annihilate the power and efficacy of the Sacrifice of the Crosse And that there is but one onely Sacrificator sacrificing expiatorily in the Evangelicall Law to wit Jesus Christ our Lord BRiefly whosoever shall consider the Popes Doctrine and of his Disciples he shall see plainly That it tendeth onely to debase the merit and vertue of the death and passion of our Lord Jesus Christ as you may observe by the Doctrine of their pretended sacrifice of the Masse For these Doctors teach that it is a second sacrifice of Christ propitiatory both for the quicke and for the dead which is plainly to deny that the Sacrifice of the Crosse hath the power and efficacy to take away sinnes unlesse it be reiterated But the Apostle Saint Paul teacheth us plainly that the sacrifice of the Crosse hath at once taken sin wholly away when he saith That by the wil of God we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all By one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified And he addeth yet another sentence that cutteth up this Error by the very roots Now Where remission of these is there is no more offering for sin Heb. 10. 10. 14. 18. He meaneth by these things the transgression of the Law of God But in the Sacrifice of the Crosse there is forgivenesse of these things Therefore there is no more oblation for sinne Against such cleare places these Doctors arme themselves with a false distinction of Sacrifice which they could never yet prove neither out of any expresse text taken out of the Word of God or necessary Consequence drawn out of the same They say that there is no more bloody sacrifice for sin but that there is an unbloody sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedeck for the continuall application of the merit of the sacrifice of the Crosse But this distinction is not able to take them off the hooks For the Apostle saying expressely That there is no more oblation for sin sheweth us plainly That there is no other propitiatory sacrifice for sinne of what kind soever but that of the Crosse It is therefore their part that goe about to give the Apostle the lye to prove that distinction shewing by expresse texts or at least by necessary consequences drawne out of the pure Word of God that we ought to sacrifice againe the body of Christ unbloodily to apply the merit of his bloody sacrifice which thing they are never able to doe For to attaine to this proofe some of them argue thus Christ is a sacrificator after the order of Melchisedeck but Melchisedeck offered an unbloody sacrifice for he offered bread and wine Therefore Christ after the same order hath offered an unbloody sacrifice when he hath offered himselfe under the Species of bread and wine And therefore the distinction of bloody and unbloody sacrifice is true We grant the Major but wee deny the Minor which is grounded upon a falshood Wee doe not finde in any place of holy Scripture that Melchisedeck offered to God bread and wine Wee reade in the 14 of Genesis vers. 18. that he brought unto Abraham bread and wine for to feede and refresh him and his men that were wearied and travayl'd as they came from the defeat of the Kings But there is not a word there that Melchisedeck offered bread and wine unto God And therefore the conclusion of this argument is false and by consequent also this pretended distinction of bloody and unbloody sacrifice Now I will shew hereafter wherin consists this order of Melchisedeck according to which order Christ is an everlasting Sacrificator At this present I will presse our Adversaries upon this pretended application which is the last refuge of falshood brought to the baye upon her back We say then that in this pretended application our Adversaries grant under hand tacitely that the Masse is not the sacrifice of Jesus Christ For if it be but the application of Christs sacrifice It followeth it is not Christs sacrifice For even as the application of a plaster is not a plaster so the application of Christs sacrifice is not Christs sacrifice And here these Doctors confesse freely againe that the Masse is not Christs sacrifice For they say that every true sacrifice requireth that the thing offered be destroyed and consumed Whereupon we build this argument Every true sacrifice requireth that the thing offered be destroyed and consumed But the Masse say they is a true sacrifice Therefore the thing offered in the Masse is destroyed and consumed They yeeld us that too but to their confusion for say we If the thing offered in the Masse be destroyed and consumed and this thing offered is the body of Christ It followeth that the body of Christ is destroyed and consumed in the Masse It is not true say they but it is the Species of bread and wine that are destroyed and consumed that is the color the taste the roundnesse and quantity of the bread and wine They confesse therefore freely that the Masse is not Christs sacrifice seeing that he is not destroyed but onely a sacrifice of roundnesses of measures of lines of castles in the ayre well befitting such a Religion wherein all is nothing but Maske and hypocrisie Moreover the application of a thing is not the thing applyed As for example The water of the Bath is applyed by meanes of the channel or conduit-pipe Yet it is not the pipe Physicke is administred with a cup or vessel but it is not the vessel and so of all other things But contrariwise these suttle Doctors will have the application and the thing applyed to be one and the selfe same thing For they say that Christs sacrifice is applyed by the sacrifice of the same Christ But they have not cunning enough yet to perswade us that although the Masse were good it could be both the Physicke and the vessel together But say our Adversaries doe we an injury to the physick by applying it with the vessell doe we wrong to the water of the Bath when we receive it by the channel doe we wrong to the bloody sacrifice in applying it by the unbloody sacrifice Yea Doctors ye doe wrong to the Physick when ye attribute unto the vessel the vertue of healing which is onely proper to the physicke Ye doe wrong to the water of the Bath when ye attribute unto the conduit-pipe the cure which the water onely worketh Likewise ye doe wrong to the sacrifice of the Crosse when yee attribute to your pretended sacrifice of the Masse the vertue to expiate sinnes as if the other alone were insufficient Wee hold therefore that Christ cannot bee offered againe in sacrifice for the forgivenesse of sinnes without making voyde the vertue and efficacy of the sacrifice of the Crosse For of two plasters either the one is sufficient to heale the wound or both are requisite and necessary If the one be sufficient the other is superflous If both are requisite
prove it by this expresse text out of Saint Paul And you saith he being dead in your sinnes and through the uncircumcision of your flesh hath he quickned together with him having forgiven you all trespasses Colos. 2. 13. Now even as a dead man cannot doe so much as to stir his fingers end unlesse he be raised againe So a man dead in sinne cannot doe any good work unlesse God raise him first and regenerate him inwardly by his spirit The same Apostle teacheth it plainly in another place saying That it is God which worketh in us both to will and to doe according to his good pleasure Phil. 2. 13. The holyest men though endued with the spirit of God and ordinarily accompanied with his grace have alwaies acknowledged themselves to be sinners and very unable to doe good works Saint Paul speaketh thus of himselfe and also of all others in his person For I was alive without the Law once but when the Commandement came sinne revived and I died I am carnall sould under sinne I know that in me that is in my flesh dwelleth no good thing For to will is present with me but how to performe that which is good I finde not For the good that I would doe I doe not but the evill which I would not that I doe Rom. 7. 9. 14. 15. 18. 19. Is it not then a meere ridiculous foolery to teach that a man destitute of the Grace of God may doe any good work to obtain Grace seeing that these which have this Grace already doe not doe the good they would but doe the evill which they would not having alwaies some corruptions of the flesh opposing the desires of the spirit And therefore they must confesse that we doe good workes after we have received Grace whence it followeth that their Doctrine is false as I prove it by this argument If we doe good works after we are received into Grace Then it followeth that our works doe not dispose us to obtaine that Grace which we have already and without which we cannot apply our selves to good works But the Antecedent is true therefore the Consequent also CHAP. IV. That our Lord Jesus Christ hath fully and perfectly satisfied the justice of God for our sins both for the guilt and punishment thereof and consequently that it is a vain and unprofitable thing to desire to satisfie again unto the same by works THat which our Adversaries teach concerning satisfaction is That God releaseth unto the sinner all the guilt and forgiveth him the eternall punishment due unto it But that he will have it turn'd into a Temporal punishment alledging that if in our Justification nothing were found but the forgivenesse of sins it would be perfect mercy but that there is some other thing whereby the justice of God appeareth To be short The Doctrin of these Doctors is that God for the manifestation of his justice wil have the justified sinner to satisfie Gods justice for the Temporal punishment of his sinnes otherwise his justice is not satisfied Answer It is an old wile of Sathan which he hath alwaies practised by his false Prophets to smother and bury as much as in him lyeth the meanes whereby God is pacified with us and his justice fully satisfied Therefore I aske of them whether Christ hath satisfied to the justice of God or no If he hath not satisfied it he is not our Saviour and we are still in our sinnes lyable to the curse of the Law Galat. 3. 13. But if Christ hath satisfied the justice of God for sinne it followeth that it is satisfied and declared in this alone satisfaction of his and by consequent that it is a vain and an unprofitable thing to desire to satisfie the same again Now that Christ hath satisfied fully the justice of God for sinne these expresse texts shewe it clearly and plainly He hath born our griefes and carried our sorrowes He was wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our iniquities The chastisement of our peace was upon him and with his stripes we are healed The Lord hath laid on him the iniquitie of us all Esay 53. 4. 5. 6. And the Apostle Saint Paul teacheth us That he hath reconciled all things unto himselfe having made peace through the blood of his Crosse whether they be things in Earth or things in Heaven Colos. 1. 20. Again The Mediator is one between God and Man the Man Christ Jesus who gave himselfe a ransome for all 1. Tim. 2. 5. 6. Now the Jesuits and other Doctors of the Roman Church to avoid this use to make a distinction of guilt and punishment saying that Christ hath satisfied for the guilt and eternall punishment but not for that Temporal punishment reserved for the sinner justified for which he is bound to satisfie the justice of God But this is brought in to no purpose For I will stop up this passage upon them in producing expresse texts and necessary consequences drawn out of the Word of God that shew plainely the contrary First of all the Prophet Esay hath told us in the forenamed place that Christ hath not onely borne our griefes but our sorrowes also which are not the guilt but the punishment of our sinnes And to say that this is true as touching the eternall and not the Temporall punishment is to no purpose For S. Paul saith That there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus Rom. 8. 1. But what punishment soever is imposed for the satisfying of Gods justice is a condemnation Therefore there is no punishment imposed to satisfie the justice of God Secondly The same Apostle teacheth us That by Grace we are saved through Faith and that not of our selves it is the gift of God not of works least any man should boast Saint Paul teacheth us That he hath reconciled all things unto himselfe having made peace through the blood of his Crosse whether they be things in Earth or things in Heaven Colos. 1. 20. Again The Mediator is one between God and Man the Man Christ Jesus who gave himselfe a ransome for all 1. Tim. 2. 5. 6. Now the Jesuits and other Doctors of the Roman Church to avoid this use to make a distinction of guilt and punishment saying that Christ hath satisfied for the guilt and eternall punishment but not for that Temporal punishment reserved for the sinner justified for which he is bound to satisfie the justice of God But this is brought in to no purpose For I will stop up this passage upon them in producing expresse texts and necessary consequences drawn out of the Word of God that shew plainely the contrary First of all the Prophet Esay hath told us in the forenamed place that Christ hath not onely borne our griefes but our sorrowes also which are not the guilt but the punishment of our sinnes And to say that this is true as touching the eternall and not the Temporall punishment is to no purpose For S. Paul saith That there
is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus Rom. 8. 1. But what punishment soever is imposed for the satisfying of Gods justice is a condemnation Therefore there is no punishment imposed to satisfie the justice of God Secondly The same Apostle teacheth us That by Grace we are saved through Faith and that not of our selves it is the gift of God not of works least any man should boast Ephes. 2. 8. 9. And in the Epistle to the Romans he saith All have sinned and come short of the glory of God being justified freely by his Grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus Rom. 3. 23. 24. It is not therefore by paying on our part for the punishment of our sins it being altogether incompatible freely to acquit and discharge a debt and yet desire to be satisfied for it to the uttermost farthing 3 Again if God doe forgive the sinnes of his children in such sort as he will remember them no more it followeth that he will not be satisfied with temporall punishments But the first proposition is true I will forgive their iniquity saith the Lord and I will remember their sinne no more Jerem. 31. 34. Esay 43. 25. Heb. 10. 27. Ergo the last also and therefore there remains no punishment for the justified sinner 4 Moreover Jesus Christ our Lord hath satisfied the justice of God for us either fully and perfectly or imperfectly and in part onely yea or no If fully and perfectly then it followeth that he hath satisfied it aswel for the guilt as for the punishment of sinne and by consequent that we ought neither to satisfie it for the one nor for the other If inperfectly and in part onely it followeth that he is our Saviour but in part for he is not our Saviour unlesse he hath fully satisfied the Justice of God for us 5 Again Whatsoever is done by ones selfe is not done by an other But Jesus Christ our Lord hath purged our sinnes by himselfe Christ saith Saint Paul having by himselfe purged our sinnes sate downe on the right hand of the Majesty on high Heb. 1. 3. It is not done therfore but by Christ And if the purgation of sinnes be not but by Christ it followeth that it is not done by Temporall punishment and Humane satisfactions But the Antecedent is true Ergo the Consequent also And therefore to desire to satisfie again the Justice of God is to debase too much the worth and merits of the blood of Christ and to esteeme his satisfaction as a thing of nought For it is he only that was able to satisfie the same for them that have obtained free mercy And to alledge as they doe that the Physicke is prepared but that we must drink it That it is true that we receive all good things from the blood of Christ but we must apply it is to no purpose For our penall works are not the means wherby we may apply unto our selves the vertue and efficacy of the blood of Christ It is by faith that he is apprehended and applyed unto us For as the body is fed and nourished by means of the corporall mouth that receiveth and apprehendeth the food So the soule is nourished and sustained by Faith that receiveth and apprehendeth our Lord Jesus Christ and his merits by which onely means Christ is applied unto it for it's spirituall food In a word I maintain that it is altogether impossible for a man to satisfie the Justice of God Yea even for all men put together to satisfie it for the least sinne whether for the guilt or for the punishment For God is infinite he therefore that offends him deserves an infinite and an Eternall punishment Punishments ought to be according to the offences And the offences according to the quality of the persons offended And to alledge that Eternall punishments are turned into Temporall is as vain and ridiculous For Gods Justice being infinite cannot be satisfied but by an infinite punishment And if God through his mercy remits any thing unto the sinner he will not doe it by halfes Therefore they consider the Justice of God and the desert of sinne very ill when as they think to be able to satisfie the same and that by such means as should open the gates of Heaven to the rich rather than to the poore For the principall means they appoint unto man to satisfie Gods Justice withall for the punishment of sins is to buy pardons and indulgences of the Pope and give to the Churh the which indeed the rich may do but not the poore Wherupon it will follow that we must say quite contrary to that which Christ saith Blessed are the poore for to such is the kingdome of Heaven Math. 5. 3. Our Adversaries doe bring in some places of Scripture to prove their pretended satisfactions but against their true sence as that of the Apostle to the Hebrews Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth and scourgeth every sonne whom he receiveth Heb. 12. 6. Again they say that David having confessed his sin to Nathan did neverthelesse bear the punishment of his sin it being said unto him The childe that is borne unto thee shall surely die 2. Sam. 12. 14. and divers other places where it is said that God chastiseth his children I answer That in all these places there is not a word spoken of satisfying Gods Justice who indeed tryeth his children and fatherly chastiseth them not to satisfie his Justice but to correct them and make them wiser for the time to come shewing them and making them feele how much sin is displeasing unto him There is two sorts of Judgements of God the one of revenge the other of correction by the one God punisheth his enemies confounding them in his wrath David prayeth he might not be punished in this kind Lord saith he rebuke me not in thine anger neither chastise me in thy hot displeasure Psal. 6. 2. By the other of correction God doth not chasten to cast away and to destroy but to admonish his children and make thē to profit unto repentance He chastened David fatherly when he took away his childe and Saul in Justice in taking away his kingdome from him The Faithfull are also called to suffer in this life for to follow the steps of our Lord Jesus Christ For even hereunto were yee called saith S. Peter because Christ also suffered for you leaving us an example that yee should follow his steps 1. Epist. 2. 21. All saith S. Paul that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution 2. Tim. 3. 12. In the World yee shall have tribulation saith our Lord to his Disciples John 16. 33. And in another place Whosoever taketh not his crosse and followes after me he is not worthy of me Math. 10. 38. Therefore the pains and afflictions that befall the Faithfull are not to satisfie the Justice of God neither for the guilt nor for the punishment of sinnes but to follow the steps of Jesus
Christ our Lord CHAP. V. That a man not being able to satisfie the Justice of God for his own sinnes cannot by consequent satisfie for the sinnes of others OUr Adversaries have not been contented to teach that a man is able to satisfie the Justice of God for the punishment due to his own sinnes but have gone a great deale farther and are come to such a height of absurdity as to teach That one man may satisfie for another and that God accepteth for the satisfaction of the one whatsoever is done by the other Now to give some colour to this Doctrine they alleadge that a justified man in this life may doe more satisfactory workes than is needfull for the paying of the Temporall punishment remaining for his sinnes And that having finished the satisfaction ordained for the said punishment All the penall and satisfactory workes that hee doth afterwards are superaboundant which workes being applyed unto another with an intention to satisfie for him are allowed as satisfactory for the punishment of his sins Answ. I have shewed already and proved out of expresse texts of the Word of God and invincible reasons That a man is not able to satisfie the justice of God for himselfe and by consequent much lesse for another Neverthelesse it is necessary to shew againe the impiety of this doctrine First if a man ought and may satisfie the justice of God for another it followes necessarily that Christ is not an alone Saviour but that he that satisfieth for another is also a Saviour of that man O horrible impiety For there is no salvation in any other neither is there any other name under heaven given unto men saith Saint Peter whereby we must bee saved but the name of Jesus Act. 4. 12. Moreover I demand of these Doctors whether a man can satisfie for another before hee have fully and wholy satisfied for his owne sinnes and have none left behinde for otherwise how can a man satisfie for another if himselfe be still indebted If so be then a man cannot be without sinne it followeth he cannot satisfie for himselfe and consequently much lesse for another But the first is true therefore the last also I prove the Antecedent of my Argument by the proper confession of these Doctors yeelding us that concupisence remaineth still in a man but yet they say for an evasion that it is not sinne as touching the guilt but an inclination and an alluring unto sinne being onely an originall punishment of the sinne of Adam wherein they deceive themselves grosly for whatsoever is a transgression of the Commandement of God is sinne as touching the guilt But concupiscence is a transgression of the commandement of God Thou shalt not covet Exod. 20. 17. Rom. 7. 7. Therefore concupiscence is sin as touching the guilt Item If sinne begets concupiscence in a man it followeth that concupiscence is sinne as touching the guilt for what other thing can sin beget in a man but sinne it selfe But the Antecedent is true for Sinne saith Saint Paul taking occasion by the commandement wrought in mee all manner of concupiscence Rom. 7. 8. Ergo the Consequent also and therefore a man is never without sinne sinne I say in the very guilt concupiscence remaining still in him Salomon teacheth us so much when he saith That a Just man falleth into sinne seaven times a day Pro. 24. 16. If we say saith Saint John that wee have no sinne we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us 1. Epist. 1. 8. I am carnall saith Saint Paul sould under sinne I know that in me that is in my flesh dwelleth no good thing For the good that I would I doe not but the evill I would not that I doe Rom. 7. 14. 18. 19. It is enough now O Lord said Elias take away my life for I am not better than my Fathers 1. King 19. 4. And Christ teaches us to say every day Forgive us our sinnes Matth. 6. 11. and Luke 11. 4. Whence it appeares plainely that a man is not able to keepe himselfe one day without offending his God That he hath sinne alwayes dwelling in him and consequently that he cannot wholly satisfie the justice of God In a word I aske of these Doctors how shall that man take upon him to satisfie for another that is not able to know whether hee hath sufficiently satisfied for himselfe or no and how shall one sinner trust to the satisfaction of another sinner that knowes not in what case the other standeth before his God CHAP. VI That the pretended treasure of the Roman Church was established onely for to weaken the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ and to make a little Saint of him that no body may know from the rest of the Saints BUt it was not yet enough for our Adversaries to teach men to satisfie the Justice of God and that they may doe it superabundantly one for another But they maintain moreover That the treasure of their holy mother Church is framed and replenished with these superabundant satisfactions of which treasure His Holinesse is the Guardian and may distribute them to those that have not satisfied sufficiently And it is here that they make Christ a little Saint that no body can know among the rest of the Saints Behold we here how they argue to cloak this Doctrin Saint Peter and Saint Paul say they about the latter end of their life had done so many painefull works that they had fully accomplished their satisfaction After that they suffered martyrdome this martyrdome was a good work done in Grace Therefore it was satisfactory and meritorious But so is it that it was not satisfactory for them for they had already wholly and fully satisfied It was therefore a worke of supererogation And so may one say of so many other Saints besides the infinite satisfaction of the blood of Christ and of the Virgine Marie who at the very point of her death was found to have gathered and heaped up together a very great heape of satisfactions In summe with the passion of Christ saith Panigarolle Lesson 11. Page 333. inasmuch as it is satisfactory are joyned also O horrible impiety the passion and superabundancies of al the Saints wherewith is framed the treasury of the holy mother Church to supply the want of them in whom their owne satisfactory workes are wanting All this being builded upon this naughty foundation of their pretended satisfaction which I have already refuted by expresse texts out of the Word of God and invincible reasons deserves not a new refutation But what Christian man is there that hearing but such impieties read will not wonder at the patience of God And shall not shiver for feare to see the merits of the passion of the sonne of God thus trampled under feet and that they should make of him a little Saint that no man can know among so many Saints nor sever his merit and satisfaction from so many merits and superaboundant satisfactions O Doctors how
I deny the Major For there are some undeserved rewards A Father may promise his Son a fine suit of cloathes if he write a good coppie Now that sonne deserves not that suite of clothes for doing well that coppie For what profit cometh to the father thereby neverthelesse the father will give the promised suit onely because of his promise Even so doth God to his children giving his Kingdome unto them without any desert but onely because he hath promised it Moreover a father may be induced to give the promised suite to his sonne because of his duty in doing his coppie well giveing his father content by that meanes But none of the faithfull can doe their duty towards God All have sinned saith Saint Paul Rom. 3. 23. and Whosoever saith Saint James offendeth in one point of the Law he is guilty of all Jam. 2. 10. All therefore are guiltie of the breach of the whole Law For who is he that hath not fayled in some one point or other of the Law And therefore our Adversaries are very farre wide of that pretended merit they doe attribute to their good workes CHAP. VIII That the Invocation of Saints departed is contrary unto the Word of God and tendeth to no other end but to give unto the creatures the honour and glory that belongeth unto the Creator THese Doctors keepe a great noyse and cry out very lowd that they are the true Church and that the doctrine which they teach is conformable unto the Word of God but when it cometh to the proofe they are mightily puzzled haveing nothing to shew but some few allegories which they bring in upon certaine points of controversie Like unto Foxes which runne into thickets and bushie places to save themselves True it is they make a great bucklet of these words This is my body which they thinke are very cleare to prove that the bread is transubstantiated into the body of Christ But I will shew in its due place in few words That they pervert the meaning of this place of Scripture taking this word is properly and without a figure which in all Sacraments ought to be taken for Signifieth of Representeth Now I will shew what slender cause they have to maintaine the Invocation of Saints departed and to teach that Christ is not our onely Mediator with God but that all the Saints in heaven are also our Mediators and that we must draw neere unto God by them as wee come neere unto the King by his familiar servants intreating them to pray for us A Doctrine which is absolutely false as I shall prove hereafter out of diverse expresse places and necessary consequences drawne out of the Word of God First of all then wee aske of them one expresse text out of the Word of God or one necessary consequence drawne out of the same for the proofe of this doctrine There they stand as mute as fishes Behold then a doctrine that hath neither prop nor foundation in the Word of God but is meerely invented by men against the Word of God as I will shew hereafter And albeit it were not contrary unto the same I yet maintaine that it ought to bee rejected of every Christian because it is a vaine worshipping of God to worship him after the Doctrine and commandements of men As our Lord Jesus Christ tearmeth it Marke 7. 7. Moreover I prove that this doctrine cannot be without great sinne For whatsoever is done without the Word of God is done without faith Faith saith Saint Paul commeth by hearing and hearing by the Word of God Rom. 10. 17. But the Invocation of Saints departed is done without the Word of God Therefore it is done without Faith Whatsoever is done without Faith is sin saith the same Apostle Rom. 14. 23. But the Invocation of Saints departed is done without Faith Therefore the Invocation of Saints departed is sinne In briefe That Doctrine which teacheth men to pray unto Saints departed is contrary unto the Word of God that teacheth That we ought to call upon none but on him in whom we have beleeved Rom. 10. 14. But we doe not beleeve in the Saints departed but in one onely God Father Son and holy Ghost Therefore we ought not to call upon Saints departed but upon God alone in whom we beleeve That Doctrine which teacheth men to goe unto God by his Saints as a man goes to the King by his familiar servants is contrary unto the Word of God which teacheth us to goe directly to Christ and that he is the onely Way to goe to the Father Come unto me saith he al ye that labour and are heavie laden and I will give you rest c. Math. 11. 28. He would not have us then goe unto him by the Saints departed I am saith he the Way the Truth and the Life no man commeth unto the Father but by me John 14. 6. That Doctrine which teacheth that there is divers Mediators with God is contrary unto the Word of God which teaches us That God is one and the Mediator one between God and Man the Man Christ Jesus 1. Tim. 2. 5. Item That God alone knoweth the hearts of all the sonnes of men 1. Kin. 8. 38. Whereupon it followeth That the Saints departed doe not know our prayers which are made in the heart and that by Consequent it is a vain and an idle thing to pray unto them The Argument which we draw out of this place of Saint Paul against the Invocation of Saints departed is thus If there be one onely Mediator between God and man to wit Christ Jesus It followeth That the Saints departed are not our Mediators with God and by Consequent that it is unprofitable to pray unto them to pray for us But the Antecedent is true Therfore the Consequent also Our Adversaries to put off this blow make a distinction saying That Saint Paul in this place speaketh not of a Mediator of Intercession but of a Mediator of Redemption and therefore that this place is not brought to the purpose for the Intercession of Saints a thing which is in controversie between them and us To which I answer First That they are not able to prove that distinction of a Mediator of Redemption and a Mediator of Intercession either by any expresse texts out of the Word of God or any necessary consequence drawn out of the same and therefore that it is false Secondly That on the contrary the Word of God teaching us that we have an Advocate with God which is Christ Jesus teacheth us Consequently that he is our alone Mediator of Intercession aswell as â—f Redemption If any man sin saith S. John we have an Advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the Righteous John 1. Epist. 2. 1. Veron the Jesuite in his answer to my Book Of the Cabale of the Jesuits pag. 18. answereth That to say there is one Mediator Therefore there is but one Mediator is no good Consequence and he bringeth in for example one that
will that his Sonne should take a true humane body and by Consequent that he should be in one and not in divers places It is most true That God is omnipotent but he doth not all that he is able to do For he could transforme the Pope into a monster having seven heads and ten hornes and al his Disciples into Grashoppers but he doth not doe it In a word He will not have the body of his Sonne to be in divers places at once because there would be in him Yea and Nay Yea in that he will have every physicall and composed body to be in one onely place Nay If he would have the body of his Son which is such to be in severall places at once Moreover every true humane body is a materiall substance that hath his naturall and inseparable properties one of which is to be limited circumscribed and contained in one certaine place Take away from bodies the distance of places saith Saint Austin and they shall be nowhere and because they shall be nowhere they shall not be at all And speaking of the body of Christ he saith That if some space be not given unto it that may contain it after the same manner as other bodies are its humane nature is destroyed Epist. 37. ad Dardanum Therefore there is a figure in these words This is my body The fourth rule also shewes us very plainly That there is a figure in these words This is my body For if we take them literally and without a figure there followeth divers absurdities 1 First That a body like unto ours in all things sinne excepted should be in an infinite number of places at one and the same time For they teach it is in as many places as there are Masses said and that it is whole in every crumme of the Hoste and in every drop in the Chalice and yet budges not from Heaven neither is it in the space which is between both and by Consequent that one and the selfe same body may be higher and lower than it selfe and that there is some distance between Christs body and the body of Christ 2 Secondly That a true body hath all its parts under one point having the head where the feet are the eyes mouth and eares altogether and by Consequent it hath a length without extent that is a length and no length 3 Thirdly That Christ did eat himselfe and drank his own body and blood seeing after their own Doctrine his body is also in the Chalice And that by Consequent he had his head in his mouth and his whole body in his stomack having the inside out and the outside in which is a thing more absurd than if the scabberd were in the sword For being in the sword it were in another thing than it selfe But these Doctors put the body of Christ into the body of Christ 4 Fourthly That there is a Christ suffering and a Christ not suffering A Christ crucified and a Christ not crucified For as soone as Christ had supped he went to the Garden of Olives where he swate greate drops of blood was apprehended and finally Crucified But the same that was in his and the Apostles stomacks did not sweat great drops of blood was not apprehended nor crucified And by Consequent he was not our Saviour seeing he hath not suffered for us It appeareth therefore plainly by that which hath bin above said That these words This is my body must not be taken literally but figuratively Neverthelesse our Adversaries are so wilfull and obstinate in this as to affirme still That these words must be taken literally and without a figure and that the bread of the Masse is transubstantiated into the body of Christ alledging that God is able to doe it but as I have said already the Question is of his will and not of his power They should have proved first That it is his Truth and his Will before they goe about to tell us of his power There is no opinion so extravagant or fantasticall but may be maintained in saying that God is powerfull enough to make it to bee so To prove a doctrine onely because God is omnipotent is an open confession of their weakenesse There be some things that God cannot doe because he is omnipotent He cannot lye He cannot contradict himselfe Gods omnipotencie ought not to be a cloake unto Error nor serve as a refuge to falshood and Idolatry Therefore wee must see first whether it bee his truth or no 1. In the first place the Apostle to the Hebrewes telleth us that Christ is like unto his brethren in all things sinne excepted Heb. 2. 16. 17. Therefore it is a thing contrarie unto the truth of God to teach that he may be in a million of places at one and the same time For to have a true body and to be like unto his brethren in al things he must be in one and not in many places 2. Himselfe tels us that hee leaveth the World and goes to the Father John 16. 28. That hee is no more in the World John 17. 11. That we shall have the poore alwayes but we shall not have him alwayes Marke 14. 7. It is therefore a thing contrary unto the truth of God to teach that he is here on earth in a million of places at once They answer to this that we have Christ no more visibly but that wee have him invisibly under the Species of the bread and wine But that will not serve their turne For to have Christ invisibly is still to have Christ That man were a lyer that should say he had no clothes because they are hid in a trunke Even so hee were a lyer that should say he had not Christ because he is hidden under the Species of bread and wine But he saith expresly Wee shall not have him alwayes That he leaves the World and goes to the Father Sentences which should be false if he were yet in the world betweene the hands of a Priest saying Masse or lockt up in a pix or box And as touching that which hee saith Matth. 28. 20. That hee shall be with us unto the end of the World That is very true not according to his Humane nature but according to his Divinity power and efficacie of the holy Ghost whereby he guideth governeth and ruleth his Church We have Christ alwayes according to the presence of his Majesty saith Saint Austin but according to the presence of his flesh it was truly said unto the Apostles Ye shall not have me alwayes August 50 Treatise upon Saint John 3. Saint Peter saith That Heaven must containe him untill the times of restitution of al things which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy Prophets since the World began Act 3. 21. It is therefore a thing contrary unto the Truth of God to teach that he is here on earth below in the hands of a Priest in as many places as there are Masses said 4. In the