paenaunce fasting almesdeeds prayer and vvorkes of paenaunce vve may satisfye for all our sinnes and all the paynes devv vnto our sinnes So that Christ hathe redeemed vs from the seruitude and heauy yoke of the lavve and yet vve must keepe the lavve and novv especially bicause the heauinesse therof is taken avvay by Christ his grace Christ hathe freed vs from the seruitude of sinne and yet vve must auoide sinne and novv especially bicause Christes grace hath giuen force to arise by paenaunce from our former sinfull life Psal 〈◊〉 and to vvalke in the vvaye of his commaundementes and nevvnes of life Christ also hathe deliuered vs from the tyrannie of the deuill bicause he hathe giuen vs grace to resist him vvherfore vvee must not yeeld vnto him but novv especially vve must stand against him Christ also hathe satisfied for vs and yet vve must satisfie and novv especially bicause he hathe giuen vs grace by vvhich vve may do paenaunce for sinne and satisfie for the payne For although that Christe hathe payed the price of our redemption yet vvould he haue vs to applye it by our cooperation not only in faithe for so hee should open the gapp to all vice but in poenaunce in obseruatioÌ„ of the commaundementes and receiuing of the Sacramentes Vvherfore our redeemer him selfe vvho freed vs from the yoke of the lavve yet commaunds vs 〈◊〉 Keep the lavve if vve mean to enter into life Mat. 19. and although he hath satisfied for or sinnes Lue. vle yet he commaunds his Apostles to preach penaunce vnto vs as necessarie for remission and satisfaction of our sinnes And if hee had redeemed vs in that manner vv ch the Ghospellers imagin and had set vs at that libertie that noe lavve can bynde vs nor noe sinne hurte vs and that noe good vvorkes nor satisfaction nor any other cooperation besides faith can be required on our parte then had hee beene a most absurd redeemer as I haue all ready proued and had rather tumbled vs dovvne into the depthe of sinne and damnation then redeemed vs. The third Chapter shevveth hovv by their doctrine they make Christe no Redemer at all VVell did our blessed sauiour compare heretiks vnto Vvolues vvrapped and invested in sheepe-skinnes Mat. 7. vvhose manner hath all vvayes been vnder praetence of religion to vtter blasphemie and then to mean intend the vvorst vvhen they speake fairest Vvhat I pray you is so common in our ghospellers mouthes as that Christ only is our Redeemer and sole mediatour vnder vvhich pretence they â—ondeÌ„ne all honour giuen vnto sainâ—â—es and abandon all prayer and intercessi in valhich is made vnto them as iniuriouse to Christ and his title of a Redeemer In vvhich truly they seeme not vnlik to Iudas vvho vvould needs Kisse Christe vvhen he meant to betray him and me thinkes and vvhat I thinke I shall proue anone in this point they resemble the Ievves vvhich invested Christe like a King called him King and adored him as King yet in deed derided him as a foole For so these men calle Christ the Redeemer and rather then they vvill not seem to mean so they take from the Saincts the mother and freends of Christ all secondarie mediation and intercession and vvill seem to be so zealous of Christes honour that they vvill haue none honoured but him and yet in deed vnder this faire shovve they cary false hartes and euen then vvhem they calle him and adore him as a Redeemer they robbe him and despoile him of that honourable title Lut. in com Gal. fol. 298. Luther in his commentaries vppon the second Chapter to the Galathians sayeth plainly that Christe apprehended by faith is Christian iustice for vvhom God reputeth vs iuste l. 3 Inst c. 3. §. 2. Caluin also subscribeth that our iustice consisteth in the imputation of Christes iustice vnto vs. And bicause this iustice is extrinsecall and is not inhaerent in vs they saye that thoughe for Christes sake vve be reputed iuste yet the holyest that is is a greevouse sinner and all his vvorkes are vvorthy nothing else but damnation vvhich doctrine herafter diuerse tymes especially in the seuenth booke shal be related hence it is also that they saye that our sinnes are only couered vvith christes iustice vv ch is imputed vnto vs but are not taken avvaye nor extinquished This they explicate by a similitude for say they as if a man looke thorovghe redd glasse all seemeth redd bee it blacke or vvhite so God beholding vs throughe Christes iustice reputeth vs iuste thoughe in deed vvee bee sinners Abouâ— in the first chap. And this Caluin in his preface of his Institutions to the King of Fraunce avoucheth not to derogate from christe but to make much for his honour for vvhat sayeth he is to Christe more honorable theÌ„ to acknovvledge our selues despoiled of all vertue that of 〈◊〉 vvee maye bee clothed that is reputed 〈◊〉 for his iustice vvhich is imputed vnto vs. But let vs see hovve honourable this is to Christe I vvill not deny but that it is honourable to Christ and expedient for 〈◊〉 to acknovvledge that of our selues vvith out Christes grace vvee are sinners and cá do litle else but sinne Th. 1 2.q.109 but to saye that notvvithstanding Christes grace vvhâ—â—â— he hath bestovved on his iuste is ready to bestovve on all repeÌ„taunt sinners 〈◊〉 still sinners and only reputed 〈◊〉 for Christes iustice vvhich is by fayth apprehended and by God imputed vnto vs is most dishonorable to Christe For if vve haue no other iustice then Christs iustice vvhich is imputed vnto vs then haue vve no internall sanctitie in vs then are vve not truly sanctified then are vve still sinners be vve neuer so iuste Caluin and Luther and all the Lutheranes Caluinists haue no other ansvver to this then concedo totum I graunte all Are vvee then still truly sinners and not truly iuste then vvas the first Adame more potent in mallice then the second in grace and sanctitie for he made vs truly sinners Christ could not make vs truly iuste Then vvas Sainct Paule deceiued vvho sayeth that Christs grace exceeded Adams sime Rom. 5. Are vve still sinners and not truly sanctified then hathe not Christ verily redeemed vs from the seruitude of sinne Io. 8. for vvhosoeuer is in sinne is a slaue to sinne If vvee be not redeemed from sinne then are vve not freed froÌ„ the tyrannie of Satan vvhose only title is sinne by vvhich he domineereth ouer vs. And seing that hell follovveth sinne as a iust punishment for such a fault then are vve still captiues prisoners of Hell and Christ is noe Redemer vvho hathe nether redeemed vs from sinne nor hell nor daÌ„nation The same ghospellers affirm that by sinne our nature is so vveakened that not vvithstanding Christes grace vve can not resist any temptation of the flesh or deuill that vve can not possibly fullfill the lavve and coÌ„maundementes that vve
a mortall life subiecte to sickness and diseases vv ch partely come by disorder in dyet partely by extrinsecall operation of the Starres ayre and vvether to vvhich our bodyes are subiecte partely do proceed from the complexion and coÌ„stitution of mans body vvhich is composed of contraries it vvas necessary for preseruation of corporall life that God should prouide vs of Phisitians and corporall Phisick vvhich restoreth vs to healthe after sicknes In like manner our spiritual life vvhich is grace in this life being not so stable but that it may be loste many tymes by mortall sinne and our healthe being not as yet so confirmed but that vvee may falle into as many diseases as by our free vvill vve may coÌ„mit sinnes it vvas not only expedient but also necessary that Christe our spirituall Phisitian should prouide vs of Phisicke and of a generall salue and medicin against all the sores and maladies of our soule And this is the Sacrament of Penaunce vvhich is a remedie against sinne committed after baptisme and vvhich by the Preeste our spirituall Phisitian is to bee applyed vnto vs. For to him as being successour vnto the Apostles Christe gaue this povver and authoritie vvhen hee sayed vnto his Apostles Vvhose sinnes you forgiue are for giuen Io. 20. Vvherfore sainct Chrisostome sayeth that the Preests of the nevv lavve haue povver not only to giue sentence vvhether vve be infected vvith the leprie of sinne or noe vvhich authoritie only the old Preâ—sts of the old lavve had coÌ„cerning the corporall lepresie but allso to cure l. â— de saâ—â—rd clense and purge this leprie Fiftly vvhen maÌ„ is recured often tymes ther remaine the reliques of his disease vvhich keep him lovv a great vvhile and therfore he yet needeth Phisick nor so much healing as confirming and perfiting healthe vvhich consisteth in some confortatiues or restauratiues The like happeneth vnto man after that by the Sacrament of penaunce he is recured for after that he still hathe a kinde of vveakenesse and infirmitie euill habits and inclinations yea litle diseases also such as veniall sinnes are And therfore agaiÌ„st these Reliques of his disease Christ hathe prouided him the Sacrament of Extreme vnction vvhich is giuen at the hovver of deathe to purge vs cleane from all reliques of our diseases to recure the corporall infirmitie if it bee expedient for our saluation and to prepare vs to a better health of the next life vvhih is immortalitie And these fiue things are requisit in a corporall and spirituall life for euery maÌ„ in particuler but besides them tvvoe things also are necessary for the coÌ„munitie The first is coniunction of man and vvoman vvithout vvhich mankind can nether be propagated nor preserued and to make this coniunction lavvfull matrimony vvas euer necessarie And to this in the nevv lavve vvhich is a lavv of grace the Sacrament of matrimonie ansvvereth very fittely vvhich before Christe vvas a ciuill contracte but noe Sacrament as novv it is Ephes 5. For novv as sainct Paule sayeth it is a great sacrament in that it signifieth the coniunction of Christe vvith his Church by Incarnation and grace and giueth grace vnto the maryed by vvhich they maye loue one another as Christe did his Church and beare the burdens of vvedlocke more easily The second thing is constitution of Princes gouernours or magistrates to rule this humaine societie vvhich matrimonye hath propagated For if the confused multitude vvere lefte to it selfe and had not some head to gouerne it it vvould bee like a shipp vvithout a Pilot or a body vvithout a head vvhich by mutuall dissenssion and disorder vvould soone ruinate it selfe To this is ansvverable the sacrament of order by vvhich Bishops and Preests are ordained to minister sacraments to offer sacrifice to teach preach and instructe and by lavves and censures to gouerne this multitude and to directe it in those thinges vvhich concerne good life spirituall peace and religion here and life cuerlasting herafter These seuen Sacraments are those seuen pillers vvhich as the vviseman sayeth Prou. 9. vvisdome it selfe Christe Iesus hathe made to supporte the huge pallace of his Church And the seuen tymes sprinkling of the bloud of the calfe Leuit. 4. prefigured these seuen sacraments in vvhich the blood of Christe is as it vvere seuen tymes sprinkled bicause it giueth them their force vertue and efficacie â— Reg. 5. Yea Naamans seuen vvashings vvere a figure of the same sacramentes in vvhich the soule of man is seuen tymes vvashed and so freed from the lepresie of sinne But these are but congruences sayeth our aduersarie let vs see the plaine vvord of God for seuen Sacramentes else vvere are not to admitte them I graunte that these are not plaine demonstrations bicause as Diuines saye matters of facte can not be demonstrated but yet are they better argumentes then they can bring for their lesser number of sacramentes I could alleage also fathers for euery one of the Sacramentes before named but they vvill say that fathers are men And are not our aduersaries also men yes saye they but vvee praeferre the vvord of God before mens traditions But then I aske of them vvhat expresse vvorde of God they haue against these men The fathers auouche seuen Sacraments vvhere read they in scripture that there are but tvvoe or three Vvee haue noe suche nuÌ„ber expressely named say they but vve gather by good coÌ„sequeÌ„ce out of scripture that there are but tvvoe or three Doe you soe And did not the fathers out of scripture also deduce seueÌ„ SacrameÌ„ts For althoughe they neuer say thar there are iuste seuen yet sometymes they name one sometimes tvvoe sometymes moe and many of them amongest them haue giuen testimonie for euery one of the seuen sacraments in particuler Scholastici in 4. dist 2. none deny seuen Yea for these 500 yeares all the diuines haue defended seuen sacraments vvho also neuer mentioned this number as any nevv article of beleefe but accepting it from their forfathers sought by argument to defend it by scriptures also to confirme it Con. Flor. in decreto Trid. sess 7. can 1. Yea the Councels of Florence and Trent haue auouched the same number and thought them selues backed herin by authoritie of scripture But they vvere all deceued sayeth our aduersarie Vvere thy soe And hovve can you vvarraunte vs that you in denying seuen sacrameÌ„ts are not deceiued If you say that you deduce your tvvoe or three Sacraments out of Scripture they vvill saye that they also out of Scripture deduce their seuen And so the question is not vvhether that Scriptures or fathers are to bee beleeued but vvhether the Churche Councells and fathers Vvhoe proue seuen Sacraments out of scripture are to bee credited in the exposition of Scripture or rather your nevv biblists vvhoe began to studie but yester daye and neuer studied soe many dayes as they haue doone dayes and nightes vvho also nether for grauitie nor sanctitie nether for
God by his Prophete Hieremie c. 15. If thou vvilt be conuerted I vvill conuerte thee And hovve often doth scripture exhorte and commaund vs to conuerte our selues to God Ezech. 18.33 Vvhich vvere ridiculously spoken if it vvere not in our freevvill by the assistaunce of Gods grace to tourne vnto God Mat. 19. And in the nevv Testament sayeth Christ if thou vvilte enter into life Keepe the cōmaundementes And again hee complaineth vvith teares of Hierusalems ingratitude saying Mat. 23. Hierusalem Hierusalem hovv often vvould I haue gathered thee as a hen gathereth her chickins vnder her vvinges and thou vvouldst not Vvhat man in his vvittes vvould speake thus vnless he thought that Hierusalem had free vvill else might Hierusalem haue ansvvered Christe in this manner Vvhy complainest thou so pitifullie of my slouthe and ingratitude Knovvest not thou that I can not vvhy sayest thou to mee and thou vvouldst not knovving that I haue noe vvill that thine only is the vvill myne is seruile necessitie So that it is manifest by experience reason and scripture that man hathe free vvill And seing that ther is no page of scripture but it conteinethe ether commaundement or counsaile or exhortation or some one or other of the signes of free vvill vvhich are before alleaged I may be bold to say that there is noe page in holy Scripture out of vvhich may not euidently be deduced a pregnaunte proofe and argument for free vvill Vvherfore althoughe some fevv places are in Scripture vvhich till they be vvel vnderstood may seeme to disproue free vvill yet rather should the heretike confesse his vvāt of skill to interpret those places then to deny free vvill vv ch all scripture allmost so euidētly auoucheth l. Cor. 12. Let thē not therfore obiecte that God vvorketh all in vs that mans vvay is not in man Ier. 10. that it is not of the vviller nor of the ronner but of God that taketh mercie on vs Rom 9. that God calleth and knocketh at the dore of our soule Ephes 5. that God the father dravveth vs For I can easilie ansvvere and haue al the sfathers and diuines to backe me in it Io. 6. that God only operateth in vs by his antecedēt grace but vvee also by vertue of it cooperate vnto his motion that mans vvay that is the vvay of Saluation is not in mans povver in respect of the beginning bicause God only puttes vs in the vvay by his vocation and praecedent grace but yet by vertue of this grace it is in our povver to vvalke in this vvay that it is God only that begīneth all good vvills and courses but supposing his precedent grace vve also vvill and ronne but not vve only but his grace vvith vs vve vvith it That God only calleth and knocketh by his praeuenient grace but vve also by cōsent do open the dore vnto him that God the father dravveth by his motions but svveetly vvithout violence by persuasion and allurement not by cōpulsion But to labour no farther in so euident and plaine a matter by a great absurditie vvhich follovveth this doctrine I vvill demonstrate it to bee absurd bicause one absurditie follovveth another If man haue no freevvill all vice and vvickednesse must goe for currant and no man must endeuour to auoid sinne bicause he hathe no povver to auoid it Be it then that Maister Minister dehorte me from vice vvith all the Rhetorick vvhich he hathe let him lay before myne eyes the filthines of sinne the dishonestie vvhich it implyeth the offēce of God the scandale of my neighbour vvhich follovveth it therby to dissuade me from it yet if I haue no freevvil nor povver to auoid sinne I may ansvvere him that his persuasions are but lippe-labour vvhich he might as vvel vse to a beast as to a man For vvhat I shall do that of neceffitie I shall doe and as hee disuadeth me from vice so the pleasure or temporall profit vvhich vice bringeth doth so allure me and the deuil so vrgeth me that I can not resiste bicause I haue no free vvill but must behaue my selfe passiuely permitting concupiscence and the deuil to vvorke in me vvhat they vvill bicause I haue no povver to resiste them For as a man that is persuaded that he hathe noe force to resiste his enemie or the Ministers of iustice layeth dovvne his armes and vveapons and permitteth them to do their pleasure knovving that resistaunce is vaine vvhen vvill he nill he their pleasure must be doone so vvhen a man is persuaded that he hathe no freevvill nor povver to auoide sinne he must yeeld him selfe as a slaue to all vice and vvhen he feeleth the temptation he must yeeld presently and acknovvledge his ovvn impotencie And if any man rebuke him for his sinnes or if God herafter at the day of Iudgement accuse him or condemne him he hathe an excuse ready for such an accusation and a tricke in store to auoid such a condemnation to vvit that he could do no othervvise bicause he had no free vvill And so he may commit vvhat sinnes he vvill and no man yea not God him selfe can iustly finde fault vvith him vnless they first finde a fault in Luthers and Caluins doctrine vvhich teacheth him that hee can not do othervvise The seuenth Chapter proueth that the reformers in auouching the lavves and commaundementes of God to bee impossible giue occasion also of all impiety I Shall not need to dvvell longe on this pointe nor to vse any longe discourse to come vnto my intended conclusion bicause I haue already in the fifte booke sette dovvne Luthers and Caluins vvordes in vvhich they affirme the commaundementes to be impossible vvher also I haue disproued this doctrine and proued the contrarie to vvit that man hathe povver vvith the grace of God to fullfill his commaundementes only novve out of those premises as in that booke I inferred God to bee vnreasonable by Luthers and Caluins doctrine so novve out of the same I vvill conclude that the gappe is opened to all vice and vvickednes For if a man bee once persuaded that hee can not fullfill the commaundement of keeping the Sabboth-daye if desire of gaine or lacre moue him to seruile vvorkes labours hee vvill easilie bee persvvaded to labour vvho is allready persvvaded that hee can not keepe the Sabothe as hee should doe And if hee once giue credit to Caluin that hee can not obserue the lavve vvhich forbiddeth him to couet his neighbours vvife or goods if hee bee tempted or moued vvith suche obiectes hee vvill neuer vrge him selfe to vvithstand such temptations bicause hee is persuaded that he can not fullfill this lavve but must needes transgresse it and not only couet and desire but also inordinatelye vse his neighbours vvife and vsurpe his goodes also vvhen soeuer they crosse the vvaye of his desire Breefely seing that there is noe sinne but it is a transgression of one lavve or other hee that is persuaded that hee
can not fullfill any lavve of God as all Lutheranes and Caluinistes are is persuaded also that hee can auoid noe sinne and consequently if any sinne moue or allure him ether by profit or pleasure vvhich it implyeth hee can not being so persuaded endeuour to vvithstande the temptation bicause that vvere to shevve him selfe able to resiste sinne and to fullfill the commaunde mentes and consequently to condemne Ihon Caluins doctrine And althoughe in so doing hee openeth the gappe to all manner of iniquitie yet therin hee shevveth him selfe a true Caluiniste vvhoe being persuaded by religion and conscience that hee hathe nether force nor vvill to resiste any sinne or to fullfill any commaundemeÌ„t must not yea can not vvithout offence of conscience and hazard of faithe go about to fullfill any lavve for so thoughe not in vvordes yet in facte and deed hee should deny his religion The eight Chapter shevveth hovve in affirming that Christ hathe freed vs from all lavves they loose the bridle to all vice THe reformers as is recounted partely in the third booke and second chapter partely in the fifte chapter of the same booke are of opinion that Christe vvas noe lavvgiuer but rather that he came to free vs from all lavves vvhich doctrine althoughe I haue in the former places alleaged yet to ease the reader it shall not bee amisse here also to set dovvne the samedoctrine in other their ovvn vvords in cap. 4. Gal. Luther in a comment of his on holy scriptur often tymes inculcateth that by Christ vvee are so freed from all lavves that none of them can bynd vs or touch vs in conscience These are his vvords Discat igitur pius legem Christum duo contraria esse prorsus incompatibilia praesente Christo lex mullo modo dominari debet sed cedere debet è conscientia relinquere cubilâ— quòd angustius est quam vt duos capere possit soli Christo Let therfore the godly man learn to knovv that Christ and the lavv are tvvoe contraries altogether incompatible Christe being present the lavv must in no vvise rule but must depart from conscience and leaue the bedd vvhich is to narrovv for tvvoe to Christe alone Vvhere you see that hee makes Christe and all lavves euen his ovvn lavves so contrarie that if Christ stand noe lavv can stande nor haue any force ouer conscience in c. 2. Gal. And in another place of the same comment thus hee defineth quatenus est Christianus est supra omnem legem as hee is a Christian or in that hee is a Christian he is aboue all lavve And yet again in another vvorke of his l. de libertaâ—â— Christiana hee speaketh more boldly and plainly nullo opere nulla lege homini Christiano opus est cum per fidem sit liber ab omnilege for a Christian no lavv nor vvorke is needfull seing that by faith he is free from all lavve Supra l. 2. Inst c. 2. §. â— 14 The same opinion holdeth Ihon Caluin as in the former and many other places is plainely to be seen By vvhich doctrine althoughe they vvill seem to make Christe a more perfect redeemer as before is noted yet in deed they make him a fauourer and patrone of all vice and vvickednes For if vve be freed from all obligation of lavves then do they noe more bynde vs then lavves abrogated if they bynde not in conscience then noe man is bound in conscience to obserue them If he be not bound in coÌ„science to obserue them then he sinneth not in transgressing them no more then in doing contrarie to a lavv vvhich is abrogated bicause euery sinne is against the obligation of one lavve or other yea then he transgresseth not bicause vvhere is noe obligation ther can be no transgression If it be no sinne to transgresse lavves as Luther and Caluin say that to a Christian such transgressions are not imputed as sinnes then need not any Christian make any scrouple of any action by vvhat lavv soeuer it be forbidden and so hee may as freely steale as giue almes and as boldly hee may follovv his lust and sensualitie as liue chastly and moderate his appetites for vvhere noe lavv byndethe in conscience all is lavvfull that liketh and so the gappe is open to all manner of vice The ninth Chapter proueth that in affirming God to be the autour of sinne the Reformers open the gappe to all vice I Haue already related the blasphemies of our nevv Christians against the goodnes of God and I haue demonstrated that they are senseles absurd and impious in making God the autour of our sinnes vvhose mercie pardoneth and vvhose iustice punishethe sinnes but can not vvorke or commit the least sinne vvithout preiudice of his goodnesse and deitie also vvhich is goodnes it selfe So that novve I vvill suppose for my premises that they are of that opinion and I vvill deducefor my intended conclusion that this doctrine looseth the bridle vnto all iniquitie For if a man be once persuaded as all Caluinistes are that God is the autour and vvorker of his sinnes vvhat is ther remaining to restrayne and vvith-hold him from sinne he may and vvill easily discourse thus vvith him selfe vvhen soeuer the deuil vrgeth or the flesh allurethe or the vvorld intiseth him to sinne This acte to vvhich I ame tempted and vvhich commonly is called a sinne is the vvorke of God as vvell as myne and more his then myne bicause as my oracle that is Ihon Caluin telleth me he vvorketh it in me and vrgeth me vnto it Vvhy then should I ether be a frayed or ashamed to do that vvhich God not only dothe vvith me but also so forcibly moueth mee vnto it that as M. Caluin telleth me I can not possibly resiste him Ame I better then he or can any sinne be so vglye as not to beseeme me vvhich beseemeth him vvho is goodnes it selfe But peraduenture God dispenseth vvith him selfe but not vvith me and therfore vvill not haue me to sinne Vvill he not Vvhy then dothe he vrge and egge me to sinne vvhere I ame vrged certes I ame vvilled and vvilled by him by vvhom I ame vrged Yea if sinne be the vvorke of God as it is vnless Caluin lye then is it the effect of his vvill for as Dauid sayeth hee dothe all by his vvill and as diuines say his povver is his vvill and so I in sining shall do his pleasure and conforme my selfe to his vvill Let vs sinne then freely vvee do but Gods vvill and let vs not make scruple of that of vvhich hee is the vviller and vvorker let vs not blushe at the turpitude of sinne of vvhich God him selfe is not ashamed nether lette vs feare offence vvhere vve doe our masters vvill and pleasure rather let vs persuade our selues that all sinnes are lavvfull and pleasing to God bicause they are the vvorkes of his vvill and consequently according to his vvill But fye rather vppon this impious and licentious
doctrine God forbiddeth sinne by his lavve and therfore vvould not haue it done and hee punisheth sinne most seuerily and therfore is no autour of it and hee is goodnesse it selfe and deuoide of aâ—â— mallice and therfore caÌ„ not vvorke sinne vvhich is deuoid of all goodnes and nothing but mallice The tenthe Chapter by many pointes of their doctrine proueth that they take avvay all vice and vertue from mens actioÌ„s and so giue them leaue to sinne and to do vvhat they vvill IT is a thinge so manifest that vertue and vice honestie dishonestie is to be found in the actions of man that there vvas neuer any people so barbarous or vitiouse vvhich hath not commended many of mens actions and hathe not dispraised many others and blushed at them euen in them selues as not beseeming mans nature vvhich as it is reasonable so it should be ruled by reason Vvherfore to certaine actioÌ„s honours and revvardes haue beene proposed and to others seuere punishmentes and chastisments The vvisest of the GeÌ„tils vvhose reason by sinne superstitioÌ„ vvas least obscured vvere of opinioÌ„ that some actions vvere sinnes and offences of God that others vvere gratefull and pleasing vnto him For they knevv that God the autour of nature as hee had ordained all thinges to their end and giuen them faculties to exercise those actioÌ„s vvhich should bring them to their end so hee hathe ordained man vnto his end vvhich is to liue vertuously and by vertuous life so to serue God here that he maye enioye him herafter and therfore hee hathe endevved him vvith reason by vvhich hee may knovv vertue from vice and good from euill and a vvill also to execute that vvhich reason shal coÌ„maund so that vvhen hee liueth according to reason hee follovvethe his nature and Gods ordinaunce and exercise the those actions vvhich beseem his reasonable nature and are pleasing vnto God and vvhen he sollovveth sensualitie and leaueth reason theÌ„ dothe hee that vvhich is not beseeming his nature then dothe hee breake Gods ordinaunce and svverue from the end to vvhich he is ordained and consequentlye sinneth offendeth God l. 1. Eth. c. 8. Vvherfore Aristotle sayeth that vvise and vertuouse men vvhich liue according to reason are most deare vnto God Ex Clement Alex orat hortator ad gentes in Phaedone Plato affirmeth that God is the reuenger of sinne and dishonestie and in another place he distinguisheth three kindes states of men The first of those that liue vertuously and they sayeth he are sent to the happy Ilancls vvhich vvee vvould calle heauen the second state is of them vvho commit lesser faultes vvhich vvee vvould calle veniall sinnes such sayeth hee are purged for a tyme the same doe Catholikes saye of theÌ„ that dy out of mortall sinne yet are defiled so vvith veniall sinnes that they need some purging in Purgatorie and then vvith the first sorte are admitted to the happy IlaÌ„ds The last are they vvhich commit enormous and hainous crimes and such sayeth Plato are tormented perpetually bicause their paines do them noe good vvhich is as much to saye as Catholikes say of theÌ„ vvhoe for greater offences of vvhich they repent not before deathe are condemned to a praemunire and perpetuall imprisonment in hell By vvhich it may appeare that not only Christianes but also paganes and those that vvante the light of fayeth haue yet by light of reason espyed vice in some of our actions and vertue in other some and haue deemed those vvorthy punishment these vvorthy some revvard And yet if vvee giue credit to our nevve Christianes vvee must acknovvledge noe more vertue or vice in the actioÌ„s of men theÌ„ in the operations of brutish and vnreasonable creaturs For first if it be true vvhich Luther and Caluin teache vs that noe lavves caÌ„ bynde a Christian then doth it follovve that a Christiane can not sinne and consequently that ther can bee noe vice in any of his actioÌ„s For vvher noe lavve byndeth there is noe lavve vvhere no lavve is there is noe transgression of lavve vvhere is no transgression noe sinne can bee bicause euery sinne is a transgression of one lavve or other Rom. 7. Vvherfore S. Paule sayeth that vvithout lavve sinne is dead and of noemallice 8. 10. s. And S. Ihon sayeth that vvhosoeuer sinneth committeth iniquitie and that sinne is iniquitie that is transgression for so the Greeke vvord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vvhich hee vseth importeth therfore the Grecianes commonly calle sinne by the selfe same name And althoughe some actions vvhich are of them selues cuill are not sinnes bicause the lavveforbiddeth them but therfore are by the lavve forbidden bicause of them selues they are sinnes yet certaine it is that there is noe sinne but it is forbidden ether by the lavv of God or of nature or of man and therfore vvell might sainct Austine saye l. 2. de pee mer. c. 16. that noe sinne should be if noe lavve did forbid it Rom. 2. And althoughe sainct Paule sayeth that the gentils sinned vvithout a lavve and therfore shal be punished vvithout a lavve yet hee excludeth only a vvritten lavve such as the Ievves had and vvithout that sayethe hee the geÌ„tils doe sinne but yet not vvithout all lavve for at least they transgressed the lavve of nature othervvise they could not haue sinned bicause euery sinne is against one lavve or other and so if noe lavv bynd vs in conscience noe sinne at all can bee found in our actions be they neuer so crossing and contratie to reason Secondly they denye free-vvill and consequently they take avvay all vice and vertue For if vvhen I do that action vvhich is counted a sinne I haue noe free-vvill then I can do no othervvise if I can do noe othervvise I ame not to bee blamed for that vvhich I could not auoyed but rather to bee pityed that I ame so constrained And if vvhen I pray to God or giue almes to the poore I can do no othervvise as I can not if I haue noe free-vvill I ame not pravse vvorthe bicause noe God a mercie to him that dothe vvell vnavvares or vvether hee vvill or noe Vvherfore vvee commend those moste vvhich doe vvell freely and of their ovvne choise vvhere vvee see men by feare or coÌ„pulsion are driueÌ„ to vvell doing vvee coÌ„mend them the lesse by hovv much greater vvas the constrainte vvhich is a signe that free choise more or lesse is necessary to the making of a vertuouse action Thirdly they say that God imputeth no sinne vnto a faithfull man vvhence it follovveth that there is noe sinne in their actions or that God is deceiued or is noe right esteemer of thinges but this they vvill not saye and therfore must auouch that there is noe sinne in Christians actions Fourthly although herin they speake not vvith that consequence vvhich might haue beene expected of men of reason they affirme that all our actions euen those that go for best are of them selues
povver dares vvarraunt vs to goe harmeles And this the heathen Philosophers could see yea could not but see in so much that Cicero sayeth Orat. prâ— Milonâ— magna vis est conscientiae in vtraÌ„que partem vt neque timeant qui nihil commiserunt panam semper ante oculos versari putent qui peccauerunt great force hath conscience in both partes that is in good and euil life in so much that they feare not vvho haue committed no fault and they vvho haue offended haue allvvayes the punishemeÌ„t before their eyes l. 2. de legâ—â— And in an other place he proueth by experience hovve necessarie coÌ„science is to restraine vs from sinne For sayeth he take avvay conscience and vvhat vvill he do in the darke that feareth nothing but the vvitnesse or Iudge Vvhat vvill he do in the desert vvhen he meeteth vvith a maÌ„ loden vvith gold and vveaker then him selfe Truly if coÌ„science bee taken avvay vve vvill neuer make scruple of secret sinnes no nor of publike transgressions if ether by povver or bribe vve can escape the penalties of the lavve If conscience bee once banished the vvorld bargaines vvill seeldom holde and promises vvill as seeldom bee kepte chastitie vvil allvvaies bee in dauÌ„ger ritch and treasurs vvill not bee secure Princes liues vvill bee subâ—et to hazard false dealing vvilbe rife in buying and selling thâ—eues cooseners cutpurses and conicatches haue good leaue and libertie to exercise their artes and the gappe vvill ly open vnto all vice Hovve perniciouse then vnto vertue and hovv fauourable vnto vice is our Reformers doctrine vvhich as I shall euideÌ„tlye proue and therfore breefly bicause euidently despoilethe the vvorlde of conscience more necessarye to mans life then the sonne it selfe They say as is allready related that to a faithfull man and true Christian God imputeth no sinne vvhy then should a Christian make conscience of sinne vvhich if it bee not imputed ether is no sinne at all or else not to bee caâ—ed for They auouch that since Adams fall man neuer had free vvill and libertie and seing that vvher noe libertie is no sinne can bee for no man deserueth euil for that vvhich he could not auoid it follovvethe that vvhosoeuer is persuaded as all must be by theyr opinion that hee hath no free-vvill must make nether conscience nor scruple of any sinne They affirme also that by Christe vvee are freed from all obligation of lavves in so much that noe lavve can bynde or touch our conscience vvee need not then make scrouple of anye transgression or sinne vvhich in that it is sinne is against the obligatioÌ„ of one lavve or other bicause vvhere no lavve byndeth there is no obligatioÌ„ vvhere noe obligation is noe breach or transgression can bee founde and vvhere no transgressioÌ„ there is no sinne vvhere noe sinne is no conscience of sinne is to be made It is an article also of fay the amongest them or at least a thing necessary to bee beleeued that the commaundementes are ampossible vvho then vvilbee so madde as to make conscience for not full filling the lavve vvhich is impossible to bee full-filled as vvell truly maye the prisonner make a conscience that hee goeth not to the Church or sernson on an holy daye vvhen he is faste chained to a blocke in prison and the dores are faste locked bolted Bicause it is as impossible if Caluin lye not to keepe the commaundements as for that prisonner to go to the Churche They are of opinion that God is the autour of all our sinnes as vvell yea more then vvee or selues bicause hee is the principall cause vvee are only his instrumeÌ„ts vvhich if it bee true noe man needeth to bee soe scrupulous as to make bones of that of vvhich God him selfe maketh no conscience And if conscience bee takeÌ„ a vvaye the lavve vvitnesse Iudge and Executioner is taken a vvaye so good leaue is giuen to playe vvhat euill parts vvee vvill if ether vvee can by secrecie auoid the magistrats eye or by violence and force resiste his povver for then conscience being taken a vvaye nothing is remaining to keep vs in avve The tvvelueth Chapter shevveth hovv they open the gapp to pride I Haue allready declared hovv the Reformers by many pointes of their doctrine opeÌ„ the gapp to all vice in generall novv it shall not be amiss to shevv hovv they fauourize some vices especially and in particuler And first I vvill beginne vvith pride bicause that vvas the first sinne and the first cause of all sinnes â—â—â—li 10. bicause the deuil sinned before man and his first sinne vvas svvelling pride by vvhich hee coueted to bee as great and as highe in perfection as the highest Yea many are of opinion that Adams first sinne also vvas pride vvhich moued him to eate of the forbidden frute maugre the commaundement of God imagining that soe for so the deuill had promised hee should become like vnto God in knovving good and euil And this is the cause vvhy proud men especially are called the children of the deuil bicause by pride they especially ressemble him Vvherfore that doctrine vvhich stirreth vp a proude coÌ„ceipte in vs caÌ„ not bee of God bicause it moueth to pride vvhich is of the deuil and therfore if I shall proue that our reformers doctrine puffeth vp vvith pride all those vvhich follovve it I shall proue it not to bee of God but of the deuil For althoughe pride be a common disease of all heretikes for vvhoe so preferreth his ovvne iudgement before the vvholle Church as all heretikes doe in that they are heretikes must needes condemne him selfe of an extraordinarie pride yet some heretikes by some pointes of their doctrine haue giuen more especiall cause of this sinne of pride The Gnostikes vvere of opinion that as gold thoughe cast into the mire neuer looseth his natiue colour and perfectioÌ„ so a iust man such as they counted them selues Ex Iren. l. 10 c. 1. can neuer bee soyled neuer loose his perfection in vvhat actions soeuer hee intermedleth him selfe thoughe in adulteries and fornications Vvhich doctrine moued them to suche a conceit of theÌ„ selues that they thought them selues to knovve al thinges and to be so perfecte that noe sinne could contaminate them Ex Anth l. c. de poenit c. â— The like vvas the pride of the NouatiaÌ„s vvho therfore called them selues pure and cleane And to omit the pride of Arius Nestorius chap. 5. Luther and Caluin vvhich in the first booke I haue set dovvne let vs see hovv their doctrine puffeth meÌ„ vp vvith pride They are of opinion as is allready related that vvee are iust by no other iustice then Christes ovvn iustice vvhich doctrine vvhoe soever embraceth he must needs be persvvaded that he is as iuste as Christe him selfe bicause in his opinion they haue bothe one and the same iustice vvhich persuasioÌ„ is enough to stirre vs vp to LuciferiaÌ„ pride as is allready in another place
an heretike by Vvherfore Ireneus sayeth that by succession vve confound all heretikes Supra Sainct Austine sayeth that it is the thing Lib. cont ep fund c. 4 l. dâ— vtilit cred c. 17. vvhich holdeth him in the Catholike Church bicause sayeth he that Church in vvhich is this successioÌ„ is the rock against vvhich the gates of hell can not preuail If therfore our nevv Christianes vvill discharge them selues of this marke of an heretike vvhich is vvante of succession let them shevv vs as Tertulian demaunded of the heretikes of his tyme the catalogue of their Bishops and the origen of their Churche that if in the same vve finde them to be descended from the Apostles vve may acknovvledg them as true Christians if vve finde that they are not descended from so noble a race vve may hisse them out of the Church for heretikes But I ame sure they caÌ„ shevv noâ— succession bicause they are the first them selues and can as soone name their predecessours as they can finde out Lutheranes before Luther caluinistes before caluin I vvill not deny but that they can deriue some pointes of their doctrine froÌ„ Simon Magus and other ancient heretikes but this succession proueth them also to be heretikes as is before demonstrated but a succession from that Church vvhichvvas commonly counted Christian they can not shevv yea they can not shevv vs a succession of their doctrine from any ancient heretikes but are them selues the first of their familie succeeding to none but sent and ordayned by them selues See the first booke first chap. borne prodigiously of theÌ„ selues ChildreÌ„ vvith out fathers and schollers vvith out masters for although they borovv their heresies of other heretikes yet they iumpe vvith no heretikes in all points but ether adde or detracte so succeed in all poincts to none Vverfore though sometymes they vaunte that they succeed the Apostles and the primatiue Church yet some tymes the truthe breaketh from theÌ„ against their vvills as it doth from the deuil vvhen by coniuration he is compelled to tell the truth and then they confess them selues to be the first of their familie but this confession hangeth them Oecolampadius they call the first bishop of Basil and Caluin the first of Geneua Latimer the first Apostle of Ingland and knokes of Scotland And Martin Luther the most ancient of them all is not afrayed to saye that he vvas the first man that manifested the ghospell and the truthe vnto the vvorld In prafaâ— disp Lypsiâ— Audemus dicere sayeth hee à nobis primo diuulgatum esse Christum Vve dare saye that Christ vvas first by vs made knovvn vnto the vvorld He hathe piggs in his belly therfore he speakes in the plurall nuÌ„ber but he hath noe braynes in his head nor blood in his face to blush vvith all and therfore he dares be bold to say that he is the first man that promulgated the christian lavve Art thou the first thou vaunting compagnion modestie vvould yeeld at least to the Apostles So he vvill peraduenture but at least sayeth he I ame the first after them O monstrouse and Luciferian pride and novv not Luther but Lucifer Art thou the first after the Apostles Vvhere then vvas the Churche all this vvhile Vvhere vver ethe Pastours and Doctours of the same Vvhere vvere the Austines Ambroses Gregories Hieromes Vvas ther none all this vvhile to haue been imployed but God must needs expecte till an Apostata fryar leaped out of a Cloister and maryed vvith a Nonne notvvithstanding that bothe had promised chastitie before god and man by a solemne vovve But they haue a shifte or tvvoe by vvhich they thinke to auoyd this argument of succession The first is this our doctrine say they is Apostolicall and vve are the Apostles successours bicause vve preach conformable to that doctrine vvhich they haue left in the ghospells epistles by them vvritten But this shifte vvill not serue See the second chap. bicause this is to make bare scripture Iudge of their doctrine as all heretikes haue euer doon vv ch not notvvithstanding as is in the first booke demonstrated is noe certain rule to square fayth religion by Vvherfore they haue yet another ansvveare in store vv ch is this They graunte that the Apostles once plaÌ„ted a true church true religioÌ„ and established true pastours but soone after this Churche fayled degenerated froÌ„ that it vvas into the Synagogue of the deuil vv ch they call the Papisticall Churche and possessed the vvorld for many hundred yeares till at length Luther the man of god builded this Church agayne renevved the religion and appointed nevv pastours so say they vve succeed to that Church vvhich the Apostles founded not by a continuall succession but by an interruption of many hundred yeares But aske them vvhat yeare of our lord vnder vvhat Emperour or Pope vppon vvhat occasion this Church fayled then they can not giue you a resolute ansvver Luther in the Assembly at Wormatia publikely auouched that the Church fell in the tyme of the Councel of ConstaÌ„ce in vvhich Vvicleph vvas condeÌ„ned Tom. 9. l cont Papatum The same Martin not allvvayes myndfull of euery vvord vvhich he hath spoken in his book vvhich he vvrote against Papacie sayeth that this Church fayled a thousand yeares after Christe and his reason is biccause the Apocalips sayeth that Satan for a thousand yeares shal be tyed and so for six hundred years he hath been loose l. de Capt. Babyl In another place he sayeth that saint Gregorie vvas the last good pope and that since that tyme the Church and pastours are degenerated Yet the same man perceiuing hovv litle aggreemeÌ„t is betvvixte his religion and that vvhich vvas practised euen in the first age and tyme of the Apostles hovv vnlike his ministers are to those ancient preestes and fathers Act 15. he sayeth that the Apostles them selues erred in their Councel holdeÌ„ at Hierusalem or else sayeth he vve all sinne novv in eating blood-puddings vvhich they forbad not knovving absurde companion as he vvas or not acknovv-ledging that the precept vvas but for a tyme to coÌ„tent the Ievves As for the Councell of Nice vvhich vvas vvith in 300 yeares after Christe he auoucheth that the canons and articles of the same are but Stravv and Stubble â—â—prâ— vvhich epithetons he giues also vnto saint Iames his epistle Ep. â—d Sadol Caluin sayeth that Bonifacius the Pope vvas the first that vvas made suprem head of the Churche by Phocas the Emperour and so he thinketh that then the Churche first degenerated yet the same man in his preface to the king of Fraunce Prafat Inst. ad Regem Galliâ— in locis postreâ—â—â—â—ditu sayeth that the Church fell not till the tyme of the Councel of Basil Melancthon sayeth that Pope Zozimus vvas the first Anti-christ and that since ther vvas neuer any true Bishop of Rome But first this disagreement of the tyme
of the priuate spirit contempte of fathers vvant of a visible Iudge of vvhich vvee haue spoken in the first booke for these vvere the properties of all heretikes and are as proper to our nevve reformers as euer they vvere to any ancient heretike as by the same chapters doth appear most euidently THE THIRD BOOKE CONTEINETH A SVRVEY of their doctrine concerning Christ in vvhich by many poinctes of their doctrine it is proued that they are Antichristians rather then Christians The first Chapter proueth that their doctrine despoileth Christe of his diuinitie and that they therfore are no sincere Christians EVERY man liketh and loueth that vvhich he professeth and vvill speake honourably of him vvhom he follovveth in that profession The Stoickes coÌ„mend Zeno the Platonistes prayse Plato the Peripatetickes Aristotle the Epicureans Epicure the Atheists Diagoras and euery one reuerenceth and respecteth him vvhose doctrine and professioÌ„ he embraceth If then the reformers be sincere and reall Christians as they vvill seem to bee they must thinke and speake of Christe very honourably and giue that homage to his parson vvhich his doctrine hath deserued And so in deed or rather in vvordes they seem to doe Luther vvhen he first began to preach against Indulgences merits satisfactioÌ„ good vvorkes Lut. in c 17. Gal. fol. 2â—â— and inherent iustice affirming that only to beleeue that Christs Iustice is ours is sufficient to saluation vsed this for a Cloke that forsooth hee gaue all to Christs iustice and nothing to our vvorkes Caluin also in his preface of his Institutions vv ch he vvrote to the King of Fraunce In prâ—f Inst ad Reg. Galâ— commendes his ovvn doctrine for this pointe especially that it giues all honour to Christe leaueth nothing to our ovvn force habilitie And vvhat doth better aggree vvith faith sayeth he then to acknovvledge our selues despoiled of all vertue that of God vve may be clothed deuoid of all good that of him vve may be filled bond-seruaunts of sinne that of him vve may be made free blinde that of him vve may be enlightened lame that of him vve may be made straight feeble that of him vve may be vpholden to take from our selues all matter of glorying that he alone may be gloriouse on hyghe and in him vve may glorie So that vvhilest they deny good vvorkes to bee necessarie affirme faythe only sufficient vvhilest they say that vve haue no inherent iustice but are the best of vs though apostles sinners before god that our best vvorkes are sinnes and that vvee haue noe other Iustice then the iustice of Christe apprehended by fayth and imputed only to vs vvhilest they deny that vvee caÌ„ obserue the coÌ„maÌ„demeÌ„tes or haue the povver free vvill to do any good or resist any tentation they attribute forsooth all to Christe and leaue nothing to vs that hee only may be glorified But by this booke I hope to make knovvn vnto the vvorld their deep dissimulation vvho in vvordes seeme to giue all to Christ but by their doctrine doe robbe him and despoile him of all his honourable titles And first you shall see hovv sacrilegiously they plucke and pull at Christes diuinitie I vvill not here relate the blasphemies of Michael Seruet vvhoe yet vvas a brother of this religion bicause they vvill say that for such doctrine Caluine caused him to bee burned for he sayed plainly that God the sonne vvas not true God l. Trin. fo 7 34 35. l 2. fol 8 in dial not coaquall vvith his father yea he sayed that God the father only vvas God vvhich doctrine notvvithstaÌ„ding he gathered or might haue gathered out of Luthers and Caluins vvorkes Nether vvill I say any thing of the heretikes and nevv Arians of TraÌ„siluania vvho in this also aggree vvith Seruetus Luther the graund Patriarch and nevv Euangelist must not bee omitted vvho in his booke against Latomus sayeth that he can not abide that vvord Homousion These are his vvords anima mea odit vocabulum Homousion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 My soule hateth the vvord consubstantiall So did the Arians hate the same vvord and called it exoticuÌ„ straunge and vnusuall But Athanasius gathereth this vvord out of scriptures ancient fathers Ep. Decr. Conc. Nâ—iâ— vvho in that they affirm that the sonne is begotten of his father coequall vnto him one vvth him affirm also that he is coÌ„substaÌ„tiall of the same substaunce vvith his father bicause nothing is equall and coequall to god the father but God and nothing is God vv ch is not the same substauÌ„ce vvith him bicause there are not many Gods And vvhy should Luther hate this vvord but for the signification for the sound is no more vngratefull then the sound of other vvords If he hate the signification then is he an Arian vvho beleeueth not that the sonne is coÌ„substaÌ„tiall and of the same substaunce vvith his father and consequently he thinks him not to be God or else he thinkes that ther are many Gods different in substaunce The same Luther as diuerse affirm in an edition of his commentaries vppon Genesis vvhich I haue not seen calles the sonne of God the instrument of his father by vv ch he created the vvorld in â— ca. Gen. vvhich manner of speech Arius also vsed And seing that the instrument is neuer of so noble a nature as the principall agent vvhat is this but to make the sonne of God inferiour to his father and consequently a creature And this testimonie as I haue read Seruetus alleaged against Luthers Scholers in the Albane disputation Luther also blotted out of the Germain prayer books those ancient vvords Sancta Trinitas vnus Deus miserere nobis Holy Trinitie one God haue mercy vppon vs. And vvhy for some spite belike vvhich he conceiued against Christ Iesus the second person in Trinitie For vvhy else did he in his Germain Bibles vvhen he came to the translation of those vvords of the ninth chapter of Esaie Deus fortis stronge God Leaue out God as though Christ vvere strong but not God Vvhy did he leaue out quite those vvords of saint Ihons epistle â— â—o â— Tres funt qui testimonium dant in caelo Pater Verbum Spiritus sanctus hi tres vnum sunt Ther are three vvhich giue testimonie in heauen the father the vvord and the holy ghost and these three are one The same Luther in his booke of Councels excuseth Eutyches l. de concil ◠〈◊〉 and Nestorius and accuseth S. Leo and sainct Cyrill as men vvhich vvere to eagre against them for sayeth he as Eutyches sayed so may it vvell be sayed that Christs diuinitie suffred O blasphemie did the diuinitie of Christ suffer then vvas it not true diuinitie and consequeÌ„tly Christ vvas not God bicause God as God can not suffer I may vse here Alamundarus vvitty ansvvere against Luther Niceph l. 16 hist c. â—â— Baron in Annal anno Christi 509. vv ch he vsed
and the lavve of grace in all vvhich See the first booke sint chapter as I haue declared in the laste chapter of the first booke vvere Preestes and they also diuerse according to the diuersitie of lavves Vvherfore if Christe hathe planted a Church and in it established a lavv and religion certainly he hath also appointed a succession of Preestes bicause they euer goe together and haue such a connexion that the one can not stande vvithout the other For if there be noe Preests to offer sacrifice and to minister sacramentes and to interpret the lavve no shevv or face of religion can remaine and as vvell may a Kingdome florishe vvithout a Prince or magistrate In the first booke and sixt chap. as religion vvithout Preests and bishops Vvherfore as I haue proued before in the lavve of nature the first begotten of euerie familie vvas a Preeste in the lavve vvritten the tribe of Leuie vvas deputed and dedicated vnto Preesthod Ios l. 2. cont App. In vvhich tribe ther vvere inferiour Preests so many that Dauid vvas fayne to deuide them into tvventy fovvre rankes vvhich also conteyned a great number There vvere also Leuits vvho had inferiour offices And ther vvere highe Preestes vvhich succeeded one after anothers deathe to the number of fovvre score odde â—os li. 22. Aut. c. 2. and the laste highe Preestvvas Finasius vvho liued vntill the Citie of Hierusalem vvith the Temple vvas beseeged and ruined by Titus Vespasian These Preestes and Leuites loosing their office vvith the abrogation of the old lavve Christe Iesus vvho gaue vs a nevve lavve appointed a nevv Preesthood of vvhich hee him selfe vvas the first Preest and the principall and the only high Preest to vvhom no man succeedeth in the same authoritie and therfore sainct Paule putteth a difference herin betvvixte the olde and the nevve lavve that in the olde lavve many highe Preestes vvho succeeded one another vvere necessarie bicause one dying another vvas of necessitie to succeed least the Church should vvante an highe Preest but in the nevv lavve there is but one highe Preeste Christe Iesus and he is sufficient bicause thoughe hee dyed yet he rose again and neuer gaue ouer the office but still offereth sacrifice and still ministreth sacraments See the third booke sixâ— chap. by the hands of his vnder-Preestes So that he only is the highe Preest of the nevv lavv and none but he bicause no man succeedeth him in the same authoritie But here the aduersarie vvil insulte and say vnto me that I haue affirmed that vv ch hee desired for if Christe bee the only highe preest of the nevv lavve vvhat neede vvee any Popes Bishops and Preests Thus he argueth but vvth hovv litle reasoÌ„ a blinde man may see For as it is no good argument to say that novv in Ingland and Scotland and Ireland can be but one King at once therfore ther muste bee noe viceroyes nor Deputies nor Chauncelours nor Treasures nor Dukes nor Noble men vvhoe are the Princes Officers and Princes in their kinde vicegerentes also some in more ample some in lesse ample maÌ„ner so it is noe good argument to saye that Christe is the only highe Preest of the nevve lavve Ergo ther are noe other Preelts but he for he may haue many vicegerentes vvho also are true Predsts in their Kind And so the Pope maye be his supreme Vicare in earthe and other Bishops and Preests may be inferiour Vicars and Preests also subordinate in iurisdiction vnto the Pope Yea seing that the high Preest Christe Iesus hathe vvithdravvne his visible presence froÌ„ the Churche and executeth not visibly and immediatly by him selfe his preestly function it vvas necessary that to his visible Churche he should leaue a visible succession of Preests vvho should rule and minister vnder him and for him in his absence not as his successours but as his vicegerents and ministers for as noe Preest noe Churche so noe visible Preest noe visible Church Vvherfore vvhen Christe vvas to bid his Church fare vvell he instituted his Apostles Precsts Mat 26. giuing them authoritie to consecrate 10 20. 10.21 and to offer sacrifie and after his resurrection giuing them povver also to absolue from sinnes and appointing Peter as the highe Preest and Vicare vnder him selfe Iesâ— 22. Can. 2. vvhich to denye vvere not only to coÌ„tradicte the Councell of Trent vvhich defineth that in the place alleaged Christe made the Apostles Preefts but also to contemne and condemne the vvholle Schoole of ancient interpretours yea the vvholle Christian vvorld vvho haue so interpreted the places alleaged This Preestly function the Apostles in their tyme did exercisein preaching teaching baptising confirming and offerring Sacrifice also vv ch is the proper function of a Preest Yea their Disciples did the same Act. 1â— for S. Luke sayeth that they ministred vnto our Lord that is sacrificed as the Greeke vvord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth and as Erasmus him selfe trassateth yea as the maÌ„ner of speach also importeth For if they had only preached or ministred SacrameÌ„ts vvell might they haue been sayed to haue ministred to the People but not so properly vnto our lord vnless they had offered sacrifice vvhich is proper to him Sainct Paule sayeth that Timothie vvas ordained bishop by imposition of hands of the Presbiterie 1. Tim. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Tim. 〈◊〉 in c. 5â— Isa that is a company of bishops and he affirmeth that he him selfe imposed his haÌ„ds vppon him vvhich imposition of hands is in greeke called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and as S. Hierome vvitnessethe signifiethe giuing of holy orders Tit. 〈◊〉 The same sainct Paule vvriting vnto Titus sayeth that he lefte him at Creta that he should constitute and ordaine Preests in euery citie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The same sainct Paule vvith Barnabas Act. 10. ordained to the people Preests in euery Church by imposition of hands as the greeke vvord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 importeth Act. 20. The same sainct Paule as sainct Luke reporteth sent to Ephesus called the elders of the Churche that is Preests for to them he sayed Looke to your selues and vnto your flocke 1. Tim 〈◊〉 And of Preests he speaketh vvheÌ„ he sayeth Preests vvhich do rule vvell are vvorthy double honou Iaeâ— 5. And againe Against a Preest receiue no accusation Of Preests also speaketh Sainct Iames vvhen he sayeth If any bee diseased among you let them call for the Preests of the Churche And bicause our ghospellers see that by these places it is manifest that in the Apostles tymes Preests vvere ordeined they are enforced for other vvise they could not coÌ„ceale this from the People to translate elders for Preestes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Presbiter Prestre Prete Preest notvvithstanding that the greeke vvorde yea the Latin frenche and Italian soundeth as much as Preest in Inglish Of Bishops Preestes and deacons vve haue mention in the
vvit nor learning vvere vvorthy to cary their bookes after them But least our aduersarie triuÌ„phe that vvee can not proue our sacraments out of scripture I vvill bringe Scriptures for euery one of theÌ„ But first I muste aggree vvith them vppon certaine conditions for first of all they muste not exacte of mee to pro ue that these seuen are expressely called by the name of SacrameÌ„t for soe they can not proue their tvvo or three sacraments Ephes 5. bicause matrimonie only vvhich they deny to be a sacrament is expressely called a sacrament Secondly they muste not demaund of me any place of Scripture vv ch sayeth that there are seuen Sacraments bicause they can alleage noe such place vvhich sayeth that ther are not seuen or that there are but tvvoe or three And the reason is bicause scripture vseth to treate of many thinges but not allvvayes to nuÌ„ber them For Scripture relateth Christes miracles and yet numbers them not and it settes dovvne many articles of faithe as the Trinitie Incarnation Passion Resurrection Ascension and many others yet neuer setteth dovvne any certaine number They muste bee content then that I deduce by as good consequence out of Scripture that there are seuen Sacramentes as they can gather their tvvoe or three Sacramentes And this I can doe and if this I doe I shall refute all their opinions of vv ch some hold one some tvvoe some three some fovvre only and all conspire in the deniall of seuen But before I doe this I must suppose vvhich they vvill graunte caÌ„not deny vnless they vvill deny all sacraments that to proue seuen sacramentes out of Scripture shal be sufficient if I can fynde in scripture ether in expresse termes or by good deductioÌ„ an externall rite commaundemeÌ„t or Institution and a promise of grace in euery one of the seueÌ„ SacrameÌ„ts afore-named for thus our aduersaries proue their Sacramentes and bicause they imagin that some of these conditions requisite to a sacrament are deficient in some of the seueÌ„ they deny them to be sacramentes â— 18 Vvherfore in the Apologie of their coÌ„fession these vvordes are to bee seene If vve calle Sacramentes rites vvhich haue a commaundement from God and to vvhich is annexed a promise of grace it is easie to iudge vvhich are properly sacramentes And a litle after by this rule they gather that Baptisme the supper and Penaunce are sacraments To begin therfore vvith baptisme the externall rite vve gather out of the third of sainct Ihon and the last of sainct Matthevve vvhich is vvater and vvashing the commaundement and Institution is proued out of these vvordes vnlesse a man be regenerated of vvater and the holy spirit Io. 3. The promise of grace vvhich is annexed to this Sacrament the last chapter of saint Matthevve proposeth in those vvords he vvho beleeueth and shal be baptized Mar. 16. shal be saued And to goe on vvith the Sacrament of the Altare the externall rite of this sacrament is bread and vvine or the formes of bread vvine The institution and commaundement is conteined in those vvords Mat. 26.1 Cor. 15. d ee this in commemoratâ—n of mee The promise of grace vvee gather out of sainct Ihon he vvhoe eateth this bread shall liue for euer Io. â— In CoÌ„firmation also vvee finde an externall rite vvhich is imposition of handes by vvhich the Apostles and Apostles and Bishops only vsed after Baptisme to giue the holy ghoste Act â— 19. Dionis l. 〈◊〉 Hierâ—p 3. c. 2 Tert l. de res â—arnis lib de baptis Cip lâ— ep 12â— Aug. l 2. coÌ„t lit Pre. ◠〈◊〉 The promise of grace appearethe by the performaunce bicause all they vppon vvhome the Apostles layed their handes receued the holy ghost and consequently grace The institution and commaundemeÌ„t vve may vvel presume to haue proceeded from Christe bicause Apostles can not institute SacrameÌ„tes nor cause any externall ceremonie to giue the holy ghoste infallibly and they vvould neuer haue presumed such a thinge vvithout a coÌ„maundement froÌ„ Christe their master Vvherfore sainct Austine speaking of this sacrament sayeth in plaine termes Suprâ—â— that the Sacrament of Chrisme is to be numbered amongest the sacred signes euen as Baptisme is The same conditions of a sacrament are easily to be found also in the sacrament of Confession Io. â—â— for Christe sayeth vnto his Apostles and in them to all their successours Vvhose sinnes you shall forgiue are forgiuen them and vvhose sinnes you shall reteine are reteined In vvhich vvordes he giues authoritie to Preests as his vnder Iudges to absolue from sinnes and to deteine sinnes and bicause the Preest can not absolue vnlesse the penitente confesse his sinnes Amb l. 1. de pâ—n ca 7. Aug l. 5 de Bapt c. 20. and the penitent can not knovv that hee is absolued vnlesse the Preest pronounce some audible sentence vvee gather that the externall rite of this sacrament is an audible absolution and confession the promise of grace is found also in this Sacrament most euideÌ„tly bicause Christe promiseth that vvhose sinnes the Preest forgiueth shal be forgiuen and seing that sinnes can not be forgiuen vvithout grace if the preest can forgiue sinnes he can also giue grace by this sacrament The institution and commaundemeÌ„t is conteined in the same vvords bicause Preestes haue commissioÌ„ from Christe to absolue froÌ„ sinnes to holde and deteine our sinnes consequeÌ„tly sinners vvho must recoÌ„cile them selues to God muste doe it by confessioÌ„ to the Preest else can not he absolue for noe iudge can giue sentence vvithout knovvledg of the cause othervvise he can not be sayed to deteine our sinnes for if he de teine our sinnes vve caÌ„ not be loosed but by his absolution and seing that all sinners must seeke to free theÌ„ selues froÌ„ the bandes and bondage of sinne they must come to the Preest vvhoe only vnder God bindeth and looseth In the Sacrament of Order vve finde also an external rite to vvit impositioÌ„ of handes 1 Tim. 4 2. Tim. 1. vvhich in Greeke is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vvhich as sainct Hierome sayeth sigâ—â—neth ordination of Clerkes in c â—8 Isa The commaundement and institution vve gather thus Supra saint Paule bids Timothee not to neglecte the grace vvhich he had receiued by imposition of hands vvherfore sainct Paule Knevve that infallibly that externall rite gaue grace but it could not giue grace if Christ had not instituted it to that ende and S. Paule vvould not haue praesumed to haue vsed it to that end if Christe had not commaunded and instituted it Aug l. â— coÌ„t ep Parn c 13. l â— de bap c. 1. ergo this externall rite vvas instituted and commaunded The promise of grace vve gatther by the performaunce bicause sainct Paule sayeth that Timothie had receiued grace by imposition of hands Ephes 5. That matrimonie also is a Sacrament sainct Paule vvill vvitnesse vvho bicause this seemed most
vnlike a sacrament or holy signe callethe it a great Sacrament bicause it signifieth the coniunction of Christe vvith his Church As if he had sayed Matrimonie to a vvordly eye may seeme to haue litle sanctitie or mysterie in it but I say that in this respecte that it signifieth the Mariage of Christe vvith his Church it is a sacrament and a great sacrament The externall rite of this sacrament is the contracte vvhich by vvords or signes is made betvvixte man vvife and therfore S. Chrisostome and S. Hierome vppon this place affirme that sainct Paule called this contracte a great Sacrament The Institution vve haue in Christes ovvne vvords Mat. 19. vvhat God hath conioined let not man separate The promise of grace thus vve gather bicause Christe hathe made this sacrament indissoluble and consequently he must giue grace by it tobeare the burden of perpetuall vvedlocke easilie else had the lavve of matrimonie pressed more heauilie the necks of ChristiaÌ„s theÌ„ the lavve of the Ievves bicause they in case of fornication might leaue their olde vvife and take a nevv and so shake of the burden Secondly S. Paule sayeth that this SacrameÌ„t signifieth the Mariage of Christe vvith his Church vvhich Mariage vvas made not only by Incarnation but also by grace and therfore the Church is called Christes louing spouse â— Gâ—r 10. and sainct Paule biddeth men to loue their vviues as Christe loued his Church vvherfore vnlesse vve vvil saye that matrimonie is an idle signe vve muste saye that it hathe a promise of grace annexed by vvhich man and vvife maye loue one another and beare also more easily the heauy burden of Mariage Vvherfore sainct Austine sayeth in the mariages of Christians l. de beno coniug c 19 vide câ—â—am cap. 24. the sanctitie of the Sacrament is of more valevv then the frutefullues of the vvombe Laste of all that Extreme vnction is also a Sacrament it is plaine by the vvords of saincte Iames cap 5. Is any sicke amongest you let him bring in the Preests of the Church and let them pray vppon him anointing him vvith oyle in the name of our Lorde and the prayer of faith shall saue the sick-man and our lorde shall alleuiate him and if he be in sinnes they shal be forgiuen him In vvhich vvords vvho seeth not the externall rite to vvit prayer that is the forme of vvordes vsed in this Sacrament and the anointing vvith oile The promise is alleuiation and forgiueness of sinnes vvhich are neuer remitted vvithout grace The institution and commaundement is easilie deduced bicause an Apostle vvho may promulgate and minister SacrameÌ„tes but not institute them vvould neuer haue so bodly promised forgiuenes of sinnes by an externall rite and ceremonie had he not beene assured that Christe had instituted it to that effecte Vvherfore sainct Bernard in the life of sainct Malachias affirmeth that he anointed a vvoman knovving that in this Sacrament sinnes are forgiuen Ber in vita Ma Inno entius ep 1. ad Decentium c. â— And thus much for proofe of seuen Sacraments Novve let vs see vvhat sacrameÌ„tes the reformers haue Luther very peremptorilie auoucheth that he must denye seuen Sacramentes and allovv of three only for the tyme l. de cap. Bab. he sayeth for the tyme bicause he vvas not sure hovv longe he should remain in that mynde And vvhat are those three Sacramentes vvhich for a tyme he is contente to allovv vs Baptisme sayeth he penaunce and bread Zuinglius allovves allso of three but not the same vv ch his Master Luther admitteth l. de vera falsa rel c. de inatr l. 4. Inst c. 19. §. 31. vvhich are baptisme the supper and matrimonie Caluin admitteth also three SacrameÌ„tes but not the same vvhich Zuinglius grauntethe Baptisme the Supper and ordination Mel. in locis Melancton is more liberall for he affordethe vs fovvre to vvit Baptisme the supper penaunce and order The softer Lutheranes in their conuenticle at lipsia allovved of seuen SacrameÌ„tes l. 20. hist an â—8 for so Sledan the Historiographer relateth Out of this diuersitie of opinions I gather first that they haue amongest them denyed allmoste all the sacramentes and so can haue noe religion or a uery graceless religion bicause religion and sacramentes euer vvent together Secondly I gather that if any man vvill forsake the Catholique Churche and her beleefe of seuen Sacramentes that he hathe no morall nor probable assuraunce of any Sacramentes for seing that he hath noe more reason to credit Luther vvhen hee sayed once that ther vvas but one sacrament l. de cap. Baâ— initio another tyme that there vvere but tvvoe SacrameÌ„tes in fine then vvheÌ„ he admitted three for the tyme he is not to credit him at all And seing that he caÌ„ alleage noe more for him selfe theÌ„ others that is scripture interpreted as he pleasethe and they noe more then he noe man can haue iuste cause to beleeue any of them and so if hee leaue the Catholike Church he may doubte of all the Sacramentes Lastly seing that the reformers can not bring expresse scripture for any of the Sacramentes but Matrimonie vvhich not vvith standing allmost all of them denye and seing that by deduction as I haue declared vve may gather out of scripture as probably seueÌ„ Sacramentes as one if the reformers leaue the authoritie of the Church and fathers and truste only to their ovvne vvittes in gathering by deduction and consequence their SacrameÌ„tes out of scripture then as one distrusteth anothers deduction so may he distrust his ovvne and so they haue noe certaintie of any sacramentes at all consequeÌ„tly haue noe probable assuraunce of their religioÌ„ bicause sacrametes and religion goe together vvhich Luther him selfe vvill confesse l. de not Eccl. vvho affirmeth that consent in doctrine of the Sacramentes is a note of the true Church and religion The fourth Chapter shevveth of vvhat litle importaunce they make the Sacramentes to bee THe reformers as by the sormer chapter appeareth are very sparing in their Sacramentes some and the most of them not affording vs aboue tvvoe or three but these also they seem to graunte vs vvith an euill vvill bicause they so detracte from their dignitie and attribute so litle vnto them that they might as vvell vvith SueÌ„kfeldius haue denyed these also bicause as good neuer a vvhit as neuer the better For they deny vvith commoÌ„ voice that Sacramentes giue grace or effectuate any iotte of sanctification in our soules To vvhat purpose theÌ„ serue they or vvhat necessitie vvas ther of them Melancthon sayeth that they serue for badges to distinguis he vs from Infidels l. de loc c. de signiâ— but for this effect vvee needed no sacraments at all bicause the yellovv capp of the Ievv in Rome or some noble mans cognisaunce vvould haue been more fitting for this purpose For seing that Baptisme according to Melancthons opinion giueth no caracter after the childe is vvashed
in baptisme and the vvater dryed vp vvhat signe remaineth I pray you to distinguish a ChristiaÌ„ from an infidel And vvill not profession of our faythe vvhich is noe sacramente distinguishe vs better l de vera falsa rel c de sacramentis Zuinglius maketh Sacramentes no better then souldiours markes by vvhich they are admitted and distinguished but this is refuted by the same argument by vvhich vvee haue reiected Melancthons badges l. capt Bab. c. de bap c. vl Luther graunts a litle more vnto Sacramentes for he sayeth that SacrameÌ„tes are external signes ordained to no other purpose then to stirre vp fayth vvhich only iustifieth and therfore vvhen he and his Lutheranes sometymes saye that sacramentes do sanctifie vs and that baptisme dothe regenerate vs they meane not as Catholikes doe that Sacramentes immediately giue vs grace but only that that they stirr vp faith vvhich sanctifieth vvherfore sometymes they call sacrameÌ„tes pictures vvhich put vs in mynde of Christe his passion But then it follovveth that they vvho haue pictures of Christe or his passion or bookes of the same subiecte staÌ„de in need of noe sacramentes bicause these thinges are more apte to stirre vp faythe then sacramentes Secondly Baptisme is to noe purpose in children bicause it can not stirre vp their fayth at all vvho haue noe vse of reason at all This so presseth Luther that it had made him an Anabaptiste had he not had a shifte in store vvhich also is a very poore one l. cont Cocleâ—â— he sayeth therfore that infantes at the tyme of baptisme haue vse of reason and that they vnderstand vvhat baptisme signifieth and so beleeue also in Christe And this he proueth by the example of sainct â—hon Baptist vvho reioised and acknovvledged Christ in his mothers vvombe Luc. 1. but by the same argumeÌ„t he might haue proued that all asses can speake bicause Balaams Asse by miracle once spake to the Prophet Num. 22. for as it vvas a priuiledg that sainct Ihon had vse of reason in his mothers vvombe so vvas it that Balaams Asse did speake and therfore if this be a good argument Sainct Iohn had vse of reason vvhen he vvas an infante Ergo all children haue this also is a good argument Balaams Asse could speake ergo all asses can speake At least vvise by this argument of Luther vve Maye experience in him Vvhat an asse can speake and is not ashamed to vtter And truly if children at that age vvere as vvise as Luther vvill make them vve must condemne them of hainous sacriledg Aug ep 57. vvho by their crying and by the resistaunce vvhich such litle onescaÌ„ make shevv hovv vnvvillingly and vvith vvhat litle respect they receiue this sacrament l 4. Inst c 14. §. 1.5.14 Caluin sayeth that Sacramentes are but Seales vvhich outvvardly signe the grace vvhich vvee receue by the promises of God and therfore he sayeth flatly that Sacramentes giue noe grace §. 23.22 and that the Sacramentes of the nevv lavve are noe better in this respecte then vvere the Sacramentes of the old lavv 1 Cor â— Yea he addeth that as sainct Paule sayed that Circumcision is nothing so he might haue sayed that baptisme in this respecte is nothing vvorthe And their reasons vvhy they vvil giue no vertue vnto SacrameÌ„tes are tvvoe especially First saye they if vve graunte that SacrameÌ„tes giue grace then follovveth it that vve must put our truste in Sacramentes and seeke for saluatioÌ„ else vvhere then at the handes of Christe vvhich can not but derogate much from the passion and person of Christe But this reason seemeth to haue litle reason For as the sicke patiente principally after God puttes his truste in his Phisitian yet expecteth health allso by the medicins vvhich he prescribeth so puttes his truste in the Phisitian as in the principall cause of his healthe and in the medicins as in the instrumentall causes and yet doth noe iniurie to the Phisitian yea rather in allovving of his medicins dothe him great honour so may vve put our hope and confidence principallie in Christe as our spirituall Phisitian and yet hope also for healthe by the meanes of his Sacramentes as by his medicins and instrumentall causes of spiritual healthe Secondly they are of opinion as shal be herafter related and refuted that only fayth iustifiethe vvherfore they must consequently saye that sacramentes giue noe grace for if they did giue grace they should also iustifie and sanctifie and so only fayeth should not iustifie And so follovving this doctrine some of them saye that Sacramentes are only badges to make vs knovvne Christianes others saye they only stirre vp faythe others make them seales and signes of former iustice and all denye that they sanctifie vs. Against all these opinions might suffice that place of sainct Paule Gal. 4. vvhere to put a differeÌ„ce betvvixte our Sacramentes and the old he calleth the olde naked elementes that is bare figures and of noe force nor vertue to giue grace but vvee vvante not many other places of Scripture vvhich may also proue this veritie Io. â— Sainct Ihon sayethe that if a man be not regenerated of vvater and the holy ghoste he can not enter into heauen ergo not only the holy ghoste but vvater also regeneratethe and consequeÌ„tly not only the holy ghoste as a principall Agente but also the vvater as an instrumeÌ„te vvorketh grace in vs by vvhich vve are regenerated Io. 4. The Sacrament of the altare Christe him selfe calleth true meate vvhich giueth life and nourisheth The Sacrament of Penaunce remitteth sinnes Io. â—â— bicause Christe giueth povver to his Apostles and in them to their successours to remitte sinnes by the sentence of absolution 1. Tim. 4. 2. Tim â— c. 8.19 And sainct Paule vvill vvitnesse that Order giueth grace to Preestes the Actes of the Apostles auouch that the Apostles vvhen they confirmed the first Christians Act. 8.19 gaue the holy ghoste by imposition of handes The like proofes I could bring and haue before brought in the former chapter for the other Sacramentes But bee it so that Sacramentes giue noe grace then dothe it follovve that they are to noe purpose bicause other thinges vve haue more fitte to distinguishe Christians from Infidells and to stirre vp faythe vvhich are by our aduersaries opinion the only effectes of Sacramentes and so it follovveth that if SacrameÌ„tes giue no grace that they are of noe vertue and altogether superfluouse and so as good it vvere to haue no Sacramentes as SacrameÌ„tes bicause as good neuer a vvhitt as neuer the better and noe Sacramentes noe religion bicause as before Sacramentes and religion euer vvente together The fifte Chapter shevveth hovv in effecte the reformers take avvay from vs those fevve Sacramentes vvhich they seeme to allovv of OVR Reformers are so liber all as to afforde vs tvvoe SacrameÌ„tes to vvit Baptisme and the Eucharist or the sacrament of the Altar vv ch they
giue him occasion by his motion of his body to declare his desire to follovve yet if hee commaūde him in deed to folovve hee is very vnreasonable Or if Caluin vvill saye that God vvill seeme only to cōmaund vs bicause hee vvould make vs to see our imbecillitie and to doe vvhat vve can at least to shevve our desire then follovveth it that there are noe cōmaundementes bicause God dothe not verilie commaund them but seemeth only to commaund to make vs see our ovvne infirmitie and to shevve our desire Or if Caluin vvill not bee so bold as to deny all commaundementes then must hee graūt that God is vnreasonable in commaunding vs more then vvee are able to performe As for example if the master vvould commaund his seruaunt not onlye to ronne but also to flye on his arraund and for a shorter cutte to leape ouer a riuer ouer vvhich he cā scarsely see vvould you not thinke him vnreasonable and quite beside him selfe The like dothe almightie God if vve beleeue Caluin for he commaundeth vs to loue him aboue all and our neighbour as our selues he biddes vs not to steale not to kill yea not to couet our neighbours vvife or goods vvhich is as if hee should commaund vs to flye or to moue mountaines or to leape ouer the sea bicause these thinges in Caluins opinion are noe more impossible then are the commaundamentes and therfore in these commaundementes God shevveth him selfe as vnreasōable as hee should doe in the other Yea if once vvee graunte that god maye cōmaund impossibilities then is ther noe reason vvhy brute bealles maye not bee commaunded not to kill one another not to liue of spoile to faste somes tymes and to honour yea loue their Creatour bicause God commaundeth mā to doe these thinges vvho yet is noe more able to do thē then beastes are And if beastes could speake vvould tell allmightie God that hee hathe noe reason to commaund them to do these thinges bicause they are not in their povver then maye men make the same exception and accuse their Creatour as a Prince most vnreasonable vvhoe commaundeth them to excute those lavves vvhich they noe more can fullfill then oxen and asses can doe And if god vvill condemne them as guiltie of offence for not obeying his commaundment they maye ansvvere vvith saincte Christostome Hom 16 in ep Heb. Si impotentes nos fecit deinde imperat culpa eius est If he hath made vs impotent as Caluin sayeth he hathe bicause by his decree and ordinaunce he hindreth vs or at least if vvee be allready by Adams sinne made impotent Supra l. 2. Instis c. 7. sect 5. And yet he commaundeth vs the faulte is his and not ours if vvee transgresse his commaundement The fourth Chapter shevveth hovv the former doctrine maketh God a most cruel tyraunt CErdon that infamous heretike Ex Ter. l. prasc c. 51. and diuers of his folovvers reading in the old testament vvhat seueritie in that lavve God had sometymes vsed and not considering that the enormitie of sinne is such that it deserueth not only temporall but also aeternal deathe and imagining that such seueritie could not proceed frō the good God vvhoe is goodnes it selfe as thoughe God vvere mercifull and not iuste also they affirmed that there vvere tvvoe gods the one good the other cruel the one the autour of the olde testamēt the other of the nevv the one Creatour only of superiour substaunces the other of this inferiour vvorlde Against these men saint Austine vvrote a booke entitled Against the aduersarie of the lavve and Prophetes in vv ch hee proueth that in the nevve lavve God hath shevved as great seueritie to vvit in the death of Ananias Act. 3. Mat. 2◠5. Saphita in and threatening aeternal danation vv ch passeth all temporall punishment against those that shall not giue almes and not only against those that shall kill but also against them that shal be angrie and shall call contumeliously their brother foole Vvhence it follovveth that one and the selfe same god is seuere and svveete iuste and mercifull And good reason for as the king must not only be gētle but iuste also and therfore the Aegiptians Hierogliffe of a kinge vvas a bee vvhose hony signifieth the svveetnesse vvhich ought to be in a Prince and his stinge importeth that hee must bee vvith all seuere and iuste also vvhere mercie and faire meanes vvill not serue so God the king of kinges offereth his grace moste frankelye bestovveth benefites on vs bountifully and many tymes vvinketh at our defaultes expecteth patiently amendement and repentaunce but if vvee contemne his benefittes and abuse his patiēce then dothe hee lay it on seuerely vppon vs bicause as hee is good so is hee iust must bee iust else vvere hee not God And althoughe some respecting only the shortenesse of the pleasure vvhich they haue takē in sinne thinke it harde to be punished eternally for a momētaire pleasure yet if they consider vvhat it is to offende so great a Maiestie and hovve vvhen vve sinne vve doe in affection desire eternally to perseuer in that sinne and pleasure or cōmoditie l. 4. dial c. 44. vve vvill thinke vvith sainct Gregoire that it is good reasō that the sinner vvhoe hath sinned in his eternitie should bee punished in gods aeternitie Yea if Princes for a momentarie transgression may iustly punishe their subiectes vvith perpetuall exile and death it selfe vvhich of it selfe is perpetuall bicause a resurrectiō is not naturall vvhy maye not God iustelie punishe vs vvith eternall paines for our tēporall faultes especially seing that they vv ch dye in mortall sinne neuer thinke of repētaunce but remaine perpetually obstinate in their mallice and so may iustely bee perpetually punished bicause sinne as longe as it remaines is vvorthy paine and therfore if it remaine for euer it may iustly bee punished for euer and euer But althoughe it be so that there are not tvvoe gods as Cerdon sayed the one meeke and mylde the other cruel and Churlishe and althoughe the selfe same God and the good and the onlygod bee must bee bicause hee is God mercifull and iust and consequently gentle seuere vvithout all crueltie bicause iustice is noe crueltie yet if vve vvill auouch Luthers and Caluins doctrine for currant vve must of necessitie confesse that God is the cruellest tyraunte that euer vvas or can bee For they affirme as vve haue related in the former Chapter that God commaundethe vs thinges altogetherimpossible and they can not deny but that for transgressing these commaundemēts the vvicked are tormēted in hell perpetually for Christe bidds thē goe accursed in to euerlasting fyer Mat. 2◠vvhoe clothed him not in his mēbers vvhen hee vvas in them naked vvho fed him not vvhen in them hee vvas houngrie vvhich if it bee so then is God moste cruel and barbarouse Luther once vvell perceued that this consequence to vvit that God is cruel