was impossible who hath bestowed so great grace vpon vs. S. Siluester as Nycephorus hath recorded speaketh thus of baptisme e Lib. 7. hystor cap. 33. This water hauing receiued by the inuocation of the blessed Trinity heauenly vertue euen as it washeth the body without so doth it within cleanse the soule from filth and corruption and make it brighter then the Sunne-beames So that it is most conformable both vnto the holy Scriptures and the auncient Fathers to affirme and hold that the Sacraments doe really contayne and convay the graces of God into our soules as his true and proper instruments OF SAVING FAITH M. PERKINS Page 305. HEre followeth a Chapter which for the most part doth nothing but repeate points of doctrine which hath beene particularly handled in the questions of Iustification Satisfaction and Merits and aboue twenty times touched by the vvay in his booke therefore a tedious and loathsome thing it is to me here againe to heare of them yet because the man thinketh that in these points the principall glory of the newe Gospell consisteth and that there fore they are alwayes to be inculcated in season and out of seasorr I vvill briefly runne them once more ouer shewing as he doth only vvherein we differ without repeating the arguments which are to be seene in their proper places To come to the matter he putteth downe fiuâ— conclusions The first conclusion The Catholikes teach iâ— to be the property of faith to beleeue the whole word of God and especially the redemption of mankinde by Christ M. PERKINS DIFFERENCE THey beleeue indeede all the written word of God and more then all for they beleeue the bookes Apocryphall and vnwritten Traditions Answere Touching vnwritten Traditions see that Chapter in the first part M. PER. saith here Because they come to vs by the handes of men they cannot come within the compasse of our faith Then I say vpon the same ground the vvritten word cannot come within the compasse of our beleefe because it also commeth vnto vs by the handes of men And as the Apostles and their Schollers are to be credited when they deliuered the vvritten word vnto vs for Gods pure word so are they to be beleeued vvhen they taught the Church these poynts of Gods vvord vnwritten to be embraced as the true word of God although not written but committed to the harts of the faithfull And when we haue the testimony of auncient Councels or of many holy Fathers that these points of doctrine vvere by Tradition deliuered vnto the Church by the Apostles vve as firmely beleeue them as if they were written in the holy Scriptures For which bookes of Scripture be Canonicall vvhich not and what is the true meaning of hard places in Scripture we knowe no other way of infallible certainty then by the declaration of the Catholike Church which we therefore aswell beleeue telling vs these thinges were deliuered from the Apostles by Tradition as those thinges in vvriting And that such credit is to be giuen to the Catholike Church the Apostles Creede witnesseth which biddeth vs beleeue the Catholike Church Nowe touching those bookes of holy Scripture vvhich vvere some hundreth yeares after Christ doubted off by some of the auncient Fathers vvhether they were Canonicall or no thus we say That albeit it were vndetermined by the Church vntill S. Augustines time vvhether they were Canonical or no and so were by diuers auncient Fathers though not condemned as Apocryphall yet not comprehended vvithin the Canon of assured Scriptures notwithstanding that matter being in a Councell holden at Carthage where among many other learned Bishops S. Augustine vvas present throughly debated Concil Cartag 3. cap. 47. those bookes doubted off before were found by the holy Ghost and them to be true Canonicall Scripture and afterward vvere by the sixt generall Councell that confirmed this Councell holden at Carthage declared and deliuered to the whole Church for Canonicall Nowe as we receiued at the first the other bookes of Canonicall Scripture on the â—â—edit of the Catholike Church euen so ought vve to doe these shee hauing declared them to be such yea the Protestants themselues haue admitted many bookes of the newe Testament vvhich vvere doubted off for three hundred yeares after Christ why then doe they not as vvell receiue them of the old The difference betwixt vs is that they only of passion and priuate fancy admit these and reject those vvhereas vve of obedience relying vpon the judgement of the vvhole Church admit those bookes for Canonicall which the Catholike Church hath declared for such And thus much of the first conclusion Nowe to the second touching saluation by Christ alone wherein the Protestants either cannot vnderstand or will not report our doctrine aright We confesse that Christ IESVS hath merited the redemption and saluation of all mankinde yet say we further that not one man is saued through Christ vnlesse he for his owne part first beleeue in Christ if he be of yeares and be content to doe all those thinges that Christ hath commanded vs to doe so that to saluation two thinges are required the first and principall is Christes mediation the second is the applying of Christes mediation and merits vnto vs vvithout this latter the former will stand no man in steede Nowe to be made partaker of Christs merits we must not only beleeue in him as the Protestants teach but also keepe his commandements and by good workes deserue heauen otherwise according to Christs decree we shall neuer come thither as in the question of Merits hath beene plentifully proued out of the holy scriptures so we teach then that besides Christs sufferings and merits we must haue some of our owne or else vve shall neuer be partakers of Christes And M. PERKINS cannot be excused from a vvilfull corruption of Gods word when he affirmeth S. Paul to say We are not saued by such workes as God hath ordayned men regenerated to walke in for those be not the wordes of the text but his peeuish construction S. Paul putting a playne distinction betweene workes that we are not saued by and workes that we must walke in calling these later good workes and the other barely workes To the other text I say that we haue no righteousnesse of our owne strength or by the vertue of Moyses lawe but through the mercy of God and Christs merits we haue true righteousnesse giuen vs by baptisme Christ indeede by himselfe and his owne sufferinges not by sacrifice of Goates or Calues hath meritoriously washed away our sinnes that is deserued of God that they should be washed away but formally he hath washed away our sinnes by infusion of Christian righteousnesse into our soules He that will see more of this let him reade the question of Iustification And where as M. PER. saith that all grace of God powred into our hartes is by the corruption of our hartes defiled he little knoweth the vertue of Gods grace vvhich so cleanseth and purifieth
vulgar tongue or that all thinges necessary to be beleeued to saluation are contained in the Scriptures To be short not one article of their religion which is contrary to ours is contained in this Creede of the Apostles therefore to affirme as de doth all necessarie pointes of religion to be contained in this Creede is to cast their owne religion flat to the ground and to teach that not one point of it is to be beleeued this Creede may neuerthelesse be called the key and rule of faith because it containeth the principall pointes of the Christian religion and doth open as it were the doore vnto all the rest and guide a man certainely vnto the knowledge of them by teaching vs to beleeue the Catholike Church 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. Ioh. 16. vers 13. which being the piller and ground of truth directed and guided by the spirit of truth will alwaies instruct her obedient children in all truth necessary to saluation Then saith Master PERKINS The eternal truth of God the creatour shal depend on the determination of the creature Nothing lesse for Gods truth is most sincere and certaine in it selfe before anie declaration of the Church but vve poore creatures that are subject to mistaking and errour should not so certaynelie vnderstand and knowe that truth of God vnlesse he had ordained and appointed such a skilfull and faithfull Mistris and interpreter to assure vs both what is his word and what is the true meaning of it Like as pure gold is not made perfect in it selfe by the Gold-smithes touch-stone but other men are thereby assured that it is true and pure gold euen so the word of God doth not borrowe his truth from the Church but the true children of God are by the holie Church assured which is the same his word If we did hold as we doe not that the written vvord contayneth all pointes of doctrine necessarie to saluation yet vvere it most necessarie to relie vpon the Catholike Churches declaration both to be assured which bookes of Scriptures be Canonicall which not whereupon S. Augustine a man of farre better judgement then any of these daies said Con. Epist Iud. cap. 5. that he would not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse the authority of the Church moued him thereunto as also to vnderstand them truly because the wordes of holy Scripture without the true meaning and sence of them doe but deceiue men and leade them into errour and to that end haue alwaies beene and yet are by Heretikes abused to drawe others after them into destruction The like may be said of other ancient Creedes and confessions of faith which holding the Apostles Creede did adde some fewe pointes vnto it namely such as were in those daies called into question by Heretikes of greater fame and who were followed of many not touching in particuler diuers other articles generally beleeued of all true Christians or else by some fewe and obscure men only questioned Wherefore to argue that no other pointes of faith are to be beleeued but such as are expressed in ancient Creedes is to cut of a great part of our faith Lastly it is most vntrue to say that those ancient Fathers and Councels knewe not of these articles of faith by him mentioned for they haue most plainely taught them in their writinges yea and expresly condemned of heresie most of the contrary positions nowe againe reuiued and holden by the Protestantes as in those seuerall questions I haue before proued Touching beleeuing in the Church which he thrusteth in by the way we vse not that phrase as the very Creede sheweth following therein S. Augustine with others who hold that to beleeue in a thing is to make it our creatour by giuing our whole hart vnto it in which sence we beleeue not in Saintes nor in the Church albeit some other ancient Doctors take the wordes to beleeue in not so precisely but say that me may beleeue in the Church in Saintes that is beleeue certainely that the Catholike Church is the only true company of Christians and that to the lawfull gouernours thereof it appertaineth to declare both which bookes be Canonicall and what is the true meaning of all doubtfull places in them so we beleeue the Saintes in heauen to heare our prayers to be carefull to pray for vs to be able to obtaine by intreaty much at Gods handes in whose high fauour they liue Thus much in answere vnto that which M. PER. objecteth in generall nowe to that he saith in particuler He chargeth vs first with the breach of the third article Conceiued by the holy Ghost Which saith he is ouerturned by the transubstantiation of bread and wine in the Masse into the body and bloud of Christ for here we are taught to confesse the true and perpetuall incarnation of Christ beginning in his conception and neuer ending afterward Answ Here is a strange exposition of the Creede Is Christes incarnation perpetuall and not yet ended then it is true to say that Christ is not yet incarnate as we may say truly that a man is not borne vntill his birth be accomplished and ended But to the present purpose because Christes incarnation beganne at his conception cannot bread be turned afterward into his body how hangeth this together Belike he meanes that Christes body was but once conceiued and that was by the holy Ghost in his mothers wombe therefore it cannot afterward be made of any other thing This to be his meaning he declares in the question of the Sacrament but it is too too simple and childish For we hold him not to be so conceiued by bread as he was by the holy Ghost who was the efficient cause of his conception but that the same body that was cōceiued by the holy Ghost is made really present in the Sacrament by transubstantiation of bread into it which hath no opposition at al with this article as I haue more largely proued in the foresaid question And whereas he saith further cleane besides the purpose of this article that Christes body hath the essentiall properties of a true body standing of flesh and bone we grant the same but when he addeth that local circumscription cannot be seuered from a body he is deceiued for the greatest body of all others which is the highest heauen is not circumscribed by any place because there is no other body without it whose extreamities might compasse in and circumscribe that body of the highest heauen And when he saith that to be circumscribed in place is an essentiall property of euery quantity and that quantity is the common essence of euery body he makes himselfe but a common mocking-stocke vnto euery simple Logitian who knoweth that no accident such as euery quantity is can be of the essence and nature of a substance such as Christes body is Neither would any man say that cared what he said that to be circumscribed in a place is essentiall to euery quantity when all numbers that be quantities
we will demand at his handes We call vpon Christ for saluation and therefore must we first beleeue him to be a Sauiour we call vpon Saints to pray for vs therefore must vve before hand beleeue that they both can and will pray for vs and that they are able through the fauour and loue that God beareth them to entreate much at Gods handes see howe vve must beleeue in them vpon whom we call for helpe And the very phrase of beleeuing in Saints is vsed by the same a Ad Philemon v. 5. Apostle not vnlike that of the old Testament b Exod. 14 vers 31. The people beleeued God and his seruant Moyses M. PERKINS goeth on patching vp his former argument with that which hath small coherence with it to wit That we haue no promise to be heard but for Christs sake Admit it vvere so it maketh nothing against prayer to Saints for they pray for vs in Christs name and are heard for Christs sake Finally M. PERKINS fableth that we giue for our only warrant of inuocation of Saints miracles and reuelations and thereunto answereth that to judge of any point of doctrine by miracles three thinges must concurre First the doctrine of faith and piety to be confirmed Secondly prayer to God that some thing may be done for the ratifying of the said doctrine Thirdly the manifest edification of the Church by the two former What of all this good Sir Marry thinke what you vvill for he inferreth nothing I will therefore apply all this to the purpose and say first That vvhen a miracle is graunted by God to confirme any point of doctrine in controuersie then euery man is as vvell bound to beleeue that point of doctrine as if it were plainely recorded in the holy Scripture for it hath God to witnesse who cannot deceiue Secondly that S. Bernard a most Godly man and one whose testimony M. PER. doth very often alleage did fulfill all those three worthy obseruations of M. PER. in working of miracles to confirme inuocation of Saints and therefore it is to be beleeued of all men euen by M. PERKINS owne sentence For first he propounded inuocation of Saints Lib. 3. vitae cap. 5. as a doctrine of faith and great piety in the Prouince of Tolouse in France where it was by our Protestants Grandsiers the Albigenses denyed Secondly he blessed some certaine loafes of bread that were presented to him and prayed to God that if inuocation to Saints were pure doctrine of faith that then whosoeuer should taste of that bread might be cured of what disease soeuer he was sicke A Bishop that stoode by added yea Sir if they receiue them with good faith they shall be healed S. Bernard replyed I said not so but whosoeuer shall truly taste of them shall be cured that they may knowe vs to haue the truth and to be the true messengers of God And as it there followeth An huge multitude of sicke and diseased persons tasting of that bread recouered perfect health If we had no other argument then this it alone were sufficient to perswade any Christian that to pray vnto Saints is the true doctrine of Christ which God so expresly would confirme by miracles and testifie so euidently What would he beleeue that will not beleeue this But saith M. PER. miracles be to be done for Infidels and not for them who beleeue True it is and therefore was this miracle done to conuert or to confound such Infidels as our Protestants are vvho will not beleeue the inuocation of Saints Lastly saith he our faith is not to be confirmed by reuelations Luc. 16. vers 29. and apparitions of dead men but by the writings of the Apostles and Prophets What is this either to miracles or inuocation of Saints neither is that which he saith to be drawne out of those wordes of that parable as I will proue when it shall be neede Note by the way that twice in this question he himselfe citeth that parable of Diues and Lazarus for proofe of doctrine vvhich he afterward denyeth to be lawfull for vs to doe What our other groundes be for inuocation of Saints shall be declared in our arguments following M. PERKINS fift reason To pray to Saints departed to bowe the knee to them while they are in heauen is to asscribe vnto them that which is proper to God namely to knowe the hart and inward desires thereof and to knowe the speeches and behauiours of all men in all places on the earth at all times Answere This man doth too too broadly enlarge his lies for neither doe all men at once much lesse at all times pray vnto euery or any one of the Saints but suppose they did yet to heare all their prayers togither is nothing so much as to see that which euery Saint doth see in heauen to wit the one only substance of God in three persons for what are all the cogitations of men compared vnto the immense and incomprehensible nature of God not so much as the point of a pinne to the whole globe of the earth and yet euery Saint in heauen doth clearely behold God therefore much more able are they to heare and see all thinges that belong vnto men And as the learned Diuines knowe the man-hood of our Sauiour Christ doth see knowe and comprehend all the deedes wordes and thoughts of all men that haue liued since the beginning of the world vnto the end because it belongeth vnto him who is judge of all to knowe all aswell to reward the good as to punish the euill and yet doth no Diuine say that the man-hood of Christ is God or equall vnto God in knowledge Nowe the Saints in heauen doe not see the secretes of our harts in our harts but being present to the face of God doe behold in it as it were in a most cleare glasse all that is pleaseth the goodnesse of God to reueale vnto them and it is incident and belonging necessarily vnto their most happy estate to haue graunted to them all that in reason they can demande otherwise they were not so happy as they might be Now what good nature would not be glad to pleasure his owne fellowe members and deare friendes specially such as craue so much at his handes vvherefore it cannot be denyed of any considerate man but that God who satisfieth al their just requests doth ordinarily reueale vnto his dearely beloued Saints all the prayers that be made vnto them Surely S. Augustine in most expresse tearmes declareth De cura pro mort cap. 15. 16. That God can giue such power vnto his Saints and Martirs that they may be present in spirit at euery place throughout the world where there is any memory of them or prayer made vnto them He will not take vpon him to define whether they be actually there present or no or whether by the ministery of Angels they be relieued that seeke helpe by the intercession of Martirs but maketh no
vers 12. considering his owne frailty Marry very good hope and confidence ought we all to haue in respect of Gods infinite mercy and goodnesse and in the inestimable merits of our Lord and Sauiour IESVS Christ but by faith we cannot beleeue it vnlesse God doe extraordinarylie reueale any such thing vnto vs which he doth to very fewe of his best beloued and best tryed seruants In the matter of our difference he saith first That we teach not faith to be a knowledge of thinges beleeued but a reuerent assent vnto them whether they be knowne or vnknowne But this he saith very vntruly for we hold faith in his owne nature to comprehend a certayne kinde of knowledge though not so cleare and euident yet of as great assurance as is the knowledge of naturall thinges but the man harpeth vpon something else if he could hitte on it We say indeede that it is not of necessity for the simpler sort and ignorant people to reade the holy Scriptures and to goe fish their faith out of that profound Ocean but may content themselues with their Pastors instructions and with their Catechismes and other bookes of piety and deuotion albeit we wish them of better vnderstanding if they be not too curious and wilfull to reade the holy Scriptures vvith reuerence seeking humbly to better their knowledge and especially to amend their liues and in places of difficulty not to trust vnto their owne wits but to referre themselues to the exposition of the Catholike Church which is the pillar and fortresse of truth and there vpon vvholy to rely Yet vve require much more knowledge in the simpler sort of people then the Protestants doe for we teach that euery one is to knowe expresly the 12. articles of the Apostles Creede the tenne Commandements and those Sacraments which they themselues are to receiue Further also all such lawes and ordinances of either the spirituall or temporall Gouernour which doe appertayne vnto their owne estate that they may knowe howe both in spirituall and temporall matters to carry themselues vvithout offence Let those our Authors which teach cases of conscience be consulted in those points and you shall finde them to charge euery man in conscience to knowe all these thinges whatsoeuer some men haue thought to the contrary who be not in that allowed but disproued euen by the testimony of that Authour Banes vvhome M. PERKINS quoteth And touching praying in Latin the lawes of the Catholike Church doth not bind any man to pray in Latin who is not first bound to learne the Latin tongue that is men in holy orders are bound to their Latin Breuiary but no man ignorant of the Latin tongue must be admitted vnto holy orders for them that are ignorant of the Latin tongue vve haue diuers bookes of English prayers vvherein they may exercise themselues fruitfully If any deuout women or others who vnderstand not Latin desire to reade some selected and approued Latin prayers we doe not forbidde them because those prayers haue many priuiledges aboue others And vve doubt not but that many of them doe reade the same Latin prayers with much more humility attention and eleuation of their mindes vnto God and all goodnesse then thousandes of Protestants or Puritans who reade and pronounce gallantly many glorious English prayers composed very curiously when their harts be farre from God Lastly he dissenteth from vs for that we say That some articles of faith were at the first beleeued generally by an infolded faith which afterward being by generall Councels vnfolded and declared to be articles of faith were beleeued expreslie This implicity of faith touching articles of religion M. PER. rejecteth saying That all matters of faith are contained plainelie in the Scriptures This he saith without probation and it is by me in the question of Traditions refuted already therefore to that place I referre the reader OF PVRGATORY OVR CONSENT M. PERKINS Page 278. WE hold a Christian Purgatory by which we vnderstand first the afflictions of Gods children here on earth secondly the bloud of Christ is a Purgatory for our sinnes and so Augustine calleth the mercy of God our Purgatory To this I say that the word Purgatory may be taken diuersly and signifie many thinges which because they be not to the present purpose may be here well omitted THE DIFFERENCE WE differ in two thinges first concerning the place the Catholikes hold it to be vnder the ground into which mens soules after this life doe enter This we deny as hauing no warrant in the word which mentioneth only two places for men after this life Luc. 16. v. 25.26 Ioh. 3. Apoc. 22. heauen and hell Here M. PER. beginneth the disproofe of Purgatory with his ordinary hackney it is not mentioned in the Scriptures To which I answere first that it is as shall be proued hereafter but if it were not yet were it to be beleeued because it vvas receiued by Tradition euen from the Apostles time Besides this fault in M. PER. argument there is another more childish to wit because there is no mention made of Purgatory in three or foure places by him quoted he concludeth that it hath no warrant at all in any other place of Scriptures as who should say there is no Doctor of Phisicke in two or three Colledges of Cambridge therefore there is not one in all the Vniuersity besides Finally Luc. 16. vers 25. the very first place by him cited ouerthroweth flatly his owne position it being truly vnderstood according vnto the generall exposition of the most learned Doctors for Abraham then was not in heauen but in a third place called Lymbo Patrum because before Christ had paid their ransome by his death on the crosse the Fathers of the old Testament were holden captiue and so of Christ it is said That ascending on high he ledde captiuity captiue Ephes 4. vers 8. Hebr. 9. v. 8. 15. And S. Paul proueth by the entring of the high Priest only into the second part of the Tabernacle called Sancta Sanctorum that the way of the Holies was not then manifested but by the bloud of Christ to be laid open and they by the death of the testatour to receiue the eternall redemption But this is by the way to shew the wisdome of the man to bring one text in controuersie to established another But he goeth forward and saith stoutly that there can be no place for Purgatory for that it is saide That they who dyed in the Lord Apoc. 14. vers 13. are bidden to rest from their labours which cannot be saith he if they goe into Purgatory And to cut off all cauils it is further said their workes that is the reward of their workes followe them euen at the heeles I answere first that we haue here by the way heauen to be the reward of workes by M. PER. confession which in the question of merits he denied most absolutely Secondly that albeit they who die in our
former offences Neyther can a man that is dead alter his estate but must expect judgement according to his former deserts Now if he haue vpon the true foundation builded wood hay and stubble then he must passe through the fire marry by the helpe of good prayers almes and principally by the Sacrifice of the Masse he may haue his paines in that purging fire remitted or much eased as you haue heard before out of S. Augustine Hom. 41. in 1. ad Corinth And the same teacheth S. Chrysostome saying The dead are holpen not by their friendes weeping but by their prayers supplications and almes And this is all in effect which M. PERKINS disputeth against Purgatory Secondly saith he we differ from them touching the meanes of Purgatory They say that men are purged by suffering of paines in Purgatory whereby they satisfie for their veniall sinnes and for the temporall punishment of their mortall sinnes We teach the contrary holding that nothing can free vs from the least punishment of the smallest sinne but the sufferinges of Christ Indeede they say that our sufferinges in themselues considered doe not purge and satisfie but as they are made meritorious by the sufferings of Christ But to this I oppose one text of Scripture Hebr. 1. vers 3. Christ hath purged our sinnes by himselfe where the last clause cuts the throate of all humane satisfactions and merits and it giueth vs to vnderstand that whatsoeuer purgeth vs from our sinnes is not to be found in vs but in Christ alone To batter this his only fortresse his owne wordes in the beginning of the same Chapter are very sufficient for there he plainely teacheth That by afflictions which men suffer in this world they are clensed from their corruption as gold is from the drosse by fire If our owne suffering purge vs from sinne as he confesseth before howe then can it be true that that vvhich purgeth vs from our sinnes is not in vs but in Christ alone Againe it is but a diuers reading in the Greeke text that hath those wordes by himselfe for they are not in the Latin translation But admitting them for currant the sence is most easie and nothing against eyther Purgatory or humane satisfactions for the Apostle meaneth no other thing thereby then that he expresseth in the 9. Chapter following to wit That Christ not by the bloud of Calues or Goates but by his owne bloud purged vs from our sinnes and wrought our redemption in such sort as in the question of satisfaction hath beene declared at large Here I say briefly that Christ appeased his Fathers wrath towardes all such as shal be made pertakers of his merits defaced the sinne it selfe and paide the eternall punishment due vnto their sinnes but left a temporall paine to be endured of the offendour for euery such sinne pardoned eyther in this world or in the next both because reason requireth that he vvho falleth after that he was once freely pardoned as vve were all in baptisme should not the second time be so easilie admitted into Gods grace as that he should not himselfe feele some smart for his offence Againe we being members of Christs body meete it is that we suffer with him Rom. 8. Col. 1 24. if we will raigne with him as the Apostle teacheth vvho also was so bold as to say that he in his body accomplished those thinges that wanted to the passions of Christ. To this place M. PER. referreth prayer for the dead of which he propoundeth three conclusions two affirmatiue and one negatiue but proueth nothing The first conclusion We hold that Christian charity must extend it selfe to them that be dead to wit in honest buriall of them in preseruing their good names and in reliefe of their posterity The second conclusion Further we pray in generall for the faithfull departed that God would hasten their joyfull resurrection The third conclusion To pray for particular men departed and to pray for their deliuerance out of Purgatory we thinke it vnlawfull because we haue neither promise nor commandement so to doe and so endeth he the question of Purgatory not propounding one argument in fauour of our party His reason of the necessity of a promise and commandement to pray for any thing before we pray for it I haue in the question of praying to Saints confuted at large and therefore omit it here and will furnish this place vvith some arguments for the proofe of Purgatory And though M. PER. blushed not to say that it hath no warrant in the word of God yet he hath or might haue seene in Cardinall Bellarmine Tom. 1. controuer 6. cap. 3. 4. little lesse then 20. textes of holy Scripture vsed by the auncient Doctors to confirme the doctrine of Purgatory I will make choise of some fewe of them and because Purgatory and prayer for the dead be so closely lincked together that the one doth necessarily followe the other I will joyne them both togither And gentle Reader remember here that which hath beene before rehearsed out of S. Augustine that there be some who die in so perfect an estate that they are carryed presently to heauen as all Innocents and Martirs and such other holy personages who commit fewe offences and yet doe leade a very austere life Others there be too too many vvho both liue and die wickedly such are also straight after their death plunged into the flames of hell fire Nowe There is a third sort of men who liue reasonable honestly at least doe die very penitently these only goe to Purgatory there to doe satisfaction for their former offences before they can be admitted into the joyes of heauen nowe to our proofes First 2. Machabaeor 12. Iudas Machabeus that most valiant Captayne of the people of God with all his armie prayed vnto God to pardon the offence of them that were slaine * Vers 42. and afterward making a generall collection among them sent 12000. groates to Hierusalem that sacrifice might there be offered for the offence of the departed the holy Ghost in the text witnessing it To be a holy and holesome cogitation to pray for the dead that they may be loosed and deliuered from their sinnes This text is so euident for prayer for the dead that it can haue no other answere then that which Heretikes flie vnto in their most desperate plunges to vvit to denie the whole booke to be Canonicall Scripture Vpon which point because it belongeth to another place I wil not dwel yet vvill I note by the vvay that S. Augustine in expresse tearmes doth declare 18. Ciuit. cap. 36. that the Church of God in his time did take it for Canonicall Scripture although the Iewes did not so The Protestants I knowe vvell cauill at many thinges in those bookes so might they that were disposed to wrangle against the best Hystories in the Bible But one of milder temper may perhaps demand howe those bookes that were at the first
in Adam c. I therefore ô my prayse my life and God of my hart laying aside for a season her good workes for which I rejoycing doe giue thee thankes doe nowe pray vnto thee for the sinnes of my Mother heare me I beseech thee through the salue of our woundes that hanged vpon the tree and nowe sitting at thy right hand doth plead for vs. I knowe that shee did many workes of mercy and from her hart forgaue all them that trespassed against her doe thou ô Lord also forgiue her her trespasses if shee committed any after baptisme Pardon her pardon her ô Lord I beseech thee and enter not into judgement with her let thy mercy surpasse thy judgements because thy wordes are true and thou hast promised mercy to the mercifull c. Could that most vvorthy Doctor more directly crosse Caluins false relation of his coldnesse in this matter or in better manner cleare himselfe from his spitefull slaunders Caluin blushed not to say that S. Augustine out of passion prayed for his mother but he himselfe relateth howe he did it some yeares after her death of setled judgement hauing his hart cured from humane affection And thus I end this question of Purgatory OF THE SVPREMACY IN CAVSES ECCLESIASTICAL OVR CONSENT M. PERKINS Page 283. TOuching the point of Supremacy Ecclesiasticall I will set downe howe neare we may come vnto the Roman Church in two conclusions The first conclusion For the founding of the primitiue Church the Ministery of the word was distinguished by degrees not only of order but also of power and Peter was called to the highest degree for Apostles were aboue Euangelists and Euangelists aboue Pastors and teachers nowe Peter was an Apostle and so aboue all Euangelists and Pastors howsoeuer he were not aboue other Apostles The second conclusion Among the 12. Apostes Peter had a three-fold priuiledge or prerogatiue first of authority I meane a preheminence in regard of estimation whereby he was in reuerence aboue the rest of the twelue Secondly of primacy because he was the first named as the fore-man of the quest Thirdly of principality in regard of measure of grace wherein he excelled the rest of the twelue but Paul excelled Peter euery way in learning zeale and vnderstanding as farre as Peter excelled the rest ANNOTATION MAster PERKINS as his manner is at the first vvould seeme to approch somewhat neare vnto the Catholike doctrine and therefore giueth as braue wordes for S. Peters prerogatiues as we doe to wit That he surpassed the other Apostles both in authority primacy and principality but pâ—â—â—ently after his old fashion he watereth his former wordes with such cold glosses that they shrinke in exceedingly for all Peters priuiledges doe extend no further then that he excelled the rest in priuate grace of learning zeale and vnderstanding and was therefore somewhat more esteemed then the rest and named first so that with M. PER. a great mill-post is quickly thwited as they say into a pudding pricke Againe all this is besides the purpose for the question is not vvhich of the Apostles excelled in those priuate gifts of vnderstanding zeale and piety for it is not vnlikely hat S. Iohn the Euangelist who sucked diuine mysteries out of our Sauiours breast was not inferior to either S. Peter or S. Paul in these spirituall graces of heauenly knowledge and charity but vve leauing these secretes vnto him vvho is the judge of the hart and of his inward gifts doe affirme S. Peter to haue beene aduanced aboue all the rest of the Apostles in the externall gouernement of Christes Church and the Bishops of Rome his successors to inherite the same supremacy THE DIFFERENCE by M. PERKINS THe Church of Rome giueth to Peter a supremacy vnder Christ aboue all persons and causes this standeth in a power to determine which bookes of Scripture be Canonicall and what is the true sence of any doubtfull place of them and for this purpose to call and assemble generall Councels and to confirme the decrees of them and by these meanes to decide all controuersiâ—â— about matter of faith Besides he can excommunicate any Christian be he King or Kaesar if they by obstinate withstanding Gods lawes or the decrees of holy Church shal justly deserue it Moreouer to him it doth belong to make Ecclesiasticall Canons and lawes for the due discipline and ordering of matters of the Church which doe binde in conscience Finally to confirme the election of Bishops and to decide all such greater controuersies as by appeale are brought vnto him from any part of Christendome These indeede be the chiefest points of the Popes supremacy as for that of pardoning of sinnes it is no proper part of his primacy but common vnto all not only to Bishops but also to Priests We saith M. PERKINS hold that neyther Peter nor any Bishop of Rome had or hath any such supremacy ouer the Catholike Church but that all supremacy vnder Christ is appertaining to Kinges and Princes with him in their Dominions And that our doctrine is good and theirs false I will make manifest by sundry reasons First Christ must be considered as he was a King two wayes first as he is God so is he King ouer al by right of creation and so as God hath deputies on earth to gouerne the world namely Kings and Princes Secondly he is King by right of redemption ouer the whole Church which he hath redeemed with his pretious bloud and so as mediatour and redeemer he hath no fellowe nor deputy for no creature is capable of this office to doe in the roome and stead of Christ that which himselfe doth because euery worke of the mediatour must arise from the effectes of two natures concurring in one action namely the God-head and Man-hood Againe Christes Priest-hood cannot passe from his person to any other whence it followeth that neyther his Kingly nor his Propheticall he vvould haue said Priestly office can passe from him to any creature Nay it is needlesse for Christ to haue a deputy considering that a deputy only serueth to supply the absence of the principall whereas Christ is alwayes present by his word and spirit it may be said that the Ministers in the worke of the ministery are Christes deputies I answere that they are no deputies but only actiue instruments because they doe only vtter the word but it is Christ that worketh in the hart In like manner in excommunication it is Christ that cutteth that excommunicate person from the Kingdome of heauen and the Church doth only declare this by cutting him off from the rest of Christes people vntill he repent so that in all Ecclesiasticall actions Christ hath no deputies but only instruments the whole action being personall in respect of Christ. Is not this trowe you a prety peece of an argument but we must beare with the length of it because it alone will serue as M. PER. opineth to ouerthrowe many points of Popery let it be therefore wel
commandements Besides S. Gregory did dispatch much businesse in and about Rome for the Emperour in his absence and so might vvrite that he had faithfully discharged the trust that the Emperour reposed in him yet in the very Epistle whence Caluin piketh some like wordes Lib. 4. epist 31. He doth admonish the Emperour that he ought to doe reuerence to Priests and putteth him in minde of Constantine the great who would not presume to judge of Bishops causes albeit the Bishops themselues requested and desired him so to doe And thus much in answere to that which is objected out of S. Gregory nowe if you desire to see vvhat this holy Bishops opinion vvas concerning the Supremacy of the Sea of Rome reade the 72. Epistle of his first booke vvhere he commandeth That if any out of Numidia the remotest part of Afrike desired to come vnto the Apostolike Sea of Rome that they should be permitted And in the 37. of his second booke doth signifie That all the foure Patriarkes might appeale vnto his court of Rome and could not afterward remoue the case from thence without great scandall and contumacy And in the 7. booke epist 63. doth in most expresse tearmes declare That without all doubt the Patriarke of Constantinople was subject vnto the Sea Apostolike And in the 64. addeth That all Bishops are subject vnto it saying For in that he saith himselfe to be subject to this Sea if any fault be found in Bishops I knowe not what Bishop is not subject to it And further l. 4. epist 52. It is euident vnto all that know the Gospel that by our Lordes voyce the chardge of the whole Church was committed vnto the most blessed and Prince of all the Apostles S. Peter And in his exposition of the fourth penitentiall Psalme affirmeth The Church of Rome to be head of all Churches And l. 14. Moral c 19. teacheth That Priests not Princes are the chiefe members of the Church And lib. 5. epist 25. speaking of the Emperour Maurice saith I knowe the most pious Princes to line discipline to keepe order to reuerence the Canons of the Church and not to intrude themselues into the businesse of Priests This may suffice to assure him that cannot reade S. Gregories vvorkes of his opinion in this matter and a hundreth times more may he finde that wil take the paines to peruse that his worke of Epistles called registrum By this may be answered that vvhich M. PER. citeth out of Pope Leo 4. that liued as he saith two hundreth yeares after Gregory That he professed obedience vnto his imperiall commandements to be but an vsuall Italian phrase And vvith what congruity he citeth one of them to professe obedience of curtefie to the Emperour whome they account to haue beene no better then Antichrist in his full pride and to haue acknowledged no other man for his head yea to haue extolled himselfe aboue God as they blaspheme I leaue it to the consideration of the wise Hitherto in answere of M. PERKINS objection against the Popes supremacy It followed in due order that hauing disputed against that he should haue confirmed his owne opinion for the supremacy of Kings Princes for it doth not followe necessarily that if the Pope be not head of the Church that then the King is for Patriarkes or Primates may be in the seuerall Prouinces or else the graue learned Senate of consistoriall Ministers and rude artificers called forsooth Elders of the congregation But M. PER. towardes the end of his booke waxeth slouthfull and hath omitted also to propose any arguments in our behalf yea he doth not propose one reason in proofe of his owne position Nay vvhich is most reproueable he doth in his owne arguments made against the Popes supremacy vtterly subuert the Kinges supremacy as you haue heard already in his first and fourth reasons To vvhich I will adde a third gathered out of him in an hundred places Nothing is to be beleeued as necessary to saluation that is not written in the word of God but it is not written any where in the new Testament that our Sauiour Christ committed the gouernement of his Church vnto Kings or temporal Princes therefore no such thing is to be beleeued or taught by any Christian There is so little said in fauour of their Supremacies in holy Scripture that M. PER. held it good policy not to goe about the probation of it Some are so simple as to alleage that of the Apostle S. Paul in proofe of it Rom. 13. Let euery soule he subject to higher powers but it falleth many feadomes to short of it for that sentence may be as wel applied to spirituall as to temporall gouernours Againe if he speake of temporall Magistrates most assured it is that he meant nothing lesse then to counsaile the Christians Romans to obey their Emperors who were then Pagans and persecutors in matter of religion The same answere will serue for their other text out of S. Peter 1. Pet. c. 2. vers 14. vvho biddeth Christians obey the King as the more excellent More excellent then whome vvhat then Priests and Bishops nothing lesse but more excellent then their Dukes Captaines and such like officers vnder them as it followeth in the text of which sort very fewe in S. Peters dayes were members of the Church and much lesse supreme heades in cases Ecclesiasticall so that there is no vvarrant in all the newe Testament for Kinges supremacy in matters of religion and as little is there in the old as shall be examined in due place vvherefore not to be beleeued of any Protestant And in very equity and true naturall light how is it likely that temporall Princes both slenderly studyed in matter of Diuinity and nothing practised in the manner of Ecclesiastical gouernement should be chosen as fittest persons to decide all doubtes in Diuinity and to order and determine all controuersie in Church gouernement or shall we thinke that our Sauiour had such a simple fore-sight or slender care of his Church as to commit it specially to their chardge vvho vvere both least able and most vnlikely to looke well vnto it Women also and children may be lawfull Kinges but to make them supreme Gouernours of causes Ecclesiasticall vvherein children cannot and vvomen may not speake is most ridiculous And if all other proofes fayled the very experience of our age were sufficient to perswade any reasonable man that it is most absurd to be ruled by temporall Princes in matters of religion for it would followe of it necessarily that a Christian were bound to conforme his conscience to the Kinges lawes and to embrace that religion which the King commandeth him because he is bound to obey his superior appointed by God And consequently my father for example who liued in King Henryes the eight King Edwardes Queene Maryes and Queene Elizabeths daies should haue changed his religion foure times in his life and that vvith a very good conscience because he