Secondlie he speaketh of the fourth daies or Wednesdaies fast to be appointed by the tradition of the Apostles which yet neuerthelesse the Romish Church doth not obserue Thirdlie that the Pente cosse or fiftie daies by the tradition of Apostles are exempted from the Fridaie fast which tradition is not kept in the Popes Church except you will saie that Pentecost is taken for whitson weeke and then the custome of the PopishChurch is directlie contrarie to the tradition of the Apostles for Wednesdaie and Fridaie that weeke are 〈◊〉 daies And as for the Wednesdaie fast as well as the Fridaie Epiphanius is so earnest that he addeth further Deinde verò st non de eodem argumento quartarum Prosabbatorum ijdem Apostoli in constitutione dixissent etiamaliter vndique demonstrare possemus Attamen de hoc exactè scribunt Assumpsit autem ecclesta in toto mundo assensus factus est c. And moreouer if the same Apostles in their constitutions had not spoken of the same argument of wednesdaies Fridaies we could otherwise throughly make proofe of it But they write exactly ofit and the Church hath taken it vp assent hath bin geuen in al the world You see he alledgeth not onely a decree of the Apostles but also the consent of all the world for the wednesdaie fast as well as the Fridaie fast So that if the Apostles tradition beside the scripture be necessarie for lent whie is it not also for wednesdaies fast And if wednesdaies faste is not necessarie no more is lent fast Further you affirme that Dionystus and Tertullian saie that praiers and oblations for the dead are traditions of the Apostles De Eccles. hier c. 7. de corona milit but Dionystus al beit we do not acknowledge him for a man of such antiquitie as the papists would obtrude him yet hath not any mention of traditions of the Apostles in that Chap ter touching praier for the dead but either of tradition in scripture orels at large endeuoring to prooue that he saith by scripture Tertullian in the place quoted speaketh onelie of oblations for the dead in that yearelie day which maie signifie thanksgiuing as pro nataliliis for their birth doth in in the verie same clause Not denying yet but Tertullian when he forsooke the Church and became a Montanist yealed to praier for the dead as a thing reuealed by the spirit aud new prophecie of Montanus Last of all you saie Saint Basill teacheth that the consecration of the fant before baptisme the exorcisme vpon those that are to be baptized their anointing with holie chrisme and diuerse like thinges are deliuered to vs by prescript of Christ and his Apostles lib. de spi. 5. cap. 27. Of consecration or blessing of the water to the holie vse of baptisme of those that are to be baptized there neede no tradition to be alledged the scripture is sufficient in the institution of baptisme whereby both the water and the perfon are dedicated to God aud his holie worke of regeneration The anointing with chrisme seemeth at the first to haue beene the signe of the giftes of the holie Ghost which were wont to be graunted with baptisme which though it had beene vfed by the Apostles in baptisme yet that particular grace being ceased which to signifie it was vsed it hath no longer anie profitable vse in the Church As for exorcisme vpon those that are to be baptized Is is your owne addition for Saint Basill hath it not But where you saie he hath diuers like thinges as deliuered by traditian it is verie true and among them this sor example that it is necessarie for the children of the Church to praie standing on the Lords daie But this necessitie euen in the popish Church is notacknowledged therefore whatsoeuer he saieth is a tradition of the Apostles is necessarieto be kept of all Christians although all the Church in his time beleeued it as that which Epiphanius reporteth of the wednesdaies fast before spoken of You demaund vpon what ground you shall discredit or reiect these traditions deliuered by such fathers cheife Doctors and pillers of the Church Euen by the same ground that you giue ouer other traditions deliuered by the same persones either because they are not true traditions or els because they are not necessarie for the Church albelt they were deliuered as no doubt some ceremoniall matters were euen by the Apostles them selues Your other reasons are friuolous That they were neerer the Apostles then we For the neerest and moste immediat successours to the Apostles Policarpus and Anicetus could not agree vpon the tradition of the Apostles one of them building vpon Iohn the other vpon Peter as is testified by Eusebius out of Irenaeus in the place before cited An other reason is that they were honest men and would not deceiue vs willinglie And so much we acknowledge yet might they be deceiued in ascribing the common practise of their time to Apostolike tradition and so deceiue vs vnwittinglie nor be controlled because the custome generall acceptation of that ceremonie restreined men Which things considered it is a great iniquitie as Master Charke saieth to adde traditions to the written word of God as if of it selfe it were not sufficient to instruct the Church in all thinges necessarie to saluation That which followeth of Doctor Fulkes handling the olde Fathers about traditions is answered by himselfe in his confutation of popish quarrells from pag. 55. to pag 61. After this you cite foure seuer all Doctors in defence of traditions vnwritten whereunto as some of auncient writers were too much inclined so haue you not so sure ground out of them for your popish traditions as you purpose And to beginne with Basill who by Apostolike traditiō defendeth the custome of the Church which was to sing Glorie be to the Father and to the sonne with the holie Ghost whereas the heretikes would haue it in the holie Ghost and cauilled that the other forme was not in the scriptures Saint Basil mainteineth it as agreeable to the scriptures by authoritie of auncient tradition although it were not expressed in so manie wordes in the scriptures as manie other thinges are which haue like force vnto pietie with those that are dilinered in expresse wordes as for example he alledgeth the confession of the faith in the 〈◊〉 which no man doubteth to be sufficientlie tanght in the scriptures although the verie wordes of our creed are not expressed in such for me As we rehearse our creede I omit 〈◊〉 things saieth he the verie confession of faith in which we beleeue in the father the sonne the holie Ghost in what scripture haue we it Againe And if they doe reiect the manner of glorifying of god as not written let them bring forth demonstration in writing of the confession of faith of other things that we rehearse By which it is manifest that the traditions he speaketh of are of two sortes the one
fastidia detergeret Nihil enim fere de illis obscuritatibus eruitur quod non planissimè dictum alibi reperiatur The holie ghost hath magnifically and wholsomlie so tempered the holy scriptures that with euident places he might satisfie hunger and with more darke places might wipe awaie disdainfulnes For nothing almoste is found out of those obscurities which is not found els where most plainlie vttered It were no hard matter to heape vp manie testimonies of the auncient fathers to this purpose but that the va nitie of this answerer appeereth sufficientlie in all our bookes written against the papists in which not onely by the manifest places of the scriptures but also by most euident testimonies of the doctors of the church we confute them in the most and greatest matters of controuersie that ate betweene vs. But what saith our gallant answerer that the councels fathers and anciters of theChurch haue from time to timedeclared the true sense of the scriptures vnto vs hath none of these at any time erred in expounding the scriptures may we safely beleeue them whatsoeuer they say He wil I warrant you deny it except the Pope of Rome do alow their interpretations And therfore this flying from the only scriptures to the interpretation of Coun cels fathers ancetors of the Church is nothing els but an impudent shift to reserue vnto the Pope liberty authority to make what meaning of scripture they please thereby to giue colour to euery fansie they list to father it vpon the authority of the holie scriptures The third cause he affirmeth to be that by chalenging of onely scripture they maie deliuer themselues from all ordinan ces or doctrines left vnto vs by the first pillers of Christs Church though not expressely set down in the scripture c. In deede to deliuer our selues from the burthen of mens traditions the ordinances or doctrines of men we affirme the holie scriptures to be hable and sufficient to make vs wise vnto saluation by faith in Iesus Christ as the Apostles and principall pillers of the Church haue taught vs who haue left no such ordinances or doctrines but they be either expressely set down in the holy scriptures or by plaine and necessarie collection to be gathered out of the same For how will our aduersaries prooue that anie thing is receaued from the Apostles which hath not testimonie out of the writings of the Apostles who can be a sufficient witnes of such de liuerie seeing manie things were of olde referred to the Apostles tradition which euen our aduersaries do not admit to be Apostolical seeing the most auncient and immediate successors of the Apostles as Polyearpus Anicetus can not agree about a ceremony receaued from the Apostles namelie the celebration of Easter what certentie can there be of anie other ordinances or doctines fathered vpon the Apostles without witnes of their writings yea and some times directlie contrarie and repugnant to their writings But hereof saith our aduersarie they assume authoritie of allowing or not allowing whatsoeuer liketh or serueth their turnes for the time and hereof he bringeth example First of the number of sacraments whereof some protestants haue written diuerslie because the name of sacrament is diuerslie taken sometimes largelie for euerie holie signe sometimes strictlie for such holie signes onely as being instituted of God are seales of the dispensation of his generall grace in the new teftament perteining to euerie member of the Church somtimes for al holy mysteries or secrets c. But what doth it serue anie protestants turne whether there be more or fewer signes in number that maie be called sacraments seeing all protestants agree about the things themselues that are set forth in the scriptures to be visible signes of grace inuisible and the name it selfe Sacrament in that sense we speake of when we saie there are 2. 3. 4. or 7. sacraments is not once vsed This diuersitie therefore is but of a terme and that not vsed in scripture therefore it ariseth not of anie interpretation or peruerse vnderstanding of the scripture as our answerer would haue it seeme to be But let vs heare his example Martin Luther saith he after he had denied all testimonie of man besides himselfe he beginneth thus about the number of sacraments Principiò neganda mihisunt septem sacramenta tantúm tria pro tempore ponenda First of all I must denie seauen sacraments and appoint three for the time Marie this time lasted not long for in the same place he saith that if he would speake according to the vse of onely scripture he hath but one sacrament for vs that is baptisme In this sentence how manie lies and slaunders be packed together First he saith Martin Luther denieth all testimonie of man which is false for he alloweth all testimonie of man that agreeth with the testimonie of God expressed in the scriptures and often citeth the testimonies of the auncient fathers for confirmation of the trueth which he taught indeede he alloweth man no authoritie to institute sacraments or to make articles of faith or lawes to binde the conscience of man and he would haue all mans testimonies to be examined and iudged according to the word of God but this is not to denie all testimonie of man but to distinguish true testimonies of man from false An other slaunder is where he saith that Luther in denying all mans testimonie excepteth him selfe which is altogether vntrue For he requireth none other credit to be giuen to his owne testimonie then he alloweth to the testimonie of other Neither doth he arrogate any authoritie to him selfe which he derogateth from other men And namelie in this booke of the captiuitie of Babilon he taketh not vpon him absolutelie to teach euerie point but so farr forth as he did for the present vnderstand of them promising after greater study more diligent inquirie to intreat of diuers of them more certenly euen in this verie place of the number of the sacraments he saith he will admit three onclie for the present time intending to be further a duised whether there be fewer or more to be entituled with that name Wherein our answerer offereth him the third iniurie in translating tria pro tempore ponenda I must appoint three for the time as though Luther had taken vpon him to appoint how manie sacraments the Church should haue or would challenge power to appoint more or Jesse at his pleasure where as his wordes if the answerer did not wilfullie corrupt them by false translation do import no such thing but onelie as farr as he did presentlie see there were no more but three of those that were commonlie called sacraments of the new testament which were rightlie to be called by that name The fourth slaunder is that Luther hath but one sacrament for vs which is Baptisme if he would speake according to the vse of onelie scripture yea this is a double slaunder for neither doth
the scriptures of the authoritie of councels auncient fathers traditions of the Apostles and primitiue Church they binde them selues to nothing but to the present Popes authoritie and determi nation in thinges which he may choppe and chaunge at his pleasure against which they admitte neither scripture Councell Fathers nor Church For example brieflie The scripture moste plainlie forbiddeh the worshipping of Images will they giue soueraigne authoritie to the scriptures All the primitiue Church for six hundred yeares after Christ condemned the worshipping of Images euen Pope Gregorie that allowed the vse of them shall the authoritie of the primatiue Church or of Pope Gregorie in this point ouerrule them No I warrant you they will set them al to schoole and learne them a new lesson Theodoretus Bishop of Cyrus and Gelasius Bishop of Rome doe in plaine wordes affirme that the substance of bread and wine doth remaine in the Lordes supper after consecration doth either the antiquitie of these fathers or the determination of the Bishop of Rome which otherwise they affirme neuer to erre in doctrine preuaile with them against their new here sie of transsubstantiation The councells of Constantiople the first and of Chalcedon decreed that the Bishop of Constantinople should haue equall authoritie and dignitie with the Bishop of Rome The councells of Constans and Basill determined that the Councell is aboue the Pope The councels of Constantinople the sixt and Nice the second condemned the Pope for an heretike will the Papists of these daies trow you stand to the determination of these Councells you maie be assured they will not But the traditions of the Apostles they holde fast and binde them-selues vnto yea verilie as long and as much as they list What beareth a greater shew of the Apostles traditions then the Canons of the Apostles which excommunicate a Bishop priest or deacon that putteth away his wiffe vnder pretence of religion which excommunicate anie of the cleargie that is present at the communion doth not communicate except he shewe a cause whie he doth not Which admmitted him that is maimed in his eie or other partes of his bodie being otherwise worthie vnto the office of a Bishop because the maime of the bodie doth not pollute a man but the filthines of the soules These such like traditions of the Apostles how are they regarded of our Traditioners euen as much as they list and that is neuer a whit at this time and yet these men binde them selues to Councells Fathers traditions primitiue Church you see how farre Yea you see that while they raile vpon vs for appealing to onelie scriptures they themselues relie vpon the present Popes authoritie onelie Let all indifferent men therefore iudge whether it be more safe for a Christian man to bind him-selfe to the authoritie of scriptures onelie or to the Popes authoritie onelie and whether claime a priuiledge of ease they that will admitte no testimonie irrefragable but onelie the scripture or they which chattering of many other things in the end conclude vpon the Church onelie which when it commeth to triall is nothing els but the Pope onelie for if all the Church saie it and the Pope denie it it is nothing worth with them and if the Pope affirme it thoughe all the Church denie it it must stand for paiment But seeing the sense and interpretation of scripture is the cheefe matter we haue to speake of let vs consider whether Master Charke be iustlie charged by our answerer to haue abused that scripture by interpretation which is the chiefe ground of his preface and which he saith is a full and plaine rule whereby to discerne and trie the spirites namelie the text of Saint Iohn 1. Iohn 4. Euerie spirite which confesseth Iesus Christ being come in the flesh is of God and euerie spirite which confesseth not Iesus Christ being come in the flesh is not of God and this is that spirit of Antichrist c. This text Master Charke doth so expound as that it conteineth a confession not onelie of the person of Christ but also of his office for which office sake that wonderfull person of God and man Iesus Christ was ordeined and sent into the world to be a Prophet alone to teach a King alone to rule a Priest alone to sanctifie vs and to reconcile vs to his father by the obedience of faith And if any spiritte shall teach that Christ is not our onelie teacher by his Gospell but that we must admitte vnwritten beleefe and traditions from we know not whome to be of like authoritie with the written worde Secondlie if any spirite make not Christ alone our King and head to rule vs by his holie spirite but teach that a mortal and sinfull man must sit in our consciences and for hatred or gaine which is his practise binde or loose at his pleasure lastlie if anie spirite impeach the all-sufficiencie and entire vertue of Christes sacrifice offered vp once for euer and teach that themselues must enforce it from day to day by the continuance of their daylie sacrifice of the Masse offered for the quick and the deade it appeareth manifestlie that such spirits are not of God c. This interpretation of Master Charke saith the answerer conteineth manie absurdities For first the auncient fathers did expound this place as of it selfe it is moste euident against the Iewes which denied Christ to haue taken flesh also against Ebion Cerinthus and other heretikes that denied the Godhead of Christ. Note here by the aduersaries confession that some places of scripture are of them selues moste euident whereof this is one against the Iewes other heretikes that deny the godhead of Christ. And I hope you shall see it shortly as euident against the Papists that denie his offices To this interpretation of the auncient fathers we agree that whosoeuer denieth the person of Christ or any thing proper to his person is of Antichrist But none of the auncient fathers doe affirme that this text is to be vnderstood against such enemies onelie as denie the Godhead or manhoode of Christ. For Augustine and Oecumenius do interpret it against all heretikes and schismatikes which although they confesse this matter in wordes yet denie it in deedes and Oecumenius against all wicked persons which haue not the spirite of Christ mortifying their vngodlie lustes which carie not the mortification of Christ in their bodie c. Augustine also expoundeth the place against all that breake charitie Omnes negant Iesum Christum in carne venisse qui violant charitatem All they denie Iesus Christe to haue come in the flesh which doe breake or violate charitie whie so because not onelie the person that came but the end whie he came must be considered in the interpretation of this place as Saint Augustine rightlie iudgeth or els all heretikes will after a manner in tongue and wordes confesse that Iesus Christ came in the flesh But Quaeramus saith
their aduetsaries it is well knowne that Master Charke and the ministers of the Church are none such neither haue they anie such authoritie It remaineth then that he accounteth the Prince her councell magistrates and ministers of Iustice his aduersaries who indeede haue good cause so to be not onelie in respect of their heresyes but also in regard of their manifolde and almoste infinite practises of treason against the Prince and realme for which some of them haue suffered moste iustlie and not for offering of disputation as this traiterous heretike euerie where moste slaunderouslie doth avowe But nowe for their partes he saith they offere the best surest and easiest meanes that can be deuised or that haue bene vsed in Gods Churches for triall and they are manie in number The first is the bookes of Scripture receiued vpon the credit of the auncient Church of which we are content saith he to accept for canonicall and allowe all those and none other which antiquitie in Christendome hath agreed vpon But this is false for to omit that they receiue for canonicall such as the Church of God before Christ neuer receiued they receiue also such as the greatest and best antiquitie in Christendome receiued not as the Church in Origens time witnesse Eusebius more then the Church of Rome receiued in Saint Ieromes witnesse Ierome himselfe prologo Galeato and Ruffinus in Expossymb more then the Councell of Laodicea did receiue for canonicall as is manifest by the 59. canon The second way of trial is the expresse plaine words of Scripture wherein they must needs be farre superior for what one expresse plaine text haue they saith he in anie one point or article against vs which we doe not acknowledge liberallie as they doe and as the wordes doe lie yes we haue manie but a fewe shal serue for example God saith Exod. 20. Thou shalt not make to thy selse anie grauen image c. thou shalt not fall down to thē nor worship them Againe Matt. 4. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onelie shalt thou serue Which are moste plaine expresse and manifest against worshipping of Images and other creatures in anie vse of Religion Christ saith drinke ye all of this they be expresse and manifest wordes against the popish sacriledge of the cuppe The 14. to the Corinthians the first Epistle is expresse and plaine against publike praiers homilies lessons in a straunge vnknowne tongue 1. Tim. 4. in expresse and plaine wordes the spirite pronunceth the forbidding of marriage and meates to be the doctrine of deuilles And Heb. 13. Mariage is honourable in all men And 1. Tim. 3. Tit. 1. a Bishop Elder or Deacon must be the husband of one wife beside a great number more But the papists saith our answerer haue infinit texts against vs which we cannot admit without glosses and fond interpretations of our owne A bolde speach as alwaies he vseth but it shall alwaies be founde that if we doe in anie text departe from the grammaticall sense there is necessarie cause why as if it be a figuratiue spcach which is tried either by circumstances of the same place or by other texts of scriptures for the most parte hath the iudgement of the most auncient writers agreing with our interpretation But the most of these examples he bringeth haue nothing in shewe that the expresle wordes of scripture are with them or against vs but by their fonde false vnreasonable collections and such as they can neuer conclude in lawful true syllogismes as for example We haue it saith he for the supremacie expresselie saide to Peter that signifieth arocke vpon this rock will I builde my Church We answere that we might followe the interpretation of the most auncient and approoued fathers that the rocke here spoken of is Christ whom Peter confessed but graunting them that they could neuer euict we confesse that the Church is builded vpon the foundation of Peter the Apostle but not vpon him alone or more principallie then vpon all the Apostles who are all rockes or stones vpon whose foundation as also vpon the foundation of the Prophets the Church of Christ is builded Neither is it possible to prooue the supremacie of the Pope out of those wordes of scripture or anie other But they haue further expresselie touching the Apostles he that is great among you let him be as the younger Luk. 22. We haue no where there is none greater then other among you Neither do we holde that none ought to be greater then other among vs but that the greatest among the ministers ought to be seruant of all the rest and that none ought to exercise Dominion ouer the Lordes inheritaunce yet the primacie of order we graunt euen among the Apostles according to which Iames was president of the Councell at Ierusalem Peter the cheife Aposlle of the circumcision Paull of the gentiles all which will not serue one whit to maintaine the popish tiranny For Paul was nothing inferiour to the highest Apostles But for the reall presence they haue expreslie This is my bodie we haue no where this is the signe of my bodie Neither doe we denie the sacrament to be the bodie of Christ neither doe we affirme that it is a bare signe But that this is a figuratiue speach we haue expreslie This cuppe is the newe Testament in my blood and as expreslie the Apostle speaking of the same sacrament the rocke was Christ which prooueth that it must be vnderstoode in a sigue and after a spirituall manner and so doe al the olde Doctors interpretit as hath beene often shewed We haue expreslie saith he The bread that I will giue you is my flesh Iohn 6. they haue nowhere It is but the signe of my flesh And we confesse as much for we neuer saide that the signe of Christs flesh was crucified for vs but his verie naturall bodie which he promiseth in that text to giue for the life of the world which by faith and the spirit of God is made the spirituall foode of all the elect children of God and without eating of which none can be saued Ioh. 6. 53. But they haue expresly A man is iustified by works and not by faith onelie Iames. 2. we haue no where a man is iustified by faith alone no nor that he is iustified by faith without workes talking of workes that followe faith First we confesse the text that a man is iustified by workes As Abraham was when he offered his sonne and as Rahab was when she receiued the spies that is a man is declared to be iust in the sight of men For Abraham was iustified before God by faith before he offered his sonne whome God did not trie to enforme himselfe but to declare vnto men by the fruites of obedience that Abraham was a iust man euen so by faith the harlot Rahab perished not with the vnbeleeuers when the receiued the spies in peace but by receiuing
them peaceablie she was declared to be iust or iustified in the sight of men Therefore there are two kindes of iustification the one by faith before god the other by works before men therefore a man is not iustified by faith only but by works also which saying of S. Iamesis not repugnant to that we holde that a man is iustified before god sola fide by faith alone or by faith without the workes of the lawe as S. Paule saieth which is alone which comprehendeth al good works as also the examples of Abraham and Dauid in the 4. Chapter to the Romanes doc plainelie declare where the Apostle speaketh expreslely of circumcisiō which was a worke of obedience following the faith of Abraham And Dauid pronounceth the blessednes of a man to whome the Lord imputeth righteousnes without workes which must needes be vnderstood euen of workes following faith because Dauid speaketh of himselfe and of all men generallie that shall obtaine blessednes by the grace of god without merite of workes For to him that worketh reward is not imputed according to grace but according to debt Againe the Apostle writing to the Galathians which were faithful speaketh generally It is manifest that by the lawe no man is iustified before god for the iust shal liue by faith By which texts many more the conclusion is moste necessarie that before God workes following faith doe not iuslifie but faith alone without workes yet not a dead but a liuing faith which worketh by loue Further he saith they haue expresselie for absolution whose sinnes ye forgiue are forgiuen whose sinnes ye retaine are retained Iohn 20. but we haue no where that Priests cannot forgiue or retaine sinnes in earth But the controuersie is not whether the Ministers of God haue power to forgiue or retaine sinnes for we beleeue that they haue such power but whether absolute power properlie to forgiue sinnes and how the same is to be exercised is the question For we beleeue that God onelie hath power absolutelie properlie to remit sinnes according to the scripture man by declaring Gods will pleasure Yet againe they haue expresselie The doers of the lawe shall be iustified Rom. 2. And we saie euen as much but because none is found a doer of the lawe we saie with the same Apostle that it is manifest that no man is iustified before God by the lawe But our answerer inferreth moreouer that we haue no where that the law required at Christians hands is impossible or that the doing therof iustifieth not Christians yes we haue it expressely That which was impossible of the law in as much as it was weake by the flesh God sending his sonne in the similitude of sinfull flesh c. If there had beene a lawe giuen that had bene able to giue life righteousnes in deede had bene of the lawe but the scripture hath concluded all vnder sinne that the promis by the faith of Iesus Christ might be giuen to them that belecue Againe by the workes of the lawe no flesh shal be iustified before him therefore no Christians by the workes of the lawe shal be iustified before him Moreouer we are saued by grace through faith not of workes Ergo Christians for none els are saued are iustified through faith without workes Yet againe they haue expresselie Psal. 75. Vowe ye and render your vowes we haut no where vowe ye not or if you haue vowed breake your vowes we confesse the Prophet willeth the people to vowe yet he meaneth onelie thinges lawfull and in their power to performe we bid no man to breake his vowe if it be lawful and possible but if he haue vowed to goe a pilgrimage which is Idolatrie or to liue vnmaried which is not able to liue continentlie we exhort him to repent of his wicked or vnaduised vowe to serue God as he hath appointed or to vse the remedie that God hath prouided They haue againe expreslie Keepe the traditions which ye haue learned either by worde or epistle 2. Thess. 2. we haue no where the Apostles left noe traditions to the Church vnwritten Saint Paull willeth the Thessalonians to keepe the traditions or doctrine which he had deliuered vnto them either by word of mouth or by his epistle This prooueth not that the Apostles left any traditions which are no where written in the holie scripture because they were not all written in the epistle of Saint Paul to the Thessalonians But we haue expresselie that the holie scriptures are able to make vs wise to saluation to make the man of God perfect and prepared to all good works which things seing we haue fufficientlie in the holie scriptures we neither regard nor receiue any other doctrine vnder name of tradition of the Apo stles or of Angels from heauen Still they haue expresselie If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commaundements and when he said he did that already if thou wilt be perfect go sel all thou hast giue to the poore follow me And we haue no where that either the commaundements of God cannot be kept or that we are not bound vnto them or that there is no degree of life one perfecter then another We graunt that who so by good deeds will seeke to enter into life as that yong man did must doe the deedes of the commaundements which if he can doe he shal liue by them but albeit he boasted that he had kept the commaundements yet it followeth not that he did keepe them indeede and as god required but was a blinde hipocrite and sought to iustifie him-selfe according to the heresie of the Pharisies That we are not bound to keepe the commaundements as neere as God will giue vs grace is no article of ours but a slaunder of his Finallie we denie that anie mortall mans life is perfect yet we graunt that some mens liues come neerer to perfection then other some Neither doth our Sauiours words include perfection in selling his goodes nor in giuing them to the poore for if a man bestowe all his goodes to feede the poore and haue not loue he is nothing but he addeth that he must followe Christ and take vp his crosse and so by Christs grace he shal attaine vnto perfection which he falselie imagined that he he had obtained by a pharizaical obseruation of the lawe this fauoreth not Monkes and friers more then hipocrites and liers Beside this They haue expresselie worke your owne saluation with feare and tremhling Phil. 2. we haue no where either that a man can worke nothing toward his owne saluation being holpen with the grace of God or that a man should make it of his beliefe that he shall be saued without all doubt or feare The saying of Saint Paull we acknowledge that men should worke out their owne saluation with feare and trembling together with the next verse following for it is God that worketh in
some fault the other for sawe the seedes of superstition and Idolatrie then in sowing better then he yet are not Saint Paul Barnabas Ierome hereby noted for heretikes But for railing saie you and foule scurrilitie such as Protestants vse ordinarilie against vs and among them selues when they dissent I dare auow to be proper to them and their ancetora onelie All this while you tell vs not what you call railing and foule scurrilitie except you meane that the verie same odious termes which are lawfull or tollerable in you be railing and foule scurrilitie in vs onelie because you accompt vs heretikes and then we must accompt you to be trifling sophisters which to conuince vs of railing can bring none other arguments but that which is the wholl matter in contro uersie betweene vs namelie whether we or you be the heretikes and yet you dare auow railing foule scurrility such as Protestantes vse against you not onelie to agree to vs but also to be proper to vs our ancetors by whom you vn derstand none but heretiks Othe modesty of Papistes among whome no one person can be found that euer vsed railing or scurrilitie if this be true that you dare auow of the propertie of heretikes and of all them whome you take for such But it is good to examine your reason by which you would prooue railing to be proper vnto gospellers as you terme them and thereby easilie take a scantling of the diuersitie of their spirits from Popish Catholikes First the mouth speaketh according to the aboundance of the heart which is trew in such sense as it is spoken of by our Sauiour Christ for wickednesse is first bred in the heart before it breake forth of the mouth but it followeth not thereof that you conclude when you saie I meane a man maie be knowne by his speach for then the wickednes of euerie hypocrite might appeare by his talke which is vntrue But Saint Peter said vnto Simon Magus vpon his onelie speech saie you I see thee to be in the verie gall of bitternes c. yet was it no railing speech which Simon Magus vttered nor dissembled speech for he plainlie professed that he was desirous to buie the gift of the holie ghost and last of al it was not onelie speach for the text saith he offered mony for his march andise for otherwise his onelie words as they are reported by Saint Luke were not sufficient to discouer so great wickednes of his heart giue vnto me also this power that vpon whomsoeuer I laie my handes he maie receiue the holie ghost it might haue bene thought vpon this onelie speech that Simon latelie baptized was desirous to haue beene a Minister of the dispensation of the holie ghost to the benefit of gods Church by the graunt of the Apostles if he had not profered monie also by which his couetousnes and other wicked blasphemous opinions of the holie ghost were plainlie discouered You shew your selfe therefore to be a man mightie in the scriptures that can bring no better example or proofe that one by his onelie speech sometime maie be sufficientlie conuicted of the wickednes of his hart then this of Peter and Simon Magus where onelie speech was not vsed and the speech that was vsed was not of it selfe able to discouer the heart of him that spake In matters of greater controuersie betwixt vs perhaps you are better exercised or els we are like to finde feeble arguments on your behalfe To proceede you saie the scripture is plaine in this point what point that a man maie be knowne alwaies by his speech for that he maie sometime thereby be abundantlie conuinced we doubt not well what saith the scripture he that hath not the spirit of Christ appertaineth not to Christ. This is most true of the spirit of adoption which also sheweth it selfe in the fruites of mortification and renouation But hereof we maie not conclude thatall thinges in them that haue the spirit of Christ. are perfect so that they neuer offended no not in wordes or that in whomesoeuer appeereth anie thing which proceedeth not from the spirite of Christ as in the best there do manie things they are therefore to be iudged void of the spirit of Christ. And therefore we maie see what sound diuinitie you teach and how well you vnderstand the scriptures vpon which you conclude as followeth Now then if we consider the quiet calme and sober spirit of Christ and of all godlie Christians from the beginning and the furious reprochfull and vnclean spirit of Sathan and all heretikes from time to time and do compare them with the writings of both partes at this daie we maie easilie take ascantling of the diuersitie of their spirites Verilie it shall be found as hard a matter as it was before you made this demonstration for notwithstanding we acknowledge the quiet calme and sober spirit of Christ and Christians yet you confesse and the scripture is plentifull to prooue that Christ and his Apostles against the wicked and obstinate enemies of the trueth vsed most hott vehement and sharpe speeches and they which haue trueth on their side maie vse the like in like causes by their examples So that by vehemencie of speech the cause can not so easilie be discerned neither is your scantling right to be taken thereby Those kinde of speaches for the moste parte are to be accompted furious reprochfull and vncleane which are vttered of malice against the trueth when the same being spoken of zeale against falsehood maie wel stand with the quiet calme and sober spirit of Christ. Yet are there also certaine vncleane reprochfull and scurrilous speaches which serue not so much to describe falsehood and sinne to the detestation thereof as they seeme of them-selues to bewraie the hatred and intemperate heate of them that vse them against the persons of other and these in no case are commendable but to be reprooued whether they be found in Papistes or Protestantes as neither of both perhapsmaie be cleerelie excused of this falt By this it may be gathered what railing is properlie not euery hot worde as you saie but such as are vsed in an euill cause against trueth iustice of malice commonlie sometime of immoderate zeale such as be offensiue in what cause soeuer or of what zeale soeuer they be vsed and such railing I dare auouch you shall not be able to prooue that it is proper to Protestantes no nor to heretikes For there be heretikes which not with railinges and reprochfull speeches make diuisions in the Church beside the Doctrine of Christ but with faire smooth flatering talke deceiue the harts of the simple therfore railing is not a proper and perpetuall note of heretikes Now as concerning your examples first you begin with Master Charke asking what more venemous wordes can be imagined then these of scorpions poysoned spiders and the like vsed by Master Charke against reuerend men Here except you can first
see no reason to refuse it But if you will learne reason when it is shewed you maie see more then you do now Are your ancetors of the primitiue Church greater then Saint Paull Is there anie testimonié of man greater then the witnes of an Angell from heauen yet if Saint Paull him selfe or an Angell from heauen should preach an other Gospell then Saint Paull had preached and is contained in the holi scriptures that false Gospell were to be resused and the author thereof to be accursed Now that Saint Paull preached nothing beside the doctrine conteined in the scriptures he is a sufficient witnes himselfe Act. 26. 22. But why see you no reason to refuse such traditions so obtruded Forsooth because the same men that deliuered vnto you the scriptures and saide this is Gods writen worde and saide of other forged scriptures this is not Gods written worde the same deliuered to you these doctrines saying this is Gods wordes vnwritten So that by this reason you haue no other foundation of your faith but the testimonie of men who as they may speake the truth in one matter so they may lie or be deceiued in an other As euen by your owne reason the Grecians the Armenians the Georgians the Moscouites and all other sectaries are bound to beleeue all that to be the word of God vnwritten which the same men affirme to be such that deliuered the canonicall scriptures to them and said it was the word of God written But in steade of this vnsure and sandie ground the children of God haue a more firme rocke to builde their faith vpon namelie the spirit of trueth sealing in their heartes the testimonie of men concerning the truth of Gods worde written In which the same spirit also testifieth of the sufficiencie of the word written vnto saluation in such sort as if we receiue the word written for truth we must needs condemne for false what word soeuer speaketh either the contrarie or addeth any thing as wanting and not set forth in the word written And this I say not as though the primitiue Church or the godlie fathers of the same haue brought in any thing vnder the name of tradition of Christ or his Apostles as necessarie to saluation although some of them in matters of rites ceremonies haue alledged tradition beside the scriptures yet in such things as are now for the most part abolished either because they were not deliuered by the Apostles as it was pretended or els because such matters are mutable and not perpetuall though they were receiued from the Apostles But let vs examine the examples that you ioyne to your reason First Saint Augustine and Origen doe teach vs that baptizing of infantes is to be practized in the Church onelie by tradition of the Apostles For which you quote August lib. 10. ad gen lit cap. 23. Origen in cap. 6. Epist. ad Rom. What Saint Augustine saieth and how the baptisme of infantes is practized by authoritie of the scripture I haue shewed before sect 11. As for Origen in the place quoted hath neuer a word to any such matter But of these impudent allegations we haue had too many examples alreadie The second example is Saint Hierome and Epiphanius tell vs that the faste of the lent and oher the like is a tradition of the Apostles Hierom. Epist. 54. ad Marcella Epiphann Haer. 7. 5. Hieromes wordes are these against the Montanistes Nos vnam quadragesimam secundùm traditionem Apostolorum toto anno tempore nobis congruo ieiunamus 〈◊〉 tres in anno faciunt quadragesimas quasi tres passi sunt saluatores non quòd per totum annum excepta pentecoste ieiunare non liceat sed quòd aliud sit necessitate aliud voluntate munus offerre We fast one lent or fourtie daies according to the tradition of the Apostles in the wholl yeare in a time conuenient for vs they make three lentes or fourtie daies fast in a yeare as though three sauiours had sussered not but that it is lawfull all the yeare long except in the pentecostor fiftie daies but that it is one thing to offer a gift of necessitie an other thing to doe it of free will Here Hierome saith that one fourtie daies fast is of the tradition of the Apostles but other writers say otherwise For Damasus in his Pontificall saieth that Telesphorus Bishope of Roome did institute this seauen weekes faste before Easter Telesphorus him-selfe in his decretall Epistle saith that he and his fellow Bishoppes gathered in a Councell at Roome did ordeine this fourtie daies faste onelie for clerkes and contendeth in manie wordes that there must be a difference betweene clerkes and laie men as well in faste as in other thinges If you saie these authorities are counterfet 〈◊〉 as I thin 〈◊〉 you may truelie though you will not willinglie yet what saie you to 〈◊〉 an elder witnes then Hierome whoe testifieth out of yeares that two hundered 〈◊〉 before his time there was great controuersie betweene the next successours of the Apostles concerning the daie of the celebration of Easter and that the coutrouersie was not onelie of the daie but also of the fast some fasting one daie some two dates some more So that of the Apostles tradition we haue no certaintie in any monument of antiquitie Againe it is to be noted that Hierome holdeth it vnlawfull to faste betweene Easter and Whitesontyde which he calleth Peatecoste by the same tradition of the Apostles which yet in the Popish Church is not obserued at this daie for beside the fridaie fast they haue also the gang weeke fast in that time which in Saint Hieromes age was accounted vnlawfull to fast in Your other witnes Epiphanius speaketh not of your fourtie daies lent but of a shorter and yet a streighter For these are his wordes Aquo verò non assensum est in omnibus orbis terrarum regionibus quòd quarta prosabbato ieiunium est in Ecclesia ordinatum Siverò etiam oportet constitutionem Apostolorum proferre quomodo illic decreuerunt quarta prosabbato ieiunium per omnia excepta pentecoste de sex dieb paschatis quomodo praecipiunt nihil omnino accipere quà m panem salem aquam qualemque diem agere quomodo dimittere in illucescentem dominicam manifestum est And of whome is it not agreed in all regions of the world that one wednesdaie and fridaie fast is ordeined in the Church But if we must also bring forth the constitution of the Apostles how they haue there decreed one the wednesdaie and fridaie a fast thoroughout all except pentecost and of the six daies of Easter how they commaund to take nothing at all but bread and salte and water and how to spend the daie and how to giue ouer against the dawning of the Lords daie it is manifest Here he speaketh but ofsixe daies before Easter daie and of an other manner of diet then the Popish Church holdeth to be necessarie
necessarie to saluation not expressed in so manie wordes and syllables yet in full sense contained and to be plainlie concluded out of the holie scriptures and these we receiue to be of as great credit as anie thing that is expresselie contained in the scriptures The other kinde of traditions was rites and cerimonies which are not necessary to saluation but are in the Churches power to alter as it maie stand best with edification Among which S. Basill rehearseth some that long since are abolished as the rite of standing in praier one the Lords daie and betweene Easter and Whitsontid which of it selfe is a thing indifferent as also that manner of glorifying in which they said with the holy ghost whereas al the Church long since hath said neither in the holie Ghost nor with the holie Ghost but to the holie Ghost To beleeue that the holie Ghost is to be glorified equallie with the Father and the sonne it is necessarie to saluation but in what forme of wordes that shal be song in the Church it is indifferent and the later Church hath vsed her libertie herein to alter that forme which Saint Basill saith was deliuered by the Apostles themselues without writing By this I hope it is manifest what kinde of traditions are of equall force or authoritie with the scripture euen they which haue their ground in the scriptures and none other For as the same Basill affirmeth Euerie word or deede ought to be confirmed by testimonie of the holie Scriptures Againe For if all that is not of faith is sinne as the Apostle saith and faith is of hearing and hearing by the word of God whatsoeuer is beside the holie Scripture being not of faith is sinne Thus Basill whatsoeuer he speaketh of vnwritten traditions he meaneth not against the insufficiencie of the holie scriptures except you will saie he is contrarie to him-selfe in manie places beside these that I haue noted Tr. de vera piafide Epist. 80. in Reg. Breu. Inter. 1. 65. 68. de ornatu Monachi Your next testimonie is out of Eusebius lib. 1. Eu. Demonst. cap. 8. whole wordes you mangle after your manner leauing out at your pleasure more then you rehearse Eusebius hauing shewed the excellencie of Christ aboue Moses declareth also that there are two manners ofliuing in Christianitie the one of them that are strong and perfect the other of them that are subiect to manie infirmites and that whereas Moses did write in tables without life Christ hath written the perfect preceptes of the new Testament in liuing mindes his disciples following their Masters minde considering what Doctrine is meete for both sortes haue committed the one to writing as that which is necessarie to be kept of all the other they deliuered without writing to those that were able to receiue it wich haue excelled the common manner of men in knowledge in strength in abstinence c. And this is the meaning of Eusebius in that place not of anie traditions necessarie to saluation of euerie man which are not taught in the holy scriptures but of certaine precepts tending to perfection not enioyned to all but written in the heartes of some The third man is Epiphanius who you saie is more earnest then Eusebius writing against certaine heretikes called Apostolici which denied traditions as our Protestantes do Which is but a tale for they were more like to Popish monkes and friers then Protestantes For they professed to abstaine from marryage to poslesse nothing and such other superstitions they obserued But what saith Epiphanius for traditions He saith that we must vse tradition For all thinges can not be taken out of the scripture wherefore the holie Apostles deliuered somethings in the scriptures and something in tradition Mine answer to Epiphanius is the same that it was to Basilius Namelie that such things as were not expressed in plaine wordes in the scripture were approoued by tradition being neuertheles such thinges as were to be concluded necessarilie out of the scripture As in the question for which he alledgeth tradition it is manifest Tradiderunt c. the holie Apostles of God saith he haue deliuered vnto vs that it is sinne after virginitie decreed to be turned vnto marriage This the Papistes doubt not but that they are hable to prooue out of the scripture except where the Pope dispenseth And we acknowledge that where the vow was made a duisedly to a Godlie purpose and abilitie in the partie to performe it that it is sinne to breake it neither can the Pope dispense with it In the other place where he rehearseth manie examples of traditions he speaketh of rites and ceremonies as is before declared wherof manie are not obserued in the Popish Church neither is there anie of them necessarie to saluation But Epiphanius you saie prooueth it out of scripture 1. Cor. 11. 14. 15. vhere Saint Paulsaith as I deliuered vnto you And againe so I teach and so I haue deliuered vnto the Churches and If you holde fast except you haue beleeued in vaine To the first I answer that it prooueth no traditions necessarie to saluation which are not contained in the scriptures as is more manifest by the second and third text for where Saint Paul saith so I teach in all the Churches of God 1. Cor. 14. 33. he saith immediatelie before that God is not the God of sedition but of peace 1. Cor. 15. 1. 2. 3. the Apostle speaketh manifestlie of the doctrine of the resurrection wherof he him-selfe in that place writeth plentifullie and in manie other places of scripture the same article is taught moste expresselie You see therefore how substantiallie Epiphanius prooueth tradition vnwritten out of the scripture to be necessarie to saluation which is our question But with Epiphanius saie you ioyneth fullie and earnestlie Saint Chrysostome writing vpon these wordes of Saint Paul to the purpose Stand fast and holde traditions out of which cleere wordes Saint Chrysostome maketh this illation Hinc patet c. Hereof it is euident that the Apostles deliuered not all by epistle but manie thinges also without writing and those are as worthie credit as these Therefore we think the tradition of the Church to be worthie of credit it is a tradition seeke no more The sense of these wordes is that the Apostles in their preaching did expresse manie things more perticularly then in their epistles not that they preached anie thing necessarie to saluation but that the same was contained either in their epistles or in other bookes of the holie scripture And so I saie of the tradition of the Church which is a doctrine contained in the scriptures though not expressed in the same or in so manie wordes as the three persons and one God in trinitie and trinitie in vnitie to be worshipped c. is of equall credit with that which is expressed in the scriptures because the ground of our faith standeth not vppon the sound of wordes but vppon
the sense and true meaning of thinges them-selues And this is Chrisostomes meaning not of traditions altogether without the compasse of the scriptures and yet held necessarie to saluation For of the sufficiencie of the scri ptures he speaketh in diuers places and namelie vppon that cleere text 2. Tim. 3. Hom 9. of the scripiure he saith Siquid vel diseere velignorare opus sit illic addiscemus If anie thing be needefisli to know or not to know in the scriptures we shall learne But because you saie those wordes of Saint Paulare cleere 2. Thess. 2. for vnwritten tradititions I praie you what argument can you conclude out of them Saint Paul deliuered to the Thessalonians something by preaching and something by writing ergo he deliuered something that is not contained in the holie scriptures written either by himselfe or anie other of the holie men of God appointed for that purpose Who is so childish thinke you to graunt you this consequence therefore for anie thing you haue brought or can bring or anie thing that the fathers haue said or can saie the word of God writ ten is perfect and hable to make a man wise to saluation by faith in Iesus Christ which is to be had sufficientlie in the holie scriptures as Christ him-selfe doth witnes Iohn 5. 39. And so the former conclusion doth still stand It is great iniquitie to receiue traditions altogether beside the holie scripture as necessarie to saluation which must needes argue the holie scriptures of imperfection and vnsufficiencie Neither doth the consent of Antiquitie refute this assertion of Master Charke seeing the auncients as it is said spake either of doctrine not expressed in word but contained in deede in the scriptures or els of rites and ceremonies the perpetuall obseruation where of is not necessatie to eternall life as is prooued by the discussing of manie of them which the elder fathers do father vpon the tradition of the Apostles as much as anie other that they name And if you saie they were deceiued in such as are abolished how shall we know that 〈◊〉 not in such as are retained For in their 〈◊〉 they were all generallie receiued as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well such as are discontinued as those 〈◊〉 remaine 〈◊〉 if any man will aske you what be these Apostolicall 〈◊〉 in particuler you could alleadge him testimonies 〈◊〉 auncient fathers for a great number But you referr 〈◊〉 Saint Cyprian Serm. de ablut pedum Tertullian 〈◊〉 milit and Saint Hieron dialog contra Luciferianos 〈◊〉 say he shall finde store Belike your note booke 〈◊〉 you thither although you listed not to take so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your selfe but turne it ouer to your 〈◊〉 Howbert he that is disposed to read the sermon 〈◊〉 Cyprian shall finde no store at all but of the necessitie of washing offcete which ceremonie was taken by the example of Christ yet is not thought necessarie in the Popish Church at this daie Tertullian in deede hath some prety store yet not to mantaine popish traditions so much as to ouerthrow them For he 〈◊〉 some things that are taken out of the scripture as to renounce the deuill in Baptisme c. some that are growne out of vse manie hundred yeares agoe as that the baptized should taste of milke and honie that they should abstaine from washing seauen daies after That men should signe their forheade at euerie steppe and proceeding going forth and comming home at putting on of apparell and at pulling on of shooes at washings at table at lighting of candells at beddes at stooles at all times and places Saint Hierome also in the person of the heretike rehearseth traditiones and among them such as Papistes do not obserue namelie the mixture of milke and honie geuen to them that are newlie baptized On the Lords daie and during the wholl time of Pentecoste neither to kneele in praiers nor to fast These are parte of those Apostolical traditions in particular which if they had beene necessary to saluation must haue beene perpetuallie continued If they were vntruelie ascribed to the Apostles what wartant can we haue of any other seeing the most auncient writers commend these as much as anie other for Apostolicall traditions Yet a few other examples you wil adde out of Saint Augustine whoe prooueth baptisme you sare by tradition of the Church lib. 10. de gen ad lit cap. 23. to this answere hath beene made sufficientlie in the 11. section that Saint Augustine doth not defend baptisme of infants onelie by the custome of the Church but also by the scriptures Likewise you saie he prooueth by the same tradions that we must not rebaptize those which are baptized of heretikes lib. 2. de bapt capt 7. lib. 1. cap. 23. lib. 4. cap. 6 It is true that he perwsadeth him selfe that this custome of not rebaptizing came from the Apostles tradition yet doth he by many arguments out of scripture prooue that such are not to be baptized againe which haue beene once baptized although by heretikes and therefore he saith of the same matter Hoc planè verum est quia ratio veritas consuetudini praeponenda est Sed cùm consuetudini veritas suffragatur nihil oportet firmius retineri This is plainlie true that reason and truth is to be preferred before custome but when truth consenteth with custome nothing ought more steadefastlie to be 〈◊〉 You see therefore that he buildeth not onelie vppon custome or tradition which is the matter in question but vppon trueth and reason which is founded by the holie scriptuers Your middle quotation de bap lib. 1. cap. 23. you may correct against your nextreplie for there are but 19. Chapters in that booke Againe you saie He prooueth by tradition the celebration of the Pentecost commonlie called Whitsontide ep 11 c. 1. If it were as you saie it is but a matter of ceremony not necessarie to saluation but in the power of the Church to alter as many like which are abrogated But in trueth he prooueth it not as you say by tradition For these are his wordes Illa autem quae non scripta c. But those thinges which are kept beeing not written but deliuered which are obserued thoroughout all the worlde it is giuen to be vnderstoode that they are retained as commended and decreed either by the Apostles them-selues or by generall Councells the authoritie of which is moste whollesome in the Church as that the passion of our Lord and his resurrection ascension into heauen and the comming of the holie ghoste from heauen are celebrated with yearelie solemnitie You see by his owne wordes that he is not certaine whether he should laie this ceremoniall celebration vpon deliuery of the Apostles or vpon decrees of general coun cells And whencesoeuer they came the matter is not great in such thinges as of their owne nature are indifferent and therefore alterable by discretion of the Church in all times Whether the Apostles were baptized which is
which is but a short section or Chap er doth not charge Luther with this opinion of heretikes not to be burned but the Donatists whose fansie is renewed againe in the Anabaptists and Libertines As for Luther Contra Latomum deincendiariis handleth not this controuersie at all but onelie expostulateth with the deuines of Louane which burned his bookes without examination or Conuiction of them out of the word of God Manie men haue complained and that moste iustlie of the crueltie of the Papists in burning as heretikes the true saints martyrs and members of the Church whose faith and religion they were neuer hable to conuince of heresie by the authoritie of gods word But that no blasphemer or obstinate heretike maintaining blasphemie against the expresse and manifest trueth of God is to be punished by death I am persuaded he can bring no booke or author of any accompt that so holdeth Fourthlie he addeth that Luther by onelie scripture found the sacramentaries to be heretikes D. Fulk by the same scripture findeth that both parties are good Catholikes But as Luther erred in his opinion of the sacrament so he was ouer rash in condemning those whome he calleth sacramentaries neuerthelesse seing he erred of ignorance and inconsiderate zeale he hath found mercie with God and is not to be adiudged as a blasphemous heretike For neither the error he maintained is blasphemie in it selfe neither did he hold it contrarie to his knowledge but as he was ignorantlie persuaded with zeale of trueth though deceiued with error How Doctor Fulke prooueth this not onelie by scripture but also by example of auncient fathers erring in like cases and yet not to be condemned for heretikes you maie reade in the place by this answerer quoted and in his confutation of Popish quarrels His last example is of manie things which Master Whitgift doth defend against Thomas Cartwright to be lawfull by scripture as Bishops Dcanes Archdeacons officialls holy daies and an hundreth more which in Geneua are holden to be flat conirarie to the scripture There are manie things lawfull by scripture which yet are not necessarie to be vsed The forme of external gouernment and discipline of the Church is not so expreslie set downe in holie scriptures but that euetie particulare Church hath libertie and must of necessitie appoint manie things for order decencie and gouernment which are not in expresse termes conteined in the scriptures euen as god shall giue them grace to see what is moste expedient according to the difference of times places and persons for the building vp of the Church in trueth and loue Wherefore although the Church of Geneua in the forme of outward regiment rites and discipline differing from the Church of England do not vse the same things that we do yet it followeth not that they holde them to be flat contrarie to the scripture neither is our answerer hable soundlie to prooue that he doth so boldlie asseuere To proceede he telleth vs what aduantage herctikes haue by onelie scripture they make them-selues therebie iudges of Doctors Councels histories presidentes cusiomes prescriptions yea of the bookes of scripture sense it selfe reseruing al interpretation to them-selues But this is nothing so for howsoeuerheretikes take vppon them to control al things according to their fantasie yet haue they noe aduantage by onelie scripture but therebie maie be are confounded when they come to examination tri all And as for the professors of the Gospell which acknowledge the scriprure to be sufficiente to teach all thinges needful to be knownevnto saluation although they are by god him selfe made Iudges of the spirits of al men by exacting them vnto the trial of the word of god which is the onelie certaine rule of truth yet doe they not by priuate authoritie iudge of Councells doctors fathers customs c. But by that charge which is laide vpon them to iudge cōdemne euen the Angels from heauen if they should bring anie other Gospell then that which the Apostles haue preached without al arrogancie or insolencie against the Angels Councels Doctors Fathers whatsoeuer but in giuing god the glorie to be onely true al men to be liers no Angel to be credited except they speake by the spirite of God of whose speach we haue no certaine demonstration but in the holie scriptures whatsoeuer is agreeable vnto them The discerning of the bookes of scripture of the true sense of them is also committed vnto the Church the faithful members thereof that doutful bookes be iudged by those that without doubt are indited by the holy ghost deliuered to the Church by faithfull witnesses instruments of the holy ghost to be of soueraigne and perpetual authority in the Church and so are knowne and taken of the true Church from time to time in such sorte that although the same truth maie be found in other bookes yet as Saint Augustine saith they are not of the same authoritie because there is not such certentie of trueth As for the sense and interpretation of the holie scriptures it must be taken out of the scriptures them-selues which are alwaies the best and surest interpretation of them-selues in all points necessarie to be knowne with the aide of the gift of tongues the gift of knowledge the gift of interpretation in them that haue labored in finding out the sense thereof according to the analogie of faith which is comprehended in the scriptures and that in places so plaine and euident as they neede no interpretation and therefore cannot be wrested by damnable heretikes without great impudencie and against their owne conscience for which cause Saint Paul willeth an heretike after the first second admonition to be auoided as one who though he will not acknowledge the truth yet he is condemned in his owne conscience and sinneth vnto eternall damnation Wherefore Councells Fathers Doctors customs examples are by vs admitted but not hand ouer head without distinction but such so farre forth as they be true and faithful interpreters of the scripture by matters and places plaine certenly knowne opening matters places obscure and vnknowne Which is the office of an expounder not to determine by his owne authority of anothers meaning whereof as among men euetie man is the best in terpreter of his owne so is the holy ghost of him-selfe in the scriptures by him inspired of whose meaning where they be hard to be vnderstood no man can be certaine but either by his own plaine wordes or by plaine necessary conclusion out of his plaine words Now touching the Papists whome our answerer saith to be restrained from chopping and changing affirming and denying at their pleasures because they binde them-selues to other things beside the scriptures to which they giue souereigne authoritie as to councells auncient fathers traditions of the Apostles and primatiue Church with the like the matter is farre otherwise For whatsoeuer they prate of the soueraigntie of
conscience of men to sanctifie them by their worke whome Christ by his onelie oblation hath made perfect for euer They that holde these points denie Christ to be a perfect Prophet King and Priest But these be deepe mysteries of puritanisme saith the answerer Christ is a Prophet alone a King alone a Priest alone the ouerthrow of all gouernment No sir no to acknowledge Christe to be our onelie Prophet king and priest ouerthroweth not but establisheth all power that is ordeined vnder him to teach gouerne and sanctifie The scripture in deede Eph. 4. Acts. 5. doth allowe Prophets and teachers in the Church but not authors of new doctrine no makers of new articles of faith no traditions beside the Gospell of Christ which is written that we might beleeue and beleeuing haue eternall life in his name The scripture alloweth Kinges and rulers 1. Pet. 2. Act. 2. but the scripture giueth no authoritie to any king or ruler to dispense against the lawes of God nor to any Prophet or priest to discharge subiects of their oth made to their lawfull Prince to binde the conscience of man with new constitutions as necessarie to saluation c. But whereas you aske whether Priests may not sanctifie by the word of god 2. Tim. 4. you are neare driuen for proofes For to omitte that the Chapter you quote hath neuer a word either of priests or sanctifying and to take your meaning to be of 1. Tim. 4. verse 5. the Apostle speaketh not of the Priest or ecclesiasticall ministers power of sanctifying but of euerie Christian man and woman to whome euerie creature of God in the right vse thereof is sanctified by the word of God and praier and against them that forbid thinges consecrated and allowed by God as matrimonie and meates sanctifyed by his worde that hath giuen them to be receiued with thankesgiuing and by the praier of the thankefull receiuer as a mean to obtaine sanctification from God whoe onelie is holie and therefore hath onelie power properlie to sanctifie and to inioyne as more holie by their owne making and not by Gods sanctification virginitie then matrimonie fish then flesh yca take vpon them to sanctifie Gods creatures in an other vse then God hath appointed them as water fire garments boughs flowers bread and such like for religion and sanctifying of Christian men Againe he asketh what doe the traditions of Christ and his Apostles for of those onelie they talke when they compare them with scripture impeach the teaching of Christ and his Apostles I answere there are no traditions of Christ and his Apostles pertaining to a Christian mans dutie to obtaine erernall life but those that be comprehended in the holie scriptures as the spirite of God in the scripture which cannot lie doth testifie And therefore they are the traditions of men and not of Christ and his Apostles that areso called vnder which title all heresies fansies may be brought in without testimonie of the written worde of God Wherefore such traditions doe greatlie impeach the office of Christes teaching reproouing his Apostles and Euangelists of imperfection if they haue not comprehended the summe of all that Christ taught and did for our saluation which Saint Luke in the beginning of his Gospell doth professe that he hath done and that verie exactlie And further it is false that our answerer saith they talke of the traditions of Christ and his Apostles onelie when they compare them with scripture For they compare the decrees of their Pope and of their generall councells allowed by him to be of equall authoritie with the holie scriptures as well as traditions Secondlie he asketh what doth the spiritual authorttie of the Pope vnder Christ diminish the Kinglie power and authoritie of Christ I answere the Pope hath no spirituall authoritie vnder Christ by anie graunt of Christ but he vsurpeth authoritie aboue Christ when he will controll the lawes and institutions of Christ as denying the cuppe of blessing vnto the laie people and in taking vpon him to make newe lawes and to inioyne men to obserue them in paine of damnation as be his lawes of abstinence from mariage and meates for religions sake which Christ hath left free for all men euen for Bishops Priests and Deacons of the Church and in an hundred matters beside Last of all he asketh How doth the priesthood of men as from Christ or the sacrifice of the altar instituted by Christ disgrace Christs priesthood or his sufficient sacrifice once for all offered on the crosse I answere the priesthood of reconciling by sacrifice doth not passe from Christ to anie man because he hath by one sacrifice made perfect for euer all that are sanctifyed and liueth for euer to make intercession for vs therefore hath as the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a priesthood that passeth not to any other in succession as Arons priesthood did whereby he is able to saue for euer those that come vnto God by hym Againe I denie that Christ did institute that sacrifice of the altar whereof there is no worde in all the scripture and therefore a new priesthood and a new sacrifice must needes be blaspemous against the eternal priesthood of Christ and that one sufficient sacrifice which he offered and therebie found eternall redemption The texts alledged by Master Charke Heb. 7. 9. he saith doe not impeach this dailie sacrifice of theirs because they graunt that sacrifice once offered c. in that manner as it was then done meaning bloodelie whereas they offer it vnbloodelie c. But the wholl discourse of the Aposile throughout the wholl epistle almoste excludeth all repetition of that sacrifice in any manner For therepetition of the same sacrifice should argue imperfection in it as it did in the Iewish sacrifices and without shedding of blood there is noremission of sinnes Is Christ shoulde be often offered he should often suffer All which being impossible it remaineth that as Christ offered himselfe but once and not often so no man hath authoritie or power to offer him anie more neither is there anie neede he should be more then once offered seing by that one oblation he hath made perfect for euer all that are sanctified and hath found eternall redemption for all that beleeue in him But for proofe that there must be such a daylie sacrifice in the Church vntill the end of the world he alledgeiu the prophecie of Daniell 12. Malachie 1. whereas Daniell speaketh of the dailie sacrifice of the Lawe which should cease in the persecution of Antiochus and be vtterly abolished by the death of Christ. And Malachic of the sacrifice of praise and thankesgeuing which by all nations is offered as a pure sacrifice and acceptable to him through Christ. The former exposition is allowed by S. Ierome to be verified of Antiochus in a type of Antichrist whoe shall forbid culium Dei the worship of God which doth not require any such
holde thy peace that no man euer perceiue or smell out that I haue so euill a conscience And afterward should set forth my selfe lustilie and clapping my handes together with full mouth should sing Hei how the Christians haue not anie place of scripture which affirmeth and prooueth that the word is made flesh And yet at the last I should submitte my selfe againe and desire to be instructed and taught how they could prooue it out of the scripture which I before had rent in peeces If this were leife and lawfull for me to doe O mortall God how great businesse and trouble might I cause in the olde and new testament as well to the Iewes as Christians These are the verie wordes of Luther in deede Now the ende why he vseth these fond comparisons he sheweth afterward Quisquis enim vult verba scripturae aliter quà m sonant interpretari is tenetur ex textu eiusdem loci aut ex aliquo fidei articulo probare For whoesoeuer will interpret the wordes of scripture otherwise then they sound he is bound out of the text of the same place or out of some article of faith to prooue it Which rule in deede or the like if it be notkept there will be no ende of vaine licentious interpretations But Zuinglius and Oecolampadius out of the text of the same place where the cuppe is called the new testament in his bloode and out of the article of Christs incarnation and true manhoode vnconfounded with his godhead doe prooue that their interpretation must needes be true therefore these similitudes doe not shew that their exposition is absurde also Luther him selfe denyeth that his meaning was to deface them by those grosse similitudes absurdities Deus nouit c. God knoweth saith he that with these grosse similitudes I studdie not to deface Zuinglius and much lesse Oecolampadius vnto whome God hath giuen manie gifts aboue many other men whose case I doe lament from my heart neither with such wordes doe I bend my pen against them but rather against the Deuill proudlie and bitterlie 〈◊〉 vs which hath circumuenied and deceiued them that I might fulfill the lust of my minde against him to the honour of God c. These sayings of Luther declare that albeit he stood too much in his owne conccyt touching this sacramentarie matter and was verie hastie and rash of iudgement in condemning them that helde the truth against him yet he was not so voide of charitie as the answerer gathereth by some vehement speaches of his shewing here how he meaneth them and would haue thē to be vnderstood namely not against the persons of Zuinglius and Oecolampadius but against the deuill who as he falselie imagined had deceiued them in this matter So that the controuersie is still betweene the true Catholikes and the Papists which part prouoketh to the scriptures in their true meaning as the onelie sufficient rule to decide all controuersies of religion But which part alleadgeih the true meaning saith our answerer according to the councell of wise Sisinius to Theodosius the Emperour we desire to be tried by the iudgement of auncient fathers indifferent in this matter for that they liued before our controuersies came in question This he saith but as I haue prooued before and namelie in the exampled of transsubstantiation they will not stand to the iudgement of the auncient fathers further then their Pope shal alow them As for vs we refuse not the iudgement of the most auncient fathers except it be in such matters wherein it is manifest by the plaine texts and necessarie collections out of the scripture that they were deceiued as euen the Papists will confesse in some poyntes that they were This wise Sisinius whose counsell he would haue followed was a wise heretike whoe first gaue the aduise to Nectarius the Catholike Bishop by whome it was commended to the Emperour and had good successe against all other heresies saue the heresie of the Nouatians who by meanes hereof came in credit with the Emperour and had free libertie to vse their conuenticles openlie By which it appeareth that it is no perfect kinde of triall which was first offered by an heretike wherebie he could not be conuicted of his heresie Againe it was not vsed against the sufficiencie of the scripture and the triall that maie be had therebie but onelie to cutte of quarelous disputation of heretikes which are alwaies more readie to contend then to learne the truth Last of all where he saith the auncient fathers are indifferent for that they liued before our controuersies came in question it is no sufficient argument seeing the auncient fathers erred them-selues in some points and no man is an indifferent iudge in that case wherein he is deeeiued him-selfe Againe the auncient fathers are not all of one antiquitie but commonlie the most auncient the purest and furthest from all smacke of Antichristian errors the later more sauouring of the infection of the times drawing toward the apostasie Euen as water the nearer the spring is purer but running further of through vnpure soyle receiueth some taste thereof So the Councell of Sisinius in respect of the most auncient fathers that were before the heresies of those times was better to be vsed in his time then in these daies when they that liued fiue hundred yeares after Sisinius maie be counted auncient fathers in respect of vs yet their iudgement not so weightie nor so meete to be imbraced as those first fathers of the primitiue Church to whose iudgement if all matters of controuersie were referred the Papists should get but small aduantage But our aduersaries saith the answerer will allow no exposition but their owne wherebie it is easie to defeat whatsoeuer is brought against them scripture or Doctor In deede this which he saith is moste true of the Papists as I haue prooued before but vntrue of vs for we allowe all interpretations that are not contrarie to the analogie of faith and are agreeable to the plaine words necessarie circumstances of the place of scripture not repugnant to anie other euident text of scripture According to which rules we must examine all expositions of all men since the Apostles time yea the Apostles them-selues were content that their doctrine should be examined by the scriptures of the olde testament but so are not the Papists for they holde opinions altogether beside the scriptures But our answerer to iustifie that which he hath saide against vs bringeth examples of shifting scriptures and Doctors all which except one are gathered out of diuerse writings of Doctor Fulke for answere of which seeing he hath set forth a speciall treatise I referre the reader thereunto pag. 38. 39. 40. That one example which he could father vpon no man I will examine here The like euasion saith he they haue when we alleadge the wordes of Saint Paull Qui matrimonio c he that ioyneth his virgin in mariage doth well and he that ioyneth
of necessarie collection For Logicke would stil iudge whether such meaning could be necessarilie gathered out of such wordes Seeing we are not bound to creditte any writings since the diuine inspired scriptures but so farre as they agree with the scriptures and receiue the light of trueth from them But those auncient writers to whome he would haue vs to referre our selues liued so many hun dred yeares after the Apostles and Euangelists the writers of the new testament as they could no more declare to them then to vs their meaning in their writings and therefore those auncient fathers which ground purgatorie prayer to saintes sacrifice of the altar vse of the crosse c. beside tradition vpon the scriptures as the answerer saith must shew the necessarie collection of them by the iudgement of demonstration seeing they neuer sawe the writers neuer heard them speake nor possiblie could liuing so long after them or els they can carie no credit of necessarie collection outof the expresse wordes of holy scripture As for tradition without scripture since God hath giuen the holie scripture is as good as the credit of men may be without a warrant from God A fourth waie of triall of spirites with him is Councells by which olde heretikes haue beene tried and they are content to referre themselues to all the Christian Councells that euer haue beene since Christ died We acknowledge Christian councells to be a godlie meane to exa mine and trie the spirites but according to the scriptures onelie for matters of faith as in the example of the first Councell of Christendome Act. 15. where the question was determined by authoritie of the scriptures But that the Papists dare abide the triall by al Councells it is false for they admit none but by the Popes consent they admitte nothing in them but that the present Pope doth allow Many Councells in Aphrica forbad appellations to Rome the general Councell of Chalcedon made the Bishop of Constantinople of equal dignitie with the Bishop of Rome the Bishop of Constantinople condemned and accursed a Pope sor an heretike the Pope of that time confirmed it yet now it is not holden for Catholike But I will spare examples vntill this lustie gallant dare aduenture the triall whereof he maketh the challenge But seeing there are many points of controuersies betweene vs and the Papists which in no auncient councell came in question he bobs vs with the last most learned Godlie and generall Councell of Trent which was gathered of purpose for triall of hercticall spirites whereunto all safe conduct being offered we refused to come for triall As though the Catholikes would haue come to the Councell of Nice if nothing might haue beene therein determined but that which pleased Arius or to the Councell of Constantinople if nothing might haue beene concluded but that Macedonius would allow Or to the Councells of Ephesus and Chalcedon if when all had beene saide that which liked Nestorius and Eutiches must haue bene holden for Catholike Such is our case we accuse the Pope to be an heritike yea and to be Antichrist the Pope will admit no councell but where he him selfe is iudge nor any to haue any voice determinatiue but onely such as are sworne to maintaine his heresies and ambition It is great pitie but the Protestants must come to such a councell Such were many councells holden of olde time by heretikes but for the most part not frequented by the Catholikes Some of our profession were at Trent but what entertainement had they euen such as their aduersaries could afforde them they were not permitted to haue any speach but as pleased their enemies wherefore when they saw noe equitie vsed as they could looke for no better before they came they left the heretikes to consult among them-selues by example of auncient fathers in like Chapters of heretikes The sift waie of triall is to referre the matter to the olde Doctors which liued before the controuersies began of which we haue spoken latelie and this we haue often vsed and still vse against the Papists in most controuersies although the authoritie of man is no certaine rule to trie which is the truth of God Augustine against Iulian vsed this waie rightlie first confuting the Pelagians by the authoritie of the holie scripture and then by the testimonie of the auncient fathers also Theodosius also in a case determined by the holie scripture did politikelie circumuent the heretikes after the aduise of Sisinius the Nouatian by the suggestion of Nectarius the Catholike to put them to a foile which had good successe because the others cause was naught But Epiphanius hath a hard saying against vs as our answerer thinketh It is enough to say against all heresies the catholike church hath not taught this the holy fathers haue not admitted this But I wene Epiphanius doth not meane that it is enough to saie so except men can prooue it to be so For els it is aseasy for heretikes to saie so against Catholikes as for Catholikes against heretikes And here out answerer voucheth Epiphanius quoting onelie lib. 2. contra haere but no Chapter of so long a booke wherebie knowing him to be a common foyster we maie well suspect his honestie in this voucher vntill he shew vs in what Chapter we shall finde it The sixtwaie of triall with him is to consider which is the Catholike or vniuersall Church or great multitude of Christians out of which the other part first departed But to consider which is the Catholike or vniuersal Church is no waie of triall but the matter to be tried And the description that he maketh of the Church is as vncerten the great multitud of Christians out of which the other part first departed For the Catholike Church is not alwaies the greatest multitude When the East Church was deuided from the West the one was as great a multitude as the other yea considering the number of prouinces of the East and the largenesse of them it was the greater And one heresie some times departeth out of another as the Rogatians from the Donatists the Eunomians from the Arrians the Iacobites from the Eutichians c. Neither doth Saint Augustine against the Manichecs make the consent of people and the name of Catholike of them-selues to be a sufficient waie of trial but among many thinges which altogether held him beside the authoritie of the holie scriptures he accounteth these which with the truth are a good confirmation but can be no preiudice against the manifest truth as he confesseth in the same place To the iudgement of Vincentius we will subscribe to holde that which euerie where which alwaies which of all hath beene beleeued so hath no point of Poperie Hoc est etenim verè proprièque Catholicum quòd ipsa vis nominis ratioque declarat quod omnia verè vniuersaliter comprehendit For that is truelie and properlie Catholike saith Vincentius which thing the verie force and reason of the name declareth
into great contempt wheresoeuer they plant them-selues in so much that the Fryers in some places haue slirred vp sedition against them caused them to be expelled It remaineth therefore that the Iesuites are a sect or schisme euen in Popery as they are a detestable kinde of heretikes against the Catholike faith which is common to al obstinate Papists and it is true likewise which Master Charksayeth that the Pharises were a notorious sect ver did they not cut of themselues from the religiō of the Church nay they bare the greatest sway in the Church albeit some of thē held great heresies yet they professed to imbraceal the doctrine of the Church and so did the Saduces in so much that some of them climed vp euen to the high priests office yet were they a detestable sect but of a bastarde Church as the Iesuites are of the Popish Church of Rome His definition also if you did not cauill and trifle about words is true that a sect is a companie of men that differ from the rest of their religion in matter or forme of then profession Whether you deriue the Etimologie à secando of cutting or à sequendo of following although I thinke Master Charke meaneth it of cutting the absurdities you gather are wilfull cauillations For Bishopes ministers lawyers iudges c. though they differ in auctoritie apparell state and forme of life yet they differ not in forme of profession of religion from the rest of our religion They be diuerse offices and lawful callings in one profession of religion but so are not Iesuites and other orders of Monkes and Fryers for they albeit they hold one religion with the rest yet doe differ in the sorme and profession of that religion beeing no necessarie offices or callinges instituted by God but seuerall professions begonne by men whose imitation soeuer they pretend Therefore no wise man but such a quarreling Censurer woulde haue made the cases of Bishopes iudges lawyers like in this point with Dominicans Franciscans Iesuites Like wisedome and grauitie you shew in flouting of Master Charkes definition with your ridiculous comparisons where he sayeth a sect is a companie of men For when you haue sported your selfe vntil you haue wearied your selfe and your reader in the end you confesse that you are not ignorant that in common speach this word sect may improperly signifie the mē also which professe the same but not in a definition where the proper nature of each word is declared Whether it be properlie or improperlie so taken because it is a brable of wordes I will not contend but if you exclude all improper or figuratiue speaches whose sense is commonlie knowne as this of sect from definitions you will driue them into a straight roome For we may not saie Logicke is a science or arte bene disserendi which in common speach signifieth to dispute well because disserere in latine doth properlie signifie to sow or set in diuerse places and seeing the worde sect in common speach may signifie the men that professe such a seperation why may there not a definition be giuen of the terme according to that signification Now whether the Iesuites be a sect according to Master Charkes definition you will examine after you haue tolde vs that his conclusion is like that he made in the Tower against Campian which was to dispatch him at Tyburne nothing following of the premises which fond comparison I passe ouer seeing all men knowe that conclusion was not of Master Charkes making by which Campian was hanged at Tyburne and all men may see what was Master Charkes disputation in the Tower and how it was answered by Campian But to the matter in hand you aske what is in M. Charkes illation that can make the lesuites a sect if it were all graunted to be true the Iesuites receiue a peculiar vow to preach as the Apostles did euerie where of free cost First to dedicate a mans life by vow to Gods seruice you saie it is alowed in scripture Numbers 6. Ps. 131. yea that is euery mans dutie but Master Charkes illation is of a peculiar vow which by no scripture is allowed but of such things onelie as God accepteth to his seruice and are in our owne power to performe as the vow of a Nazarite the vow of sacrifices of thankesgiuing c. Other be either superstitious or vnlawfull vowes Secondlie to preach euerie where and at free cost you thinke he should be ashamed to saie that it maketh a sect seeing Christ commaunded his Apostles to preach euerie where freelie and Saint Paul glorieth that he had taught the Gospell of free cost Yes Syr this maketh a sect for them to vow to exercise the office of Apostles which are not called by Christ to be Apostles the vow is vnlawfull and the votaries are sectaries not of the Apostles but of that pseudo Apostle Laiolas that was of his own ordination Againe where you saie that the Apostles were commaunded to preach the Gospell in all places freelie it is false for that precept Mat. 10. giue freelie as you haue receiued freelie either is ment of the graces of healing or if you ioyne it with the other preceptes that follow of not possessing golde nor siluer nor monie garments c. other prouision for the iournie it is as they are particular for that viage and not generall for all time of their Apostleshippe For otherwise the Apostles should haue greeuouslie offended in not preaching in all places of free cost and Saint Paull in taking of double wages of somme Churches that in some other he might preach freelie Therefore as vpon good consideration in some place the Apostles did preach of free cost and so may men at this daie yet for any man to vow that in al places and at al times he wil preach at free cost the vow is vnlawfull because it is contrarie to the ordinance of God which hath ordained and appointed that they which preach the Gospell should liue of the Gospell 1. Cor. 9. 14. And it cannot but be to the iniurie such as will procure contempte and neglect vnto them that preach the Gospell and liue according to the ordinance of the Gospell in taking the stipende for them appointed that there should be a sect or company of men which should professe alwaies and in all places to preach of free cost You proceede and aske what then maketh them sectaries to whippe and torment them-selues if it were true seeing Saint Paull chastened his owne bodie and caried the bonds of Christ in his flesh and the scriptures talke much of mortifying our members of crucifying our flesh and the like and neuer a word of pampering the same As though there could be no chastening of the body bearing of Christs markes mortifying the members or crucifying the flesh except men whippe and torment them-selues or that whosoeuer doth not whippe him-selfe doth pamper his flesh Saint Paull did chastise his bodie with
or testimonie And I doubt not but he was called brother as all Christians are called one of an other but not as Friers are called fratres You adde further out of Saint Ambrose that he ware a blacke hoode and a girdell of lether Ser. 94. so that nothing wanted in him to the verie habit of an Augustine Frier But seeing there are of Ambrose his sermons numbred in all but 93. this bastarde bable where this of the hood and the girdle is written must be set out for a wrangler and he had beene worthy to be set one the pillerie that fayned such a sermon vnder the name of Saint Ambrose to giue creditte to the Augustine Friers Possidonius testifieth that his apparell shooes and bedding were of moderate and competent habit neither too fine and costlie nor too verie abiect or contemptible In which he kept the meane As for the blacke hoode and lethern belte he that liued 40. yeares with him as you say can tell vs nothing of thē so that you haue neither the weede nor the profession of Friers in S. Augustine Where the example of Christ is alledged to vpholde the institution of Iesuites which Master Charke affirmeth to be blaspemous against his Maiestie you confesse that Christ did not whippe him selfe because he had no rebellion in his flesh as you haue and therefore vse mortification of your bodie according to Saint Paules counsell Coll. 3. You shew how wiselie you vnderstand mortification which you referre to the bodie onelie where Saint Paul commandeth vs to mortifie our members which are vpon earth And least you should thinke he meaneth your head your armes or your shoulders he addeth fornication vncleanes lust euill concupiscence couetousnes and such like which be the members of the olde man that must be mortified not the natural body of man or the partes thereof But though you haue no example of Christ whipping himselfe yet you haue of long fasting praying and lying all night one the ground which notwithstanding you thinke we ministers wil not imitate for prayer and fasting we know it to be our dueties hauing not one lie the example but also the commaundement of Christ for it But for lying all night on the grounde we finde no example of Christ. The Euangelist Luke 6. which you quote for it saith that Christ continued all night in prayer but that he lay all night on the grounde he saith not so you declare your selfe as well by this as by many other things to be verie well studied in the scriptures Where Master Charke saith that Christ came eating and drinking did frequent the publicke assemblies and was sometime entertained at great feastes he sheweth the forme of Christes life differing from Iohns the Baptistes which was more austere whose example is more like your profession then that example of Christ although your vocation be nothing answerable to his Concerning pouertie Master Charke asketh what worldly blessing giuen vnto Christ by his father did he at any time abandon how doth his example recommend wilfull pouertie to you Iesuites or to any except you would by vertue of the example haue all men be of your order because all should be followers of Christ and holde it as commaunded or recommended for an example to be followed of all whatsoeuer he hath done before And then the Pope aboue all other by his owne claime must be the poorest of all and become a brother of your beggerlie order To this you an swere by asking if it were not wilfull pouertie for him the was Lord of all to liue of almes Yes verilie he did willingly forbeate to challenge that which was his owne neuertheles it was necessarie for his office to become poore that he might inrich vs with his grace so is it not for Iesuites or any other to whome God hath giuen such benefites as they should not neede to liue of almes You aske further if he that counselled men torenounce all they possessed for his service and to giue all to the poore that would be perfect did not he recommend voluntarie pouertie though he commaunded it not Surelie if the necessitte of his seruice doe require it there is no doubt but that it is euerie mans durie to renounce all that he possesseth But what necessitie compelleth the Iesuites to any such seruice of his but that they may liue of their owne and eare their owne breade As for the place you quote Luk. the 14. is verie Anabaptisticallie applied to actuall forsaking of mens possesons whereas it is manifestlie to be vnderstood of renouncing in affection is not counselled onelie to some but commaunded of necessitie to all euerie one of you saith he which renounceth not all that he possesseth cannot be my disciple For euen as bearing his crosse is necessarie for all Christians so is willfull pouertie and it is impossible for anie rich man to enter into the kingdome of heauen which places if they be vnderstood against actuall possession of worldlie goods what followeth but Anabaptisticall confusion For they are expresse commaundements and denialls to all not lost to the choise of a fewe It remaineth therefore that they be vnderstood of the minde loue affection and truste in wordlie riches not of budelie vse or hauing eiuill proprietie in them Neither doth it follow that the perfection of a Christian life consisteth in wilfull pouertie because our sauiour said vnto the rich yonge man that boasted that he had fullfilled the commaundements If thou wilt be perfect goe sell all that thou haste c. For by perfest he meaneth such a one as the yong man professed him-selfe to be in whome nothing wanted Againe he was further commaunded to follow Christ as his Apostles did and to take vs the crosse Therefore it was no generall counsell to all that desire perfection but a speciall discouerie of that mans worldely affection and hypocrisie which preferred temporall things before eternall felicitie and yet boasted that he had kept the commaundements from his youth And Luke 12. where he willeth his disciples to sell their possessions and giue almes he sheweth the dutie of all men which is not to spare their owne patrimonie but euen to sell their possessions rather then the poore shoud perish for lacke of necessaries yet not to make our selues beggers or to be pinched that other might haue ease but that equalitie might be obserued as the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 8. 13. So that hetherto we haue not willfull pouertie such as is that of the Iesuites by Christes example or counsell commended vnto vs. But you adde further If the Apostles left all proprietie and did liue in common as the seripture noteth c. But the Apostles left not all proprietie allthough they forsooke all thinges For Peter retained the proprietie of his house Matthew made agreat feast of his owne goodes I warrant you Iohn receiued the virgine Mary into his owne to prouide for hir Neither had the Apostles and Christians in
haue beene hither to frustrate and the strength of the Turke is increased by our warres The second is that vnder pretext of making warre against the Turke the Popehath vsed to rake mony to gether for their pardons And he concludeth that without repentance and the ouerthrow of the Popes tyrannie there is no hope to preuaile in warre against the Turkes because God is not on our side butiustlie incensed against vs. Quantòrectius saith he faceremus c. How much better should we do if first with our praiers yea rather by changeing the wholl course of our life we reconcile God vnto vs And then that the Emperours the princes would restraine that Idole of Roome from tyrannie deceit and destroying of souies For that I also maie once prophecie although I know I shall not be heard Except the Pope of Rome be brought vnder all Christendome is vndonne Let him flie as Christ hath taught into the mountaines he that can or with confidence let him offer his life to death vnto the Romish murtherers The Popedome can worke nothing but sinne and destruction what will you more But who shall subdue the Pope Christ by the brightnes of his comming and none other Lord who hath beleeued our preaching he that hath eares to heare let him heare and let him absteine from the Turgish warre while the name of the Pope preuaileth vnder heauen I haue said By this you maie see that Luther fauored not the empire of infidelitie but sheweth by what meanes it maie be resisted Againe he forbiddeth not defense against the Turke but inuasion of the Turke when we maie be at peace with him For that it is lawfull to fight against the Turke in our owne defense he sheweth his opinion in consut Rat. Latomianae where he derideth the follie of Latomus and the diuines of Louane which racked the decree of Pope Leo to this sense that it was needles to answer the aduersaties of religion which is as great wisedome of the schoole of Louane in proceeding against Luther as if when the Turke doth set vpon vs which is no waies lawfull for him and yet he will not be staid we should send the diuines of Louane embassadors vnto him which should saie vnto him It is not lawfull for thee to fight and if thou do we will condemne thee and so suffer him to raunge at his pleasure and yet boast that we haue gotten the victorie Nay saith he let vs laie aside praiers and all spirituall armour and cease to resist the deuill denouncing vnto him and saying It is not lauful for thee to trouble the Church of God So that Luther by these wordes declareth his iudgement that it is as lawfull for vs and as necessarie with bodelie armour to defend our selues against the Turke assailing vs as it is to fight against the deuill with spirituall armour and to confute enemies of the trueth by the word of God For a fourth example of impietie you adde when he reprehended the Pope for defining beside scripture that the soule is immortall and calleth it a monster of the dunghill of Rome what ground of impietie doth he not laie In deed if Luther should denie the immortalitie of the soule as Pope Iohn the 23. did and was therefore conuicted and condemned in the Counsell of Constance wee would accurse Luthers memorie as much as the Popes But if Luther reprehended the Pope for deliuering that vpon the creditte of his owne definition and authoritie which is manifestlie grounded vpon the authoritie of holie scriptures what a slaunderous penne haue you He was charged by the Collectors art 37. to haue saide thus Certum est in manu Ecclesiae c. It is certaine that it is not in the hand of the Church or of the Pope at all to decree articles of the faith nay nor yet lawes of manners and good workes To this article Luther answereth thus Probo hunc sic c. This article I prooue thus 1. Cor. 3. No man can lay any other foundation beside that which is alreadie laide which is Iesus Christ. Here thou hast the foundation laid by the Apostles but euerie article of faith is part of this foundation therefore none other article can be laid then is alreadie laid There may be builded vpon as the same Apostle saith And therefore the Pope ought to be laide and builded vpon the same foundation but not to lay any foundation for all things to be beleeued are fully set forth in the scriptures Yet I permit that the Pope may make articles of faith to them that beleeue in him such as these are That the bread and wine are transsubstantiated in the sacrament That the essence of god doth neither beget nor is begotton That the soul is the substantiall forme of the bodie That he him seife is the Emperour of the world King of heauen and an earthly God That the soull is immortall And all those infinite monsters in the Romish dunghill of decrees that such as his faith is such may be his Gospell such his beeleeuers such his Church and that like lippes may haue like lettice and the cup a couer meete for it But we which are Christians and not Papanes doe know that there is nothing pertaining either to faith or good manners which is not abundantlie set forth in the holie scriptures that there is neither authoritie nor place for men to decree any other thing These wordes declare that what doctrine is true and needefull to be knowne must be receiued from God by the holie scriptures not from the Popes decrees or from any mortall mans authoritie It is maruaile you doe not charge Luther with holding the pluralitie of Gods because here prehendeth the Pope for defining that the essence of god can neither beget nor be begotton as wel as with denying the immortality of the soul. both which articles are to be taken out of the holie scriptures not from the authoritie of the Popes definition For though the Pope define any thing which is true yet it must not be receiued vpon his creditte but vpon the authoritie of Gods worde And seeing the Popes decrees doe containe such a number of vntruethes the articles of faith from the Popes decrees may receiue discredit rather then authoritie But all thinges must be examined according to the worde of God writen which is the truth yea euen the scripture comming from the mouth of the deuill Againe I wish the reader to consider how truelie you saie that Luther calleth that opinion of the immortalitie of the soule a monster of the dunghill of Rome when he speaketh of the infinite monsters of falsehoode that are found in the dunghill of the Popes decrees where of he maketh no expresse mention in answere to this article The last example of impiety is when Luther affirmeth and mantaineth that neither man nor Angell on earth can laie any one lawe vpon any one Christian further then he will him-selfe What foundation say you
examples of inuocation of Saintes praier for the dead purgatorie and the like if you can winne them either by manifest wordes or by necessarie conclusion we are content you shall weare them and we also wilyeald vnto them otherwise you prate without proofe of expressed in the scripture trifling vppon the terme expressed which either we vse not in this question or els we meane therbie certainlie declared and taught in the scriptures either in expresse wordes or by necessarie conclusion But now let vs see how Master Chark is distressed in answering these twelue particulers For the first of the seauen which he acknowledgeth to be contained in the scripscripture which is that there is two natures and two wills in Christ he citeth these wordes Rom. 1. of his sonne which was made vnto him of the seede of Dauid according to the flesh Also Math. 26. not as I will but as thou wilt here you saie that the interpretation of the Church being set aside and the bare text onelie admitted these places cannot conuict an heretike yes verelie the onelie authoritie of the textis sufficient to confit me faith and to conuince an heretike For the former point thus The diuinitie and humanitie are two natures in Christ is diuinitie and humanitie ergo two natures The maior is manifest the minor is plaine by the text the sonne of God one nature the seede of Dauid an other nature For the fecond point The will of God and the will of man the one contradictorie to the other are two willes In Christ was the will of God contradictorie to the wil of man ergo two wills The minor is prooued out of the text not as I wil but as thou wilt seeing Christ was both God man That the Monothelits in the 6. Councill of Costantinople could not be conuinced out of the scriptures it is an intollerable slaunder of that reuerend assemblie for euen by this text and manie other their error was made manisest wherunto albeit the consent of the aun cient fathers was added yet is there no word in all that 4. action which you quote to prooue that they were not sufficientlie confuted out of the holie scriptures The second point is the proceeding of the holie ghost from the father and the sonne equallie for which Master Chark quoteth Ioh. 15. 26. When the holie ghoste shall come which I will send you from my father the spirit of trueth which proceedeth from the father c. Against this you cauill that it prooueth not the proceeding equallie and cite Cyril for your witnes in 15. Ioh. who out of this place prooueth that equally as wel as the proceeding seeing the heretikes might be ashamed to say that the spirit of the father was sent by the son as by a minister which also if they should saie he disprooueth for that if the sonn were as a minister he should be of an other substance then the father and the spirit proceeding from the father being of the same substance with the father should be greater in nature then the fonne whereas the sonne saith plainlie of the holy ghoste he shal glorifie me c. An other cauil you haue that this place telleth not whether he proceeded by generation or without generation from the father But it is sufficient that neither this place nor any other place of scripture teacheth that the holie ghoste is begotten therefore we beleeue without generation The third point is the vnion of the word vnto the nature of man and not to the person of man which because you did set downe obscurelie M. Charke did not rightlie vnderstand yet the text that the quoteth 1. 〈◊〉 14. The word was made flesh includeth that assertion also seeing there was no person of the man when the vnion was made vnto the nature of man but the word in taking vpon him the nature of man did vnite him selfe to it in vniting tooke it as it is euident Luk. 1. 35. Mat. 1. 20. The fourth doctrine is the baptising of infants for which Master Charke quoteth Gen. 17. 12. the infant of eight daies shall be circumcised Against this you haue manie trifling cauills that baptisme is not expressed of the sexe of the eight daie Against which I oppose the authoritie of Saint Augustine which lib. 1. cont Crescon Grammat cap. 31. confuteth the rebaptization of such as were baptized by heretikes by example of them that were circumcised by the Samaritantes whose circumcision was not to be repeated to whome the like might be obiected But it is sufficient that wherein baptisme answereth to circumsion the reason is one in both Circumcision was the sacrament of regeneration as baptisme is the one giuen to infantes ergo the other The cerimonie of the eight day had an other reason not needefull to be obserued in baptisme The distinction of the sexe is taken awaie by Christ in whome there is neither male nor female That Beza was striken dumme with this question in the conference at Poyssie it is a slaunder of Cladius de Xanctes confuted by Beza him-selfe But you had rather followe Saint Augustine who contendeth and prooueth that baptizing of infantes is onelie a tradition of the Apostles and not left vs by anie written Scripture lib. 10. cap. 23. super Gen. ad lizeram So you write but I will set downe Saint Augustines wordes that the reader may see what contention and proofes he vseth hauing protested of his ignorance how the reasonable soule commeth into the bodie he concludeth that the baptisme of infantes fauoreth their opinion which thinke that soules are procreated of the parentes And of the baptisme of infantes thus he writeth Consuctudo tamen matris Ecclesiae in baptizandis paruulis nequaquam spernenda est neque vllo modo superflua de putanda nec omnino credenda nisi Apostolica esset traditio Habet enim illaparua aet as magnum testimonij pondus quae prima pro Christo meruit sanguinē fundere Yet the custome of our mother the Church in baptizing of infantes is not to be despised nor by any meanes to be thought superfluous nor to be credited at all if it were not an Apostolike tradition for euen that litle age hath greate weight of testimonie which first obteined to shed blood for Christ. You see that here is neither contention not profe that it is onelie a tradition not leftin writing for he alledgeth one testimonie out of Scripture of gods acceptation of that age to martirdome much rather to baptisme and manie other testimonies might be brought for the same purpose as Matt. 19. 14. 1. Cor. 7. 14. c. As for Origen he doth onelie make mention of the baptisme of infants according to the obseruance of the Church to prooue originall sinne But whether it stand onelie vpon tradition and not vpon the scripture he saith not one word The 5. Doctrine is the changeing of the Sabbath into Sondaie M. Charke quoteth Apo. 1. 10. I was in the spirit on
the Lordes daie Here you cauill that there is no mention of Saturdaie or sondaie much lesse of celebration of either and least of all of the changeing of the Sabbath into an other daie But if it please your Censurship are you ignorant what day of the weeke is called dies Dominicus the Lordsday whether saturdaie or sondaie if it be sondaie as al professors of Christes name confesse here is as much mention thereof as is needfull for the daie into which the change is made Or if that be not sufficient you maie haue further Act. 20. 7. 1. Cor. 16. 2. And whie is the first of the Sabbath called the Lordes daie but in respect of the celebration there of in honour of the redemption of the world by Christ For otherwise all daies of the weeke are the Lordes daies in respect of their creation Thirdlie seeing the Lordes daie was one daie in the weeke vsed for the assemblie of the Church for their spirituall exercises of Religion it is certaine that the change of the Iewish Sabbath was made into that daie except you would be so waywatd to saie there were two daies in euerie weeke appointed by God to be celebrated whereas the lawe of God requireth but one and giueth libertie of bodelie exercise in sixe daies So that the change of the Sabbath daie is sufficientlie prooued out of the Scripture into the Lordes daie The sixt point is about foure Gospells and the Epistle to the Romanes which Master Charke saith to be prooued out of the scripture but yet he quoteth no place of scripture where onelie he saith the inscription expresseth the names of the writers But what a mocker is this you saie Are the bare names of the Apostles sufficient to prooue that they were written by them who can prooue by scripture that these names are not counterfet as in the Epistle to the Laodiceans in the Gospells of Bartholomew and Thomas c. But abide you sir your question hath two branches the one that the 4. Go spells are true Gospells the other that the epistle to the Romanes was written by Saint Paul and not that to the Laodiceans To the former it is answered that they are prooued by other vndoubted bookes of the scripture both of the olde testament and the new secing they declare that to be fullfilled of Christ which was spoken in the lawe in the Prophetes and in the Psalmes To the other it is answered that admitting the Epistle to the Romanes to be scripture the inscription of his name is sufficient to prooue that it was written by Saint Paull And so of therest Although the name of the writer is not materiall vnto saluation when the booke is receiued to be Canonicall as diuers bookes of scripture are receiued whose writer is vnknowne That Epistle which is called to the Laodicians is not receiued and therefore the inscription is vnsufficient as the Gospelles of Bartholomew and Thomas and such like which are knowne to be countefet by the dissent they haue from the other canonicall scriptures Whereas you require one place of Scripture to prooue all the foure Gospelles to be canonicall you declare your wrangling and wayward spirit But name you anie one point of Doctrine writen in anie of those foure Gospells and the same shall be aduouched by other textes of scripture and so maie eucrie point conteined in them if neede were But you affirme that Origen saith he reiecteth the Gospell of Saint Thomas onelie for that the tradition of the Church receiued it not Which is false He saith he hath read the Gospell after Thomas after Mathias and manie other Sed in his omnibus nihil aliud probamus niss quod Ecclesia idest quatuor tantùm euangelia recipienda But in all these we allowe nothing els but that which the Church alloweth that is that onelie foure Gospells are to be receiued In these wordes he affirmeth that he approoueth the iudgment of the Church he saith not that the iudgement or traditions of the Church was the onelie cause whie he reiected those Gospells for he said before they were receiued of heretikes and wherefore but in maintenance of their heresie which is contrarie to the holie scriptures That all counterfet Go spells were reiected by the Church it is confessed but the Church had this iudgement of discretion confirmed by the canonical scriptures against which Epiphanius saith nothing But when Faustus the Manichie denied the Gospell of Saint Mathew saie you saith not S. Augustine Mathaei Euangelium probatum aduersus Faustum Manichaeum per traditionem The Gospell of Mathew was alleged against Faustus the Manichie by tradition August lib. 28. Cont. Faust. c. 2. If you aske me I saie no he hath no such wordes Yet doth he auouch the Gospell of Saint Mathew in that Chapter by testimonie of the Church from the Apostles by continuall succession euen vnto his time against the Maniches but in far other words then you haue set downe in steed of Saint Augustines wordes by which the reader maie once against perceiue how impudentlie and ignorantlie you ailedge whatsoeuer the note booke which was neuer of your own gatheriug because you vnderstood it not did minister vnto you For these are the wordes of the collector of your notes not of S. Augustine Maie not the papists haue great ioie of such a Cenfure defender Yet you triumph like a Iustie champion and aske what can be more euident then all this to prooue our opinion of the necessitie of tradition to confound the fonde madnes of this poore Minister Alas poore defender what waightie euidencethou hast brought to prooue the necessity of tradition which prooueth thee to be a blind beggerlie yet a bolde brocher of other mens notes which thou vnderstandest not thy selfe The seuenth doctrine which is required to be prooued out of the scripture is that God the father begat his sonne onelie by vnderstanding him-selfe Here Master Charke in steede of these darke wordes out of Thomas how the father begat the sonne wisheth cleare and perfect wordes in so high a mysterie which you saie are plaine and vsuall to those which haue studied any thing in diuinitie As though there were no diuinitie in the holie scriptures and so many of the auncient fathers which haue neither this question nor these wordes but that al diuinity were included in the brest of Thomas Aquinas and such doctors as he was That he quoteth a place or two of the scripture to prooue that Christ was the onelie begotten sonne of God you make smal account of seeing the question is of the māner how this generation maybe which the Church de fendeth against the aduersaries And here you insult against M. chark as ignorant in those high points of diuinitie whereas Catholiks know what the Church hath determined herein against heretikes and infidels as though either of both cared for the Churches determination if the one were not vanquished by scripture the other by right reason
Laodicea or from the Laodiceans which in sense maie be al one with the most vsuall reading that expresseth the preposition from Therefore it is true that Master Charke saith by both the editions and by the vulgar Latine text also that albeit manie make mention of an Epistle written by Saint Paull to the Laodiceans he him selfe maketh none The 12. section Of the Scriptures missalledged for the contrarie by M. Charke THe text is 2. Tim. 3. 16. 17. The wholl Scripture is inspired of God and is profitable c. The Censure had cauiled against his translation which it was nessarie for him to defend against which defence you haue nothing to replie and therefore begin with the first reason about profitable and sufficient Hetahis profitable sometimes shall import sufficient and not barelie profitable as for example when some reason is adioyned why it should be profitable nothing els applied or seruing to that effect as when the Apostle writeth that godlines is profitable to al things hauing the promises of this life and of the life to come where profitable importeth sufficient for the obtaining of all good thinges of both liues Against this you trifle First that it is but a slender argument to inferre one particular of an other But if your eies were matches your might see a particular inferred of an vniuersall Whersoeuer some reason is alledged whie a thing should be so prositable that nothing els is necessarie for the effect there profitable importeth sufficient as in that example godlines is profitable for all thinges c. But so it is in the text in question therefore in that text profitable importeth sufficient Neuertheles in your opinion M. Charke is vttrerlie deceiued in this example of godlines which by the 〈◊〉 of Saint Ambrose Saint Ierome and Saint Augustine importeth no more but that godlines hath her promises of reward in all actions whether they be about matters of this life or of the life to come So that the meaning is that pietie meriteth in all actions but is not sufficient to the obtaining of all good thinges of both liues First concerning Saint Ambrose reade him who will vpon this text and he shall finde the contrarie Pietati operam dandam commonet quia grandem habet presectum Qui enim misericordiae student senioribus 〈◊〉 reddentes parentibus in presenti vita auxilia Dei non 〈◊〉 in He admonisheth to labour in godlines because it hath greas profit For they that are mercifull 〈◊〉 their olde Parents loue they shall 〈◊〉 mant the helpe of God in this present life and in the world to come they shalhaue immortalitie with glorie Againe omnis enim 〈◊〉 discipline 〈◊〉 in misericus dia pietate est All the summe of our discipline is in 〈◊〉 and pietie Now pietie as you confesse comprehendeth charitie and the loue of God And therefore in the end Saint Ambrose after he hath shewed that bodelie exercise taken for fasting and abstinence without godlines shal haue 〈◊〉 punishment concludeth that fasting and abstinence of men that are spirituall being to the end of pietie is comprehended therein S. Ieromes wordes vpon this text are no more but these Et 〈◊〉 tempus in futurum nam ipsa vidua in presenti casta est merces eius manetinea Godlines is profitable c. both for the present time for the time to come For euen the widow her selfe is both chast in the present time her reward abideth in her What is here against the sufficiencie of pietie S. Augustine de morib Eccles. lib. 1. c. 33. hath onelie these wordes 〈◊〉 to this text speaking of the godlie life of Christians liuing vnder discipline in citties Ita pietatem sedulò exercent corporis verò exercitationem vt ait idem Apostolus ad exiguum tempus 〈◊〉 nouerunt So they exercise godlines diligentlie as for corporall exercise as the same Apostle saieth they knowe to pertaine but to a short time Where is here either the vnsufficiencie orthe merit of godlines for the promise of reward is of mercie not of merit This reason therefore of Master Charkes for the safficiencie of the Scripture standeth im mooueable seeing the Scripture is so profitable to all points of doctrine that nothing els is required to perfection The second reason you saie he frameth in these wordes That which is profitable to all the partes which maie be required to perfection cannot but be sufficient for the perfection of the wholl but that the Scripture is profitable in such manner the Apostle doth fullie declare in rehearsing all the particular partes which are necessarie and adding also after generallie that the man of God maie be perfect 〈◊〉 the Scripture is 〈◊〉 Here of your charitie you praie God to helpe Master Charke 〈◊〉 him that he is a simple one to take controuerfies in hand And then you aske what boie in Cambridge would haue reasoned thus And whie all this forsooth euery boie knoweth there is a cause sine qua non which is not onelie profitable but also necessarie to all partes whereof it is such a cause and yet it is not sufficient alone either to the partes or to the wholl as the head is 〈◊〉 for all the actions of this life as to sing weepe dispute yet is it not sufficient alone to performe these actions Therefore it followeth not that whatsoeuer is profitable to all particular partes should be sufficient to all Dij te Damasyppe 〈◊〉 verunrob consilium 〈◊〉 tonsore Or as we saie in English the vicar of fooles be your Ghosllie father Did you learne when you were a boic in Cambridge orOxford to repeate your aduersaries proposition by halfes then to confute as much there of as you list Looke backe you shall finde that his proposition is not what soeuer is profitable to all particular parts is sufficient for the wholl but whatsoeuer is profitable to all the partes which maie be required to perfection is sufficient for the perfection of the wholl or whatsoeuer is so profitable to euery part as maketh the wholl perfect is sufficient to the wholl Against these propositions if you haue anie thing to obiect perhappes we shall haue it in your next replie for hetherto you haue said nothing and his argument standeth still His third reason is taken of the wordes of S. Paull immediatlie before where he saieth vnto Timothie That the holie Scriptures which he had learned from his infancie were able to make him wise vnto saluation So the argument is this that which is able to make a man wise vnto saluation is sufficient the holy scriptures are of ability to make a man wise vnto saluation ergo they are sufficient But this you denie What I praie you for I hope the 〈◊〉 be rightlie framed In effect the minor which is the very wordes of Saint Paull For as though either you knew not or cared not for the originall text which saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which are able to make thee wise you harpe onelie vpon the word of instructing which the vulgar interpreter vseth not sufficient to answere the greeke verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet if it be rightlie vnderstood as perhappes he meant it signifieth to furnish and not to teach properlie so the sense might be that the scripture is able to furnish thee with knowledge to saluation and that 〈◊〉 a sufficiencie Now to your pelting cauilles You aske if the Scriptures which can shew Timothie the waie to saluation and bring him also to it if he will follow them be sufficient for the wholl Church so that all Doctrine by tradition is superfluous I answere yea For there is but one waie to saluation for all the Church But you obiect that euerie Epistle of Saint Paull enstructeth a man to saluation yet it not sufficient for the wholl Church I answere that euerie Epistle of Saint Paull is not sufficient to instruct a man to saluation or to make him wise vnto saluation But that which Saint Paull spaketh is of the wholl scripture not of euery epistle For you might as well obiect that euery chapter and verse instructeth a man toward saluation rather then to saluation but not sufficientlie yet the wholl is able to make a man wise vnto saluation Your second obiection is that the Apostle speaketh principallie of the olde Testament and will Master Charke saie that the olde Testament is sufficient to Christian men for their saluation without anie other writt Yea I warrant you for there is no Doctrine in the new but it was taught in the olde Saint Paull affirmeth that he said nothing but that which the Prophetes and Moses had spoken of thinges to be performed The new Testament hath no other Doctrine then the olde onelie it testifieth the performance of those thinges in Christ which the olde Testament foreshewed to be performed Againe because you grate so much vpon the exclusion of other writt Saint Paull addeth by faith in Iesus Christ which containeth all that is written in the new Testament concerning the storie of performancet and seales of this faith And if the olde were sufficient how much more is the olde the new together a rich aboundant Doctrine The 〈◊〉 that you make against his translation of the wholl Scripture which you would referre to euerie Scripture is answered before the translation must be according to the circumstance of the place Euerie Scripture which is euerie seuerall booke or euerie seuerall Chapter or euerie seuerall verse is not able to make the man of God perfect and perfectlie prepared to euerie good worke but the wholl is therefore the translation must be the whole scriptures and not euerie scripture But now to your tow reasons In the first you saie that Saint Paull could not meane to Timothie of all the scriptures together which we now vse for that all was not then written To this you confesse that he answereth there was inough written then for the susficient saluation of men of that time and therest is not superfluous But this you saie is from the purpose Yea is how so I praie you you answere it was sufficient with the supplie by worde of 〈◊〉 vnwritten but that is contrarie to the purpose for Master Charke telleth you that from the time that any 〈◊〉 was written that scripture contanied sufficient 〈◊〉 to saluation without anie supply of anie other Doctrine that was not in that Scripture comprehended although preaching and other meanes were necessarie to reach men which is beside the purpose Before the scripture was written the same doctrine in substance was deliuered by reuelation that afterwarde was written The continuance thereof was not onelie by bare tradition but also in euerie age renewed by reuelation Againe the age of men was lo long that there remained alwaies faithfull and ceratine witnesses of the doctrine aliue so that it could not be corrúpted but it was easie by those witnesses to be refuted But when the age of man was drawne into the streights of 70. yeares or litle more as Moses sheweth the Doctrine of the Church was committed to writing euen as much at the first as was sufficient for the instruction of the people vnto saluation without anie supplie of traditions The 〈◊〉 of the Prophetes and Apostles writinges is a more full and plentifull declaration of thesame Doctrine of saluation not anie addition of anie new Doctrine or waie to saluation Your second reason is that 〈◊〉 partes of scripture be wanting now which were in Saint Pauls time But that you are not able to prooue For although there is mention in the olde testament of diuerse bookes written by Prophets which are not now extant yet it followeth not that those were extant in Saint Pauls time And if any were yet were they but explications and interpretations of the bookes of Moses which are extant euerie syllable and pricke and shall be to the ende of the world But Epiphanius affirmeth that all thinges cannot be taken from the scripture wherefore the Aposties 〈◊〉 somethings in writing and somethings in tradition To this I answere first that Saint Paul is greater then Epiphanius Secondlie that Epiphanius saith not that anie thing necessarie to saluation cannot be taken out of the scripture For he speaketh onelie of this opinion that it is sinne to marrie after virginitie decreed which neuertheles maie be taken out of the scripture if the vow were aduisedlie taken and no necessitie of incontinencie requiring mariage But of tradition we shall haue further to consider in the next section The thirteenth section intituled Of teaching traditions besides the scripture Art 5. GOtuisus reporteth the Iesuits to saic that the want of holie scriptures muste be supplied by peecing it out by traditions Cens. f. 220. Here you repeat your olde friuolous quarrel that the Iesuites haue no such vnreuerent words Master Chark chargeth you out of Hosius with a farre worseisaying that if traditions be reiected the verie Gospell it selfe seemeth to be reiected For what els are traditions then a certaine liuing Gospell But thereto you answere not one worde and the meaning of those words reported by Gotuisus you mainteine egerlie thorouhout this section as you did in parte in the 12. section that the scriptures are not sufficient and that there must be traditions receiued beside the scripture To what ende but to supplie the want and insufficiencie of the holie scriptures Nay saie you Though both parts of Gods worde that is both written and vnwritten be necessarie vnto Gods Church yet both of them do stand in their full perfection assigned them by God neither is the one a maime or impeachment to the other You meane they are as perfect as God made them not that the written word is sufficient to teach all trueth vnto the perfection of the man of God And so for all your vaine compasse of wordes the sense is all one The scripture is but a part or a
peece of Gods worde and traditions are an other peece and this peece must be added to that or els it is not a perfect or sufficient instruction of itselfe for Gods Church The comparison you make of ioyning S. Lukes Gospell to that of Saint Matthew or Saint Paules epistles to them both to resemble your patching of traditions to the written word of God is both odious and vnlike and without begging the wholl matter in question gaineth nothing For the adding of the writings of one Euangelist to another or of an Apostle to the Euangelistes is but the heaping of heauenlie treasure to the further inriching of the Church in all light of spirituall knowledge so the accession of the bookes of the new testament is as it were the vnfolding or laying open of the same diuine riches that was perfectlie contayned in the olde testament for the saluation of all Gods elect that liued vnder that discipline But your traditions as you maintaine them argue an insufficiencie of the holie scriptures which allso you confesse your selfe and are not a more plaine or plentifull application of the mysteries comprehended in them Therefore though you can for manners sake otherwhile forbeare odious speeches aginst the dignitie of holie scriptures yet euen that odious conclusion gathered by Gotuisus must needes follow of your doctrine concerning the insufficiencie of scriptures and the necessitie of traditions That your traditions are Gods word and of equall authoritie with the scriptures you promise to shew more largelie in the twelft article together with certaine meanes how to know and discerne the same Sed haec in dicm minitave Parmeno You haue taken a pretie pause of three yeares long since you were interrupted as you 〈◊〉 in the end by a writte de remouendo But the daie will come that shall paie for all Whether anie cause or matter hath beene ministred by you of odious speeches against the dignitie of holie scriptures Mastet Charke declareth by one example out of Hosius which with all the rest that he saith you omit to answer as trifling speech to litle purpose So whatsoeuer by anie colour of reason you can not auoid by your censorious authoritie you maie contemne and passe ouer But his conclusion seemeth worthie the answer which he maketh in these wordes To conclude it is a great iniquitie to adde traditions or your vnwritten verities to the written word of God whereunto no man maie adde because nothing is wanting from which no man maie take because nothing is superfluous But to him that addeth shall the curses written in the booke be added for euer Against this conclusiō you note in the margent great iniquitie to adde one veritie to another or to beleeue two verities together A fine ieste but a grosse begging of the wholl cause For who shal graunt that your vnwritten vereties be truth and not falsehood falselie by you termed verities vnwritten There is no veritie of matters necessarie to be knowne vnto saluation which is not written in the holie scriptures that are hable to make vs wise vnto saluation But good Lord what a sturre you keepe because M. Chatk noteth in the margent Apoc. 22. ask how this place is alledged against you c. As though that which is true of one booke yea of euery booke of the scripture maie not iustlie be verefied of the wholl bodie and boke of the the Bible Because adding to the word of god argueth imperfection in the word of god Your stale obiection of Saint Iohns Gospell written after the Reuelation is alreadie answered For al bookes of scripture that haue beene written since the fiue bookes of Moses are no addition to the word of God but a more cleere explication of the 〈◊〉 first com mitted to writing by inspiration of God Neither do they teach an other waie of saluation then Moses did but set forth the same more plainlie by demonstration by examples of Gods iustice and his mercie by threatenings by exhortations by explication of his promises by shewing the accomplishment and the manner of perfourmance of them in Christ and his Church And this they do moste absolutelie sufficiently and plentifully to the saluation of Gods people These things saith S. Iohn are written that you should beleeue that Iesus is Christ the sonne of God and that beleeuing you maie haue euerlasting life in his name Here you maie as well cauill that not onelie the Gospell of Saint Iohn or the miracles written in the same is necessarie to be beleeued vnto saluation but all the rest of the scripture also foolishlie opposing thinges that are no waie repugnant but the one including the other For the beleeuing of Saint Iohns Gospell doth not exclude but include all other bookes and partes of holie scripture which teach the same meane of saluation or any thing thereto pertaining But how holdeth this argument saie you no man maie adde to the booke of Apocalips ergo no man maie beleeue a tradition of Christ or his Apostles Maie we not as well saie ergo we maie not beleeue the actes of the Apostles No sir for we make our argument in this man ner No man maie adde to the booke of the Apocalips much lesse may anie man adde to the wholl Bible of the olde and new testament And consequentlie there are no traditions of Christ and his Apostles to be credited as needefull to saluation which are not contained in the holy scriptures Thus we alledge scriptures and thus we argue vppon them not as it pleaseth you to deseant vpon our allegations and to dissigure our arguments But it is lamentable you saie to see the 〈◊〉 dealings of these men in matters of such importance It is verie true vnderstanding you and your complices to be the men that vse such fleightes in 〈◊〉 waightie causes As for our doctrine is plaine without any seame that the scriptures are sufficient to saluation therfore al tradition besides them are 〈◊〉 to that purpose But let vs see who 〈◊〉 sleightes by your iudgement First you aske Master Charke what he 〈◊〉 by adding Who doth adde Or in what sense as though his meaning and sense of adding were not manifest as also his accusation that the I suites the Papistes do adde to the word of God their traditions a necessarie to saluation yet not expressed or contained in the word of God But if God saie you left anie doctrine by tradition vnto the Church and our ancetours haue deliuered the same vuto vs especiallie those of the 〈◊〉 Church what shall we do in this case Shall we refuse it It seemeth dangerous and I see no reason The question is not whether we should refuse anie thing that God hath left but whether God hath left anie such tradition to be beleeued vnto salua tion which is not contained in the holie scriptures But if our ancetours of the primitiue Church haue deliuered anie such tradition vnwritten as left by Christ what shall we doe you
the next matter that you saie he prnoueth by tradition it is a question not so needefull to be decided although it may be prooued out of scripture that some of them which were Iohns disciples were baptized by him and so it is like were all the rest seeing Ierusalem and all Iurie and all the coast neere vnto Iordan were baptized by Iohn euen to the Pharisees and Saduces Publicans and souldiers it is not probable that the Apostles whoe before their calling by Christ were of honest and deuout conuersation did neglect that diuine institution which all men that would seeme to be religious made hast to receiue Furthermore you saie he prooueth by tradition the ceremonies of baptisme as deliuered by the Apostles lib. de fide Oper. cap. 9. The question is whether the Eunuch whome Philip baptized made such profession of his faith c. renouncing of the deuill as is required of them that are baptized when the scripture maketh mention onelie of a short confession that Iesus Christ is the sonne of God Where Saint Augustine sheweth that the holie ghost would haue vs to vnderstand that althinges were fulfilled in his baptisme which though they be not expressed in that scripture for breuities sake yet by order of the tradition we know that they are to be fulfilled Where tradition is not taken for that which is altogether beside the scripture but that which according to the scripture deliuereth what is to be obserued concerning the celebration of that sacrament which is the seale of mortification and regeneration That the Lordes supper should be receiued before other meates he thinketh of it as of other ceremontall matters that it came either from Apostolike tradition or from decrees of generall councell yet is it a thing not necessarie alwaies to be obserued for your selues doe housell sicke folkes at all times of the daie or night without respect whether they haue tasted any thing or no otherwise as a matter of order and decencie it is obserued of vs also to minister that sacrament before dinner and to them that be fasting if the case of necessity require not the contrarie Yet againe you saie he prooueth by tradition the exorcisme of such as should be baptized l. de nupt concu cap. 20. l. 6. cont Iulian. c. 2. But the truth is that by the ceremonie of exorcisme exsufflation and renunciation that is vsed in baptisme he goeth about to prooue that infantes before baptisme be in originall sinne and in the power of the deuill as is euident by both the places which prooue not exorcisme to haue beene receiued by tradition but by the end of that ceremonie vpon what beginning soeuer vsed in the Church at that time that infants are borne in originall sinne and subject to the power of Sathan before they be baptized The wordes of the former place are these In veritate itaque non in falsitate c. In truth therefore not in falsehoode the deuils power is exorcised in infants and they renounce him by the heartes and mouthes of their bearers because they cannot by their owne that beeing deliuered from the power of darke nes they may be translated into the kingdome of their Lorde Here is neuer a word of traditiō The second place hath these words Sedetsi nullaratione indagetur nullo sermone explicetur verum est tamen quòd antiquitas c. But although it originall sinne may be sought out by noe reason by no speach it may be expressed yet is it true that by true Catholike faith from auncient time is preached and beleeued thoroughout the wholl Church which would neither exorcise nor exsufflate the children of the faithfull if shee did not deliuer them from the power of darkenes and from the prince of death Here the auncient doctrine of original sinne is confirmed by the olde ceremonies of exorcisme and exsufflation which were vsed in baptisme to signifie that infants were by that sacrament deliuered from the guilt of originall sinne by which they were vnder the power of darkenes and death But that these ceremonies were Apostolike traditions he saith not or that they are of necessitie to 〈◊〉 vsed in baptisme when the one of them namelie 〈◊〉 is not vsed at this day for ought I know in the Popish forme of baptisme The Moscouites in place of it as it seemeth vse excreation For when the Godfathers and Godmothers answere that they renounce the deuil they spit out one the earth as it were in signe of detestation In Saint Augustines time they vsed to blow out In the last place you saie he prooueth by the same tradition that we must offer vp the sacrifice of the masse for the dead lib. de cura pro mort agenda cap. 1. 4. serm 32. de verbis Apostoli Of the sacrifice of the Masse Saint Augustine speaketh nothing but that praiers were offered for the dead at the celebration of the Lordes supper which he calleth sacrifice he saith it was by authoritie of the whol Church which was notable in that custome and that the wholl Church obserued it as deliuered from their fathers But seeing the elder Church for more then an hundred yeares after Christ had no such custome nor doctrine and especiallie seeing the same custome is against faith taught in the holie scriptures that the dead in the Lord are blessed that iudgement followeth immediatelie after death c. The authoritie of faith and trueth is to be preferred before the tradition and custome of men Neither is it to be thought to haue proceeded from the Apostles which is disprooued by the writings of the Apostles the onelie certaine witnes of the doctrine deliuered by them which is necessarie for vs to beeleeue and follow And therefore this new sir Censurer doth greatlie abuse the olde saints whome he would haue patrones of his vnwritten verities partely in charging them to referre vnto tradition many things that they doe not partlie in drawing to doctrine necessarie that which they speake of ceremonies mutable not the least in picking out one or two ouersightes to be pardoned vnder colour of them to maintaine all the grosse heresies of Poperie that are intollerable The fourteenth section Whether the Iesuites speake euil of scripture Art 6. intituled Nose of waxe IF you had ser downe Master Charkes replie betweene your Censure and your defense as reason would you should haue done for men to iudge indifferentlie betweene both you might haue spared more then two pages which you haue spent in charging him with a slaunder of the Iesuites where he reporteth that they saie the scripture is a nose of waxe when they saie it is as a nose of waxe For no reasonable man can make any other sense of those wordes the scripture is a nose of waxe but euen the same that you confesse to be the saying of the Iesuites the scripture is as a nose of waxe as Master Charke telleth you And moreouer that Paiua saith the fathers
of his manhood thus he saith Quòd vnctio sit secundúm humanitatem nemo qui rectè sapere solet dubitabit quia absque omni controuersia minus à maiore benedicitur That the annointing of Christ should be meant of his humanitie no man doubteth that is of anie right vnderstanding For without all controuersie the inferiour and lesse euer receiueth blessing of the superiour and greater There can be no question then but all soueraigntie and supreme iurisdiction which he exercised ouer the Church being his bodie and spouse in that respect that he was either Priest and Bishop of our soules as Saint Peter calleth him or els as he was out head and pastour it is certaine that all this came vnto him by his fathers sending and the vnction of the holie Ghost and the benediction of the holie Trinitie to which he was inferiour accor ding to his manhood FVLKE That our sauiour Christ by his vnction receaued no gift or blessing of God but in respect of his humanitie it is more cleere then it needed to haue beene declared by the testimonies of Hilarius and Cyrillus but that all soueraigntie and supreame inrisdiction which he exercised ouer the Church in respect that he was Priest and Bishop of our soules or as he was our head and Pastor came onelie to his manhoode as Allen maketh it certaine it is vtterlie false and blasphemous against his godheade For vnto all soueraigntie and authoritie he hath full right in respect of his diuinitie and therefore the Apostle Heb. 3. 5. c. saith that Moses was faithfull in Godds house as a seruant but Christ as the sonne ouer his owne house which was builded by himselfe as God which hath made all thinges For what cause Allen speaking of the soueraigntie of Christ ouer his Church vseth the time past saying he was our Priest and Bishop he was our head and pastour it is easie to gesse seeing he laboureth to establish such a soueraigntie and supreme iurisdiction on earth as is derogatorie to the high authoritie of Christ in heauen But the scripture teacheth vs that he is an eternall Priest Heb. 7. 9. c. that he is the shepheard and Bishop of our soules 1. Peter 2. that he is and shall be to the end of the world the heade of his Church Eph. 1 ALLEN If thou doubt of his Priesthood in this case heare Theodoretus Christus autem quód ad humanitatem quidem attinet Sacerdos appellatus est non aliam autem hostiam quám suum corpus obtulit Christ saith he touching his humanitie was called a Priest and he offered no other hoste but his owne bodie But we maie haue more forcible testimonie hereof in Saint Paull him selfe who in sundrie other places that are knowen professeth euerie Bishop to be elected and chosen out among a number of men to offer sacrifice for sinne And that he is made the supreame gouernour head of the Church in his humanitie yea and in respect thereof is appointed to be the high minister of God the father in pardoning or iudgeing the world it is an assured ground of our faith approued not onelie by the consent of all Doctors but also by the Scriptures euerie where protesting that all power in heauen and earth is giuen to Christ in so much that the Apostle calleth him the man in quo viro statuit iudicare orbem tetratum In which or by which appointed man he will iudge the world All these thinges though they maie seeme to the simple to be farre from the matter yet they be both neare our purpose and necessarie to be laied vp in memorie for the further establishing of our faith in the Article proposed and diuerse other profitable pointes of Christian beliefe now impugned FVLKE We doubt not that Christ was a Priest as touching his humanitie as Theodoret saith but we beleeue that he was a Priest as he was the mediator God and man Fot as some ministeriall partes of that office did require that he should be a man áccording to which nature he might be subiect so other parts of the same office required the authoritie of God For none but God hath authoritie to reconcile man and to bring him into the holiest place into the presence and sight of God whereunto he hath full right of his owne nature and dignitie The forcible testimonies that Master Allen citeth out of the Apostle Heb. 5. 9. haue no force to prooue that Christ is not a Priest as he is God and man although they prooue that he is a Priest as he is man But contrariwise if these scriptures be well marked which the Apostle doth alledge out of the second Psalme Thou art my sonne this daie haue I begotten the and out of the 110. psalme thou art a Priest for euer after the order of Melchiseà ech they will make euident proofe vnto vs that Christ not onelie in respect of his humanitie but also in respect of his deitie is our eternall high Priest as he is our sauiour our mediator our redeemer as in other places the Apostle sheweth more plainlie and I haue argued purposelie and plentifullie against the slaunderous note of the Rhemistes in my confutation of the Papistes quarreils against my writings pag 64. vnto the end whereunto I referre the reader for more full satisfaction That Christ in his humanitie is made the supreame gouernor and head of his Church we do constantlie bleeue but that he hath this excellent authoritie in respect of his humanitie alone and not in respect of his diuinitie we can not acknowledge For in respect of his diuinitie his person is capable of all honour glorie power and authoritie which in the onelie respect of his humanitie it were not That he is appointed to iudge the world also in his humanitie we confesse according to the scriptures but seeing I haue prooued before that to be iudge of the world is proper to the deitie we must needes confesse that the man Iesus Christ is appointed to be iudge of the quick and the dead not onely as an high minister deputed of God in respect of his humanitie but as God him-selfe of supreame authority in respect of his diuinitie For to holde that Christ is no otherwise iudge of the world but as an high minister as kings and Princes are iudges of the earth as high ministers by deputation onelie of Gods authoritie committed to them and not by right of their nature I see not how it can be excused from grosse Nestorianisme The scriptures which protest that all power in heauen and earth is geuen to Christ are to be vnderstood in deede of the exaltation of his humanitie and crowning of his manhood with glorie and maiestie but thereof it followeth not that Christ enioyeth all that power that is giuen to him by the onelie right of his humanitie For except Christ were God as verilie as he is man he were not able to receiue such a gift which no
which only meane of preaching expressed in this place you with a Marie for all that fumble vp with I cannot tell what guidance because you cannot content your selfe to be a minister a seruant a subiect but you must be a Lord a Prince a ruler But the other text of Ioh. 20. yousay doth properlie concerne the commission giuen to the Apostles for the sacrament of penaunce and remission of sins But whether I praie you in the scripture shal we read of this your sacrament or the institution thereof what is the visible worde or element thereof yet you saie that this text doth in moste cleare and vndoubted sense giue to them the like right in that case that Christ him-selfe had by the sending of God the father that is to saie the verie same authoritie that he had in respect of his mediation and manhood So that be like Christ as Mediator hath no authority peculiar to himselfe in respect of the excellency of his person but that which is communicable vnto others and is communicated to his Apostles But that is a strange doctrine neuer heard of before in the Church of God except it were from the mouth of Nestorius or any of his disciples For our sauiour Christ receiued in his manhoode that which no other man is able to receiue because he one lie is God and man he receiued the spirit not according to measure Iohn 3. 34. as all men muste do that receiue it therefore no man can receiue such power by the spirit in measure which he receiued by the spirit infinitelie or without measure But Saint Augnstine is called to witnes that this text doth giue theverie same authoritie to the Apostles that Christ had in respect of his mediation and manhoode Whereas Saint Augustines words import no such thing but onelie shew that Christ though equal to his father in respect of his Godheade yet as he is our Mediatour is sent of his father in respect of his manhood But of the verie same authoritie that Christ had in respect of his mediation giuen to the Apostles he speaketh not a word That you ioyne his māhood to his mediation as though the mediator were nothing but man or as though the man Iesus Christ which is our onelie mediator were not Immannell that is God with vs it is not without some smack of Nestorian heresie wherebie you seeme so to separate the man from God as though any thing might be verified of the man which in respect of the vnitie of person might not be verified of God or as though there were not such a perfect vnion of the two natures in one person that although they both continue vnconfounded reteining their essentiall properties yet any part of the office and authoritie of Christ which he exercised in his humanitie might as latgelie as fullie and with the verie same authoritie be committed ouer to any other mortall man to be exercised as it was by Christ himselfe But Theophilact is cited to be an interpreter of Saint Augustine whoe saith vpon these wordes as the father hath sent me c. in the person of Christ take vpon you my worke and be sure that I will be with you meaning that he committeth to them the office of teaching whereunto he was sent by his father but of equall authoritie with him he speaketh no worde Which place you haue verie licentiouslie translated to draw it to your purpose For the words are no more but these as Philippus Montanus hath translated them Meum opus inquit suscipite confidite quod vobiscum sum futurus And in the ende he willeth men to consider the dignitie of priests that it is diuine For it perteineth to God to remit sinnes so therefore are they to be honoured as God For although they be vnworthie what is that they are the ministers of Gods giftes and grace worketh by them euen as he spake by Balaams asse For our vnworthines hindreth not grace so because by meanes of priests grace is graunted they are to be honoured Thefe wordes of Theophilact declare that although he ascribe much to the dignitie of Priests yet he doth not allowe them the verie same authoritie that Christ had in respect of his mediation but a farre inferior ministerie And excellentlie to our purpose wrote the holie father Cyril as well for the dignitie of the Apostolike vocation as for the honourable legacie in these wordes Ad gloriosum Apostolalatum Dominus noster Iesus Christus Discipulos suos vocduit qui commotum orbem firmarunt sustentacula eius facti vnde per Psalmistam de terra de Apostolis dicit quia ego firmaui columnas eius Columnae enim robur veritatis discipulisunt quos ita dicit se mittere sicut à patre ipse missus est vs Apostolatus dignitatem ostenderet magnitudinem potestatis eorum aperiret These wordes and the residue following concerning the same purpose goe thus in english Our Lord and master Christ Iesus promoted his disciple to a glorious Apostleship whoe becing made the proppes and staies of all the earth haue established the wauering worlde whereupon the Psalmist sayeth thus of the earth and the Apostles I haue surelie and firmelie set the pillers thereof For the disciples no doubt be the verie pillers strength and staie of trueth whome Christ saith that he doth send euen as his father did send him that thereby he might declare to the worlde as well the dignitie of their Apostleship as open to all men their excellencie and the might of their power and no lesse signifie vnto them what way they had to take in all their life and studies For if they be so sent as Christ him selfe was sent of the father it is requisite to consider for what worke purpose the father euerlasting sent his sonne in flesh to the worlde And that him selfe els where declareth saying Non veni vocare iustos sed peccatores ad poenitentiam I came not to cal the iust but sinners to repen tance in another place it is said God sent not his sonne into the world to iudge the worlde but that the worlde shold be saued by him al these thinges and other he touched brieflie in these few wordes Sicus misit me pater ego mitto vos vt hinc intelligant vocandos esse 〈◊〉 ad poenitentiam 〈◊〉 corpore simul spiritumale habentes Like as my father sent me so I send you that sinners should be called to repentance and be healed both in bodie and soule Thus farre spake S. Cyril of the excellent calling of the disciples of the cause of their large commission not restricted by any streighter tearmes then Christs owne commission was which he receiued from his euerlasting Father FVLKE The wordes of Saint Cyrillus declare no more then I haue said before that the Apostles were sent of Christ as Christ was sent of his father to call sinners to repentance by their ministerie of preaching not
vertue of the holie Ghost hath euer beene in it selfe bòth so plaine and so firme that the holie fathers haue vsed it as a ground to prooue against heretikes of Eunomius and Macedonius sectc the Godhheade of the holie Ghost the third person in Trinitie FVLKE You remember Saint Augustine but you can rehearse nothing that he saith touching this matter to confirme the deifying of your poeticall Popish halfe gods the Popish Faunes and Satyres saue onelie the generall argument of vniuersall consent and practize which if it be denyed you you are at a stale til you can prooue it You saide that priests as deified persons halfe Gods not meere men had abilitie to exercise the proper workes of God For otherwise the lawfull power and practize of remitting sinnes is so sufficientlie authorized by the words of the Gospel that it neede not be vnderproped with Saint Augustines generall argument wherein yet he neuer placed so great force as you affirme of him ALLEN S. Bernard is too young good man to name amongst these olde fathers of our new Church els perdie with the vertuous his wordes sound full sweetelie Thus saith he to prooue the equalitie of the holie Ghost with the Father and the sonne Sicut in nobis interpellas pro nobis ita a in patre delicta donatcum ipso Patre vt omnino scias quòd remissionem peccatorum spiritus sanctus operatur audi quod aliquando audierunt Apostoli Accipite Spiritum sanctum quorum remiserit is peccata remittuntur eis In English thus Like as in vs he maketh sute for vs so in the father he pardoneth sinnes with the father and that thou maiest vnderstande that the holy Ghost worketh remission of sinnes hear that which she Apostles once heard Receiue you the holie Ghost whose sins you doe forgiue they are forgiuen Thus he And Saint Ambrose his auncient to prooue the holie Ghost to be God alledgeth that he remitteth sins by the priests ministerie which he could not in any wise doe if he were not in all pointes equall and omnipotent God with the father and sonne Let vs see saith he Whether the holie Ghost doth pardon sinnes and he answereth him-selfe thus Sedhinc dubitari non potest cùm ipse Dominus dixerit Accipite spiritum sanctum quorum remiseritis peccata remittuntur ecce quia per spiritum sanctum peccata donantur homines autem in remissionem peccatoris ministerium suum exhibent non ius alicuius potestatis exercent It is thus much to saie There can be no doubt thereof seeing our Lord saide Receiue you the holie Ghost whose sinnes you doe forgiue they shal be forgiuen lookeye that by the holie Ghost sinnes be forgiuen men doe but exercise their seruice and ministerie and claime not the right of power and principalitie therein And Saine Basill vpon this assured ground frameth in full forme against Eunomius this argument Dominus sanctis Apostolis insufflans inquit Accipite spiritum sanctum quorumcunque dimittetis peccata dimittentur eis siergo nullius est peccata dimittere nisi solius Dei dimittit autem spiritus sanctus per Apostolos Deus ergo spiritus sanctus Our lord breathing on the Apostles said take ye the holy ghost for whose sinnes soeuer you shall pardon they be pardoned therefore if it be the onelie proprietie of God to forgiue sinnes and the holie Ghost so doth by the Apostles Ergo the holie Ghost is truelie God FVLKE Saint Bernarde is not to be despised for his youth where he agreeth with the most auncient and eternall truth reuealed in the holie scriptures His purpose is to prooue the equallity of the holy ghost with the father and the sonne and prooueth it by his effects because he forgiueth sinnes which is proper to God His saying Hom. de Pentecost 1. is mangled by you I know not for what purpose except you follow some Iesuites dictates more then your owne reading But in trueth there is nothing which can prooue the deification of priests but contrariwise that it is the holie Ghost that properlie remitteth sinnes of whose pleasure according to the holie scriptures the priestes are but interpreters and reporters As for the saying of Saint Ambrose is flat against you if you had not falsified it in translation For you traslate Exhibent ministerium non ius alicuius potestatis exercent They doe but exercise their seruice and ministerie and claime not the right of power and principallitie Where you should saie men doe exhibit or yeald their ministerie or seruise they exercise not the right of any power And he addeth a reason which you omit Neque enim in suo sed in patris filii SS nomine peccata dimittuntur Isti rogant diuinitas donat humanum enim obsequium sed munificentia supernae est potestatis For sins are not forgiuen in their name but in the name of the father and of the sonne of the holie Ghost These men do intreate the godhead doth graunt for the seruice is mans but the bowntiful gift is of the highest power Saint Basill also if his wholl saying were recited would appeare more manifest against you as he maketh vpon your owne report no shew at all for you His wordes are these against Eunomius Lib. 5. Cap. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. It is proper to God to forgiue sinnes he him-selfe affirming the same I am he which putteth away thy sinnes if your sinnes were as purple I will make them as white as snow and if they were as scarlet I will make them as white as woll Afterward when God the sonne of God Iesus forgiueth sinnes to the man sicke of the palsie saying sonne thy sinnes are forgiuen thee whereupon he was thought to blaspheme of the Iewes which knew not that he was God saying that this man blasphemeth for it perteineth to none to forgiue sinnes but to god alone But our Lord breathing vpon his holie Apostles said receiue the holie ghost whose sinnes you forgiue they are forgiuen to them If therfore it perteineth to none to forgiue sinnes as it doth not but onelie to God and the holy ghost by the Apostles forgiueth then the holy ghost is God and of the same efficacie and power with the father and the sonne In this saying of Saint Basil you haue not onelie omitted the former parte which ascribeth the power of forgiuing of sinnes as proper to God but also haue gelded out these wordes in that parte you alledge both in your latine and English translation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in deede it is not of what purpose let the indifferent reader iudge ALLEN Thus you perceiue that the ground of this our faith and assertion was of olde accounted so sure that it was a singular aide and for tresse of faith against the vnfaithfull attemptes of most wicked persons in diuerse ages The onelie practize that priests vse by the Sacrament of penance to pardon sinnes was a full proofe that the
holie ghost was God by whose authoritie and proper power they did alwaies since Christs word was spoken remitte the same The which beeing true as it cannot be false that is so agreeable both to scriptures and to all our fathers faith the heresy of our time must needes directly impugne the vertue and power of Gods owne spirit For as the proofe of mans ministerie in this foresaid function induceth the true and euerlasting Godhead of the holy ghost by whome they practize that power so the denial thereof and robberie of priesthoode of this their moste iust claime doth directlie spoile God of his honour and of the euerlasting right that he hath in remission of sinnes So whiles these goodmen seeke to abase man vniustlie they blaspheme God highlie and together with mans ministerie they bring vnto vtter contempt Gods owne authoritie FVLKE Your deifying of popish priests doth altogether weaken the force of that argument which our fathers vsed against the auncient heretikes to prooue the diuinitie of the holie Ghost For it were an easie matter for Eunomius Macedonius or anie other heretike that was against his godhead to replie that by ministerie of God the holie Ghost might as properlie forgiue sinnes as Priestes do by the ministerie of Christ and of the holie ghost yea so farre forth as thereby they are made halfe Gods yea deified and made Gods in deede But you vtter repugnancie when you saie that by Gods authoritie and proper power Priestes do forgiue sinnes Where you make it not proper to God which is common to others with him Therefore you should speake more properlie to saie that God the holy ghost by his owne authoritie and power proper to the deitie doth forgiue sinnes in their ministery men thereto authorized do no more in proper speach and sense but testifie and declare what God doth for which declaration and testification seeing they are the embassadours and messengers of God vnto the world to declare his pleasure of reconciliation or condemnation they are said to forgiue sinnes or to retaine them which they do not properlie but pronounce the sentence of God concerning the remission or retention of mens sinnes And that this was the meaning of the Auncient fathers concerning the authoritie and power of Gods ministers it is moste manifest by this argument whereby they choke the enuier of the holie ghostes diuinitie from which you cutte of all the sinnewes and force it hath to prooue it when you communicate to men that which is proper to God and aduance men aboue the nature of meere men when you deifie their persons by meanes of the giftes of the holie Ghost giuen to them and make them of abilitie to exercise the proper workes of God As for the deniall and robberie that you ascribe I can not tell to what heretikes of this time we detest as much as ye not seeking to abase man beneath the nature and condition of man norseeking to extoll him by robbing God of his glorie and proper effects to magnifie menne to deifie the persoas of men as you do in plaine termes Whereby it is manifest we are as far from blaspheming god or making mans ministerie contemptible which he exerciseth in the name of God as you are from sobrietie thus to iudge if your meaning be of vs or thus to reason if you would defend the argument of the auncient fathers against the auncient heretikes ALLEN But for the readersease and more light of our cause I ioyne thus in argument with them againe vpon the second part of Christes owne wordes and action had in the authorizing of his Apostles Whatsoeuer the holie Ghost maie doe in this case by the proper power of his Godhead that may the Apostles and Priestcs do by seruice and ministerie through the power of the holie Ghost But the holie Ghost properlie and rightlie doth remit sinnes Therefore the Apostles doe rightlie remit sinnes by their ministerie in the said holie Ghost All partes of this conclusion stand vpright and feare no falsehood they be guarded on euerie side by Christes action by wordes of scripture by the Doctors plain warrant and by all reason With all which whosoeuer is not contented but will needes extinguere spiritum extinguish Gods spirit and violentlie take from the Church the greatest comfort of all mans life that in this infirmitie of our flesh standeth in moste hope by his gift in remission of sinnes for which especiall cause the said spirit was mercifullie breathed vpon the Apostles peculiarly before the mare common sending of the same from heauen aboue If all this reason and iust demonstration of trueth will not serue them I will charge them with this graue conclusion of S. Augustine vttered partlie against the Nouatians especallie against the desperate that would not seeke for Gods mercie by the Churches ministerie in the sacrament of penance To be briefe I will speake it in English Whosoeuer he be that beleeueth no mans sinnes to be remitted in Gods Church and therefore despiseth the bountifulnes of God inso mightie a worke if he in that obstinate minde continue til his liues end he is guiltie of sinne against the holie Ghost in which holy ghost Christ remitteth sinnes FVLKE I doe greatlie commend you that you haue such regard of the readers ease and it seemeth you haue good confidence of your cause that you flie not the light of Logicall iudgement by which the trueth shall more plainelie appeere to all sortes of men then by anie discourses at large vnder which many great errors may be often couered vnder sophistical cloudes ambiguity of words which in a briefe syllogisme is soone and easilie espied To answere your argument therefore First I distinguish of your Maior for if you meane by seruice and ministerie the expressing and declaring of the will and pleasure of the holy ghost wherunto they are authorized I acknowledge your Maior proposition to be true whatsoeuer the holie Ghost maie doe in this case by the proper power of his godhead that maie the Apostles and Priestes doe by seruice ministerie through the power of the holie Ghost But if you meane by seruice and ministerie that the proper power of God is communicated to men I denie your Maior as false and absurde For the Apostles and Priests maie not by seruice and ministerie through the power of the holie Ghost forgiue sinnes properlie which the holie ghost by proper power of his godhead may doe for this is a proper power not com municable vnto any creature but a declaration of the will of him that hath such power is the ministeriall authoritie by which men forgiue sinnes Secondlie I answere that your conclusion is deceitfull For your Minor Extreame or Assumption is not perfectlie ioyned with your Maior or Proposition in the conclusion For your Minor is that the holie ghost properly rightlie doth remit sinnes So your conclusion should be therefore the Apostles properlie and rightlie doe remit sinnes by their ministerie
in stead of which word properlie you craftelie conueigh in the worde truelie so your wholl syllogisme is a paralogisme and may lawfully be denied Notwithstanding your conclusion as it is we do graunt that the Apostles do rightlie and truely remit sinnes by their ministery in the holie ghost but as it should be inferred vpon your premises we denie it which cannot be gathered but vpon a false Maior Whatsoeuer the holie ghost may doe properlie in remitting sinnes the Apostles may do by ministerie as properlie As for the comfort of mans life taken away by denying sinnes to be properlie forgiuen by Priestes is a fond cauill and meere slaunder For we acknowledge it a singular comfort of mans life that God hath appointed men by their ministerie to assure vs of his fauour and reconciliation in the remission of oursins And we beleeue with Saint Augustine that sinnes are forgiuen in Gods Church vpon earth acknowledgeing the bountefullnes of God in so mightie a worke anathematizing and detesting the Nouatians and all other heretikes that obstinatelie and willfullie mainteine the contrarie The power to remit sinnes is further prooued to be giuen to the Apostles by these wordes of Christ Whose sinnes you do forgiue c. by the Doctors exposition of the same and by conference of other wordes of scripture of the like sense THE FOVRTH CHAP. ALLEN HOw the priestes of Christes Church haue defended this right and calling for remission of sinnes as wel by the commission that Christ first receiued of his father and afterward bestowed vpon them as by the assured receiuing of the spi rit of god from Christes blessed breath to the same and purpose I haue hitherto declared at large Now the third part of the place before alledged out of S. Iohns gospel concerneth the words of Christes promis and warrant made vnto his Apostles out of which wordes distinctly vttered we must see what force may be further added vnto our Catholike assertion for the pristes autho rity to remit and retaine sinnes And surely if none of the former wordes of commission nor any other mean or mention had beene made of the holy ghostes assistaunce herein these onlie woordes vpon the credit that faithful men owe to Christ had bin sufficient to haue assured the world of the authoritie of priesthood of the wholl cause that now is called in controuersie For what can be said either of god or man more properlie or more playnlie then this whose sinnes you shal forgiue they be forgiuen whose sinnes you shal retaine they be retained I must needes heree complaine of these vnfaithful and vnhappie times that in the continuall lothsome bragges of the scripture and Gods word in perpetuall tossing and tumbling of the booke of the Bible in endlesse contention and disputation of most high mysteries in them contained haue wholie conuerted the cleerest and onely vndoubted meaning of such places specially as moste touch the verie life and saluation of all mankinde and which be of all other thinges in termes of scripture most open and euident sull foolishlie and vnlearnedlie haue both the simple sort handled Gods word as in such grosse ignorance of al thinges they needes must and their new procured Masters also in not much more knowledge and farre passing pride can not otherwise do but whilest they plaie them selues in things of smaler importance they are to be laughed at rather then lamented but if the deuil driue them farther as he lightlie doth wherere he se quietlie possesseth and cause them to dallie and delude the places of scripture that principally concerne the state and saluation of vs al then we must with al force resist lest we leese the fruite and good of our Christianitie What can be of higher importance in the world or touch our soules and saluation so neere as the holie sacraments of Christ Church by which grace and mercy through gods appointment be procured yet these blessed fountains especiallie euen these waters springing euerlastingly to our life and comfort haue these men most infected FVLKE You fare as though we denied all power of remitting or retaining of sinnes whereas we do moste gladlie imbrace all such power as Christ hath giuen vs which we must so take as it be not dishonourable to the godhead that man should exercise that which is proper to God him-selfe The power therefore we graunt but what manner of power this is we must inquire whether an absolute power for priests at their pleasure as you speake afterward in this Chapter to forgiue sinnes properlie or a power to declare the same to be forgiuen according to the pleasure of God to them that repent and beleeue the Gospell and also whether this power is to be exercised by preaching the Ghospel or by auricular confession You spend manie words therefore in vaine to prooue the power and authoritie whereof we stand in no controuersie with you but what manner of power this is and by what meanes it is to be exercised As for the lothsome bragges of the scripture and Gods word in perpetuall tossing and tumbling of the bookes of the Bible doe argue that you complaine of sauoreth not of the spirit of Christ which willeth the scriptures to be searched as those which beare witnes of him To glory in the truth of Gods word contained in his holie scriptures is no vaine bragging but such as Christians ought moste of all to delight in The rest of your railing I passe ouer as vnworthie anie answere when whatsoeuer you prate in generall shal be founde false in speciall when you come to prooue the particulers ALLEN In the institution of Sacraments Christs wordes were euer plaine without colour or figure as wordes that worke with singular efficacie grace and vertue and therewith giue to the ministers iust authoritie for the execution of Christes meaning which could not be done in figuratiue speaches and parables without infinit error Did God speake parables when he instituted the solemnitie of so manie sacrifices in the olde lawe when he signified vnto Moses and Aaron euerie seuerall sorte of beast or creature with their sexe kind all the ceremonie thereunto belonging Did he speake parables when the sacrament of the lambe was to be instituted Did he speake by figure to Abraham when he commaunded him to circumcise the male of euerie of his people Did he speake by figure when he instituted the Sabbath Did he to be breefe euer in the olde lawe speake one thing and meane another when anie externall worke by the charge of his worde was to be practized for euer amongest the people In common speach in prophecying in preaching in similitudes in examples vttered for the declaration of manie thinges and for grace and varietie of talke to stirre vp mans industrie in searching the secretes of the trueth there figures of all sortes be vsed but where by externall wordes and actions force of inward grace must be procured or perpetuall vsages in the Church are
of Christ and his spouse the Church which you saie in no sauce we can abide as though wheresoeuer any mysterie is confessed to be there muste needes follow a Sacrament of the new testament ALLEN These fellowes therefore that dare be so bolde to disturbe all the orders and sacramentes of Gods Church and to mainteine their phantasies dare brust the sacred bandes of expresse scriptures in such pointes as doe directlie touch the wholl policie of our Christian common wealth and ordered waics of our saluation euen in those which Christ moste carefullie left to be practized for the vse of his louing slocke by the warrant of wordes moste plaine what shall we saie to such bold and impudent faces that thus dare doe and yet which I more mernaile at in this their vncurtesie and most vnhonest dealing will not sticke to crie and call vpon Gods worde as though they did that by scripture the contrarie whereof they expresslie finde in scripture And truelie where they be not holpen by the verte wordes vaine it shall be for them to stand with vs and with all our Fathers and with the practize of all nations and with the very expresse iudgement of the Church of God it shal not boote them I saie in their darke ignorance infinite pride to stand with vs hauing so many helpes for the true meaning and the expresse text of the worde for our selues and side FVLKE He must needes haue an impudent face and a wicked conscience that so shamefullie slaundereth vs to bereake the sacred bandes of the expresse scriptures wherunto we seeme to attribute al credit as though we denie any one word of expresse scripture do not affirme whatsoeuer the scripture doth affirme in expresse words or denie whatsoeuer the holy scripture in expresse words doth deny according to such sense and meaning as the scripture must haue as it is agreable to it selfe in all places The expresse wordes of scripture touching the Lords supper are these that it is the body blood of Christ we confesse and beleeue as much The expresse wordes of scripture concerning the Apostles authoritie in pardoning or reteining sinnes are as they haue beene often alledged we beleeue they and their successours of whome there is no expresse word haue power to remit or reteine sins The expresse words of scripture concerning the Lords supper are also The rocke was Christ we beleeue that the rocke was Christ. The cup is the new testament we beleeue that the cup is the new testament Also by expresse words to the Apostles there is graunted power to binde and to loose We confesse and beleeue that they haue power to binde and to loose And yet I trust we may be bolde to saie without breaking the sacred bondes of expresse scriptures The rocke was not Christ in nature of his humanitie and diuinitie but a sacrament of Christ. The cup is not the new couenant it selfe but that which is in the cup is an holie signe or seale thereof The Apostles had no power giuen them to binde men with chaines or coardes nor to loose the chaines coards of them that be bound by other but a spirituall authoritie to binde and loose spirituallie In like manner we doe not breake the sacred bandes of expresse scripture when we affirme that the Sacramentall bread and wine are not by transsbustantiation turned into the naturall bodie and bloode of Christ or the bodie and blood of Christ in the sacrament are not corporallie receiued but spirituallie For the contrarie of these we finde not expresselie in the scripture So when we saie the Apostles had not power to remit sinnes properlie which is peculiar onelie to God but to aslure men in Christes name whose embassadours they were of the forgiuenes of their sinnes by Christ we breake no bandes of expresse scriptures For we confesle the wordes according to their true meaning agreeable with other places of scripture that teach it to be peculiar to God to remit sinnes properlie An embassadour is said to make peace or warre when he declareth according to his commission his Princes determination of peace or warre The Kinges Liuetenant hauing such commission offereth or graun teth pardon to rebells or other offenders where he doth onelie declare the kinges pleasure in pardoning or releasing their offences As for the Popish bragge of all our fathers with the practize of all nations and the verie expresse iudgement of the Church of God to be for your assertion how vaine it is will easilie appeare when you come to cite fathers shew forth the practize of all nations declare the iudgement of Gods Church and when the contradictorie shall be manifestlie prooued and brough forth against you ALLEN Sometimes where it may appeare that the wordes and outwarde face of scripture serue not our assertions so plainlie as the holie traditions of Christes Church doe there they call vpon vs with infinite clamours to abide the iudgement of the word which they would be thought to esteeme aboue all mans meaning But whether would they now runne thinke you where all our sacraments stand vpon euident words more then words vpon the verie expresse notorious action of Christ him selfe al instituted sincerelie to be practized of the Church after his de parture hence all commended in knowne termes of greatest moste efficacie that could be not by way of preaching in which he vsed sometimes figures not at such time as he vsed other then common knowne speach but after his resurrection when he now vttered no more parables as he did before that such as faw should not see and such as were of vnderstanding might not vnderstand but did open vnto his dearest their senses that they might vnderstand scriptures and more carefullie expressed his meaning for the instruction of his holie Disciples to the better bearing of that charge which he meant to leaue them in after his departure whither will these men I saie where they see all thinges so enuironed with trueth whither will they flie The scriptures be plainlie ours the Doctors they dare not claime reason is against them there is then no waie to beare it out but with boldnes and exercised audacitie Yet here we wil assay by the notorious euidence of this one cause that we now haue in hand to breake their stonie heartes to the obedience of Christs Church word for whose faith if they haue seene great light force of argument allready shal yet see much more I trust they wil not stil with stand the knowen truth FVLKE We will runne no further for the vnderstanding of Christes wordes concerning the institution and practize of his holie sacramentes although we haue the consent of the moste auncient and approoued doctors of the primitiue Church as witnesses of the same That the sacraments are commended in knowne terms of greatest and most efficacie that could be we cofesse but therof it followeth not that they were not in some part commended by figuratiue speeches
which are often and almost alwaies if they be rightlie vsed better knowne and of greater efficacie then proper tearmes That you saie the sacraments were not commended by way of Preaching it is a grosse and impudent absurditie when they were instituted and commended to be seales of the doctrine that was preached for confirmation of faith which is builded vpon the hearing of Gods word preached As also it is a brutish assertion that Christ vsed no figuratiue speeches after his resurrection For what are these but figuratiue speeches feede my sheepe feede my lambes And what was that but a parable of Peters bandes girding him-selfe and being girded walking where he would and led whither he would not to signifie by what death he should glorifie God Neither did he affect obscurity by parables before his resurrection For his parables were vttered for better and more plaine vnderstanding of his obedient disciples although to the reprobate contemners of his doctrine they seemed hard and inexplicate and were as all things are vnto them and as Christ him-selfe was a stumbling block and stone of offence that they might fall and perish That our sauiour Christ did open the senses of his Apostles that they might vnderstand the scriptures they were the better able to vnderstand figuratiue speeches of which the scripture is full But that he did more carefully expresse his meaning for the instruction of his holie disciples I do denie for he had alwaies before as great care to expresse his meaning and without care was alwaies hable to vtter his diuine pleasure considering that he had appointed the doctrine which he preached before his resurrection to be committed to writing for the publike and perpetuall instruction of his wholl Church To the vaine insultation and boasting that followeth I answer as in the end of the last section before ALLEN All wordes then of institution of sacraments being literallie to be taken and things of so great charge not otherwise to be vnderstanded then are both by act and word of Christ sincerelie vttered we neede not doubt but the forme of Christes sentence in which he giueth the Apostles power to remit sinnes is plainly to be taken in that common sense as the same by wordes importeth and therefore that by force thereof they maie remitte sinnes And yet to make more proofe to satisfie all men I will ioyne to these wordes of our sauiour that most properlie concerne the sacrament of penance other his wordes touching our principall couclusion not vnlike whereby in conference of the like sayinges together which our aduersaries do alwaies as they would seeme well to allow trueth maie trie it selfe Therefore as our master here saith whose sinnes you shall forgiue they be forgiuen And whose sinnes you retaine they be also retained euen so said he twice before vnto the Apostles expressing in other wordes almost the same meaning and sense once to them altogether in the 18. of Saint Mathew and an other time before that in the 16. of the same Gospel to S. Peter alone To them in generall thus saith Christ If thy brother haue committed anie offence towards thee go to him admonish him priuately betwixt him and thy selfe If he take it well thou hast wonne thy brother if he regarde thee not take one or two with the that in the mouthes of two or three witnesses euerie word maie stand if he regarde not them neither then make complaint of him to the Church that is to saie as Saint Chrisostome expoundeth it to the gouernours of the Church and if he will not obey the Church then take him for no better then a Heathen and a Publicane And straight vpon these wordes lest anie man should set light by the Church or rulers thereof Christ added saith Saint Augustine a wonderfull terrour of her seuere authoritie saying Amen dico vobis quaecunque alligaueritis super terram erunt ligata in coelo quaecunque solueritis super terram erunr soluta in coelo Surelie I saie vnto you what things soeuer you binde in earth it shal be bound in heauen And whatsoeuer you loose in earth it shall be loosed in heauen This text is cleere for the Churches claime in remission of sinnes though it properlie pertaine rather to the outward power iudiciarie and court of external iudgement for open crimes and notorious contemptes then for the sinnes of the people that be secret and onelie subiect to power practized in the sacrament of penance which now lightlie is close and onelie vttered in secret to him that hath charge of his soule Neuerthelesse if the Priestes of God haue receiued power to loose and binde which is to pardon and punish open notorious crimes and contemptes which touching the guiltines of the fault doth no lesse pertaine to the power of God then the absoluing of secres sinnes doth then without question they maie pardon orretaine mans sinnes of al sortes as well in the sacrament of penance all that be confessed as in publike iudgement whatsoeuer is by witnesse prooued And as in this they maie at their pleasure where iustice requireth correct the open offender by most graue censures of Gods Church so maie the Priestes giue due penance in the sacrament for the chastisment of such sinnes as be to them confessed and for the satisfying of Gods iustice by sinne violated FVLKE If al wordes of institution of sacramets must be taken literallie then must these wordes be taken literallie This cup is the new testament in my blood The lambe is the Lordes passeouer Circumcision is the couenant and such like But as for your conclusion though inferred vpon a false principle I confesse to be true that the Apostles by force of the wordes of commission graunted to them maie remit sinnes but not properly for that the wordes do not enforce Both the places that you will ioyne to this of Math. 18. and Math. 16. are parables and figuratiue speaches of binding and loosing of the keies of the Kingdome of heauen and of a stone and buildilng of che Church thereupon neuerthelesse the text Math 18. I do acknowledge to be cleere for the Churches claime in remitting offences and that it pertaineth more properlie to the discipline of the Church then to the preaching of repentance and remission of sins whereunto the text of Iohn 21. moste properlie belongeth That you saie pennance is now lightlie close and the sinnes vttered onelie in secret to him that hath charge of his soule you do closelie confesse that otherwise lightlie you will not openlie acknowledge that your practize is contrarie to the vse of the most auncient and primitiue Church But that the ministers of the Church haue authoritie to remit sinnes as well openlie as secretlie I am content it be without question onelie this is the question whether anie thing pertaining to the proper power of God be made common to men For we holde that they do in such sorte remit sinnes as they exercise nothing that pertaineth
that they are the twelue rocks or stones the foundation of the walles of the new Ierusalem Apoc. 21. 14. and the Church is builded vpon the foundation of all the Apostles Eph. 2. 20. Secondlie you saie the promis made to him Ioan. 1. Math. 16. was perfourmed no doubt after his resurrection when he committed to him the feeding of all his sheepe yong and olde Ioh. 21. 2. We graunt as much but that it doth exceedinglie import a wonderful incomparable soueraigntie and iurisdiction ouer mens soules greater or other then was equally graunted to the rest of the Apostles we see not how it can be inferred of anie scripture Euerie one of the Apostles being sent into all the world to teach all nations and to preach the Gospell to euerie creature hath as generall authority to feede the shepe of Christ both olde and yong as Peter Thirdlie you saie for a mortall man to receiue the keies of the kingdome of heauen and by them to binde and loose to lock out and let in before our Master Christ who had full iurisdiction therein it was neuer heard of But we read that the samekeies were committed to the scribes and Pharisees and teachers of the law which they did shamefullie abuse and therfore are threatned by our sauiour Christ woe be to you teachers of the law for you haue taken awaie the key of knowledge and neither you your selues do enter and you forbid them that would Woe be vnto you Scribes and Pharisees ye hypocrites for you shut vp the kingdome of heauen before men For neither you your selues do enter nor suffer those to enter that would enter Luk. 11. Mat. 23. here you note inthese places the key of knowledge by which the kingdome of heauen should haue beene opened taken awaie and the kingdome of heauen shut vp from them that gladlie would enter if they knew which way The keies in deede do signifie power and authoritie but that onelie Peter hath those keies and not the Church and euerie true Pastour of the same or that Peter by them had greater power and authoritie then the rest of the Apostles which had them also you shall neuer be hable to make demonstration Your remembrance serueth you well that all the olde writers do make no difference betweene the authoritie of Peter and the rest of the Apostles concerning the remitting of sins But you do forget that the power of bynding and loosing was by our sauiour Christ graunted equallie to all the Apostles and to their successours though it were once singularlie vttered to one The subtiltie of Origen to make a difference betweene binding and loosing in all the heauens and in one heauen onelie beside that it is vaine in it selfe yet is it not brought of Origen to dignifie Peter aboue all the Apostles whome both vpon the place of Mat. 16. and this also he confesseth to haue receiued equall power with Peter but to prefer Peter and such as Peter was before them that haue thrise reprehended offenders and beeing not heard haue bound the sinner vpon earth iudgeing him as an heathen or publicane whereof he inferreth Quanto melior fuerit qui ligat c how much better he is that bindeth by somuch he that is bound is bound more then in one heauen and how much better he is that looseth by so much he shall be more happie that is loosed for he is loosed in all the heauens The greater preheminence of rule and iurisdiction the fullnes of power and prerogatiue deriued from Peter as from a fountaine be matters of bolde assertion but void of all manner of proofe or demonstration ALLEN But we will not stand hereon now nor yet to put difference betwixt these wordes and tearmes loosing or remitting binding or retaining nor to dispute whether these two textes more properlie signifie the authoritie and iurisdiction giuen to the spiritual Magistrates for punishing by temporal pain enioyned and releasing by mercie as they see occasion the same appointed penance againe or els it properlie concerneth the verie release of sinne it selfe or retaining the sinne which they vpon iust causes will not forgiue These thinges would grow to ouer tedious a tale and ouercurious for the simple whome I would moste helpe in these matters and I shall briefllie touch so much hereof as is necessarie hereafter when I shall dispute of pardons For in deede these two textes of binding and loosing as well spoken to Peter as to the residue afterward shall be the ground of our wholl discourse there and therefore till then we must touch these textes no further but as in common pertaineth to remitting or retaining sinnes For they are brought indifferentlie of the holie fathers with the foresaid wordes of Saint Iohn in which as I haue declared the verie institution of penance and Priestes iudgement of our soules and sinnes be moste properlie grounded Theresore that by all these wordes so often vttered by our sauiour you maie well perceiue the verie literall and vudoubted meaning to be that Priestes haue authoritie by Christes warrant to remit and retaine sinnes I will recite one or two places of most auncient fathers that they ioyning with such plaine wordes of sundrie places of scripture maie make all most sure to such as can by anie reason be satisfied First Ialledge the saying of S. Maximus an olde author a blessed saint He doth by conference couple together these textes whereon we now stand thus hespeaketh verie pithely therefore you shal heare his owne words Ne qua vos fiatres de creditis Petro clauibus regni more nostrarum clauium cogitatio terrena promoueat Clauis caeli lingua est Petri quam singulorum meritae censendo Aposiolus vnicuique regnum coelorum aut claudit aut aperit Non est ergo clauis ista mortalis artificis aptata manu sed data à Christo potestas est iudicandi Denique ait eis quorum remiseritis peccata remissa erunt quorum detinueritis detenta erunt Thus he saith in our tongue Least anie earthlie cogitation mooue you to think of anie such materiall keies as we occupy in earth when you heare of committing the keies of the kingdome to Peter you must thus vnderstand that the key of heauen is Peters word or tongue because the Apostle weighing well euerie of our deserts openeth or shutteth to euery man the kingdome of Christ. This key therfore is not made by mortal mans hand but it is the power of iudgement giuen by Christ. To be briefe he saith to them al whose sins you shal forgiue they shal be forgiuē c. Thus saith Maximus ioyning together fitly two textes for one purpose out of both maketh a moste forcible argument that the iudgement of our soules which is a passing authoritie and the verie letting in and keeping out of heauen is addicted by the keies to Peters and the Apostles ministerie For which cause also S. Gregorie calleth all Christes Apostles and the iust occupiers
truelie forgiue sinnes it is graunted but not that they doe properlie forgiue sinnes beeing but Gods seruants appointed to declare his forgiuenes Secondly your Minor bringeth in a fourth tearme Claue non errante beside that it is ambiguous that you saie Gods pardon followeth the preists pardon for if by following you meane succeading later in time or depending vpon the priests pardon your Minor is false wtih Claue non errante if you meane as I haue explicated in your Maior the worde ensueth it is true Last of all your conclusion ioyneth not your two extreames together as it ought to doe but leaueth out the worde which is of most importance and question among vs namelie this tearme Properlie For you should couclude that Priestes doe truelie and properlie remit sinnes which in respect of the worde properlie is false But as you set it downe with the worde assuredlie it is graunted For we acknowledge that the lawfull minister elder or priest of the Church doth truelie and assuredlie remit sinnes but yet not properlie So you misse the cushion and make a shew in your Maior as though you would reason directlie but in your Minor you giue backe with Claue non errante in your conclusion you fly quite from the question Where you interpret your Minor so that God in the same instant forgiueth in heauen you rid vs of one doubt of the posteritie in time But where you saie out of Saint Hilarie that mans sentence shall be as a sentence preiudiciall to God in heauen you giue vs to vnderstand that Gods sentence dependeth vpon mans sentence which is horrible blasphemie neither doe I beleeue that you are able to shew any such saying of Saint Hilarie for out of the places before alledged there is no such thinge to be seene or gathered That the same power of remitting and reteining sinnes which was giuen to the Apostles was nor bestowed on them in respect of their priuate persons but as they were publike officers and that therefore the like authoritie is committed by Christes graunt to all Priestes of Christes Church whoe in this matter are the Apostles successours THE FIFT CHAP. IF I had here to doe onelie with the learned it were enough that is alreadie prooued for the power preheminence giuen to the Apostles in remission of sinnes thereupon to ground most assuredlie the like right in the same cause to perteine to all Bishoppes and priestes of Christes Church But we studie to helpe such as cannot by this so farre consider that the power giuen to his Apostles or to any of them is one eternall power not ceasing in their persons but during in their succession to the worlds ende For I haue my selfe met with many such as could be content as they saide to acknowledge vpon so plaine scripture the singular priuiledge giuen to the Apostles and thereupon if they might haue had an Apostle they would not haue sticked to haue made there confession and sute to him for the remission of their sinnes but because I had not the like wordes of Christ spoken to all priests particularlie they thought it was no reason that any such challenge should be made for them nor any such charge to be giuen to others to confesse their sinnes vnto them This simplicitie of the common sorte or rather this rude frowardnes rising vpon contempt and disobedience to Gods Church is mainteined euen of the more learned sort whoe haue charged them-selues in all behauiour to be so populare and so plausible that euen against knowne order of things they will drawe backe from the light of the trueth with the common rude and vnlearned reasons of the people For Iohn Caluine a man borne to sedition and the Churches calamitie mainteineth the madnes of the multitude by this reason The Apostles saith he had the holy ghost whereof our priests haue no warrant But enquire of them whether they haue the holie ghost if they saie yea demaund of them further whether the holie Ghost may erre if they confesse that the holy ghost can not erre then they prooue themselues not to haue the holie Ghost because it is well seene that they may erre and doe erre both in loosing and binding many otherwise then Gods sentence will allow But brieflie to satisfie all sides in this case I shall declare the like power to be left by Christes meaning to al Bispopes and priests no lesse then to the Apostles them-selues to whome Christ then presentlie spake that both the peoples lacke of vnderstanding may be corrected and the false and craftie conueiance of their captaine may be to his shame and the diuells plainlie disclosed FVLKE It seemeth that those which you met with which would not acknowledge the same power to be in the ministers of the Church that was in the Apostles concerning remitting of sinnes were some of your owne chickens whome ignorance the mother of Popish deuotion had blooded vp in such phantasticall and soolish errors But least you should seeme to fight onelie with the simple sorte you saie the same opinion is vpon popularitie and plausibilitie mainteined euen of the more learned sort yea of Iohn Caluine him-selfe but you dare not set downe where or in which of his writings lest your impudencie should be manifestlie conuinced In deede Instit. lib. 3. Cap. 4. Sect. 20. he denieth that ignorant Popish confessours or shrift priests haue the power of the keyes which are voide of the spirit of God that is of the giftes of the holie ghost that they may know who me to binde whome to loose but he acknowledgeth the power of remitting sinnes to be perpetuall in the true preachers and faithfull ministers of the Ghospell And therefore you take needelesse paines to prooue this matter against him vnles you will take vpon you to defend the ignorance of your priesthoode and answere the arguments that he bringeth against it ALLEN First this is plaine that whatsoeuer Christ after his resurrection or before did institute for the commoditie of the people and weale of the wholl Church that did not decaie in the persons of them to whome Christ presentlie spake the wordes for ells all sacraments had beene ended and all gouernment ceased at the death of them to whome in person that charge was first giuen by Christ. For example Christ in his institution of the holie Sacrament of the altar spake onelie to his twelue to those present persons he onelie said presently hoc facite do this yet in their persons the Church was so instructed and all priests so authorized that the same soueraigne worke hath vpon that warrant beene truelie practized of the Church and by vaine imitation followed by their aduersaries euen till this daie And in deede the verie wordes of the instruction did importe no lesse for it is said Mortem Domini annunciabitis donec 〈◊〉 You shall set forth Christes death till his comming which could not be if the ministerie had decayed with their persons to whome Christ
they are not crowned if they be not didicated But if they be washed in their own blood this mans will pietie also hath washed him Againe he saith speaking in an Apostrophe to him Quis dabit tefrater fratrem mihi lactentem vbera matris meae hoc est non quicunque te sed Christus illuminabit gratia spirituali ille te baptizauit quia humana tibi officia defuerunt Who shall giue thee brother to be my brother sucking the papes of my mother that is not euerie one but Christ him selfe shall lighten thee with spirituall grace He hath baptized thee because the seruice of man was wanting to thee By all which wordes it is manifest that S. Ambrose vnderstood not those wordes of our sauiour Christ of externall baptisme as you doe when he refuseth not them that haue a purpose and will to be baptized and are preuented by necessity of time But where you proceed and dare be bolde to saie that neuer man was saued that either contemned or neglected confession if you meane popish auricular and as you after call it sacramentall confession I dare be bolde to saie you speake vntrulie because the word of God prescribeth no such confession as necessarie to saluation Confession of that we beleeue and of our sins before God I knowe to be necessarie to saluation Neither can you prooue that they which dispise popish shrift be contemners of Gods ordinance for the Minor of your syllogisme that followeth is a lowd lie that your popish sacrament of penance and confession made to the Priest is the appointed meanes that God vseth in his Church for remission of mortall sinnes for God hath appointed no such sacrament or confession as necessarie meanes without the which remission of sinnes may not be obtained Your similitude of baptisme will prooue nothing except you can first prooue your confession to be of Gods institution as necessarie for doing awaie sinnes committed after baptisme as baptisme is by Christs ordinance the seale of regeneration by which we are assured of the remissiō of our sins ALLEN And yet me thinke I heare alreadie the sounde of the deceitfull voices of our Preachers It is Christes bloode that remitteth sinnes Come to me all ye that are heauie loaden and I shall refresh you I am he saith the Lord that putteth awaie thy sinnes with a thousand such like as though Christes bloode did not stand with Christes ordinances and sacraments as though they came not to Christ that keepe the waie of his will and sacraments to come vnto him as though God did not remit those sinnes which in his name and in his sacraments and by his appointed minister be remitted Protestant saie plainlie will thou refuse baptisme because Christes bloode washeth awaie originall sinnes If thou darest not openlie so preach although couertly thou maie chaunce so intend how darest thou deceiue the people and draw them from penance and confession because Christes blood doth remit sinnes For if the one sacrament may stand with the honour of God and with all those places that thou bringest so deceitfullie out of the scripture why may not the other seeing both are prooued alike to be instituted of Christ For the same selfe sauiour which said Come to me ye that be loaden and I shall refresh you he and no other said except you be borne of water and the holie Ghost you cannot enter into the kingdome of heauen The same God that said I am he that putteth awaie thy sinnes saith now to the Apostles and Priestss whose sinnes you doe forgiue forgiuen be they The same Spirit of God that said in the Prophet Confesse your selues to the Lorde for he his good said now againe in the Apostle confesse your sinnes one to another that you maie be saued By which he meaneth not as Origen venerable Bede and other doe declare so much brotherly acknowledging sor counsellor other causes the greefe of minde ech man to his fellowe as he doth the order of sacramentall confession to be made vnto gods Priests as it may well appeere by the circumstance of the letter For there he had willed them to send for the Priestes of the Church to annoile them streight after addeth this alledged text of confession and praing ouer the sicke The which place the heretikes sawe to sounde so manie waies as well towardes the sacrament of extreame vnction as the sacrament of confession both which they haue vnworthilie abandoned that they thought it not amisse either to denie the Apostles authoritie and the wholl epistle as no peece of holie scripture as Luther and other did or else which was after thought more handsome conueiance to corrupt the text and write instead of send for the Priestes of the Church thus call the elders of the congregation For they thought it might sounde euill to haue in one sentence priestes Church confession remission of sinnes release of paines for sinne annoiling praying ouer the sicke and so forth FVLKE It is no deceitfull voice of our preachers to affirme by these and a thousand such like textes of scripture that it belongeth to God onelie to forgiue sins properlie satisfaction being made for them by the bloode of Christ. And yet we derogat nothing from Christes ordinances and sacraments by which he worketh effectuall assurance of the same We acknowledge the ministerie of the Apostles and their lawful successours for the remission and retaining of sinnes both by preaching and by ministering of the sacraments instituted by our sauiour Christ. But we denie and dare stand to the deniall with all the papists that hath beene are or shal be that popish penance and confession is anie sacrament of our sauiour Christes institution for he that said whose sinnes you forgiue forgiuen be they hath not said whosoeuer will haue his sinnes forgiuen by you must haue some penance by you inioyned for satisfaction of Gods iustice yea there is nothing more contrarie to forgiuenes then satisfaction made by the partie to whome sinnes should be forgiuen And he that said confesse your offences one to another and praie one for an other that you maie be healed saith no where confesse all your sinnes vnto a Priest that you may be saued but willeth a mutuall acknoledgeing and reconciliation of one Christian man to another where there hath bin anie trespasse of such offences as one man hath committed against another and a mutuall acknowledging of our sinfullnes one to another that we may be sturred vp to mutuall praier By which textre the Priest is asmuch bounde to shriue himselfe to his parishioner as the parishioner to the Priest But Origen and Bede are alledged to prooue that the Apostle meaneth not onlie of such acknowledgeing nor so much thereof as the order of sacramental confession Verilie when the wordes of the scripture are plaine the sense 〈◊〉 to be gathered of the plaine words we may not restin anie mans opinion that is contrary to the same The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
communicat both functions at once and gaue the Magistrates of the Church not onlie by preaching to threaten or exhort men to vertue or promise them release of their sinnes by only faith as men haue now plained the waie to heauen but also by force of their regiment to giue great penance as we haue prooued greatpardon againe as to their wisdomes and for the Churches edifying may seeme most conuenient Of this great power of Christ communicated to his Apostles we haue practize as well for punishing sinners as pardoning them For vpon this soueraigne iurisdiction it rose that the Apostles mightelie ministred iustice vpon offendours as well by afflicting their bodies with enioyned long fasies and large almoses as by excommunicaton other meanes Which thing whsoeuer well weigheth in the manifolde examples of Gods worde they shall not wonder that the holie Bishops of Christs Church may giue a pardon of penance enioyned For by this authoritie did S. Peter who first receiued the keies of iurisdictiō power ouer the Church kil both Ananias and Saphira his wife which is as great a bodilie punishment for sinne as may be By this authoritie did he excommunicate Simon the Sorcerer by this power did S. Paull offer to reuenge disobedience by this did he threaten tocome to the faithfull with a rodde of discipline By this he prescribed to Timothie whom he consecrated Bishop how he should heare accusations and behaue himselfe in rebuking sinne correction of diuerse states By this power did he mightely deliuer vp some to Sathan and bodelie vexation By this power did he strike blinde Elimas the witch and released him at his pleasure againe FVLKE That the ministers of the Church haue authoritie not onelie to preach the worde of life moste comfortablie to al penitent sinners and moste terribly to all reproba tes and impenitent persons but also to exercise discipline of correction vpon offendours and to release the same vpon hope and apparance of their amendment it is at all times and in all places by vs willinglie confessed and acknowledged Wherefore this discourse is altogether needelesse but that you muste interlace some trueth not denied among so manie vnpropable and vnreasonable propositions that of no wise men will euer be graunted The waie to heauen is no other wise plained by vs in promising men release of their sinnes by faith onelie then it was by Saint Paul Rom. 4. and before him by Dauid psal 32. That the Apostles ministred iustice vpon offenders as well by afflicting their bodies with enioyned long fastes large almes as by excommunication and other meanes when you prooue it out of the scriptures we will yeelde vnto you We finde they did excommunicate and that they exhorted men to fasting and almes but that they enioyned any prescript fastes or almes such we finde not And yet we doubt not but they esteemed fasting praying and sorowing for sinnes almes and other Godlie exercises to be fruites of true repentance in beholding of which they were mooued to receiue againe into the Church such as for their offences were iustlie cast out Neither did Saint Peter by the same keies of iurisdiction as you call them kill Ananias and his wife by which he did excommunicate Simon the sorcerer if that denuntiation of Gods iudgement maie be called an excommunication Neither did Peter properlie kil Ananias who was stryken immediatelie of God for lying against the holie ghost neither hath anie successour of his authoritie to kill mens bodies howsoeuer you would insinuate that your Antichrist the Pope haththe power of both the swords to slaie mens bodies with the one as he murdereth their soules with his pestilent heresies That the Apostles deliuered some to Satan to be vexed in their bodies it prooueth no ordinarie iurisdiction of punishing mens bodies for that it was onelie a miraculous power they had which goeth not by succession vnto their posteritie like as the example of Saint Paul striking Elimas with blindnes can not be drawne to discipline which is practized onelie vpon the members of the Church whereof that Sorcerer was neuer anie parte neither did Saint Paull release him at his pleasure but at the time appointed by God ALLEN By this power haue holie Bishops excommunicated mightie Emperours suspended manie from the sacraments disgraded diuers spirituall men from their functions interdicted wholl Realmes and to be short by this power hath the Church of God prescribed a due punishment for euerie deadlie sinne iustlie respecting the greeuousnes thereof and continuance therein As we maie see in the penitentiall booke of I heodotus and Bede the cannons whereof be translated into the booke of decrees which is the 15. intituled De poenitent And namelie in the most auncient Councell of Ancyre which was holden well neare 1300. yeares since in the most pure time of Christian religion when I trow our aduersaries dare not saie that the faith was corrupted There the Priests and deacons that relented in persecution were suspended from the executing of their seuerall functions Such as supt in the temples of Idols and sacrificed to false Gods were charged beside absteining from the sa craments with 3. yeares penance those that committed brutish sinnes vnnatural should do 25. years penance for adultery 7 yeares penance for women that destroied their birth 10. years for murtherers 7. if it be not voluntarie if it be wilfull til the endof mans life for superstitious southsaiers or dreame readers or sorcerers and witches fiue yeares Finallie for rape 10. yeares were prescribed The like were made for diuers crimes in the councell of Nice But it is inough that we know though the eternall paines deserued by dcadlie sinnes be forgiuen with the sinnes them-selues and yet there remaineth for the satisfying of Gods iustice some temporall scourge to preuent which the Church enioyneth paine for faults remitted that both Gods mercie be followed in the remission of their sinnes and his iustice partlie answered in the punishment of the same the which debt of deserued paine being not here fulfilied or released it must in another world be answered FVLKE By power receaued from Christ holie Bishops haue practized christian discipline in excommunicating euen Emperours and great estates separating from the sacraments and displasing of ecclesiasticall persons from their functions But I neuer read that anie holie Bishop did interdict wholl realmes but onelie Antichrist of Rome Victor of olde time did take vpon him to excommunicate all the Churches of the East for not celebrating of the feast of Easter as he did but he was counter maunded and reprooued by his fellow Bishops not onelie of the East but euen of the West which agreed not with him in that ceremonie as by Ireneus Bishop of Lions in Fraunce and other That the Church of great antiquity prescribed a certaine time of punish ment for euery kinde of heinous sinne it was partly to reforme the facility of
content to ride on an Asse the Apostles to goe barefot in planting the Gospell But whereon 〈◊〉 the pope and how be his Cardinals feete surbaighted in going barefote to preach the Gospell Although I knowe not where he findeth in holie scripture that the Apostles went barefote in planting the Gospell Their trauell was great into all partes of the world though they had bene well shood yea booted and ridden on horsebacke But if the comparison be made between the ministers of the Gospell and Antichrist the Pope and his proud prelates whether in pacience humility and mildnes of behauiour be more like to Christ and his Apostels we doubt not our cause though the triall were before verie partiall iudges Well howsoeuer it were you should haue suffered Martyrdome rather then to haue resisted and murthered other but that you would not for you sought to liue licentiouslie and had no hope of eternall life after this Among so manie thousand as suffered martyrdome most quietlie without resistance when they were imprisoned tormented and condemned by those which had power to kil their bodies he can finde no examples of pacience and hope of eternall life except all the Protestants in the world will giue there throtes to be cut and suffer themselues to be murthered contrarie to lawe and liberties established by lawfull authoritie and that by priuat persones and bloodie Tirants as the poore Christians were by the Duke of Guyse at Vassi and so should all the rest in Fraunce haue beene if God had not stirred vp diuers Princes and noble men at the request of the Queene Mother to oppose themselues against the furious and trayterous attempts of that bloodie tyrant who abusing the minoritie of the King whome he toke captiue with his mother vsurped moste vnlawfull power against the King the Queene the estates and all the realme Frarine therefore fareth with vs as that seditious Ruffian of Rome who sued an action against his enemie whome he had wrongfullie wounded because he receiued not his weapon deepe enough to death Christ himselfe the paterne of patience saide to the seruant which moste iniuriouslie smote him when he stoode in iudgement before the high priest why smitest thou me if I haue spoken euill beare witnes of euill that is deale with me as order of iustice requireth And Saint Paule his faithfull disciple could not forbeare that painted wall Ananias who pretending to sit in iudgement according to the lawe did contrarie to the lawe commaund him to be smitten and should the Protestants in Fraunce hauing both authoritie and power to defend themselues suffer the Duke of Guyse a priuate man and a straunger with his complices to smite of all their heades as it were with one stroke and not rather to oppose themselues against his furie not onelie for defence of the gospell but also for the maintenance of the lawe and the libertie of their nation There resistance therefore was not treason rebellion crueltie as this declaimer raueth butobedience iustice and authoritie to withstand treason crueltie and rebellion Yet againe he repeateth that lack of libertie was no iust cause of these warres seing euerie where they might fill their paunches carrie a sister wife about with them toule Nuns out of cloysters filthilie abuse them still he speaketh as though none were Authors Captaines or Souldiers of these warres but such licentious ministers or as though so manie princes noble men gentlemen and valiant souldiers as serued in those warres had no other quarrell but to maintaine the gluttonie and lecherie of a fewe lewde ministers of which sort yet he is not able to name one Neuertheles he saith that moste commonlie euerie Apostate Monke had his Nun at his toile and holie Kate hir holie mate Although the worlde knoweth that this might better be verefied of Clauster all Monkes and Nunnes of limiting friers and their holie sisters But srier Luthers pleasure was if we beleeue this man that his Ladie Venus court should be franke and free if the wife saith he will not doe it let the maide supplie her place The will of God commaundeth and necessetie bindeth as well to haue carnall copulation as to eate and drinke See how malice draweth all wordes to the worste meaning Luther in his booke of Babilonicall captiuitie speaking in the person of Assuerus taking Hester his maide to wife when Vasti refused to come to him hath some such wordes as he reporteth If the wife will not let the maide come and possesse her place meaning nothing els but the diuorcing of Vasti and the marrying of Hester but nothing as the Papists cauill that a man hauing a wife maie abuse his maide The other saying of the necessitie of carnall copulation is spoken onelie of them that haue not the gift of continencie for whome marriage is the lawfull and necessarie remedie ordained by God to auoide sinne To conclude this first part he saith it was neither religion nor gospell nor Gods quarrell they meant to further but malice against the pope as Luther in an epistle ad argentin confesseth But Luther neuer confessed any such matter he might well acknowledge his iust hatred against the Pope as the enemie of Christ and so doe all true Christians And if the estates of France had raised warre for malice against the Pope they would haue sent a power into Italie to haue annoyed him or his possessions there as Charles the 5. and Philip his Catholike sonnes haue done for the loue they bare to the Pope As for the restitution of Christian faith wel neere worne out there was no neede he saieth to laboure For the Church of God the seat and piller of truth had alwaies without force battaile kept that most recurently Then it followeth the Church of Rome was not the Church of God for which Christ praied Ihon. 17. To which he promiseth the holie Ghost Ihon. 14. In which are foūd so few sparkes of true faith which mainteineth so many grosse errours eontrarie to the expresse wordes of God conteined in the holie scriptures as often and moste cleare demonstrations hath beene made To be short if the cause of these warrs taken in hand be demaunded which he calleth Tragicall and cruell doinges you shall haue a short answear saith he with Mum Budget except they will alleadge perhappes the ambition auarice boldenes wantones of certaine loose Friers as though he could be ignorant of the publike protestation of the Prince of Condy and a great part of the nobilitie of Fraunce set forth when they beganne the first warres In which they neither alledge the fond surmised causes by Frarine nor mumble them ouer in Mum Budget but plainlie declare the reasonable sufficient and necessarie causes which mooued them to that attempt The copie whereof is yet extant in storie to be seene and read Now is he come to the second part wherein he will prooue that as without iust cause so without authoritie and commission they haue made warres And
you both to wil and to be hable to do for his owne good pleasure whereupon we conclude that though a man is willed to worke his owne saluation by walking in that waie which god hath appointed for them that shal be saued yet he can doe nothing by his owne strength but all that he doth is of the grace of god for by grace you are saued through faith that not of your selues it is the gift of God To be short we make not the grace of God an helper onelie but a wholl doer and bringer to passe in vs of our saluation and of all thinges tending thereto For we are not apt of our selues as of our selues to thinke anie thing belonging thereto but our aptnes is of God Nor I saith Saint Paul but the grace of God which is with me Againe we haue infinit places of scripture to prooue that a man ought not to dout of his saluatiō in respect of the truth of Gods promises although we ought to feare trem ble at Gods iudgements and although we cannot be alwaies voide of feare in respect of our own weakenes Furthermore they haue expresselie doe ye the worthie fruites of penance Luc. 3. we haue no where that faith onelie is sufficient without all satisfaction and all other workes of penance on our partes The fruites worthie of repentance we acknowledge to be necessaire to declare vnfained repentance but not for satisfaction of Gods iustice which is blasphemous against the satisfaction of Christes death But that a faith which is fruitles or voide of the workes of repentance should be sufficient to saluation or Iustification we doe vtterlie deny as a thing contrary to the scriptures Yet againe they haue expresselie that euerie man shal be saued according to his workes Apo. 20. we haue no where that men shal be iudged onelie according to their faith We confesse as the text is that euerie man shal be iudged according to his workes and so perhaps he would haue saide if the corrector had done his part neither doe we affirme that men shal be iudged onelie according to their faith for triall of their faith shal be made by their workes Once againe they haue expresselie that there remaineth aretribution stipend and paie to euery good worke in heauen Marc. 9. 1. Cor. 3. Apoc. 22. Ps. 118. we haue as he saith no where that good workes done in Christ do merite nothing In the 3. text quoted out of the new testament is all one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a rewarde whether it be freelie giuen or deserued by laboure To him that worketh saith Saint Paule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rewarde is not accompted according to grace but according to debt But God is debter to no man Neither is there anie merit of good workes once named in the scriptures but against the merit of good workes Christ saith epxresselie when you haue done all thinges that are commaunded vnto you saie we are vnprofitable seruants and the paie wages stipend merite or desert of an vnprofitable seruant is shewed Matt. 25. 30. Cast out the vnprofitable seruant into vtter darkenesse there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth It is therfore the grace mercie and trueth of Gods promise whereby we claime rewarde and not the merites desert or debt of our good workes To that he saieth they haue expresselie praier and sacrifice for the dead in the second of the Maccaebees We answer that booke of Macabes to be no holie Scripture out of which he might haue expresselie a man commended for killing himselfe Whether Angels present good workes and almesdeedes before God and whether Saintes departed do praie for them that are aliue which he gathereth out of the Apocriphal bookes of Tobie and the Maccabes we make no question as of matters not reuealed in the canonicall scriptures But if they were graunted to be so yet it followeth not that men aliue must or may praie to Angels or Saintes departed Last of all out of the canonicall scripture he saieth they haue expresselie that the affliction which Daniell vsed vpon his bodie was acceptable in the sight of God Dan. 10. and we haue no where that such voluntarie corporall afflictions are in vaine But which of vs saith that such voluntarie corporall affliction as Daniell vsed and to such end as he did vse them are in vaine No man verilie You see therefore that while he boasteth of expresse words of scripture against vs he is driuen either to glose vpon the text or to faine some opinion vnto vs which we holde not at all and that all his bragges are but winde and wordes without matter as of one that-fcareth no shame because his heade is hidden The third waie of triall is necessarie collections made and inferred vpon the scriptures which we are willing to acknowledge and admitte to be of as great authoritie as the expresse words of the scripture But to discerne what is necessarie collection and what is not necessarie collection when there is no expresse wordes of scripture there is no certaine waie but the iudgement of Logicke for that onelie is necessarie collection which out of expresse words of scripture or articles of faith or other groundes confessed to be necessarilie gathered out of the holie scripture may be rightly concluded in a true and lawfull syllogisme whatsoeuer cannot be so concluded is no necessarie collection But our answerer saith we must referre our selues to the auncient primitiue Church for this meaning and his reason is For it is like they knew it best for that they liued nearer to the writers thereof then we doe who could well declare vnto them what was the meaning of the same we doe willinglie yeald to consult with the auncient primitiue Church to be holpen with their collections but to admit all their collections without examining them were to admit many errors that euen the Papists doe condemne for errors and which are reprooued by the scriptures them-selues Let one example serue in stead of manie S. Ierome collecteth out of this scripture It is good not to touch a woman that therefore it is euill to touch a woman Euerie man doth see that this is an vnnecessary collection and so are many other in the auncient fathers writings Wherefore we must vse the gift of knowledge of right gathering and concluding which God hath giuen not to be vnprofitable vnto his Church but to be both beneficiall and necessarie Againe marke the feeble reason vpon which our answerer groundeth his saying It is like they knew it best he cannot say it is necessarie that they knew it best then how prooueth he that it is like because they liued neerer to the writers then we doe who could well declare the meaning vnto them In deede if we had the writings of them that liued so neere vnto the Apostles that they might heare their meaning of their owne mouthes it were some likeliehood and yet no necessarie proofe