not a better good I prooue it by the flat testimonie of Saint Gregorie Nazianzene a most eloquent and learned father who was S. Hieroms master and taught him the holy scriptures and for his wonderfull knowledge therein was rightly surnamed Theologus as recordeth Simeon Metaphrastes these are his expresse wordes Cum in duo haec genera vita nostra omnis diuisa sit nimirum in matrimonium caelibatū quorum alterum vt praestantius diuinius ita maioris quoque laboris periculi alterum humilius quidem abiectius caeterum minori periculo obnoxium vitatis vtriusque status incommodis quicquid in vtroque commodi erat delegerit in vnumque coegerit alterius nempe sublimitatem alterius securitatem fuerìtque citra supercilium pudica caelibatus commoda matrimonio temperans ac reipsa ostendens neutrum horum suapte natura tale esse vt nos prorsus vel Deo vel mundo astringat vel ab his penitus nos separet Sic quidem vt alterum natura omnino fugiendum sit alterum prorsus expetendum verum mentem esse quae nuptias virginitatem recte moderetur atque vtrumque horum instar materiae cuiuspiam ab artifice ratione componi ad virtutem elaborari Whereas our whole life is diuided into these two kindes to wit into matrimonie and single life whereof the one as it is more excellent and diuine so is it also of greater labour danger the other more base and vile but subiect to lesse danger Gorgonia eschewing the discommodities of either state hath chosen and gathered into one what commoditie soeuer was in both that is the sublimitie of the one and the securitie of the other She was chaste and nothing proud tempering the commodities of single life with marriage and shewing in very deede that neither of the twaine is such of it owne nature as can eyther ioyne vs wholy to God or to the worlde or withdraw vs wholy from God or from the world So verily as the one ought of it owne nature be auoided and the other to bee required but that it is the minde that doth rightly moderate both marriage and virginitie and that either of them must bee by reason composed of the artificer as certaine vnwrought stuffe so be made a vertue These are the words of this great clarke and holy father in which he hath learnedly described the natures and properties both of marriage virginitie which I haue alleaged at large because they are worthy of our consideration and doe exactly explaine this intricate and important matter Out of them therefore I note first that as virginitie is more excellent one way so is it more dangerous another way and so all things considered there is no preeminence in either of the twaine at least not in virginitie I note secondly that as matrimonie is more secure and free from perill so may it also include al the good that is in virginitie For as S. Gregorie saith Gorgonia being a married woman ioyned the sublimitie most excellent part of virginitie with the securitie of hir chast wedlocke I note thirdly that by S. Gregories discourse wedlock is to be preferred before virginitie For al the good parts of virginitie may be included in chast wedlocke not so the good parts of wedlocke in virginitie that is virginity is euer subiect to perill from which wedlocke abideth free I adde hereunto that the world may be cōtinued without virginity although wedlocke be necessarie for the same I note fourthly that virginitie of it owne nature can neither ioyne vs to God nor withdraw vs from God but is as marriage in that respect I note fiftly that neither wedlock nor yet virginity is a virtue of it selfe but a peece of vnwrought stuffe which then becommeth a vertue when it is perfectly laboured by the worker and consequently that virginitie hath no such perfection and merite as our papists doe ascribe vnto it Clemens Alexandrinus taught this doctrine long before Saint Gregorie It followeth secondly vppon the foure obseruations that if virginitie were a better good as it is considered in it selfe the contrarie whereof is proued yet woulde it not follow that it were a better good as it is vowed of him or hir that hath not y e gift the reason is euident because our sauiour hath appointed such persons to vse the soueraigne medicine of chast wedlocke and so single life is so farre from being a better good in such persons that it is no good at all but a flat damnable sin Besides this such persons expose themselues to great perill that is to commit fornication because they know not their own future state It followeth thirdly that such a vowe cannot be of a better good because it is not of faith I proue it because his act cannot be of faith who knoweth not whether his act please God or not yea he contemneth God presuming to do that which is offensiue in Gods sight If they answere that they know God will giue them the gift for asking I replie that so to say is great presumption For Christ himselfe saith that all cannot liue single but they onely to whom it is giuen and saint Paul after he had wished euerie man to be as himselfe added forthwith but euerie one hath his proper gift of God one after this manner and another after that Saint Ambrose saith sola est virginitas quae suaderi potest imperari non potest onely virginitie is a thing which may be counselled but commanded it cannot be I say eightly that a lawfull and godly vowe must bee of such things as are in our owne
the opiniō of the Pharisies who held that only God could forgiue sin I note secondly that if Christ had not been equall with God the father he would neuer haue taken vpon him to pardon sin and consequently that the pope who will giue a generall pardon of al sinnes must by S. Chrysostomes iudgement be either as good as God or worse then the diuell I note thirdly that it was needfull for Christ to shew himselfe to be God because otherwise he might iustly haue been charged with blasphemie because he did pardon sin And consequently y t our pope and his popish vassals our Iesuites moonkes and friers must either prooue themselues Gods by signes and myracles or else confesse themselues to blaspheme God while they remit and pardon sinne For they all chalenge this power of remitting sinne in their so termed sacrament of penance S. Ambrose and S. Hilary both are of the very same iudgement S. Ambrose writeth in this maner Cognosce interioris homines sanitatem cui peccata donantur quae cum Iudaei asserunt à solo Deo posse concedi Deum vtique confitentur suóque iudicio perfidiam suam produnt qui vt opus astruant personam negant Sequitur magna itaque infidae plebis amentia vt cum confessa fuerit solius dei esse donare peccata nō credat deo pecca ta donanti Acknowledge the curing of the inward man whose sins are forgiuen which when the Iewes confesse that onely God can forgiue they doubtlesse confesse him to be God by their owne iudgement bewray their false faith who to establish the work denie the person Great therfore is the incredulitie of faithles people who confessing that only God can forgiue sins doth not for all that beleeue in God that forgiueth sins S. Hilary hath these words Mouet Scribas remissum ab homine peccatam hominem enim tantum in Iesu Christo contuebantur remissum ab eo quod lex laxare non poterat fides enim sola iustificat Deinde murmurationem eorum dominus introspicit dicitque facile esse filio hominis in terra peccata dimittere verum enim nemo potest dimittere peccata nisi solus Deus ergo qui remittit Deus est quia nemo remittit nisi Deus It stirreth the Scribes that a man should forgiue sin because they beheld in Iesu Christ onely a man not God and that to be forgiuen by him which the law could not release For faith onely iustifieth Afterward the Lord looketh into their murmuring and saith that it is easie for the son of man to forgiue sins on earth for it is true that no man can forgiue sinnes but onely God therefore he that remitteth sinnes is God because no man remitteth sinnes but God By these testimonies it is euident that God and onely God can forgiue sins that our sauiour Christ did effectually proue himselfe to be God in that he could forgiue sin Which kind of reasoning had been of no force at all if others beside god as monks Iesuits could haue remitted sin The replie The text saith that the faithfull people did glorifie God for that he gaue such power to men as to remit sins and to do miracles knowing that so to doe by commission from God was not against his glory The answere I answer that although sundry of the people were reuerently affected towards Christ by reason of his miracles yet did they not behold or confesse God manifested in the flesh but still thought Christ to be a pure man though a great and holy prophet And the reason hereof is euident because they did not acknowledge Christ to be God but to haue receiued that power from God as an holy man for as the text saith the multitudes seeing it were afraid and glorified God that gaue such power vnto men Out of which words I note first that they beleeued not Christ to be God because they were afraid For as Saint Iohn saith he that confesseth Iesus to be the sonne of God wil loue him and be without feare I note secondly that they gaue glorie to god but not to the Sauior of the world for albeit that no man but Christ wrought the miracles yet did they glorifie God for giuing such power to men whereby it is cleare that they esteemed of him as of a pure man and that god had giuen that power to others as well as to him otherwise they would haue spoken in the singular number and not in the plurall of onely Christ whom they saw and not of moe whome they neither saw nor could see working in that diuine maner I note thirdly that it is a bluntish kinde of disputation when the conceit of the vulgar sort is alleaged to refute Christs diuine reasoning The third obiection S. Paul himselfe gaue pardon to the incestuous Corinthian who had committed fornication with his fathers wife The answere I say first that if popish pardons should be grounded vpon this place it would follow by a necessarie consecution that the Pope himselfe could pardon no more then euerie simple priest which sequele I coniecture cannot well stand with the Popes liking I proue it because the other ministers in Corinth gaue the selfe same pardon with S. Paul and therfore doth the Apostle say To whom ye pardon anie thing I also pardon I say secondly that popish confession must of necessity go before popish pardoning in al such as sin mortally and therefore since the apostle doth not once name popish confession it followeth perforce that he neither speaketh of popish pardoning I say thirdly that the pardoning whereof S. Paul speakketh is nothing else but that he who was excommunicate for his publique trespas may after signes of true remorce be restored to the church againe and after their sharpe censure of correction find pardon and mercie at their hands This much I prooue out of saint Paules owne words which are these It is sufficient to the same man that he was rebuked of many so now contrariwise ye ought rather to forgiue him and comfort him lest he should be swallowed vp with ouermuch heauines Wherefore I pray you that ye would confirme your loue towards him After this graue and godly exhortation he adioyneth these words To whom ye forgiue any thing I forgiue also as if hee had saide if yee be content to receiue him into the church againe I am therewith well pleased For he yeeldeth two reasons why the church of Corinth ought to pardon the excommunicate person the one is for that hee seemed to haue giuen sufficient signes of his vnfained repentance the other is lest too much rigour of correction should bring him to desperation For which cause S. Paul requesteth them to declare the consent of the whole congregation that hee was taken againe for a brother and pardoned for his offence So then S. Paul and the church of Corinth did pardon no otherwise indeede but euen as we our selues are
taught to pardon in the Lords praier saying and pardon vs our trespasses as we pardon or forgiue them that offend against vs. I say fourthly that the renowmed popish Thomist Syluester Prierias sometime maister of their so termed sacred pallace confesseth plainely according to right and reason that popish pardons were neither knowne to vs by this place of S. Paul neither yet by any other place of the whole scripture these are his expresse words Indulgentia nobis per scripturam minimè innotuit licet inducatur illud 2. Corin. 2. si quid donaui vobis sed nec per dicta antiquorum doctorum sed modernorum Dicitur enim Gregorius indulgentiam septennem in stationibus Romae posuisse quia ecclesia hoc facit seruat credendum est ita esse quia regitur spiritu sancto The popes pardons saieth frier Syluester their surnamed absolutus theologus were neuer knowne to vs by the Scriptures although some alledge S. Paul to the Corinthians for that purpose neither were they knowne by the ancient fathers but onely by late writers For Gregorie is said to haue appointed seuen yeeres of indulgence in his stations at Rome And because the church of Rome this doth and thus obserueth we must beleeue it to be so for the church is gouerned by y e holy ghost Out of these words I note first that this frier Syluester was a man of great fame among the papists for his singular learning reputed an absolute diuine and therefore that his testimonie must needs be very authenticall among the papists I note secondly that Antoninus a learned papist who was the archbishop of Florence euen in the altitude of popedome holdeth the selfe same opinion and hath the very same wordes now recited out of Syluester I note thirdly that popish pardons can neither be proued by the scriptures nor by the ancient fathers and consequently that pope Boniface the eight of that name was the first founder thereof as is already proued For albeit Syluester seemeth here to ascribe the originall of some kind of pardoning to Gregorie yet doth he onely tel that by heare-say and besides that Gregorie either gaue no pardons in deede which is very probable or at the most he pardoned after saint Paules manner some part of seuerity inioyned by the church I note fourthly that the chiefest ground vppon which Popish pardoning is built is the bare and naked commaundement of the pope For whatsoeuer the church saith that is to say the pope that must be beleeued because forsooth the pope cannot erre but yet that he both may erre and hath alreadie erred de facto I haue prooued aboundantly in my Booke of Motiues where the gentle Reader shall finde the opinions of other popish doctors most fit for this end and purpose Shamelesse and impudent therefore are the papists when they blush not to father their Romish pardons vpon saint Paul The reply In the councell of Laterane which was almost an hundred yeeres before pope Bonifacius mention is made of pardons with good liking of the same yea S. Gregorie appointed stations and granted pardons for frequenting them The answere I say first that in processe of time when sinne increased and the people waxed slow in accomplishing ecclesiasticall satisfaction inioyned redemptions and commutations succeeded in the place thereof and canonicall discipline began to decay as their owne Burchardus writeth about the yeere of Christ 1020. I say secondly that by little and little after such redemptions commutations superstitious opinions were instilled into the minds of the vulgar people as that the fulfilling of the multe inioined by the church was necessarie for saluatioÌ„ able to satisfie the iust iudgement of God that god required much more satisfaction then was so inioyned and that for the same they must either satisfie in this life or afterward in purgatorie if they were not pardoned by the pope I say thirdly that albeit penance satisfaction or canonicall discipline vsed in the olde church and auncient councels which was nothing else but a ciuill multe imposed to publike offenders not to satisfie Gods iudgement but to bridle ill life and to keepe comely order in the church was by little and little changed into superstitious popish satisfaction yet had not that execrable doctrine gotten place in the church in the time of the Lateran councel I proue it because that councel maketh mention onely de poenitentiis iniunctis of penance inioyned which was holden Anno Dom. 2215. I say fourthly that the bishoppe of Rome now called Pope 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might haue released or pardoned in his owne churches and iurisdiction as Cornelius and other good bishoppes did such ligaments mults or canonicall corrections as he had inioyned to publike offenders and perhappes Gregorie the Great granted some such pardons indeede but that hee gaue pardons for sinne and to satisfie Gods iustice as Popes this day doe it can neuer be proued out of his works The fourth obiection The blessed virgin Marie holy Iob and manie others haue suffered much more then was needefull for their owne sinnes And saint Paul saith of himselfe that he supplied the wants of Christs passion for his church which super abundant satisfactions of S. Paul and others bicause they were not determined by themselues to this or that particular person it pertaineth to the supreme pastour the popes holines to make application thereof as he seeth cause Which application is termed pardoning for that when the pope applieth twentie degrees of the satisfaction of Christ or of S. Paul or some other saint to one of his nunnes monkes or iesuites then so many degrees of satisfaction are pardoned to such a nunne monke or iesuite which the saide nunne monke or iesuite should otherwise haue done either in this life or else in purgatorie The answer I say first that no saint did or can suffer so much as is sufficient for his sinnes And I prooue it euidently because the best learned papists graunt freely and truely that euery mortall sin hath in it infinite deformitie as which is an auersion from God of infinite maiestie and consequently that God requireth infinite satisfaction for the same yet so it is that pure man is vncapable of euery infinit action for otherwise he should be an other God and consequently mans actions of which no one among all can be infinite can not yeeld condigne compensation for one only mortall sin and yet is euery sin mortall indeed as I haue prooued in my Motiues euen by popish doctrine Pervse the eight article of Dissention in the second Booke of the said Motiues and thou shalt see euidently that not only Gerson Durand Baius Roffensis and Almayn who al were renowmed papists but euen the common schooles of late dayes doe holde the same opinion I say secondly that God hath alreadie rewarded euerie saint in heauen as he will also in time rewarde euerie saint nowe on earth fâ—r aboue their deserts Which I prooue
being free from sinne no need at all to suffer for her selfe The answere I say first that what the late churche of Rome beleeueth is not much materiall because it is become the whore of Babylon as I haue prooued copiously I say secondly that though the blessed virgin had great grace and sanctification bestowed on her as who was not onely the mother of man but of God also yet was she conceiued in originall sinne vndoubtedly For so the holy scripture doth conuince so the auncient fathers affirme so the best approoued popishe doctors graunt and so right reason doth euidently conclude As by one man saith the apostles sinne entered into the world and death by sinne and so death went ouer all men in whom all men haue sinned Againe as by the offence of one the fault came on all men to condemnation so by the iustifying of one the benefite abounded towarde all men to the iustification of life And in another place there is none righteous no not one Againe in another place the scripture hath concluded al vnder sin y t the promise by the faith of Iesus Christ should be giuen to them that beleeue And the holy Psalmographe saith Enter not into iudgement with thy seruaunt for in thy sight shall none that liueth be iustified All which textes and such like are generally spoken of all no one nor other is exempt S. Ambrose hath a long discourse in which he prooueth that none but onely Iesus Christ is void of sinne These among others are his wordes Omnes intra retia erant imò adhuc intra retia sumus quia nemo sine peccato nisi solus Iesus quem non cognoscentem peccatum peccatum pro nobis fecit pater Infra venit ad laqueos Iesus vt Adam solueret venit liberare quod perierat Omnes retibus tenebamur nullus alium eruere poterat cum seipsum non possit eruere All were in the nettes yea we are yet in the nets because none is without sinne but onely Iesus whom when hee knewe no sinne the father made him a sacrifice for sinne in our behalfe Iesus came to the snare that hee might loose Adam he came to deliuer that which was lost We were al taken in the net we could not deliuer one another when no man could deliuer himselfe S. Augustine teacheth the same veritie in many places of his workes but I wil content my selfe with one or two Thus therfore doth he write vpon the 34. Psalm sic ergo peccatum domini quod factum est de peccato quia inde carnem assumpsit de massa ipsa quae mortem meruerat ex peccato Etenim vt celerius dicam Maria ex Adam mortua propter peccatum Adae Adam mortuus est propter peccatum caro domini ex Maria mortua est propter delenda peccata Euen so therefore is it called the sinne of the Lord which is made of sinne because hee tooke flesh from thence of that masse which had deserued death by reason of sin For to speake more brieflie Mary descending of Adam is dead by reason of Adams sinne Adam is dead for his owne sin and our Lords flesh of Mary is dead to put away sinne S. Augustine in another place hath these wordes Proinde corpus Christi quamuis ex carne foeminae assumptum est quae de illa carnis peccati propagine concepta fuerat tamen quia non sic in ea conceptum est quomodo erat illa concepta nec ipsa erat caro peccati sed similitudo carnis peccati Therefore Christes body although it were assumpted of the flesh of a woman which was conceiued of the stocke of the flesh of sinne yet because it was not so conceiued in it as it was conceiued therefore was it not the flesh of sinne but only the similitude of the flesh of sinne The same S. Augustine in another place writeth in this maner Sine dubio caro Christi non est caro peccati sed similis carni peccati quid restat vt intelligamus nisi ea excepta omnem reliquam humanam carnem esse peccati hinc apparet illam concupiscentiam per quam Christus concipi noluit fecisse in genere humano propaginē mali quia Mariae corpus quamuis inde venerit tamen eam non traiecit in corpus quod non inde concepit Doubtlesse Christes flesh is not the flesh of sinne but only like to the flesh of sinne what therefore must wee vnderstande but that all other mens flesh besides it is the flesh of sinne And heereuppon it is cleare that that concupiscence by which Christ would not be conceiued dispersed sin throughout mankind because the body of Marie though it came from thence yet could it not conuey that into the bodie which was not conceiued thereupon but of the holy ghost These words of S. Austen and Saint Ambrose are so plaine and easie as they neede no declaration Thomas Aquinas albeit hee constantly defendeth that the blessed virgin was neither borne in sinne nor yet sinned actually after hir birth more or lesse graunteth for all that that shee was conceiued in originall sinne and hee prooueth it by two euident reasons whereof this is one Sanctificatio de qua loquimur non est nisi emundatio à peccato originali culpa autem non potest emundari nisi per gratiam cuius subiectum est sola creatura rationalis ideo ante infusionem animae rationalis B. virgo sanctificata non fuit Sanctification whereof we now speake saith the cheefest popish doctour is nothing else but a clensing from originall sinne but sinne cannot bee purged without grace whose subiect can be nothing but a reasonable creature and therefore the blessed virgin could not be sanctified from sin before a reasonable soule was infused into her bodie This argument of Aquinas is so inuincible in popish manner of proceeding as no Iesuite in the world though they all hold the contrarie can inuent a sufficient solution for the same Deuout and holy Bernarde whose authoritie is great with all Papists holdeth the same opinion with Aquinas For albeit hee sharply reproue the practise of the cathedrall church of Lions for keeping the festiuitie of the conception of the blessed virgin calling that practise the noueltie of presumption the mother of temeritie sister of superstition and the daughter of leuitie yet doth he hold that shee was borne without sinne and 〈◊〉 continued all her life All learned men that euer wrote before our seditious lately hatched Iesuites confesse the conception of the blessed virgin to haue beene polluted with sinne and I prooue it by an irrefragable demonstration First because the blessed virgin if she had euer beene free from sinne should haue needed no Sauiour nor had anie Sauior and so Christ should not haue bin her Iesus which to say is both against the scripture and against the honour of that holy virgin Bernardus
and Aquinas saw the force of this reason and grauely vrged the same Yea the holy virgin renounceth flatly their hereticall and hypocriticall doctrine in her humble thankes to God for her saluation My soule saith she doth magnifie the Lord and my spirit reioyceth in God my sauiour For this cause Bernard cryeth out in these words Non est hoc virginem honorare sed honori detrahere The virgin is not this way honored but greatly dishonored Secondly because as Bernard saieth Where lust is there must needs be sinne and therefore since the virgin was conceiued with lust or else as they dare not say by the holy ghost it followeth that she was conceiued in sinne Other reasons the same Bernard hath but these may suffice The second reply But saint Austen saith that hee will alway except the holy virgine Mary when he disputeth or reasoneth of sinners or sinne The answer I say first that saint Austen confesseth flatly as you haue heard that the blessed virgin was vndoubtedly conceiued in original sin I say secondly that originall sin is of infinite deformitie as is already proued and consequently that the blessed virgin being polluted therewith was neuer able to yeeld condigne compensation for the same howe great soeuer her holinesse was afterward the reason is afore yeelded for that the infinit malice of sin surmounteth the value of the finite actions of all creatures And if she were not able to satisfie for her own sinnes much lesse had shee any surplussage of satisfaction left which may serue to binde vp the popes pardons for the sins of others I say thirdly that albeit S. Austen would not for the honor of our Sauior as he saith call the blessed virgin into question touching sin yet doth he not affirm her to haue bin void of all actual sinne but seemeth rather to hold the contrary For he addeth these words Vnde enim scimus quod ei plus gratiae colla tum fuerit ad vincendum omni ex parte peccatum quae concipere ac parere meruit quem constat nullum habuisse peccatum For how know we that she had more grace giuen her to ouercome all sinne who did conceiue and beare him that certainely was free from al sin In which words S. Austen sheweth plainly that he can not tell whether the blessed virgin was voide of all actuall sinne or no yet is he vnwilling to call her into question for the honour of our Lord Iesus whose mother she was according to the flesh Yea Saint Austen in his questions vpon the new testament if it be his worke confesseth freely that she sinned for want of faith These are his expresse words Hoc vtique significauit quia etiam Maria per quam gestum est mysterium incarnationis saluatoris in morte domini dubitaret ita tamen vt in resurrectione firmaretur This verily is signified that Marie by whome was accomplished the misterie of the incarnation of our Sauiour doubted in the death of our Lord yet so as she was confirmed in his resurrection Thus hee writeth and yet knoweth euerie child that to doubt in matters of faith is no little sinne S. Basil dissenteth nothing from Saint Augustine when hee telleth vs that the blessed virgin standing by the crosse wauered and was doubtfull in her minde while shee behelde on one side what miserie hee suffered on the other side what wonders he had done Saint Chrysostome affirmeth so expressely that the blessed virgin sinned that their angelicall doctour Aquinas is enforced to vse this sillie shift for a colorable answere to his words to wit that hee was excessiue in his words But who wil not rather thinke that hee was presumptuous in his answere These are S. Chrysostomes expresse words Quae estmater mea fratres mei aiebat siquidem nō adhuc debitam de ipso opinionem habebant sed more matrum Maria iure omnia filio se praecepturam censebat cum tanquam dominum colere reuereri licebat ideo in hunc modum respondit who is my mother my brethren said Christ for they had not yet a right opiniō of him but Mary after the maner of mothers thought she might command her sonne to do all things albeit she might well haue honored him as her Lord therfore did he answer in this maner Againe he saith thus Optabat enim vt tam hominum gratiam conciliaret ipsa clarior filij gratia efficeretur fortasse aliquo humano afficiebatur affectu For she wished that now he would win the fauor of men that she might be more famous for his sake and perhappes she was touched with some humane affection Againe in another place he saith thus Ambitione quadam ac ostentatione commoti foris eum in praesentia omnium euocarunt vt viderentur facile ac magna cum potestate Christo imperare Infra vnde patet inani quadam gloria illos commotos fuisse nihil adhuc magni de ipso cogitantes quod apertius Ioannes significauit dicens quia neque fratres eius credebant in eum They being tickled with ambition and vaine glorie called him out in the presence of all that they might seeme to command Christ at their pleasure and with authoritie Whervpon it is cleare that they were tickled with vaine glorie hauing no great opinion on him as yet which Iohn signified euidently when he saide For neither did his brethren beleeue in him Saint Hierome shall conclude this point which I haue handled more at large because many stumble at it and fewe seeme to vnderstand it well these are his expresse words Conclusit Deus omnes sub peccato vt omnium misereatur absque eo solo qui peccatum non fecit nec inuentus est dolus in ore eius God hath shut vp all vnder sinne that he may shew mercie vnto all him onely excepting that sinned not neither was there guile found in his mouth The third replie She was Christs mother and therefore was more blessed then al other women The answere I confesse willingly that shee was blessed aboue all women and yet that shee was a sinner and had Christ not onely for her sonne but euen for her Lorde and Sauiour neither was it so great a grace simplie and barely to beare Christ as the Papists faine it to be but the holy fathers S. Austen and S. Chrysostome shal tel vs what they thinke therof S. Austen hath these expresse words Hoc in ea magnificauit dominus quia fecit voluntatem patris non quia caro genuit carnē Propterea cum dominus in turba admirabilis videretur faciens signa prodigia ostendens quid lateret in carne admiratae quaedam animae dixerunt foelix venter qui te portauit ille imò foelices qui audiunt verbum Dei custodiūt illud hoc est dicere mater mea quam appellatis foelicem inde foelix quia verbum
deteriores non remisit nobis supplicium sed vidit hoc manifeste quod peccatis ipsis non mâ—nus damnosum sit non puniri propter hoc imponit poenam non exigens supplicium de peccatis sed ad futura nos corrigens For lest we our selues should be made worse if wee should not be punished when we offend God forgaue vs not the punishment for that he saw euidently that it was no lesse hurtfull to sinne it selfe if it should not be punished For which cause he imposeth paine vpon vs not requiring satisfaction for the sinnes but correcting vs for that which is to come Out of these wordes I note first that if we should escape vnpunished when we sin we would be more prone to sin again I note secondly that the punishment which God laâ—eth on vs is not any part of satisfaction for our sinne committed but a fatherly correction to keepe vs from sinning so againe I note thirdly that saint Chrysostome was not acquainted with popish pardons wherewith the world is this day so pestered I note fourthly that whosoeuer disliketh this my answer must reprooue saint Chrysostome for the same as from whom I receiued it And yet indeede hee saith nothing which holy writ hath not taught vs long before For as wise Salomon saith He that spareth the rodde hateth the childe but he that loueth him chasteneth him betime I blesse thee saith Tobie O Lord God of Israel because thou hast scourged me Thou hast corrected me saith Ephraim and I was chastised as an vntamed heiffer Whom the Lord loueth saith saint Paul him he chasteneth and he scourgeth euery sonne that he receiueth As many as I loue saith God I rebuke and chasten be zealous therefore and amend Marke these wordes well gentle Reader God correcteth vs not in way of satisfaction which we are neuer able to performe as I haue prooued more at large in my booke of Motiues but that we may repent turne to him and amend our sinfull liues For this cause saieth the Psalmograph Blessed is the man whom thou chastisest O Lord and teachest him in thy lawe that thou mayest giue him rest from the dayes of euill while the pit is digged for the wicked For as saint Paul saieth If we would iudge our selues by true faith and repentance wee should not be iudged But when we are iudged we are chastened of the Lord that wee should not be condemned with the world which Christ himselfe confirmed when he willed the adultresse to goe and to sinne no more The sixt obiection S. Paul exhorted the Corinthians who abounded in goods but wanted merites to bestow money largely on the saints at Ierusalem that so they might be partakers of their merites Therefore it is very lawful to procure pardon with our mony by the application of godly mens merites vnto vs. The answere S. Paul meaneth nothing lesse then that the Hierosolymitains should sell spirituall things for money For when Symon the sorcerer euen after his baptisme would haue bought the distribution of holy things with money then saide saint Peter to him Thy money perish with thee because thou thinkest that the gift of God may be gotten with money But the apostle exhorteth the richer sort at Corinth to minister competently to the faithfull at Ierusalem for their necessarie releefe and sustentation and this to do the rather for that heretofore they receiued the gospel from thence so that there may bee an analogicall or proportionable equalitie betweene them For liberalitie ought to be mutuall among christians and as the apostle saith in another place It is no great thing for them that haue sowen to vs spirituall things to reape part of our carnall things Thus seemeth Chrysostome to vnderstand this place whose wordes are these Haec autem dicebat etiam diuitum superbiam deprimens ostendens quod post hanc vitam in maiori dignitate spirituales futuri sint He spake these things to abate the pride of rich men shewing that after this life the godly shal be in greater dignitie as if he had saide esteeme not better of your selues because ye haue more worldly wealth but distribute such things liberally and seeke to abound in spirituall things that so there may be an equalitie The seuenth obiection The article of our creed I beleeue the communioÌ„ of saints doth plainely shew that ones satisfaction may be applied to an other which is that application that the pope maketh when he giues pardons The answer I answer that the duties of charitie are ought to be common among the faithfull in that they are the mysticall members of one mysticall body which saint Paul proueth to be so by the example of the members in mans body And this is that communion of saints whereof mention is made in the Creede apostolike But of popish pardons and merits of supererrogation this article maketh no relation at all Yea as the apostle saith al righteousnes remission of sins and eternall life is ministred to the members of the church by Christ the head Of whose fulnes we haue all receiued euen grace for grace CHAP. VI. Of Popish purgatorie OF popish purgatorie I haue spoken sufficiently in the seuenth chapter of the second booke of my Motiues It will therefore here be sufficient to declare the originall thereof and to solue the obiections against the same The superstitious fond fantasies of purgatorie came from the old heathen Romanes for as saint Austen recordeth they had a purgatorie sacrifice these are his words Ideo terminalia eodem mense Februario celebrari dicunt cum fit sacrum purgatorium quod vocant Februm vnde mensis nomen accepit Therfore men say that the ends of things are celebrated in the same moneth of Februarie when the purgatorie sacrifice is made which they call Februs whereupon the month tooke the name Afterward Origen being too much addicted to his allegoricall speculation fained many odde things touching purgatorie as the ethnicke Plato whom he much imitateth had done before him After Origen others began to cal the matter into question others rashly to beleeue it others to adde many things to Origens conceit Thus by little and little it encreased till the late bishops of Rome made it an article of popish faith But of what credite Origen ought to be in this point his owne opinion will declare sufficiently as who held that the diuels should all be purged at the latter day For of Origen thus writeth S. Austen Qua in re misericordior profecto fuit Origenes qui ipsum diabolum atque angelos eius post grauiora pro meritis diuturniora supplicia ex illis cruciatibus eruendos atque sociandos sanctis angelis credidit Wherein Origen doubtles was more compassionable who beleeued that the deuill himselfe his angels after great long punishment for their demerites should be deliuered from their torments and placed with the
the Papists themselues and consequently that the papists ought not to make account of his iudgement herein For you doe see that he granteth the punishment of the damned to be mitigated in hell for the prayers of the liuing which thing no papist will or dare auouch And the like is to be saide of other of the Fathers when they folow opinions not grounded vpon the word of God Saint Austen therefore must be reiected by his owne rule as I haue prooued in my Motiues when he dissenteth from Gods word the true touchstone and triall of all trueth And saint Austens inconstancie is plainely vttered in an other place where he hath these wordes Quod quidem non ideo confirmo quoniam non resisâ—o Which verily I do not therefore approue because I do not impugne it Out of which wordes I note that though saint Austen could not approoue the opinion of the vulgar sort as which he knew to haue no ground but a meere naturall affection yet would hee not condemne it but leaue it as in suspense The foureteenth obiection Praier for the dead is proued by the scripture euen in y t new testament for when S. Iohn forbids to pray for them that die without repentance he doubtles exhorts to pray for them that die penitent The answer I say first that when cardinall Allen in his notes vpon this place auoucheth roundly that this text coÌ„uinceth praier for the dead he may tell that tale to wise men and repute himselfe a foole for his paines For first as S. Austen vpon whose authoritie he only buildeth affirmeth that the apostle speaketh of him that dieth impenitent so doth the same S. Austen auouch that he doth iniury to a martyr that praieth for a martyr which is a receiued axiome with the papists and consequently when he inferreth out of S. Austen that we must pray for them that die penitent he concludeth against S. Austen that wee must pray for most constant martyrs and so commit a manifest iniurie So then albeit S. Iohn dehorteth from praying for such as die without repentance yet doth he not exhort vs to pray for those that die penitent for otherwise doubtles wee must pray for martyrs which no papist wil allow I say secondly that S. Iohn exhorteth to pray for penitent sinners here on earth but not for the dead I prooue it because these are saint Iohns words If any shal see his brother sinning a sin not to death but he that sinneth is in this life for wee can not see a man sinning in the next life where no sinne is committed and therfore S. Iohn speaketh of prayer only in this life I say thirdly that saint Iohus purpose is this no other to exhort vs to repentance for our sins in this life because after this life there is neither repentance nor remission of sinnes to be had neither can any other sense be truely deduced out of S. Iohns words Yea their owne cardinall Caietane doth so expound this place to their vtter confusion CHAP. VII Of praying to Saints departed COncerning the inuocation of Saints great abuses and intollerable superstition haue crept into the church and dazeled the eies of the vulgar sort wherein I desire diligent attention and indifferent iudgement vntill the end of my discourse The first Conclusion Albeit a christian man neuer pray to the saints departed yet doth he not sinne therein I prooue it because euery sinne is a transgression of Gods law or commandement but God hath made no law nor giuen any commandement to pray to saints Ergo not to pray to them is no sin at all The proposition is a receiued maxime in the Romish church grounded on these wordes of saint Austen Peccatum est factum vel dictum vel concupitum aliquid contra legem aeternam Sinne is any deed word or thought against the eternall law which is the will of God Saint Ambrose confirmeth Saint Augustines description in these wordes Quid est peccatum nisi praeuaricatio legis diuinae caelestium inobedientia praeceptorum What is sinne but the transgression of Gods lawe and the disobedience of his holie precepts The assumption is secure vntil the papists can alleadge some precept out of the olde or new testament for the inuocation of saints which they will doe ad Calendas Graecas But the Papistes thinke they haue a mightie obiection against this Conclusion taken out of Genesis in these wordes Et innocetur super eos nomen meum nomina quaeque patrum meorum Abraham Isaac And let my name be called vpon them and the names of my fathers Abraham and Isaac To which I answere thus First this vocation or nomination was not any precept from God but the meere fact of Iacob or Israel who as hee was holy so was he a man and might haue erred herein as man Secondly the hebrew text is thus Let my name be named in them that is let them bee called my children by adoption or let them bee surnamed after me For it was the custome both of the Hebrewes and of the Greekes to expresse the surname of euery one by the name of the father as Aristoteles the sonne of Nicomachus Zenophon the sonne of Gryllus Cambyses the sonne of Cyrus Thirdly the whole course of holy scripture doth yeelde this interpretation of Iacobs wordes In the olde testament it was a great reproch for a woman to beare no children though nowe with the Papists they be reputed holy that will rashly vow neuer to marry for which respect the small remnant of men left after the execution of Gods iustice in the destruction of Ierusalem inforced women contrary to womanly shamefastnesse to seek vnto men and to offer themselues to very base conditions to the end they would be their husbands and so take away their reproch Which thing the prophet Ieremy vttereth in these wordes In that day seuen women shall take hold of one man saying We will eate our owne bread and weare our owne garments onely let vs be called by thy name and take away our reproch Thus writeth Gods holy prophet whose discourse with the due circumstances thereof if the christian Reader wil exactly ponder he shall behold as clearely as the glittering beames of the sunne the most impudent and sophisticall dealing of the papists For though the words aswell in the latine as in the Hebrew be all one and the very same yet are the papists ashamed I am well assured to inferre or proue inuocation of Saints by this latter place That which I say is euident because these women desired nothing else of the man but that he would be their husband and that they might be called his wiues and so put away their reproch This interpretation is plainely touched in the expresse wordes of the text when the women desired the man to take their reproch away by letting his name be called vppon them for which end they promised not only
religion which the prophet râ—sed not Achior the Ammonite fel at Iudeths feet reuerenced her the Sunamite whose child Elizeus raised to life fel down before his feet adored him he reproued hir not the prophets at Iericho perceiuing the double grace of Elias to be in Elizeus fel down before him and adored him which hee reiected not The answere I answer to al these in general that for the greater part they speake of ciuil worship which I grant may be done to angels prophets magistrats holy men To y e seueral obiectioÌ„s thus in particular I say first that y e Iews gaue such ciuil reuerence as was due to a godly pastour or Bishop but yeelded no religious worship vnto him I say secondly that your popish vulgar latin translation is false idolatricall albeit your late disholy synode of Trent anathematized al that wil not reuerence the same For you reade thus Iacob adored the top of his rod which if Iacob had done indeed as your guilefull edition saith he shuld haue coÌ„mitted flat idolatry because as I haue proued out of your owne Pope Gregory it is not lawfull to worship images much lesse a naked piece of wood religiously But the text indeed is thus as your own deare doctor Arias Montanus granteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He adored on the top of his rod or staffe which is nothing else but staying himselfe vpon his staffe adored God So doth Saint Augustine expounde it whose expresse words are these Nam facile intelligeretur senem qui virgam ferebaâ— eo more quo illa aetas baculum solet vt se inclinauit ad Deum adorandum id vtique fecerit super cacumen virgae suae quam sic ferebat vt super eam caput inclinando adoraret Deum For we might easiâ—y vnderstand that the olde man who carried a rodde in such manner as that age vsed to beare a staffe as he bowed himselfe to worship God he did it on the end of his staffe which he carrieâ— so as he might adore God by bowing his head vpon it In which words S. Austen sheweth plainely that Iacob when he worshipped god leaned on his staffe by reason of his age weakenesse Behold here gentle reader how our late papists do wrest the holy scriptures to build thereupon their superstitious and idololatricall adoration of stocks stones I say thirdly that it was Christ himselfe that appeared to Iosue in the likenes of a man therfore he both rightly required worship and Iosue of duetie adored him religiously This is euident in the verie beginning of the next chap. with the last end of the former I say fourthly that albeit the worship which Nabuchadonosor yeelded seemed to deserue coÌ„mendation yet was it indeed very reprehensible because he ioyned Gods honor with the Prophets And if Daniel did not admonish him of his fault as it is verie probable hee did he sinned grieuously That which Abraham Achior the Sunamite the rest did was meere ciuil adoratioÌ„ The replie It is lawfull to adore holy things as the temple the arke the bread of proposition and the like for the Psalmograph saith adore ye his footestoole because it is holy The answere I say first that it is not lawful to adore religiously any saint in heauen no not the blessed virgin Marie the mother of God man much lesse is it lawefull to adore stockes and stones and other like sensles creatures as the papists would guilefully enforce vs to do Neither doe I barely say this of mine own head but with the vniforme consent of the holy fathers Thus writeth S. Epiphanius Sed neque Helias adorandus est etiamsi in viuis sit neque Ioannes adorandus quanquam per proprias preces suas dormitionem suam admirandam effecerit imò potius ex deo gratiam acceperit sed neque Thecla neque quisquaÌ„ sanctus adoratur Non enim dominabitur nobis antiquus error vt relinquamus viuentem adoremus â—a quae ab ipso facta sunt Infra sit in honore Mariaâ—pater filius spiritus sanctus adoretur Mariam nemo adoret non dico mulierem imò neque virum Deo debetur hoc mysterium neque angeli capiunt taleÌ„ glorificationem deleantur quae male scripta sunt in corde deceptoruÌ„ tollatur ex oculis cupiditasligni conuertatur rursus figmentum ad dominum reuereatur Eua cum Adam vt deum colat solum ne ducatur serpentis voce sed permaneat in dei praecepto ne comedes de ligno erat lignum non error sed per ipsum lignum facta est inobedientia erroris ne comedat quis de errore qui est propter S. Mariam nam etsi pulchrum est lignum sed tamen non ad cibuÌ„ si pulcherrima est Maria sancta honorata at noÌ„ ad adorationem Neither is Elias to be adored though he be among the liuing neither S. Iohn must be adored though by his praiers his death was wonderful yea hee rather receiued grace from God but neither Thecla neither any saint is to be adored For the olde error may not ouerrule vs that we forsake the liuing god and adore the works of his hands Let Mary be in honor let the father the son the holy ghost be adored let no man adore Marie I do not say the woman but neither the maÌ„ This mistery is due to god neither are the angels capable of such glory let such errors be blotted out as are wickedly engrauen in the harts of deceiued soules let the concupiscence of the wood be taken out of our sight let the worke return again to the workeman let Eue haue reuerence with Adam let her worship onely God let her not be seduced with the voice of the serpent but let her abide in Gods commandement thou shalt not eate of the wood and it was wood indeede not errour but by the wood came disobedience of errour let none eate of that error which is for holy Mary For though the wood be faire yet is it not for meate although Marie be most beautiful and holy and honoured yet not for adoration Out of these golden words I note first that in the time of S. Epiphanius who liued more then 370. yeres after Christ it was reputed great superstition and flat paganisme to adore any Saint or angel in heauen much more to adore men yet liuing on earth and most of all to adore woode stones and sencelesse things I note secondly that religious honour or worship is due to God alone and that neither saintes nor images nor the mother of God is capable thereof I note thirdly that to thinke that Saintes or Angels may be adored is an old damnable error receiued from the gentiles wherewith some of the vulgar and common people were deceiued euen in the daies of Epiphanius I note fourthly that by the iudgement of this holy
aboue him For first the virgine Mary is desired to defend vs from the tortures of hell Secondly to bring vs to the ioyes of heauen Thirdly the last iudgement is called her iudgement Fourthly she is called our sauiour Fiftly she is requested to saue father mother brother sister friendes benefactors the quicke and the dead by the help of Christ her sonne Now by the first foure she is made equall with Christ and by the last farre aboue him For she is the sauiour and hee the intercessor which I gather out of these wordes ipso auxiliante c. By the helpe of our Lord Iesus Christ. For by these wordes and the rest afore going the virgine Mary doth saue vs Christ is but the instrument that helpeth her in the worke of our saluation which howe intollerable blasphemie it is let the reader iudge I haue said The sixt conclusion To inuocate Saintes as the papistes doe and to beleeue that they heare their praiers is to make a pluralitie of Gods I say as the papistes doe because to inuocate saintes at certaine times in certaine places and for certaine respectes doth not make them gods I proue this conclusion because to heare all prayers at all times in all places for al things is a thing so proper to God as it can not possibly agree to anie but to God alone For his knowledge is infinite and so not communicable to any creature marke well gentle reader what I say for this reson is such as few seem to haue cōceiued y e same But certs no learned papist can indeed denie it to be tru For which cause their great learned D. Aquinas telles vs two truths the one that God can not communicate the power of creation to any creature liuing either on earth or in heauen and he proueth it out of Saint Augustine who saith that neither the good nor the bad angels can be the creators of any thing And why so because that kind of worke requireth power infinite whereof no creature is or can be capable The other that none but God is or can be infinite and his reason is euident because to be infinite is against the nature of that which is made The first obiection The Saints in heauen may heare vnderstand our praiers on earth and yet haue limited not infinit knowledge ergo the proofe of your conclusion is not good The answere I say first that God hath reuealed to his seruants on earth the secret cogitations and externall facts of others farre distant from them For hee reuealed to Ahias that Ieroboams wife would come disguised to him and told him what he should say vnto her He reuealed to Elizeus all the secret dealing of Giezi which he had with Naaman the Syrian he disclosed to Peter the falshoode of Ananias and Saphyra his wife and so may he at his holy pleasure reueale to his saints in heauen the prayers that on earth are made in some places at sometimes vnto them Euerie thing is proportionable no contradiction is implied therein I say secondly that there be sundrie things which God cannot do as I haue proued in my booke of Motiues not for that there is any want in God but because there is defect in the thing that shoulde bee doone and so is it in this present case of popish inuocation I say thirdly that Gods apostles and prophets knewe but some special things which seemed good in Gods wisedome to be so reuealed Neither did they know such things by any inherent qualitie but by signification from aboue and that onely at such time as the necessitie of the church did require Which I proue by these words of Elyzeus to Gihezi Let her alone for her soule is vexed within her and the Lord hath hid it from me and hath not told it me as if the prophet had said God reuealeth not al things to his deare and faithfull seruants at all times but some things at some times as seemeth best in his diuine wisedome I say fourthly that popish inuocation requireth infinite knowledge because they pray for all matters at al times in al places so that y e saints must perforce be somtime ignorant what they pray for vnles their knowledge be infinit The first replie As the saints cannot haue infinite knowledge because it is not communicable to any creature so neither can anie liuing of limited power make any infinite request vnto them The answere I say first that there is exceeding great disparitie betweene the persons that pray the things praied for and the saints praied vnto for the things prayed for are without end and measure They that pray are innumerable multiplicable into infinit in potentia and yet must euery saint seuerally for himself haue the distinct notice of al them that pray and of all things that are prayed for for otherwise many shall pray at manie times and not be heard which is the thing that I contend to proue For example al papists in al countries pray to the virgin Mary at al times for all things and so hir knowledge must extend to al persons al places and al desires at al times and so be infinite or certes she must be sometime deceiued not knowing what is required of her I say secondly that it is proper to God alone to know our hearts and cogitations and consequently our prayers Therefore is it saide in the Acts thou Lord which knowest the hearts of all men shewe whether of these two thou hast chosen God saith S. Peter which knoweth the harts beare them witnes Salomon saith thou only knowest the hearts of the children of men He saith S. Paul that searcheth the harts knoweth what is the meaning of the spirit Thou O Lord of hosts saith Ieremy iudgest righteously triest the reines and the hart And yet must the saints know our hearts and thoughts if they heare and know our prayers for doubtlesse the sound of our words can not reach vp to heauen The second replie Both Angels saints are present here on earth and knowe our affaires and therefore it is a vaine cauill to say that the sounde of our wordes cannot be heard to heauen The answere I say first that neither angels nor saints can be in many places at once but are definitiuely in one onely place at one time And this their owne angelical doctor Aquinas doth witnesse with me in these words Nam corpus est in loco circumscriptiuè quia commensuratur loco angelus autem non circumscriptiuè cum non commensuretur loco sed definitiuè quia ita est in vno loco quòd nō alio Deus autem neque circumscriptiuè neque definitiuè quia est vbique for a body is in a place circumscriptiuely because it is measured with the place but an angel is not in place by circumscription for that hee is not measured with the place but definitiuely because he is so in one place that he
the reward of eternal life I say fourthly that to inuocate saints departed beleeuing that they can do heare our praiers is to make them gods And euen so shuld we make the liuing gods if we did in that maner cal on thē in their absence I may therfore wel conclude that though the one kind of praying be godly and imitable yet is the other damnable and flat idololatricall for God is zealous and wil not giue his glorie to another The second obiection The soule of the rich man in hel knew where Abraham was as also the state of Lazarus and of his brethren then liuing therfore much more do the saints in heauen know our state on earth The answere I say first that parables and allegories are not sufficient to establish any new kind of doctrine for by this parable as Irenaeus recordeth Christ meant nothing els but to declare the cogitations torments state of the wicked after this life Iustinus is of the same opinion hereupon flatly denieth purgatory I say secondly that if this were granted to be a true history no parable yet would it not follow therupon that the saints in heauen knew our thoughts and praiers here on earth for as S. Austen grauely writeth though the dead knowe not what is done here on earth while wee doe it yet may they afterwarde know what is done either by the dead that go from hence or by the angels that are present when the things are done and this knowledge had Abraham by the relation of the dead and no otherwise as witnesseth the same S. Austen in the same booke The third obiection S. Austen Ambrose Gregory Cyprian and the ancient fathers generally vsed to inuocate and to pray vnto the saints and therfore it is neither any new thing nor any vnlawful act The answere Better answer cannot be giuen to the fathers then that which is truely gathered out of the works of the same fathers I therfore say first with Cyprian that we must heare attend what Christ alone saith in whom God is wel pleased We must not regard what others think shuld be done but what Christ who was before al wold haue to be done for we must not folow the custom of man but the truth of god so saith holy Cyprian To which I may adde with S. Ierome that y e multitude of them that erre bring no patronage to the error it self with Augustine that neither what I say nor what thou saiest but what Christ saith ought to be regarded with Tertullian that that is tru whatsoeuer was first that coūterfeit whatsoeuer came after I say secondly that thogh the papists glorie greatly of y e fathers in this point yet when their sayings are duly considered they wil make litle or nothing for their purpose And that the reader may with perspicuitie behold the force of their doctrine in this point which hath kept my selfe long in suspence I purpose in God to deliuer the sum thereof by these plaine and briefe canons The first Canon The visible Church as writeth Egesippus remained a virgin free from all heresies and corruptions during the life of the Apostles that is about one hundred yeeres after Christ to which time S. Iohn the euangelist was liuing But after the death of the apostles errors by litle and little crept into the church as into a voide and desart house Which assertion is doleful inough but yet profitable against the papists as who are not ashamed impudently to auouch that after so many hundred yeres from Christs ascension there hath been no errour at all in their whorish Babylon And a great cause of these errors is this for that many without due examination receiued the doctrine of him that went before them So writeth Eusebius that Papias a man of no sound iudgement was the Author of the Chiliastes as who first grossely inuented that there should be 1000. yeres after the resurrection To which error though most palpable Irenaeus and others otherwise wel learned gaue place onely for antiquitie sake This imitation without time or reason was is and wil bee the cause of many errors which sundrie of the learned papists haue profoundly considered For this cause did Canus oppose himselfe against al the Thomists Scotists the old and latter papists for this cause did Caietanus in his literall exposition of Genesis and other bookes condemne the multitude of former commentaries for this cause said their learned Victoria that he reputed nothing certaine albeit al writers agreed thereunto vnlesse he could finde it in the holy scriptures for this cause their sound canonist Nauarre did roundly reiect the common opinion when it seemed not grounded vpon right reason for this cause grauely said Saint Austen that he reputed no mans writings free from errours but onely the writers of the holy scriptures for this cause said their owne Roffensis that it is lawful to appeale from Austen Cyprian Hierome and al the rest because they are men and do not want their imperfections I saith S. Austen do not repute S. Cyprians writings as canonical but iudge them by the canonicall and whatsoeuer doth not agree with the scriptures that by his leaue do I refuse The second Canon Many of the ancient fathers haue not only many waies erred but withall committed to the view of the worlde in printed bookes that which this day is reputed and generally confessed of al as wel papists as good christians to be a notorious heresie The heresie is this to wit that the soules of the faithful departed out of this life doe not see God clearely till the day of doome This opinion held Iustinus Martyr Irenaeus Origenes Chrysost. Theodoritus Hilarius Ambrosius Augustinus Lactantius yea these latter writers were of the selfesame resolution Theophilactus Oecumenius Euthymius Arethas and others And to the great comfort of our Iesuits and other papists their owne sweete S. Barnard singeth the same song these are his words Aduertistis ni fallor tres esse sanctarum status animarum primum videlicet in corpore corruptibili secundum sine corpore tertium in beatitudine consummata primū in tabernaculis secundū inatriis tertium in domo dei Infra in illam beatissimam domum nec sine nobis intrabunt nec sine corporibus id est nec sancti fine plebe nec spiritus sine carne Ye vnderstand I weene that there be three states of holy soules to wit the first in the corruptible body the second without the body the third in perfect blisse the first in tabernacles the second in courts the third in the house of God Into that most blessed house they shall neither enter without vs nor yet without their bodies that is neither the saints without the common multitude nor the soules without the flesh Again in another place the same Bernard hath these words Interim sub Christi
to auoid the scandall of some persons that are either holy or troublous I dare not freely reprehēd many such things But I am very sory for this that many wholesome precepts in Gods bookes are little regarded and that all things are so full of presumptions that he is more sharply reprooued which toucheth the ground in his octaues with his bare foote then he that shall lye drunken in the streete All things therefore which neither are contayned in the holy scriptures neither in the decrees of bishops neither established by the custome of the vniuersal church but are infinitely varied by the diuersitie of maners in diuerse places so that seldome or neuer the causes can be knowen which men respected in the ordinance thereof I thinke they are to be taken away without any stop where power and authority is at hand For although it cannot bee found howe they make against the catholike faith yet doe they clog the religion with seruile bondage which our mercifull God would haue freely celebrated with verie few and manifest sacraments so that now the condition of the Iewes is more tolerable who though they haue not acknowledged the time of libertie yet are they subiect to legal burdens not to humaine presumptions Thus saith holy and learned Austen Out of whose words I note first that S. Austen for feare of scandall and other humaine respects durst not speake all he thought nor freely reproue euerie abuse as he wished in his heart I note secondly that al the bishops learned fathers of the church did not at all times like and approue all things which were publikely done in the church thogh they spoke not flatly and openly against the same Which point if it be wel noted doth more then a little gall our papists I note thirdly that Gods word was little regarded euen in Saint Austens time and that superstition in steede thereof raigned euerie where and therefore no maruell if so much Romish trumperie did after Saint Austens time abound in their visible church I note fourthly that euen in Saint Austens dayes odde conceits of superstitious trumperie were more regarded then the chiefest points of religion I note fiftly that manie superstitious errours haue crept into the church the causes wereof neither are nor can bee knowen and therefore by Saint Austens iudgement all such trumperie ought to bee cut off by the authoritie of the Magistrate I note sixtly that the church was brought into seruile bondagt by reason of beggarly ceremonies other superstition so as in S. Austens time the state of the Iewes was more tolerable then the condition of faithful christians I note seauenthly that the christian libertie of the new testament may not bee charged with superfluous ceremonies The second conclusion The bodies bones and reliques of Gods Saints and martyres are not to be contēned reiected or disdainfully cast away but to be buried honourably and esteemed reuerently as wel to giue a signe of our hope in the resurrection of our bodies and theirs as to signifie their true faith in the euerliuing God This conclusion may euidently be proued by many texts of holy writ Pretious in the sight of the Lord saith Dauid is the death of his saints Again in another place Great are the troubles of the righteous but the Lord deliuereth him out of them all he keepeth all his bones not one of them is broken Againe in another place Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord in another place the Psalmograph yeeldeth the reason why the bodies reliques of y e dead be honorable to wit for the hope of the resurrection that they shal once be glorified for my flesh saith he shall rest in hope and in the Hebrew more significantly shall dwell in hope to expresse the full assurance of the resurrection In this hope did S. Ioseph cause his fathers bodie be enbalmed being accompanied with al the seruants of R. Pharao both the elders of his house all the elders of the land of Egypt and with his brethren and others of his fathers house he went vp into the land of Canaā there to burie his father with great honour and solemnitie The prophet Daniel when he died was buried with great honor so was Micheas Ioel many others the prophets apostles seruants of the liuing god In regard wherof prudently said Syrach Let their bones flourish out of their place and their names by succession remaine to them that are most famous of their children All which Saint Austen comprised briefly in these golden words Nec tamen contemnenda abiicienda sunt corpora defunctorum maximèque iustorum atque fidelium quibus tanquam organis vasis ad omnia bona opera sanctus vsus est spiritus Si enim paterna vestis annulus ac si quid huiusmodi tanto charius est posteris quanto erga parentes maior extitit affectus nullo modo ipsa spernenda sunt corpora quae vtique multo familiarius atque coniunctius quam quaelibet indumenta gestamus Haec enim non ad ornamētum vel adiutorium quod adhibetur extrinsecus sed ad ipsam naturam hominis pertinent Neither are the bodies of the dead to be dispised and cast away specially the bodies of the iust and of the faithful whom the holie ghost hath vsed as instruments and vessels to all good workes For if the fathers garment and ring and the like bee so much the dearer to the posteritie by howe much our affection was greater to our parents then doubtlesse their bodies are no way to be contemned which are more familiar and nearer to vs thē anie garment for they pertaine not to the ornament or helpe which we vse externally but euen to the nature of man it selfe The third conclusion To goe from place to place on pilgrimage to learne experience ciuil maners customes and lawes of other countries or christianly to profit others therby is a godly act highly to be commended The painful godly peregrinatiōs of Christ him selfe and of his chosen vessels will make this conclusion euident For Christ was conceiued in Nazareth borne in Bethlehem the eight day presented in Hierusalem Hee fled into Egypt he returned and dwelt in Nazareth Being twelue yeres of age hee disputed in the temple at Hierusalem from whence he returned with his parents and came to Nazareth Being thirtie yeeres olde hee was baptized in Iorden tempted of the Deuill in the wildernesse placed on a Pinnacle of the temple and after that carried into an exceeding high mountaine In Cana of Galilee he was present at a marriage where he changed water into wine Hee abode a while at Capernaum with his mother and his friendes He went throughout Galilee teaching in the synagogues Besides the sea of Galilee hee calleth Simon Andrew Iames and Iohn From thence he came to the region of the Gerasenes where the swine were drowned in the
the bone of a dead dogge if it be saide by any to be a relique of a saint will drawe them with facilitie to touch it to kisse it and to adore it as if it were God almightie For which cause saint Austen saieth truely that many bodies are adored vpon earth whose soules are damned in hell Yea the dead corps of Hermannus was adored for a saint twenty yeeres at Ferrara who yet was an heretique as writeth their owne Platina The first obiection They are vndoubtedly the true relikes of true saints which the church appointeth to be adored euery where And saint Austen speaketh onely against priuate abuses of certaine priuate persons not against the generall practise of y e vniuersal church For the vse of the church is first to canonize the saint and after to propose his relikes to be adored Which church being therein directed by the holy ghost cannot erre as you imagine The answer I say first that how your church both may erre and hath erred de facto is already prooued I say secondly that your abuses are as generall as your reliques For you all teach to adore all your reliques religiously in all places wheresoeuer insomuch as your owne Ludouicus Viues granteth that many christians do sinne no lesse in adoring their images and relikes then do the Gentiles in adoring their false gods I say thirdly that your worshipping of reliques is flatly reproued by S. Paul in what maner soeuer ye doe it The apostle of Christ yeeldeth this reason because it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 voluntarie worship◠not contained in Gods word I say fourthly that if Christs crosse must therefore be adored because it touched Christs bodie which is the reason of popish adoration euen so ought the lippes of Iudas to be adored because they touched Christs sacred mouth This reason is inuincible if it be well vrged I say fiftly that the Pope may erre in canonizing your Saints as your owne Doctour Melchior Canus telleth you neither can Aquinas indeede denie the same And certes as the pope may erre in canonizing your saintes so may he much more erre in determining such and such reliques to be the bodies bones or ashes of such and such saintes and consequently so may all papistes adoring them commit idolatry yea though it were granted that true reliques might be adored because as S. Austen grauely saide their reliques are adored on earth whose soules are broyling in hell fire I say sixtly that when the pope taketh vpon him not only to canonize saintes but withall not to erre in so doing he doubtlesse chalengeth to himselfe the authoritie of God omnipotent and may therefore fitly be called Antichrist howsoeuer the Iesuites and his other vassals labour to defend him in this The second obiection If it were not a godly act to adore holy reliques to translate them from place to place as the church hath a long time vsed holy Moses who had Gods spirite largely would neuer haue so reuerenced the dead body of S. Ioseph nor yet haue caried it so many miles The answere I say first that the flesh of Iosephs bodie was wholy consumed and nothing left but bones and ashes For the Israelites abode in Egypt about 215. yeares after the death of holy Ioseph I say secondly that as the wicked gaine nothing by being buried in temples after the christian maner euen so neither are the godly worse for being buried in places prophane For they who die in the warres for the seruice of their Soueraigne and defence of their natiue countrey are doubtlesse in as good case notwithstanding their base kinde of funerall as if they had died at home and been buried with all pompe and solemnitie I say thirdly that the translation of S. Iosephes bones out of Egypt was not for religion sake whereof holy Writ maketh no mention but to shew his hope and confidence in Gods promise and to confirme the faith of his brethren For these are the wordes God will surely visite you and yee shal take my bones away hence with you As if he had said Haue full trust in Gods promise for your deliuerance for vndoubtedly God will bring you into the land of Chanaan as he hath said and for the better confirmation thereof I appoint my bones to be taken with you thither and for this end doth the Apostle ascribe this charge giuen to Iosephes brethren to the great commendation of his faith The third obiection The scripture telleth vs that Helcana and Anna his wife went thrise in the yeare on pilgrimage to Hierusalem Sundrie of the Greekes left their owne countrey and came to adore in Hierusalem The Eunuch came from farre to adore in the same place S. Paul himselfe made haste in his iourney that he might keepe Pentecost at Hierusalem Christ likewise with his mother Mary and S. Ioseph her husband came on pilgrimage to Hierusalem The answere I say first that God appointed his temple at Hierusalem to be the peculiar place of his externall worship and that al his people should repaire thither at three seueral times in the yere To wit at Easter Pentecost and the feast of tabernacles So that S. Ioseph S. Marie S. Anna and Helcana went to Hierusalem at that day euen as we doe nowe to the Church to heare diuine seruice and sermons And therefore their pilgrimage was honourable and highly to be commended I say secondly that Christ himselfe went not of any necessity but for our sake and to giue vs an example of obedience and humilitie For hee came to fulfill the lawe not to dissolue the same I say thirdly that saint Paul hasted thither for the gospel sake because then there would be great concourse of people whom he desired to instruct with godly sermons I say fourthly that as Iosephus writeth sundry of the conuerted gentiles as the Eunuch Cornelius and others vsed to resort to Ierusalem with the dispersed Iewes where they adored the liuing God then as we do now in the church neere at home But they went not to adore stockes and stones as the papists do nor to put religion in dead creatures The fourth obiection Going on pilgrimage is a very auncient custome and that for religion sake for S. Alexander a most holy martyr who liued aboue a thousand and two hundreth yeares agoe went for that end to Hierusalem as writeth Eusebius in his historie The answere I say first that to go on pilgrimage is an holy and auncient thing indeed as which both Christ himselfe S. Paule and other holy men haue practised as I haue already graunted I say secondly that though Saint Alexander had a great affection to see those places where Christ hadde been present and wrought his miracles yet did he neither think his praiers more acceptable in y e place then in an other nor yet thought his iourney to be any part of satisfaction for his sinnes For hee knew right well
otherwise he should be contrarie to himselfe who affirmeth it to bee sinne in many places of his works as is alreadie prooued but hee onely laboureth to perswade the reader that it is neuer imputed to the faithfull that stoutly striue against it And that this is the true meaning of S. Austen I proue it by the iudgement of S. Ambrose concerning the selfe same matter Thus doth hee write Caro contra spiritum contra carnem spiritus concupiscit â—ec inuenitur in vllo hominum tanta concordia vt legi mentis lex quae membris est insita non repugnet Propter quod ex omnium sanctorum persona accipitur quod Ioannes apostolus ait si dixerimus quoniam peccatum non habemus nosipsos seducimus veritas in nobis non est cum tamen idem ipse dicat qui natus est ex Deo peccatum non facit qoniam semen ipsius in eo manet non potest peccare quoniaÌ„ ex Deo natus est Vtrumque ergo verum est quia nemo sine peccato est in eo quod nemo est fine lege peccati qui natus est ex Deo peccatum non facit quia per legem mentis id est per charitatem quae Dei semen est peccatum non facit Charitas enim operit multitudineÌ„ peccatoruÌ„ the flesh lusteth against the spirit the spirit against the flesh neither is there found in any man such concord but that the lawe of concupiscence which is ingrafted in the members fighteth against the law of the mind And for that cause Saint Iohns words are taken as spoken in the person of all saints If we say we haue no sin we deceiue our selues and the truth is not in vs when for al that the same apostle saith He that is borne of God sinneth not because his seed abideth in him and he cannot sinne because he is of God Therfore both are true because no man is without sinne for that no man is without the law of sinne that is concupiscence and he that is borne of God sinneth not bicause he sinneth not by the law of his mind that is by charitie which is Gods seede for charitie couereth the multitude of sinnes Out of these words I note first that concupiscence moueth rebellion against the spirit in the holyest man vpon earth I note secondly that this rebellion of concupiscence is sinne in euerie one because S. Iohn speaketh of sinne indeede whose words saint Ambrose applieth heere to concupiscence I note thirdly that hee speaketh of originall concupiscence because he speaketh of that concupiscence which is in the saints that is in those that are borne of God I note fourthly that the faithfull sinne not because charitie couereth their sins So then S. Austen meaneth as S. Ambrose doth that they are without sin to whom sinne is not imputed Yea Aquinas himselfe granteth which is to be admired that the inordinate motion of sensualitie euen which goeth before the deliberation of reason is sinne though in a lowe degree These are his expresse wordes Dicendum quòd illud quod homo facit sine deliberatione rationis non perfectè ipse facit quia nihil operatur ibi id quod est principale in homine vnde non est perfectè actus humanus per consequens non potestesse perfectè actus virtutis vel peccati sed aliquid imperfectum in genere horum Vnde talis motus sensualitatis rationem praeueniens est peccatum veniale quod est quiddam imperfectum in genere peccati I answere that that which man doth without the deliberation of reason he doth it not perfectly because that which is the chiefe in man worketh nothing there wherefore it is not perfectly mans act and consequently it cannot be perfectly the act of vertue or of sinne but some imperfect thing in this kinde Whereupon such a motion of sensuality preuenting reason is a venial sinne which is a certaine imperfect thing in the nature of sinne The fourth replie Concupiscence at the most is but a little venial sinne as S. Thomas Aquinas truely saith therefore it cannot bring a man to hell neither debarre him of heauen The answere I answere that euerie sin is mortall vndoubtedly as which is flatly against Gods holy commaundements For that the transgression of Gods commandements is a grieuous mortal sinne no man euer did or will denie Cursed is euery one saith the apostle that continueth not in all things which are written in the booke of the law to doe them Againe in another place The reward or wage of sinne is death And S. Iames saith Whosoeuer shall keepe the whole lawe and yet faileth in one point he is guiltie of all Nowe that euerie sinne aswel great as small is against Gods holy lawe I prooue sundrie waies First because the Apostle saith that al our thoughts words and works ought to be referred to the glorie of God for most certaine it is that no sinne at al is referred to Gods glorie For no sin no not the least of al is referrible to god but is of it own nature repugnant to his glorie Secondly because wee must yeelde an account to God for euerie idle word as Christ himselfe telleth vs and yet as euerie child can perceiue God most merciful and most iust wil neuer lay that to our charge which is not against his holy law Thirdly because the apostle saith of sin generally that the punishment thereof is death Fourthly because sinne in generall is defined by the fathers to bee the transgression of Gods law which definition could not bee true if anie little sinne could stand with his commaundement Fiftly because famous popish writers as Ioannes Gerson Michael Baius Almayn and our owne Bishop of Rochester doe all freely graunt that euerie sinne is mortall of it owne nature and deserueth eternall death their words I haue alleaged in my booke of Motiues Sixtly because Durandus and Iosephus Angles to whom the Schooles of the papistes this day accord doe sharpely impugne Aquinas his doctrine in that he teacheth Venials not to be against Gods law The 7. conclusion Although good works do not iustifie yet are they pretious in Gods sight and neuer want their reward Christ himselfe prooueth this conclusion when he promiseth that not so much as a cup of colde water giuen in his name shall passe without reward And in another place hee saith That whosoeuer shall leaue house parents brethren wife or children for his sake shal receiue much more in this world and in the world to come life euerlasting And in another place Christ telleth vs that when the sonne of man commeth in his glory and al his holy angels with him then will he pronounce them blessed that haue done the works of charitie to their poore neighbours God saith S. Paul will reward euery man according to his workes The Lord rewarded me saith holy
The cause without which the latter shall not haue effect For as vocation iustification regeneration and glorification are the effectes of predestination euen so by Gods holy ordinance being predestinate wee are called by the hearing of his word vnto â—aith which faith is the cause of our iustification by apprehending the righteousnesse of Christ Iesus after wee be iustified of our iustification proceedes regeneration as who hauing remission of our sinnes and being ingraffed in Christ by faith are indued with more aboundant grace of his holy spirite thorough which we are dayly more and more regenerate and made new creatures after we be regenerate out of our regeneration spring good workes aswel internall as externall as who being made good trees begin to bring forth good fruits and so continuing are brought at the length of Gods free mercie to the possession of eternall life For as y e apostle saith we are created vnto good workes which God hath ordained that wee shoulde walke in them and continuing in them we shall at the dreadful day of doome heare this ioyfull sentence pronounced to our vnspeakable comfort Come yee blessed of my father take the inheritance of the kingdome prepared for you from the foundation of the world For I was an hungred and ye gaue me meate I was thirsty and ye gaue me drink I was a stranger and ye took me in vnto you I was naked and ye clothed me I I was sicke and ye visited me I was in prison and ye came to me And with this it is true yet y t the apostle saith Not by the workes of righteousnesse which we had done but according to his mercie he saued vs by the washing of the new birth and by renuing of the holy Ghost which hee shed on vs aboundantly through Iesus Christ our sauiour that wee being iustified by his grace should be made heires according to the hope of eternall life This is a true saying and these thinges I will thou shouldest affirme that they which haue beleeued God might be carefull to shew forth good workes These things are good and profitable vnto men Thus saith S. Paule and therefore I thinke this a profitable conclusion By it rightly vnderstood many places of holy Scripture may easily be answered which seeme to ascribe iustification or glorification to good workes The 10. conclusion This popish assertion that workes doe iustifie and merite eternall life de condigno was for the space of a thousand and eightie yeares vnknowne to the church of God About which time Petrus Lombardus and his fellowes began their scholasticall theologie and disputed such matters doubtfully About the yeare of our Lord 1545. the late councell of Trent defined the same for an article of christian beliefe solemnely accursing al such as hold the contrary opinion This is the originall and antiquitie of this impudently defended heresie It is sufficiently confuted throughout the whole chapter CHAP. X. Of the popish idololatricall masse The 1. conclusion TO withhold from the vulgar and laycall sort of people the one part of the holy communion is a diabolical hereticall and sacrilegious fact I prooue it sundry waies First because it is flatly against the expresse scripture and Christes holy institution For Christ himselfe instituted and ministred the Sacrament in both kindes saying drinke yee all of it as Saint Mathew recordeth and they all dranke of it as witnesseth Saint Marke Saint Paule also taught all the Corinthians to communicate in both kindes protesting that hee deliuered the forme and maner of the holy communion euen as he had in spirite receiued it from the Lord. Secondly because the auncient fathers shew euidently that in their time it was the generall practise of the church to deliuer the holy communion to the lay people vnder both kindes Neither was the cup taken from the vulgar sort by any setled law vntill the late councell of Constance which was in the yere of our Lord God 1414. Origen hath these words Quis est iste populus qui in vsu habet sanguinem bibere haec erant quae in euangelio audientes ij qui ex Iudaeis dominum sequebantur scandalizati sunt dixerunt Quis potest manducare carnem sanguinem bibere sed populus Christianus populus fidelis audit haec amplectitur sequitur eum qui dicit nisi manducaueritis carnem meam biberitis sanguinem meum non habebitis vitam in vobis ipsis quia caro mea verè est cibus sanguis meus verè potus est Who is that people that hath in custome to drinke bloud these were the thinges which the Iewes that followed Christ heard in the gospel and were scandalized and said Who can eate flesh and drinke bloud but the christian people the faithfull people heare these thinges and embrace them and follow him that sayth vnlesse ye shall eate my flesh drink my bloud ye shall haue no life in your selues because my fleshe is meate indeed and my bloud drinke indeed S. Hierome hath these words Sacerdotes quoque qui eucharistiae seruiunt sanguinem domini populis eius diuidunt impiè agunt in legem Christi The Priestes also that administer the eucharist and diuide the Lordes bloud to his people transgresse the law of Christ heynously Saint Cyprian with fourtie learned bishops in their ioynt Epistle to Cornelius write in this expresse maner Quo modo docemus aut prouocamus eos in confessione nominis sanguinem suum fundere si eis militaturis Christi sanguinem denegamus aut quo modo ad martyrij poculum idoâ—â—os facimus si non eis priùs ad bibendum in ecclesia poculum domini iure communicationis admittimus Howe doe we teache 〈◊〉 them to shed their bloud for the name of Christ if wee denie them the bloud of Christ when they go to warre or how doe we make them fit for the cuppe of martyrdome if wee doe not first admit them to drinke the Lordes cuppe in the Churche and that by the right of communion where I wishe the reader to note well that the lay people haue right to both kindes and consequently that the Romish church is become the whore of Babylon in that shee robbeth vs of our christian right which wee haue de iure diuino Saint Chrysostome hath these wordes Est vbi nihil differt sacerdos à subdito vt quando fruendum est honorandis mysteriis Similiter enim omnes vt illa percipiamus digni habemur Non sicut in veteri lege partem quidem sacerdos comedebat partem autem populus non licebat populo participem esse eorum quorum particeps erat sacerdos Sed nunc non sic verum omnibus vnum corpus proponitur poculum vnum There is a place where there is no difference betweene the priest the lay person as when we are to communicate in the holy mysteries for we are all in
like worthie for that communion not as it was in the olde lawe where the priest ate one part and the people another neither coulde the people be permitted to take part of that that the priest ate For nowe it is not so but to all is proposed one bodie and one cuppe Out of these golden words I note first that the difference in communion is a Iudaicall ceremonie from which Christs death deliuered vs. I note secondly that in the christian communion the common people ought to be as free as the minister I note thirdly that it was so in Saint Chrysostomes time when the people receiued vnder both kinds I note fourthly that the pope hath brought vs into greater bondage then euer were the Iewes S. Ignatius hath these wordes Vna est caro domini Iesu vnus eius sanguis qui pro nobis effusus est vnus etiam panis pro omnibus confractus vnus calix totius ecclesiae There is one flesh of our Lord Iesus one blood which was shed for vs one bread also broken for all and one cuppe of the whole church Saint Iustine hath these wordes Praesidens vero postquam gratiarum actionem perfecit populus vniuersus apprecatione laeta eum comprobauit qui apud nos vocantur diaconi atquo ministri distribuunt vnicuique praesentium vt participet eum in quo gratiae actae sunt panem vinum aquam After the chiefe pastour hath finished the giuing of thankes and all the people haue with ioyfull prayer approoued the same they that we cal Deacons and Ministers do distribute to euery one that is present the sanctified bread wine and water to be partaker thereof Yea the said Iustinus a little after addeth these important wordes Nam apostoli in commentarijs à se scriptis quae euangelia vocantur ita tradiderunt praecepisse sibi Iesum For the apostles in their commentaries that is in the gospelles haue taught vs that Iesus so commaunded them to minister the holie communion Where note by the way that Christ did not onelie ordaine both kindes but he also gaue commaundement to retaine the same in the church For which cause saint Paul teaching the Corinthians to communicate vnder both kinds said that he receiued that form maner from the Lord. S. Austen hath these words Cum Dom. dicat nisi manducaueritis carnem meam biberitis meum sanguinem non habebitis vitam in vobis quid sibi vult quod à sanguine sacrificiorum quae pro peccatis offerebantur tantopere populus prohibetur si illis sacrificijs vnum hoc sacrificium significabatur in quo vera sit remissio peccatorum à cuius tamen sacrificij sanguine in alimentum sumendo noÌ„ solum nemo prohibetur sed ad bibendum potius omnes exhortaÌ„tur qui volunt habere vitam When our Lord saith vnles ye shal eate my flesh and drinke my blood ye shal haue no life in you what meaneth it that the people is so greatly forbidden the blood of sacrifices which was offered for sins if in those sacrifices this onely sacrifice was signified in which there is true remission of sins From y e blood of which sacrifice for al that to be takeÌ„ for nourishment not only none is prohibited but al rather are exhorted to drinke it that desire to haue life S. Ambrose at such time as the emperour Theodosius after his great slaughter of men at Thessalonica desired to enter into the church at Millan and there to be partaker of the holie eucharist spoke these words vnto him Quî quaeso manus iniusta caede sanguine respersas extendere audes eisdem sacrosanctum corpus domini accipere aut quomodo venerandum eius sanguinem ori admouebis qui furore irae iubente tantum sanguinis tam iniquè effudisti How I pray thee darest thou stretch out thy hands sprinckled with vniust slaughter and blood and to take the holie bodie of our Lord in the same Or how wilt thou touch thy mouth with his venerable blood who to satisfy thy fury hast shed so much bloud so vnworthily Gregorius magnus their owne bishop of Rome confirmeth this veritie in these words Eius quippe ibi corpus sumitur eius caro in populi salutem partitur eius sanguis non iam in manus infidelium sed in ora fidelium funditur For his bodie is there receiued his flesh is diuided for the saluation of the people his bloud is now powred not into the handes of infidels but into the mouthes of the faithfull What need many words Their owne Gelasius in their owne canon law condemneth their fact as flat sacrilege These be his words Aut integra sacramenta percipiant aut ab integris arceaÌ„tur quia diuisio vnius eiusdeÌ„que mysterij sine grandi sacrilegio non potest peruenire Either let them participate the whole sacraments or els let them abstain from the whole bicause the diuision of one and the same sacrament cannot be done without great sacrilege The first obiection The commaundement to receiue in both kinds was onelie giuen to the twelue apostles and in them to all priestes for they onely were present when Christ spâ—ke these wordes Drinke ye all of this The answer I say first that if the commaundement pertained onelie to the apostles then are priests aswell as clarkes free from the same I say secondly that the commandement was giuen of both kindes in one and the selfe same maner and therefore the lay people are as free from the one as the from the other I say thirdly that by the common opinion of the papists they were lay people that receiued the communion at Christs handes in his supper For the apostles were vnpriested vntil after his resurrection when hee saide Receiue ye the holy ghost I say fourthly with S. Bernard that the participation of both kinds was commaunded by Christ in the first institution thereof for thus doth he write Nam de sacramento quidem corporis sanguinis sui nemo est qui nesciat hanc quoque tantam tam singularem alimoniam eâ primùm die exhibitam eâ die commendatam mandatam deinceps frequentari For concerning the sacrament of his body and bloud euery one knoweth that this such and so singular nourishment was exhibited that day the first that day commended and commaunded afterward to be frequented This commandement S. Cyprian and saint Iustine vrge for both kindes their words already are set downe I say fiftly that S. Paul who knew Christs minde aswell as any papist did communicate the vnpriested Corinthians vnder both kinds and told them that Christ had so appointed The replie S. Paul only recited Christs institution saith our Iesuite Bellarmine but gaue no commaundement for both kindes but left it as he found it indifferent and in the free choise of the Corinthians to communicate in both or in one only kind The answere I say
chance that may tend to the iniurie of so worthie a misterie which might chance especially in the receiuing of the bloud which if it were vnwarily receiued might easily be shed And because the multitude of christian people is increased wherin are conteined old men yong men and litle ones whereof some are not of so great discretion to vse due warines about the vse of this sacrament therefore there is a good prouiso made in some churches that the lay people shall not receiue the bloud but onely the priest Out of these words of Aquinas I note first that he liued a thousand two hundred seuentie and fiue yeers after Christ. I note secondly that the perfection of the sacrament consisteth in both kinds and consequently that the communion of the lay people is this day vnperfect in the church of Rome I note thirdly that both kinds were vsually giuen to the lay people in Aquinas his time that the contrarie was practised onely in some few odde churches apart I note fourthly that in his time yong childreÌ„ receiued the holy communion To this I adde fiftly that the papists can neuer shew any other alteration betweene the dayes of Aquinas and their late synode of Constance The second obiection Christ ministred the holy Eucharist in one onely kinde to his two disciples in Emaus for saint Luke maketh mention of bread onely and not of wine The answere I say first that your own Iansenius granteth that this place is not meant of the eucharist but was onely a figure thereof he proueth his opinion out of saint Austen S. Bede Theophilacte I say secondly that it is the vsuall phrase of the hebrew tongue to tearme all kinde of meate by the name of bread and so howsoeuer the place be vnderstood drinke can no way be excluded I say thirdly that if this place be vnderstood of the holy communion yet wil it not confirme the popish practise by any meanes For a singular act of Christ who was aboue his law and not bound thereunto cannot discharge vs from his holy institution which he commanded vs to obserue The third obiection S. Luke saith that the faithful continued in the apostles doctrine and felowship and breaking of bread and prayers where by the breaking of bread must needes be vnderstood the blessed eucharist and yet is there no mention made of wine The answere I say first that as it is true that these Textes are to bee vnderstoode of the holy sacrament of Christes body and bloud so is it true also that both kindes were ministred therein I prooue it because otherwise the Apostles shoulde haue ministred the sacrament in one onely kinde which yet no learned paipst will auouch I say secondly that the whole sacrament is figuratiuely signified by the breaking of bread by the figure Synecdoche which is frequent in the holy scripture wheÌ„ a part is named for the whole Whosoeuer reiects this glosse must charge the apostle with flat sacriledge Yea it is common with the fathers to vnderstand both the kinds whensoeuer they speake of the holy eucharist although they make but expresse mention of the one Therefore Saint Iustine after hee had made expresse mention of both the kinds addeth these words Alimentum hoc apud nos appellatur eucharistia This foode or nourishmeÌ„t we cal the eucharist S. Irenaeus hath these words Quando mixtus calix fractus panis percipit verbum Dei fit eucharistia corporis sanguinis Christi When the cuppe mingled and the bread broken receiueth the worde of God it is made the eucharist of the body and bloud of Christ. So S. Cyprian naming the cup onely calleth it the eucharist Which cup being giueÌ„ to an infant proueth euidently that in the primitiue church both kinds were thought most necessarie The fourth obiection It was the vse in the primitiue church to beare the eucharist in one kind to the sicke because there was great danger in carrying the consecrated wine A sufficient testimonie hereof is the storie of Serapion The answere I say first that most ancient approued antiquity beareth witnesse of both kindes sent and carried to the sicke and to such as were absent S. Iustine the martyr hath these words Diaconi distribuunt vnicuique praesentium vt participet eum in quo gratiae actae sunt panem vinum aquam ad absentes perferunt The deacons distribute to euerie one that is present a portion of the consecrated bread wine and water and they also carrie thereof to those that be absent Againe he writeth thus Distributio communicatióque fit eorum in quibus gratiae actae sunt cuique praesenti absentibus autem per diaconos mittitur A distribution and communication is made of those things that are blessed to euerie one that is present and the same is carried by the deacons to those that be absent Saint Hierome greatly commendeth saint Exuperius for his singular zeale in this behalfe these are his words Sanctus Exuperius Tolosae episcopus viduae Sarepâ—ensis imitator esuriens pascit alios ore pallente â—eiunijs fame torquetur alienâ omnémque substantiaÌ„ Christi visceribus erogauit Nihil illo ditius qui corpus domini canistro viminâ—o sanguinem portat in vitro Saint Exuperius the bishoppe of Tolose imitating the widow of Sarepta feedeth others euen when himselfe is hungrie his own mouth is pale with fasting yet it grieueth him to behold others famine al his substaÌ„ce he bestoweth on Christs members None more rich then he he carrieth our Lords body in a wicker basket and his blood in a glasse I say secondly that Serapion receiued both kinds though in some thing different from Christs institution For the bread was first infused into the consecrated wine and so receiued which manner of receiuing was a little corruption though farre different from the popish practise which altogether abandoneth the perfection of the holy sacrament This their owne Durand telleth them and if they will not heare mee yet must I request them to hearken to his words Thus doth he write Etsi in hostiâ consecratâ Christi sanguis sit non tamen est ibi sacramentaliter eò quòd panis corpus non sanguinem vinum sanguinem significat non corpus Quia ergo sub alterá taÌ„tum specie non est completum sacramentum quâ— ad sacramentum vel signum debet hoc sacramentum compleri prius quâm presbiter eo vtatur Although in the consecrate host there bee the blood of Christ yet is it not there sacramentally because the bread doth signifie the bodie not the blood and the wine doth signifie the blood not the body Therfore because the sacrament is not complete vnder one only kind in respect of the sacrament or signe this sacrament must bee first complete before the priest vse it Thus saith our popish Durand Out of whose wordes I note to the
great comfort of good christians that the aduersaries vnwittingly are beaten with their owne swords For though their doctour Durand onely intend to make good the priests receiuing yet is his reason generall forcible christian insoluble vtterly ouerthroweth al communicating vnder one kind Which hee proueth vnwittingly and vnwillingly such is the force of truth by three reasons first because the bloud is not in the consecrate host sacramentally secondly because the bread caÌ„not signifie the blood thirdly because the sacrament is not perfit vnder one kind Now that to vse dipped bread in stead of the blessed wine is a corruption I haue already proued by pope Iulius who telleth vs that none receiued dipped bread but only Iudas the traitor The fift obiection In the primitiue church the faithfull vsed to carie the bread home with them that they might receiue it when they thought good which is an euident signe that then they receiued it in one kind at home The answere I say first that the custome the obiection speaketh of was as well of the wine as of the bread For S. Gregorie Nazianzene writeth of his sister Gorgonia that shee reserued for deuotion sake some part of the signes of the bodie bloud of our Lord which she brought home from the church Tertullian writing to his wife of this vse maketh mention of the wine as well as the bread And Saint Exuperius as yee haue heard alreadie carried both the kinds about with him to releeue the sicke and absent which he would neuer haue done if the laie people had not receiued in both kinds I say secondly that this custome was not generall but onely vsed in some places of some persons rather of zeale then discretion and therfore iustly abrogated by sundrie holy councils Toletain and Cesaraugustain These are the expresse words of these holy councels Si quis acceptam à sacerdote eucharistiam noÌ„ consumpserit velut sacrilegus propellatur anathema sit If any shall not eate vp all the eucharist which hee receiueth of the priest let him be excoÌ„municated let him be accursed Out of which words I gather that the lay people receiued both kinds in the church but of a certaine zeale reserued some part thereof which they carried home to eate in time conuenient as they thought Which vse these graue synodes vtterly disliking condemned as sacrilegious The sixt obiection Many councels make mention of the laicall communion by which the lay people were distinguished from the clerkes Which distinction coulde neuer haue bene if both had receiued vnder both kindes The answere I answere briefely that both sorts receiued the holy eucharist in both kinds but the difference was this the priest receued before the altar the clerks in the chauncell the lay people without so that the meaning of the councels is this and no other to 〈◊〉 that when the laicall communion was inioyned to the clergie for penance then they were to receiue in both kinds as before but after the other clergie and in a lower place with the vulgar and lay people This my solution is grounded in these words of the Toletain councel Sacerdotes Leuitae ante altare communicent in choro clericus extra chorum populus Let the priests and the deacons communicate before the altar the clerkes in the chancell the people without the chancell In which words is insinuated the distinction of communions by the locall distinction where the communion was receiued The second conclusion The priuate communicating in the popish masse where the priest deuoureth vp all alone is wicked prophane and execrable as which is repugnant to Christs sacred institution controlled by apostolicall tradition and vnknowen to the ancient church following I prooue it briefely First because Christ instituted both kinds commanded al to receiue both kinds and withall because all present accomplished his precept For as Saint Marke saith they all dranke thereof Secondly because S. Paul deliuered to al the Corinthians as wel the lay sort as the clergie not only the forme of bread but of wine also protesting that he had so receiued the same froÌ„ the Lord and consequently that they ought in like maner to frequent that holy sacrament And that all without exception vsed thus to do is most euident by the course of holy scripture For Luke writeth The faithful continued in the apostles doctrine fellowship breaking of bread praiers yea it is so euideÌ„t in the very canoÌ„s of the apostles so highly magnified of the papists that priuat masse was reputed an execrable thing in their time as none liuing perusing their canoÌ„s seriously caÌ„ without the note of impudencie denie the same These are the expresse words of the tenth canon Omnes fideles qui conueniunt in solennibus sacris ad ecclesiam scripturas apostolorum euangelium audiant Qui auteÌ„ non perseuerauerint in oratione vsque dum missa peragitur nec sanctam communionem percipiuÌ„t velut inquietudines ecclesiae moueÌ„tes conuenit communione priuari Let all the faithfull that come to the church in time of the holy mysteries heare the scriptures of the apostles and the gospel And if any shal not continue in prayer til y e masse be done or shal not receiue the holy communion let them be excommunicate as those that disquiet the congregation Thus did the apostles decree In whose constitution we see plainly that the apostles are so farre from approuing the priuat masse of the papists as they would not permit any to be in the church but such as did communicate with the priest This is confirmed euen by the popes canon law Thirdly because all the fathers of approued antiquitie doe teach vs the same doctrine S. Chrysostome hath these words Ista videlicet nunc ad omnes nos dicit qui impudenter hic improbè adstamus Quisquis enim mysteriorum consors non est impudens imprâ—bus adstat These things verily he now saith to vs all which stand by impudently and wickedly For whosoeuer standeth by and doth not communicate he is impudent wicked Oh what would this holy father say if he were this day in Rome and should see many hundreds standing by gazing and the priest onely deuouring al he would doubtlesse terme them most impudent and vngratious people Saint Clement whose Epistles the papistes haue in great reuerence writeth in these words Certè tanta in altario holocausta offerantur quanta populo sufficere debeant Quòdsi remanserint in crastinum non reseruentur Let so many breades be offered at the altar as may suffice the people not only the ministers And if any thing shall remaine let it not bee reserued till the morrow S. Ambrose is consonant and confirmeth Saint Clements assertion in these wordes Munus enim oblatum totius populi fit quia in vno pane omnes significantur Per id enim quod vnum sumus de vno pane
For first the cup doth figuratiuely signifie the liquour in the cup. Again the cup is called the testament and yet it is but the figure or signe of the testament I say secondly that y e figure Metonymie is very frequent in the holy scripture aswell in the old as in the new testament In the old testament we haue these examples this is the passeouer That is this doth signifie the passeouer Againe this is my couenant that is to say this doth signifie my couenant or this is a signe of my couenant Againe the 7. good kine are 7. yeares and the seuen good eares are seuen yeares Againe the the seuen thinne and euill fauoured kine are seuen yeares Againe the seuen emptie eares blasted with the East-wind are seuen yeares of famine In all which places the figure Metonymia is vsed For neither the kine nor the eares were the seeuen yeares as euery childe knoweth but they did signifie the yeares to come they were a signe and figure thereof In the newe testament we haue these examples I am the vine Againe I am a doore Againe My father is an husbandman Againe The seed is the word of God Againe We that are manie are one bread Againe The rocke was Christ. Againe The lyon which is of the tribe of Iuda the root of Dauid hath obteined to open the booke In which places Christ neither was the vine nor the rocke nor the lyon neither was the seed the word of God neither was God the father an husbandman neither are the fathfull one bread but al these things are figuratiuely spoken by the vsuall custome of the holy Scripture I say thirdly that not only the ancient fathers but euen the papistes also haue acknowledged this figure their words and testimonies are alreadie cited I say fourthly that the verie wordes of institution are figuratiue which thing is so plaine as euerie child may perceiue the same For thus saith S. Luke This cup is the newe Testament in my bloud which is shed for you Where I am well assured euerie papist small and great will confesse with me that the cup by the figure metonymia is taken for the liquour in the cup. And so against their will they are enforced to acknowledge a figure euen there where they so obstinately denie a figure The fift obiection The Prophet Malachie hath such a plaine testimonie for the reall presence and sacrifice of the altar as it can neuer be aunswered till the worldes end These are the wordes In euery place incense shall be offered to my name and a pure offering These wordes of the Prophet being effectually applied will confound the respondent whatsoeuer hee shall answere For first the prophet speaketh of the oblatiō of the new testament as your selues cannot deny Secondly the prophet saith that this oblation must be in euery place and so it cannot be vnderstoode of Christs bodie offered vpon the crosse for that oblation was but in one place euen without the walles of Ierusalem Thirdly it cannot be vnderstood of the sacrifice of praise thanksgiuing bicause whatsoeuer proceedeth from vs is impure polluted Yea as an other prophet saith Al our righteousnes is as filthie clouts and so no oblation that is ours can be pure Therefore he speaketh of Christs body offered in the masse which is a pure oblation indeede The answere I answere to this insoluble so supposed argument that the prophet speaketh of the sacrifice of prayer and thankesgiuing And I prooue it by the flat testimonies of the holy Fathers Saint Irenaeus hath these wordes In omni loco incensum offertur nomini meo sacrificium purum Incensa autem Ioannes in Apocalypsi orationes esse ait sanctorum Incense is offered to my name in euery place and a pure sacrifice and Saint Iohn in the Reuelation saith that this incense is the prayers of the Saints Saint Theodoretus doeth expound this place after the same maner in his Commentaries vpon the same text Saint Hierome hath these wordes Sed thymiama hoc est sanctorum orationes Domino offerendas non in vna orbis prouincia Iudaeâ nec in vna Iudaeae vrbe Hierusalem sed in omni loco offerri oblationem But incense that is the prayers of saints must be offered to the Lord and that not in Iudea one onely prouince of the world neither in Ierusalem one onlie citie thereof but in euery place must an oblation be made Now where it is said that al our actions be impure and polluted I answere that that is true indeed when our actions be examined in rigour of iustice But not so when we are clad with the righteousnesse of Christ Iesus and haue washed our sins in his bloud for whose sake God doth not impute our pollutitions and filth vnto vs. Not so when God dealeth with vs according to mercie Not so when God accepteth our sinfull and imperfect acts as pure iust and innocent For our owne vnworthienesse the Prophet desired God not to enter into iudgement with his seruants but for Christs righteousnesse the Apostle pronounceth vs free from condemnation For though our sinnes be red as scarlet yet so soone as they be washed in the bloud of the immaculate Lambe they become by acceptation as white as snow This whole discourse Saint Augustine handleth finely in these golden wordes Vae etiam laudabili vitae hominum si remota misericordia discutias eam Woe euen to the laudable life of men if thou examine it thy mercie set a part And in this sense the obiection taketh place Neuertheles god of his great mercie doth accept our works as iust and pure through faith in Christ Iesus our sweet redeemer for whose sake he doth not impute our sins to vs. So saith the Apostle not by the workes of righteousnesse which wee haue done but according to his mercie hath he saued vs by the washing of the new birth the renewing of the holy Ghost So saith S. Iohn These are they which came out of great tribulation and haue washed their long robes haue made them white in the bloud of the lamb through the merits of which lambe our prayers and works are reputed pure Therefore saith Saint Paul I will therefore that the men pray euery where lifting vp pure hands without wrath or doubting The 6. obiection If the words of consecration be trophicall and figuratiue so as there is but a bare signe of Christs body and bloud then shall our sacraments of the newe Testament bee no better then the sacraments of the old The reason is euident because they did signifie Christs death and passion euen as ours do and yet is it cleare by the scriptures that we haue the verity wherof they had but the figure onely The answere I say first that our sacraments excell the olde sundry waies first because they are immutable and shall not bee altered till the worlds
cannot erre neither all generally nor one finally 207 Emperours of Rome 86 Errour may be in the church 206 Errours how they come 342 The Eucharist giuen to infants 186 The Eucharist expounded by Chrysostome 461 The Eucharist is not Christs body 467 The Eucharist vnder one kindâ— 402 The Eucharist broken 484 Eutiches and his heresie 181 F Abrahams Faith did iustifie him 383 Sole Faith iustifieth 370 Faith can not be without good woorkes 399 The first Faith broken how vnderstoode 241 A true Fast 72 Fasting and choice of meates 60 The Fathers doe erre very often 342 Festiuall dayes 116 Fidelitie allegeance condemned by the pope 528 Free-will how it remaineth 358 G Grace that iustifieth is not inherent 370 The Grace of the Manicheâ—s 176 Saint Paul iustified by Grace yet a sinner stil 374 Grace infused may stand with sinne 350 The virgin Mary abounded with Grace yet not freâ— from sinne 28â— The Greekes and their supputation 8â— Gryphus at strife with his vncle 123 The Gouernement of the Iewes 135 H The Heresie of Arrius 178 Of Nestorius 180 Of Macedonius 181 Of Eutiches ibidem Of Mahomet 182 The Historie of Nectarius 509 Of Spiridion 64 Hierusalem besieged 153 Destroyed 25 Holy dayes and Sabbaths 116 I Iesuites are humble 144 Dissemblers 145 Images 139 Indulgences 270 Inuocation of Saints 319 Ioseph and his acts 57 Iosue 58 Of the Israelites but seuentie persons went into Egypt 53 Israelites 400. yeeres in Egypt 54 Iustice inherent 383 Iustice of the regenerate vnperfit 351 Iustification by faith 370 Iustification formall in Christ ibid. Iustification by workes 383 and 384 Iulianus Apostata 175 K Kings of the Assyrians 74 Of Egypt 128 Of the Iewes 135 Of Israel 20 24 Of Iuda 24 Of Macedonia 116 Of the Medes 76 Of the Persians 94 Of the Romanes 83 Of Syria 123 Kings are supreame gouernors in causes ecclesiasticall 34 and 426 Kings that afflicted the Iewes 147 Kissing the altar 483 The pax 482 The patine 483 The Popes feete 487 L The Law impossible after Adam 350 c. The Law fulfilled by faith 370 Euery transgression of the Law a mortal sin 381 What time the Law was giuen 56 The Lie in the midwiues 55 The Librarie of king Ptolomie 132 M Macedonius â—81 The Maniches 176 Marriage of Priests prohibited onely by mans lawe 216 Gratian alloweth priests marriage 231 The Nicene councell alloweth priests marriage 233 The Masse how it is called a sacrifice 428 The canon of the popish Masse 480 Masse in one kinde contrary to Christs institution and antiquitie 402 Popish Masse iniurious to Christs passion 417 Popish Masse is not a propitiatorie sacrifice 432.433 c. Popish Masse a clowted beggars cloake 476 Priuate Masse is diabolical 414 c. Masse ought to be saide in the vulgar tongue 476 Melchisedech what he offered 422 c. No Merit in mans worke 372 c. The Merit which the fathers ascribe to good workes 394 c. The Meritorious cause of iustification 345 The popish Miter 486 A Monarchie contained not all power in it 129 The Monarchie of the Assyrians 74 Of the Greekes 121 Of the Persians 92 Of the Romanes 149 Moses and his actes 55 N The seuerall Names of the ten tribes 43 Nectarius abolished confession 510 Nestorius 180 Nero and his wicked actes 150 Noah his floud 27 Nouatus the cause and beginning of popish confession 512 Nunnes may lawfully marry euen after vowes 235 O Olympias 116 The Olympiads 81 The Originall of confession 509 c. Of kissing the Popes feete 487 Of pardons 270 Of pilgrimage 341 c. Of popish masse 480 Of changing Popes names 486 The Originall of praying for the dead 296 Of praying to Saints 311 Of praying on beades 487 Of popish primacie 187 Of purgatorie 296 Of single life 224 Of transubstantiation 436 P Pardons 270 Pax vsed in poperie 481 Phocas author of primacie 188 Pilgrimage 341 c. Popes and their wicked dealing 529 Of kissing the Popes feete 487 Changing the Popes name 486 Praying to Saints 311 For the dead 296 In the vulgar tongue 476 Vpon beads 487 Primaâ—â—â— 187 Priuate masse 414 Purgatorie 296 Ptolomaeus his librarie 232 R Reliques of Saints not to be adored 349 Remus how slaine 82 The Romish church hath erred 203 c. The church of Rome holdeth many things whereof it can yeelde no reason 186 The church of Rome vseth to wrest the scripture ib. Rome how it had the name 82 Rome when builded ibidem S The alteration of the Sabbath 108 c. The Sacrifice of the masse 428 The Saracens 182 A Scribe what it signifieth 133 The Scripture must try euery trueth 342 The Sects of Romish religion and when they began 530 The Septuagints and their celles 131 Succession of kings See Kings Succession in the Romish church 194 c. Supremacie of the Romish church 187 T The Temple when it was built 2â— Transubstantiation when it began 436 The destruction of Troy 81 All Trueth to be tried by the scripture 342 V No sinne Veniall of it owne nature 381 Vestments and their colour 490 The Virgin Mary a sinner 287 Virgins may marry after their vowes 235 The Visible church clogged with superstitions See Church Vowes cannot dissolue lawful marriage 253 c. Vowes vnlawfull 265 W The Wearing of a Cardinalles hat 488 The seuentie Weekes in Daniel are declared 101 The scripture must Witnes trueth 342 A Woman pope of Rome 191 A Woman clad in mans apparell 74 Good Workes cannot iustifie before God 383 c Good Workes do not merit 392 Widowes damned for breaking their first faith 241 FINIS Among other faults escaped in the Printing these especially are thus to be corrected Pag. 2. for Cabatist reade Cabalist Pag. 13. for 432 443 Pag. 19 for 428 443 Ibidem for 4082 4097 Pag 21. The first two lines as part of the sentence afore-going Pag. 37. for Achab Achaz Ibidem for eight seuenth Pag. 74. for hadle handle Pa. 75. for Tantanes Tautanes Ibid. for Tantens Tantens Pag. 1â—â— deest made with other literall faultes which the ingenious Reader may easily espie and amend Act. 9.1 2. Act 9.4 1 Cor. 15.9 1. Cor. 2.8 1. Tim. 1.13 Gal. â— 10 Genes 2. vers The state of 〈◊〉 in his creation The vertue of the tree of life â—ugust de ciuit 〈◊〉 3 cap. 20. â—enes 2.16 â—enes 3.19 â—enes 1. â—9 â—enes 9.3 Aug. de ciuit libr. 22. cap. 30. The difficultie consisteth not in the ages but in the supputatâ—â—on of the yeareâ— Exceeding greâ—â— varietie of opinâ—â—ons 〈◊〉 first age second age August quaest sup Gen. q. 25. Mal. 1. verse 2 3. â— Par 4. v 1. Actes 7. verse â— The third age â—ee the Fift Sectiâ—n of the eight â—hapter where â—his is handled more at large This point must be well noted See Athanasius in synopsi Anno mundâ— 3088 4. Reg. 25. Ier. 52. Iosephus his â—â—â—putation 〈◊〉 be allowed 〈◊〉 from the 〈◊〉 to the 〈◊〉 be 〈◊〉 443. yeares 〈◊〉