Apostle but we are sure the Pope is none neither successor of any Apostle but very Antichrist Ergo we haue more iust cause to examine his decrees 4 Lastly let Augustine speake Nouit charitas vestra omnes nos vnum magistrum habere sub illo condiscipulos esse nec ideo magistri sumus quia de superiore loco loquimur vobis sed magister est omnium qui habitat in nobis omnib You know brethren saith he that we are all felow scholers vnder one maister and though we speake to you out of an higher place yet are we not your master he is the teacher and master of vs all that dwelleth in our harts Ergo the spirite of God speaking in the scriptures is the chief and best interpreter thereof THE THIRD PART OF THE SIXTH QVEstion concerning the meanes or methode to be vsed in interpreting of Scripture The Papistes error 10 OVr aduersaries prescribe this methode and course to be takē in expounding of scripture which consisteth in foure rules the generall peactise of the Church the consonant interpretation of the fathers the decrees of generall Councels lastly the rule of faith consisting partly of the scriptures partly of traditions vnwrittē Stapleton Cōcerning the three first we haue already touched them in part they appeare to be insufficient First the Councels and fathers he made chief interpreters of Scripture before and now they are but meanes what other chief iudge then is there to vse these meanes surely none but the scriptures Secondly these meanes are most vncertaine the practise of the Church is often changed fathers agree not in their expositiōs and Councels can not alwayes be had Concerning the rule of faith consisting of vnwritten verities he groundeth it falsely vpon that place Rom. 12.6 let vs prophecie according to the rule of faith and Gal. 6.16 as many as walke according to this rule This rule was a certaine platforme of Religion geuen by the Apostles before the Scriptures were written according to the which say they the Scriptures were afterward compiled by the Apostles Rhemens in Rom. 12.6 Answere S. Paul meaneth no other rule but that which is set downe in his writings no other forme of doctrine but that conteined in his Epistles as in the 6. to the Galathians speaking of this rule he alludeth to the former verse where he saith he reioyced in nothing but in the Crosse of Christ his rule therfore is to receiue Christ onely without the ceremonies or workes of the law against the which heresie he disputeth in the whole Epistle But of all other it is a great blasphemie to say that the Apostles set downe the Scriptures by a rule as though the spirite of God by whom they spake had neede of any such direction The Protestantes WHen we say that the scriptures must expound them selues our meaning is that by certaine compendious and ready meanes we should labour to vnderstand the scriptures by them selues the meanes are especially these foure First to haue recourse to the originall toung as in the old Testament to the Hebrue in the new to the Greeke as 1. Tim. 2.15 through bearing of children they shal be saued if they continue in faith and loue In the English it is doubtfull whether this clause if they continue in faith be referred to children or to those that beare them but read the Greeke and the doubt is remoued for bearing of children is all one word in the originall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that it must needes be vnderstood of the women for this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bearing of children is in the singular number that which foloweth of the plurall and it is but an action not a person so that it should be improperly sayd if they continue that is in bearing of children Stapleton obiecteth against this meane that it is not now needefull seeing there is a perfect and absolute translatiō authorised by the Councell of Trent he meaneth the vulgare Latin We answere First it is no perfect but an erronious translation and verie corrupt Secondly if it were neuer so perfect yet for more certaintie it is profitable to search the originall euery man will trust his owne skill rather then another mans Thirdly the Councell did fondly in authorising an old blind translation before the authenticall copies of the Hebrue and Greeke 2 Secondly the scope of the place the circumstance of it with that which goeth before and commeth after must be wayghed which will bring great light to the place we haue in hand an example we haue 1. Pet. 4.8 loue couereth multitude of sinnes the Papistes gather out of these words that loue doth iustifie vs before God and taketh away our sinnes but by the circunstance of the place the Apostole saying immediatly before haue feruent loue among you it is euident he vnderstandeth brotherly loue amōgest our selues whereby faultes are buried forgeuen and forgotten Stapleton obiecteth that this is but an vncertaine way and many times fayleth for the scripture passeth many times from one matter and argument to another how then can it helpe to consider the circumstance of the place being of a diuerse matter We answere we say not that any of these meanes serueth for euery place but when one fayleth to vse another when the circumstance helpeth not to runne to the originall if there we find no succour to cōpare places together and when we may to vse them all or the most 3 Thirdly the conference of places is very profitable as Iames. 2.21 Abraham was iustified by workes compare it with that place Rom. 4.2 there S. Paule saith flatly that Abraham was not iustified by workes Wherfore seeing one Apostle is not contrary to the other we must needs gather that this word iustified is diuersly taken Paule saith that Abraham was not iustified that is made righteous before God by his workes Iames saith he was iustified that is declared to be iust before men and so Thom. Aquinas expoundeth it Stapleton obiecteth that this meanes in cōparing of places is of it selfe many times of smal force Answere as though we affirme that these meanes must be vsed asunder and not rather ioyntly together and where one fayleth another to helpe Secondly some things are found but once in the scriptures Aunswere they are then either very plaine or not greatly necessarie Thirdly heretikes haue erred in comparing of Scripture Answere they compared them not diligently nor with a syncere minde but corruptly and negligently 4 The fourth rule is the analogie and proportion of faith which is nothing els but the summe grounds of Religiō gathered out of scripture such as are conteined in the Creede the Lordes Prayer the ten Commaundements and in our whole Catechisme We must take heede that in the interpretation of Scripture we swarue not from this rule of faith nor impugne any principle of Religion Wherefore the Papistes interpretation of those wordes of Christ we do reiect Hoc est corpus meum this is my
chiefe citie in all the world this reason was rendered in the Councel of Chalcedon Can. 28. An other cause thereof was the ample priuiledges and immunities which the Emperours endued it withall as Constantine the great and Gratianus the Emperour made a lawe that all men should reteyne that religion which Damasus of Rome and Peter Bishop of Alexandria did hold A third cause was the vnquiet estate of the Greeke Church who often voluntarily referred their matters to the Bishop of Rome as being lesse partiall and a more indifferent Iudge they themselues being diuided and rent into sects And hereupon and other like causes it came about that the Bishop of Rome a little stepped aboue his fellowe Patriarkes but yet had no such preeminent authoritie as to commaund them Fourthly the Pope of Rome being thus tickled with vayne glorie because they were reuerenced of other Churches many matters were committed vnto them and their consent required vnto the decrees of Councels when they were absent Hereupon they laboured euery day more and more to aduance that See taking euery small occasion that might helpe forward their ambicious desire till Anno. 606. or somewhat after Boniface the 3. obtayned of wicked Phocas the Emperour who murthered his master the Emperour Mauritius and his children to come to the Empire and was after slaine himselfe of Heraclius that succeeded him of him I say Boniface for himselfe and his successors obtayned to bee called vniuersall Bishops ouer the whole Church and the See of Rome to haue the preeminence aboue all other Churches in the world Afterward in Pope Zacharie his time the proude and insolent iurisdiction of Rome was established by Pipinus King of France who aspired to the Crowne and obtayned it by the sayd Popes meanes first deposing Childericus the rightfull King and dispensing with the oath which the French men had made before to Childericus Calum Institut 4. cap. 7. sect 17. Thus then it sufficiently appeareth that the primacie of Rome which it now vniustly challengeth ouer other Churches is not of any such antiquitie as they would beare the world in hand neither that it had the beginning from Christ but both the time when and the authors by whom it began may bee easily assigned 2 Wee neede no better argument to proue that the primacie of Rome hath not his originall from Christ then the Iesuites owne confession First he sayth that it doth not depend of Christs institution but ex Petri facto of Peters fact that the Bishop of Rome should bee rather Peters successor then the Bishop of Antioch or any other It is not iure diuino saith he by Gods lawe neither is it ex prima institutione pontificatus quae in Euangelio legitur of the first institution whereof wee reade in the Gospell And agayne Romanum pontificem succedere Petro non habetur expresse in scripturis It is not expressely set downe in scripture that the Bishop of Rome should succeede Peter but it is grounded onely vpon the tradition of Peter Nay he saith further that Peter needed not to haue chosen any particular place for succession and he might as well haue chosen Antioch as Rome Ergo neither is the succession of Rome grounded vpon scripture neither any commandement of Christ for then Peter could not haue had free choyse to appoynt his successor where he would himselfe as the Iesuite saith if he had had any especiall direction or commaundement from Christ. So then marke I pray you they cannot proue out of scripture that the Bishop of Rome ought to succeede Peter in the chiefe Bishopricke but onely that Peter had the chiefe Bishopricke committed to him and his successors in generall whosoeuer they should appoynt Ergo the Bishops of Rome by their owne confession can alleadge no scripture institution or commandement of Christ for the primacie of the Church to bee annexed to the See of Rome and yet agaynst their knowledge they will alleadge scripture to colour the matter withall Bellarm. lib. 2. de pontif ca. 17. 3 Augustine saith Secundum honorum vocabula quae iam ecclesiae vsus obtinuit episcopatus presbyterio maior est The office of a Bishop is aboue the office of a Priest according to the names of honour which the Church by custome hath obtayned If then the difference of those two offices both named in scripture did arise rather and spring of the custome of the Church which thought it good to distinguish them for auoyding of schisme and is not grounded vpon the authoritie of scripture much lesse can the Pope whose neither name nor office is expressed in scripture fetch from thence any shew of proofe for his vsurped primacie THE SIXT PART OF THIS QVESTION CONCERning the proud names and vayne glorious titles of the Pope The Papists BEllarmine setteth downe to the number of fifteene glorious names which error 46 haue been of old giuen as he saith to the Bishop of Rome whereby his primacie ouer other Bishops is notoriously knowne but the principall are these He is called the Pope and chiefe Father the prince of Priests or high Bishop the Vicar of Christ the head of the Church the Prelate of the Apostolike See vniuersall Bishop These sixe names or titles they doe appropriate to the See of Rome Bellarm. de Roman pontif lib. 2. cap. 31. The Protestants WE will shewe by Gods grace that these sixe seuerall titles and names aforesayd are either such as ought not in their sense to be attributed to any Bishop nor any mortall man or els were common in ancient times as well to other Bishops as to him of Rome 1 For the first name of Pope it is deriued from the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in the Syracusane language is as much as Father which name was indifferently giuen to other Bishops which were famous in the Church for their vertue and learning As Cypriane Epiphanius Athanasius were called Papae Popes Augustine saluteth Aurelius President of the 6. Councel of Carthage by the name of Pope Epistol 77. Likewise those two epithetes of the Pope as to bee called Beatissim sanctissim pater most holy and blessed father were vsed in the stile of other Bisshops Prosper in his Epistle to Augustine twise calleth him Dominum beatissimum papam Lord most blessed Pope Tom. 7. Hierome calleth Epiphanius Beatum papam blessed Pope Ad Eustach Fabiol Augustine writing to Petrus the Presbyter or Priest being no Bishop yet thus saluteth him Ad sanctitatem tuam scripsit he hath written to your holines Nay in his booke dedicated to Renatus a lay man neither Priest nor Bishop thus he writeth Hinc angor quòd sanctitati tuae minus quà m vellem cognitus sum This grieueth me that I am not so well knowne to your holines as I desire If then these titles of holinesse and blessednesse were not onely giuen to Bishops but Priests also yea vnto lay men of vertuous and holy life what colour or
lawfull for any to inuent allegories of scripture as it seemeth good to them selues THE SECOND PART OF THE SIXTH QVEtion to whom the chief authoritie to expound Scripture is committed The Papistes error 9 IT was decreed in the Councell of Trent that scripture should be expoūded as the Church expoundeth it and according to the common and consonant cōsent of the fathers Sect. 4. The Rhemistes say that the sense of the scriptures must be learned of the fathers and pastors of the Church Praefat. Sect. 18. If the fathers agree not the matter is referred to a generall Councell if there it be not determined we must haue recourse to the Pope and his Cardinals The Iesuite dare not referre the matter to the Pope alone to expound scripture but ioyneth the Colledge of Cardinals with him Bellarm. lib. 3. de script cap. 3. 1 They obiect that place Deut. 17.9 where the people are commaunded to resorte vnto the Priest or Iudge in doubtfull matters Ergo there ought to be a chief and supreme iudge in Ecclesiasticall matters Bellarm. We aunswere First here the ciuill Magistrate and the Iudge are ioyned together as ver 12. Wherefore if they will gather hereby that the Pope must be supreme Iudge in all Ecclesiasticall matters then the Emperour ought to be as well in ciuill Secōdly the text saith they shal come to the Priests ver 9. assigning many not to one onely Priest Thirdly they must iudge according to the law v. 11. not as they list thē selues Fourthly here is no mentiō made of doubts in interpreting scripture but of controuersies that may fall out betweene man and man either Ecclesiasticall to be decided by the Priest or ciuill by the Magistrate Fiftly we graunt that in euery country there ought be a supreme and high seate of iudgement for determining of controuersiall matters betweene men but it foloweth not that there should be a supreme iudge ouer the whole Church especially in such matters as this concerning the sense of the scriptures which i◠not commited to the iudgement of men neither is any such controuersie named in that palce ver 8. 2 Ecclesiastes 12.11 The wisemā cōpareth the wordes of the wise to nayles which are fastned geuen by one pastor Ergo the Pope is supreme iudge We aunswere the wise men are here vnderstood to be the Pastors and Ministers of Gods word but this one pastor signifieth neither the high Priest in the old law nor the Pope in the new but Iesus Christ the high shepheard for our soules What great boldnesse is this to attribute that to the Pope which is onely proper to Christ 3 They also picke out some places in the new Testament as Math. 16.19 to thee will I geue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen Christ saith so to Peter Ergo the Pope hath authoritie to expound scripture We aunswere First by the keyes here is meant commission to preach the Gospell not onely to expound doubtes Secōdly they were geuen to all the Apostles not to Peter onely Math. 28. v. 18.19 Thirdly the Pope is not successor of Peter no more then any other godly Bishop nor so much vnlesse he folow Peters steps So they abuse that place Math. 18.17 he that will not heare the Church c. Ergo the Bishops and chief pastors must expound the doubt in scriptures Aunswere First our Sauiour speaketh here of the discipline of the Church of correctiōs and admonitions not of interpreting scripture which dependeth not vpō the will fantacie of Pope Cardinals or Popish Councels but must be tryed by the scriptures them selues Secondly we must geue eare to the Church but with a double condition we must be sure it is the Church of God secōdly we must not heare them cōtrary to the scriptures but so long as they do teach the doctrine of Christ. The Protestants WE haue a more compendious way to come to the vnderstanding of the scripture It were to lōg whē we doubt of any place to stay till we haue the generall consent of the pastors of the Church or to expect a generall Councell or go vp to Rome And it were to much to trouble the Popes grauitie with euery questiō The Lord hath shewed vs a more easie and ready way see that we neede not ascend to heauen or cōpasse the earth or passe the Alpes but the word of God is amongest vs the scriptures them selues and the spirite of God opening our harts do teach vs how to vnderstand them the interpretation of Scripture is not assigned to any succession of pastors or tryed to any place or persons Our arguments folow some few of them 1 That onely hath power to geue the sense of Scripture which doth beget vs faith the spirite onely by the Scriptures begetteth faith Rom. 10.17 faith commeth of hearing the word Ergo the spirit of God is the onely interpreter of scripture The proposition also is cleare for seeing the Scripture is the true sense and meaning therof if any should geue the sense of the scripture but that which worketh faith then vpon him should our faith be grounded If the Pope therefore geue the sense of Scripture and our faith ariseth of the Scripture vnderstood then our faith is builded vpon the Popes sense argum Whitach 2. 9. 2 The Scriptures cā not be interpreted but by the same spirit wherewith they were writtē but that spirite is found no where but in the Scriptures Ergo. The first part the Papistes them selues graunt the second is thus proued the spirite of the Apostles is not geuen by secret inspiration that sauoureth of Anabaptisme where is it thē to be found whether is it like that S. Peters spirite should be found in the Popes chaire or in his Epistles or if they haue S. Peters spirite where is S. Paules found but in his writings Yet it is all one spirite appeareth not els where but in the Scriptures where euery man may finde it as wel as the Pope the spirituall man iudgeth all things 1. Cor. 2.15 you haue an oyntment from him that is holy and you haue knowen all things and ver 27. you need not that any mā teach you By these places it is euident that euery faithfull man by the spirite of God may vnderstand the scriptures 3 The doctrine of the Church must be examined by the Scriptures Ergo the scriptures are not to stand to the iudgement of the Church The former part is proued by the example of the Berrheans Act. 17.11 If they did well in examining Paules doctrine much more may the decrees of the Pope Church Coūcels be examined by the scriptures But they knew not whether Paule was an Apostle or not therefore they might examine his doctrine saith the Iesuite Answere it is no matter for the person of Paule they examined his doctrine which dependeth not vpon the person Secondly they could not be ignoraunt of his Apostleship who was famous throughout the Churches Thirdly they doubted onely whether Paul was an
which is contrarie We aunswere whatsoeuer is imposed as necessarie to saluation beside the Scripture praeter Scripturas is also contra Scripturas contrarie to Scripture as are all Popish traditions which they lay a necessitie vpon both beside and contrarie to Scripture Neither did those false Apostles against whom S. Paule writeth so much bring in another or cōtrary Gospell as the Apostle saith ver 7. as they did labour to corrupt and peruert that Gospel which S. Paul taught Therfore all traditiōs whether praeter or cōtra beside or contrarie to Scripture are notablie by this place ouerthrowen 2 Iohn 20.31 these things are written that ye might beleeue that Iesus Christ is the sonne of God that in beleeuing ye might haue life through his name Ergo the Scriptures conteine all things necessarie to saluation for they suffise to worke in vs faith and faith bringeth vs to eternall life First Bellarmine aunswereth that Iohn speaketh onely of that which he had written Aunswere If this one Apostles writings were able to worke faith the whole body of Scripture much more but he rather speaketh of all other holy writings of the Apostles for he was the suruiuer of them all acknowledged their writings and approued them Secōdly saith he the Apostle saith not that those writings onely suffise but they are profitable and referred to this end to worke faith Aunswere The Scripture is not one of the meanes but the sole whole and onely meanes for if they perfectly worke faith what neede any other helpes but the first is true for they doe beget in vs a perfect faith which shall bring vs to eternall life Ergo they are the onely meanes of faith 3 The whole Scripture saith S. Paule is profitable to teach to improue to correct and instruct in righteousnesse 2. Tim. 3.16 Ergo it conteineth all things necessarie for what els is requisite besides these foure to teach the right faith improue error to instruct in righteousnes and vertue to correct vice First they aunswere the Apostle meaneth as well euery booke of Scripture as the whole euery part therfore hath this perfection as well as the whole But you will not say that euery booke conteineth all things necessarie to saluation therefore this perfection is not so to be taken We aunswere First S. Paule vnderstandeth the body of Scripture as ver 15. thou hast knowen the Scriptures he speaketh of them all Secondly if euery part had these vtilities you might as well conclude that euery word and sillable hath them for they are parts of Scripture Thirdly it appeareth by these foure great vtilities here set downe that the Apostle meaneth not any part or partes of Scripture but the whole for euery part of Scripture is not profitable for all these endes but the whole Secōdly they say it foloweth not the Scripture is profitable therfore sufficient they also graunt it is profitable Aunswere but we conclude out of S. Paule that the Scripture is not onely profitable but sufficient as it foloweth v. 17. that the man of God may be absolute perfectly instructed to euery good worke If then the scriptures are able perfectly to instruct vs then are they sufficient then neede we no other helpes 4 Lastly Augustine thus writeth in Psal. 66. Ne putetis saith he ex alijs Scripturis petendum quod forte hic deest Thinke not saith he that it is to be found in any other writings if it be not in Scripture And in another place In Euangelio quaeramus nam si ibi non inuenimus vbi inueniemus Let vs saith he seeke to be resolued in the Gospell if we finde not there where shall we find it Ergo by the iudgemēt of Augustine there is no truth necessary to be knowen which is not to be found in the Scripture THE THIRD PART OF THE SEVENTH question whether there be any traditions beside Scripture concerning faith and manners The Papistes error 13 THey vnderstand by this word tradition doctrine preceptes and ceremonies with other vsages of the Church which are not written in the scriptures They do not say that all their traditiōs are necessary but they make diuerse kindes of them some are vniuersall obserued in the whole Church some particular some are free some necessarie some are Apostolicall inuented by the Apostles some Ecclesiasticall by the Church so thus they conclude all traditions decreed in Councels and iudged Apostolicall whatsoeuer the Church of Rome receiueth as Apostolicall are not to be doubted but to be Apostolicall indeed Secondly all Apostolicall traditions are of equall authoritie with the writings of the Apostles Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 2. 9. and they are that part of the word of God which is vnwritten as well as the scriptures are that part which is written Let vs see what arguments they bring for these traditions 1 They geue an instance of certaine traditiōs as the Baptisme of infants and the not rebaptising of those which were before Baptised by heretikes We aunswere these two customes of the Church are grounded vpon scripture for as childrē were in the time of the law Circūcised so are they now vnder the Gospell Baptised and that promise Gene. 17. I will be thy God and the God of thy seede as it belonged to them and their children so doth it appertaine to vs and our children Concerning the other point that they whom heretikes haue once Baptised ought not to be Baptised againe S. Augustine doth proue it out of the scripture Ephe. 4. there is one Faith one Baptisme Ergo not to be repeated But now they come in with other traditions as the Lenton fast which they vse most fondly and superstitiously the eight Ecclesiasticall orders Bishops Prists Deacōs Subdeacons Acolythistes Readers Exorcistes Doore-keepers the worshipping of Images with many other these they would face vs out to be Apostolical traditions and to haue bene vniuersally obserued which are but their vayne brags and Thrasonicall crakes they shall neuer proue them vniuersall much lesse Apostolicall And because they finde no scripture to establish these their superstitious fantasies by they flye vnto tradition which is their onely hauen where they hope to finde succour but all in vayne Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 9. Consul Whitacher quaest 6. cap. 4. 2 They proceede and alledge scripture for their traditions as that place Iohn 16.12 I haue many things to say but you can not beare them now Ergo say they there are many traditions not written We aunswere First it foloweth not because Christ declared not all things at that time that therefore he kept them from his Apostles all together Nay whatsoeuer afterwardes the Apostles learned of the spirite of God they had heard before of Christ for it was the office of the spirite but to put them in remembrance of Christes sayings Iohn 14.26 which they had heard before but vnderstood them not and so forgat them Wherefore these things which Christ forbeareth to speake are the same things which are cōteined in
the Apostles writings Secondly if there were other matters which Christ vttered not how foloweth it nay what great presumptiō is it to say that those trifles and apish toyes which the Papistes vse in their Idolatrous sacrifice and their other beggarly ceremonies which boyes may well laugh at are those profoūd matters which the Apostles were not then able to conceiue 3 That of all other they take to be an inuincible place 2. Thess. 2.15 keepe the instructions or traditions which ye haue bene taught either by word or by Epistle Ergo there are traditions besides scripture We aunswere when S. Paule wrote this Epistle all the scriptures were not writtē wherefore besides these two short Epistles which do not conteine the summe of the Gospell nor all necessarie preceptes he by his preaching supplied what was wanting and so declared vnto them the whole mysterie of the Gospell as he saith 1. Thess. 2.2 these he calleth his traditions because yet he had not written his other Epistles wherein those instructions and traditions are conteined This then is but a weake argument the Thessalonians had other instructiōs and traditions beside the two Epistles writtē vnto them Ergo they had other traditiōs beside all the writings of S. Paule and the other Apostles this is their mayne and waightie argument The Protestantes FIrst we graunt that all things are not written which our Sauiour Christ and the Apostles taught and that it was the Gospell which they preached as well as this which is written yet in substance they preached the same Gospell which now is expressed in the scripture neither was there any necessarie precept deliuered in their Sermons which is not now to be found in the scriptures Secondly we denie not but there were certaine rites and orders ordained by the Apostles in diuerse churches which were not cōmitted to writing because they were not to continue and endure for euer in the Church as that precept Act. 16. that the Gentiles should abstaine from strangled and from bloud Thirdly we also graunt that the Church may vse externall rites and orders either left by tradition or ordained by the Church for decencie and comelynesse and tending to edification But we constantly affirme that there are no traditions in the Church of God necessarie to saluation beside scripture wherein all things are conteined necessarie to saluation both concerning faith and manners 1 It is not lawfull as to take ought from the word of God so to adde any thing vnto it Deut. 12.32 Apocal. 22.18 But they which bring in traditiōs necessarie beside the scriptures do adde vnto them Ergo. To the proposition the Iesuite aunswereth that all addition to the word of God is not forbidden for the Prophets did write after Moses the Apostles after the Euangelistes We aunswere that those holy men had authoritie from God to compile scripture if the Papistes haue the like Apostolike authoritie for their traditions let them shew it and we will beleeue them Secondly the Prophetes did but explane Moses and expound the law and the Apostles did as it were set forth their Commentaries vpon the Gospell this therefore was no addition because they did not derogate from the perfection of the scriptures any way To the assumptiō they aunswere that their traditions are but expositiōs of Scripture We aunswere their traditions are cleane contrarie to Scripture as the worshipping of Images and the sacrifice of their Masse and they adde to Scripture making it vnperfect saying it doth not conteine all things necessarie to saluation Wherefore they can not escape that curse which they runne into that adde to the word of God 2 All traditions among the Iewes besides the law were condemned Math. 15.3 Ergo all vnwritten traditions now must be abolished The Iesuite aunswereth First Christ condemned not the auncient traditions of Moses but those which were newly and lately inuented Aunswere first the Scripture maketh no mention of any such traditions of Moses Christ biddeth them search the Scriptures not runne vnto traditions Secondly these seemed to be auncient traditions bearing the name of Elders traditions and they were in great authoritie amongest the Iewes most like because of some long continuance Secondly saith he Christ findeth fault with wicked and impious traditions Aunswere First their traditions were not openly and plainly euill and pernicious but had some shew of holynesse as the washing of pots and tables and beds I would the Papists did not here take thē selues by the nose whose traditions come nearer to open impietie and blasphemie then theirs did Secondly Christ in opposing the Scripture against traditions therein condemneth all traditions not written besides the Scripture 3 If Paule preaching the whole Gospell Act. 20.27 did say none other things then Moses and the Prophetes then all things necessarie to saluation are conteined in the Scriptures For it can not be said to be a whole and perfite Gospell if any thing necessarie to saluation be wanting But Paule preached nothing but out of Moses and the Prophetes Act. 26.22 Ergo much more now is the Scripture a perfect rule of faith we hauing beside Moses and the Prophetes the holy writings of the Euangelistes and Apostles 4 Last of all although we might multiplie many arguments but these I trust strongly concluding out of Scripture may serue as a sufficient bulwarke against all Popish paper bullets Let vs heare in the knitting vp the iudgement of Augustine In his rebus inquit in quib nihil certi statuit Scriptura mos populi Dei vel instituta maiorum pro lege tenenda Epist. 86. In all those things saith he speaking of externall rules and ceremonies of the which we haue no certaine rule out of Scripture the custome of the people of God and the godly constitutions of our forefathers must stand for a law but concerning matters of faith and good maners the Scriptures do giue certaine rules as in another place In ijs quae aperte in Scriptura posita sunt inueniuntur illa omnia quae continent fidem moresque viuendi De doctrin Christian. 2.9 all things appertaining to faith and the rule of life are plainlie expressed in the Scripture Ergo by the sentence of Augustine traditions besides scripture haue nothing to do with the doctrine of faith and manners but do consist onely in externall rites and customes of the Church THE SECOND GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE CHVRCH HAuing now finished the questions betweene our aduersaries and vs concerning the Scriptures and word of God which all do belong to the Propheticall office of Christ in the next place such controuersies are to be handled as do concerne the Kingly office of Christ. And seeing the Church of Christ is his kingdome where he ruleth and raigneth we must intreat of the Church and first in generall of the whole and in speciall of the partes and members This present controuersie concerning the Church in generall standeth vpon fiue principall questions 1 Of the definition of the Catholike Church two partes
Notes we would desire no better arguments then those which our aduersaries alleadged against vs for first our notes are proper onely to the Church and cannot bee found in any place where the Church of God is not Secondly they are most notorious markes and a man by the Scriptures may more easely knowe what true doctrine is and which are the right Sacraments then which is the true Church Thirdly these markes can not be absent from the Church but doe alwayes accompanie it and it is no longer a true Church then it hath those markes 2 We are able out of the Scriptures to proue these marks which may stand in stead of many reasons Iohn 10. my sheepe heare my voyce Ephes. 5. clensing it by the washing of water through the word Ergo the Word and Sacraments are true notes of the Church Bellarmine answereth to the first place that the hearing of the word is not a visible note of the Church but a signe vnto euery man whereby he may knowe his election Wee replie agayne looke which way a man is knowne to bee a member of the Church by the same way the Church also it selfe is discerned if the hearing of the word doe make one a sheep of Christ then doth it also shew which is the flocke and fould of Christ As I knowe my hand or foote to bee a part of my bodie because it hath life and motion of the bodie euen so the bodie is discerned from a carkas because it moueth and liueth To the second place he answereth very simply that the Apostle there sheweth not which is the Church but what good Christ hath wrought for his Church We replie againe But the Church is best knowne by the benefites that Christ hath bestowed vpon it amongst the which the Word and the Sacraments are not the least Ergo by these the Church is knowne and in that place by the Apostle described And let the reader iudge whether that place of the Apostle where there is direct mention made of the word and sacraments be not fitly applied to our purpose concerning the description of the Church 3 Let Augustine speake In scripturis didicimus Christum in scripturis didicimus ecclesiam epistol 166. In the scripture we doe learne Christ in the scripture let vs likewise learne the Church His argument is this Looke how Christ is knowne so is his Church but Christ is onely knowne by his word Ergo so is his Church The fourth question of the authoritie of the Church THe Papists affirme that the authoritie of the Church consisteth in these fiue poynts First in authorising the scriptures and defining which are Canonicall Secondly in giuing the sense of the scripture Thirdly in determining matters besides scripture Fourthly in making lawes constitutions for the Church Fiftly in exercising of discipline Concerning the two last we doe not greatly stand with them We acknowledge the Church hath authoritie to make decrees and constitutions but so as the Apostles did Visum est nobis spiritui sancto It seemed good to vs and the holy Ghost the Church must be directed by the wisedome of the spirit speaking in the scriptures We also acknowledge the holesome power of the Church in exercising of holy discipline but it must be done in the name and power of Christ. 1. Cor. 5.4 not according to the will of men Concerning the two first we haue alreadie shewed that neither the Church doth giue authoritie to the word of God but doth take her authoritie from thē for the scriptures are of sufficient credite of themselues 1. controu quaest 4. Neither that the sense of scripture dependeth vpon the interpretation of the scripture but that the word expoundeth it selfe 1. controu quaest 6. There remaineth therefore onely one poynt to be discussed of the authoritie of the Church namely in deciding of matters beside the scriptures which are of two sorts either necessarie appertayning to faith or indifferent concerning ceremonies of both these in their order THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE CHVRCH hath authoritie in matters of faith beside the scriptures The Papists WE ought to take our faith and al necessarie things of saluation at the hands error 24 of our superiours Rhemist Act. 10. sect 8. In poynts not decided by scripture wee must aske counsaile of the Church Praefat. sect 25. The Church is the onely piller and stay to leane vnto in all doubts of doctrine without the which there can be no certaintie nor securitie we must therefore beleeue it and trust it in all things annot 1. Timoth. cap. 3. sect 9. Yea it hath authoritie say they to make newe Articles of faith as in the Councell of Constance it was decreed to be necessarie to saluation to beleeue the Pope to be head of the Church In the Councell of Basile it was made an Article of the faith to beleeue that the Councell was aboue the Pope and therfore Pope Eugenius in not obeying the Councell was adiudged to be an heretike 1 Vpon these words in the Gospel Iohn 15.27 the spirit shall testifie of me and you shall beare witnesse also they conclude thus Ergo the testimonie of the trueth ioyntly consisteth in the holy Ghost and Prelates of the Church Rhemist Iohn 15. sect 8. We answere The witnesse of the spirit and of the Apostles is all one witnesse for the spirit first testifieth the trueth to the Apostles inwardly and the Apostles inspired by the spirite did witnesse it outwardly so the Pastors of the Church witnessing with the spirit which is not now inspired by reuelation but onely found in the scriptures are to bee heard but if the spirit testifie one thing in the word and they testifie another there we must leaue them 2 The Church erreth not Ergo we must heare her in all things Rhem. 1. Timoth 3. sect 9. We answere First the Church may erre if she followe not the scriptures Proued before 2. controu quaest 2. Secondly so long as the Church heareth Christs voyce we are likewise to heare hers and so long as she is preserued from error she will not swarue from Christs precepts neither impose any thing vpon her children without the warrant of her spouse The Protestantes THat the Church hath no such power to ordaine articles of faith or impose matters to be beleeued necessarie to saluation not contayned or prescribed in the holy scriptures We prooue it thus and wee are sure that the true Church of Christ will neuer chalenge any such prerogatiue 1. All truthes and verities in the scriptures are not so necessary to saluation that the ignorance thereof should bring perill of damnation Ergo much lesse are any verities out of scripture of any such necessitie the first is manifest for to know the iust chronologie of time or space of yeares from the beginning of the world to Christ is a veritie in scripture yet not necessary so to beleeue that Marie continued a virgin euer after the birth of our Lord was thought by
the Iewish ceremonies this is great presumption to thinke it is lawfull for the Church to doe whatsoeuer Christ and his Apostles did Fulk 1. Tim. 4. sect 18. The Protestants ALthough there be great moderation to bee vsed in the ceremonies of the Church and there is also some limitation for them yet hath the Church greater libertie in the rites and ceremonies which are appoynted for order and comelinesse sake then in the doctrine of fayth and religion The doctrine of saluation is alwayes the same and cannot be changed and toucheth the conscience But rites and ceremonies are externall and commanded for order sake and neither are they vniuersall the same in euery Church nor perpetuall but are changed according to times and as there is occasion Againe the precepts of Christianitie are either directly expressed or necessarilie concluded out of the scriptures but externall rites and ceremonies are not particularlie declared in the word there are onely certaine generall rules set downe according to the which all ceremonies brought into the Church are to bee examined as for the Sacraments of the Church they cannot bee altered hauing a perpetuall commandement from Christ Therefore the Church cannot appoynt what how many ceremonies soeuer she shall thinke good but according to these foure rules and conditions which followe here in order 1 All things ought to bee done to the glorie of God euen in ciuill actions much more in things appertayning to the seruice of God 1. Cor. 10.31 Our aduersaries offend agaynst this rule applying and annexing remission of sinnes to their owne inuentions and superstitious ceremonies as vnto penance and extreame vnction which they also make Sacraments for this is greatly derogatorie to Christs institution who hath only appoynted the hearing of his word and vse of the Sacraments for the begetting and encreasing of faith and by this faith only is the death of Christ applied vnto vs for the remission of sinnes 2 All things ought to be done orderly and decently 1. Cor. 14.40 Wherefore al ridiculous light vnprofitable ceremonies are to be abolished such our aduersaries haue many as knocking kneeling creeping to the Crosse lighting candles at noone day turning ouer of beades and many phantasticall gestures they haue in their idolatrous Masse as turning returning looking to the East to the West crossing lifting quaffing and shewing the emptie cup with many such toyes 3 All things ought to bee done without offence 1. Corinth 10.32 But to whom that hath but a little feeling of religion is not the abhominable sacrifice of the Masse offensiue What good conscience doth it not grieue that the Priest should create his maker as they say should offer vp the bodie of Christ in sacrifice and be an intercessor as it were for his mediatour desiring God to accept the sacrifice of his sonnes bodie As also to make it a propitiatorie sacrifice for the quicke and the dead But of these matters we shall haue fitter occasion to entreate afterward when we come to the seuerall controuersies 4 All things ought to bee done to edifying 1. Corinth 14. vers 12. But the popish ceremonies are so farre from edifying that by reason of their infinite rabble and number they are a clogge vnto Christians and more burdensome then were the obseruations of the Iewes They haue hallowed fire water bread ashes oyle waxe flowers braunches clay spittle salt incense balme chalices paxes pixes altars corporals superaltars altarclothes rings swords and an infinite companie besides doe these tend thinke you to the edification of the minde Nay they doe cleane destroy and extinguish all spirituall and internall motions drawing the heart from the spiritual worship of God to externall beggerlie and ragged reliques and ceremonies Fulk 1. Timoth. 4. sect 1. Beza lib. confess de eccles articul 18.19.20 The fift question whether the Church of Rome be the true Church THis question hath two parts First whether the Romane Church be the Catholike Church or not Secondly whether the Church of Rome be a true visible Church THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE ROMANE Church be the Catholike Church The Papists BEllarmine defining the Church maketh this one part of the definition to be error 27 subiect vnto the Bishop of Romes iurisdiction Lib. 3. de eccles cap. 2. And therefore they conclude that they are out of the Church and no better then heretikes that doe not acknowledge the Pope to be their chiefe Pastor Canis de praecept eccles cap. 9. So they make the Romane faith and Catholike to bee all one Rhemist annot in 1. Rom. sect 5. Their reasons are none other then we haue seene before taken from vniuersalitie antiquitie vnitie vnto the which wee haue alreadie answered quaest 3. of this controuersie Not. 1 2 3. The Protestants WHile the Church of Rome continued in the doctrine of the Apostles it was a notable and famous visible Church and a principall part and member of the vniuersall Catholike but now since it is degenerate and fallen away from the Apostolike faith from being the house of God to be a synagogue for Antichrist we take it not to be so much as a true visible Church But neuer was it to be counted the Catholike Church as though all other Churches were parts and members of it but it selfe onely was a part as others and Catholike too while it continued in the right faith but not Catholike as hauing iurisdiction ouer the rest and all to receiue this name of her 1 The vniuersall Catholike Church is so called because it conteyneth the whole number of the elect and first borne of God Heb. 12.23 Whereof manie are now saints in heauen many liuing in the earth many yet vnborne But all these were not neither are of the Romane faith the holie men departed knewe not of these superstitious and prodigious vsages which now doe raigne in the Church of Rome nay many of them neuer heard in their life so much as of the name of Rome Ergo. 2 It is called Catholike and vniuersall because they that are to be saued must belong vnto this companie and be of this Church for without the Church there is no saluation for Christ onely gaue himselfe for his Church to sanctifie it and cleanse it Ephes. 5.25 But all that dye out of the faith of the Romane Church do not perish Nay verely we doubt not to say but that all which depart this life in the communion thereof without repentance are barred from saluation and dye out of grace We are in the right faith neither will we be our owne iudges the scriptures shall iudge vs Euery spirit that confesseth that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God 1. Iohn 4.2 We beleeue aright in both the natures and all the offices of Christ which you doe not which doe greatly deface his prophetical office in not reuerencing his word but making it imperfect his kingdom in appointing him a Vicar and Vicegerent vpon earth as though he of himselfe were not sufficient to gouerne
his Priesthood in setting vp another sacrifice Ergo your spirit is not of God 3 The Catholike Church is so called because it embraceth the whole and onely doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles Ephes. 2. vers 20. But the Romane Church receiueth many things contrary to scripture and addeth many things vnto it as it shall appeare throughout this whole discourse Ergo. 4 The Catholike Church hath the name because it is dispersed ouer the whole earth Acts 1. vers 8. But so was neuer the Romane faith which is now professed as we haue shewed before Quaest. 3. de Eccles. Not. 2. Ergo ex Amand. Polan THE SECOND PART THE CHVRCH OF Rome is not a true visible Church The Papists THeir arguments are as wee haue heard Quaest. 3. of the notes of the Church error 28 grounded vpon their succession miracles gift of prophesiyng answered sufficiently afore Not. 4.5.6 Wee neede not nor must not for breuities sake repeate the same things often Protestants WE denie vtterly that they are a true visible Church of Christ but an Antichristian Church and an assembly of heretickes and enemies to the Gospell of Iesus Christ. 1 That cannot bee a true Church where the word of God is not truely preached nor the Sacraments rightly administred according to Christs institution So are they not in the Popes Church For the word is not sincerely taught but they haue added many inuentions of their owne and doe preach contrarie Doctrines to the Scripture the Sacraments also they haue not kept for first they haue augmented the number they haue made fiue more of confirmation orders penance Matrimonie extreame vnction beside the Sacraments of Christ they haue corrupted In baptisme beside water they vse spittle salt oyle Chrisme contrarie to the institution and they lay such a necessitie vpon this Sacrament that al which die without it say they are damned In the Lordes Supper they haue turned the Sacrament to a sacrifice made an Idol of bread chaunged the Communion into priuate masses taken the cup from the lay people and many other abhominations are committed by them Ergo neither hauing the word nor Sacraments according to the institution they are no true Church 2 They which are enemies to the true Church and doe persecute the members thereof are no true visible Church they cannot be of that Church which they persecute as Bellarmine saith of Paul how could he bee of that Church which he with al his force oppressed de eccles lib. 3. cap. 7. But they persecute the Saints of God are most cruel towards them as their consciences beare them record Ergo. 3 The habitation of Antichrist cannot be the Church of Christ so is theirs the Pope himselfe is Antichrist for who else but hee sitteth in the temple being an enemie to Christ. 2. Thes. 2. Where haue you a citie in the world built vpon seauen hilles but Rome Apocalyps 17.9 But of this matter we shall of purpose intreate afterward Ergo. they are not a true visible Church THE THIRD CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING COVNCELS A Councel is nothing else but an assembly and gathering together of the people of God about the affaires and businesse of the Church and they are of two sortes either vniuersall in the name of the whole Church or particular which are either National when the learned of a whole Realme are called together or Prouincial when as the Churches of one Prouince doo assemble into one place to consult of Religion There may be two especiall occasions of Councels the one for resisting and rooting out of heresies as the Apostles and elders met together Act. 15. against those which would haue imposed the Iewish ceremonies vppon the beleeuing Gentiles So the Councell of Nice was celebrated the yeare of the Lorde 327. to confound the heresie of Arrius who denied Christ as he was God to be equall to his Father In the Councel of Constantinople Anno 383. or there aboute the heresie of Macedonius was condemned which denied the holy Ghost to bee God In the Ephesine Councel the first Nestorius heresie was ouerthrowne which affirmed Christ to haue two persons Anno 434. The Councel of Chalcedon was collected Anno 454. about the heresie of Eutiches which held that there was in Christ but one nature after his incarnation so confounding his humanitie and diuinitie together The other cause of the calling of Councels is to prouide establish holsome Lawes decrees and constitutions for the gouernement of the Church so the Apostles called the brethren together Act. 6. to take order for the poore And in the Councell of Nice an vniforme order was established for the celebration of Easter which before had much troubled the Church The questions betweene vs and the Papists concerning Councels are these First whether generall Councels be absolutely necessarie Secondly by whome they ought to be called Thirdly of what persons they ought to cōsist Fourthly who should bee the president of the Councel Fiftly concerning the authoritie of them Sixtly whether they may erre or not Seauenthly whether they are aboue the Pope Eightly of the conditions to be obserued in generall Councels of these in order THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING the necessitie of Councels The assertion of the Papists THey seeme in wordes to affirme that Generall Councels are not absolutelie error 29 necessarie for the Primitiue Church was without any Councel for the space of 300. yeares and more yet they hold that some Councels either generall or particular are of necessitie to be had Bellarmine de concil lib. 1. cap. 11. And yet this is to be maruelled at that they should so much stand for Councels seeing they might vse a farre more compendious way in referring all to the determination of the Pope whome they boldly but very fondly affirme that hee cannot erre Although they seeme not to lay a necessitie vpon Generall Councels yet in truth they doo contrarie for they allowe no Councels at all without the Popes consent and authoritie neither thinke it lawfull for any Nation or Prouince to make within themselues any innouation or change of Religion So in the assembly at Zuricke Anno 1523. For the reformation of Religion Faber tooke exception against that meeting affirming that it was no conuenient place nor fit time for the discussing of such matter but rather the cognition and tractation thereof belonged to a generall Councel Sleid. lib. 3. And further they hold that what hath beene decreed in a Councel cānot be dissolued but by the like Councel as if the Councel of Trent were to bee disanulled it must be done by the like Synod Bellarmine de cōcil lib. 3. ca. 21. Which Councel they affirme to haue been general therefore another general Councel must by their opinion necessarily be expected before it can be reuoked The confession of the Protestants WE doe hold that generall Councels are an holesome meanes for the repressing and reforming both of errors in Religion and corruption in manners and that true generall Councels ought to
are Christs Disciples which is an vnreasonable supposition seeing we hold him to be Antichrist and that the Iesuite knoweth Such a Councell was that of the Iewes Iohn 9. where all they were excommunicate that confessed Christ Mark. 14 Christ himselfe was by the Councel condemned It cannot be denied that this Councell erred Let vs heare the papists goodly answeres some say that the Councel erred in a matter of fact de facto non de iure not in a case of right as whether Christ should be put to death as though in condemning him they denied not that he was the Messiah other that they erred in their owne opinion not in the sentence giuen for Christ indeede was guilty of death say they because he did beare our sinnes the Iesuite findeth not much fault with this answere yet it is an open blasphemie as is that also of the papists that the Iewes had sinned mortally if they had not put Christ to death Some of them say the Councel erred not in that which was done but in the maner of iudgement because it was tumultuous disorderly done by suborning of false witnesses and this sayth the Iesuite is probabilis responsio a probable answere sayth hee being most impious and blasphemous But he dare not rest in this answere but findeth out a fourth of his owne that the chiefe priestes and Councels of the Iewes could not erre before the comming of Christ but after he was come they might A blinde popish answere for doth not Christ euery where impugne the traditions and decrees of the Elders as Mark. 7. which our Sauiour should not haue done belike seeing the Elders before his comming could not erre or will they say that those traditions were right and good before and afterward erronious I know not els what they should say 3. We see by experience that many councels haue erred we let pas those which the Iesuite himself cōfesseth to haue erred as the third Coūcel of Antioch where Athanasius was condemned and the Arrian heresie approoued the Councel of Arimine where the same heresie was furthered the fourth Ephesine approuing Eutiches heresie These Councels though they were generall the papists confesse to haue erred and they haue a trick to shift it off but a silly one God knoweth They were not approoued by the Pope saye they As though all verity knowledge in the whole earth were locked vp in the Popes breast But wee will bring an instance of such Councels as the Pope allowed and yet by the papists owne confession erred In the Councell of Naeo-Caesarea confirmed by Leo 4. in the 7. canon second marriage is forbidden In the Councel Toletan 1. the 17. canon it is thus written that one may be admitted to the communion though he haue a concubine modò non sit vxoratus so hee be not wiued the Iesuites poore shift is this that a concubine is here vnderstoode for a wife without a dowrie and further sayth that Agar was Abrahams wife and not his concubine agaynst the scripture for Abraham should haue done euill in sending of her away as he did if she were his wife and the scripture calleth Sara by the name onely of Abrahams wife the other by the name of a bond woman Gen. 21.8.12 In the sixt Synod confirmed by Adrian the 1. canon 72. the mariages betweene Catholikes and hereticks are adiudged to be voyde In the second Councel of Nice act 5. it was concluded that Angels and mens souls are bodily and circumscriptible In the Councel of Rome vnder Pope Stephan the 7. all the acts of Formosus his predecessor were reuoked And in the Councel of Rauenna vnder Iohn 9. Pope Formosus actes were established and Stephans decrees abrogate Lastly in the Councel of Constance they are excommunicate that receiue the sacrament in both kinds the Councel of Basile on the contrary side permitteth and giueth leaue to the Bohemians to vse both kindes One of these Councels must needs erre both of them were confirmed by the Popes the Councel of Constance by Martin the 5. the Councel of Basile by Foelix 5. By this induction of many particulars we inferre and conclude that Councels euen approued by the Pope may and haue erred 4. Lastly Augustines opinion is this that prouincial Councels ought to giue place to general Et ipsa plenaria priora posteriorib emendari and the former general Councels must be amended by the latter The Rhemists haue found out this shift that in matters indifferent which are to be chāged according to time and place Councels may be altered Act. 15. sect 8. But to that it is aunswered that the word emendare signifieth not onely a change but a correcting of that which is amisse And that clause of Augustines must bee put in why Councels must be amended si a veritate deuiatum fit if they swarue from the truth de baptism lib 2. cap. 3. Wherfore we conclude that Councels may erre THE SIXT QVESTION CONCERNING THE AVthority of general Councels whether they may absolutely determine without scripture and necessarily binde all men to the obedience of their Canons The Papists IN words they would seem to magnifie the scripture aboue Councels for error 34 they say that the authority of the scripture depēdeth not in himself of Church Pope or Councels but in respect of vs the word of God is the word of God say they though there be no determination of the Church but we doe not know it so to be but because the Church hath so defined Bellarmine lib. 2. de con cap. 12. Here is a goodly glosse but nothing to the purpose for in that they say the Church hath absolute authoritie to declare and pronounce which is the word which indeed it hath not without testimonie and warrant of the word it selfe by this meanes it commeth about that much is taken for the worde of GOD which is not and so the Church doth not onely declare the worde but maketh that the word which is not First beside the Apocrypha which they make part of the word as we haue shewed afore they hold that their traditions are also the word of God Bellarmine cap. 12. Secondly Gratian is so bolde to affirme that the decretall Epistles of the Popes are to be counted amongst the Canonical scriptures dist 19. can in canonicis that the Canons of Councels are of the same authority dist 20. can decretales And Greg. 1. epist. 24. saith he doth reuerēce the 4. general Councels as the foure Euangelists Thirdly they shamefully affirme that whatsoeuer the pastors and priests do teach in the vnity of the Church is the word of God Rhemens 1. Thes. 2. v. 12. First then they conclude that Councels are not bound to determine according to the scriptures but as iudges may determine of their own authority Secondly that al men are bound of necessity to receiue the decrees of Councels without any further triall or examination They reason thus out of the
scripture 1. Deut. 17.12 He that harkeneth not vnto the priest that man shal die But mark I pray you what goeth before v. 11. according to the law which they shal teach thee according to the iudgement which they shall tell thee shalt thou do see then here is no absolute iudicial power giuen to the priest but according to the law of God 2. The example of the Apostles Act. 15. is as fōdly alleadged where it was decreed saith the Iesuite that the Gētiles shuld not be burthened with ceremonies which saith hee was not determined by the scriptures but by the absolute suffrages of the Apostles Again their decrees were absolutely imposed vpon the Churches without any further examination of the Disciples Ergo we are now also absolutely bound to obey all decrees of Councels Bellar. de concil 1.18 We answere first it is false that this matter was determined without scripture for Iames alleadgeth scripture Peter thus reasoneth we beleeue through the grace of God to be saued as wel as they v. 11. therfore what need this yoke of ceremonies 2. Though there had been no scripture who seeth not that the spirit of God so ruled the Apostles that their writings and holy actions should serue for scripture vnto the ages following Thirdly the Disciples needed not to examine their decrees knowing that they were gouerned by the spirit as they themselues write It seemed good to vs and the holy Ghost yet we see the brethren of Bereae searched the scripture for the trueth of those things which the Apostles preached Act. 17.11 When they can proue such a plenarie power fulnes of the spirit in their pastors and Councels as was in the Apostles we wil also beleeue them The Protestantes WE doe firmly beleeue that neither the Church nor Councels haue any such absolute power to determine without the holy scriptures either beside or agaynst them or to binde other men to obey such decrees Neither that the true Church of God dare or will arrogate such power vnto it self But that Councels are ordayned for the discussing deciding of doubtful matters according to the scriptures and word written 1. If the Apostles preachings might bee examined according to scripture much more the acts of all other Bishops and pastors But that was lawful in the Disciples of Berea Act. 17.11 which are commended for it therefore called noble couragious Christians because of this their promptnes diligence in searching out of the truth Ergo. 2. All things necessarie to saluation to be beleeued are articles of our fayth but al such articles must be grounded vpon the word of God therfore nothing can be imposed as necessary to saluation without the word of God Wherefore it is a blasphemous saying of the papists that the Church may make new articles of fayth Rhemens annot in 1. Tim. 3. sect 9. and Eckius maintained the same poynt agaynst Luther in the disputation at Lipsia and brought forth a new article of faith agreed of in the Councel of Constance that it is de necessitate salutis of the necessitie of saluation to beleeue that the Pope is the head of the Church The fathers of Basile more modest then so concluding that it was an article of fayth to beleeue that Councels were aboue the Pope doe vse this reason those things say they which we alleadge for the superioritie of general Councels are gathered out of the sayings of our Sauiour Christ. Ergo we are al bound to obey them Therefore we conclude that the word of God only written is the rule of fayth and al things necessary to be beleeued Rom. 10.10 Fayth commeth by hearing and hearing by the word Councels are to explane and declare articles of faith not to establish new 3 Lastly we will heare Augustine speake Nec tu debes Ariminense neque ego Nicaenū tanquā praeiudicaturus proferre concilium scripturarum authoritatibus c. Neither must I alleadge the Nicen Councel nor you the Arimine I am neither bound to the one nor you to the other let the matter be tried by Scripture cont Maximu Arrianum lib. 3. cap. 14. By this fathers sentence therefore no man is bound of necessitie to be tyed to Councels but the Scripture onely is absolutely to be beleeued THE SEAVENTH QVESTION WHETHER Councels be aboue the Pope or not The Papists THis is a matter yet not fully determined amongst the Papists Neither are error 35 they all of one opinion In the Councell of Constance and Basile it was fully concluded that the Councell is aboue the Pope Gerson of Paris that was also present in the Councell of Constance and a great dooer against Iohn Hus stifly maintaineth the authoritie of Councels aboue the Pope Other Papists more fauorable to their new God amight say that the Pope is by right aboue the Councell but he may if he wil submit himselfe to the Councell But now commeth in the stoute Iesuite and saith with the rest of the schoolemen that the Pope hath such a soueraigntie aboue the Councell that he cannot be subiect to their sentence though hee would Bellar. de concil lib. 2.14 Yet hee is in a mammering with himselfe for saith he in periculo schismatis when there is a schisme and it is not knowne who is the true Pope in such a case the Councell is aboue the Pope Let vs examine some of his best reasons 1 Now commeth in a great blasphemie All the names saith the Iesuite that are giuen to Christ in the Scriptures as head of the Church are ascribed to the Pope as he is called fidelis dispensator Luc. 12. a faithfull steward in the Lords house pastor gregis Iohn 10. the shepheard of the flocke Caput corporis ecclesiae Ephes. 4. the head of his bodie the Church vir seu sponsus Ephes. 5. the husband or spouse of the Church all these titles saith he are due to the Pope Ergo he is aboue the Church and so consequently aboue generall Councels Bellar. de concil lib. 2.17 O Lord what great blasphemie is here to appropriate the titles of Christ to a mortall man But goe to Bellarmine and the rest of that packe fil vp the measure of iniquitie of your forefathers say with Pope Athanasius that the people of the world are the partes of his bodie with Cornelius the Bishop in the Councell of Trent the Pope being the light came into the world and men loued darkenes rather then light with Pope Calixtus in the Councell of Rhemes who when hee saw the Councell would not consent to excommunicate the Emperour impiously cried out that they had forsaken him as Christ was left of his Disciples with Innocentius the third that all things in Heauen and earth and vnder the earth doe bowe the knee vnto him with Otho no Pope but a Cardinall that sitting amongst his Bishops blasphemously applied to himselfe the vision of Ezechiel cap. 1. resembling the Bishops to the sower faced beasts himselfe vnto God that approched to the
and the rest iudged corruptly there remayned yet another remedie A generall Councell might haue beene called where the iudges and the cause might further haue been tried and examined their iudgement if there were cause reuersed Whereby it appeareth say the fathers of Basile that not onely the sentence of the Pope alone but also the Pope with his Bishops ioyned with him might be made frustrate by a Councell Here the Iesuite paltreth saith that a matter determined by the Pope in a particular Councell may be called againe in question by the Pope in a general Councel First what neede that seeing that a particular Councel hauing the Popes authoritie as the Iesuite confesseth cannot erre Againe Augustine saith vbi cum ipsis iudicibus causa possit agitari In the which generall Councell the cause and the former iudges of the which Miltiades was one may bee tryed and examined so that the Pope himselfe might be adiudged by the Councell and not the cause onely Vpon the Premisses we truely and iustly conclude that the Pope is and of right ought to be subiect to generall Councels THE EIGHT QVESTION OF THE CONditions and qualitie of generall Councels The Papists THeir vnreasonable and vnequall conditions are these and such like as followe 1 That the Pope onely should haue authoritie to summon call proroge dissolue and confirme Councels and he onely to bee the iudge president and moderator in Councels or some at his appoyntment 2 They will haue none to giue voyces but Bishops and such as are bound by oath of alleageance to the Pope 3 That the Councell is not bound to determine according to Scripture but to follow their traditions and former decrees of Councels 4 That no Councell is in force without the Popes assent yea the Pope himselfe say they by his sole authotitie may abrogate and disanull the canons and decrees of Councels These and such other conditions the Papists require in their Councels So they wil be sure that nothing shall be concluded against them The Protestants OVr conditions which we would haue obserued and kept in generall Councells are these most iust and reasonable 1 That the Pope which is a party should be no iudge for it is vnreasonable that the same man should be both a partie and a iudge and therefore he ought not to meddle with calling and appoynting Councels with ruling or moderating them seeing it is like he would worke for his owne aduantage 2 That such a time and place be appointed as when and where the Churches of Christendome may most safely and conueniently meete together not at such a time as Paulus the third called a Councell when all Princes in Christendome were occupied in great affaires nor such a place as he thē appointed at Mantua in Italie whither Princes could not come without perill of iourney and danger of life being penned in by the Popes garrisons Thus Pope or Bishop Leo for then there were no Popes writ to Martianus the Emperour to haue the Councell remoued from Calchis to Italie but hee preuayled not So Pope Eugenius would haue dissolued the Councell at Basile and brought it vnder his owne nose 3 We would haue it a free Councell where euery man might fully vtter his minde and that there should be a safe conduct graunted to al to come and goe which the Pope for all his faire promises is vnwilling to doe as it was flatly denyed to Hierome of Prage in the Councell of Constance to whome it was answered that he should haue safe conduct to come but none to goe Neither if they should giue a safe conduct were they to bee trusted for it cannot bee forgotten to their perpetuall infamie that they brake the Emperour Sigismunds safe conduct graunted to Iohn Husse in the Councell of Constance saying that faith was not to be kept with Hereticks 4 That the matter should not bee left wholie to Bishops and Prelates but that the learned of the Clergie and Laitie besides should giue voices seeing the cause of religion is common and concerneth all But most of all that nothing bee carried with violence or popularitie against the Scriptures but euery matter determined according to the truth thereof Such a Councell wee refuse not nay wee much desire which is the true generall Councell that is not generall where all men cannot speake no freedome nor libertie graunted for men to vtter the trueth where all thinges are partially handled and are swayed by one mans authoritie Wherefore the Rhemists slander vs in saying wee raile vppon general Councels annot in Act. 15.10 and that we refuse them 2. Galath 2. Whether wee or they are enemies to true generall free holy indifferent Councels let all men iudge THE FOVRTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE BISHOP OF ROME COMMONLIE CALLED THE POPE THis great and waightie controuersie conteineth tenne seuerall questions 1 Whether the regiment of the Church be Monarchicall 2 Whether Peter were the Prince of the Apostles and by our Sauiour Christ made head of the Church 3 Whether Peter were at Rome and dyed Bishop there 4 Whether the Bishop of Rome be the true successor of Peter 5 Concerning the primacie of the Bishop of Rome sixe partes of the question First whether hee haue authoritie ouer other Bishops Secondly whether appeales are to be made to Rome Thirdly whether the Pope be subiect to the iudgemēt of any Fourthly whether he may be deposed Fiftly what primacy he hath ouer other Churches Sixtly of his titles and names 6 Whether the Bishop of Rome may erre and likewise whether the Church of Rome be subiect to error 7 Of the spiritual iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome two parts First whether he can make lawes to binde the conscience Secondly whether other Bishops doe receiue their iurisdiction from him 8 Of the Popes temporall iurisdiction two parts First whether hee haue authoritie aboue Kings and princes Secondly whether he be a temporal prince 9 Of the prerogatiues of the Pope 10 Concerning Antichrist nine parts First whether Antichrist shall be some one singular man Secondly of the time of his comming Thirdly of his name Fourthly of his nation and kinred Fiftly where his place and seate shall be Sixtly of his doctrine and manners Seuenthly of his miracles Eightly of his kingdome and warres Ninthly whether the Pope bee the very Antichrist of these in their order THE FIRST QVESTION WHETHER THE Regiment of the Church be Monarchicall error 36 WE are not ignorant that the Philosophers made three formes and states of gouernement in the commonwealth the Monarchical when as the principall and soueraigne power rested in one as in the King Queene or Emperor as Rome sometime was ruled by Kings and many yeares after by Emperors Secondly the Aristocratical when the commonwealth was gouerned by an assembly and Senate of nobles as the Romanes had a long time their Consuls and Senators Thirdly the Democratical which is the popular state when the people and multitude bare the greatest sway as
Bellarm. They did it by an extraordinarie authoritie not as Kings but as Prophets Nay it was an ordinarie power for all the good kings of Iuda beside as Iehosaphat Hezekiah and others did take care of religion this was so properly annexed to the kingly office that idolatrous kings also tooke vpon them to command false religion as Ieroboam set vp two golden calues and Ahaz king of Iudah cōmanded Vriah the high Priest to make an Altar according to the patterne which he sent from Damascus 2. King 16.11 This power also was afterward exercised by Christian Kings and Emperours as Constantinus Theodosius Martianus made lawes for the Church Fulk annot 1. Cor. 14. sect 16. Iustinianus the Emperour decreed many things concerning Church affayres as how excommunication should be vsed how Bishops and Priests should be ordained concerning the order and manner of funerals that the holy mysteries should not be done in priuate houses Carolus magnus decreed that onely the Canonical bookes of scripture should be read in the Church he chargeth all Bishops and priests to preach the word Lodouicus Pius his sonne and Emperour after him ordained that no entrie should bee made into the Church by Simonie that Bishops should bee chosen by the free election of the Clergie and the people All these Emperours did lawfully exercise their princely authoritie in Ecclesiastical matters Ergo other princes may doe the same still 3 Augustine saith Epistol 50. Quis mente sobrius c Who in his right wits would say to the King It pertaineth not to you who in your kingdome is religious or sacrilegious to whom it cannot be said let it not pertaine vnto you who in your kingdome will be chast or vnchast And in another place Ad fratres in erem serm 14. Tunc iustitia dicitur gladius ex vtraque parte acutus quia hominis defendit corpus ab exterioribus iniurijs animam à spiritualibus molestijs Then iustice is rightly called a sword with a double edge because it doth both defend the bodie from externall and corporall wrongs and the soule from spirituall vexation That is the sword of the Magistrate serueth as well to prune the Church and to cut off all errors and heresies in religion as to destroy the vices and corruptions in manners AN APPENDIX OR FOVRTH PART OF THE QVEstion whether the Prince in any good sense may be called the head of his kingdome and consequently of the Church in his kingdome The Papists THey do appropriate this title to be called heads of the vniuersall Church to error 101 the Pope of Rome most blasphemouslie for there can be no head of the vniuersal bodie but Christ But for Princes to be called the head that is chiefe gouernours of the Churches in their kingdomes they do abhorre it Whereupon Bellarmine is so saucie as to checke and controule King Henrie the 8. because he was called the head of the English Church 1 The heathen Emperours were not heads of the Church being not so much as members thereof therefore neither Christian Magistrates which doe succeede them in that authoritie Rhemist annot 1. Pet. 2. sect 6. Ans. 1. The argument followeth not they were no true mēbers of the Church therefore could not be heads that is haue the soueraigntie of the externall gouernment for wicked kings and princes doe keepe their magistracie gouernment still who though they be not true members of the Catholike Church yet ought to be obeied as princes 2. Though the metaphorical name of head agreed not vnto them yet were they by Gods ordinance appointed to be heads gouernours of his people protectors of his Church should haue been if they had not abused their authoritie 3. Christian princes though they haue the same authoritie which they had yet now exercising the sword according to Gods law and being Nurses of the Church may vse and retaine those princely titles in deed to be called Patrones and defenders of the faith head that is chiefe gouernours and protectors of the Church which by right had been due vnto the other if they had vsed their authoritie as they should 2 Christian princes are members of the Church Ergo not heads for if they were heads how could the Church stand without them as it did in the time of persecution Ans. First as though the head is not a member and part of the bodie though a principall one so the Prince is a member of the Church but a principall and chiefe member not of the inuisible Church for so Christ is onely head but of a particular visible Church Secondly we denie not but that the inuisible and spiritual Church may consist without the Magistrate but a visible flourishing and wel-gouerned Church cannot want a head or chiefe gouernour that is as a wall or hedge vnto it The Protestants TO bee head of the vniuersall Church is proper onely to Christ and in that sense is not communicable to any creature for he is to his Church as the head to the naturall bodie giuing vnto it influence of grace spirit and life he is therefore the onely mysticall head of the vniuersal Church But in another sense the Prince may be said to be the head and chiefe gouernour of his kingdome of that particular visible Church where he is king We make him neither the mysticall head which is only Christ farre be that blasphemie from vs nor a ministerial head as they make the Pope to be as Christs Vicegerent in the Church but a politicall head to keepe and preserue the peace of the Church and to see that euery member doe his office and duetie But this name we confesse is vnproperly giuen to the Prince neither were we the first inuentors of it for the papists first gaue it to Henry the 8. And there are other titles which doe sufficiently expresse the office of the Prince and may bee more safely vsed If any man thinke it too high a name for any mortall man and so not to be giuen to any we will not greatly contend about it But if any denye it to the Prince as thereby to abridge her of her power in Ecclesiastical matters we doe stand stiffely for it and are bold to affirme that with much better right is this title attributed to the ciuill Magistrate then it was to the Pope yea and that it hath been of old giuen in a modest and sober sense to Kings and Princes and may with a fauourable exposition be still and Princes also may receiue this honour and title at their subiects hands with protestation of their Christian meaning herein 1 This phrase for the King to be called the head is not vnusuall in scripture 1. Sam. 15.17 Saul is sayd to be the head of the tribes Psal. 18.43 Dauid the head of the nations Isay. 9.15 The Prince or honourable man the head of the people yea Princes are called Gods Psal. 82.2 which is a name of greater Soueraigntie then to be called heads
the sacrament of the Lords bodie Baptisme is equiualent to the word of God by our aduersaries own confession Ergo also it is of equall value and dignitie with the other sacrament THE TWELFTH GENERALL CONTROVERSY OF THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISME THis controuersie standeth vpon diuers questions 1. Of the name and definition of Baptisme Secondly of the partes of Baptisme Thirdly of the necessitie of Baptisme Fourthly of the Minister of Baptisme Fiftly of the parties which are to be baptized Sixtly of the effects of Baptisme Seuenthly of the difference of Christs Baptisme and Iohns Eightly of the ceremonies of Baptisme THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE NAME and definition of Baptisme COncerning the name there is no question betweene vs for the name of Baptisme hath the originall and beginning from the scripture Saint Paul vseth this word Coloss. 2.12 We are buryed with him through Baptisme And againe Heb. 6.2 All the question is about the definition of Baptisme The Papists error 98 THey define Baptisme to bee a sacrament of regeneration by water in the worde that is not which signifieth and sealeth vnto vs our regeneration and assureth vs of remission of sinnes but actually iustifieth and regenerateth vs Bellarm. lib. 1. de Baptism cap. 1. The Protestants WE rather according to the scriptures define baptisme to be a signe or seale of our regeneration and new birth whereby wee are assured that as verily by fayth in the blood of Christ we are cleansed from our sinnes as our bodies are washed with water in the name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost So that Baptisme doth not actually bestow remission of sinnes by the work wrought but is a pledge and seale of the righteousnesse of fayth as Saint Paul sayth of Circumcision Rom. 4.11 for it is not the washing of the flesh by water but the establishing of the heart with fayth and grace that saueth vs 1. Pet. 3.21 See this poynt handled more at large Controuers 11. next before quest 2. part 1. Augustine saith Per fidem renascimur in baptismate by fayth wee are borne agayne in Baptisme De tempor serm 53. It is then the proper act of fayth to regenerate vs not of Baptisme the vse and end whereof is to strengthen and increase our fayth THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE PARTES which are the matter and forme of Baptisme AS touching the matter that is the externall element vsed in Baptisme there is no question betweene vs but that it ought to bee plaine and common water Act. 10.47 Saint Peter saith Can any man forbid water that these should not bee baptized Wherefore wee condemne the foolish and vngodly practises and inuentions of heretikes that either exclude water altogether as the Manichees with others or doe vse any other element as the Iacobites that in stead of water burned them that were to be baptized with a whot yron or as the Aethiopians which are called Abissines that vsed fire in stead of water misconstruing the words of the Gospell Matth. 2.11 That Christ should baptize with the holy Ghost and with fire which is not literally to bee vnderstoode but thereby is signified the internall and forceable working of the spirite which kindleth zeale and loue in our hearts as fire Concerning the forme of Baptisme we all agree that no other is to be vsed then that prescribed by our Sauiour Christ to baptize in the name of the Father the Sonne and holy Ghost that it is neither lawfull to change this forme in sense as many heretikes haue done nor yet in words as to leaue out any of the three persons in Trinitie and inclusiuely to vnderstand them by naming of one for whereas some alleadge that place Act. 2.38 Bee yee baptized in the name of Iesus Christ for remission of sinnes to proue that it is lawfull onely in the name of Christ to baptize wee are to vnderstand that the forme of Baptisme is not in that place expresly set downe but the scope onely and end of Baptisme which is to assure vs of remission of sinnes in the name of Christ as Beza very well noteth vpon that place The point of difference betweene vs concerning the forme of Baptisme is this The Papists THey are bold to affirme that this forme of Baptisme to baptize in the name error 99 of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost is not fully concluded out of Scripture but deliuered by tradition for say they the commandement of Christ to baptize in the name of the Trinitie Matth. 28. may bee vnderstoode thus to baptize them into the faith of the Trinitie or by the authoritie of the Trinitie And it were sufficient by those words to doe and performe it in act without saying the wordes were it not that wee haue otherwise learned by tradition that this very forme of wordes is to bee kept Bellarmine de baptism lib. 1. cap. 3. The Protestants WE neede no tradition for this matter the very forme which is to bee vsed in Baptisme is plainely proued out of the Scriptures for that commandement of Christ Goe and baptize c. doth necessarily imply a forme of speech to be vsed Wee grant that in the Scriptures this word name is taken for power vertue authoritie as Act. 3.6 In the name of Iesus arise and walke So also as there is a Baptisme with water there may be a baptizing with fire Matth. 3.11 Wherefore if part of the commandement bee to bee taken properlie and literally as this Goe and baptize why not the rest also In the name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost If then the whole commaundement bee properly and plainely vnderstoode how can they baptize in the name of the Trinitie vnlesse the Trinitie bee spoken and named Secondly it appeareth also out of other places of Scripture that this forme was vsed in the Apostles time As Act. 10.47 Can any man forbid water why these should not be baptized which haue receiued the holy Ghost as well as wee As if Saint Peter should haue reasoned thus these haue receiued the giftes of the holy Ghost Ergo they may be also baptized in the name of the holy Ghost Likewise Act. 19.2 When the brethren at Ephesus had answered Paul that they had not heard whether there were a holy Ghost he saith vnto them Vnto what then were you baptized By this interrogatorie it appeareth it was their manner to baptize in the name of the holy Ghost and so consequently of the whole Trinitie Wee haue no cause then to flie vnto tradition this matter being so plainely decided by the Scripture Augustin tract in Iohann 80. Vpon those wordes of our Sauiour Iohn 15.3 You are cleane thorough the word which I haue spoken vnto you Detrahe verbum quid est aqua nisi aqua Accedit verbum ad elementum fit sacramentum Take away the word and what remaineth in Baptisme but bare water let the word be ioyned to the element and it maketh a Sacrament The forme then of Baptisme is the word which Christ
the prosecuting whereof if sometime I chance to misse I say with Augustine Nunquam errari tutius existimo quà m cum in amore nimio veritatis reiectione nimia falsitatis erratur I thinke a man can neuer more safely erre then when he erreth in the too much loue of the truth and the reiecting of falsehoode I haue labored in this worke to set downe not onely the chiefe and principall but euen the most and in a manner all the controuersies of religion betweene vs and the Papists maintained this day If any thing bee missing I say againe with Augustine Tale esse arbitratus sum cui mea responsio necessaria non fuisset siue quia ad rem de qua agitur non pertinet siue quod tam leue esset vt à quolibet redargui facillimè posset I thought it to be such as vnto the which mine answere was not needefull either because it was not pertinent to the matter in hand or else of so small moment that euery man might easilie answer vnto it I haue no more to say but this If thou findest thy selfe any thing profited or helped good Christian Reader by these simple labouâ—s of mine giue God the praise and I will praise him with thee but one thing let mee pray thee Quisquis legis nihil reprehendas nisi cum totum perlegeris atque ita forte minus reprehendes Whosoeuer readest in this booke reprehend nothing before thou hast read the whole and so perhaps thou wilt be more sparing in rephending The Lorde giue vs all grace to loue the truth that they which knowe it may liue thereafter and they which as yet knowe it not may seeke for it and wee all may embrace the Counsell of the wise man to Buy the trueth but in no wise to sell it that is by all possible meanes to labour for it and hauing attained thereunto for no earthly respect for feare or fauour to depart from it The Lord God Iesus Christ Iehouah Emmanuel our blessed Sauiour and Redeemer who is the way the truth and the life giue vs of his heauenlie grace that wee may walke obediently in his waies and constantly professe his truth that in the end he may bring vs to eternall life Amen Soli Deo immortali patri Filio cum Spiritu sancto sit omnis honor gloria A PARTICVLAR INDEX OR TABLE OF ALL THE CONTROVERSIES WITH THEIR SEVERAL questions contained in this treatise The contents of the first Booke This Booke containeth seuen Controuersies The first Controuersie of the Scriptures hath seuen questions 1. quest Of the number of the Canonicall bookes of Scripture pag. 2. 2. Of the authenticall edition of Scripture pag. 12. 3. Of the vulgar translation of Scripture and of publique prayers in the vulgar tongue pag. 16. 4. Of the authoritie of Scripture pag. 20. 5. Of the perspicuitie and plainnes of Scripture pag. 23. 6. Of the interpretation of Scripture 3. parts 1. Of the diuers senses of Scripture pag. 26. 2. Who ought to expound Scripture pag. 28. 3. Of the manner of expounding Scripture pag. 30. 7. Of the perfection of Scripture 3. parts 1. Whether the Scripture be absolutely necessarie p. 33. 2. Whether they be sufficient pag. 35. 3. Of vnwritten traditions beside Scripture pag. 38. The second generall Controuersie concerning the Church containeth fiue questions 1. quest Of the definition of the Church 2. parts 1. Whether wicked men be members of the Church pag. 43. 2. Whether the Church be inuisible pag. 46. 2. Whether the Church may erre 2. parts 1. Whether the Catholike Church may erre at all or not pag. 49. 2. Whether the visible Church vpon earth may fall into Idolatrie or Apostasie pag. 52. 3. Of the notes and markes of the Church 1. Antiquitie pag. 55 2. Vniuersalitie pag. 57 3. Succession pag. 59 4. Vnitie pag. 60 5. Miracles pag. 63 6. The gift of prophecying pag. 66 4. Of the authoritie of the Church 2. parts 1. What authoritie it hath in matters of faith and whether wee are to beleeue in the Church pag. 73 2. Of the ceremonies of the Church pag. 76 5. Of the Church of Rome two parts 1. Whether it be the Catholike Church pag. 78 2. Whether it be a true visible Church pag. 79 The third controuersie of generall Councels containeth eight questions 1. quest Whether Councels be absolutely necessarie pag. 81 2. By whom generall Councels ought to be summoned pag. 83 3. Of what persons Councels ought to consist pag. 84 4. Who ought to be the president in Councels pag. 88 5. Whether Councels may erre or not pag. 90 6. Of the authoritie of Councels pag. 93 7. Whether they be aboue the Pope pag. 95 8 Of the conditions requisite in generall Councels pag. 98 The fourth controuersie of the Bishop of Rome called the Pope ten questions 1. Whether the regiment of the Church be Monarchicall pag. 100 2. Whether Peter were Prince of the Apostles and assigned by Christ to be the head of the Church pag. 105 3. Of Peters being at Rome two parts 1. Whether Peter were at Rome pag. 112 2. Whether Peter were Bishop of Rome pag. 116 4. Whether the Bishop of Rome be the true successor of Peter pag. 118 5 Of the primacie of the See of Rome sixe parts 1. Whether the Bishop of Rome be aboue other Bishops pag. 120 2. Concerning appeales made to Rome pag. 122 3. Whether the Pope bee subiect to the iudgement of any pag. 124 4. Whether the Pope may be deposed from his Papacie pag. 125 5. The originall of the primacie of Rome p. 128 6. Of the names and titles of the Bishop of Rome pag. 131 6. quest Whether the Pope of Rome as likewise whether the Church of Rome may erre pag. 134 7. quest Of the spirituall iurisdiction of the Pope two parts 1. Whether hee may make lawes to binde the conscience pag. 141 2. Whether all Bishops do receiue their Ecclesiastical iurisdiction from the Pope p. 145 8 Of the temporal iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome two parts 1 Whether the Pope be aboue Kings and Emperours pag. 148 2 Whether he be a temporall prince pag. 151 9 Of the Popes prerogatiue 3. parts 1 Of his power dispensatiue pag. 154 2 Of his power exemptiue Ibid. 3 Of his power transcendent Ibid. 10. Of Antichrist 9. parts 1 Whether Antichrist shal be one particular man pag. 155 2 Whether Antichrist be yet come and how long he shall raigne pag. 157 3 Concerning the name character of Antichrist p. 162 4 Of the generation of Antichrist pag. 168 5 Of the seate and place of Antichrist pag. 169 6 Of the doctrine of Antichrist pag. 172 7 The miracles of Antichrist pag. 176 8 The warres and kingdome of Antichrist pag. 179 9 Whether the Pope be Antichrist pag. 182 The fift controuersie of the Clergie sixe questions 1. quest Of the name of Clerkes or Clergie men pag. 190 2 Of the election of Bishops and
through beginning at the first and so prosecuting euery particular questioÌ„ till we are come to the last My purpose is not to set down all the heresies which impugne the Christian faith but onely those which are maintained by the Church of Rome this day who are the chief troublers disquieters of the peace of our Church I say therefore with Augustine Omnis Christianus Catholicus ista noÌ„ debes credere sed noÌ„ omnis qui ista noÌ„ credit coÌ„sequenter se debet Christianum Catholicum â—utare vel dicere Euery true Catholike Christian is bound not to beleeue any of these errors set down in this book but it foloweth not that whosoeuer beleeueth not these is a true Catholike for there are other heresies in the world which destroy the faith as the heresies of the Anabaptistes Familie of Loue Libertines and such like But our speciall purpose and drift is to weed out the Popish cockle and darnell that troubleth our field Neither haue I set forth at large the controuersies betweene vs for that laborious worke other of our learned countrymen haue taken in hand as D. Whitakers in Cambridge D. Reynoldes in Oxford and besides it farre exceedeth my strength and habilitie I haue onely brieflie set downe the grounds of Poperie as I haue collected them out of Bellarmine the stoutest champion of their side our English Rhemistes Eckius Canisius and other Papistes as also out of the late Chapter of Trent for it deserueth not the name of a CouÌ„cell And with all as an Antidotum or counterpoyson I haue opposed and set against them the coÌ„fession of the Protestants and Church of God with reasons and Arguments of both sides and places of Scripture annexed adding also throughout the iudgement of Augustine who of all the fathers is most plentifull in these matters which fall in question in our dayes The benefite which the Christian Reader shall reape in some measure I trust by this simple labour of mine is threefold First the knowledge of all Popish errours which much auayleth Multum adiuuat cor fidele nosce quid credendum non sit etiamsi disputandi facultate id refutare non possit It much helpeth a Christian toward beleefe to know what is not to be beleeued though he can not refell it by Argument Secondlie he shall vnderstand both their principall Obiections which they do entangle simple men withall as also he shall learne how to defend and maintayne the truth Thirdly the chief places of Scripture which make for them or against them are briefly euery where expounded and opened This whole worke I haue deuided into three partes or bookes the first conteineth the coÌ„trouersies of the Scriptures and the Militant Church the second the controuersies of the Triumphant Church and of the Sacraments the third the questions concerning the benefites of our redemption and as touching the person of Christ Which bookes I haue thus deuided not so much in respect of the matter which they conteine for then the controuersies of the Militant and TriuÌ„phant Church ought not to haue bene sundred but that there might be some equalitie indifferent proportion in the Volumes euery one of them comprehending a Centurie that is an hundred of Popish errours either vnder or ouer But the rather I haue so done because I had proceeded no further then to the end of the controuersies of the Militant Church when this first booke went out of my haÌ„ds the which I was moued vpon some occasion to publish before the rest were finished which shall not stay long after God assisting me Wherein I doe also folow the counsell and example of Augustine who writing of the like argument of heresies doth thus conclude his booke Hunc librum antequam totum hoc opus perfeci vobis credidi esse mittendum vt cum quicunque legentis ad id quod restat implendum quod tam magnum esse cernitis orationib adiuuetis This booke I thought good saith he to send abroad before the rest be finished that whosoeuer readeth it might helpe me with their prayers to the better performing of that which remaineth Which I beseech thee also good Christian Reader to afoord me that being mutuallie assisted one with the prayers of an other we may walke on with strength and chearefulnesse in our Christian race till we haue by Iesus Christ obtayned the price of euerlasting life Amen THE FIRST BOOKE OR CENTVRIE CONTEINING THE CONTROVERSIES OF RELIGION WHICH ARISE IN QVEstion betweene the Church of God and the Papistes about the word of God conteined in the Scriptures and the Church Militant here vpon earth with the partes and members thereof THE FIRST GENERALL CONTROVERsie of the holie Scriptures ACcording to the methode which we wil God assisting vs by his spirite obserue throughout this whole Treatise of the controuersies in the first place we are to entreat of such matters as coÌ„cerne the Propheticall office of Christ. He is our Prophet our heauenly teacher and Doctor Math. 23. vers 8. from him proceedeth all holy knowledge we haue not seen God nor the high things of God but the onely begotten sonne which is in the bosome of the father he hath declared him Iohn 1.18 Wherefore all the true sheepe of Christ will heare his voyce Iohn 10.3 His voyce is not els where heard but onely in the Scriptures We must heare Moses and the Prophetes Luke 16.29 First of all therefore this great and most famous controuersie betweene vs and our aduersaries concerning the Scriptures must be handled which is distributed into seuen seuerall questions 1 Concerning the Canonicall Scripture what bookes are to be receiued into the sacred Canon what books to be reiected and counted apocryphall 2 Concerning the authenticall Edition of the holy Scriptures whether the Hebrue Greeke or Latine translation is cheifly to be folowed 3 Whether the Scriptures ought to be translated into the vulgar and English toung and whether publique prayers and diuine seruice ought to be vsed in the same toung 4 Whether the scriptures are authorized by the Church and not rather so knowne to be of them selues 5 Concerning the perspicuitie and playnnes of the Scripture whether it be so hard that the common people may not safely be admitted to the reading thereof 6 Concerning the interpretation of Scripture which question is deuided into three parts first whether the Scripture admit diuerse senses and expositions secondly who hath the cheife authoritie to expound Scripture thirdly what meanes ought to be vsed in expounding of it 7 Concerning the perfection of the Scripture three parts of the questioÌ„ First whether the Scriptures be necessarie secondly whether they be sufficient to saluation thirdly whether there be any traditions beside necessarie to saluation THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING the Canonicall Scripture Of the state of the first Question WE haue not any thing in this place to deale with those heretikes which denie either the whole Scripture or any part thereof but onely with our
body who would haue the verie flesh of Christ present in the Sacrament for this is against the article of the Creede that Christ is ascended into heauen and there sitteth till his comming againe in iudgement Concerning these meanes thus writeth Augustine Rarissime inuenitur ambiguitas in verbis proprijs quam non aut circumstantia ipsa sermonis qua cognoscitur Scripturarum intentio aut interpretum collatio aut praecedentes soluat inspectio de doctrin Christ. lib. 3.4 There is almost no ambiguitie in any word properly vsed that is not metaphoricall or borrowed which may not either by the circumstance of the place the conference and comparing of interpreters or by looking into the originals easily be taken away Augustine we see approueth this methode though our aduersaries like it not Besides these prayer must be vsed before we enterprise any thing that the Lord would direct vs. And they which cā not so easily take this course which is prescribed shall do well to seeke helpe of learned and godly expositors or to consult with their Pastors and Ministers Ex Whitacher quaest 5. cap. 9. THE SEVENTH QVESTION CONCERNING the perfection and sufficiencie of Scripture THis question is deuided into three parts First whether the Scriptures be absolutely necessary Secōdly whether they be sufficient without vnwritten traditions Thirdly whether there be any traditions of faith and manners beside the Scriptures THE FIRST PART OF THE NEcessitie of the Scriptures The Papistes THe Iesuite laboureth to proue that the Scriptures are not simply necessarie error 11 which we denie not for meate is not simply necessarie for God may preserue man without so in respect of God nothing is simply necessarie God is not necessarily tyed to vse this or that meanes but his argumentes do tend to this end to shew that the scriptures are not necessarie at all and may be spared in the Church so saith Petrus a Soto the Scripture was not alway extant and it is not necessarie vnto faith And the Scripture it not now so necessarie since Christ as it was afore Tilman de verbo Dei error 17. 1 There was no Scripture from Adam to Moses for the space of two thousand yeares and yet true Religion was kept and continued and why might not true Religiō be as well preserued a 1500. yeare after Christ without scripture as afore We answere It foloweth not because in times past God taught his church by a liuelie voyce that the written word is not necessarie now for the Lord saw it good that his word should be left in writing that we might haue a certaine rule of our faith in this corrupt and sinfull age And what els is this but to cōtroll the wisedome of God saying it is not necessarie or needfull for the Church which the Lord saw to be needfull for if the Lord had thought it as good for vs to be taught without Scripture as in that simple and innocēt age of the world I meane innocent in respect of vs he would not haue moued and stirred vp his Apostles to write 2 After the time of Moses when the law was written yet there were many that feared God amongest the Gentiles which had not the Scriptures as Iob and the other his friends Ergo the scripture not necessarie The Iewes also them selues vsed traditions more then Scriptures as Psal. 44. v. 1.2 the fathers did report the workes of God to their children by the negligence also of the Priests the law was lost as 2. King 22. we read that the volume of the law was found which had bene missing a long time We answere First euē the faithfull amōgest the Gētiles did read the scripture as the Eunuke Act. 8. had the booke of the Prophet Isay. Secondly the Iewes declared the workes of God vnto their children but the same were also written as how the heathen were cast out before them and of their deliuerāce out of Egypt those were the things they heard of their fathers as we read Psal. 44. 78. yet all these things are recorded in the bookes of Moses Thirdly what though the Priests were negligent in preseruing the scriptures it is no good argument to proue that therefore they are not necessarie neither was the whole booke of the law lost but either Moses owne manuscript or the booke of Deuteronomie Yet he hath proued nothing 3 The Church after Christ wanted the Scriptures many yeares Ergo they are not necessarie We aunswere it is a great vntruth for the old Testamēt the Church could not be without and the new Testament was written not long after in the age of the Apostles whose liuely voyce and preachings were vnto them as their writings are now to vs. See now what strong arguments they bring the scriptures were not necessary in the time of the Patriarkes when God taught them by his owne voyce they were not necessarie in the time of the Prophetes and Apostles when they had mē inspired of God to teach them Ergo they are not now necessarie when neither God teacheth from heauen neither haue we any Prophetes or Apostles to instruct vs by heauenly reuelations nay rather because they were not necessarie then when they had other effectuall meanes notwithstanding they are necessarie now seeing there is no other way of instruction left vnto vs. The Protestantes THat the scriptures are necessarie for the people of God the reading preaching and vnderstanding whereof is the onely and ordinarie meanes to beget faith in vs we thus proue out of the Scriptures them selues 1 The scriptures conteine necessarie knowledge to saluation which can not be learned but out of the scripture Ergo they are necessarie The knowledge of the law is necessarie but that onely is deriued from the Scripture as the Apostle witnesseth Rom. 7.7 he had not knowen lust to be sinne vnlesse the law had said thou shalt not lust And if the right knowledge of the law is not learned but out of the scripture much more the knowledge of the Gospel is more high and mysticall and more straunge vnto our nature 2 That whereby we are kept frō error and doubtfulnes in matters of faith is necessarie but this is performed by the scripture Ergo. First the Scripture keepeth vs from error Math. 22.29 ye erre not knowing the scriptures saith our Sauiour The ignoraunce of scripture was cause of their error Secondly if our knowledge were onely builded vpon tradition without scripture we should be doubtfull and vncertaine of the truth so S. Luke saith in his Preface to Theophilus I haue written saith he that thou mightest be certaine of those things whereof thou hast bene instructed Hence we conclude that although we might know the truth without scripture as Theophilus did yet we can not know it certainlie without 3 If the scriptures be not necessarie then we may be without them but this can not be Ergo the scriptures can not be spared for then God had done a needlesse and superfluous worke in stirring vp
the Prophets and Apostles to write S. Paule saith that what soeuer is writtē is written for our learning that through patience and cōsolation of the scriptures we might haue hope Rom. 15.4 The Lord saw in wisedome that his people could not be without the Scriptures which are necessarie for their learning for their comfort and to strengthen their hope how then dare our aduersaries say that the scriptures are not necessarie seeing these things wrought in vs by the scriptures knowledge consolation hope are most necessarie 4 Let Augustine now put in his verdict Illud credo quod etiā hinc diuinorū eloquiorum clarissima authoritas esset si homo illud sine dispendio salutis ignorare non posset de peccator merit remiss lib. 2.36 I thinke saith he that euen concerning this matter speaking of the originall or beginning of the soule the Scriptures would not haue bene silent if we might not safelie be ignoraunt of this matter without daunger of saluation Ergo whatsoeuer is necessarie to saluatiō is onely to be found in scripture for other matters there not expressed there in no daunger in not knowing them therfore the Scriptures by this Fathers iudgement are most necessary THE SECOND PART OF THE SEVENTH question of the sufficiencie of Scripture The Papistes THey do straungely affirme that the Scriptures conteine not all things necessarie error 12 to be knowen cōcerning faith and manners and that they are not sufficient without traditions Bellarm. cap. 3.4 Lindanus a Papist saith that the scriptures conteine not all things necessarie to saluation Andradius that their approued traditions are of equall authoritie with the Scripture Ex Tilman de verbo error 2. 1 First the Iesuite thus reasoneth against the sufficiencie of Scripture There are diuerse bookes of canonicall Scripture lost and perished Ergo that part of canonical scripture which remaineth is not sufficiēt that much is lost he thus proueth 1. Chron. cap. vlt. mention is made of the bookes of Nathan Gad. 2. Chron. 9. of the bookes of Ahiiah Ieedo in the new Testamēt Col. 4. of the Epistle of S. Paule to the Laodiceans all those bookes are lost We aunswere First we denie not but that some bookes are now wanting which were part of canonicall scripture yet that which remaineth is sufficiēt as some of Solomōs bookes are perished which he wrote of herbes plāts and many of his Prouerbes the Lord saw that they were not so greatly necessarie for vs to saluation Secondly there is not so much wanting as the Iesuite would beare vs in hād for the books of the Prophets which he nameth are the same with the bookes of the Chronicles of the Kings which no doubt were writtē by those Prophetes And as for the Epistle of S. Paule to the Laodiceās there was neuer any such the text is written from the Laodiceans it was the Epistle rather of the Laodiceans to S. Paule vnto the which he partly maketh aunswere in the Epistle to the Colossians and therefore he would haue it read also in their Church 2 If the Apostles had any such meaning to contriue in the scriptures the summe of faith and all necessarie knowledge it is very like Christ would haue geuen them some expresse commaundement so to do but we read not of any such strict commaundement Ergo they had no such purpose Bellarmine We aunswere First they them selues dare not denie but that the Apostles wrote by the instinct of the spirite what is that els but the commaundement of God Actes 16.6 Paule was forbidden of the holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia and ver 10. when he had seene a vision of a man of Macedonia appearing vnto him the Apostle concludeth that they were called of God wherefore what they did by the secret mouing of the spirite was done at the cōmaundement of God Secondly Apocal. 11.1.14.13 Iohn is biddē to write that which he saw no doubt the other Apostles had the like cōmaundement 3 There are many points which we ought in no wise to be ignoraunt of which the scriptures speake either obscurelie of or not at all First these things are obscurely and doubtfully set downe in Scripture the equalitie of the persons in Trinitie the proceeding of the holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne the doctrine of originall sinne We aunswere First if these things be found at all in the Scriptures it is sufficient concerning the question we haue in hand Secondly the Scripture doth manifestly declare the truth in all those points the equalitie of the persons is directly proued 1. Iohn 5.7 the procession of the spirite Iohn 15.26 the spirit is there said to be sent frō the Father the Sonne And Ioh. 14.26 Original sinne is described plainly by the Apostle Rom. 5.12 though the name be not found in Scripture Secondly there are diuerse things necessarie to be knowen not at all declared in Scripture First as that Marie continued a perpetuall Virgine We answere the Scripture saith euery where she was a Virgine neither maketh mention of any children she had and therefore out of the Scripture we gather that she continued Secondly Basile saith that it is sufficient to know she was a Virgine before the birth of Christ. Secondly to know that the Pasch or Easter must be kept vpon the Lordes day is necessarie Aunswere there is no such necessiitie in it to saluation neither needed the Church so much to haue contended about it in times past these are the mightie weapons which our aduersaries vse The Protestantes WE do not affirme as our aduersaries charge vs that all things necessarie to saluation are expressely conteined in scripture that is in so many words but this we hold that all things which are necessarily to be knowen of vs are either expresly declared in Scripture or necessarily concluded out of Scripture and so conteined in them We also graunt that it was not Gospell onely which was written but all that Christ and his Apostles taught by liuely voyce the whole summe whereof and substaunce is conteined in the written word and so we conclude that nothing necessarie to saluation either concerning faith or manners is els where to be found but in the holy Scriptures 1 S. Paule saith if we or an Aungell preach vnto you otherwise then that which we haue preached let him be accursed Ergo the Scripture conteineth all things necessarie First the Iesuite aunswereth that S. Paule speaketh not onely of his writings but also of his preachings which were not written We aunswere that the summe of all S. Paules preachings is conteined in his Epistles and other holy writings for S. Paule confirmed his doctrine out of the scriptures as Act. 17.10 the Berrheans examined his doctrine by the scriptures and found it to be consonant and to agree in all things Secondly he condēneth those which preach any thing not besides or otherwise but contrarie and therefore not any other doctrine besides Scripture is forbidden but that
come after him which should preach the same fayth that hee had taught and should conuert many from their errors And many such examples wee haue of holy martyrs and worthy Prophets But we hereby doe not proue our Church Yet this I hope hath not been out of the way to haue aunswered a little to our aduersaries vaine and vntrue bragges Hitherto we haue touched the principall notes and markes whereby the Papists doe decipher out their Church vnto vs Now it followeth that we declare the right and certaine signes of the true Church Of the true and infallible Notes of the Church of Christ. THe outward tokens whereby the true visible Church is discerned are not many in number as our aduersaries doe reckon vp many the Iesuite no lesse than 15. supplying belike in number that which they want in waight Neither in this place doe we speake of the vniuersal Catholike inuisible Church which is beleeued and not seen being an article of our faith but of particular visible Churches which are discerned and knowen by these two essentiall markes the true preaching of the word and right vse of the sacraments Some also doe adde a third namely ecclesiasticall discipline Beza confess de eccles art 7. Hooper vpon the Creede articul 72. But this partly is comprehended in the 2. former for there cannot be hearing preaching of the worde the frequenting of the sacraments vnlesse there bee an exercise of Church discipline partly also we say that it is not so essential a note as the other are for the absence of the other make a nullity of the Church If the word or sacramēts in substance be corrupted the Church also is defaced but if there be not an exact forme of discipline it doth not straightway cease to be a Church Wherfore we conclude that the true preaching of the word and right vse of the sacraments are the only necessary and essentiall notes of the Church Where these two are rightly vsed according to Gods worde there is a right Church as here in England God be blessed Where they are falsely and impurely handled there is a false and corrupt Church as among the Papists where they are not at all in vse there is no Church as amongst the Turkes Iewes and Infidels First we will examine our aduersaries arguments and then bring foorth our owne The Papistes 1. BEllarmine thus argueth the true notes of the Church ought to be proper and particular not common and generall as these are for euery sect of hereticks doe chalenge to themselues the right preaching of the word and vsage of the sacraments Ergo they are no true notes We answere 1. It skilleth not how many do lay clayme to those notes the word of God it self is a manifest iudge where pure doctrine is taught and the sacraments rightly kept according to the institution It is no matter howsoeuer Papists and other heretickes doe make their bragges the scriptures themselues can soone decide this question 2. I maruaile they are not ashamed to obiect that our notes are common seeing theirs are most common for not only assemblies of hereticks but euen the heathen and Idolatrous Gentiles might as well prooue themselues to be the Church by those popish notes of vniuersalitie for Idolatrie had ouer-spread the whole world of vnitie they all consented to persecute the Church of Christ of antiquitie for the worship of Idols continued aboue two thousand yeares of succession for the monarch of the Assyrians endured 1300. yeares their kings all this while one succeeding another They had also Prophets and such as wrought miracles Our aduersaries may be now ashamed to cast vs in the teeth that our notes are common when as theirs doe well agree to the Synagogues of Sathan and assemblies of Infidels 2. Sayth he the note or the marke must be better knowen and more notorious then the thing marked or notified by it so are not these for we know not which is the worde of God nor what bookes are canonicall and to be taken for scripture but by the Church We answere the Iesuite still beggeth that which is in question a foule fault in a professed disputer for haue we not largely prooued before 1. contr quaest 4. that the Church dependeth vpon the authoritie of the scripture and not contrariwise and that there is no more certaine and euident and vndoubted thing in the whole world vpon the which a man may bee bolde to builde and ground his faith then vpon the scriptures This sure is a childish and ridiculous argument to take that as graunted which is most of all in controuersie 3 The true notes sayth hee are inseparable from the Church it is neuer without them But many true Churches haue wanted these The Church of the Corinthians was a true Church and yet they beleeued not the resurrection cap. 15. The Galathians were a true Church and yet they held that Moses lawe was to bee obserued together with the Gospell And the Corinthians likewise did not sincerely obserue the Sacraments 1. Corinth 11. Ergo they are no true signes We answere First this argument may with better right bee returned vpon their owne head for many true Churches haue wanted their markes Christ and his Apostles had neither succession from Aaron nor vniuersalitie and yet they made the true Church The Church of the Iewes after Malachies time had no Prophets nor miracles for the space of 400. yeares before Christ yet were they the true Church and so of the rest of your notes the Church of Christ hath many times wanted them Secondly It was not the whole Church of Corinthus that doubted of the resurrection but certaine false Apostles that laboured to seduce others 1. Corinth 15.34 Some of you sayth the Apostle haue not the knowledge of God he saith not all So likewise amongst the Galathians there were false teachers that stood for the lawe of Moses Galath 5.9 a little leauen doth marre the whole lumpe It was not therefore a publike doctrine in the Church but secretly taught by false Apostles Thirdly there may be some error in the Church but being not fundamental such an one as destroyeth faith it doth not dissolue the Church as there was some abuse amongst the Corinthians in receiuing the Sacrament but the forme and institution and substance of the Sacrament was kept Nay yet to graunt a little more though the error bee daungerous and of great waight and moment and such an one as being stifely maintained would destroye the faith and Church too yet if they haue fallen into it rather of ignorance then any other cause and doe not continue in it but doe submit themselues to bee reformed by the word it ceaseth not for all that to be a Church So the Corinthians referred themselues wholly and their opinions to the iudgement and determination of the Apostle Hetherto our aduersaries haue sayd nothing agaynst vs now wee will say somewhat for our selues The Protestants 1 FOr the sufficiencie of these
they were of the Gentiles and part of his charge and vnlesse they can proue that Paul resigned ouer his lot vnto Peter that he also should be the chiefe Apostle of the Gentiles as he was of the Iewes Peter should haue intruded himselfe into Paules charge not in preaching to the Gentiles for both Paul might preach to the Iewes and Peter to the Gentiles but in taking vpon him to be the chiefe Apostle of the Gentiles which was giuen before to S. Paul 2 The Rhemists themselues graunt that the Church of Rome was founded both by Peter and Paul annot in 2. Gal. sect 6. B. Tunstal a strong champion of theirs but varying from them in this opinion shewed in a letter of his to Cardinall Poole how in times past both Peter and Paul were counted Patrones of the Church of Rome and principes apostolorum the chiefe of the Apostles Eusebius sayth that Clement was the third Bishop after Peter and Paul Alexander succeeded in the fift place after Peter and Paul If therefore the Bishops of Rome challenge any preeminence of authoritie from Peter they may doe it as well from Paul for they both founded that Church preached there and both there suffered Fox pag. 1066. 3 No Apostles were Bishops for they were diuers offices Eph. 4.11 he gaue some to be Apostles some to be Pastors Doctors Ergo they were diuers offices and the same were not Apostles and Pastors or Bishops for both are all one The offices were much different Apostles were immediatly called of God Bishops and Pastors were ordayned by the Apostles the Apostles calling was general ouer the whole world the Pastors were obliged to their dioces parishes particular Churches the office of the Apostles was extraordinarie but for a time the calling of Pastors was to endure euer in the Church Wherfore it can in no wise be that the Apostles were Bishops of any certaine places Irenaeus saith that Fundata ecclesia beati apostoli Lino officiū episcopatus iniungunt the Church of Rome once founded the holy Apostles layd the charge of the Bishopricke vpon Linus Whereby it appeareth that they onely reteyned their Apostleship inioyned them of Christ Tunstal ex Fox pag. 1066. It had therefore been contrarie to the commaundement of Christ who sayd Ite in vniuersum mundum goe into all the world if they should haue left their calling and bound themselues to any peculiar Church Ergo we conclude that neither Peter nor Paul were Bishops of Rome THE FOVRTH QVESTION WHETHER THE Bishop of Rome be the true successor of S. Peter The Papists error 40 THey doe generally hold that the Bishops of Rome being lineally descended by succession from Peter they haue the same primacie apostolike authoritie iurisdiction ouer the whole Church which Peter had Bellar. lib. 2. de pont c. 12. They are very barren and scant of arguments in this place to maintaine and vphold this succession by and in the end the Iesuite runneth to tradition and at the length he thus concludeth that it is not de iure diuino it is not necessarie by the lawe of God that the Romane Bishop should be Peters successor but it dependeth onely vpon the ordinance of Peter and is proued by tradition not diduced out of scripture That it was necessarie for Peter to haue a successor they say it is proued out of scripture which we also graunt that all faithfull Pastors and Ministers are the Apostles successors though they haue not their plenarie and Apostolike power but that the Pope ought to bee and is his successor it standeth vpon tradition We see then the grounds of their opinion scripture they haue none but blind tradition vnlesse therefore they could bring better stuffe for the Papall succession we will not spend any time in confuting nothing The Protestants THat the Pope or Bishop of Rome neither can is or ought to be S. Peters successor in his high and Apostolike authoritie primacie and iurisdiction ouer the whole Church which Peter himselfe neuer had thus we declare it 1 The Pope though hee were Peters successor yet can hee not receiue that from him which he neuer had but Peter had neuer any such primacie of power as we haue shewed before Quaest. 1.2 Ergo he is not here in his successor 2 That primacie which Peter had could not bee conueyed to any other namely his primacie of confession which he first of all the Apostles did vtter concerning Christ proceeding from faith did adhere so to his person that it could not bee deriued to any successor of his for Peters faith was a proper adiunct to himselfe Argument Tonstalli Fox pag. 1066. Agayne how can he haue the Apostolike authoritie being not an Apostle But an Apostle he is not for Christ onely made Apostles the Apostles did not ordayne other Apostles Argum. Nili 3 He succeedeth not Peter rightly in place for seeing Peter sate at Antioch why may not that Church challenge succession as well as Rome Why might not also other Churches haue Apostolike succession as Alexandria from Peter and Marke Herusalem from Iames Constantinople from Andrew Further they haue no certaine succession from Peter Tertullian maketh Clement the next successor to Peter Optatus first nameth Linus then Clement Irenaeus after Peter placeth Linus and Cletus and Clement in the fourth What certaintie therefore can they haue of so vncertaine succession Fulk annot in Rom. 16. sect 4. 4 It skilleth not who commeth in the place roome of the Apostles They that will be their true successors must followe their example and walke in their steps teaching their doctrine and embracing their holie vertues Wherfore the Pope is not Peters right successor swaruing both from his doctrine example Non sanctorum filij sunt qui tenent loca sanctorum sed qui exercent opera eorū They are not the children of the Saints which occupie the same places but they which doe their workes Lambert So Bernard writing to Eugenius chargeth him that in respect of his pompe and pride he did rather succeede Constantine then Peter Iohann Huss pag. 610. 5 All good Bishops and Pastors are as well the Apostles successors as the Pope nay rather then he being a wicked man Iohn Huss articul 4. Fox pag. 590. Lambert pag. 1120. Nay they haue greater and more excellent titles then to be called the Apostles successors for those that walke in obedience vnto Gods commandements our Sauiour calleth them his sisters kinsfolkes and brethren Math. 12.50 Ergo the Pope is not the right successor of Peter Lastly of this matter Augustine thus writeth Cathedra tibi quid fecit ecclesiae Romanae in qua Petrus sedit in qua hodie Anastasius sedet vel ecclesiae Hyerosolymitanae in qua Iacobus sedit in qua hodie Iohannes sedet What hath the Sea of Rome done vnto thee wherein sometime Peter sate where Anastasius now sitteth or what hath the Church or chaire of Ierusalem committed where
so well knowne in stories that I neede not come to particulars 6 Antichrist is called a wicked man and a man of sinne vers 3.8 And where shall you finde more wicked men then among the Popes Siluester the 2. gaue his soule to the diuell to obtayne the Papacie Fox pag. 167. Benno reporteth of Hildebrand that he poysoned sixe Popes to come to the Popedome Pope Stephen and Sergius tooke vp the bodie of Formosus and mangled it cutting off his head and fingers and so cast it into Tibris Fox pag. 120. We haue heard before what a holy Father Pope Iohn the 13. was he lay with his owne sister and with his fathers Concubines playing at dice called for the diuell was slayne in adulterie And was it not I pray you a common prouerbe in England He that goeth to Rome once seeth a wicked man he that goeth twise learneth to know him he that goeth the third time bringeth him home with him Fox pag. 841. argument Illyrici The third place we doe take out of the Apocalyps chap. 9. where is a playne storie set downe of the Pope 1 vers 1. He is a starre fallen from heauen he is departed from the ancient faith of Rome to superstition and idolatrie 2 He hath the key of the bottomlesse pit who giueth the crosse keyes in his armes but the Pope who sayth hee may euacuate all Purgatorie at once if hee will but he Who sayth he may Pleno iure currus animarum plenos secum ad tartara detrudere by full right carrie downe to hell with him charriots Ioden with soules cap. si Papa distinct 42. Is not this the Pope who then more fitly may be sayd to haue the key of the bottomlesse pit 3 There arise out of the bottomlesse pit a great flocke of Locusts that is the innumerable sort of begging Friers for they are in euery respect described First compared to Locusts for their number vers 3. There were an 100. diuers sorts of Friers Fox pag. 260. Secondly they had power giuen them for fiue moneths that is as Walter Brute expoundeth it taking a moneth for thirtie dayes a day for a yeere as it is prophetically taken an 150. yeeres for so long it was from the beginning of the Friers vnder Innocent the 3. anno 1212. to the time of Armachanus who preached disputed and wrote agaynst the Friers about anno 1360. Fox pag. 414. Thirdly they shall sting like Scorpions not slay all at once but venome and poyson the conscience with the sting of their pestilent doctrine Fourthly other parts also of the description agree as vers 7. They are as horses prepared to battaile that is stoute ambitious their haire as the haire of women that is they shall be effeminate and giuen to the lusts of the flesh their teeth as the teeth of Lions they by valiant begging shall deuoure the portions of the poore as it was well proued in King Henry the 8. dayes in the Supplication of beggars that the summe of the Friers almes came to a great summe in the yeere for the fiue orders of Friers had a penie a quarter for euery one of euery housholder throughout England that is for them all twentie pence by the yeere suppose that there be but ten housholds in euery towne and let there be twentie thousand parishes and townes in England it will not want much of twentie thousand pound Thus had they Lions teeth that is consuming and deuouring Lastly they haue a King vers 11. whose name is Abaddon a destroyer for the Pope their chiefe prince and patron hath by his Antichristian doctrine layd wast the Church of God Argument Chytraei The fourth place of scripture wee will take out of the 17. of the Apocalyps there the seate of Antichrist is described First vers 5. It is called Babylon the citie which raigneth ouer the Kings of the earth vers 18. This can be no other but Rome which then had the Empire of the whole world Secondly It is the citie built vpon seuen hils or mountaynes vers 9. that is no other but Rome Thirdly the whore which is Antichrist shall sit vpon the beast with seuen heads and ten hornes that is shall succeede in the Empire and haue the authoritie thereof so hath the Pope Fourthly the ten hornes that is the Kings of the earth shal giue their authoritie to the beast but afterward shall deuoure her flesh Euen so the Kings of the earth by their sword maintayned the authoritie of the Pope But now being taught by the Gospell they are made the Lords free men and begin to subdue their neckes from his yoke The fift place is 1. Iohn 2.22 Who is a lyar but he that denyeth that Iesus is Christ the same is Antichrist that denyeth the father and the sonne Euen so the Pope of Rome though not openly and apertly yet closely and subtilly is an enemie vnto the whole trinitie He exalteth himselfe aboue God the father because he taketh vpon him to dispense not onely agaynst the lawe of nature but agaynst the lawe of God the morall law and agaynst the precepts both of the old and new testament but a lawe cannot be dispensed withall but by the same authoritie or greater Agaynst Iesus Christ he exalteth himselfe and all his offices he denyeth him to be the onely Prophet saying the scriptures are vnperfect and that their traditions are also necessarie to saluation Agayne he maketh other bookes scripture then those which are Canonicall His kingly office he doth arrogate to himselfe in making lawes to binde the conscience in ordayning other Sacraments in granting Indulgences and Pardons saying that he is the head of the Church His Priesthood he is an enemie vnto constituting another priesthood after the order of Melchisedech then that of our Sauiour Christ which begun vpon the Crosse and remayneth still in his person being incommunicable to any other creature yet they make euery sacrificing Priest to bee of the order of Melchisedech He impugneth the office of the holy spirit counting that prophane which the holy Ghost hath sanctified as marriage and meates arrogateth in all things the spirit of truth not to erre applieth the merites of Christs passion after his owne pleasure by Pardons Indulgences by ceremonies and Sacraments of his owne inuention Fulk 2. Thess. 2. sect 10. Ergo we conclude out of S. Iohn that seeing he denieth Iesus to be Christ he is Antichrist Sixtly S. Paul sayth that Antichrist shal be an aduersarie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Thess. 2.4 An aduersarie in doctrine teaching cleane contrarie to the Gospell of Christ so doth the Pope 1 The scripture sayth wee ought to put our trust onely in God and not in man Ierem. 17.7 and to call vpon God onely in the day of trouble Psal. 50.15 and to worship him in spirit and truth Iohn 4.24 The Papists say cleane contrarie that we must call vpon Saints and beleeue they can helpe vs and they teach vs to fall downe before
Spirit was not giuen him by measure Ioh. 3.34 and that the holy Ghost dwelleth in him bodily but it were great blasphemie so to say of any man Apostle or Minister beside which haue receiued of the same grace but not in the like measure that Christ hath but the spirit is giuen to euery one in measure as they haue neede in their seuerall places and callings Secondly though we should grant that the Apostles had the full authoritie of Christ actually to remit sinnes which they shall neuer proue yet it may be doubted whether al Ministers whom they call Priests which name we refuse not if it be taken according to the sense of the originall word Presbyter and not for a sacrificing priesthood haue as full power in this case as the Apostles had nay it is plaine they haue not for the Apostles and other in the Primitiue Church had power to discerne spirits 1. Cor. 12.10 and to giue actually the bodies of the excommunicate to bee vexed and possessed of the diuell 1. Cor. 5.5 and after a strange manner to exercise power ouer their bodily life as Peter did vpon Ananias and Sapphira Act. 5 Yet we rather stand vpon this poynt that neither the Apostles nor any other Ministers haue power actually to remit sinnes then onely as dispensers and stewards in the name of Christ. The Protestants AL the power of binding and loosing committed to the Apostles and to the Ministers of the word and Sacraments is by declaring the will and pleasure of God out of his word both to pronounce forgiuenes of sinnes to all that are truely penitent the reteining of them to the obstinate and impenitent Fulk annot Iohn 20. sect 3. So that Ministers are not made iudges in this case but only as the Lords ambassadors to declare the will of God out of his word 1 There is a notable place for this purpose 2. Corinth 5.18 God hath reconciled vs vnto himselfe through Iesus Christ and hath giuen vs the ministerie of reconciliation So then Christ is the onely author of reconciliation the Apostles are but ministers how then say the Rhemists that Christ himselfe is but a minister also of our reconciliation yet a chiefe minister whereas the Apostle maketh him the author God was in Christ reconciling the world to himselfe vers 19. Wee are but ambassadors for Christ and pray you in Christs stead to bee reconciled vnto God this then is the office of Ministers not to reconcile men vnto God but to pray them to bee reconciled through Christ Christ onely is the reconciler they but ministers of reconciliation They are but messengers and ambassadors onely to declare their Princes pleasure their commission is certaine beyond that they cannot goe Wherefore that is a blasphemous decretal and cleane contrarie to the scripture which is ascribed but falsely to Pontianus Bishop of Rome which sayth that God hath Priests so familiar that by them he forgiueth the sinnes of others and reconcileth them vnto him Fox pag. 59. But S. Paul sayth that God onely by Christ reconcileth vs vnto himselfe 2 Augustine doth very freely vtter his minde concerning this matter who putteth this obiection If men doe not forgiue sinnes then it should seeme to be false which Christ sayth Whatsoeuer you bind in earth is bound in heauen He answereth Daturus erat dominus hominibus spiritum sanctum c. God was to giue vnto men the holy Ghost by whom their sinnes should be forgiuen them Spiritus dimittit non vos spiritus autem Deus est Deus ergo dimittit non vos the spirit therefore remitteth sinne and not you the spirit is God God forgiueth sinnes and not you Here is one argument God onely forgiueth sinnes Ergo not man Againe Quides homo nisi aeger sanandus vis mihi esse medicus mecum quaere medicum O man what art thou that takest away my sinnes but a sicke man thy selfe wouldest thou be my phisition nay let vs both together goe seeke a phisition that may heale vs. Lo another argument He cannot be a phisition to others that needeth a phisition himselfe he cannot reconcile others to God who hath himselfe neede of a reconciler Further he sayth Qui dimittit per hominem potest dimittere praeter hominem non enim minus est idoneus per se dare qui potest per alium dare He that can forgiue sinnes by man can forgiue also without man for he may as well forgiue by himselfe as he can doe it by another Here is then the third argument If man doe actually forgiue sinnes then Christ should not forgiue sinnes without man for the whole power is committed to man Yea the Rhemists affirme the same that it is necessarie we should submit our selues to the iudgement of the Priest for release of our sinnes if it bee necessarie then sinnes cannot be remitted without the Priest then is Christs power limited he cannot forgiue without man which is contrarie to that Augustine affirmeth here THE FOVRTH PART WHETHER STRAIGHT waies whatsoeuer be loosed or bound by the ministerie of men vpon earth be so in heauen The Papists AN expresse power say they is giuen vnto Priests to remit and reteyne error 76 sinnes And Christ promiseth that whose sinnes soeuer they forgiue they are forgiuen of God and whose sinnes soeuer they retaine they are retained of God Rhemist annot Iohn 20. sect 5. Whereby it appeareth it is their opinion which is manifest also by the practise of their Church that at the will and pleasure of euerie priest exercising the keyes vpon earth men are bound and loosed in heauen They ground this their opinion vpon the generalitie of the wordes Whosoeuers sinnes you remit they are remitted Iohn 20.23 and Math. 18.18 Whatsoeuer you binde in earth shall be bound in heauen Answere These places are not so to be vnderstood as though God were bound to ratifie euery decree of men vpon earth for first this power is giuen to all lawfull pastors which doe holde the Apostolike fayth not to Idolatrous ignorant and blasphemous priests such as most if not all of the popish sorte are Secondly they must decree in the earth according to Gods wil Wherefore Iohn 20.22 first Christ breatheth his spirite vpon his Apostles and then giueth them their commission signifiyng hereby that they must execute this power as they shall be directed by Gods spirite and Matth. 18.20 it followeth that they must be assembled in the name of Christ that is according to Christs rule and the direction of his word they must binde and loose and not at their owne discretion The Protestants THat no sentence or decree of men bindeth or looseth before God in heauen but that which is pronounced according to the will and pleasure of GOD and by the warrant of his worde the scripture euery where teacheth vs. 1 Prouer. 26.2 As the sparrow by flying escapeth so the curse that is causelesse shall not come Isay 5.20 Woe vnto them that speake good
diuisions among Christians as the Monkes Friers haue done one sort persecuting another for their opinions euen to death Fulk annot 1. Thess. 1. sect 2. Fox pag. 798. The Protestants COntrariwise we affirme that it is a great derogation to Christ when the people shall say I follow the religion of Augustine the religon of Francis an other sayth I holde of Dominick another I hold of Iesus as the Iesuites doe Fulk Philip. 3. vers 17. 1 Saint Paul reproueth the Corinthians because they made the like sects amongst themselues one sayd I am Pauls another I am Apolloes and concludeth that therefore they were carnall 1. Cor. 3.4 And further he sayth they should not reioyce in men for all things were theirs whether Paul Apollos or Cephas ver 21.22 That is they were not masters of their fayth to institute new religions and sects but the Ministers and seruants of the Lords inheritance If therefore it was not lawful to say I hold of Paul I hold of Cephas neither is it lawfull to say I holde of Dominick I hold of Francis I hold of Iesus for seeing they make their sects and Iesus maketh his it is euident that they are not all referred to the imitation of Iesus for then they might all as well bee called Iesuites 2 The number of Monkes and Friers was almost infinite sects vpon sects and new orders daylie were deuised as Augustinians Bernardines Carmelites Carthusians Dominicanes Franciscanes and a great sort more to the number of an hundred sects as they are reckoned by Master Fox pag. 260. and Tilmane Heshus setteth downe 65 seueral sects or rather schismes of Monkes loc 25. error 10. This yrksome rabble therefore of Monkes is fitly shadowed foorth by the swarme of Locusts which came vp out of the bottomlesse pitte Apocal. 9.4 And verily as the Locusts and Grashoppers consume and deuoure the fruits of the earth so the begging-Friers and idle Monkes deuoured the goods of the people and corrupted the doctrine of the Church 3 Lastly this diuision of Monkery into sects and sundry orders is of no great antiquitie they were not knowen in Augustines time who knew no other name of them then Monkes for hee wrote a booke of purpose de opere Monachorum of the labour of Monkes But other names of Carmelites Carthusians Franciscanes or such like were not heard of in the Church in those dayes but came in long after in the time of Innocentius 3. about anno 1212. many yeeres after Augustine Fox pag. 259. THE SECOND QVESTION CONCERning the Counsels of perfection The Papists THis they say is the very foundation of the Monastical life which is the most error 84 perfect estate and calling of Christians for they performe more then Christ hath commaunded not onely his precepts but euen his Counsels also Which they say doe much differ for the precepts are inioyned to all Christians and to leaue a precept vndone is sinne but the Euangelicall Counsels are giuen only to those that are perfect which they are not bound to keepe neither doe they sinne in leauing them vndone yet if they obserue them they doe merite more and shall haue a greater rewarde Such Counsels of perfection are these to giue all we haue to the poore to abstaine from eating of flesh to vow chastitie and such like Bellarm. cap. 7. Rhemist annot Math. 19. sect 9. 1 Matth. 19. verse 21. Christ sayth goe and sell all thou hast if thou wilt bee perfect This was a Counsel of perfection not a precept giuen to all Christians Answ. First this was both a Counsel and precept though not to al yet to this one man to discouer his hypocrisie and vayne confidence which he had in himselfe as though he had kept the law when he was farre from it Fulk Matth. 19.9 Mark 10.3 Secondly it is a generall precept vnto all to loue the Lord with all the heart and to be content when the Lord requireth for Christs sake to leaue all we haue Caluin Institut 4. cap. 13. sect 13. 2 Act. 2.44 They had all things common This is not a rule or precept to all Christian men to liue in common but a life of perfection and counsell followed of the Religious Rhemist Answere This liuing in common among the brethren in the Apostles time is the same that ought alwayes to be among all Christians that no man account that to be his owne which the necessitie of his brother requireth to be bestowed vpon him this the rule of charitie requireth which is one of the great commandements Fulk in hunc locum 3 1. Corinth 7.25 Concerning Virgins I haue no commaundement of the Lord but I giue mine aduice A precept therefore is one thing a Counsel of perfection another Bellarm. cap. 9. Answere First Paul hath no generall commandement from God to impose the yoke of continencie vpon any because God had left marriage free and therefore no man is to be barred and kept from it But the Apostles particular aduice and sentence being moued by the spirit of God vers 40. is not onely a Counsel but a commandement that both they which haue the gift of continencie should glorifie God by that gift vers 7. and they which haue it not should marrie rather then burne and so dishonour God vers 9. Therefore the Apostle sayth Let euery man wherein he is called therein abide with God vers 24. If a man be called to liue single hee ought to obey his calling hauing receiued the gift if a man be called to the maried estate he must not presume beyond his strength to liue vnmaried Wherefore it is both Counsel a precept to those that haue receiued the gift of single life for otherwise they disobey Gods calling which is sinne And our Sauiour sayth he that is able to receiue it let him receiue it Matth. 19.12 He that hath the gift is commanded to vse it for in leesing it he sinneth And lastly euery man by commandement is bound to the vttermost of his power to set forth Gods glorie But God is most glorified by the single life of those which are able to conteine and therefore they ought in duetie so to doe The Protestants WE doe truely affirme and according to the scriptures that it is impossible for any man to performe the law and commaundements of GOD much lesse to fulfill more then is commaunded And therefore it is false that beside the precepts of Christ there are Counsels of perfection which are at a mans choyce to doe or not to doe for whatsoeuer is to the glorie of God wee are bound to doe We acknowledge then no such euangelical Counsels as they imagine Caluin 1 Math. 5.48 Our Sauiour sayth Ye shall be perfect as your heauenly father is perfect Therefore all Counsels tending to perfection are commandements If there be any thing whereby we may more neerely attaine vnto perfection that we are bound and commanded to doe As if a man can better obtaine this perfection of godlinesse by
Ruffinus that it was left at Ierusalem and that Helena sent a peece of it to Constantinople and in many other places there are peeces of the Crosse to bee seene which if they were all laied together as Erasmus saith would fill a shippe for why Paulinus witnesseth that the Crosse remaineth whole at Ierusalem as though it had been neuer touched though innumerable peeces be dayly cut off from it at the request of men But this fable that goeth vnder the name of Paulinus the Papistes themselues are ashamed of But if the true and right Crosse were to be had why might it not be serued if people beganne to abuse it to Idolatrie as Hezekiah serued the brasen serpent he brake it in peeces when the people began to make an Idol of it Augustine saith Christus ambulauit in mari vt ostenderet in mari esse viam sed tù quoniam i◠mari ambulare non potes naui portare ligno portare crede in crucifixum poteris peruenire Nemo potest transire mare huius seculi nisi Cruce Christi portatus Christ walked in the Sea to shewe vs that our way must bee through the Sea But thou because thou canst not walke in the sea must sayle in a ship and be carried in a peece of wood Beleeue in him that was crucified for thee No man can passe the sea of this world but being borne vp with the crosse of Christ. Heere Augustine maketh no reckoning of the wood of the Crosse which was easier to be had in his daies then euer since but ascribeth al to faith and beleefe in Christ crucified THE SECOND ARTICLE OF THE Image of the Crosse or Crucifix The Papists THe Image of Christ vpon the crosse whether painted carued or grauen we error 43 see is had in great honour amongst our aduersaries They kneele downe before their crucifix weare it in their bosomes next to their heart carry it in their iourneyes set it vp to be adored in their churches Argum. 1. As adoration was done vnto God in olde time at and before the Arke and Tabernacle so it may be done now at or before a crucifix relique image Rhemist annot Heb. 11. sect 9. Ans. 1. It is not al one to worship God at or before a thing as to worship and adore the thing the Israelits worshipped God in at or before the Tabernacle yet did they not worship the Tabernacle as you do the crucifix 2. They might worship God before the Arke because they were commanded so to do but it is not lawfull to fall downe before a crucifix because all such images are flatly in the 2. commandement forbidden Argum. 2. The signe of the crosse appeared to Constantine in the ayer he caused the crosse to be carried before him as an ensigne in battail When the Iewes had leaue of Iulian to build the Temple there were Crosses seene euery where in their garmentes and many such apparitions haue there beene of the Crosse Ergo it is to be honoured and worshipped Bellarmine cap. 28. Ans. 1. What if Constantine caused the Crosse to be carried before him stamped it in his coyne set vp his picture with the Crosse in his hand all this we grant was done may be done againe It was but a ciuil no religious vse of the Crosse He worshipped it not vnlesse you will say he set vp his owne image with the Crosse in his hand to be worshipped 2. As for the apparitions of the Crosse though wee think many of them to be forged yet wee deny not but that the Lord hath and may yet shewe what signes and tokens it pleaseth him in the Heauen and the earth yet it followeth not that the signe of the crosse should therfore be worshipped because it was shewed to Constantine no more then other signes and strange sights that many times appeare in the aire For the other apparition of Crosses in the Iewes garmentes wee will require it with another and yet you shal gaine nothing by it Anno. 1505. vnder the raigne of the Emperor Maximilian there appeared diuerse tokens of bloody crosses the nayles the spunge the speare and other signes of Christs passion in the garments of men and women yea in their rockes while they were a spinning reported by Francis Mirandula Carion Functius Melancton Flaccius But the Popish Chronologers make no mentiō of it as Christianus Masseus others of that profession As the Crosses in the Iewes garments that went about to establish their ceremonies againe did shew that do what they could the gospell that is the preaching of his Crosse should take place as it did so these signes in Germany did portēd that the gospel in Germany should be preached though the Papistes striued neuer so much against it But it is a farre fetcht conclusion to inferre heereupon that the signe or Image of the Crosse is to be adored The Protestants THe Image of the Crosse of Christ is neither to be painted carued grauen for any religious vse nor to be adored or worshipped but men so doing do fal into the grieuous and high offence and sinne of idolatrie Argu. 1. The Scripture neuer calleth the Crosse whereon Christ suffered the holy Crosse as the papistes do but rather cursed for S. Paul proueth that Christ became accursed for vs because he dyed vpon the Crosse according to the scripture Cursed is euery one that hangeth on a tree Howe then is it nowe honored which was then accursed And if all crosses are worthy honour because of Christ his Crosse then why not all nayles and speares for with them he was pearsed al thornes also because of his crowne of thornes yea al horse-mangers too because he was laid in a Cribbe Argum. 2 They are vncertaine of what fashion the Crosse of Christ was whetherlike the Greeke letter Υ. or this letter x. or the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 T. or of this fashiō †or of this ✚ which is the vsuall fourme of their Crosses how then dare they worship that which they know not and are vncertaine of 3. All those reasons which we brought before against the worshipping of images part ◠huius quaest articul 3. may be vrged against the adoration of Crucifixes Augustine thus writeth Hanc intuentes salutiferam crucem omne calumniantium superborum virus expellimus By beholding this helpfull or helthfull Crosse we are able to auoid the poyson of all proud venemous Cauillers Hee speaketh not of any Crucifix that they had in sight but of the fruitfull meditation of the passion of Christ as he sayeth a little before Dum vigilantissima diligentissima pietate Christus crucifixus attenditur When with diligent and watchfull and godly attention we consider Christ crucified Loe this was Augustines Crucifix to meditate vpon the death of Christ. THE THIRD ARTICLE OF THE SIGNE of the Crosse in the forehead or made ouer any thing with the hand The Papists THey say it is an holy and venerable signe and meet to be
God so the manner of celebrating and keeping it holy is to be learned out of the word and neither custome nor authority ought to giue liberty for such workes vpon the Lords day as are not warranted by the word First we graunt that we are not so necessarily tied to the rest of the Sabboth as the Iewes were for those things are abolished which appertained to the Iewish Sabboth First the prescript of the day Secondly the ceremonious exercises of the Sabboth in the sacrifices and other rites of the Law Thirdly the typicall shadowes and significations of their Sabboth as first it betokened their rest in Canaan then the rest and peace of the Church by Christ Hebre. 4.3 5. Fourthly the strickt and precise rest wherein Christians haue more liberty then the Iewes had and againe they obserued their rest as being properly and simply and in it selfe a sabboth daies duty but we doe consider it as being referred to a more principall end as making of vs more fit for spirituall exercises Secondly we allow these workes to be done First opera religiosa or pietatis the religious workes and conferring to piety as the Priestes did slaye the sacrifices vpon the Sabboth and yet brake not the rest of the Sabboth Math. 12.5 so the people may walke to their parish Church though somewhat farre off the Pastor Minister may goe forth to preach yea and preaching is of it selfe a labour of the body to study also and meditate of his Sermon to ring the bels to call the people to the Church all these are lawfull as being helpes for the exercises of religion Secondly opera charitatis the workes of mercy are permitted as to visite the sicke the Phisitian to resorte to his patient yea to shew compassion to brute beastes as to helpe the sheepe out of a pit Math. 12.11 Thirdly opera necessitatis the workes of necessitie as the dressing of meat and such like Math. 12.1.3 Our Sauiour excuseth his Apostles for plucking the eares of Corne when they were hungry As for opera voluntaria workes of pleasure and recreation we haue no other permission to vse them then as they shal be no le ts or impediments vnto spirituall exercises as the hearing of the word and meditating therein and such other Otherwise they are not to be vsed Augustine saith speaking of the Iewes who did greatly prophane their Sabboth in sporting and dalliance Melius toto die foderent quà m toto die saltarēt It were better for them to digge all day then to daunce all day euen so verily it were better for many poore ignorant people that vpon the Sabboth giue themselues to drinking and quaffing gaming if they should goe to plough or cart all the day But as for other seruile workes as to keepe Faires and Markets vpon the Lords day to trauell themselues their seruants and beastes vpon the Sabboth it is flat contrary to the commaundement of God and the practise of the Church Nehemiah 13.16 where there is no extream and vrgent necessitie so that it is not to be doubted but that as the keeping of the Lords day is a moral commaundement so also the manner of the obseruing thereof in sanctifying it and resting therein is morall the ceremonies of the rest being abolished that is the Iewish strictnes thereof and the opinion which they had of their rest as being simply a part of the sanctifying of the Sabboth But we doe consider it as referred vnto more principall duties and obserue it not as of it selfe pleasing God but as making vs more fit for spirituall exercises Contrary to these rules we acknowledge neither power in Ordinaries nor priuiledge in custome to dispence with the sanctification of the Sabboth The Papists THey affirme that the Apostles altered the sabboth day from the seaueth day to the eight counting from the creation and they did it without scripture error 62 or any commaundement of Christ such power say they hath God left to his Church This then they holde that the sabboth was changed by the ordinarie power and authoritie of the Church not by any especiall direction from Christ thereupon it followeth that the Church which they say cannot erre may also change the sabboth to any other day in the weeke Rhemist Apoca. 1. sect 6. The Protestants 1. THe Apostles did not abrogate the Iewish sabboth but Christ himselfe by his death as he did also other ceremonies of the Law and this the Apostles knew both by the scriptures the word of Christ his holy spirite 2. They did not appoint a new sabboth of their owne authoritie for first they knew by the scripture that one day of seauen was to be obserued for euer for the seruice of God and exercise of religion although the prescript day according to the Law were abrogate for the Lord before the morall law was written euen immediatly after the creation sanctified the seauenth day shewing thereby that one of the seauen must be obserued so long as the world endured Secōdly they knew there was the same reason of sanctifiyng the day of Christs resurrection and the restitution of the worlde thereby as of sanctifiyng the day of the Lords rest after the creation of the world Thirdly they did it by the direction of the spirite of God whereby they were so directed and gouerned that although they were fraile men by nature and subiect to error yet they could not decline in their writings and ordinances of the Church from the truth which assurance of Gods spirite in the like measure the Church hath not but so farre forth is promised to be led into all truth as she followeth the rule of truth expressed in the Scriptures Wherefore the Church hath no authority to change the Lords day and to keepe it vpon Munday or Tuesday or any other day seeing it is not a matter of indifferency but a necessary prescription of Christ himselfe deliuered by the Apostles for the Lords day began in the Apostles time and no doubt by their Apostolike authority directed by the spirite of Christ was instituted Act. 20.7 Apocal. 1. ver 10. Neither can there come so long as the world continueth so great a cause of changing the Sabboth as the Apostles had by the resurrection of Christ. Wherfore the law of the Sabboth as it is now kept and obserued is perpetuall The Papists errour 63 4. THey affirme that the keeping of the Lords day in stead of the Iewish Sabboth is a tradition of the Apostles and not warranted by Scripture Rhemist Math. 15. sect 3. The Protestants THe obseruation of the Lords day is not deliuered by blinde tradition but hath testimony of holy Scriptures 1. Corinth 16.2 Act. 20.7 Apocal. 1.10 and the obseruation thereof is according to Gods commaundement not after the doctrine of men Fulk ibid. The Papists errour 64 5. THey teach that the Lords day is commaunded and likewise kept for some mysticall signification not onely for the remembraunce of benefites already
QVESTION OF THE NATVRE and definition of a Sacrament WE thus define a Sacrament to be an outward sensible signe representing an holy inward and spirituall grace instituted of Christ to be vsed in that manner he hath appoynted to seale vnto vs the promises of God and to assure vs of the remission of sinnes by the righteousnes of faith in Christ Rom. 4.11 Some things there be in this definition that are agreed vpon betweene vs and our aduersaries as that the Sacraments are outward signes of spirituall and holy graces and that there must be a conueniencie and agreement betweene the signe and the thing signified that not euery thing may be represented by a Sacrament but an holy and spirituall grace that a Sacrament ought to be instituted by a diuine not an humane authoritie Bellar. de Sacram. in gener lib. 1. cap. 9 The seuerall poynts then wherein we dissent from them and which they mislike in this definition are these First concerning the authoritie of instiâ—uting a Sacrament which we affirme to be deriued onely from Christ and manifestly to be proued out of the scriptures Secondly of the forme and manner of celebrating the Sacraments Thirdly of the instrumental or ministerial cause which is the Minister Fourthly of the vse and end of a Sacrament whether it be a scale of the promises of God and instituted for that end THE FIRST PART OF THE EFFICIENT CAVSE that is the author or institutor of a Sacrament The Papists THey doe willingly grant that neither the Apostles then had nor the Church error 87 now hath authoritie to institute Sacraments but that this power is onely in Christ and that the Apostles did but declare and deliuer that which they receiued of Christ yet for the triall of this they refuse to be iudged by the expresse word of God but flie vnto their traditions which they call the word of God not written Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sacram. cap. 14. 23. Argum. The sacrament of Baptisme and of the Eucharist were instituted without expresse warrant of scripture for at that time the newe testament was not written when Christ ordained those mysteries Ergo for the other Sacraments we need not the expresse coÌ„mandement of scripture Bellar. lib. 1. cap. 14. Ans. First the traditions of our Sauiour giuen vnto the Apostles concerning those two Sacraments were afterward written by the Apostles and expressely set downe in scripture therefore we doubt not but that they were of Christs institution But your traditions being not committed to writing concerning your other forged sacraments are iustly suspected seeing the Apostles should haue as well been charged with all the sacraments if Christ had instituted theÌ„ as with only two Secondly how then followeth it the word of God was sometime vnwritten therefore it is so still or Christ who was the author of the word written might institute sacraments without expresse scripture Ergo the testimonie of scripture is not necessarie now The Protestants WE hold no sacraments to be of Christs institution but those onely which the scripture testifieth to haue been commanded by Christ as Baptisme Math. 28.19 the Lords Supper Luk. 23.19 The other which haue no testimonie of scripture were not appoynted by Christ. Argum. 1. S. Paul saith That the scriptures are able to make the man of God absolute and perfect to euery good worke 1. Timoth. 3.17 But how can the Minister of God be perfectly furnished and prepared for the worke of the ministerie if he haue not sufficient direction out of the scriptures concerning the sacraments of the Church for how can he absolutely execute euery part of his office if he faile in the right vse of the sacraments Ergo seeing the scriptures are able to make him perfect from thence he receiueth sufficient instruction for the sacraments Argum. 2. Augustine saith Christus sacramentis numero paucissimis obseruatione facilimis c. Christ hath ioyned his people together by the sacrameÌ„ts few in number easie in obseruation such are Baptisme and the partaking of his bodie and blood then it followeth Et si quid aliud in scripturis canonicis commendatur And if any other sacrament be commanded in the canonicall scripture Epistol 118. Ergo we must attend vpon the scripture and written word of God if we will be instructed aright concerning the Sacraments THE SECOND PART OF THE FORME OF A Sacrament and the manner of consecration The Papists THe Sacrament is not consecrated say they by al the words of the institution error 88 but by a certain forme of speech to be vsed ouer the elemeÌ„ts as these words to be said ouer the bread This is my body the like ouer the wine This cup is the new testament c. And in Baptisme these In the name of the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost These are the formes of the Sacrament and very words of consecration though spoken in a strange tongue without further inuocation of the name of God or giuing of thankes or without a Sermon which we require as they say as necessarie to the essence of a sacrament Rhemist 1. Corinth 11 sect 11.15 Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sacrament cap. 19. Argum. S. Paul sayth The cup of blessing which we blesse 1. Corinth 10.16 The Apostle referreth the benediction or blessing to the cup or Chalice which is nothing els but the consecration thereof Rhemist ibid. Ans. First wee denie not but that to blesse here doth signifie to sanctifie or consecrate but that is not done by a magicall murmuration of words ouer the Sacrament but by the whole action according to Christs institution in distributing receiuing giuing of thankes Secondly as for the words which Christ vttered in the institution we rehearse them not as a magicall charme to be sayd ouer the bread and wine to conuert their substance but to declare what they are made to vs by force of Christs institution namely his bodie and blood The Protestants WE doe not hold that it is an essentiall part of the Sacrament alwayes to haue a sermon before it as they vnderstand a sermon which notwithstanding were most conuenient and alwaies to bee wished but this wee affirme that the Sacrament cannot be rightly ministred vnlesse there be a declaration and shewing forth of the Lords death not only in the visible action of breaking distributing the elements but also in setting forth the end of the Lords death out of the word of God with an exhortation to thankfulnes which is alwaies obserued amongst vs in the dayly celebration and receiuing of the Sacrament Concerning the words of the institution we also grant that they are necessarily to be vsed in the celebration of the Sacrament but not as the Papists vse them For first they make them not all of one value but out of the whole institution picke out certaine consecratorie words as they call them as This is my bodie This is the cup whereas the other words Take ye eate ye drinke ye doe this in remembrance
spake and where else speaketh Christ but in the scriptures Ergo the forme of Baptisme is the word of Christ prescribed and commanded in the scriptures Away therefore with your vncertaine and deceitfull traditions Our Baptisme is builded vpon a surer foundation namely the word of God THE THIRD QVESTION OF THE necessitie of Baptisme The Papists THey affirme that Baptisme is simply necessarie to saluation by Gods appointment error 100 so that all which die vnbaptized vnlesse the want of Baptisme be recompensed either by Martyrdome or penance must needes perish and be depriued of eternall life Concil Trident. sess 7. can 7. Bellarm. lib. 1. de baptism cap. 4. Argum. Iohn 3.5 Our sauiour Christ saith Vnlesse a man bee borne of water and the spirite he cannot enter into the Kingdome of GOD Ergo it is necessarie to saluation to bee baptized Bellarm. ibid. Rhemist in hunc locum Ans. First it is not necessarie by water here to vnderstand materiall water but the purifying grace of Christ which is called the water of life Iohn 4.11 Water then is here added as an Epithete of the spirite because it clenseth and purgeth as water as Iohn 7.38 He that beleeueth out of his bellie shall flowe riuers of waters of life Quid aqua sit saith Augustine euangelium interroga Inquire of the Gospell what this water is Then it followeth vers 39. This spake hee of the spirite which they that beleeued in him should receiue By water then it is no rare thing to vnderstand the spirite Secondly Why may not water bee here figuratiuely taken to expresse the working of the spirite as fire is added to the spirite Matth. 3.11 He shall baptize with the holy Ghost and with fire What greater necessitie is there in this place to vnderstand water literally then fire in the other Thirdly as you expound these wordes of Baptisme so yee doe applie another place Iohn 6.53 to the other Sacrament Vnlesse you doe eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood you shall not haue life in you If this bee spoken of the Sacramentall eating and drinking of Christ as the Rhemists take it then belike there is as great necessitie of the Eucharist as of Baptisme and so indeede Augustine sometime thought that the one was as necessarie to saluation as the other Sine Christi carne sanguine nec paruuli vitam habere possunt in semetipsis Without the flesh and blood of Christ neither can infants haue life in themselues And therefore it was the custome of those times to giue of the Sacrament to children Paruulis adhuc infirmis stillantur quaedam de sacramentis some part of the Sacrament is instilled and powred into the mouthes of young and tender children But our aduersaries in no wise will admit that the Eucharist is as necessarie as Baptisme wherefore they doe thus comment vpon our Sauiours wordes that they also doe eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his blood which ioyne in heart and desire to be partakers of the Sacrament and so mystically and spiritually doe receiue it Rhemist Iohn 6. sect 8. And why I pray you may there not be as well a mysticall and spirituall receiuing of Baptisme without the Sacrament as of the Eucharist or Lords Supper seeing this place Iohn 6.53 doth as necessarily enforce the receiuing of this Sacrament as that place Iohn 3.5 doth lay a necessitie of Baptisme The Protestants WEe acknowledge no greater necessitie in Baptisme then in the other Sacrament both which wee grant to be necessarie as helpes and proppes and profitable meanes to increase our faith but not so simplie necessarie as that without them there being no neglect or contempt had of them it were impossible to be saued Argum. 1. The children of the faithfull are holy already euen before they are baptized for they are within the couenant and to them also belongeth the promise The Lord saith I will be thy God and the God of thy seede Genes 17.7 And Saint Paul saith that the children of the faithfull are holy 1. Corinth 7.14 If the Lord then be the God also of children if they be holy being borne of the righteous seede how can they possibly perish although they die vnbaptized Argum. 2. Circumcision was as necessarie to the Israelites as Baptisme is to vs but their children which died before the eight day when they were to bee circumcised perished not for Dauid doubteth not to say of his child that died the seuenth day I shall goe to him hee cannot returne to me 1. Sam 12.18.23 He pronounceth that the child was saued Ergo neither children dying without Baptisme now are condemned Argum. 3. The holy Ghost may be giuen without Baptisme so it bee not contemned and neglected when it may be had therefore life eternall may be had without Baptisme for the holy Ghost is able without the sacrament to regenerate vs and bring vs to eternall life The first is proued Act. 10.47 Who can forbid water that these should not be baptized which haue receiued the holy Ghost as well as wee They had the holy Ghost before and without Baptisme as Augustine saith Adhuc loquente Petro non dico nondum imponente manum sed nondum baptizante venit spiritus sanctus While Peter yet spake before he laid on his hand or Baptized them the holy Ghost came Ergo Baptisme not necessarie Argum. 4. You your selues make two exceptions of Martyres and them that doe penance which may be saued without Baptisme Ergo Baptisme is not simplie necessarie And if our Sauiour speake of Baptisme Iohn 3.5 as yee say he doth there is no priuiledge for any no not for Martyres for all must bee borne of water and the spirite that is say you baptized Neither are your two exceptions generall enough for the theefe vpon the crosse was saued and yet neither died a Martyr for he himselfe confesseth that he was righteously punished Luk. 23.41 neither did he any such penance or made any such satisfaction as you require AN APPENDIX WHETHER THE want of Baptisme may bee by any other meanes supplied The Papists OVr aduersaries make three kindes of Baptisme Baptismum fluminis baptismum sanguinis baptismum flaminis error 101 the Baptisme of water the Baptisme of blood which is Martyrdome and the Baptisme of the spirite which is contrition and penance by these two the first say they may be supplied They affirme that Martyrdome and penance or contrition doe by the very act or worke wrought remit sinnes and iustifie the workers and not in respect of the faith onely which is in Martyrs or penitent persons Bellar. cap. 6. lib. 1. de baptism Argum. The Innocents which were slaine by Herod were saued onely by their Martyrdome they had neither faith nor workes So the theefe vpon the Crosse was not onely iustified by his faith but by the act and worke of contrition Ans. First it is not necessarie to hold all those children to be
Augustine Si Laicus baptismum dederit nulla cogente necessitate alieni muneris vsurpatio est If a Lay man doe baptize where there is no necessitie it is an vsurping of another mans office But there is no such necessitie to cause him so to doe Ergo. THE FIFT QVESTION OF SVCH AS are to be admitted to baptisme Of the Baptisme of Infants part 1. THat infants are to bee baptized it is fully agreed and concluded betweene vs. Which point we doe strongly maintaine by the Scriptures against the Anabaptists of our age But herein we dissent from our aduersaries The Papists error 104 1. THey affirme that the Baptisme of children and infants is grounded vpon tradition and not vpon Scripture Bellarmine lib. 4. de verbo dei cap. 9. The Protestants IT were very hard if we had no more certaine ground for the baptizing of infants then tradition which is but a feeble weapon to fight against heretikes withall we haue manifest proofes out of Scripture for it First they belong vnto the couenant Genes 17. I will bee thy God and the God of thy seede Ergo they haue right to the signe of the couenant Secondly they are called holy which are borne of faithfull parents 1. Cor. 7.14 Ergo are not to be denied Baptisme Thirdly they are redeemed by the blood of Christ who died for all the children of God Iohn 11.52 To them belongeth the kingdome of God Ergo also Baptisme which is a pledge of remission of sinnes and eternall life Fourthly it is also proued by the practise of the Apostles who baptized whole families with all that thereunto belonged Act 16.33 Fiftly Augustine also proueth it out of Scripture by comparing our Baptisme with the circumcision of the Iewes Veraciter coniâ—cere possumus quid valeat in paruulis baptismi sacramentum ex circumcisione carnis quam prior populus accepit How auailable Baptisme is in little ones we may gesse by the circumcision which the former people in the lawe receiued Ergo not onely by tradition but chiefely by Scripture the lawfulnes of childrens Baptisme is confirmed The Papists 2. BAptisme they say giueth grace and faith to the infant that had none before error 105 Rhemist Galath 3. sect 6. This then is their opinion that infants though actually fully they haue not faith as other haue yet there is a certaine habite of faith and hope infused into them in Baptisme so that partly they doe beleeue of themselues and partly by the faith of others namely of them that bring them to Baptisme Bellarm. lib. 1. de baptism cap. 11. Argum. Without faith it is impossible to please God Heb. 11.6 Rom. 3.28 We hold that a man is iustified by faith Ergo children if they haue no faith are neither iustified neither yet doe please God Bellarm. Ans. First these places doe as wel proue that children haue an absolute perfit and actuall faith for it is a perfect faith that iustifieth vs and maketh vs acceptable to God which I am sure our aduersaries will not yeeld vnto Secondly the iustification and saluation of children dependeth of the free election of God Rom. 9.11 And that which faith worketh in those that are of vnderstanding the spirit of God is able to effect in infants by some secret way best knowne to himselfe The Protestants THat infants neither haue faith in themselues nor yet are profited or furthered to their saluation by the faith of others it is thus proued Argum. 1. Saint Paul saith Faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the word of God Rom. 10.17 But infants can neither heare nor vnderstand the word of God Ergo no faith is wrought in them Argum. 2. There is no habituall or potentiall faith that pleaseth God but the iustifying faith is alwaies actuall working by loue Galath 5.6 Ergo children haue either no faith or it must needes bee an actuall or working faith Argum. 3. Infants are not iustified nor relieued or helped forward towards their saluation by the faith of their parents or Godfathers when they are baptized for the Scripture saith The iust shall liue by faith Rom. 1.17 that is by his owne faith not the faith of another Augustine denieth that children are illuminate in their mindes when they are baptized Si illuminati essent ipsum baptismum laeti susciperent cui videmus eos cum magnis fletibus reluctari If they were illuminate they would ioyfullie receiue Baptisme which we see them to striue against with great crying And why should the Apostle say Bee yee not children in vnderstanding 1. Corinth 14.20 if so be their mindes were illuminate Wherefore that saying in the Gospell saith hee This is the light that lighteth euerie one that commeth into the world Iohn 1.9 Whereby they would proue that children doe receiue light at their verie first comming into the world is thus to bee vnderstoode Quia nullus hominum illuminatur nisi lumine illo veritatis because no man is lightened but onely by that light What now is become of that lumen fidei the light of faith which you say is infused into children in Baptisme AN APPENDIX OF THE POpish vse in baptizing of Bels. The Papists error 106 THey begin now to be ashamed of the blinde practises of their superstitious and ignorant forefathers for Bellarmine flatly denieth that bels are baptized amongst them but they are onely consecrate and halowed for diuine vses as other Church vessels are lib. 4. de Roman pontific cap. 12. The Protestants IT is a great shame for them to denie so manifest a thing For in the halowing of bels first there were Godfathers chosen secondly they gaue names to the bels thirdly the bels had new garments put vpon them as is accustomed to bee done to Christians in their Baptisme Fourthly the baptizing of bels was onely permitted to the Bishops suffragane whereas their Priests and Deacons did vsually baptize infants all this sheweth that it was not onely a Baptisme which they bestowed vpon bels but in a more principall kinde then common Baptisme was This was one of the greeuances which the Princes of Germanie complained of in the assembly at Noremberge that the suffraganes exacted of the people such great summes of money for the baptizing of bels with what face then can they denie this vngodlie custome of theirs in Christening and baptizing of bels THE SIXT QVESTION OF THE effects and fruites of Baptisme THe partes of this question are these first whether our sinnes are wholly remitted and cleane taken away in Baptisme Secondly whether Baptisme serueth onely for the remission of sinnes that are past Thirdly of the liberties and priuiledges which are obtained by Baptisme which partes are now seuerally to be handled THE FIRST PART WHETHER IN BAPtisme our sinnes be cleane taken away The Papists THe sinnes which are past they affirme not onely by the grace of Christ error 107 receiued in Baptisme to be forgiuen and pardoned and no more imputed but euen wholly to be rased
person of Christ euen as his humanitie so that Christ was bread by consecration as he was man by his incarnation an horrible and monstrous opinion which is fathered vpon Rupertus the Abbot Iohannes Parisiensis also came neere this opinion who likewise affirmed that the bread was assumed to the person of Christ and vnited vnto him yet not immediatly as the other taught but by the mediation and meanes of the humanitie of Christ. Secondly of those that maintaine the conuersion of the elements First some would haue the forme onely of bread chaunged not the matter as Durandus Secondly some contrariwise would haue the matter altered and the forme to remaine Thirdly the Iesuits affirme the bread wholly in substance both in matter and forme to be changed the outward formes and accidents onely remaining ex Bellarm. lib. 3. de sacram Eucharist cap. 11. Thus men when they begin once to leaue the truth the Lord leaueth them to themselues and they runne mad in their owne inuentions not finding any end and so it is iustly come vpon them as S. Paul saith of the heathen Because when they knew God they did not glorifie him as God neither were thankfull they became vaine in their own imaginations and their foolish hart was full of darkenes when they professed themselues to be wise they became fooles Rom. 1.21.22 We therefore leauing these shalow pittes of humane inuentions which will holde no water will betake vs to the fountaine of truth This then to conclude is our definitiue sentence and full determination according to the Scriptures that Christ indeed is verily present in the Sacrament neither by conuersion of the bread into his body either wholly or in parte nor by assumption of the bread to the vnity of his person nor yet by the coniunction of his body and bread together but he doth verily exhibite himselfe with all his benefits spiritually by faith to be eaten and drunke of the worthy receiuer as we haue sufficiently proued before out of the Scriptures THE THIRD QVESTION WHETHER THE Eucharist being once consecrated be a Sacrament though it be neither eaten nor drunk The Papists THe elements in the Sacrament that is the bread and wine being once consecrate error 116 which say they is done by the prolation of those words hoc est corpus meum This is my body whether they be receiued or not at that instant but be reserued and kept in boxes and pixes and other vessels of the Church for daies weekes moneths to be caried solemnely to those that are sick and to be applyed to other vses are still the very body and blood of Christ. Trident. Concil sess 13. can 4.7 Bellarm. lib. 4. cap. 2. Argum. 1. Christs words which were spoken ouer the bread This is my body were true as soone as he brought them forth before he said Take eat and so likewise of the cup therefore it was a Sacrament before they did receiue and eate it and had beene a Sacrament still if it had not bene receiued at all at that time Bellarm. ibid. Ans. 1. Those wordes of Christ This is my body were not spoken before he brake the bread and distributed it but first as S. Math. setteth it downe he brake the bread and gaue it to his Disciples saying Take eate and then follow those words This is my body Math. 26.26 which seeme to haue bene vttered euen in that instant when they tooke the bread and began to eate it Secondly the institution of the Sacrament consisteth partly of a promise partly of a precept the promise is this Hoc est corpus meum This is my body the precept Accipite manducate Take eate Christ doth no otherwise make good his promise then we performe the condition vnlesse therefore accordingly we doe take and eat it it is not the body of Christ. The Protestants THe Eucharist is no sacrament beside or without the vse thereof so that though some form of words be pronounced ouer it if it be not receiued and eaten and drunk it is no sacrament neither is that which remaineth after the distribution the Eucharist being ended either of the bread or wine any part of the sacrament but so much onely as is taken and vsed Argum. 1. It is no Sacrament vnlesse it be vsed according to the institution as Christ hath commanded it but to the institution it belongeth on the behalfe of the Minister to blesse break and distribute it on the behalfe of the communicants to take eate and drinke it in them all thereby to shew the Lords death and to doe it in remembrance of Christ. But this cannot be performed by vsing the words of benediction onely but by the whole action for how can they shew the Lords death or doe it in remembrance of Christ vnlesse they take and eate Ergo if it be not so vsed it is no Sacrament Argum. 2. The Sacraments of the new testament are alike and of one and the selfesame kinde there is one way of instituting and consecrating both but the water in baptisme is no part of the Sacrament but during the solemne action of baptizing afterward it returneth to the common vse so much as is not vsed Ergo it is so also in the Eucharist for as Christ saith to his Apostles Ite baptizate Goe and baptize so that it was no Sacrament vnlesse some body were baptized euen so he saith Accipite â—anducate Take eate No SacrameÌ„t then vnlesse it be receiued and eaten And here I pray you let it be noted how well the Iesuits agree amongst themselues our Rhemists doe commend the reseruing also of the water in baptisme and carrying of it home to giue it the diseased to drink annot Iam. 5. sect 5. Bellar. saith that Res permanens in baptismo That the thing permanent in Baptisme that is water which remaineth is not the sacrament but ipsa actio the action of baptizing it selfe and alloweth onely the Eucharist to be reserued and remaine a Sacrament Etiam extra vsum Without the vse thereof Bellar li. 4. de Eucharist cap. 3. But we haue shewed already that both the Sacraments are halowed and sanctified alike and that both in the one and the other the vse onely and present action according to Christs institution maketh the Sacrament In Augustines time some vsed to receiue the Communion dayly but vpon the Sabboth or Lords day it was commonly receiued of all Quotidie Eucharistiae communionem percipere nec laudo nec reprehendo omnib tamen dominicis diebus communicandum suadeo et hortor Euery day to receiue the Eucharist I neither commend nor dispraise it but euery Lords day I doe perswade men and exhort all to communicate It should seeme then that in those daies there was no such superstitious reseruation of the Sacrament seeing euery day or at the least euery Sabboth it was administred THE FOVRTH QVESTION CONCERNING the elements or materiall part of the Sacrament namely bread and wine The Papists 1. The bread
this reason the preaching of the word also shal be a Sacrament Argu. 2. There was repentance and absolution of sinnes both in the olde testament for both Dauid confessed and was sory for his sinne and the Prophet Nathan pronounced forgiuenes from God 2. Sam. 12.13 so likewise Iohn preached repentance for remission of sinnes and the people came and confessed their sinnes heere were all things necessary for true repentance yet was it no Sacrament all this while as they themselues confesse which they holde to be instituted after Christs resurrection Trident. concil sess 14. cap. 1. Why then should it be rather a Sacrament now then before Augustine thus writeth Sacramentum ideo dicitur quia aliud videtur aliud intelligitur It is called a Sacrament because one thing is seene another vnderstoode And then he saith Quid tale aut ipsi vident aut alijs queunt ostendere in eo quod sacramentum poenitentiae vocant But neither doe they see or can shew to others any such visible signe in that which they call the Sacrament of repentance Heere Augustine denieth repentance to be a Sacrament because it hath no visible signe THE THIRD QVESTION WHETHER THERE be any other Sacrament of repentance beside Baptisme The Papists error 3 BAptisme serueth onely they say for remission of sinnes done before for sinnes committed after Baptisme the Sacrament of penance which is a distinct Sacrament from Baptisme is appointed for a remedy and therefore is fitly called The second table of refuge after shipwracke Concil Trident. sess 14. canon 2. Argum. S. Iohn saith If we confesse our sinnes he is faithfull to forgiue vs 1. Epist. 1.19 he saith not that by the memory of Baptisme but by confession which is a part of penance our sinnes are forgiuen Bellarm. cap. 13. The Protestants Ans. FIrst we say not that by the bare memory or remembrance of baptisme sinnes after committed are done away but that the sacramentall force of Baptisme doth extend it selfe to our whole life that is to be a seale vnto vs of remission of all our sinnes in the blood of Cbrist Secondly so that confession of our sinnes is not a taking away of the force of baptisme but a more effectual applying thereof as the people which were baptized by Iohn confessed also their sinnes Argu. We acknowledge no other Sacrament of repentance but baptisme for so the scripture calleth it The baptisme of repētance for remission of sinnes Marke 1.4 So Augustine calleth Baptisme Sacramentum fidei et poenitentiae the Sacrament of faith and repentance what neede we then seeke for a new Sacrament of repentance which cannot any where be found in Scripture THE FOVRTH QVESTION OF THE essentiall partes of Penance THE FIRST PART OF THE MATTER and forme of popish penance The Papists error 4 THe forme of this Sacrament say they consisteth in the words of absolution pronounced by the Minister the matter thereof is the contrition confession and satisfaction of the partie penitent Concil Tridentin sess 14. cap. 3. Bellarm. lib. 1. cap. 15. The Protestants NEither is their penance a Sacrament neither can these be partes of a Sacrament Argum. 1. In euery Sacrament there are two things required res terrena and actio externa the earthly thing or element as is water in Baptisme and the externall action neither doth the element alone nor the action alone make a sacrament as in baptisme there is both water which is the matter and the washing that is the action Wherefore seeing in their penance there is nothing but the action of the Minister and the action of the receiuer it can be no sacramēt Argum. 2. The partes of euery sacrament as the forme the matter must be instituted of Christ But this are they not able to shew for the forme and matter of penance namely the institution of Christ Ergo it is no sacrament THE SECOND PART OF THIS QVESTION OF the three materiall partes of popish Penance contrition confession satisfaction The Papistes THese three they say are the true and proper partes of penance contrition error 5 and painefull sorrow of the hart confession to the Priest and satisfaction to God for our sinnes Concil Trident. sess 14. can 4. Rhemist Math. 3. sect 2. Argu. Contrition is proued Psal. 51.17 A contrite hart is a sacrifice to God Confession Math. 3. They were baptized in Iordane confessing their sinnes Satisfaction Math. 11.21 They would haue repented long agoe in sackecloth and ashes Bellarm. cap. 19. Ans. 1. That godly sorrow and contrition of the hart is necessary to true repentance we neuer will deny but that this sorrow is any satisfaction to Gods iustice we abhorre it as a monstrous blasphemy Secondly Confession and acknowledgement of our sinnes vnto God and in some cases where the conscience is not satisfied to the Minister or some other faithfull man we do willingly graunt but that it is necessary to make generall confession of sinnes to the Priest that place proueth it not for Iohn had had shriuing worke enough for many yeeres to heare euery mans particular confession Thirdly that sitting in sackecloth and ashes was no satisfaction for sinne but an outward signe of true sorrow for sinne The Protestants WE doe make two partes onely of true repentance according to the scriptures that is the mortifying of the olde man with his works by dying vnto sinne vnto the which belongeth true sorrow and contrition of hart for our sinnes 2. Corinth 7.11 acknowledgement and confession thereof before God 2. Sam. 12.13 and a perfect hatred and detestation of sinne and indignation with our selues for the same 2. Corinth 7.11 The other part is the renewing and quickening of the new man in vs which consisteth partly in setting our consciences at peace with God our sinnes being forgiuen vs Rom. 5.1 and working in vs a zeale studie care and desire of newnes of life 2. Corin. 7.11 these two partes onely we finde in Scripture Argum. Isai. 1.17 Cease to doe euill Learne to doe good we must die vnto sinne and walke in newnes of life Rom. 6.4 Put off the olde man put on the new Coloss. 3.9 Augustine saith Fructus est dignus poenitentia transacta deflere peccata ea iterum non agere This is true repentance to lament for sinnes past and not to commit the same againe though this be no perfect definition of repentance yet we see that both confession and satisfaction are excluded AN APPENDIX WHETHER REpentance goe before faith The Papists error 6 THeir opinion is that repentance goeth before iustification by faith and that it is a way rather vnto faith and iustification in the remission of sinnes poenitentia est via ad remissionem peccatorum et prior iustificatione Bellarm cap. 19. Argum. Act. 2.38 Repent and be baptized in the name of Christ for the remission of sinnes Remission of sinnes followeth repentance Ergo iustification also and faith Bellarm. The Protestants Ans. FIrst this place proueth not
ground an ordinarie and perpetuall sacrament vpon an extraordinary example and that they were such visible graces of the spirite it appeareth because Simon Magu◠saw that the holy Ghost was giuen them by laying on of hands Secondly the holy Ghost was obtained by their praiers ver 15. and not by the very laying on of hands Thirdly to make a Sacrament it is not enough to haue a visible signe and to shew some spirituall grace therewith to be bestowed for then the spittle and clay that Christ vsed the napkins also and partlets which were carried to the sicke from the Apostles and they were healed presently all these should be sacraments for here are outward signes and some effect followed yet because there was no institution of a sacrament by Christ nor any commandement to vse them neither these nor the imposition of hands can be a Sacrament The Protestants WE graunt a ceremonie of imposition of hands vsed in the Apostles time and after so long as the miraculous gifts of the holy Ghost continued in the Church there is also another kinde of imposition of hands such as the Apostle speaketh of Heb. 6.2 which may haue perpetuall vse in the Church which is nothing else but a kinde of praier to be strengthened by the holy Ghost and for the encrease of grace But neither this nor the other doe we holde to be a sacrament Argum. 1. Euery sacrament must haue his appointment from Christ consisting both of an outward element and the word of institution but the popish sacrament of confirmation hath none of these the element they vse is oyle the word of consecration I signe thee with the signe of the Crosse and annoint thee with the Chrisme of health in the name of the Father the Sonne and holy Ghost but none of these haue their institution by Christ or his Apostles any where in the new testament Ergo it is no sacrament Augustine saith Manus impositio quid aliud est quà m oratio super hominem The imposition of the hands what els is it but praier ouer a man He saith not it is a Sacrament THE SECOND PART OF THE MATter and forme of Confirmation The Papists THe matter of this popish Sacrament they say is oyle mixed and tempered error 44 with balme Rhemist Act. 8. sect 6. First halowed and consecrated by the Minister thereof and striked in manner of a crosse vpon the forehead of him that is to be confirmed Bellarm. cap. 8. Argum. 2. Corinth 1.21 It is God which establisheth vs or confirmeth vs with you in Christ and hath annointed vs. Here the Apostle speaketh of confirmation and of the materiall part thereof which is holy vnction or anointing Bellarm. ibid. The Protestants Ans. FIrst the Apostle saith not Which hath confirmed but Which doth confirme which if it were meant of that external ceremony of confirmation see what iniury you offer to the Apostle that being a confirmer of others he had neede now to be catechized and confirmed himselfe Againe he speaketh not of confirmation wrought by the ministerie of men but God saith he confirmeth vs that is establisheth vs by his spirite 2. It is to too grosse to vnderstand by this anointing your greazie besmearing mens faces with your Chrisme seeing the Apostle expoundeth himselfe in the next verse He hath sealed vs and giuen the earnest of his spirite in our harts ver 22. Of this holy anointing of our harts by the spirite S. Iohn also maketh mention saying This Anointing teacheth you all things 1. epist. 2.27 But doth the anointing of the face I pray you giue men instruction Let vs heare Augustines exposition Christus sit in corde vnctio ipsius sit in corde inspiratio eius docet vnctio eius docet Let Christ be in your harts let his anointing be in your harts his inspiration is his anointing you may be ashamed therefore so grossely to abuse Scripture 3. As for your oyle therefore mixed with balme First the true balme you know is not to be had and therefore you abuse the people Secondly make the best of it you can it is but a Iewish ceremonie Thirdly your benediction of it is but a kinde of magicall inchantment seeing you haue no word of God to consecrate creatures in that sort for all things are sanctified by the word of God and praier Ergo without the warrant of God there is no such sanctifying of creatures The Papists 2. THe forme of Confirmation is in the words which are pronounced I signe thee with the signe of the crosse and confirme thee with the Chrisme of error 45 saluation or health in the name of the Father the Sonne and holy Ghost Bellarm cap. 10. The Protestants 1. THey must shew the institution of Christ out of the word for the forme of euery sacrament which they can not doe for this vnlesse they runne to their beggerly traditions which they blasphemously call the word of God vnwritten 2. Where haue they learned that men are confirmed and established with the externall anointing of oyle so said some amongst the Colossians Touch not taste not handle not to whom the Apostle answereth Which things perish with the vsing and are after the commandements of men Coloss. 2.21.22 So is this anointing with oyle a meere inuention of men and hath no longer vertue or force then in the naturall vse thereof THE THIRD PART OF THE EFFIcacie and vertue of confirmation The Papists THe holy Ghost is giuen in confirmation for force strength and corroboration against all our spirituall enemies and to stand constantly in the confession error 46 of our faith euen to death with great increase of grace Rhemist Act. 8. sect 7. And in this respect it giueth more abundant grace in strengthening of vs against the deuil then Baptisme doth Bellarm. cap. 11. The Protestants FIrst they doe offer great iniurie to the spirite of God tying him as it were to their beggerly elements which haue power as they say to conferre grace The Scripture saith The spirite bloweth where it listeth Ioh. 3. The spirite of God is free and is giuen without Sacraments as well as with them but this tradition of yours is no Sacrament if it were yet could it not conferre grace as we haue proued before Secondly they doe greatly deface the Sacrament of Baptisme making it imperfect without confirmation saying that he which is baptized shall neuer be a perfect Christian vnlesse he be confirmed with Chrisme Gerson And that it is to be reuerenced with greater reuerence then Baptisme See Fulk Act. 8. sect 7. Yea they depriue Baptisme of the proper effect and vse thereof which is a signe vnto vs of the assistance of Gods spirite to fight manfully against the Deuill for by baptisme we are buried into the death of Christ Rom. 6.3 But Christ by his death triumphed ouer the Deuill Coloss. 2.15 Ergo Baptisme is a signe of our victorie against the Deuil yet they rob Baptisme of this honor and giue it to
WOrkes done before iustification though they suffice not to saluation error 93 yet be acceptable preparatiues to the grace of iustification and such as moue God to mercie As were the almes deedes and prayer in Cornelius Act. 10. sect 5. Rhemist The Protestants Ans. COrnelius prayers and almes were not without fayth as Augustine confesseth Non sine aliqua fide donabat orabat He did not giue almes pray without some fayth And he proueth it by that saying of the Apostle Rom. 10.14 How shall they call on him in whom they haue not beleeued Seeing then Cornelius had fayth his iustification also was begun for so soone as fayth commeth it iustifieth These were not then workes preparatiue to fayth and iustification but the fruites of his fayth and iustification begun Argum. Before fayth come there can be no workes of preparation acceptable to God because Without fayth it is impossible to please God Hebr. 11.6 Augustine also sayth Ea ipsa opera ante fidem quae videntur hominibus laudabilia inania sunt those very workes which seeme to be commendable before fayth are altogether vaine and vnprofitable If they be vaine they are no preparations to fayth THE SECOND PART OF THE two kindes of iustification The Papists error 94 THere is a first iustification which is meerely of grace without workes as when an Infidel is made iust who had no acceptable workes before to be iustified by The second iustification is that wherein hee that is in Gods grace daylie proceedeth in by good workes Rhemist Rom. 2.3 This iustification and sanctification are all one Concil Trident. sess 6. cap. 7. And it is augmented and increased by the merite of worke sess 6. can 24. Argum. Of the first iustification S. Paul speaketh where he saith We are iustified by fayth without workes Rom 3.28 Of the second Saint Iames intreateth A man is iustified by workes and not of fayth onely 2.24 Rhemist Ans. This your deuice of first and second iustification is but a new deuice not yet 60. yeare olde your second iustification is nothing els but the effect fruits of iustification before God and a declaration that wee are iust before men Saint Paul and Saint Iames do speake of one and the same iustification by faith But they take the word diuersly for Saint Iames by iustifiyng meaneth nothing els but a testifiyng or declaration of our iustification before men And in this sense is the word taken Math. 11.19 Wisdome is iustified of her children that is declared to be iust The Protestants FIrst iustification and sanctification are two diuers things We are iustified by fayth onely by the imputation of the righteousnes of Christ Roman 4.7 We are sanctified when by fayth working by loue we walke in newnes of life These two are perpetually distinguished in the scriptures I meane iustification and sanctification 1. Corinth 1.30 6.11 and Galath 5.25 If wee liue in the spirite let vs walke in the spirite Our iustification is the liuing in the spirit our sanctification the walking in the spirite Secondly our workes can be no cause of the increase of our iustification and the grace of God in vs But both our iustification and sanctification are the free gifts of God For what hast thou that thou hast not receiued 1. Corint 4.7 This was the olde Pelagian heresie that the grace of God is giuen according to our workes confuted by Augustine Epistol 106. Gratia iam non erit gratia quia secundum merita datur nam merces fidei auctae erit merces coeptae Thus grace shal be no grace for it is giuen according to merite for the increase of fayth or iustice is made the hyre or wages of fayth that is begun Thirdly the scripture speaketh but of one iustification which glorification followeth Rom. 8.30 Whom he iustified them also hee glorified vnles you will haue another iustification to come after our glorificatiō Likewise Rom. 4. Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen ver 7. The iustification in remission of sinnes doth make a man blessed Ergo it is the onely sufficient iustification And Augustine accordingly sayth Donando delicta fecit se debitorem coronae by forgiuing our sinnes he hath made himselfe a debtor for the crowne or reward We see heauen is promised at the first remission of our sinnes what neede then any other iustification Wherefore it is a false and blasphemous decree in the Councel of Trent that wee are not iustified onely by remission of our sinnes sess 6. can 11. THE THIRD PART OF inherent iustice The Papists THey teach that men are not iustified by the onely imputation of the righteousnes error 95 of Christ Trid. Concil sess 6. can 11. Neither that wee are formally made iust by the righteousnes of Christ can 10. but by iustice inherent in vs whereby we are not onely reputed and accounted iust but are truely called iust and are so indeede sess 6. cap. 7. Rhemist Rom. cap. 2. sect 4. Argum. Rom. 2.13 Not the hearers of the law but the doers are iustified Ergo we are iustified by an inherent iustice Rhemist Ans. 1. Saint Paul speaketh of the iustification of the law and proueth by this argument that none could be iustified by the law because none were able to doe it And without performing of the law there was no iustification by the law what is this to the iustification of fayth 2. But if we will vnderstand it of the true iustification of Christians it must so be taken as August saith Non vt factorib iustificatio accedat sed factores legis iustificatio praecedat not that iustification doth come to the doers but that it goeth before the doers of the law The Protestants WE acknowledge an inherent iustice in all faithful men beleeuers but it is imperfect not able to iustifie them before God it is no other then sanctification which is a fruit of iustification But that iustice whereby we are iust before God not falsely accounted but made truly iust by God is by the righteousnes of Christ onely which we apprehend by fayth Argum. That iustice whereby we haue peace with God is the only iustice whereby we are iustified before God for vntil we are cleared and made iust before God it is impossible to haue peace with him But this is onely the iustice of faith Rom. 5.1 Ergo by this iustice onely are we iust before God August hath a good speech Si dixerimus quod nihil iustitiae habemus aduersum Dei dona mētimur si enim iustitiae nihil habemus nec fidem habemus si autem fidem habemus iam aliquid habemus iustitiae If we say we haue no iustice at all in vs we do belye the good gifts of God for if we haue no iustice we haue no faith But if we haue faith then haue we some iustice in vs. Here Augustine acknowledgeth no inherent iustice but onely the iustice of fayth THE FOVRTH PART OF
one place for it is as proper to the bodie of Christ to be seene and felt as to be in one place at once 4. Bellarmine granteth being vrged with that argument that Christs soule was in Paradise after his passion and therefore not in hell he confesseth that it was not impossible that Christs soule should be in two places at once Lib. 4. de Christi anima cap. 15. Yea he sayth that Christ may if he will turne al the world into bread and the bread so made conuert into his flesh and so his bodie may be as well in euery place of the world as now it is in the Eucharist Lib. 3. de incarnat cap. 11. What great oddes now I pray you is there between the opinion of the Vbiquitaries and of the Papists but that they say that the bodie of Christ is euery where ordinarily by the power of the Godhead the other say his flesh is in many places at once by a miracle The one sayth Christs bodie actually is in euery place the other that it may be if Christ will THE SECOND PART WHETHER OVR SAVIOVR Christ did verily encrease in knowledge and wisedome as he was man The Papists CHrist they say in the very first creation of his soule and from his conception error 98 was endued with the fulnes of al wisedome grace and knowledge neither can he be sayd properly to haue encreased in any of these gifts 1. Christ was anoynted from his mothers womb and then the spirit of God was vpon him for the Angels that appeared to the shepheards call him Christ Luk. 2.11 And Iohn sayth The word was made flesh full of grace and truth 1. vers 11. Therefore euen then he had receiued all abundance of grace and knowledge Bellarm. de Christi anima lib. 4.2 Ans. 1. We grant that our Sauiour was the Iesus the Christ euen from his natiuitie not that thē he actually straightwaies entred into those offices or receiued plenarie power of all the graces of the spirit but because he was euen from his mothers wombe consecrated and appoynted thereunto for it no more followeth because he is called Christ that he then had his actuall anoynting then that because he was called Iesus from his natiuitie that he had actually performed our redemption The full anoynting of the spirit was fulfilled in his baptisme when the holy Ghost came downe in the likenes of a Doue and then beginning to preach in his first sermon at Nazareth he sheweth the accomplishment of the prophecie of Esay The spirite of the Lord is vpon me c. Luk. 4.18 2. Neither doe the words of Iohn import so much as they gather The word was made flesh and dwelt amongst vs full of grace and truth which is not to be vnderstood of the very first assuming of the flesh but of the dwelling of the word in the flesh amongst vs and so appeared to be full of grace and truth Argum. 2. Christ was the Sonne of God in his very incarnation and euen then was the humanitie perfectly vnited to the Godhead therefore immediatly vpon this vnion and coniunction of both natures in one person must needes follow the fulnes of grace in the humane nature Againe Adam was created in perfect wisedome therefore much more the second Adam Bellar. cap. 4. Ans. 1. If presently vpon the vniting of the two natures together it had been necessarie that the humane nature of Christ should haue receiued whatsoeuer by the presence of the diuine nature was to be conferred vpon it then Christ straight waies must also both in bodie and soule haue been glorified for it can not be denied but that as the bodie of Christ after the resurrection receiued more glorie then before so also his soule being the other part of his humanitie was more glorified By this it is euident that the humanitie receiued not at once the fulnes of all grace and glorie in the first vniting of the Godhead 2. Adam was created perfect in bodie and soule and if Christ therefore ought to haue the fulnes of the gifts of the soule in his creation as Adam had why ought he not also to haue had a perfect bodie as Adam was created withall Wherefore as it was no dishonour to Christ to grow vp in stature of bodie so neither was it to encrease in the gifts of the mind The Protestants THat Christ was euen from his birth and first conception perfect God and perfect man we doe assuredly beleeue and that in the very incarnation the diuine and humane nature were vnited together Also we graunt that the Lord Christ might haue created to himselfe a soule full of all wisedome and knowledge as he might haue made himselfe a perfect bodie but seeing it pleased him to bee borne of a woman and first to dwell in the bodie of an infant wee doubt not to say as the scripture teacheth vs that he also Encreased in wisedome 1. He was in all things like to his brethren onely sinne excepted Heb. 2.17.4.15 Ergo he grew vp and encreased in knowledge according to the manner of men which may be done without sinne 2. The scripture sayth plainly which cannot lye that Iesus grew vp and encreased in wisedome and stature Luk. 2.52 And lest they should answere that this encreasing was onely in the opinion of men it followeth And in fauour with God and men he increased in wisedome stature and fauour not onely in shew before men but in truth before God and as verily and indeed he grew vp in stature so also in wisedome 3. Christ testifieth of himselfe That neither the Angels nor the Sonne of man as he is man knoweth of the day or houre of his comming to iudgement but the father onely Mark 13.31 Ergo Christ as hee was man had not at once all fulnes of knowledge Bellarmine thus expoundeth this place Filius dicitur nescire quia non sciebat ad dicendum alijs The Sonne is sayd not to knowe because he knewe it not to reueale it to others but to keepe it secret to himselfe Ans. First then by the same reason the Angels doe knowe it also but that they are charged not to declare it to men for the text sayth that neither the Angels nor the Sonne of man knoweth the time Secondly in this sense also the father might be sayd not to knowe it for neither hath he reuealed it to any Lastly although we doe affirme according to the scripture that the child Iesus did increase in the gifts of the mind as he did in the stature of his bodie yet we do put great difference between him and all other children that euer came into the world for as his conception birth were not after the cōmon manner for he was cōceiued by the holy Ghost brought forth without trauel and labour as August sayth Nec concipiendo libidinē nec pariendo perpessa est dolorē In conceauing she felt no carnal desire in bearing she suffered no payne So likewise