that the Church according to the true members thereof shall be inuisible in the time of Antichrist it is without question Now that the Bishop of Rome hath beene and is that very Antichrist of whom the Scripture hath foretold and the Church of Rome the whoore of Babylon hath beene otherwhere plentifully shewed and in some part hath beene also handled formerly in the second part of this worke The time then hath been already for the Church to bee inuisible by the meanes of the furie of Antichrist maliciously and cruelly persecuting all that came to light that refused to drinke of his poisoned cup. Now hauing thus at large instructed M. Bishop what our doctrine is of the visibility of the Church I will answer him briefly as touching the other point of this cauill The Church subiect to errour that by the ancient monuments of the Church it plainly appeareth that many foule errors entred into the Church soone after the Apostles times that whilest m Matt. 13.25 the watchmen and husbandmen were sometimes sleepie the enemie came and sowed tares amongst the wheat that the builders built much n 1. Cor. 3.12 hay wood and stubble but yet so as that for the most part they reteined the only true foundatiō which is Iesus Christ so as that by the foundation they thēselues are saued but the fire of the Lord shall consume that trash which they haue builded thereon I haue o Answer to the Epistle sect 13. ex Euseb hist. eccles l. 3. c. 29. before shewed out of Eusebius how Egesippus limited the Virginitie of the Church to the age of the Apostles and that generation which with their owne eares heard the preaching of truth from them I haue there shewed how the shifts and subtilties of Satan for corrupting of the truth which he began to practise euen in their daies though they were then checked by their authoritie yet preuailed mightily when they were gone The errours which then were how farre they extended and whether they were in other places the same that we finde them to haue beene in some it is not apparant to vs but manifest it is that so cunningly and effectually Satan conueied that poison into the Church as that it hath neuer since perfectly recouered those wounds that it receiued then Yea Antichrist the man of sinne the master of abominations finding many of those corruptions in the Church hath bound them together as it were in a bundle and by his edicts and lawes hath obtruded and forced them to be receiued as articles of true faith But this saith M. Bishop doth mightily blemish the inestimable price of the most precious bloud of Christ. And why so Forsooth it maketh it not to be of sufficient value to purchase vnto him an euerlasting inheritance free from all errours in matters of faith and abounding in all good works But the effect of Christs purchase is to be determined by the wil of Christ himselfe and not by M. Bishops wilfull and witlesse dreames by which it may as wel be prooued that man is wholly without sinne as that the Church is without errour But I answer him briefly out of his owne words that as the Church which Christ hath purchased doth not so abound in all good works but that it is subiect to many sinnes so neither doth the same Church so abound in knowledge and truth but that it is subiect to many errors Christ intended not by his mediation to bring his Church in this life to full perfection So long as she continueth a pilgrim from her bridegrome and Lord she shall still carie the marks of mortalitie and corruption The Church in this world is like vnto the Moone which is neuer so cleere but that some fret or spot of darknesse is to bee seene in it and howsoeuer it seeme bright in one part yet is obscured in another But it is worth the while to see to what issue M. Bishop wil bring this conceit of his if he be vrged to reueale the secret of it For let vs question with him If the Church cannot erre how is it that the Church of Ephesus hath erred and quite fallen away p Act. 20.28 which God purchased with his owne blood and of which it was immediately that the Apostle said that q 1. Tim. 3.15 it was the pillar and ground of truth Did not the Church of r Gal. 1.6 Galatia erre The Churches of Corinth of Philippi of Thessalonica of Colossa of Pergamus Thyatira and the rest haue they not all gone astray Yes will hee say these particular Churches may erre but the whole Church vniuersall cannot erre But if euery part of the Church may erre then surely the whole Church may erre because all the parts make the whole which can be no other than the parts are We haue heereof example in the r Exod. 32.1 Israelites when the whole Church erred in setting vp the golden calfe and in the Christian Church which was in a maner ſ Vincent Lirinens Arianorū venenum non iam portiunculam quandam sed penè orbem totum contaminauerat wholly corrupted with the heresie of Arius t Hieron adu Lucifer Ingemuit totus orbis se esse Arianum miratus est the whole world groning as Hierome saith and woondering that it was become Arian Well he will say that the Church seuered and sundred in the parts thereof may erre but being assembled together by her Pastors and Bishops in a generall Councell it cannot erre But this the former instances disprooue for the whole Church of the Israelites was gathered together to Aaron the Christian Church was assembled together by her Pastors and Bishops in the Councell of Ariminum to the number of foure hundred who were moe than before had beene in the Councell of Nice and yet decreed for the Arian heresie So was there a second general Councel holden at Ephesus which affirmed approoued the heresie of Eutyches as there were also sundry other of which M. Bishop will not say but that they did erre True saieth he generall Councels may erre if they be not congregated by the authority of the Pope but being the Popes Councels they cannot erre But the Councels of Constance and Basil were both assembled by the Popes call and both these Councels decreed that the Councelis of greater authority than the Pope and the Pope subiect thereto which M. Bishop for the Popes sake will say is an errour and by the Popes procurement the contrary hath beene since determined in other Councels He will answer vs that the Councell though it be assembled by the Pope yet may goe awry if it become diuided from the Pope but being assisted and directed by him it cannot conclude amisse because the Pope cannot erre But we bring examples of diuers Popes that haue erred as Liberius by the herisie of the Arians Honorius by the heresie of the Monothelites and such like Well the Pope then saith he
as he is a priuate man may erre but as Pope and in his consistory and iudiciall sentence hee cannot erre But what is the church now become an asse to carry a priuiledge for the Pope onely To returne vpon himselfe the skiruie terme that he hath vsed in the former section Is not heere a huge great mill-post fairely thwited into a poore pudding pricke that whereas we are told that it was the effect of the inestimable price of Christs bloud to purchase a church free from all errours in matter of faith The word of God the rule and square of Christian religion we haue this great prerogatiue of the Church resolued finally into a drunken dreame concerning the Pope that it is he onely that cannot erre This is the vpshot of all and to this issue the matter commeth that the church may erre the general councell may erre be the persons neuer so learned neuer so faithfull neuer so holy onely the Pope though hee bee an ignorant beast a very he hound and incarnate diuell yet sitting downe in his chaire of Pestilence to decree a sentence receiueth presently like the Prophets of Apollo some Enthusiasticall impression whereby he pronounceth infallibly a truth howsoeuer he himselfe in his owne priuate opinion bee perswaded otherwise Which being a ridiculous presumption a meere nouelty most impudently deuised by sycophants and parasites a matter which hath no shadow of defense from the beliefe or practise of the ancient church deserueth rather to be reiected with scorne than to haue any question made of it As for that other matter which he adioineth concerning the word of God and interpretation thereof he saith rightlie that we hold for so we doe the holy word of God to be the onely rule and square of Christian religion u Iren adu haeres lib 3. cap. 1. Euangelium per dei voluntatem in Scripturis nobis tradiderunt fundamentum columnam fidei nostrae futurum For it was the will of God that the Apostles should commit the Gospell to writing To be the pillar and foundation of our faith and x Aug. in epist. Ioan. tract 3. contra insidiosos errores ponere voluit deus firmamentum in Scripturis sanctis in the scriptures to appoint vs a fortresse against deceitfull errours so as that y Chrysost op imperfect hom 49. Christiani qui sunt in Christianitate volentes accipere firmitatem fidei ad nullam rem aliam fugiant nisi tantummodo ad scripturas Christians being desirous to receiue assurance of their faith are no whither else to flie but onely to the Scriptures But wheras he affirmeth that we say that Christ hath left his holy word to be vnderstood of euery man as his own knowledge and spirit shall direct him and that in doubtfull questions arising he hath taken no order for the deciding of them but that euery one may be his own Iudge they are but silly deuices of obiection against vs to colour the nouelties absurdities which we in the same behalfe iustly condemne in them Wee euery man vnderstand the Scriptures as his owne knowledge and spirit doth direct him and why Because we reiect that course of vnderstanding the Scripture which they factiously and partiallie haue of late deuised for the seruing of their owne turne z Hosius de expresso dei verbe Siquis habeat interpretatisnem ecclesiae Romanae de loco aliquo scripturae etiamsi nec sciat nec intelligat an quomodo cum scripturae verbis conueniat tamen habet ipsissimum verbum dei If a man forsooth haue the interpretation of the church of Rome concerning any place of Scripture albeit he seeth not how it accordeth with the words yet he hath the very word of God We leaue euery man in doubtfull questions to be his owne Iudge but why Because we refuse the triall of a Iudge presumptuously aduanced and authorised by them Forsooth the Pope being accused of hainous abominations and sacriledge against God must sit as Iudge whether he be guiltie or not and whether they doe iustly that haue accused him But what Scripture what Councell what Father or storie or practise of the Church hath tied the interpretation of the Scriptures to the church of Rome or the deciding of controuersies to the Bishop of Rome And whereas their course in this behalfe hath no maner of iustification from the ancient Church I challenge him on the other side to alleage any course entertained by the same Church for the interpretation of Scriptures and iudgement of controuersies which is not approued and practised by vs. Which because he cannot do he doth but waste his wit by trifling in this sort and renuing idle cauils which a Of Traditions sect 21.22 before haue beene troden vnder foote being not able to relieue them with any further defense or strength 18. W. BISHOP To fold vp this part let me entreate thee courteous reader to be an vpright Iudge betweene the Protestants doctrine and ours in this most weighty matter of Christs dignity vertues and mediation and if thou see most euidently that ours doth more aduance them why shouldest thou not giue sentence on our side They make Christ ignorant many yeares of his life we hold him from the first instant of his conception to haue beene replenished with most perfect knowledge They that he spake and taught now and then as other men did and was subiect to disordinate passions We that he was most free from all such and that he taught alwaies most diuinely They make his very death not sufficient to redeeme vs we hold that the least thing that euer he suffered in his life deserued the redemption of many worlds They that he died onely for the elect we that he died for all though many through their owne fault doe not receiue any benefit by his death They that thereby we are not purged from our sinnes but by imputation we that all are by the vertue thereof inwardly cleansed They that Christ purchased a Church consisting of few not to continue long and subiect to many errours we that he established a Church that should be spread ouer all the world and that should continue to the end of the world visibly and alwaies free from any errour in any matter of faith Finally they hold that Christ left his holy word to the disputation of men not taking any certaine order for the ending of controuersies that should arise about it we teach that he hath established a most assured meanes to decide all doubts in religion and to hold all obedient Christians inperfect vniformity of both faith and manners And because I am entred into these comparisons giue mee leaue to persist yet a little longer in them Consider also I pray you who goe neerer to Atheisme either we that thinke and speake of the most sacred Trinity as the blessed Fathers in the first Councell of Nice taught or they who directly crosse them and by the nouelty
not Apostolical traditions which appeare certainely so to be and yet woorthily we reiect those vnwritten doctrines and counterfet traditions of the Papists which are falsely fathered vpon the Apostles It is by these vnwritten doctrines and counterfet traditions that the grounds of our faith are impeached and shaken We therefore cannot be said to shake the grounds of faith who retaine the meere simplicity of those grounds and refuse all other strange and bastard stuffe but they shake the grounds of faith who become patrons of such tradition coloured with the names of the Apostles when notwithstanding they plainely crosse the written doctrine of the Apostles 2. W. BISHOP But let vs descend to the particulars wherein the truth will appeare more plainely Thus beginneth Master PERKINS with the Creede First of all it must be considered that some of the principall doctrines beleeued in the Church of Rome are that the Bishop of Rome is the Vicar of Christ and head of the Catholike Church that there is a fire of Purgatory that Images of God and Saints are to be placed in the Church and worshipped that Praier is to be made to Saints departed that there is a propitiatory sacrifice daily offered in the Masse for the sinnes of the quicke and the dead These points are of that moment that without them the Roman religion cannot stand c. And yet marke the Apostles Creed which hath beene thought to containe all necessary points of religion to be beleeued and hath therefore beene called the key and rule of faith This Creede I say hath not any of these points nor the expositions made thereof by the ancient Fathers nor any other Creed or confession of faith made by any Councell or Church for the space of many hundred yeeres This is a plaine proofe to any indifferent man that these bee new articles of faith neuer knowen in the Apostolike Church and that the Fathers and Councels could not finde any such articles of faith in the bookes of the old and new Testament Answer is made that all these points of doctrine are beleeued vnder the article I beleeue the Catholike Church the meaning whereof they will haue to be this I beleeue all things which the Catholike Church holdeth and teacheth to be beleeued If this bee as they say wee must beleeue in the Church that is put our confidence in the Church for the manifestation and the certainety of all doctrine necessary to saluation And thus the eternall truth of God the Creatour shall depend vpon the determination of the creature And the written word of God in this respect is made insufficient as though it had not plainely reuealed all points of doctrine pertaining to saluation And the ancient Churches haue beene farre ouer-secene that did not propound the former points to be beleeued as articles of faith but left them to these latter times Thus farre Master PERKINS Wherein are hudled vp many things confusedly I will answere briefly and distinctly to euery point The first is that in the Apostles Creede are contained all points of religion necessary to be beleeued which is most apparantly false as the Protestants themselues must needes confesse or else grant that it is not necessary to beleeue the King to be Supreame-head of the Church or that the Church is to be gouerned by Bishops or that we are iustified by Christs iustice imputed to vs or that there be but two Sacraments or that the Church seruice must be said in the vulgar tongue or that all things 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 conteined in this Creede of the Apostles therefore to affirme as he doth all necessary points 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 points 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 which being the pillar and ground of truth 1. Tim. 3.15 Ioh. 16.13 directed and guided by the spirit of truth will alwaies instruct her obedient children in all truth necessary to saluation Then saith M. PERKINS The eternall truth of God the Creatour shall depend on the determination of the creature Nothing lesse for Gods truth is most sincere and certaine in it selfe before any declaration of the church but we poore creatures that are subiect to mistaking and error should not so certainely vnderstand and know that truth of God vnlesse hee 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 self 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 borrow his truth from the Church but the true children of God are by the holy Church assured which is the same his word If we did hold as we do not that the written word containeth all points of doctrine necessary to saluation yet were it most necessary to relie vpoÌ„ the Catholike churches declaration both to be assured which books of scriptures be Canonicall which not whereupon Saint Augustine a man of far better iudgement than any of these daies said Con. Epist. Iud. cap. 5. that he would not beleeue the Gospel vnlesse the authority of the church mooued him therunto as also to vnderstand them truly because the words of holy Scripture without the true meaning and sense of them do but deceiue men and lead them into error and to that end haue alwaies beene and yet are by Heretikes abused to draw others after them into destruction The like may be said of other ancient Creeds and confessions of faith which holding the Apostles Creed did adde some few points 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 particular diuers other articles generally beleeued of all true Christians or else by soâ—e fewe and obscure men onely questioned Wherefore to argue that no other points of faith are to be beleeued but such as are expressed in ancient Creeds is to cut off a great part of our faith Lastly it is most vntrue to say that those ancient Fathers and Councels knew not of these articles of faith by him mentioned for they haue most plainely taught them in their writings yea and expresly condemned of heresie most of the contrary positions now againe reuiued and holden by the Protestants as in those seuerall questions I haue before prooued R. ABBOT How M. Pirkins vnderstood that all necessary
points in religion to be beleeued are contained in the Creede I doe not well conceiue for my part I rather admit that the Creed is therefore called the key and rule of faith The Creed how the key and rule of faith for that it is a summary Briefe containing the principall and fundamentall points of Christian faith which doe as it weere open the doore to all the rest and by which all preaching and doctrine of faith is to be esteemed so as nothing may be admitted but what holdeth correspondence with this rule according to those vses which the Scripture teacheth vs to make of euery part therof Which the scripture I say teacheth vs to make for if we draw any article of our faith to the maintenance of any doctrine which hath no warrant or testimony of the Scripture we are corrupters of the faith and doe but abuse the name thereof to the cloaking of our owne deuice Thus M. Bishop and his fellowes corrupt the faith as touching the holy catholike church first in wresting the name of the catholike church to the particular church of Rome and secondly in challenging a certain and vndoubted credit to be yeelded to that church for the infallible resolution of all points of faith For as touching the first where hath the Scripture giuen vs any inckling that the name of the Catholike Church should in any peculiar manner be vnderstood of the Church of Rome We regard not their claime we know they haue tongue at will to speake for theÌ„selues but let them giue vs one word of God whereby it may appeare that by the name of the Church we are directed in special maner to that church We are not ignorant that amongst most ancient writers the name of Catholike church is sometimes giuen to the church of Rome but we know withall that it was no otherwise giuen to the church of Rome than to any other church euery Church being called a Catholike church as hath been a Answer to the Epistle sect 3. before shewed that communicated in true faith with the church dispersed thorow the whole world And therefore as Leo wrote himselfe b Leo epist. 12. Leo papa ecclesiae Catholicae vrbis Romae Bishop of the catholike church of the citie of Rome so doth Constantine the Emperour write c Socrat hist. li. 1. ca. 6. Constantinus Catholicae Alexandrinorum ecclesiae to the catholike church of Alexandria and Athanasius accordingly is entituled by his Clergy d Athanas Apolog 2. Theognio c. Presbyteri diaconi sub reuerendissimo episcopo Athanasio Catholicae ecclesiae Alexandrinae Bishop of the catholike church of Alexandria and Austin nameth e August cont Crescon li. 3. ca. 13. Omnis Aphricana Catholica ecclesia the catholike church of Africa and Aurelius writeth himselfe f Collat. cum Donat. cognit 1. ca. 16 Aurelius episcopus ecclesiae Catholicae Carthaginensis Bishop of the catholike church of Carthage and another Aurelius g Ibid. ca. 201. Aurelius episcopus ecclesiae Catholicae Macomadiensits cap. 204. Nouatus episcopus ecclesiae Catholicae Sitifensis Bishop of the catholike church of Macomodia and Nouatus Bishop of the catholike church of Sitif So in the fift councell at Constantinople we reade the holy h Concil Constantinop 5. act 1. Supplicatiâ— Ã Clericis Monachis Apostolici thront Antiochenae magnae â—uitatis Catholicae sanctae ecclesiae catholike church of Antioch and in the subscriptions of the Councell i Dei Act. 8. in subscript Sextiltanus in sericordia Dei episcopus ecclesiae Catholicae Tumensiu Megethius gratia Dei episcopus sanctae dei Catholicae ecclesiae ciuitatis Heracleae c. Sextilianus Bishop of the catholike church of Tunis Megethius Bishop of the holy catholike church of the city of Heracela and Pompeianus Bishop of the holy catholike church of the city of Victoria and sundry other the like By all which and many other examples it may appeare with how little discretion Dureus the Iesuit hath affirmed that k Duraeus cont Whitak li. 3. In nullum planè aliam Catholicae nomen ecclesiae quaerunque de Christiecclesia Prophetae praedixerunt quà m in Romanam conuenire possunt the name of the catholike church and those things which the Prophets haue forespoken of the church of Christ can agree to no other but to the church of Rome And with this madde and witlesse fancy they are all caried away so that there can bee no naming of the church or catholike church but it soundeth in their eares vndoubtedly to haue reference to the Church of Rome According to this fancy it is that M. Bishop heere would haue his Reader to imagine that by the beleefe of the Catholik church he is taught to beleeue the church of Rome And by the same illusion hee wresteth to his purpose the words of the Apostle that the church is the pillar and ground of truth and the promise that Christ maketh vnto his of his spirit to direct and guide them into all truth as if therein were some speciall priuiledge meant to the Roman church The Church how the pillar ground of truth But for the first place if any one church might challenge a prerogatiue therby it should be the church of Ephesus For Timothie was Bishop of Ephesus wished by the Apostle l 1. Tim. 1.3 to abide still there as specially to take vpon him the charge of that place He writeth to him purposely to instruct him how to carry himselfe in that charge m cap. 3.15 That thou maist know saith hee how thou oughtest to behaue thy selfe in the house of God which is the church of the liuing God the pillar grouÌ„d of truth The house of God then wherin Timothie was to conuerse which he was to gouern was the church of Ephesus as the church in general so this church for it own part in particular is called the church of the liuing God the pillar and ground of truth Yea these two goe hand in hand to be the house of God the church of the liuing God and to be the pillar and ground of truth Now of euery church of the faithfull it is said n 1. Pet. 2.5 Yee as liuely stones are made a spirituall house o 2. Cor. 6.16 yee are the Temple of the liuing God p Eph. 2.22 yee are built together in Christ to be Gods habitation Which way then I maruell is it now brought about that to be the pillar ground of truth should be a peculiar dignity of the church of Rome more than of the church of Ephesus or of any other particular church To be the pillar and ground of truth importeth the office and duty of the whole church and euery part thereof and not a speciall prerogatiue of any one church as to bee alwaies found so in act and execution The church is the pillar and ground of truth as the
and bring all things to your remembrance that I haue told you and which he saith presently after i cap. 16.14 He shall glorifie me for he shall receiue of mine and shall shew it vnto you For hereby it is manifest that the holy Ghost which shall leade vs into all truth because he shall speake nothing of himselfe shall therefore k Thophylact in Ioan. 16. Nihil docturus est extra ea quae Christus docuit speake nothing but what Christ hath before spoken As therefore when Christ saith of himselfe l Ioh. 14.10 I speake not of my selfe hee would import that he spake nothing but what the father had before spoken in the Scriptures of the Law and the Prophets as m Chrysost de sanct orando spiritu Quia seductor est habitus dicit Ego à meipso non loquor sed de lege de Prophet is Chrysostome expoundeth it euen so when he saith of the holy Ghost that he shall speake nothing of himselfe we are likewise to conceiue that the holy Ghost shall teach nothing but what Christ himselfe hath first taught in the Scriptures of the Euangelists and Apostles Whereupon we conclude as Chrysostome doth n Ibid. Siquem videritis dicentem spiritum sanctum habee non loquentem Euangelica sed propria is à seipso loquitur non est spiritus sanctus in ipso Et paulò post Siquis eorum qui dicuntur habere spiritum sanctum dicat aliquid à seipso non ex Euangelijs ne credite c. Ex quo non legit haec scripta sed ex seipso loquitur manifestum est quod non habet spiritum sanctum If yee see a man saying I haue the holy Ghost and not speaking the things of the Gospell but matters of his owne he speaketh of himselfe and the holy Ghost is not in him If any of them who are said to haue the holy Ghost do speake any thing of himselfe and not out of the Gospell beleeue him not For that he readeth not those things which he saith in the Scriptures it is manifest that he hath not the holy Ghost Now therefore seeing M. Bishops church contrary to the ordinance of God seuereth o Esay 59.21 the spirit of truth from p Eph. 1 13. Col. 1.5 the word of truth and speaketh many things of her-felfe whereof Christ hath said nothing whereof wee reade nothing in the Scriptures it is manifest that they play the Sycophants as other heretikes haue done pretending to speake by the spirit of Christ when they speake wholly either by their owne or by a woorse spirit But M. Bishop not content with one corruption in substituting his church of Rome in the place of the Catholike Church of Christ addeth another in saying that that article of our Creede doth teach vs to beleeue the Catholike church Which words although being truely meant they expresse the same in English which wee say in Greeke and Latin yet being by the drift of his speech caried to a verie partiall and false construction doe shew him to be a leaud peruerter of our Christian faith For whereas we saie Credo sanctam ecclesiam Catholicam in the accusatiue case the meaning is I beleeue that there is a holy Catholike church namely that God the Father in all ages and at all times and amidst all the defections and corruptions of the world hath still had and shall haue his number of elect and chosen people to whom the benefite of Christs death and resurrection on standeth effectuall and good by the sanctification of the holy Ghost and the same now not of one nation or people onely but of all nations and peoples thorowout the whole world But M. Bishop by the currant of his speech turneth the accusatiue case into the datiue as if it were said in our Creed Credo ecclesiae sanctae Catholicae I giue credit to the holy Catholike church I beleeue it to be true whatsoeuer is taught me by the holy Catholike church that so his Reader thinkeing himselfe bound to beleeue the Catholike church and taking this Catholike church to be meant of the church of Rome may hold himselfe bound by the articles of his Creed in all things to beleeue the church of Rome Thus he and his fellowes most treacherously and leaudly against their owne knowledge and conscience delude simple and ignorant soules and make them slaues to their impious and wicked deuices by bearing them in hand that they are bound thus to obey the Catholike church Now heereof Master PERKINS iustly inferreth that the eternall truth of God the Creatour is heereby made to depend vpon the determination of the creature For let God say what he will wee shall not stand bound to take it for truth if the church shall say the contrary or vnlesse that which he saith be approoned by the Church Verily as Tertullian vpbraided of old the Senate of Rome that q Tertul. Apologet cap. 5. Apud vos de humano arbitratu diuinitas pensitatur nisi homini deus placuerit deus non erit with them Godhead stood at the discretion of men and vnlesse God did please man he should be no God so may it well be said now of the church of Rome that with them the religion of God standeth at their discretion and that onely shall be religion that pleaseth them For the Bishop of Rome whilest hee taketh vpon him to make declaration of Christian faith maketh what he list of Christian faith and hath verified of himselfe that which Hierome said of Antichrist that r Hieron in Daniel 7. Eleuatur supra omne quod dicitur deu◠cunctam religionem suae subijciens potestati he should subiect all religion to his owne power For the colouring of which iniquity M. Bishop according to their maner vseth guilefull words of notable hypocrisie and with a faire tale gloseth a grosse indignity and damnable presumption against God He telleth vs that Gods truth is sincere and certaine in it selfe before any declaration of the Church Well and what hath the church then to doe with this sincere and certaine truth Forsooth we poore creatures are subiect to mistaking and errour and doe not so certainly vnderstand that truth of God But who are those poore creatures of whom he speaketh Marry M. Bishop and such other petites who are but dij minorum gentium they are poore creatures but the Pope and his Cardinals and the Bishops that comply to him they are rich creatures they are the Church they are exempted from mistaking and errour we must thinke all perfection of wit to be lodged in their braines and that they certainely vnderstand and know the truth of God But what assurance can they giue vs in this behalfe Surely the Scribes and Pharisees the high Priests and Elders of the lewes had as much to say for themselues and a great deale more than they They could plead for themselues ſ Ioh. 8.33 We are the
seede of Abraham t cap. 9.28 We be Moses disciples u vers 41. We see x Ier. 8 8. We are wise and the law of the Lord is with vs y ca. 18.18 The law shall not perish from the Priest nor counsell from the wise nor the word from the Prophet and yet they persecuted Christ the sonne of God who only is the Truth How then may we now be assured that the Church of Rome is not the same to the church of Christ as they then were to Christ himselfe How may we poore creatures certainely vnderstand that those rich creatures are not subiect to error and mistaking as well as we Well if we will not beleeue it we may chuse but assurance M. Bishop can yeeld none He can tell vs a discourse what Christ said to Peter but that Christ euer spake either of Pope or Cardinall he can shew vs nothing And yet as if this matter were cleere he telleth vs of this church of theirs that whereas we are subiect to mistaking and errour God hath ordained and appointed the same to be a skilfull and faithfull mistresse and interpreter to assure vs both what is his word and what is the true meaning of it But againe we aske him where hath God so ordained and appointed in what Scripture hath he written it or by what words hath he expressed it that the church which he meaneth should bee our mistresse to tell vs what is Gods word what is the true meaning of it If he haue euidence authority for it let him shew it if he haue not what shall we thinke of him that dareth thus to bely the maiesty of God But if he considered the matter aright he would conceiue that those rich creatures of his haue no other or better meanes to assure what is Gods word and what is the meaning of it than other poore creatures haue By what touchstone they can make triall thereof by the same can we also as well as they Which comparison of the gold-smith and the touchstone which he himselfe vseth if it be rightly explicated serueth notably to set foorth the fraud and falshood of that church for which he pleadeth True it is that the church in this behalfe may rightly bee compared to the Goldsmith Now the Gold-smith for the discerning of true and perfect gold doth not take his owne fingers ends but goeth to the touch-stone and no otherwise can hee either make triall himselfe or giue assurance thereof to other men In like sort therefore the church which is the Gold-smith must vse a touch-stone for the assuring of that which it propoundeth to bee receiued and beleeued Now then whereas M. Bishop saith that we must rely vpon the churches declaration to be assured which bookes of Scripture be Canonicall I answer him that we cannot be assured thereof by the churches declaration vnlesse the church declare it and manifest it by the touch-stone The touch-stone whereby we are to take assurance heereof is the constant and perpetuall tradition and testimony of the former church And this testimony we first deriue from the church of the Iewes z Rom. 3.2 to whom the words of God were committed and to whose Scriptures a Luk. 24.44 the law and the Prophets and the Psalmes and to no other b Aug. cont Gaudent lib. 2. cap. 23. quibus dominus testimonium perhibet tanquam testibus suis Christ himselfe hath giuen testimony as witnesses of himselfe reckoning them for c Luk. 24.27 all the Scriptures and wherof the Iewes in their dispersion giue acknowledgment vntill this day God so prouiding that d Aust in Psa 58. Per omnes gentes dispersi sunt ludaei testes iniquitatis suae veritatis nostrae ipsi habent codices de quibus prophetatus est Chrislus in Ps 56. Codicem portat Iudaeus vnde credat Christianus Christian faith should be prooued out of those bookes which are acknowledged for true by them that are enemies thereto This testimony the Christian church receiued of the Apostles and hath continued the same together with the acknowledgment of those other bookes of the new testament which by the Apostles and Euangelists were added to the former What bookes then haue had this generall and vndoubted auerment and witnesse of the church continued from time to time those and no other are to be holden for Canonicall bookes and this is the true touch-stone for trial of certaine and vndoubted scriptures By which touchstone the church of Rome is found to bee not a faithfull Mistresse but a false harlot bringing her bastards into the Church and forcing men to take them for lawfully begotten And whereas it is the tradition and declaration of the former church which hath beene from the beginning by which both they and we are to be instructed as touching the true bookes of Canonicall Scripture they force vpon vs the tradition of their owne church now deliuered vpon their owne word howsoeuer contrary to that which the church formerly hath declared If we follow the declaration of the ancient church then are no other bookes to be taken for Canonicall but what are now accknowledged and approoued in our Church the same onely being testified concerning the old testament by the Church of the Iewes concerning both new and old by the whole Christian church both the Greeke and Latine the Easterne and Westerne churches as e Of Traditions sect 17. before hath been declared But the church of Rome perceiuing the authorising of some other writings to be likely to gaine credit to some broken wares whence her thrift and gaine ariseth hath taken vpon her very presumptuously as a Mistresse or rather a goddesse to giue diuine authority to those bookes reiecting the testimony of that church which in this behalfe should bee mistresse both to her and vs. In a word whatsoeuer is to be attributed to the church in this respect it is idlely by M. Bishop referred to the church of Rome as if all other churches must rely vpon her declaration we our selues being able by the touchstone to make triall of true Scriptures as well as the church of Rome and therefore there being no cause why we should rely vpon them more than they vpon vs. And as vainely doth he apply to his purpose the saying of Saint Austin that he should not beleeue the Gospell except the authority of the church mooued him thereunto there being nothing therein meant but what may bee applied to the church England as well as to the church of Rome Saint Austin speaking generally of the vniuersall church thorowout the world without any maner speciall intendment of the church of Rome But how leudly they abuse those words of Austin wholly against his meaning and purpose I haue f Of Traditions sect 22. before sufficiently declared and neede not heere to repeat againe As for the churches declaration for vnderstanding the Scripture that is also to be tried and made
good by the touchstone because no exposition or sense of Scripture is to be admitted the doctrine whereof is not to be iustified by other Scripture and they that bring other senses and meanings do but deceiue men and leade them into errour as other heretikes formerly haue done and as the Papists now doe abusing the Scriptures to draw others after them into destruction Heereof also enough hath beene said g Of Traditions sect 21. before whereof I wish the Reader duely to consider for his satisfaction in this point That which he saith of other ancient Creeds and Confessions of faith that they containe not all points of Christian doctrine I eaily admit but yet let him vnderstand that it is a maine preiudice against them that neither any ancient Creed nor any exposition of the Creed or confession of faith conteineth sundry pointes which they now make to be matters of the meaning of the Creede Let him shew that euer any ancient Creed or expositour of the Creed did vnderstand or deliuer that the name of the Catholike church in the Creed hath any speciall reference to the Church of Rome that the Catholike church is to be defined as they now define it by being subiect to the bishop of Rome that the certaine declaration of the Canonicall bookes and of the true sense of Scripture is alwaies infallibly to be expected from the sentence of that Church that all Christians are fully to beleeue and wholly to relie vpon that Church for resolution of all points of faith necessarie to saluation Which and such other points made by them matters of the Creed because neuer any ancient writer hath found to be conteined or intended in the Creed therefore we iustly affirme them to be new Creed-makers coiners of new articles of faith and thereby peruerters and corrupters of the true Christian faith As concerning the Articles mentioned by M. Perkins now holden by the Romish Church that the Pope is Christs Vicar and head of the Catholike Church that there is a purgatorie fire after this life that images of God and of Saints are to be worshipped that praier is to be made to Saints departed and their intercession to bee required that there is a propitiatorie sacrifice daily offered in the Masse for the sinnes of quicke and dead M. Bishop answereth that the Fathers haue most plainly taught them in their writings and expresly condemned of heresie most of the contrary positions But what Fathers are they and in what writings haue they so done Surely if the Bishop of Rome in the ancient Church had beene taken to bee the Vicar of Christ and head of the Catholike church it cannot be but that we should haue very currant and frequent and memorable testimonie thereof as a matter vniuersally receiued and euery where practised But now let M. Bishop shew vs one let him shew so much as one that for diuers hundreds of yeeres after Christ did euer dreame of any such thing Which though indeed he cannot doe yet hee telleth vs of that and the rest that in those seuerall questions he hath before prooued what he saith whereas hee hath not spoken of any more of these points saue onely one and in that one point cannot be said to haue prooued any thing because whatsoeuer hee hath said standeth hitherto reprooued And surely if he haue no better proofes than hitherto he hath brought in all the questions that hee hath handled the Protestants will but scorne him as a very vnproouing disputer and aduise him to bestow his time a while longer in the Schooles to know what it is to prooue 3. W. BISHOP Touching beleeuing in the Church which he thrusteth in by the way we vse not that phrase as the very Creed 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 heart vnto it in which sense we beleeue not in Saints nor in the Church albeit some other ancient Doctors take the words to beleeue in not so precisely but say that we may beleeue in the Church and in Saints that is beleeue certainly that the Catholike church is the onely true company of Christians and that to the lawfull gouernours thereof it appeâ—taineth to declare both which bookes be Canonicall and what is the true meaning of all doubtfull places in them so we beleeue the Saints in heauen to heare our prayers to be carefull to pray for vs and to bee able to obtaine by intreaty much at Gods hands in whose high fauour they liue Thus much in answer vnto that which M. PERKINS obiecteth in generall Now to that he saith in particular R. ABBOT a Greg. Nazia de sp sancto orat 6. Sâ—â—reatuÌ„ est quo pacto in ipsum eredimu c. Non enim idem est in aliquem credere de eo credere nam illud diuimt atis est hoc cuiusuis rei It is one thing saith Gregory Nazianzene to beleeue in any one another to beleeue of or concerning him the one belongeth to the Godhead the other is vsed of euery thing And heereby hee prooueth that the holy Ghost is God because wee beleeue in the holy Ghost By which argument our Sauiour Christ also teacheth vs to acknowledge him to be God when he saith b Ioh. 14.1 Yee beleeue in God beleeue also in me where c Hilar. de Trin. lib. 9. Vniens se fidei dei naturae eius vniuit c. deumse per id docens cum in eum credendum sit ab his qui in deum credant vniting himselfe to the beleefe of God saith Hilarie he vniteth himselfe also to his nature thereby teaching that he himselfe is God for that they who beleeue in God must beleeue in him I might further enlarge this point by the testimonies and expositions of d Aug. in Ioan. tract 29. de ciu dei l. 18. ca. 54. Euseb Emissen Ruffin Venant in symbol Apost Austin Eusebius Emissenus Ruffinus Venantius and others who all acknowledge that that phrase belongeth to God and is not to bee applied to any creature But it shall not neede because the Elucidatour of the Romane Catechisme according to the doctrine of the Catechisme it self as he pretendeth though quite contrary both to their doctrine and practise otherwise doth tell vs that e Elucidat Catech Roman c. 9. q. 5. Cùm dicimus nos credere in deum patrem in filium in sp sanctum phrasis haec loquendi significat nos ita credere deum patrem filium spiritu sanctuÌ„ vt etiam in eis omnem fiduciam nostram collocemus quam in deo solo non autem in creaturis ponere possumus ex quibus tamen ecclesia composita est when wee say wee beleeue in God the Father in the Sonne in the holy Ghost this phrase of speaking doth signifie that wee so beleeue God the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost as that also we place all
purpose he misinforceth the testimony of Epiphanius whereby he would exempt Aerius from the crime of heresie iustly laied vnto his charge by S. Austin and many others But I answer him that though as a man I may be deceiued yet God hath giuen me more grace than that in these matters I will willingly deceiue my selfe In this matter of Epiphanius I do not take my selfe in any sort to be deceiued His conclusion against Aerius as touching praier for the dead is this r Epiphan haer 75. Ecclesia necessâ—râ—ò hoc perficit traditione à patribus accepta quis autem poterit staturum matris dissoluere aut legem patris velut Solomon dicit Audi fili fermones patris tui ne repudies statuta matris tuae ostendens per hoc quòd in scriptu sine scripto decuit pater mater autem nostra ecclesia habet statuta in se posita indissolubilia quae dissolui non pâ—ssuntâ—â— Cùm itaque ordi nata sint in ecclesia statuta benè se habeant omnia mirabâ—ittèr fiant confutaâ—us est tursus etiam hic seductor The Church necessarily doth this by tradition receiued from the Fathers and who may dissolue the statute of his mother or the law of his Father as Solomon saith My sonne heare thy Fathers words and refuse not thy Mothers statutes heereby shewing that both in writing and without writing the Father hath taught and our Mother the Church hath statutes set downe in her which are inuiolable and may not be broken Seeing then saith hee that there are statutes ordeined in the Church and they are well and all things are admirably done this seducer is confuted Now then doe I say that praier for the dead is a tradition Epiphanius saith the same that the Church doth it by tradition from the Fathers Doe I say that he maketh it a statute or ordinance of the Church He himselfe expresly calleth it so and finally presseth the authority of the Church onely for the confuting of Aerius He alleageth no Scripture his words import that he hath none to alledge Onely to grace the ordinances of the Church he wresteth a saying of Salomon nothing pertinent thereto as if we were taught that God without scripture teacheth vs by the Church And if he meane any otherwise but that it is the ordinance of the Church very vainly and idlely doth he heere name the ordinance of the Church But M. Higgons will say that though Epiphanius name it thus a tradition and an ordinance of the Church yet he meaneth it to be such a tradition and ordinance as is from the Apostles But let him meane what he will yet so long as he maketh it a tradition without Scripture my words stand good which I vsed to M. Bishop Å¿ Answer to Doct. Bishops epistle sect 10. pag. 79. 80. Epiphanius resolueth vs that praier for the dead is a matter of tradition and an ordinance of the Church and therefore freeth vs from any trespasse against any thing that Moses or the Prophets or Christ and his Apostles in the Scriptures haue deliuered vnto vs. If it be no matter of Scripture with Epiphanius then I say rightly that he cleereth vs from impugning therein any thing that is deliuered in the Scriptures Albeit because it is by Epiphanius his confession a tradition without Scripture therefore we resolue vndoubtedly that it came not from the Apostles because whatsoeuer they taught concerning faith and saluation is conteined in the Scriptures as before hath beene shewed at large Yea and how vnsoundly Epiphanius vrgeth Apostolike tradition is to be seene in the point which he speaketh of immediately before where he saith that t Epiphan haer 75. Decreuerunt Apostoli quarta prosabbato ieiunium per omnia excepta Pentecoste de sex diebus Paschatis praecipiunt nihil omninò accipere quà m panem salem aquam the Apostles decreed a fast vpon Wednesdaies and Fridaies continually saue betwixt Easter and Whitsuntide and that six daies before Easter men should receiue nothing but bread and salt and water whereas S. Austin professeth that u Aug. epist 86. Quibus diebus non oporteat ieiunare quibus oporteat praecepto Domini vel Apostolorum non inuenio de finitum what daies to fast or what daies not to fast he findeth it not defined or set downe by any commandement of Christ or his Apostles and by Tertullian it appeareth that the Primitiue Church alledged against the Montanists x Tertul. de ieiunio sic Apostolos obsernasse nullum aliud imponentes iugum certoruÌ„ in coÌ„mune â—mnibus obeundorum â—etunorum that the Apostles imposed no yoke of standing and common fasts and of the Lent-fast Socrates resolueth that y Socrat. hist. li. 5. c. 21. Quoniam nemo de ea praeceptum literarum monumentis proditum potest osteÌ„dere perspicuum est Apostolos liberam potestatem in eadem cuiusque menti arbitrio permisisse vt quisque nec metu nec necessitate inductus quod bonum est faceret because no man can shew any written commandement thereof it is manifest that the Apostles left it free to euery mans will and discretion that without feare or necessity euery man should doe what good is Now we cannot wonder that he that would thus vnaduisedly name Apostolike tradition for the one should do the same for the other also Albeit if M. Higgons can iustifie praier for the dead according to Docter Fields rule we will not sticke with him to grant it to be an Apostolicall tradition But he might haue seene that I had put it without the compasse of that rule if he had been desirous to know the truth and had not resolued first vpon other occasions to fall away and afterwards to seeke shifts to excuse his fall I shewed by Origen that the Church at first vsed no praier for the dead by the authour of the ecclesiasticall Hierarchy that when it was first vsed it was vsed onely for iust and holy men of whose soules they were resolued that they were in heauen for what causes I haue expressed there by Epiphanius that they added afterwards to pray for euill men also and publicke offenders by Austin that there was not knowen any definite and certaine vse and effect of praiers and offerings for the dead and that many in his time did plead that if any good were to be done for the soule after death it should rather be by it owne confession of sinnes than by offerings procured by other men And lastly whereas praier for the dead by M. Higgons confession dependeth vpon Purgatory I shewed by Austins expresse words that he had no certaine beleefe or knowledge of any such place which are more cleere to that purpose than that by any Popish sophistications they can be shifted or deluded 36. Albeit I did not only alledge him doubting of Purgatory but also plainly excluding it vpon occasion by denying any third place
the dignity and worthinesse of our workes And if he say that this is all of God doth he any more than the Pharisie did who said y Luk. 18.11 I thanke thee O God that I am not as other men are c. z Hieron adu Pelag. lib. 3. Ille agit gratias deo quia illius misericordia non sit sicut caeteri homines Hee thanketh God saith Hierome that by his mercy hee is not like other men hee acknowledgeth his righteousnesse to bee the gift of God but yet hee is reiected whilest with M. Bishop hee flattereth himselfe in opinion of the value and estimation the dignitie and worthinesse of his workes Now the Protestants indeed are not of that Pharisaicall humor thus to plead the reputation of their owne workes and doe take M. Bishop therein to be a foolish vaine man and yet they doe not therfore debase and vilifie the vertue of the grace of God as hee obiecteth as not allowing it to be sufficient to help the best minded man in the world to doe any worke that doth not mortally offend God but doe confesse and teach that the faithfull by the grace of God do many good workes very highly pleasing vnto God whilest a Psal 103.13 as a father pitieth his children so the Lord is mercifull to them that feare him remembring whereof we be made and considering that we are but dust and being ready when he seeth our willing indeuours to pardon the obliquities the defects and deformities of our doings the same being perfumed by faith with the sweet incense of the obedience of Iesus Christ So then according to rigour of iudgement the Protestants say b Esay 64.6 All our righteousnesse is as a defiled cloth c Dan. 9.7 To thee O Lord belongeth righteousnesse but to vs shame and confusion of face They subscribe that which Gregory saith d Greg. Moral l. 8. c. 9. Iustise peritaeros absque ambiguitate praesciunt firemota pietate iudicentur quia hoc ipsum quò iustè videmur viuere culpa est fi vitam nostram cù iudicat hanc apud se diuina misericordia non excusat The iust know that without all doubt they shall perish if they bee iudged without mercy because euen our iust life as it seemeth is but sinne if Gods mercy doe not excuse it when he shall giue iudgement of it But yet the Protestants know also that by the mediation of Iesus Christ e Rom. 12.1 the giuing vp of our bodies to be a liuing and 〈◊〉 sacrifice is accepble vnto God and that f 1. Pet. 2.5 we are made aspirituall house and holy Priesthood to offer vp spirituall sacrifices which are acceptable to God by Iesus Christ In a word the Protestants know that the Saints of God g Apoc. 4.10 cast their crownes down before the throne of God as arrogating no part thereof to themselues but ascribing all to God and therefore cannot but condemne M. Bishop and the Papists though not of Atheisme yet of Pelagianisme and heresie for that they teach men to keepe their crownes in part vpon their owne heads and to take some part of glory to themselues to the derogation of the glory of God 2. W. BISHOP First he argueth thus He that hath not the Sonne hath not the Father and he that hath neither Father nor Sonne denies God now the present Roman religion hath not the Sonne that is Iesus Christ God and man For they in effect abolish his man-hood by teaching of him to haue two kindes of existing one naturall in heauen whereby he is visible touchable and circumscribed the other against nature whereby he is substantially according to his flesh in the hands of euery Priest inuisible and vncircumscribed Answer M. PER. and all Protestants know right well that we beleeue Iesus Christ to be perfect God and perfect man and therefore wee haue both the Sonne and the Father and his reason against it is not woorth arush for we do not destroy the nature of man by teaching it to haue two diuers maners of existing or being in a place When Christ was transfigured before his Apostles hee had another maner of outward forme and appearance than hee had before yet was not the nature of man in him thereby destroyed and after his resurrection hee was when it pleased him visible to his Apostles and at other times inuisible and yet was not his manhood thereby abolished as M. PER. would make vs beleeue no more is it when his body is in many places at once or in one place circumscribed and in the other vncir cumscribed For these externall relations of bodies vnto their places doe no whit at all destroy their inward and naturall substances as all Philosophie testifieth wherefore hence to gather that we denie both the Father and the Sonne to be God doth sauour I will not say of a silly wit but of a froward will peeuishly bent to cauill and calumniate R. ABBOT As touching the existing of the body of Christ we beleeue what the holy Scripture hath taught vs The body of Christ locally circumscribed and therein we rest as the ancient godly fathers did neither will we listen to the franticke dreames of new deuising heads who for the maintenance of one absurdity not sparing to vndergoe another haue broached a maner of the being of the body of Christ according to the fancies of Marcion Manicheus Apollinaris Eutyches and such other like Heretikes who howsoeuer they admitted the name of a body yet denied the truth thereof What other is it but a fantasticall body which they affirme to be in their consecrated host where there is the sauour and tast of bread the colour and appearance of bread to sense and feeling no other but bread and yet there is no bread but a body of flesh and blood as they tell vs or rather a body which hath neither flesh nor blood M. Bishop coloureth the matter by telling vs of a diuers maner of existing or being in a place but why doe neither Scriptures nor Fathers tell vs of this diuers maner of existing or being I know that to make some shew of antiquity they alleage a few sentences of the Fathers farre enough from the purpose but this matter could not haue so passed with a by-sentence or two when there were so many and so great occasions fully to declare it and to insist vpon it if it had beene beleeued then as it is taught now They cleerely and plainely taught that a Aug. in Ioan. tract 50. secundum carnem quam verbum assumpsit ascendit in coe um non est hic Christ according to his body is ascended into heauen and is not heere and against the Manichees that b Idem cont faust Mauich l. 20. c. 11. sacundum praesentiam corporalem simul in sole in luna in cruce esse non posset Christ according to bodily presence could not at once be in the
infallibly what is the certaine meaning of euery place Are those holy fathers loth of their labour or are they so busied in other or greater affaires as that they haue no leasure to attend to such trifles Satisfie vs M. Bishop as touching these matters otherwise we must take this deuise to be as indeed it is the couer of your shame the cloake of your apostasie which can no otherwise be shadowed but by this pretense That the Popes sense is the very trueth of Scripture being notwithstanding wholly repugnant contrary to the words In a word the Pope thrusteth out the lawes of Christ which are expressed in the words of Christ and by his sense setteth vp his owne lawes vnder the name of Christ To giue power to the Pope properly to forgiue sinnes as M. Bishop doth is a wicked blasphemie and an Antichristian exalting of him into the place of Christ When the Scribes said within themselues f Mar. 2.7 Who can forgiue sinnes but God only our Sauiour Christ did not contrary them therein but partly by discouering the thoughts of their hearts and partly by the miracle that he wrought taught them to vnderstand him to be God the Sonne of God and therefore that he had power to forgiue sinnes He hath left it therefore so to be conceiued of vs that power to for giue sinnes belongeth to God only g Cyprian de Lapsis Nec remittere aut donare indulgentia sua seruus potest quod in dominum delicto grauiore commissum est The seruant sai he Cyprian cannot for giue that which by hainous traspasse is committed against the Lord. h Cyril in Ioan. lib. 2. cap. 56. Certè solius reri dei est vt possit à ptceatis homines soluere cui enim alij praeuaricatores legis liberare â peccato licet nisi legis ipsius authori Surely it belongeth only to the true God saith Cyrill to be able to release men from their sinnes for who but the maker of the law can free them from offense that are trespassers of the law As for that which M. Bishop obiecteth that Christ said to his Apostles i Iohn 20.23 Whose sinnes ye remitte they are remitted vnto them and whose sinnes ye retaine they are retained it no more importeth a power of forgiuing sinnes then the ministers k 1. Tim. 4.16 Sauing them that heare him importeth a power of sauing For as the minister saueth not properly by any power of sauing but only by teaching the way of saluation so he also forgiueth sinnes not properly by any power thereof but by preaching the Gospell of remission of sinnes and designing them to whom belongeth this remission God hath made vs not Lords but l 2. Cor. 3.9 Ministers of the new Testament and of the spirit neither hath he giuen vs the power but m cap. 5.18 The ministry of reconciliation for God was in Christ reconciling the world vnto himselfe not imputing vnto them their sinnes to vs he hath committed only the word of this reconciliation namely whereby we preach and testifie in the name of Iesus Christ remission of sinnes and reconciliation to God to all that repent and beleeue the Gospell But this whole cōmission of forgiuing sins shall be the better vnderstood by those instances by which Cyrill exemplifieth the same n Cyril vt supra Erit autem id duobus vt arbitror modis primò baptismo acinde penitentia Nam aut credentes vitae sanctimonia probates homines ad baptismum inducunt indignos diligenter expellunt c. First in baptisme and afterward in repentance Them that beleeue and approoue themselues by holinesse of life the minister addmitteth to baptisme this is to forgiue their sinnes but carefully he repelleth and putteth backe them that are vnworthy this is to retaine them But of this forgiuenesse of sinnes in baptisme we must remember that which S. Austine saith if at least that booke be his o August scal Paradis cap. 3. Officium baptizandi dominus concessit multis potestatem verò authoritatem in baptismo remittendi peccata sibi soli retinuit The Lord Iesus gaue the office of baptizing to many but the power and authority to forgiue sinnes in baptisme he reserued to himselfe only For the noting of which difference he rightly alleageth the words of Iohn Baptist p Ioh. 1.26.33 I baptize with water but he it is which baptizeth with the holy Ghost Now if to baptize with water to the remission of sinnes be to remitte sinnes in that sense which our Sauiour intendeth in that speech and to baptize with water to remission of sinnes importeth no power for forgiuing sinnes but only a ministery for publication and for the applying of Gods seale for exhibiting and confirming thereof it followeth so far foorth that those words of Christ doe not giue to the minister any power properly to forgiue sinnes Therefore Chrysostome though he terme this ministery in some sort a power yet to shew in what sort it is to be conceiued most notably saith q Chrysost in Ioan. hom 85. Quid sacerdotes dico Neque Angelus neque Archangelus quicquam in his quae a deo data sunt efficere potest sed pater filius sp sanctus omma facit sacerdos linguam manus praebet Not the Priest only but neither Angell nor Archangell worketh any thing in those things that are giuen of God but the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost doth all the Priest putteth too but his tongue and his hand The other instance which Cyrill giueth is r Cyril vt suprà Aut ecclesia filijs peccantibus quidem increpant paenitentibus autem indulgent 1. Cor. 5.5 When the minister giueth checke to offendours and to the penitent release Whereof he giueth example in the incestuous Corinthian whom for fornication the Apostle deliuered to Satan for destroying the flesh that the spirit might be saued and afterwards receiued againe that he might not be ouerwhelmed with ouermuch sorow here the Corinthians did forgiue and the Apostle himselfe did ſ 2. Cor. 2.7.10 forgiue and thus the terme of forgiuing hath alwaies his place and vse but this forgiuenesse is disciplinary for reconcilement to the Church it is not forgiuenesse of sinnes spiritually and properly so called though by the ordinance of Christ it must be to the peritent a necessary introduction to the assurance and comfort thereof as t See the Answer to the epistle dedicatory sect 28 before hath beene declared I conclude this point with that which Hierome writeth vpon the words of Christ to Peter u Matt. 16.19 whatsoeuer thou bindest in earth shall be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou loosest on earth shall be loosed in heauen for declaration whereof he saith that z Hieron in Matt. 16. Quemodo ibs sacerdos leprosum facit mundum velimmundum non quò sacerdotes leprosos faciant immundos sed quò
yeeld himselfe to be sent and imploied by the rest without derogation to his equality with the rest As Peter and Iohn were n Acts â— 14 sent by the Apostles to Samaria and yet M. Bishop will not admit that therfore Peter was inferior to the rest of the Apostles And if he will not grant that the Son of God the second person in Trinity did in some sort submit himselfe to doe seruice to the Father let him tell vs how he is called in Scripture according to his diuine nature o Gen. 6.7.13 Iâ—d 13.3.22 The Angell of the Lord. Surely to be an Angell that is to say a Messenger is in some sort to be a subiect or minister Seeing Christ therfore the second person of the Godhead hath taken vpon him to be the Lords Angell to declare the messages of God to men let him shew vs how it may be auoided but that he hath in some sort taken vpon him subiection or seruice to the Father Nay let him tell vs how it standeth that the Syrmian Councel saith that p Hâ—lar desynod ex contil syrmiens st quis Christum filium dei obsecutum patrâ—m creatione omnium non confitetur anaâ—â—em â—sit Et pauio post Non exaequamus patri filium sed subiâ—ctum inteâ—iginius the Sonne in the creating of all things did obey the Father and that we doe not equall the Sinne to the Father but vnderstand him to bee subiect and that Hiâ—arie saith q Hila. ibid Non coaequatur filius patridum suâ—ditus per obedientiae obsequelam est that by yeelding obedience he is subiect to the Father who notwithstanding spake these things amidst their definitions and resolutions against the Arian Heretikes Yea let him tell vs how Christ saith r Ioh. 6.38 I came downe from Heauen not to doe mine own will but the will of the Father that hath sent me not speaking as in the nature of man as Å¿ Tertul. de Tri. Descendit dei verbum quod ihi fuit c. veniendo inde vnde homo venire non potuit deum se ostendit venisse Tertullian rightly argueth but as in the person of the sonne of God according to which it was that he was sent came down from heauen and abased himselfe to doe his Fathers will in taking vpon him the nature of man And heereupon Maldonatus the Iesuit aforesaid truly obserueth t Maldonat in Mat cap. 6. fecit quidem Christus non suam sed patris voluntatem sed idipsum sponte volunt 〈◊〉 sua fecit itaque non sequitur eum esse â—â—norem patre that Christ indeed did not his own will but the will of his Father but he did it voluntarily and willingly not by constraint and therefore that it followeth not that he was inferior to the Father As he did his Fathers will so and no otherwise was he subiect and obedient to the Father But that doing of his Fathers will being voluntarily vndertaken argueth no essentiall minority or subiection in the Son Therefore neither doth the same follow of his being so far foorth subiect and obedient to the Father And so Hilary briefly resolueth u Hilar. dâ— syn pietatis subiectâ—o non est essentiae diminutioneâ— religionis officium degenerem facit naturam patri obsequio subiectus nomine ita tamen vt subiectio nominis proprietatem naturalis atque indisserentis testetur essentiae subiection of piety is no diminution of essence neither doth office of deuotion put nature out of kinde He is subiect to the Father both by seruice and by name but yet so as that subiection of name testifieth a propriety of naturall and no way different essence And this point the Apostle S. Paul manifesteth when he saith that x Phil 2 6. Christ being in the forme of God and thinking it no robbery to be equall with God yet abased himselfe and tooke on him the forme of a seruant and was made like vnto men Where when he thus expresseth who it was that abased himselfe he that was in the forme of God and whereto hee abased himselfe to take vpon him the forme of a seruant he signifieth plainely that in the forme of God he as it were y Tert. de Trin. Authoritas diuâ—m verbi ad susâ—piendum hâ—minem interim conquiescens neâ— se suis viril us exercens deijcit se ad tempus atque deponit duâ—a hominem sert quem suscepit stooped downe voluntarily to take the nature of man thereby to doe the office of mediation betwixt God and man not forgoing or impeaching the forme of God but content in that wherein hee owed no seruice to become a seruant and to doe that seruice vnto God And to this purpose Cyrill vrgeth those other words of the same Apostle that z 2. Cor. 8.9 Christ being rich for our sakes became poore for how shall we vnderstand it that Christ became poore Shal we say of Christ as man that of rich he became poore That cannot be because the manhood of Christ was rather enriched and infinitely dignified and honoured by being ioined vnto God Shall we say that the Godhead of Christ became poore simply in it selfe Neither may we say so because the Godhead in it selfe is immutable and not subiect to any change It remaineth therefore as Cyril concludeth that a Cyril resp ad Theodoret. anathem 10. Quoinodo pauper factus est Quia cùm esset deus natura filius deâ—ac patris sactus est homo c. seruilemque mensuram subijt hoc est humanam is qui in forma dei patris est Christ as God the Sonne of the Father became poore in being made man and vndergoing the condition of a seruant that is of a man Now then as Christ according to his Godhead became poore not simply as God but as God incarnate and made man so he became also subiect and obedient a minister and seruant to the Father as God in man the body and manhood of Christ being b Athana apud Cyril vt supra anat 11. si videamus eum quasi per instrumentum sut corporis diuino modo operantem vel dicentem cognoscamus quòd deus existens omnia operetur the instrument as Athanasius calleth it wherein and whereby God the Sonne of God wrought whatsoeuer was needfull to reconcile vs vnto God And thus doth the Apostle say that c Act. 20.28 God purchased the Church with his owne blood that d 2. Cor. 5.19 God was in Christ reconciling the world to himselfe not as by communication of proprieties to affirme of one nature that which simply belongeth to the other but to note the act of the whole person in the offering of that sacred blood for the redemption of mankind Therefore M. Iewel and M. Fulke and we all doe rightly affirme that Christ neither as God only nor as man only but as God and man offered sacrifice both to
without a circumscribed place is to say that it may be at once both a body and not a body circumscribed and not circumscribed which being a thing repugnant to the truth of God to say that a thing is and yet it is not it is that which it is not and it is not that which it is the deniall thereof is not a deniall of Gods omnipotency but a reproofe of mens folly who to vphold their owne deuises sticke not to broach paradoxes and strange opinions iniurious vnto almighty God They who affirme the vbiquity of the body of Christ they likewise pretend for their defence the omnipotency of God And what will M. Bishop I maruell answer them thereof Is not their allegation of Gods almighty power as strong against him as his is against vs And will he be taken to deny the omnipotency of God because he subscribeth it not to be a matter of Gods omnipotency to make a finite creature of like infinity with himselfe If not let him yeeld the same measure to vs that he doth to himselfe and acknowledge his own temerity and rashnesse in charging vs that we limit the infinit power of God within the compasse of mans weake vnderstanding and in effect make him no God at all only because we will not betray Gods omnipotency to be the releefe of their fancy He telleth vs of some who were so blind and bold as to auouch God not to be able to conceiue or vnderstand how that is possible which he hath spoken of and this he noteth to haue been in a conference at Paris but who they were or when this conference was he telleth vs nothing and for my part I take it that he doth therein but vse his liberty he knoweth what I meane as he is wont to do Albeit I doubt not but some man in some forme of words might allude to that which Thomas Aquinas saith who hauing affirmed the impossibility of Gods doing those things which absolutely in themselues are vnpossible addeth m Tho. Aqu. vt supra Nesp hoc est contra verbuÌ„ angeli dicentis Non erit impossibile deo omne vertuÌ„ Id enim quod contraâ—ictionem implicat verbum esse non potest quia nullus intellectus potest illud concipere Neither is this contrary to the word of the Angell saying No word shall be vnpossible to God for that which implieth contradiction can be no word saith he because no vnderstanding speaking vniuersally is able to conceiue it Yet M. Bishop telleth vs that very naturall Philosophy teacheth that that which they say hath no repugnancy in it selfe as in his place saith he I haue prooued but where that place is we doe not yet find As for the Philosophy which they teach their naturals we doe not well know what it is but we well thinke that neuer any wise Philosopher was so vnreasonable a naturall as to hold it a matter of naturall reason that a body should be without circumscription and yet remaine a body or be in many places at once being but one and the same body and that the ancient Fathers were of another reason I haue n Sect. 2. before shewed And if by naturall Philosophy it may be made good why doth he a little before blame mans weake vnderstanding as vnable to conceiue it why doe their writers of naturall Philosophy alwaies passe it ouer as a matter beyond their element and without the compasse of their rules yea why doe they all rest it vpon so extraordinary an act of Gods omnipotency if there be nothing but what the light of naturall Philosophy can enable vs to comprehend To conclude this point before M. Bishop any more question Gods power in this matter we wish him to resolue vs of Gods will and if he can approoue to vs the will of God we will doubt no farther of his power If he cannot so doe he doth but reason as Praxeas the Heretike did o Tertul. adu praxcam Ergò inquiunt difficile non fuit deo ipsum se patrem fiiium facere c. sed si tam abruptè in praesumptionibus nostris hac sententia vtamur quiduis de deo confingere poterimus quasi fecerit quia facere potuerit It was not hard or vnpossible to God to make himselfe both the Father and the Sonne his heresie standing in the confounding of the persons and making them all one But saith Turtullian if in our owne presumptions we so abruptly vse that sentence that nothing is vnpossible to God we may feigne of God what we list and say that he hath done it because he could doe it M. Bishop then must not maruell that in his presumptions we likewise resist him As Tertullian required the Heretikes so doe we him to prooue to vs p Ibid. Probare debebis ex scripturis c. by Scripture that which he affirmeth to be beleeued vpon the power of God 9. W. BISHOP If they were enemies to Gods omnipotencie alone it might be somewhat excused because that might seeme to proceed rather from the weaknesse of their vnderstanding then out of any ill affection towards God but if they doe further oppose themselues against the goodnesse mercy and iustice of God that must needs discouer very great impietie to lie festring in their bowels Who seeth not that it doth highly attaint the inestimable goodnesse of God and his tender loue towards mankind to impute the reprobation of man and his eternall damnation not vnto mans owne wickednesse and deserts but vnto the meere will and pleasure of God himselfe and yet this is too too common an assertion amongst the Protestants In colloq Monpelgar pag. 522. Let Beza one of their brauest champions speake for the rest God saith hee in his secret counsell hath set downe an vnremooueable decree that he will not haue the greater part of men saued nor to beleeue in Christ and come to the knowledge of trueth but hath created ordained and predestinated them to euerlasting damnation Pag. 336. To whom M. PERKINS in this booke draweth neere affirming it to proceed from the verie will of God that he shewes mercy to some and forsaketh others Mercy indeed God of his meere goodnesse doth powre out vpon vs abundantly but to imagine that hee of his owne will and prime choise without any foresight of our sinnes doth forsake vs and appoint vs to hell fire is heinous impiety most contrary vnto the very nature of God whose goodnesse is so pure and sincere that it doth good to all things and wisheth euill to none vnlesse they doe first greatly deserue it What an vngodly opinion then is it to hold that hee of his owne free choise ordained man a creature made to his owne Image and likenesse to most grieuous and endlesse torments without foresight of any offence of his As though he should take a singular pleasure to see a principall worke of his owne hands frie in hell fire R. ABBOT Here M. Bishop
that God is heereby made the author of sinne it is but his want of vnderstanding that causeth him that feare Let him remember what before hath been said and the matter is very cleere Absolon was of himselfe viciously and licentiously disposed and this leud disposition of his God vseth to punish Dauid If we respect heere the sinne it is of Absolon himselfe but if we respect the ordering of the sinne whereby Dauid was made the obiect of it this as Caluin wel noteth God pronounceth to be his worke And this is all that Caluin intendeth who saith that d Caâ—uin Instit. l. 1. c. 17. sect 5. Coucedo sures et homicidas aliâ—s maâ—estâ—oss diuinae esse proâ—â—dentiae instruinâ—uta quâ—â—us dâ—minus ipse ad exâ—quenda quae apua se constitaâ—tâ—â—â—â— câ—a vtituâ— Atqâ—i eoruÌ„ malu vllam inde excusationem deberi nego Quid enim an veâ—eadem sâ—cum iniquitate deum inuoluent vel suam prauitatem illues iustitia operient neutruÌ„ pâ—ssunt Quominis se purgent proprâ—a conscientia redarguuntur quominus deum insimulent totum in se malum deprehendunt penes ipsum nounisi legâ—timum malitiae suae vsum theeues and murtherers and other malefactours are the instruments of Gods prouidence which he vseth for the executing of those iudgements which he hath decreed with himslfe But I deny saith he that thereby any excuse belongeth to their sinnes For what will they wrap God in the same iniquity with them or will they by his righteousnesse couer their owne naughtinesse They can doe neither That they may not cleere themselues they are reprooued by their owne conscience that they may not accuse God they finde the euill wholly in themselues but with God no other but the lawfull vse of their wickednesse I will end this matter with that which Saint Ambrose noteth of it who expounding e Ambros in Psal 37. Manum dei virtutem intelligimus puntendi c. Hanc manum Dauid in seipso expâ—rtus liberis alterius incestum alterius parricidium deplorauit c. sed forte aliquiâ— ditâ—â— Quomodo in paricidio vel in incestu manus dei fuerit ùm opusillud inimicisit Cognoscamus igitur quoniâ—m et vbâ— diabolus vulnerat sagittae domini vulnerare dicantur c. Cum diabeluâ— vulnerat domini sunt sagitiaequs vulnerandi permisit dâ—â—olo potestatem Denique si mandes vt tâ—â—sâ— seruâ—us verberetur nonnè etiamsi ab alio astante cadatur à te dicitur verberatuâ— the hand of God to be his power in punishing and saying that of this hand Dauid had experience when he bewailed the incest of one of his sonnes and the others murther and paricide he bringeth in one asking How was the hand of God in murther and incest seeing that is the worke of the enemy But let vs know saith he that where the diuell woundeth the arrowes of the Lord are said to wound He giueth example heereof in Iob from whom also he borroweth that phrase and by and by concludeth when the diuell woundeth the arrowes are the Lords who gaue the diuell power to wound And if saith he a man giue charge to haue his seruant beaten is not he said to beat him albeit he be stricken by another stander by In which words he plainely teacheth that albeit incest and murther and such like be the workes of the Diuell and of wicked and vngodly men that are led by him yet that in their acting and committing of these wickednesses God hath his hand so as that neither diuels nor men effect the same at their owne pleasure but by his secret prouidence euen as it were by a charge expresly giuen them are guided therein as it shall seeme good to him either to punish sinners by them or to exercise and trie Godly and faithfull men Further M. Bishop obiecteth that Caluin saith that nothing is more plaine then that God blindeth the eies of men striketh them with giddinesse maketh them drunke casteth them into madnesse and hardeneth their hearts But did not M. Bishop know that these are scripture phrases that the holy Ghost himselfe speaketh in that sort f Deutr. 28.28 The Lord saith Moses shall smite thee with madnesse and blindnesse and with astonying of heart g Exod. 4.21 I saith God will harden Pharaohs heart h Esay 19.14 The Lord saith the Prophet hath mingled amongst them the spirit of errours i Rom. 11.8 God saith the Apostle hath giuen them the spirit of slumber euen as the Prophet had said before k Esay 29.10 The Lord hath couered you with a spirit of slumber and hath shut vp your eies God saith l Esay 63.6 I will make them drunke in mine indignation l Iere. 51.57 I will make drunke her Princes and her Wisemen her Dukes and her Nobles The Apostle againe saith m 2. Thes 2.11 God shall send them strength of illusion that they may beleeue lies Infinite other such places of scripture there are and although M. Bishop himselfe be little acquainted with the text yet the very place of Caluin which he impugneth might haue giuen him occasion to take aduertisement thereof Well he will seeme so to haue done but what doth he say to such speeches The poore Papists saith he were wont to interpret such textes of Scripture by saying that God doth indeed iustly permit and suffer such things to be done but is not the authour of them Indeed it seemeth that the Papists are very poore in interpreting the Scriptures who in so cleere a light cannot see that albeit God be not the authour of any sinne which the Protestants beleeue and confesse as fully and faithfully as they doe yet that God doth more than barely permit and suffer it to be done When Ioshuah saith of the Canaanites going foorth to battell against the Israelites that n Ios 11.20 it came of the Lord to harden their hearts to goe against Israel in battell to the intent that they should vtterly destroy them and when God saith of the Assyrians going with all malicious fury against the same people o Esay 10.6 I will send him I will giue him a charge against the people of my wrath to take the spoile and to tread them downe as clay in the streets and when Dauid saith p 2. Sam. 16.10.11 The Lord hath bidden Shimei to curse Dauid will M. Bishop in these and many other such like places vnderstand nothing but bare permission The Pelagian heretikes of old vsed the same shift against the euidence of scripture and Saint Austin then reiected it and will the Papists now haue vs to admit it for a truth When Iulian the Pelagian said q Aug. cont Iulian li. 5. cap. 3. Ditis cum destderijs suis traditi dicuntur relicti per diuinam patientiam intelligendi sunt non per potentiam in peccata compulsi quasi non simul posuerit haec duo idem Apostolus patientiam potentiam vbi
he it is read in the Scriptures I will harden Pharaoh his heart and He gaue them ouer to their owne lusts and such like this figure of speech may easely be expounded if a man obserue the nature of the Hebrew tongue For certaine it is that these figuratiue speeches haue a signification of permission God gaue them ouer c. doth not signifie positiuely that God efficiently or by proper motion draweth mens mindes to fulfill their lusts but it signifieth the forsaking of them God forsaketh the wicked and suffereth them to rage hee doth not restraine their furie I will harden c. that is I will suffer to be hardened I will not bow the naturall hardnesse of the wicked heart Now when the Scripture maketh mention of this desertion it signifieth a punishment wherewith hee punisheth the wicked This saith hee is the true Grammaticall interpretation and hath nothing absurd in it This I haue set downe at large that the Reader may see that Melancthon was so farre from speaking as M. Bishop chargeth him as that contrariwise he expoundeth those places of Scripture which import how farre God interposeth himselfe in the sinfull actions of men much more mildly then Bellarmine himselfe doth being forced by euidence of truth as wee haue before seene to admit more then Melancthon saith Bucer indeed saith that x Bucer in Rom. cap. 1. Nisi fateamur eum omnia in nobis efficere deum esse negamus vnlesse we confesse that God worketh all things in all men we deny him to be God but he speaketh of motions and actions and not of the sinne that cleaueth vnto them and very perfidiously doth M. Bishop adde aswell all euill as all good Which appeareth by that that he saieth in the same place y Ibid. Verba domini haec duo simul testantur siquid peccamus culpam nostram esse non dei cui perhibet testimonium nostra ipsorum conscientia tum à deo omne bonum venire vt quod ille non dederit impossibile sit à quoquam vel cogitari nedum fieri The words of God doe testifie these two things that if we sinne the fault is ours not Gods whereto our owne conscience beareth witnesse and then that all goodnesse commeth of God so as that what he giueth not it is impossible for any man to doe or thinke The words of Zwinglius are x Zwingl de prouid dei ca. 6. Vnumatque idem faâ—mus puta adulterium aut homicidium quantum dei est authorâ—s motoris ac impulsoris opus est crimen non est quantum autem hominis est crimen ac seâ—us est One and the same deed as adultery or murther so farre as it is of God the author moouer and pusher forward thereof it is a worke and not a sinne but so farre as it is of man it is sinne and wickednesse Where wee see that for the act it selfe meerely as an act or worke he ascribeth it to God who is the true authour of all motions and actions but the sinne thereof he ascribeth onely to man to whom onely it doth belong The latter words which he citeth I doe not finde and I doubt not but hee hath plaied a part of his little honestie in them as wee see in the former he hath done 11. W. BISHOP But to proceed on with this discourse the Protestants do not onely impugne the power and goodnesse of God but they doe also peruert his iustice For to omit their last pâ—sition that God is the worker of all sinne in vs compelling as Caluin speaketh the reprobate to obedience and therefore cannot in iustice punish the poore wretches for being obedient vnto his owne will and working and not to vrge their former assertion that God of his owne will and decree hath predestinated the greater part of men to hell without any foresight of their euill deserts which if it were true should it not be intclerable wronge to torment so rigorously innocents that neuer offended him To let passe these points I say how can they defend the iustice of God who hold that he hath tied vs to such lawes as are impossible to be kept by any man For Christ as he testified himselfe will condemne men to hell fire for transgressing of these lawes by working of iniquity Matt. 7.23 depart from me you that worke iniquitie and what equity should there be in that sentence if it had neuer beene possible for these men to haue done otherwise For no reasonable Iudge condemneth any man for not doing of that which he knew well lay not any way in his power to be done So that nothing is more plaine and euident then that the Protestants doctrine trotteth apace towardes open Atheisme by impugning the power of God by defacing his goodnesse mercy and iustice which in our vnderstanding are the chiefe properties of his diuine substance and by calling into question the blessed Trinity it selfe which their of-spring and progeny the Trinitarians in Poland doe already deny flatly Thus much of their Atheismes against God R. ABBOT Whether we make God the worker of all sinne in vs appeareth by that that hath beene already said As touching the phrase of CoÌ„pelling the reprobate to obedience the words of Caluin are a Cal. Instit l. 1. cap. 18. sect 2. that the prouidence of God doth not onely shew his power in the elect but also Reprobos in obsequium cogit Which M. Bishop should haue rather translated he forceth or compelleth the reprobate to serue him to do what hee will The word obsequium doth not alwaies import obedience but noteth somtimes a mans doing of that which another would haue done though the dooer haue no meaning to obey him therein Obedience is a voluntary submission and a man cannot be said to be compelled to that that voluntarily he doth and Caluins meaning onely is that reprobates amidst all their furie and rage and rebellion against God yet are so holden in and guided by the bridle of his prouidence that they can do nothing but what he according to his good pleasure thinketh fit and conuenient to be done Because then this seruice is only intended as touching the thing done not for any minde or will that they haue to obey or serue God in the doing of it therfore they are by M. Bishop absurdly tearmed obedient to Gods will and working As for Caluin he speaketh no otherwise in this behalfe then Gregory Bishop of Rome doth when he saith of Iosephs brethren b Greg. Moral l. 6. ca. 22 Inde coacti sunt dei voluntatem peragere vnde hanc moliti sunt astutè commutaere Thereby were they compelled to doe the will of God whereby they subtelly thought to defeat the same and of the Iewes c Ibid. Cum se aestimant eius miracula persequendo abscindere haec nimirum compulsi sunt nesciendo dilatare that by persecuting they thought to cut off the miracles of Christ but were compelled
which by the condition of humane nature belongeth to that tender age And out of the same words of the Euangelist he obserueth as touching Christs not knowing the day and houre of the end of the world n Idem in Math. tract 30 Proficiens proficiebat quidem super omnes scientia est sapientia non tamen vt iam veniret quod perfectum est priusquam propriam dispeÌ„sationem impleret Nihil ergò mirum si hec nesciuit c. that Christ grew in wisdome and knowledge aboue all other but yet so as that that which is perfect should not come till he had fulfilled the dispensation that belonged to him and therefore that it was no maruell if he knew it not Now these things touch not only the infancy of Christ but also his riper yeeres and therefore take away that exception which M. Bishop will seeme to ground vpon that distinction And albeit the Apostle doe now set foorth Christ vnto vs as o Col. 2.4 Sundry cauillations against Caluin declared in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisedome and knowledge which words nowithstanding belong to other purpose then M. Bishop heere produceth them yet this nothing hindreth but that something might be hidden to the manhood of Christ till the time should come that the diuine nature should fully explicate and lay open the glorious perfection of those endowments which by vnion and felowship therewith should redound vnto it But to come to his sweet obseruations which he noteth out of Caluin hee citeth for the collectour of them his fellow Gifford in his Caluinc-Turcismus a sweete youth and a master very fiâ— for such a scholer yet he thinketh himselfe to haue this aduantage heerby that if there be any knauerie or foolerie in these collections the blame thereof shall light vpon Gifford and not vpon him And first it is alleaged that Caluin in one place saith that Christ p Caluin in Math. ca. 6.18 speaketh vnproperly A high point in a low house as if it were any strange matter to note in many places of the scripture some impropriety of speech Saint Austin saith that q August de doct Christ l. 3. cap. 29. sciant literati modis omnibus locutionis quos GraÌ„matici tropos vocant authores nostros vsos esse the writers of the scriptures haue vsed al manner of tropes and figures and what are tropes and figures but the excusing and saluing of such improprieties Of that which Saint Paul saith The flesh lusteth against the spirit Cyprian speaketh as Caluin doth r Cyprian de cardinal Christi operib in prolog Quòd caro aduersus spiritum c. contendere dicitur improprie arbitror dictum I thinke it to be vnproperly spoken and will Master Bishop make Cypriano-Turcismus of this as Gifford doth a Caluino-Turcismus of the other The next matter is that Christ vseth harsh and far-fetched similitudes The words are spoken by occasion of the parable of the vnrighteous steward concerning which Caluin aduertiseth that Å¿ Caluin in Luc. 16.1 Christ thereby admonisheth to deale friendly and kindely with our neighbours that when we shall come to the tribunall seat of God the fruit of our liberality may returne to vs. Heereupon hee addeth t Quanquam autem dura longè petita videtur similitudo clausula tamen ostendit non aliud fuisse Christi consiliuÌ„ And albeit the similitude seeme to be hard and far-fetched yet the conclusion sheweth that the purpose of Christ was no other Where we may see what a speciall skill these fellowes haue in multiplication Caluin saith this similitude seemeth to be harsh and far-fetched and they turne it to he vseth harsh and far-fetched similitudes But Hierome saith of Saint Paul u Hieron Apolog pro lib. adu Iouiniam ad Pammach Videntur eius quaedam verba simplicia quasi innocentis hâ—minis rurusticani sed quocunque 〈◊〉 eris sulmâ—â—â— sunt some of his words seem to be but simple and as the words of a silly country man who neither hath skill to snare another nor to auoid the snare himselfe and yet hee did not hold them to be so indeed for he addeth yet whithersoeuer thou lookest they are very thunder Where Caluin then saith that the similitude seemeth to be hard and farre fetched will M. Bishop straight waies conclude that hee saith it is so And what doth it not so much as seeme to be hard and farre fetched that by the similitude of an vniust steward who to prouide for himselfe vsed his witte to deceiue and robbe his master Christ should teach vs liberalitie and almes-deeds S. Austin saw it to be such as that he gaue it for a speciall caueat that x Aug. q Euang. l. 2. q. 34. In villico quem dominus eijciebat c. non omnia debeâ—◠〈…〉 duÌ„ sumere c. et paulò post E coÌ„trario dicuÌ„tur stae similitudine vt intelligamus 〈…〉 ille à domino qui fraudeÌ„ faciebat quantò ampliùs placent dom deo qui secunâ—uÌ„ 〈…〉 illa faciunt We are not to take all things heere to imitate and that it is to be taken by way of contrarietie that if he were commended of his master that deceiued much more doth he please God who according to his commandement doth such things And that commending of the vniust steward Origen interpreteth y Grigen apud Th. Aquin. Caten Euang Luc. 16. Non secundum veram coÌ„mendationem seâ— abusiâ—è dictum est not to be spoken as touching any true commendation but by abuse of speech It should seeme therefore that all things are not heere so currant but that the similitude may at least seeme to bee hard and far-fetched And doth M. Bishop thinke that there are no similitudes in the Scriptures that are hard and farre fetched If there bee none then we hope that he is able very easely to giue reason of them all Which if he say he can doe we shall thinke him scant a wise man and if he say he cannot we shall thinke him as wise that will reprooue that for a lie in Caluin which he himselfe must confesse to be a trueth Againe he obiecteth to Caluin that he saith that Christ wresteth the Prophets words into a strange sense The place is noted in the margent to be vpon the seuenth of Matthew but it is vpon the eight chapter The words which he meaneth are the words of the Prophet Esay there cited z Esay 53.4 Hee tooke our infirmities and bare our sicknesses Of which Caluin there saith thus a Cal. in Math. 8.17 videtur parum appesitè citari immò in alienum sensum torquerthoc vaticinium This prophecie seemeth to be amisse or vnfitly cited yea to be wrested to a wrong meaning or to a strange sense Which words he vseth not as of his owne opinion but propoundeth them by way of obiection and addeth a reason of some doubt made as touching the application of the
mercy of God if Christs merites did in iustice deserue our saluation it is to be noted that both be true if they be duely considered For we are saued by Christs merits in rigor of iustice he satisfying of God as far-forth fully as we offended him and yet we be saued freely by the mercy of God too both because he hath of his meere mercy without any desert of ours giuen vs Christ his Sonne to be our Sauiour and also for that he hath out of the same his mercy freely applied vnto euery one in particular that is saued the merits of Christ through which he is saued R. ABBOT The value of our redemption is not to be rated by the wilfull conceits of men Christs other sufferings not sufficiēt vvithout his finall suffering and death but by the estimation and ordinance of God himselfe who doth nothing superfluously nothing idlely and without cause and therefore would not haue decreed the death of Christ but that a Luk. 24.46 it behooued Christ to suffer death and to rise againe from the dead the third day that repentance and remission of sins might be preached in his name As the Apostle saith b Gal. 2.21 If righteousnesse be by the law then Christ died in vaine so may we also conclude If the least thing that Christ suffered in his life were sufficient to redeeme vs as M. Bishop dreameth surely then Christ died in vaine It is not for man to take vpon him to be wiser then God nor for vs to say that this or that had beene sufficient to redeeme vs when we see what God hath decreed and done in that behalfe It is true in deed that the dignity of Christs person gaue worth to his sufferings but we are to learne of the wisedome of God what it was conuenient those sufferings should be to which the dignity of his person should giue that woorth so that not the dignity of his person howsoeuer but the dignity of his person in such and such sufferings certainely before determined of God was to be the merit and purchase of our redemption and saluation So then necessary it was that Christ should die for our redemption though his death had beene no sufficient price therefore but by the infinitenesse of his person Molineus therefore might very iustly and truely say not that the incarnation and birth of Christ profited vs nothing or could doe nothing but that without the death of Christ they had profited vs nothing or could haue done nothing for vs because it was by his death that God had appointed to redeem vs euen as M. Bishop against himslfe confesseth though his eies were not open to see it that an hundred places of expresse scripture doe assigne our redemption to the bloudshedding and passion of Christ The Papisticall Doctoures then their Monkes and Priests are to be condemned who vrge Christs incarnation and birth onely as a sufficient price for vs or doe stint the same as did Campian that c Campian Rot. 8. Cutus cruoris vna quaeuis guttula propter dignitatem bostiae mille mundos redimere potuisset Christ suffered for vs in soule also one drop of his bloud had sufficed to redeeme a thousand worlds not but that his incarnation and birth were profitable to vs but because whatsoeuer Christ did or suffered otherwise all concurred in his death as being preparations thereunto and in his death the fruit and effect thereof doth redound vnto vs not that we deny the value of any drop of the blood of Christ but because we hold no lesse needfull to redeeme vs then God deemed needfull that he should shead for vs. The words of Caluin which he translateth at randon are these d Caluin Instit l. 2. c. 16. se 10. Nihil actum erat si corporea tantúm morte defunctus fuisset Christus sed operae simul pretium erat vt diuinae vltionis seueritatem sentiret quo irae ipsius intercederet satisfaceret iusto iudicio It had beene to no effect if Christ had died onely a corporall or bodily death but it was withall needfull that he should feele the scuerity of Gods reuenge that so he might appease his wrath and satisfie his iust iudgement For disproofe of which assertion he vseth the words a little before mentioned that an hundred places of expresse Scripture doe assigne our redemption to the passion of Christ Full wisely I warrant you as if the scripture when it assigneth our redemption to the passion of Christ did not assigne it to those spirituall sufferings which Caluin there intendeth when as it describeth those sufferings to be a part of the same passion and the same are by Caluin so vnderstood to be If he will say that his meaning is that the scripture assigneth our redemption to the death of Christ let him vnderstand death in his true nature as he ought to doe with the complements and furniture thereof that is the wrath and curse of God and sorrowes of death as hath beene before said and then we answer as the truth is that the Scripture in assigning our redemption to the death of Christ doth consequently assigne the same to those spirituall anguishes and sufferings because those spirituall agonies are also a part of the same death Now seeing the Father sent his Sonne e Esay 53.10 to giue his soule an offering for sinne as the Prophet teacheth vs and is before declared surely Caluin rightly concludeth that if he had died onely a bodilie death he had done nothing for vs because he had not done that that the father had required nay he had not done that which the worke of redemption did require for f Athanas de incarnat Christi Neque potuit aliud pro alio in redemptionem praestari sed corpus pro corpore anima pro anima integriū aliquid pro integro homine c. one thing saith Aathanasius might not for redemption bee paied for another but the body was to be giuen for the bodie and the soule for the soule and the whole for the whole man From hence he proceedeth and telleth vs of one of Foxes martyrs as he tearmeth them Who held that Christ with all his workes could not merit heauen for vs. Thus like a madde dogge he runneth vp and downe snapping at one and biting at another and seeking in this man and that man to fasten his venemous tooth of slander and reproach Who this was he nameth no tand whereas he citeth Acts and monuments pag. 487. I finde not in the edition that I haue which is the last any matter tending to that purpose Wheresoeuer it is that he meaneth I doubt not but hee hath plaied his part in it with like fidelity as he is wont to doe As for the Martyrs and the Martyr-monger of whom he speaketh let him not doubt but the Prophets words are verified in them g Esay 57.2 peace shall come they shall rest in their beds euery
and Espenceus confesse that p LindaÌ„ de opt gen interpret scrip l. 3. ca. p 3. Espenc Digres in 1. epist. ad Timoth. lib. 1. cap. 11. apud Rainold Thess 5. there are many Apocryphall things thrust thereinto out of the Gopell of Nicodemus and other toies that there is a false beginning shamefully and ignorantly set before the lecture of the Gospell that the canon of the Masse and the secrets are beraied with most foule faults that there are the festiuals of some saints whose names happily are scantly well warranted And what doe they now condemne the diuine seruice which they haue commended to the people haue set foorth for holy good for so many former ages Of their Bibles we haue heard before and shall I now say to them to whom he spake before If these Popes and Popish Bishops and doctours had once deceiued you in a mony matter you wold beware how you trusted them againe and will you beleeue them still they hauing by their owne confession so long deceiued you both in your Church-seruice and in your Bible commending the one to you as diuine seruice and the other as Gods pure word and since condemning them both If he will thinke vs fooles to argue in this sort let him put his hand to his owne nose and returne the imputation of this folly to himselfe remembring that it is an ill bird that beraieth his owne nest and that hee should first haue looked at home before hee had made this wise reason against vs. This only by the way as being impertinent to this place but by that that hath beene said of translations we may beforehand perceiue how faint and spiritlesse M. Bishops voice will be when the time shall come which so manfully he threatneth that he shall exclaime against vs as corruptours and deprauers of Gods sacred word At the most it will be but as the crie of a gander amongst the geese which thrusteth out the necke and hisseth and happily shaketh a man by the gowne and backe againe he runneth with a great noise and is applauded by all the flocke as if he had done some valiant worthy act It will then appeare further that it is rather for forme than for matter that hee thus bableth of peruersly mangling the Scriptures Of expounding Scriptures and resoluing doubts and of our owne pew-fellowes crying out shame vpon vs. Of resoluing doubts and difficulties I haue answered him the section last saue one I will not say as there onely of the ancient church but setting aside the foolish and idle dreame of a priuiledge resting in the Pope which is no other but an ambitious vsurpation and a meere Antichristian tyrannie subiecting the whole faith of the church to the will and fancy of one wicked man what meanes hath the Church of Rome for resoluing of doubts but that we haue in any respect as good as they Yea there are not so many difficulties or doubts in very materiall points vnresolued amongst vs as at this day remaine questioned vndecided in the Church of Rome As for ancient Fathers and Councels they are more truely regarded with vs than they are with them With vs they are made to yeeld onely to God and to his word but with them they must giue place to all their sacrilegious and abominable deuices Let the Fathers and Councels say what they will yet q Bellar. de Sacram li 2. c. 25. Omnium conciliorum veterum omnium dogmatum firmitas ab authoritate praesentis ecclesiae dependet the authority of them all and the certainty of all Doctrines must depend vpon the authority of their church As touching that which he saith that we beare our followers in hand that euery faithfull man by himselfe examining the circumstances of the text and comparing other like places shal find out the right meaning of al obscure sentences how impudeÌ„t a lie it is hereby appeareth for that we do not attribute so much to the industry or learning of any mortal man We say with Aust that r Aug lâ—b 83. quaest 69 solet circumstantia scripturae illuminare sententiam the circumstance of the scripture is woont to giue light of the meaning of it with Hilary that Å¿ Hilar. de Trinit li. 9. Dictorum intelligentia aut ex praepositis aut ex consequentibus expectatur the vnderstaÌ„ding of the sayings of Scripture is to be expected either from that that is gon before or that that followeth after We say with Origen that t Origen cont Cels l 4. Ex ipsius Scripturae locis inter se collatis verum sensum elicimus by comparing places of Scripture together we gather the right sense But yet neither doe we make these the onely necessarie meanes for vnderstanding of Scripture neither doe attribute to euery faithfull man the abilitie of doing these things neither doe we affirme of any man whatsoeuer that by these or any other meanes hee can attaine to the vnderstanding of all obscure sentences And yet we say that a vulgar faithful man hauing by plaine and euident texts learned the substance of true faith exercising himselfe in the reading of the Scriptures and being assisted by the ministery of the word may by comparing of places and examining of circumstances much further himselfe for the increase of his knowledge to his comfort and soules health Many are there of that great number of which M. Bishop speaketh who by such exercise of Scripture are able to stoppe his mouth and to giue him good instruction in the mysterie of true faith u Ps 119.105 The word of God is indeed the lanterne to their feete and the light to their steps and so farre are they from stumbling and falling thereby as that they x vers 104. gaine by it vnderstanding to hate and abhorre all wicked waies 20. W. BISHOP Now to make vp an euen reckoning with M. PER. Atheism I must come vnto their diuine seruice and worship of God the third point that I promised to handle because he spared not to speake his pleasure of ours First then whereas a true reall and externall sacrifice is among all externall works the most excellent seruice that can be done to the diuine Maiestie as shall bee prooued in the question of the sacrifice which also hath euer since the beginning of the world beene by the best men practised to acknowledge and testifie aswell the soueraigne dominion that God hath ouer vs as our dutifull subiection vnto his almightie goodnesse the Protestants to make knowne vnto the wiser sort that they are not Gods true loy all people will not vouchsafe to performe to him any such speciall seruice as to sacrifice in his honour nay they are fallen so farre out with this principall part of Gods true worship that they do in despight of it powre out most vile reproches against the daily sacrifice of the Catholike Church which conteineth the blessed body and most pretious
that high dignity but ambitious persons flatterers stageplaiers and men defiled with all vices that there was scant a man preferred to be a Bishop that had but euen lightly read heard or learned the holy Scriptures yea that had so much as touched that holy booke saue onely the couer albeit they tooke their oath at their institution that they had knowledge of them Bernard also mentioneth that euen in his time t Bernard epist 42. Scholares pueri impuberes adolescentuli ob sanguinis dignitatem promouentur ad ecclesiasticas dignitates de sub ferula transferuntur ad principandum presbyteris laetieres interim quòd virgas tuaserint quà m quòd meruerint principatum nec tam illis blanditur adeptum quà m adempâ—uÌ„ magisterum Schoole-boies and beardlesse youthes were promoted to ecclesiasticall dignities and from the ferula were exalted to beare rule ouer Priests such as were more glad that they had escaped the rod than that they had obtained their preferment and ioied more that they were come from being vnder masters than that they themselues were become masters The behauiour of these Bishops Clemangis further describeth that u Clemang vt supra Non quidem ammarum sed crumenarum potius quaestum vbique explorant c. Nihil omnino agunt nisi quod ad colligendam quacunque ex oceasione pecuniam suffragan posse crediderint c. Multò aequanimiùs laturi â—acturam decem millium animaruÌ„ quà m deceâ— aut duodecim solidorum c. Nullus ad clerâ—â—atum vel ad sacrum ordinem vel ad quemcunque gradum ecclesiasticum nisi mercede accedit Omnes quotquot aduenerint nullo aut paruo admodum discrimine ad eos quos petierint titulos admittunt nisi fortè siqui adeò egestate premuntur vt soluendo non sint Nulla de anteacta vita percunctatio est c. De literis verò doctrina quid loqui attinet cùm omnes fere Preâ—byteros sine aliquo captu aut rerum aut vocabulorum morosè syllabatimque vix legere videamus c. Si aliqua beneficia suae sint dispositions deuoluta pro quaestu ea conferunt vel fuis ea spurâ—s histrionibus donant they euery where sought the gaining not of soules but of mony doing nothing but what might serue their turne to gather mony taking in much better part the losse of ten thousand soules than of ten or twelue shillings admitting none to sacred orders or to any degree of the church but only for money refusing none in a maner but onely such as were so poore that they could not pay money no question of their life no question of their learning so that their Priests for the most part could very hardly read hauing no vnderstanding at all either of the things which they reade or of the words bestowing for money their benefices which they had to bestow or vpon their bastards and â—tage-plaiers x Specul eccles Pontif. ex Aluaro Pelag. de Planctu ecclesiae Vix credo maximè in Hispania quòd de centum episcopis sit vnus qui non sit Simoniacus in ordinibus beneficijs conferendu I scant thinke faith Aluarus Pelagius that of a hundred Bishops there is one that doth not practise simonie in bestowing of orders and benefices And whereas M. Bishop twiteth our Ministers with solacing themselues with their Yoke-fellowes Clemangis againe telleth that y Clemang ibid. Rectores parochiarum in plerisque dioecesibus ex cerâ—o condicto cum suis praelatis pretio passim publicè concubinas tenent their Bishops for a certaine fee did giue licence to their parish Priests euery where and openly to keepe Concubines which z Sleidan Comment ii 4 Scire se Germaniae Episcoporum hunc esse morem vt accepta pecuâ—ia scortationem suis permittant Cardinall Campegius also confessed that the Bishops of Germany were accustomed to doe that a Clemang Passim inuerecundè prolem ex meretricio susceptam scorta vice coniugum domi tenent their Canons and Chaplaines openly and shamelesly kept their bastards and harlots in house with them Yea Theodoric de Niem saith further that b Theodor. de Niem In eisdem etiam partibus Hiberniae Norwegiae iuxta consuetudines patriae licet Episcopis Presbyteris tenere publicè concubinas eisdem visitantibus bis in anno subditos sibi Presbyteros c. suam dilectam ducere secum ad domes hospitia corundem subditorum presbyterorum nec ipsa dilecta permittit episcopum â—masium visitare sine ipsa c. Et penè idem modus quoad luxuriant circa Presbyteros Gasconiae Hispaniae ac Portugaliae c. in omnibus obseruatur in Ireland and Norway as also in Gascoine Spaine Portugall and other countries it was lawfull by the custome of their countrey for Bishops and Priests openly to keepe concubines and when the Bishops twice in a yeere did visit the Priests and Clergy of their iurisdiction they led their minions about with them who would not suffer their paramour Bishops to goe in visitation without them because they would be partakers of their good cheere and prouide that they should not fall in loue with other to their wrong The glosse of the Canon law saith that c Dist 81. Maximianus in glossa Pauci sine illo vitio inueniuntur there were few Priests found without the sinne of fornication so as that not without cause Gerson the Chancelour of Paris wished it to bee enquired of as a matter worthy of reformation d Specul eccle Pontif. ex Io. Gerson Scrutemini si alicubi sacerdotes in consuetudinem duxerunt sub praetextu antillarum habere concubinas Whether that Priests any where had drawen it into custome vnder pretence of maide-seruants to keepe concubines pointing at a thing which all men saw to be common euery where Such was in a word the continency of those Romish Bishops and Priests as that Aluarus Pelagius before mentioned saith that e Ibid ex Alu. Pelag. In pauco maiori numero sunt filij laicorum quà m Clericorum in Spaine and otherwhere their bastards were almost as many as the children of lay men f Ibi. ex Theod. de Niem Vnde quodammodo plures innaturales ex foedo complexu nati quà m filij legitimi ac naturales in ecclesiasticis titulis coÌ„cedendis praeferuntur plures legitimis apertissimè promouentur so as that in all those parts saith Niem speaking as before of Ireland Norway Spaine Gascoine Portugal and other countries there were more such bastards preferred to ecclesiasticall dignities than there were of them that were lawfully begotten Albeit they rested not heere but g Bernard ser in Synodo Remensi Episcopi Sacerdotes traditi in reprobum sensum faciunt quae non conueniunt quae enim in occulto fiunt ab Episcopis turpe est dicere c. Masculi in masculos
turpitudinem operantes c. Vide eund de Conuers ad Clericos ca. 29. being giuen ouer to a reprobate sense saith Bernard they doe the things which are not conuement for it is a shame saith he to name the things which are done in secret euen by the Bishops men with men working filthinesse and receiuing the recompence of their owne errour Of this holy Clergy Clemangis to be short saith that he was h Ibid. Nonest apud me dubiuÌ„ plures nunc latrones in ecclesia repertum iri quam veros pastores Et postea Sacrorum eloquiorum studia cum suis professoribus in risum atque lâ—â—r brium omnibus versa sunt praesertim pontificibus qui suas traditiones diuinis longè man datis anteponunt Iam illud egregium praeclarissimum praedicandi officium solis quoâ—dam pastoribus attributum eisque maximè debitum ita apud eos viluit vt nihil magis indignâ—â— aut magis suae dignitatierubescendum existiment Et post Siquis bodie desidiosus est siquis à labore abhorrens siquis in otio luxuriari volens ad sacerdotium conuolat c. out of doubt that there were more theeues than true pastours that the studies of sacred Scriptures together with the professours thereof were with them become a matter of laughter and mockery specially with their Popes or Bishops who prefer their owne traditions far before Gods commandements that the most excellent duety of Preaching which was woont onely to belong vnto the Pastours was become so vile and base with them as that they thought nothing more vnworthy nothing whereof they were to be more ashamed that if there were a lasie fellow that would not worke and did desire to liue idlely and riotously he became a Priest and being so ioyned himselfe to the other voluptuous Priests who liuing rather after the rule of Epicurus than of Christ and diligently frequenting Ale-houses and Tauernes did spend their time in drinking in feasting and banquetting in playing at tables and tennise and being full gorged and drunke did fight and brawle and tumult and with foule mouths blaspheme the names of God and his Saints and thus ordered did come from their harlots company to the altar of God Thus Clemangis two hundred yeeres ago described the state of the Popish Clergy and it were infinite to set downe what others also haue written to the same effect and may we not iustly returne M. Bishops words vpon himselfe Are not these goodly lampes of the old religion as they call it and likely men to be chosen by Christ to giue light to others As for deuout religious soules we neede not doubt to affirme that they are farre more with vs than either Clergy or Cloister euer bred with them far moe remooued from the world not by place but by affection and conuersation wherein is that true retired life which Christ hath commended vnto vs. And for their Monkish life we are not desirous to be followers or partakers of it The filthinesse thereof was such as that it might well be said of their religious which of old was said of the Canaanites i Leu. 18.25 The Land was defiled by them therefore God visited their wickednesse vpon them and the land spued them out Clemangis noteth of their Monkes that k Clemang vt supra Quanto magis inter caeteros ecclesiae filios ex votis suae religiâ—nis perfecti esse debebant c. tantò ab his omnibus rebus licet eos videre magis alienos magis videlicet tenaces â—agis auaros magis seculari rei versis retrorsum animis immixtâ—s magis insuper lubricos indisciplinatos dissolutes inquietos c. nihil illis aequè odiosum quà m cella claustrum lectio oratio regula religio Quocirca monachi sunt exteriori habitu sed vita sed operibus sed internae conscientiae spurcitia à perfectione longissimè disiuncti whereas by the vowes of their religion they should haue beene more perfect than other more withdrawen from the world more continent more obedient they were so much the further off from all these things more holding more couetous more giuen to the world as hauing their mindes turned quite backeward more wanton vnmannerly dissolute vnquiet nothing so hatefull to them as their cell and cloister as reading and praying as their rule and religion being Monkes in outward habit but in life in workes by inward filthinesse of conscience far distant from perfection Hee saith anon after that l Ibid. De monialibus plura dicere verecundia prohibet ne non de coetu virginum deo dicataruÌ„ sed magis de lupanaribus de dolis procacia meretricum de stupris incestuosis operibus prolixè sermonem trahamus Nam quid obsecro aliud sunt hoc tempore puellarum monasteria nisi quaedam non dico dei sanctuaria sed veneris execranda prosâ—ibula sed lâ—sciuorum impudicorum iuuenum ad explendas libidines receptacula vt idem sit hodie virginem velare quod publicè ad scortandum exponere of their Nunnes he was a shamed to speake lest he should make long speech not of companies of virgins dedicated to God but rather of stewes and brothell houses of the wiles and bold impudency of harlots of whoredome and incest For what else are the Monasteries of virgins saith he but the accursed stewes of Venus receptacles of wanton and vnchast yoong men for the fulfilling of their lusts so as that it is all one at this day to veile a virgin as to set her foorth to be a common whoore m Specul eccle Pont. ex Theodorico de Nâ—em Fornicantur quamplures huiusmâ—di Monialium cum eisdem suis Pralatis ac Monachis in ijsdem Monasterijs plures parturiunt filios filias quos ab eisdem Praelatis Monachis incestuoso coitu conceperunt They play the harlots saith Niem with their Prelats and Monkes and bring foorth in their Monasteries or Nunneries many sonnes and daughters which are incestuously by them begotten But let me giue ouer and not striue too long where there is such a filthy stinke If this be the extraordinary piety and deuotion which M. Bishop commendeth let him take it to him and his we will content our selues with that ordinary course and condition wherein Christ and his Apostles and the first Christians did liue And in conforming our selues to them we doubt not but that we are to God a true Christian congregation howsoeuer to M. Bishop wee seeme strange who should rather thinke strange of his owne dreame that Christ hath specially chosen them of whom he neuer spake and whose life hath beene and is no other but the dishonour of the name of Christ whose example is pernicious vnto men and whose praiers proceeding from so vncleane thoughts cannot but be lothsome vnto God Whether therefore wee consider the persons that serue God or the place where he is serued or the maner of his Diuine
our confidence in them which we are to put in God onely and not increatures of which notwithstanding the Church consisteth Which exposition wee acknowledge conteineth the very trueth agreeable to Gods word and doe wish that they would alwaies continue constant therein But they doe heerein as their vsuall maner is what by euidence of truth they are forced to say in one place for the maintenance of their owne traditions and superstitions they vnsay it or qualifie it in another And in this sort M. Bishop heere dealeth who first inclining somewhat to that construction alreadie mentioned and telling vs that to beleeue in a thing is to make it our Creatour by giuing our whole heart vnto it alleageth notwithstanding that some ancient Doctours take the words to beleeue in not so precisely but say that wee may beleeue in the church and in Saints heereby to make way to his absurd conceits which none of the ancient Doctours dreamed of it is true indeed that Epiphanius and Cyril haue vsed that maner of speech by adding the preposition in to the rest of the articles I beleeue in one holy Catholike church in one Baptisme in the remission of sinnes in the resurrection of the body in the life eternal but yet making thereof no other construction than we do as if the article were away To beleeue in the church was with them as M. Bishop saith to beleeue certainly in the Catholike church to be the onely true company of Christians and thereof we contend not wee beleeue the same as well as they though not in M. Bishops meaning which neuer was any part of their meaning that the Catholike church should be meant in any speciall maner of the church of Rome But whereas he addeth it is another part of their construction that to the lawfull gouernours thereof that is as he intendeth to the Pope and his Cardinals and Bishops it appertaineth to declare both which bookes be Canonicall and what is the true meaning of all doubtfull places in them he verie shamefully abuseth the ancient Doctours of whom there is not one that hath noted any such matter to be conteined in the Creed If hee know any let him acquaint vs therewith if hee know none let him confesse to his Reader as he must that he hath sought to deceiue him with a lie The same I say of beleeuing in Saints for which of the ancient Doctours hath taught vs out of our Creed that we are to beleeue in them He telleth vs what they meant by it that wee beleeue the Saints in heauen to heare our praiers to be carefull to pray for vs and to be able to obteine by intreatie much at Gods hands But what a strange man is he that will tell vs what men meant by words which they neuer spake Surely to beleeue in Saints is no antiquitie but nouelty and the deuice of him who by beleeuing in Saints seeketh to draw men away from beleefe in God The Apostle telleth vs that f Rom. 10 17. Faith is by hearing and hearing by the word of God Thereupon Basil gathereth thus g Basil Ethit reg 80. Si quicquid ex fide non est peccatum est fides verò ex auditu auditus autem pâ—r verbum Dei est ergo quicquid extra diuinam Scripturam est cùm ex fide non sit peccatum est If whatsoeuer is not of faith bee sinne and faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the word of God surely whatsoeuer is beside the Scripture of God because it is not of faith is sinne Let M. Bishop then shew vs some word of God some warrant of Scripture that it is one point of faith to beleeue in Saints or if hee cannot so doe we must rest perswaded as we are that to beleeue in Saints is to sinne against God And if we may not beleeue in Saints then neither may we pray vnto them for h Rom. 10.14 how shall they call vpon him saith the Apostle in whom they haue not beleeued And seeing praier is i Grego Moral lib. 22. cap. 13. Vera postulatio non in oris est vocibus sed in cogitationibus cordis not a matter of the lippes but of the heart how can wee beleeue that the Saints in heauen heare our praiers when as the word of God telleth vs that k 1. King 8.39 it is God only which knoweth the hearts of all the children of men Againe seeing God hath himselfe named vnto vs the Mediator by whose intrety l Mat. 3.17 Ephe. 3.12 for whose sake he wil accept vs and in whom he will be m Iohn 14.13 glorified for the granting of our requests who n Rom. 8.34 sitteth at the right hand of God and o Heb. 7.25 euer liueth to make intercession for vs how can we call it faith and not rather impudent presumption that we of our owne heads should set vp euery Saint in heauen to be a Master of requests and disturbe that order which God himselfe hath appointed for our accesse to him Admit that in generality they pray for the consummation of their brethren they pray in fellowship of loue not by authority of mediation as ioined in affection with vs not as by specialtie of fauour appointed to be patrons for vs for in that respect it is true which Saint Austin telleth vs that p August in Psam 64. Solus ibi ex his qui carnem gustaverunt interpellat pro nobis of all that haue beene partakers of flesh it is Christ onely in heauen that maketh intercession for vs. To conclude we haue heard before out of the Catechisme that our beleeuing in God requireth all our confidence and trust to be placed in God onely Accordingly Cyprian saith that q Cyprian de dupl martyr Non credit in deum qui non in eo solo collocat totius felicitatis suae fidutiam he beleeueth not in God that placeth not the confidence of all his happinesse in God onely But beleeuing in Saints cannot be vnderstood but to import putting of trust and confidence in them Therefore we cannot beleeue in Saints but with the ouerthrow of our beleefe and trust in God And that the Popish beleeuing in Saints importeth the putting of their trust and confidence in them it plainly appeareth as by other their offices of deuotion so specially by their Ladies Psalter wherein they blasphemously vse to the Virgin Marie those words whereby Dauid professed his trust in God r Psalter Mariae Psal 7. Domina in te speraui de inimicis meis libera animam meam Psal 10. In domina confido propter dulcedinem misericordiae nominis sui psal 21. Quia ego speraui in gratia tua sempiternum a me opprobrium abstulisti Psal 45. Domina refugium nostrum tu es in omni necessitate nostra Psal 53 Domina in nomine tuo saluum me fac O Lady in thee haue I hoped deliuer my soule from mine enemies I
dum esset in inferno fuisse in loco pâ—â—â—ae sed sine poena the soule of Christ when it was in hell was in a place of punishment but yet without punishment It should seeme then by these that there is not so great agreement amongst them concerning this article as that M. Bishop should haue any great heart to obiect disagreement amongst vs. As for the expositions which he citeth on our part setting aside the fourth they all containe truth according to the Scripture though happily they doe not fitly expresse the meaning of this article yea they all are anouched by some of his owne side That Christ endured the agonies and anguishes of soule that belong to our damnation in hell Caluin affirmeth to bee the meaning of this article The thing it selfe is affirmed for a truth by their owne Cardinall Cusanus that h Nicol. Causan Excitat lib. 10. ex sermone in iliud Qui per sp sanctum se metipsum obtulit Passio Christi qua maior nulla potest esse suit vt damnatorum qui â—agis damnari nequeunt scilicet vsque ad poenam infernalem Etibid Illam poenam sensus confâ—rnem daemnatis in inferno pati voluit in gloriam der patris sui the passion and suffering of Christ than which none can be greater was the like as of the damned which cannot be more condemned euen vnto the paines of hell and that Christ would suffer that paine of sense and feeling correspondent to the damned in hell to the glory of his father The like in effect doth their Friar i Ferus in Math. 27. Poenam meritum peccatorum quae sunt Frigus calor efuries sitis timor trâ—pidatio horror mortis horor inferni desperatio mors infernus ipse in se transferens Ferus discourse at large writing vpon those words of Christ vpon the crosse My God my God why hast thou forsaken me That this taken in no other meaning than they speake it is a truth I haue before shewed in k Sect. 13.14 answer to the Preface but that it must necessarily be taken to be the meaning of this article I will not contend because it may be conteined in the other article of the crosse and suffering of Christ So neither will I say that it is the intent of this article that Christ was buried in the graue albeit that he was so is a truth of Scripture and they that affirme that there is nothing else meant by his descending into hell may so much the more be confirmed therein for that Andradius one of their owne greatest Scholars and a chosen defender of the Councell of Trent resolueth that in l Andrad Defens fidei Trident lib. 2. Animaduerta mus infernum hoc loco solutis doloribus inferni Act. 2 pro morte atque sepulchro Hebraeorum dicendi more vsurpari vt Psa 15. is quem mox Petrus citat Quoniam non dereâ—â—quisti an man in inferno c. some of the chiefe places whereby Christs descent to hell is prooued there is nothing meant by hell but death and the graue onely The third exposition addeth nothing to the second but only a circumstance of continuance and abiding in the state of death and of the graue which in like sort is true though we may well refuse it as touching the meaning of this article The fourth exposition which he alleageth out of Luther Smideline and others whether truely or not I cannot tell namely that Christ after death went to hell in soule there to be punished for our sinnes swarueth indeed from the truth but yet Suarez the Iesuit out of Medina confesseth that m Suarez in Thom. Aqui. p. 3. q. 52. art 8. disp 43. §. 1. Me lina dicit a iquos Catholicos sensisse ChrifluÌ„passuÌ„ esse aliquas extrinsecas poenas daÌ„naâ—â—â—â— in inferno some Catholikes as hee calleth them haue thought the same namely that Christ suffered some extrinsecall paines of the damned in hell and how neerely Thomas Aquinas commeth thereto we haue seene before The last construction which aboue all other he nameth ridiculous is their very owne he leaudly belieth the Protestants in that hee attributeth it to the most of them namely that Christs going to Paradise is meant by his descending into hell They say that the soule of Christ went immediatly to Abrahams bosome as being a part of hell there to continue till his resurrection But yet he saith to the theefe n Luk. 23.43 This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise It must needs bee therefore by their opinion that Abrahams bosome must be Paradise and so that Christs descending into hell importeth that hee went to Paradise which if it be to expound a thing by the flat contrary of it let him thanke his owne for the folly of it as for vs we haue nothing to doe with it There remaineth after all these the common receiued opinion of our church that the soule of Christ being departed from the body as the letter of the text importeth went to hell as a King into the prison not to be holden in it but to declare his power and command ouer it to bid Satan defiance in his owne kingdome and vpon his owne ground and in himselfe to carry away by way of spoile all them whose person and cause he had vndertaken and whom he had by the grace of his foreknowledge and election made members of himselfe 10. W. BISHOP 6. Concerning Christs resurrection they doe also erre For whereas a resurrection is the rising vp of the very same body that died with all his naturall parts they denie Christ to haue taken againe the same bloud which he shed in his passion Cal. in 27. Math. Perkins pag. 194. In. ca. 24. Lucae and yet is the bloud one notable part of the body Caluin also affirmeth it to be an old wiues dreame to thinke that in Christs hands and feete there remaine the print of nailes and the wound in his side notwithstanding that Christ shewed them to his Disciples and offered them to bee touched of Saint Thomas 7. About Christs ascension into heauen they doe somewhat dissent from the truth For some of them say that Christs body did not pearce through the heauens by vertue of a glorious body lest they should thereby be compelled to grant that two naturall bodies may be together in one place and therefore as well one true body in two places at once but that broad gappes were made in the lower heauens to make him way to the highest which is very ridiculous and more against true Philosophy they say also 1 Cor. 15. vers 21. Coll. 1.18 Beza inc 2. Actorum L. 1. ar 25. de concor Caluinist that he was not the first man that entred into the possession of heauen which is flat against the Scriptures that call Christ the first fruits and first begotten of the dead Thirdly they locke Christ so closely vp in heauen that they
It is not easie to finde what is their setled opinion touching theforgiuenesse of originall sinne in Infants Some attribute it to Baptisme but that cannot stand with their common doctrine that Sacraments haue no vertue in them to remit sinnes or to giue grace Others say that God without any meanes doth then when they be baptised of himselfe immediately iustifie them But that cannot stand in their owne doctrine because Infants want the instrument of faith to lay hold on that 〈◊〉 then offered by God and therefore cannot being so young take it vnto them Others will haue Infants sanctified in their mothers wombe by vertue of a couenant which they suppose God to haue made with old father Abraham and all his faithfull seruants that forsooth their seed shall bee holy But this is most phantasticall and contrary to the Scriptures and daily experience for Isaac was the sonne of promise and yet Esau his sonne was areprobate Dauids father was a godly Israelite and yet Dauid affirmeth Psal 51. that he himselfe was conceiued in iniquities and we may see whole Countries now turned Turkes whose ancestors were good Christians therefore not all the soules of the faithfull are sanctified in their mothers wombes Secondly how euill soeuer they agree about the remission of sinne yet there is a perfect consent among them that such relikes of originall sin remaine in euery man baptised and sanctified that it infecteth all and euery worke he doth with deadly sin yea that which remaineth is properly sinne in it selfe though it be not imputed to the partie so that sinne is alwaies in them though their sinnes be neuer so well forgiuen And as for the Sacrament of Penance by which we hold all sinnes committed after Baptisme to be forgiuen they doe renounce the benefit of it and are at vtter defiance with it R. ABBOT If wee were as full of differences in our doctrine as M. Bishops head is full of idle fancies it should be hard indeed to finde any setled opinion amongst vs whereas now our opinion being setled he out of sundry termes and words that are vsed in the expressing thereof dreameth of great difference and vncertainty amongst vs. Originall sin how it is forgiuen to Infants The matter is concerning the forgiuenesse of originall sinne in Infants Some saith he attribute it to baptisme And whom I maruell doth he know that doth otherwise Who of vs doth not acknowledge baptisme to be Gods instrument for the actuall application of that grace which hee hath intended towards vs in Iesus Christ before the foundation of the world which notwithstanding hath his effect not by the very worke wrought or by any vertue infused into the water or by any power giuen to the very words and syllables that are pronounced but by the assisting power of the holy Ghost accompanying the outward Sacrament to giue grace and forgiuenesse of sinnes not indifferently or generally but a Rom. 4.5 vulgat Eph. 1.5.9 according to the purpose of the grace of God Now of this that wee say that it is the holy Ghost which in baptisme worketh the effect of grace hee out of the abundance of his wit frameth another opinion which with vs is no other but onely the explication of the former As for his exception that children haue not the instrument of faith to lay hold on the grace of God which is offered in baptisme it auaileth nothing because children are brought to baptisme though not in their owne faith whereof they are vncapable yet in the faith of their parents who apprehending the promise of God according to the tenour thereof both for b Gen. 17.7 themselues and for their children doe thereby deriue and transport vnto them an interest in the grace of God whereby they are sacred and holy vnto God and are therefore by baptisme to be receiued to be made partakers of that grace Heere againe M. Bishop imagineth a third opinion whereas still there is nothing said but what is dependant vpon the first And this third opinion he deliuereth according to his owne absurd conceit thereof and not according to that that by vs is intended We say nothing but what the Scripture hath taught vs that c 1. Cor. 7.14 Children of faithfull parents how vnderstood holy the children of faithfull parents are holie Hee betwixt his pride and ignorance will take no knowledge that the Scripture so speaketh thereby to giue a true sense and meaning of that it saith but scornefully derideth it and out of his owne distempered braines bringeth a foolish reason to dispute against it This is most phantasticall saith he and contrary to the Scriptures and daily experience And how so Forsooth Isaac was the sonne of promise and yet Esau his sonne was a reprobate and many children of Christians afterwards become Turkes Therefore the children of the faithfull are not sanctified in their mothers wombe But did not his eies see that out of his owne doctrine a man might by the same argument ouerthrow the sanctification of baptisme also for in like sort a man may say The children of many faithfull become reprobates and castwaies therefore the children of the faithfull are not sanctified in baptisme which I suppose he will not admit Surely he knoweth that by the doctrine of their schooles sanctification once had may afterwards be lost and that many reprobates are for the time partakers thereof It is then no argument to say that because many children of the faithfull are reprobates therefore they were not sanctified in their mothers wombe because as hee will say of them who are sanctified in baptisme so it may be answered him of them who are sanctified in their mothers wombe that by apostasie they forgoe that which by grace they had receiued I speake not this to affirme that sanctification which he imagineth but onely to shew him the sillinesse of his argument whereby he impugneth it His other instance as he setteth it downe is as weake as that Dauids father was a godly Israelite and yet Dauid affirmeth that hee himselfe was conceiued in iniquities For though Dauid were conceiued in iniquities yet that letteth not but that after his conception hee might be sanctified in his mothers wombe But we doe not onely make him say that he was conceiued in iniquitie but also that hee was d Psal 51.5 borne in sinne euen as we confesse generally of all that e Aug. Enchir. ca. 33. Cum hac quippe ira dei omnis homo nascitur wee are borne guilty of the wrath of God f Eph. 2.3 the children of wrath and that vnlesse the grace of Christ doe thencefoorth releeue vs g Iohn 3.36 the wrath of God abideth vpon vs. When therefore the Apostle saith that the children of beleeuing parents are holy we doe not thereby vnderstand any inward indowment or gift of holinesse but onely that they are with vs to bee holden and accounted as belonging vnto God and comprehended within his couenant that
very childish and vaine that other praiers may be made vnto God very acceptably and that other praiers are vsed by Christ and set downe in the Gospel because in other praiers there may bee nothing and in the praiers set downe in the Gospel there is nothing but what is consonant and agreeable to this form For though praier be conceiued in other words yet it varieth not from this forme so long as wee pray to no other but to whom in this forme wee are directed nor for any other thing but what in this praier is concluded And albeit M. Bishop can alleage that in the Gospell and otherwhere there are other praiers vsed and set down beside the Lords praier yet in the whole course of Scripture can hee finde vs no example of any praier but to God alone If hee did bring vs example of praier to Saints somewhat it were but now it is idle that he alleageth that there are praiers in other words But he telleth vs that they gather praier to Saints out of S. Pauls requesting the Romans Corinthians others to pray for him And well indeed they may if they can prooue that S. Paul in the same sort praid to the Romans others to pray for him as they pray to the Saints in heauen to pray for theÌ„ But if that which S. Paul did were but a familiar request of mutuall charitie wheras their praier to Saints is a seruice of religious dutie and hee did beseech them onely as fellow members of the same body to giue assistance to his praiers not as Mediatours as they make the Saints to obteine for their sakes the acceptance thereof then doth M. Bishop shew himselfe a ridiculous man that will draw from the one of these a conclusion of the other Or if he will needs confound the one of these with the other it shall be well that his disciples that craue the help of his praiers do take their ghostly father and set him vp like sweete S. Rood and deuoutly kneele downe and pray vnto him But if to craue ech others praiers be piety and to doe that ech to other which they doe to the Saints be damnable idolatrie then it is apparent that they gather that which was neuer sowed and doe colourably alleage these instances for the abusing and blinding of simple men As for a Matt. 15.22 the woman of Canaan we reade that she praied to Christ for her daughter but we doe not reade that her daughter praied to her and wee finde that by her praier she shewed her compassion but that shee tooke vpon her any power of mediation wee doe not finde b Chrysost ex varijs in Math. locis hom 17. Vide prudentiam mulieris non rogat Iacobum non obsecrat Ioannem neque pergit ad Petrum nec intendit ApostoloruÌ„ chorum non quaesiuit mediatorem sed pro omnibus illis poenitentiam accepit comitem quae aduâ—cati locum in pleuit sic ad summum fontemperrexit But whereas hee addeth the disciples speaking to Christ for her hee sheweth little discretion therein because it appeareth not that they spake for her but onely requested their master to send her away as being offended at her importunate crying And so little helpe is there out of this example for praier to Saints as that Chrysostom rather giueth vs hereby a note to except against it Behold saith he the wisedome of this woman she requesteth not lames she intreateth not Iohn she goeth not to Peter she looketh not to the company of the Apostles she seeketh for no mediatour but in stead of them all she taketh repentance for her companion which supplied the place of an aduocate and so went to the well-head And whereas he hath before demanded of her c Ibid. Dic mihi mulier quemadmodum ausa es cùm sis peccatrix iniqua accedere ad Chrisium Ego inquit nouâ— quid agam c. propterea descendit propterea carnem assumpsit honâ—o factus est vt ego ei audeam loqui Tell me woman how durst thou being a sinfull and wicked woman thus come to Christ he bringeth her in answering I know what I doe therefore descended he from heauen therefore did hee take flesh and became man that I might be bold to speake vnto him It should seeme then that it is a point of godly wisedome neither to goe to one Saint nor other but to goe directly to Christ himselfe and not to be terrified by the conscience of our sinnes because for that purpose he became man that wee might be bold to come to him and to seeke of him the remission thereof But M. Bishop addeth another wise reason and well beseeming his learning If it had been either needlesse or bootlesse to haue prated vnto God any otherwise than in the name and mediation of Christ then S. Paul would not haue requested the helpe of mortall mens traiers vnto God for him As if S. Paul when hee requested them to pray for him did intend that they should pray otherwise for him than in the name and by the mediation of Iesus Christ He praieth for them and they pray for him not to be heard ech for others sake but all to be heard for Christs sake d Aug. cont epis Parmen l. 2. c. 8. Sic oratio pro in uicemmembroruÌ„ omniuÌ„ adhuc in terra laborantium ascendit ad caput in quo est propitiatio pro peccatis nostris Thus as Austen saith the praier of all the members labouring vpon the earth ech for other goeth vp to the head who is gone before into heauen in whom is the propitiation for our sinnes Now therefore M. Bishop very vainly inferreth that if poore sinners praiers may helpe vs much more may the intercession of the glorious saints because poore sinners praiers doe not helpe vs by way of mediation but onely in louing care they ioyne themselues to pray with vs that we may both be helped for Christs sake whereas Popish intercession of Saints intendeth not so much that the Saints should pray for vs for Christs sake as that Christ should accept vs for the Saints sake As for the fauour of the Saints wee know God fauoureth vs no lesse than hee fauoureth them being redeemed with the same bloud and by one spirit sealed to the same hope and no more will hee suffer an elect to perish on earth than he will suffer a Saint to perish in heauen Whatsoeuer M. Bishop will plead for their fauour sure we are that they haue no fauour in this respect and therefore without assuming any thing to themselues they haue left vs to depend vpon Christs fauour as they haue done Now heere againe see saith he the question of the intercession of Saints whereas he hath taken paines to skip ouer that question also and hath said nothing of it But remembring himselfe hee goeth further heere and saith that if that onely forme of praier were to be vsed neither were
bee the figure of Christs body Yea but Christ saith he saith not that it is the figure of his body but his body And euen so S. Paul saith not that the rocke was a figure of Christ but h 1. Cor. 10.4 The rocke was Christ i August in Leuit. q. 57. Quod vtique non erat per substantiam sed per significationem which yet saith Austin was not Christ in substance but in signification If S. Paul might say that the rocke was Christ though in substance it were not so then might Christ say of bread this is my body though it bee not so in substance but in signification and power onely euen as hath beene k Sect. 48. before said that Sacraments commonly beare the names of those things whereof they are sacraments and that because though they be signes and figures yet they are such signes as doe by the ordinance of God truely and effectually exhibite and yeeld to the faith of the beleeuer the heauenly and spirituall grace that is signified thereby Now when we say that the Sacrament is thus the figure of Christs body how doe wee meane it but of his bodie which was giuen for our redemption vpon the crosse and therefore that addition set downe by M. Bishop is impertinent and maketh nothing at all for him 60. W. BISHOP Fiftly 1. Cor. 10.16 S. Paul demandeth thus the Chalice of benediction which we doe blesse is it not the communication of the bloud of Christ and the bread that we breake is it not the participation of the body of our Lord if then wee doe in receiuing the blessed Sacrament participate Christs body and communicate his bloud they surely are there really present R. ABBOT We doe in receiuing the blessed Sacrament participate Christs body and communicate his bloud and yet they are not there really present because wee participate Christs body by faith in spirit and soule not in body by the mouth and belly as hath beene before shewed S. Austin supposing Christ to be absent in body yet teacheth vs how wee receiue him when he saith a Aug. in Ioan. tract 50. Quomodo tenebo absentem quomodo in coelum manum mitâ—am vt ibi sedentem teneam fidem mitte tenuisti How shall I lay hold of him being absent how shall I put vp my hand to heauen to lay hold of him sitting there send vp thy faith saith he and thou hast taken hold of him There needeth then no reall presence for the receiuing of Christs body but by faith we lay hold thereof sitting at the right hand of God the father 61. W. BISHOP Againe S. Paul saith He that eateth and drinketh vnwoorthely 1. Cor. 11.28 eateth and drinketh iudgement to himselfe not discerning the body of our Lord and before is guilty of the body and bloud of Christ ergo the body and bloud of Christ are there present or else why should a man incurre that guilt but by his vnwoorthy receiuing of it and by not discerning Christs body to be there present R. ABBOT M. Bishop thinketh that we doe indignitie to the Saints when wee pull downe their images which they worship and yet hee will not say that those images are the Saints themselues and can he not conceiue that in the dishonor of the sacrament is the dishonour of Christ though the sacrament be not verily Christ himselfe but the representatâ—on and signe of his body and bloud the despight and villaine that is done to the Princes picture or seale is construed to be an indignitie to the Prince and so will the Apostle haue vs to conceiue of the Sacrament of the bodie and bloud of Christ It is by Gods ordinance to vs and in our vse as it were the body and bloud of Christ and therefore iustly is he said not to discerne the Lords body and to be guiltie of the body and bloud of Christ who vnreuerently and with contempt presumeth to offer himselfe to these mysteries of Christ though Christ himselfe be not really present in the vsage thereof 62. W. BISHOP Besides all these plaine texts of holy Scripture in confirmation of the reall presence the very circumstances of it doe much fortifie our faith therein In S. Luke we haue Luc. 22.15 that our Sauiour maruellously desired desiderio desideraui to eat that this last banquet with his Diâ—ciples S. Iohn addeth that whereas he loued his that were in the world vnto the end he loued them and knowing that the Father gaue all things into his hands and that he came from God and goeth to God c. What coherence I say with this exceeding loue and infiâ—â—te power of Christ to bee shewed in his last supper if he hath left onely bread and wine to bee taken in remembrance of him any meane man might easily haue done as much and Helias departing from his Disciple Heliseus did much more for hee left a more noble remembrance of himselfe behinde him to wit his cloake and double spirit But Christ bequeathing vs his true naturall body to bee the foode of our soules and comfort of our hearts as wee beleeue and teach he then indeed shewed his iâ—finite power and loue towards vs and that he came from God and as God bestowed an inestimable gift vpon vs such a one as neuer any other did or could possibly doe R. ABBOT It is truly said by Tertullian that a Tertul. de Baptism Nihil adeò est quod obiurat mentes hominum quà m simplicitas diuinorum operum quae in actu videntur magnificentia quae in effectu repromittitur c. nothing so much offendeth mens mindes in the Sacraments as the simplicitie of Gods works as they seeme in act and the magnificence which is promised in effect M. Bishop looking to the outward signes in the Lords supper taketh the same to be a simple token of Christs exceeding loue towards vs a matter that any man might doe and not so much as that that Elias left to his scholar Elizeus Thus in his blinde fancie hee amplifieth the matter as if wee taught that Christ in his last supper had recommended nothing to vs but bread and wine But let him vnderstand that we see and teach in this sacrament the exceeding great loue of Christ not in those simple creatures which we see in act but in the magnificence of grace which is promised in effect If wee consider these creatures in act they are but bread and wine but consider them in vse and effect and then this bread is heauenly bread the bread of life the food of immortalitie there is in it the spirit of Christ euen the power of the word of God not onely feeding but also sanctifying and clensing the soule I will expresse it by M. Bishops owne words that Christ hath bequeathed and heereby giueth vnto vs his true naturall body to be the food of our soules of our soules I say not of our bodies which if he did rightly meane
modò in Graecum idioma conuersi sunt sed in Romanam quoque linguam Aegyptiam c. semelque vt dicam in linguas â—mnes quibus omnes gentes in hunc diem vtuntur that the bookes of the old Testament were translated noâ— onely into the Greeke tongue but also the Latine Aegyptian Persian Indian Armenian Scythian all tongues which all Nations vsed at that time But of that that Beda saith that the Latine tongue by meditation of the Scriptures became common to the rest M. Bishop maketh a very poore and simple collection that they needed not to haue learned the Latin tongue for the studying of the Scriptures if the Scriptures had beene translated into their owne mother languages As if he should say that because we haue the scriptures now translated into our English tongue therefore we need not for the studying of the Scriptures learne the Latine Greeke and Hebrew tongues The absurdity of which connexion is such as that we may thinke M. Bishop out of his wits that would so much disgrace himselfe as to be the authour of it 14. Another notorious vntruth and most malicious slander he saith I cast out against Austin the Moonke whom he tearmeth our English Apostle of whom I say in my answer that t Answer to the Epistle sect 31. p. 198. he being offended at the bishops of the Britons for that they refused to be subiect to his Romish authority prouoked against them Ethelbert then King of Kent by whose procurement an army of Infidels was sent to slay them who cruelly and vnmercifully performed the slaughter not sparing them who in their shirts came foorth to them to intreat mercy For the iustifying wherof he saith I can produce no ancient authour but am glad to shroud my selfe vnder an old namelesse Chronicle cited by the Arch-liar and late partiall writer Iewel I doe not maruell that Bishop Iewel in his reckoning is a liar because he knoweth that where Bishop Iewel is not taken for a liar there he and his fellowes must be accounted so to be But as touching the story if his eies had serued him he might haue seene that I cited not the old Cronicle onely alleaged by Bishop Iewel but also Galfridus Monumetensis whom in the beginning of that narration I quoted as a witnesse therof who out of the ancient British story reporteth that u Galfrid Monumetens lib. 11. cap. 12. Augustino petenti ab Episcopis Britonibus subiectionem c. Dinoâ—t diuersis argumentationibus ipsos ei nullam subiectionem debere respondit Et. c. 13. Edelbertus rex Cantiorum vt vidit Britones dedignantes subiectionem Augustino facere c. hoc graâ—issime ferens EdelfriduÌ„ regem Northanumbrorum caeteros regulos Saxonum instimulauit vt collecto grandi exercitu in ciuitatem Bangor Abbatem Dinoot caeteros Clericos qui eos spernerent perditum irent c. Edelfridus ciuitate capta cuÌ„ intellexisset causam aduentus MonachoruÌ„ vt pro salute populi sui orarentâ— iussit in eos primum arma verti et sic mille duâ—enti corum in ipsa die martyrio decorati regni caelestis adepti sunt sedem in the city of Bangor there was a most noble Church of 1200. Monks all liuing with the labour of their hands Their Abbot was named Dinoâ—ch a man maruellously well learned who by diuers arguments made it appeare when Austin required the Bishops to be subiect vnto him that they ought him no subiection Edelbert therefore the King of Kent assoone as he saw them refuse to yeeld obedience to Austin and despise his preaching sturred vp Edelfride other princes of the Saxons to gather a great army and to goe to Bangor to destroy Dinoochand his Clergy Who taking the city commanded the swords of his men to be turned first vpon the Monks and so twelue hundred of them the same day decked with Martyrdome entred the kingdome of heauen By which record it is plaine that though that slaughter were not committed by Ethelbert as M. Bishop saith yet by the procurement of Ethelbert as I affirmed it was done Albeit our English Chronicle cited x Defence of the Apology part 5. in the beginning by M. Iewell deliuereth that both the Kings Ethelbert and Edelfride ioyned their power together and so the murther was committed by them both Austin also meeting them at Leicester as they were going to the place where that act was done Moreouer he citeth a Chronicle written in French by one y Ibid. Thomas Gray aboue two hundred yeeres agoe wherein it is said that Austin being so refused of the Bishops and other learned of the Britans made such complaint thereof to Ethelbert King of Kent that foorthwith he leuied his power and marched against them and slew them in most cruell wise hauing no more regard of mercy then a woolfe hath vpon a sheep So then it should seeme that neither Austin nor Ethelbert were free of that bloudy and cruell murther howsoeuer M. Bishop doe his good will to cleere them both Yea by that which Beda reporteth it may be well coniectured that Austins hands were not free of it for that he threatned them when he saw they would not yeeld to him z Beda hist li. 2. cap. 2. fertur minitans praedixisse quòd si pacem cum fratribus accipere nollent bellum ab hostibus forent accepturi that if they would not accept of peace with their brethren they should finde warre of their enemies But it may better be coniectured by the same answer as in two written Cronicles in the Library of Baliol Colledge in Oxford it is expressed where it is not they should finde warre of their enemies but * Polychron magn Polychron Monachi Cistrensis Quòd qui pacem cum fratribus accipere nollent bellum ab eisdem forent accepturi if they would not accept of peace with their brethren they should ab eisdem of them or from them finde warre and reuenge plainely importing that he himselfe would procure the same For whereas M. Bishop alleageth out of Beda that Austin was dead and buried many yeeres before that slaughter happened Bishop Iewel sheweth that therein they haue for Austins credit falsified the Latine story of Beda because by Beda translated by Alfred seuen hundred yeeres agoe into the Saxon tongue the contrary plainely appeareth that Austin after that slaughter was aliue Yea he produceth a Charter of the Church of Canterbury yet extant and to be seene which was granted and confirmed by King Ethelbert and by Austin accepted and subscribed the same yeare that that was done whereby it is without all controuersie manifest and cleere that it is false which M. Bishop saith that Austin was dead many yeares before And for some further coniecture of this matter I wil not omit to note out of Doct. Powell his history of Wales certaine verses of that famous and renowmed Poet Ambrosius Telesinus or Taliessin surnamed in his time