his booke Rationale Diuinorum the reasons of diuine seruice And as for bodylie rites we vse but fewe and those very decent full of reuerence and most fit to stirre vp and cherish deuotion We be not spirits and therefore must serue God by bodylie ceremonies although the life and vertue of them proceede from the spirit employing all partes of the body in his worshippe and to his honor that made it neither be they borrowed of Iewes nor of the Heathens albeit they might perhaps the one by the commandement of God the other by the light of nature vse some such like but ours were deuised by the inspiration of the holy Ghost the heauenly guide and directer of the Catholike Church to moue vs to serue God more deuoutly and with greater reuerence Now to say that we giue the same worship to any Saint that we giue to God is a stale jest that hath long sithence lost all his grace being found to be nothing else but a notorious vntruth very often confuted as by others else where so by me more then once in this booke where also these other slanders here cast vpon vs are more at large in their seuerall places discussed this therefore may serue in this place for an answere to those imputations of Atheismes which Master PERKINS objecteth against vs. And for that this crime of Atheisme is the most heynous that can be as contrariewise the true opinion of the God-head and the sincere worshippe thereof is the most sweete and beautifull flower of religion let vs therefore here to hold due correspondence with Master PERKINS examine the Protestantes doctrine concerning the nature of God and their worshippe of him that the indifferent reader comparing judiciouslie our two opinions thereof together may embrace that for most pure and true that carryeth the most reuerent and holy conceite thereof For out of all doubt there can be no greater motiue to any deuout soule to like of a religion then to see that it doth deliuer a most sacred doctrine of the Soueraigne Lord of heauen and earth and doth withall most religiously adore and serue him Whereas on the other side there is not a more forcible persuasion to forsake a religion before professed then to be giuen to vnderstand that the Masters of that religion teach many absurde thinges concerning the God-head it selfe and doe as coldly and as slightly worshippe God almighty as may be Marke therefore I beseech thee gentle reader for thy owne soules sake what euidence I shall deliuer in against the Protestantes touching this point of Atheisme and following the same method that M. PER. obserueth I will first touch their errors against the most blessed Trinity and Deity secondly such as are against our Lord Iesus God and man lastly I will speake one word or two about their seruice and worshipping of God All which shall be performed in a much more temperate manner then the grauity of such a matter requireth that it may be lesse offensiue Concerning the sacred Trinity it is by the doctrine of certayne principall pillers of their newe Gospell brought into great question Lib. 1. Instit c. 13. ss 23. 25. Con. rationes Camp pag. 152. For Iohn Caluin in diuers places teacheth that the second third persons of the Trinity doe not receiue the God-head from the first but haue it of themselues euen as the first person hath And in this he is defended by M. Whitaker and preferred before all the learned Fathers of the first councell of Nice Out of which position it followeth that there is neither Father nor Sonne in the God-head for according vnto common sence and the vniforme consent of all the learned he only is a true naturall Sonne that by generation doth receiue his nature and substance from his Father We are called the Sonnes of God but that is by adoption and grace but he only is the true naturall Sonne of God that by eternall generation receiued his substance that is the God-head from him If therefore the second person did not receiue the God-head from the first but had it of himselfe as they doe affirme then certaynelie he is no true Sonne of the first and consequently the first person is no true Father For as all men confesse Father Sonne be correlatiues so that the one cannot be without the other Thus their doctrine is found to be faulty in the highest degree of Atheisme For it ouerthroweth both Father and Sonne in the Trinity And further if it were true then doth the holy Ghost proceede neither from the Father nor from the Sonne for it receiueth not the God-head from them at all as they hold but hath it of himselfe and so proceedeth no more from them then they doe from him consequently is not the third person Wherefore finally they doe ouerthrowe the whole Trinity the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost Secondly they may be truely stiled Atheistes who thinke any one to be God that hath not in him all singuler perfâ—ctions in the most perfect sort that can be but either wanteth some of them or else hath them in a meaner degree then any other they therefore that teach our Sauiour Christ in his God-head to be inferiour vnto his Father stand justly charged with Atheisme Such a one is * Epi. ad Polo pa. 940. seq Caluin who in formall tearmes doth auouch and say that Christ according to his God-head is lesse then his Father And else where he affirmeth In ca. 26 Matt. 64. CoÌ„ Stancar in locis ca. de Christo CoÌ„ Harding art 17. in the confuta of the Papists slanders the Father to hold the first ranke of honour and power and the Sonne to obtaine the second which he might haue learned of his great master Melancthon who taught that the Sonne according to his diuinity is his Fathers subject and minister Further that in Christ there was something of the nature of God some other thing then belike was wanting Againe that the God-head of Christ was obedient vnto his Father with whome our country-men Iewell and Fulke doe jumpe who affirme that the diuine nature of Christ offered sacrifice vnto his Father Briefly all Protestantes who hold Christ according to his diuine nature to haue beene a mediator make his God-head inferiour vnto God the Father For to be as a mediator must needes be a suppliant vnto another to pray and offer sacrifice to him is to acknowledge him to be his better and that something lyeth in his power to doe which the other of himselfe cannot doe but by sute must obtaine of him Ioyne here vnto that they doe expound most of the textes of holy Scripture vsed by the auncient Fathers to proue the blessed sacred Trinity euen as the old Arrians did reprouing the auncient Fathers exposition which cannot but argue that they in their hartes though they be yet ashamed to confesse it decline apace from those holy Fathers steps to fauour Arrianisme This
faith by which the hart doth really receiue Christ by resting vpon the promise which God hath made that he will giue Christ and his righteousnesse vnto euery true beleeuer Nowe then when God giueth Christ and his benefits and man by faith receiueth the same there riseth an vnion betweene them not forged but reall and so neare that none can be nearer and being a reall vnion there is a reall communion and consequently a reall presence of Christ to the hart of him that receiueth the Sacrament in faith And thus farre saith he doe we consent with the Romish Church It may well be that you agree herein with the Romish Church that is with some apish counterfeit of the Roman but the true Roman Church condemneth all that phantastical kinde of receiuing as you your selfe declare in the wordes following But before we come vnto them let vs note by the way some strange points of doctrine shall I say or rather dreaming of our conceited Masters the Protestants Who euer yet heard in true diuinitie that the God-head considered apart by it selfe had merits to conuey to the man-hood as M. PER. here teacheth for merits belong to an inferior in respect of his superior of whome he meriteth now the God-head is not inferior to any as all but Arrians confesse Againe howe can whole Christ be giuen to man as M. PER. first affirmeth if the substance of the God-head be not giuen as presently after he declareth for the substance of the God-head is the principal part of Christ who is both God man Moreouer how is Christes substance as well as his benefits made ours or really present to our faith if vve be made partakers only of his righteousnesse which may as euery man knoweth well be without any bodily presence of his besides that fiction of his that faith is created in our hart at the same instant that we receiue the Sacrament is very absurd For as all the world witnesseth a man must be indued vvith faith before he goe to receiue that Sacrament or else he presenteth himselfe most vnworthily vnto that holy table Lastly if simple men silly women should not receiue this Sacrament vntill they vnderstood M. PER. doctrine of sacramentall relation of his reall vnion and communion made by speciall faith in it as no man should receiue before he knoweth what and howe he is to receiue then surely they should neuer receiue it the manner of it is so intricate and so farre passing their capacity I may not omit here that which I clipped off in M. PER. discourse to make it the more perspicuous to wit that Christes benefits are bestowed vpon some by Gods imputation only vpon others they are bestowed by a kind of propagation which M. PER. cannot expresse fitly but doth resemble it thus As one candle is lighted by another and so the light of one is conueied vnto twenty candles euen so the inherent righteousnes of euery beleeuer is deriued from the store-house of righteousnesse which is the man-hood of Christ this I say I could not but let the gentle reader vnderstand that he may cōsider howe slippery vnconstant the man is in his owne doctrine In the question of justification it is high treason to confesse any inherent righteousnesse in vs. Pag. 66. For as he there saith it doth rase the very foundation of religion there only he alloweth of a certaine strange reall imputation of Christes justice vnto vs but here hauing belike forgotten that euer he said any such word he teacheth besides that imputatiue an inherent righteousnesse to be cōueied from Christ into euery righteous mans soule With whome will this man agree trowe you that cannot agree with himselfe Let vs nowe come vnto the maine point of our dissent which M. PER. deliuereth thus we differ not touching the presence it selfe but only in the manner of presence For though we hold a reall presence of Christes body and bloud in the Sacrament yet we doe not take it to be locall bodily or substantiall but spirituall and mysticall first to the signes by sacramentall relation then to the communicants by faith alone On the contrary the Church of Rome maintaineth a locall bodily and substantiall presence of Christes body and bloud by a change and conuersion of the bread and wine into the said body and bloud which they beleeue to be wrought by the vertue of Christes wordes pronounced ouer the bread and wine by a lawfull Priest intending to doe that which Christ at his last supper instituted and commanded him to doe Master PERKINS reasons to the contrary be these This corporall presence ouerturneth sundry articles of faith For we beleeue that the body of Christ was made of the pure substance of the Virgin Mary and that but once namely when it was conceiued by the holy Ghost But this cannot stand if the body of Christ be made of bread vnlesse we beleeue contraries that the body was made of the Virgin and not of the Virgin made once and not once but often We read not in our Creede made of the Virgin Mary but borne of her nowe there is great difference betweene made and borne For a house is made of a Carpenter but is not borne of him but the vvord made vvhich may also in good sence be vsed being fitter to cloake the fallacy Master PERKINS cared not to straine a little curtesie vvith the articles of our beleefe and to thrust in made in stead of borne But let this prety jugling-tricke passe and to his argument I answere that the appearance of this contrariety proceedeth either out of meere ignorance of our doctrine or else out of the equiuocation of this word made For we hold that Christes blessed body is but once made if made be taken for to be fashioned and formed newe from the beginning so was it but once made of the pure bloud of the immaculate Virgin Mary but may be againe and againe well made present vnder this or that forme or on this or that altar which hath no shadowe of contrariety with the other For euery mans body vvhich is but once made in his mothers vvombe may afterward a thousand times be made present in one or diuers places Nowe when we say with the ancient Fathers that of bread is made the body of Christ the sence is that the substance of bread is turned into the body of Christ so that then there is no more the substāce of bread vnder the formes of bread but Christes body which succeedeth in place of it therefore the bread is said to be turned vnto Christes body and Christes body to be made of bread not that any part of the bread remaineth changed into Christes body or that Christes body is a newe created and framed but because that by that very action wherewith the bread is remoued out the body is brought into that place the one is said to be made of the other so that here is nothing contrary vnto that
cut his flesh in peeces as butchers doe beefe in the shambles and either rawe or rosted haue giuen it to be eaten to some a legge to other an arme c. But we Catholikes doe eate Christes body whole and that without any detriment or diminution vnto that blessed body which is not extended vnder the partes of the sacred Host so as one part of his body is vnder one part of it and another part vnder another but is after the manner of our soule in the body the whole body vnder the whole Host and the whole vnder euery part of the Host and so without any parting or deuiding of his body it is wholy receiued of euery communicant and remaineth after whole in their bodies imparting his grace to their soules so long as the formes of bread tary in their stomackes in their proper shapes and afterward ceasseth to be there any longer which is confirmed by those diuine wordes of the glorious Apostle S. Andrewe recorded by his most deare Disciples Libr. de pass eius When the immaculate lambe is truly sacrificed and his flesh truly eaten of the people he neuerthelesse remaineth and continueth whole and aliue That which he peeceth too of the necessity which we are brought vnto by our doctrine to hold that our bodies be nourished by naked qualities which saith he is erronious in Philosophy is not worth the answering For neither are we driuen to hold that vnlesse it be out of the bounty of our owne good willes For it is nothing materiall â—o the real presence whether our bodies be nourished by the accidents there present or no neither is it so cleare a case in Philosophy whether odours that are naked quallities doe nourish or no as they who haue studied Philosophie knowe And lastly all matters of faith are aboue the rules of Philosophie vvherefore the reall presence of Christs blessed body in the Sacrament being a memoriall and monument of all his merueilous works it must not be thought strange if there followe of it many thinges aboue the reach of naturall Philosophie and yet not so many perhaps as must needes be granted by them as well as by vs in the resurrection of our bodies vvhich notwithstanding those difficulties in Philosophy all Christian men doe firmely beleeue Nowe let vs come vnto such authorities as M. PER. citeth in fauour of their part which neither are many nor taken out of the more famous fathers of either Greeke or Latin Church and which is more admirable not one of the authours by him cited but that in the very same wordes which he alleadgeth to disproue the reall presence they doe euidently auerre and proue it so well knowne and confessed a truth was this of the blessed Dialog 1 Sacrament in all antiquity Theodorete saith The same Christ who called his naturall body foode and bread who also called himselfe a vine he vouchsafed the visible signes the name of his owne body not changing nature but putting grace to nature Here are scarce two wordes together as it is in the author The former part of his wordes be Our Sauiour changed names giuing to his body the name of the signe and to the signe the name of his body that is he called his body bread and bread his body so that here is as much for vs as against vs and the latter part of the sentence is wholy for vs. For Christ would saith he haue them that he partakers of the misteries not to attend vnto the nature of the thinges which are seene that is bread and wine but by reason of the changing of names to giue credit to that change which is made by grace that is they hearing in consecration that which was before bread and wine to be then called his body and bloud should beleeue that then also bread and vvine vvere changed and made his body and bloud that change being wrought by the vertue and grace of his word To these wordes of Theodorete in his first Dialogue he joyneth other wordes of his taken out of his second yet quoting the same Dialogue The mysticall signes after consecration leese not their nature for they remaine in their first nature figure and forme and may be feine and touched as before Here M. PER. should haue stopped in the middest of the sentence as they are sometimes accustomed to doe and then had he left some shewe of wordes for his part yet such as might easily be answered but vvhen the reason of the remaining of mysticall signes in their former nature and figure is as he himselfe declareth that they may be seene as before he doth giue the learned reader to vnderstand that he speaketh not of the inward substance of them but of the outward appearance which is the proper object of the sences which outward accidence hath a certaine kind of essence and nature as well as the substance it selfe But that which followeth in Theodorete putteth al out of doubt For he addeth The mysticall signes may be seene as before but that which they are made is vnderstood And what is it vnderstood to be made Marry euen that which we beleeue and adore which can be no other thing but the true reall body of Christ Iesus God and man For in him doe vve beleeue and him doe we adore See then howe this his first and best authour disproueth plainely his owne position M. PER. second authour is one Gelasius an old writer I confesse but where or what he was De duabus naturis Christi it is vncertaine This man saith Bread and wine passe into the substance of the body and bloud of Christ yet they cease not but remaine still in the property of their nature these wordes be flat against M. PER. and the Zwinglians doctrine in that they teach bread and wine to passe into the substance of Christes body The other clause seemeth to make for the Lutherans yet may be interpreted that they remaine stil in some property of their nature that is in the same forme colour and taste as they did before M. PER. goeth on Lib. 4. sentent dist 11. Lumbard saith if he be asked what conuersion this is whether formall or substantiall or of any other kinde he cannot define it Ans Gentle reader turne to the place and imbrace his resolution For most formally doth he deliuer our doctrine and that proued by the testimony of the ancient Fathers albeit the name of transubstantion were not then in vse From the Fathers sentences M. PER. falleth to collections of his owne out of them First saith he they vsed in former times to burne with fire that which remained after the administration of the Lordes supper and therefore tooke it not for his body and quoteth for proofe of this Hesichius Libr. 2. in Leuit. c. 8. where he sheweth either ouer great boldnes if he did not see the place on exceeding wilfull malice if he read it For that ancient writer out of that ceremony of burning al
could but rake out of the ashes the least peeces of their burnt bones they did esteeme them more pure then gold and of greater value then pretious stones as in expresse tearmes is recorded in the Ecclesiasticall History of Eusebius Lib. 4. cap. 14. see what respect men in the purest antiquity carryed towardes the bodily reliques of Saints THE DIFFERENCE OVr dissent lyeth in the manner of worshipping the Papists make two degrees of religious worshippe c. Because the Protestants doe seeme not to vnderstand the Catholike doctrine concerning the worshipping of Saints but out of their affected ignorance doe esteeme vs therefore Idolaters I hold it expedient to explicate the state of this question more particulerly To beginne then with this word worshippe it doth signifie a knowledge or conceite of an other mans excellency joyned with a reuerent respect to the same person vvith some either inward or outward acknowledgement thereof so that all worshippe is due and done vnto an other in regard of some excellent quality which we suppose to be in him Nowe there being three most general kindes of excellency there must also be three seuerall and distinct sortes of worshippe correspondent vnto them The first and principall kinde of excellency is infinit and proper to God alone who is almighty infinitly wise and good the only Creatour supreame Gouernour and finall end of heauen and earth and of al thinges contayned in them therefore to him alone appertayneth infinit honour and glory and that supreame worshippe which the Latins vsing the Greeke word call Latria Godly honour Nowe to attribute or giue this soueraigne worshippe vnto any other then vnto God only is Idolatry the most haynous offence that can be The second sort of excellency I make the meanest of all absolute for of respectiue excellency which is in Images and such like holy thinges I haue spoken in that Chapter and that is to be found only in creatures indued with reason and vnderstanding in regard of some rare quality and endowment wherein they excell and surpasse others so that that excellent vertue and quality doe proceede only out of the naturall faculty and perfection of the party and doe not spring from any supernaturall gift therefore within the compasse of this sort of excellency I comprehend all natural perfections either of Men or Angels because all such issue out of one generall fountayne of a nature indued with reason and to this kinde of excellency is due a morall or ciuill obeysance or worshippe There is a third kinde of excellency seated betweene the two former extreames farre surpassing the naturall perfection of any pure creature and yet infinitly lesser then the diuine Majesty of God which consisteth in the perfection of Faith Hope Charity Religion and other such like gifts of the holy Ghost And to this kinde of excellency is due a different manner of worshippe which the Latins for distinction sake doe call Dulia Note that I say for distinction sake for both the wordes Latria and Dulia if they be taken in their first natiue signification may be giuen vnto any kinde of worship due to God or Man yet to auoide confusion the learned Diuines haue appropriated Latria vnto the worshippe of God and Dulia to signifie the honour due to Saints or Angels in regard of their supernaturall perfections To come nowe vnto the first point of our difference The Protestants doe commonly confound these two later kindes of vvorshippe and doe make but one of both the ciuill and supernaturall that they may skippe from the one of them to the other when they be driuen vnto their shifts and yet nothing is more cleare then that they be as distinct and different the one from the other as the grace of God is from the nature of a reasonable creature For as morall and ciuill worshippe only is due vnto that excellency vvhich ariseth out of the naturall power of man not assisted with any extraordinary grace of God such as was in the old Heathen Romans who for their valiant prowesse and politike gouerment deserued to be honoured worshipped euen so the fortitude of Christian Martirâ— the wisdome of Ecclesiasticall Prelates the power of diuers Confessors in curing all sortes of diseases and in working myracles These I say and the like diuine prerogatiues cannot but deserue a farre more excellent kinde of honour and worshippe then the former as they are more spirituall and heauenly qualities springing from a more excellent roote of the grace of God vvhich surpasseth in degree of excellency the nature of Angels without coÌ„parison who are but Gods seruants by nature though of greater perfection then we By grace they were made adopted sonnes of God and partakers of the diuine nature as S. Peter citeth it 2. Pet. â— vers 4. so as the Saints also were who therein were equall to Angels Wherefore Naaman the Syrian had reason to worshippe very humbly the Prophet Hâ—liseus who if we consider only ciuill excellency was but a meane person in respect of Naâ—man that was a principal commander ouer all the martial affaires of a potent King notwithstanding he truly weighing another more excellent kinde of power and wisdome in Heliseus then was in himselfe and another kinde of credit which he had which the God of heauen of farre greater estimation then that he had with his kinge did very dutifully humble himselfe before the Prophet All which conuinceth that there is in godly and holy personages another kinde of excellency aboue naturall reach to which is due a supernaturall reuerence and worshippe distinct from Ciuill the which spirituall and supernaturall worship we commonly call religious because it is giuen vnto holy men or Saints in consideration of their religious vertues of faith charity fortitude in defence of religion and of Ecclesiasticall superiority The tearme of religious worshippe the Protestants vtterly mislike pretending that all kinde of religious worship is due vnto God only but better men and greater clearkes then they by many degrees doe vse it in the very same sence as may be seene in diuers of S. Augustines workes L. 20. coÌ„t Faustum cap. 21. Let this one sentence suffice where he saith That Christian people doe celebrate the memories of Martirs with religious solemnity True it is that religious worship is sometime by the said holy father and others taken more strictly for the principall acts of religion which are proper vnto God alone and in that sence we deny it to be giuen vnto any creature but the same word is also not seldome vsed by them in a more large signification and applied vnto all thinges that belong to religion So we call religious men such as are specially chosen to serue God religious houses places where God is serued religious vertues such as issue out of the roote of religion and consequently religious honour or worship that is exhibited vnto men for their excellency in religious qualities and religious affaires So that any indifferent man
question but that they heare all prayers made by vvhosoeuer to them and obtayne very many of their requests And as S. Gregory saith What doe they not see Lib. 12. Moral cap. 13. who see him that seeth all thinges yea contayneth all thinges within himselfe Yet M. PER. blusheth not to say that it is but a forgery of mans braine to imagine that the God-head is such a cleare glasse representing all thinges because it should then followe that the Angels who behold Gods face should be ignorant of nothing but the Angels haue learned some thinges of the Church as S. Paul witnesseth therefore they see not all thinges in God To this we answere that in God all thinges are represented and shine more brightly then in their owne naturall places yet doth not God communicate and reueale all thinges vnto euery body there present but his diuine nature in three persons Christ God and Man with all other naturall and ordinary thinges from the cope of heauen to the center of the earth are seene of euery Cytizen of heauen though with a different degree of clearenes but of Gods counsels concerning the gouernement of the world so much is only knowne vnto either Angell or Men as appertayneth vnto their state and that when it belongeth vnto them therefore the Angels might well not knowe many thinges belonging to the gouernement of the Church vntill they sawe it accomplished and therefore might be said to haue learned some such thing of the Church But as we haue said before it properly appertayneth vnto the state of Saints in heauenly blisse to knowe their friendes reasonable requests made vnto them or else their conditions should not be so perfect but that they might in equity require the bettering of it and consequently they could not be so throughly contented as their estate of perfect felicity in heauen doth demande and thus much of M. PER. reasons To which I will here adde one argument commonly vsed by the Protestants though M. PER. for the weakenesse of it perhaps thought best to omit it it is taken ab authoritate negatiuè which Schollers knowe to be naught worth Math. 11. vers 28. Christ saith come yee vnto me all yee that labour and be burdened and I will refresh you he saith not goe to the Saints but come to me I answere neither doth he say doe not goe to the Saints and therefore here is nothing against vs. We goe to Christ for remission of our sinnes which lye more heauy then a talent of lead vpon our backes and through our redeemers merits doe we craue pardon of them but to moue more effectually this our redeemer and God his father to haue pitty vpon vs we humbly desire the Saints his best beloued seruants to speake a good vvord in our behalfe acknowledging our selues vnvvorthy to obtayne any thing at Gods handes through our owne vngratefull wickednes Now that our Sauiour Christ IESVS doth very well like and approue the mediation of others euen to himselfe may be gathered out of very many euident texts of holy Scripture Math. 8. vers 13. for he at the intercession of the Centurion cured his seruant and * Math. 9 vers 2. seing the faith of them that brought a man sicke of the palsey before him he healed the sicke man and a Luc. 4. vers 38. at his disciples request cured S. Peters mother in lawe And vvhen the vvoman of Chanaan sued vnto him for her daughter b Math. 15 vers 23. he answered her not a word before his disciples had besought him for her by which and many such like recorded in the Gospell euery man that is not wilfully blinde may well see that the intercession of others for vs doth much preuaile euen with our soueraigne intercessor and mediator Christ IESVS himselfe nowe to his authorities Lib. 3. cōt Parmenia cap. 3. The first is out of S. Augustine Christian men commend each other in their prayers to God And who prayeth for all and for whome none prayeth he is the one and true mediatour I answere these wordes be rather for vs for approuing and confessing our Sauiour Christ to be the only mediatour of redemption as we haue already declared they teach that all Christians may commend themselues each to others prayers Nowe the Saints departed be Christians I trust as good as we or rather farre better therefor all other Christians may very well in S. Augustines judgement commend themselues vnto the Saints holy prayers because each one may commend himselfe to any others prayers Concerning the word Mediatour S. Augustine neuer attributeth it vnto any sauing only to our Sauiour taking it alwaies in the second signification aboue named to which three thinges are properly required according to S. Augustine first that he pray for all and that none pray for him which property M. PER. toucheth but misquoteth the place for it is in lib. 2. cap. 8. cont Parmenianum The second property and the most necessary of all is that he pay the full price and ransome of all our sinnes and that his redemption may in equall ballance counterpoise the grieuousnesse of our sinnes which is taken out of diuers places of Scripture The third which is the ground of al the rest is that the Mediatour be both God and Man that participating of both natures he may be as it vvere a naturall middle or meanes to reconcile the two Extreames and so as Man be able to suffer something to appease Gods wrath and as God to giue to that suffering of his man-hood infinite value making thereby Christs sufferinges more then sufficient to pay for the redemption of an hundred vvorldes if neede had beene And these proprieties gathered out of c Lib. 9. de ciuitate cap. 15. alibi S. Augustine and other Fathers will put downe M. PER. odde deuise of proprieties of a Mediatour all which make nothing against the intercession of Saints who be not in that sence to be called mediatours and yet cease not to pray for vs let vs then goe on M. PERKINS citeth secondly another sentence out of S. Augustine where he bringeth in our Sauiour saying Tract 22. in Iohan. Thou hast no whether to goe but to me thou hast no way to goe but by me Answere S. Augustine there alludeth vnto those vvordes of our Sauiour I am the way the truth and the life and saith that for life and truth vve haue no other way to seeke vnto but vnto Christ vvho according vnto his diuinity is truth and life vnto the vvorld And in this high degree of redemption and mediation he was the only way vnto his Father for neither the Gentiles by their morall vertues nor Iewes by the power of their law could without him leade them to God All this is very good doctrine but no whit more against praying to Saints then against commending of vs one to anothers prayers or vsing any other meanes of saluation as S. Augustine vpon