in their bodies also Then all soules are either good or euill Their portions if they be good ioy if they be euill torment when they go out of this world not the torment of Purgatory which is but for a time but the torment of hell because it continueth till the resurrection and then shall be encreased by the receiuing of their bodies to be partakers of the same torment What place leaueth Austen here for Purgatory or for any middle sort of men Surely none at all and therefore consequently excludeth all effect of praier or offering for the dead But I sâ—eke the Answ saith to helpe Dulcitiuâ— his reason and yet conf 〈…〉 d my selfe because both by the question and by the answere it appeareth that to pray or to offer for the dead was the churches practise at that time A great confusion and worthily wrought The Answ must first know that it was his ouersight to call it Dulcitius his reason which was alleaged for S. Austen reporteth it as a reason giuen by many in his time Then let him vnderstand also that I knew it to be the churches practise but question was then moued whether that which the church did were auaileable to the dead Dulcitius vpon that occasion was doubtful herein He sendeth to S. Austen to be resolued S. Austen telleth him that c August de 8. quaest Dulcit q. 2. many indeed said hereof that if any good might be to the dead in obteining ease much rather should the soule by it owne confession of sin finde ease then by oblations procured by other men Whereby it is plaine that though it were the churches practise yet that this practise of the church was disauowed and disliked by many in S. Auâ—â—ens 〈…〉 e and therefore not vniuersally entertained in the church The Answerer knâ—w well inough that thus much was sayd to him before but because he was ouer-pressed by the reason of those many vsed then against the custome of oblations and praiers for the dead he slippeth by and taketh hold of this that hereby the practise of the church in this point is manifest True say I in part not generally because it was gainsaied and disputed against by many of the church euen in those times Now he saith nothing neither of the men nor of their reason And verily Austen himselfe neither reproueth the men nor disproueth their reason nor by any reason approueth that which he himselfe affirmed on the other side but taking this custome as he found it he laboureth rather to shewe whom we may suppose to haue benefit after death by such praiers and offerings if there be any effect thereof then to proue that there is so P. Spence Sect. 8. A Sorie shift you haue to elude all that our side can bring out of the Fathers for the sacrifice a Doct. Allen saith that the name of sacrifices in the plurall number as is this fitteth not to the sacrifice of the Masse The sacrifices of the altar are forsooth by your cauill not offered by the priest but by euerie particular man as his oblations either for the Sacrament say you or for the reliefe of the poore the worst shift of a thousande Theodoret vpon the 8. to the Hebrues asketh why if Christ offered a perfect sacrifice and made all other sacrifices vnnecessarie the priests of the new Testament offer the mysticall sacrifice If the peoples charitable offerings were the meaning of the sacrifices of the altar what need either Theodoret or so many much more auncient Fathers that aske the selfe same question vpon the like obiection so much liked of your side namely Chrysostome vpon the same Chapter to moue any such question or doubt For when Christ abolished all the olde sacrifices of the law you cannot imagine that these Fathers so learned and so wise would euer spend labour or time to moue this b A deale of idle talke I denied not but that the Fathers do vse the name of sacrifice concernâ—ng the Loâ—dâ—s Supper For I gaue the reason thereof at large idle doubt whether he abolished all charitable offerings of the people either for the Sacrament or for the helpe of the poore Besides the question is moued of the sacrifice of the new Testament offered not by the people but by the priests That the people made such oblatioÌ„s we grant but that thereby it is prooued that there was no other oblation or sacrifice offered by the priest we deny and thinke it to be as vnreasonable as if your mad AtheniaÌ„ wold proue that God made no Moone because he made a Sunne One truth neuer shouldereth out another The same Theodoret to answer his owne question goeth further and thus solueth it It is cleare saith he to those that are learned in diuinitie that we the priests of the new Testament of whom the obiection was made not of the people do offer not another sacrifice but do celebrate a memorie of that one healthfull sacrifice for this our Lord did command Do ye this for a remembrance of me R. Abbot 8. VVHereas in the place of Austen before rehearsed I construed the sacrifices of the altar to be meant of the offerings of the people at the Communion the Answerer fondly collecteth thereof that we vse this for a sorie shift to elude put off all the testimonies of the Fathers concerning sacrifice I may iustly call it a fond collection That the name of Sacrifice is vsed of those offerings I shewed him by a Hieron in 1. Cor. 11. S. Hierom. But that in other places both S. Austen and others do applie the name of Sacrifice to the mysticall offering of the bodie and blood of Christ he knew well inough that I made no doubt inasmuch as it was a great part of my spéech following to declare what they ment in so saying Wherefore all that he speaketh of this point ariseth of his owne péeâ—ish and idle fancie and therfore I trouble not my selfe therewith P. Spence Sect. 9. TO your great obiection of S. Paul leauing a great heap of a VVhich because he could not answere he thought good to passe ouer as waste words waste words to say the best of them I answere the sacrifice of the law tooke not away sinnes but made only certaine legall expiations and therefore the chiefe good that they wrought in the soule was ex Adiuncto of a thing added to them by the goodnesse of the receiuers of them which was their godly faith and expectation of remission of sinnes to be wrought by the Messias by which faith they receiued iustification such as their b Their estate â—n the old law had not the same light of reuelation but the grace of iustification and regeneration was the same to them as it is to vs. See the answer to sect 20 estate in the olde lawe was capable of But Christ by his sacrifice which was done by his death for his death only could confirme his new Testament tooke away sinnes
and breaking him as the Prophet speaketh and as it were leading out his armies against him he in the meane time holding fast still vpon God to be his God who would bring him backe from these gates of death when he had finished the worke that was giuen him to doe but yet féeling nothing for the present whereby he might appeare to be his God But what can I say more of this spéech of Christ then Ferus hath said a man by profession of the church of Roome yet in many things not so grosse as Romanists commonly are Writing vppon these wordes of Christ he saith thus r Ferus in Matt 27. Here God the father dealeth with Christ not as a father but as a tyrant although hee be in the meane time of most louing affection towardes him This Christes being forsaken is the dread of our conscience for our sinnes feeling the iudgement of God and his eternall wrath and is so affected as if it were for euer forsaken and reiected from the face of God Christ of his mercie put himselfe into our cause and vndertooke the punishment that we had deserued Therefore on the one side wee see the people reuiling him the Pharisees blaspheming him c. On the other side we see God as an aduersarie forsaking him so that he crieth out why hast thou forsaken me Christ to deliuer sinners set himself in place of all sinners not playing the theefe or adulterer c but transferring vnto himself the stipend and wages the punishment and desert of sinners as colde heate hunger thirst feare trembling the horrour of death the horrour of hell despaire death hell it self that by feare he might ouercome feare by horrour despaire death hell might ouercome horror despaire death hell and in a word by Satan might ouercome Satan Thus by the testimonie of one of their own Prophets it is iustified that Christ Iesus suffered not onely a bodily death but also in his soule the waight of his fathers indignation and the very horrour of hell it selfe when he cried out and complained in that maner as hath béen declared And this is that which the scripture meaneth when it saith that ſ Gal. 3. 13. Christ was made a curse for vs to deliuer vs from the curse For as to be made sinne for vs importeth that he did beare the punishment of our sinnes so to be made a curse for vs importeth that he did beare the burden of our curse that is to say the full measure of the wrath of God that otherwise should haue lighted vpon vs. The fathers thought no lesse when they construed the 88. Psalme or the 87. as they reckon it to be the description of the passion of Christ Where we reade thus t Psal 88. 7. 1. 16. Thine indignation is set against me or lieth hard vppon me and thou hast vexed me with all thy stormes Lord why abhorrest thou my soule Thy wrathfull displeasure goeth ouer me and the feare of thee hath vndone me So is that Psal applied by u Athan. de interpret Psalm Arnob. Hieron in psal 87. Athanasius Arnobius and Hierome Austen also calleth the same w August in Psalm 87. a song of the passion of Christ though turning the wordes alleaged to another intention then they doe manifestly intimate vnto vs. Athanasius referring himselfe to those wordes Thy furie or indignation is set against me saith x Athanas de inter Psal Christ died not for that he was guiltie of sinnne himself but he suffered for vs and in himselfe did beare the wrath that was conceiued against vs for sinne euen as he saith elswhere y Idem in Euangel de pas cruce domi that he took the bitternesse of that wrath which arose by the transgression of the law and swallowed it vp and so made it void So z Hieron in Psal 87. Hierome bringeth in our Sauiour speaking out of these former wordes of the Psalme in this sort Thou hast brought vpon me that wrath and storme of thy furie and indignation which thou wouldst haue powred out vpon the nations because I haue taken vpon me their sinnes Yea Hilarie though a Hilar. de Trinit lib 10. elswhere in heate of contention with an hereticke he séeme vtterly to denie all passion and suffering of Christ whose verie opinion in effect I take it to be which b Ambros in Luc. cap. 22. lib. 10. S. Ambros reprooueth writing vpon Luke yet in his more aduised spéech of Sermon vpon one of the Psalmes he giueth a notable testimony to this trueth Christ c Hilar. in Psa 68. became subiect to the death of the Crosse the waters comming in euen vnto his soule when the violence of all sufferings beake forth euen to the death of the soule By and by after he sheweth his mind more plainly He descended euen to the depth not of the flesh only but of death it self and al the terror of that tempest which raged against vs lighted vpon him Thus therfore it is euident both by the authoritie of the scriptures and by the consent of the ancient fathers that Christ suffered for vs not only in body but also in soule that his suffering in soule was the enduring of the vttermost of that tempest of the wrath of God which should haue fallen vpon vs for sinne Which indéed should haue oppressed vs infinitely and without end because the infinite maiestie of God whom we had offended required an infinite satisfaction for the offence and the same could not be yéelded by vs but by infinite and endlesse bearing of his wrath But it neither would nor might hold Christ in that sort because the infinitenesse of the time was recompensed by the infinitenesse of the person who was not onely man but God also Now whereas it is vrged that one drop of the bloud of Christ was sufficient to redeeme the world I answere that it is folly héereof to conclude that he suffered not in his soule for vs and with as good reason they may conclude that he was not crowned with thornes spitted vpon mocked and reuiled c. Yea the he died not at all nor shed any more but one drop of bloud We are not to stand vpon the fancies of men what they will thinke enough to redéeme vs but wée must learne in the word of God what the Lord hath done for vs that we may accordingly admire his mercie and goodnesse and sing thanks and prayses vnto him Now that thus Christ descended into hell I know that otherwise he descended into hell though I stand not to denie it yet I dare not affirme it Neither is it any pittiful damnable and horrible matter to auouch this but it is a trueth to be professed and comfortable to be beléeued and the Answe in so condemning it doth but as S. Peter saith d ◠Pet. 2. 12. speake euill of those things which he knoweth not Now by this descending of Christ into hell
Christ there is no more any offering for sin and therefore there is no true sacrifice in the Masse Nay saye the Rhemistes the texte meaneth that there is no second Baptisme to apply vnto vs a generall pardon or full forgiuenesse of sinnes contrary to the euidence of the text to the light of their owne consciences to the manifest expositions of the auncient Fathers Chrysostome Oecumenius Photius Theodoret Theophylact Primasius Ambrose as before I alleaged who all according to the drift of the text expound it against any further offering or sacrifice for sinne after that once offering vpon the Crosse Yea and it must necessarily be so vnderstood because the Apostle hereby concludeth against the many often offered sacrifices of the Iewes Which conclusion maketh nothing against their offerings or sacrifices vnlesse we vnderstand offering properly For what were it against their sacrificing that the Apostle should say there is no second baptisme to apply vnto vs full forgiuenesse of sins Now séeing this absurd vnreasonable glose of the Rhemists wil not serue turne neither could the Answ for shame write it thogh they were not ashamed to print it what other answer may we looke for at his hands Good sir saith he why dreame you that we thinke or professe to â—ley and crucifie Christ in our Masses His death was once and that once sufficient for euer and he dieth no more and then where is your obiection To whom I say againe Good sir my obiection hath not any sillable to charge you with affirming of Christes dying any more but proueth that after the once dying of Christ there is no more sacrifice for sinne and therefore that your Masse doth lie in taking vpon it to be a true propitiatorie sacrifice and then where is your answere Why did not your courage serue to make a direct answere to that that was opposed and if you could not answere why did not conscience preuaile with you to make you yeeld to the truth I prooue that there is now no more offering for sinne and he returneth me a sléeuelesse tale that they say not that Christ dieth any more and so runneth on to declare vnto me what maner of sacrifice it is which they offer which by the reason alleaged by me is ineuitably proued to be none at all If Christes bodie be really offered for sinne euery day in the Masse then there is yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an offering for sin But the Apostle saith that there is not now an offring for sinne Therefore Christ is not now any longer offered for sinne And therefore although the bodie of Christ be yet really remaining in heauen d Râ—m â— â— being raised from the dead to die no more and the same bodie be sometimes termed in our spéech the sacrifice for sinne yet is it not so called as hauing now the condition of a sacrifice for sin or as if it were now to be offered any more but only in respect that it was sacrificed once and by the vertue of that once sacrificing e Heb â— 2 appeareth in the sight of God for vs. In a word it is no otherwise so called but as Christ in the Reuelation is called the knobe not to be killed but f Apoc. 5. 6. 9. 12. that was killed and as the same bodie of Christ shall be called the sacrifice for sinne after the ende of the world when as the Saints of God shall thankfully record the sacrificing thereof thus g Apoc. 5. 9. Thou wast killed and hast redeemed vs to God by thy bloud out of euerie nation c. The end and vse of offering for sinne is to take away sinne to obtein remission of sinnes to sanctifie those that come vnto it Now when this end of offering for sinne is atchieued there is no further vse of an offering for sinne So that if the sacrifices of the old law h Heb. 10. 1. 2. had sanctified the commers thereunto they should after once offering haue ceased to bee offered as the Apostle telleth vs importing thereby that that sacrifice which doth sanctifie the commers thereunto as doth i cap. 10. 10. the bodie of Christ once offered néedeth not to be offered any more but that once And hereupon it is that he inferreth that séeing remission of sinnes is obteined by the offering of Christs bodie once therefore thenceforth there is no more offering for sinne neither of Christes bodie nor of any other thing because there is no ende or vse therof euen as when k Chrysost in Heb. 10. ho. 17. Ambros in Hebr. 10. a man hath gotten a medicine to heale his hurt it is néedlesse for him to séeke any other either of the same substance or of any other And therefore hereby he resolueth against all whether Heathenish or Iewish or Popish sacrificing for sinne as being to no ende or purpose because the ende of offering for sinne which is remission of sinnes is atteined alreadie by the death and bloodsheading of Iesus Christ And vnlesse we will vnderstand offering for sinne simply and vniuersally without exception and without that determining of it to any one sort of offering which the Answ vseth in tying it vnto Christes suffering and dying we betraie this whole disputation into the hands of the Iewes and Heathens as making nothing against their sacrificing for sin because it only proueth that Christ dieth no more not that there is no more offering for sinne But the Apostle would deny not only Christs dying any more but also all maner of Iewish and Heathenish offering for sinne Therefore the words must be absolutely and vniuersally vnderstood of offering for sinne after the once dying of our Lord Iesus Yet further let me tell him that if he will affirme the often offering of Christ he must say also that Christ often suffereth and is slaine For throughout the whole scripture he cannot alleage one place where the offering or sacrificing of Christ is otherwise vnderstood then of his death and passioÌ„ And this is plainly euicted out of the 9. to the Hebrues where the Apostle saith that Christ l He. 9. 25. 26. is entered into heauen to appeare now in the sight of God for vs not to offer himselfe often for then saith he he should haue often suffered since the foundation of the world Which reason of the Apostle hath no force at all if there be any other offering of Christ but only by suffering and death Which also is manifest out of the law of Moses where there was no offering or sacrifice of propitiation but by slaughter and bloodshead and where there was no sheading of blood there was no forgiuenesse as the m Heb. 9. 22. Apostle witnesseth Now séeing there is no sacrifice of propitiation in the newe Testament which was not prefigured in the lawe which the Apostle saith n Heb. 10. 1. had the shadow of the good things that were to come and the law prefigured none but sacrifice by
conteined in the Roomish sacrifice wherby they haue made a mockery of the sonne of God and troden vnder their féete as a vile and base thing the sacred blood of Christ whereby we were redéemed But séeing that the applying of Christs death consisteth not in sacrificing with what reason do these men teach a sacrifice to apply the death of Christ vnto vs Why could they not as well without any new sacrifice make the priestes Memento and his intention a meanes to apply Christes death vnto vs as giue him power to sacrifice Christ againe and to apply that sacrifice to whom he will and by that to apply the other sacrifice of his death And what if the priest neuer so much as thinke vpon Christs death in his Masse but mumble it vp without consideration thereof how shall we thinke that he doth apply the death of Christ Last of all why may they not with as good reason say that Christ must be borne againe to apply vnto vs the benefit of his birth that he must suffer die and rise againe to apply vnto vs the vertue of his passion death and resurrection as that he must be sacrificed againe to apply vnto vs the benefit of his former sacrifice The former are absurd the Answ will say but by no reason which shall not also proue the absurditie of the latter The truth of applying as the verie word sheweth consisteth in offering and giuing of Christ vnto vs and our receiuing of him This is set foorth in the Sacrament by words of application Take ye eate ye and againe Drinke ye all of this where the bodie of Christ crucified and his blood shed for the forgiuenesse of our sinnes are by the outward elements as by seales and pledges proposed vnto vs and we willed to accept and receiue the same Which we do by true and liuely faith through the working of the holy Ghost and so are made partakers of the benefits of his death and passion to iustification and euerlasting life And this is the only meanes of application which the scripture teacheth briefly set downe by Saint Paul Rom. 3. c Rom. 3. 25. Him hath God set foorth to be an attonement not by continual offring him in sacrifice but by faith in his blood by faith I say apprehending and laying hold on him both in the hearing of the word and receiuing of the Sacraments Herein is our receiuing of Christ as S. Iohn sheweth expounding d Ioh 1. 12. receiuing by beleeuing so many as receiued him that is so many as beleeued in his name Now the papists ouerthwarting the ordinance of Iesus Christ make litle or no regard of Take ye eate ye being the two meanes of application appointed by Christ and practised by the primitiue Church but tell vs of a continuall sacrificing of Christ which doth by the intention of the priest for the very worke wrought obteine grace and apply vnto vs forgiuenesse of sinnes But in this point beside their manifest departing from the ordinance of God they again commit high treason against God in that they aduance so many other their abhominable and hatefull deuises to ride in the same chariot with the sacrifice of the body and blood of Iesus Christ For all the filth and rifraffe of the church of Rome whereby they wickedly teach men to séeke forgiuenesse of sinnes is shadowed and coloured with this conceit of applying vnto vs the death of Christ The sufferings of Saintes and Martyrs are e Rhe. Annot. Col. 1. 24. satisfactions for our sinnes they say But how Marry forsooth they take this vertue and force from Christs death and as a particular medicine apply vnto vs the generall medicine of his passion Their crossings their f Rhe. Annot. Mat. 10. 12. 1. Tim. â—5 Summe of religion taken out of Bristow and the order of confession Bishops blessings their holy water their Popes indulgences pardons their shauen crowns their munkish orders their whippings their shrifts their pilgrimages and offerings to idols their mumbling on their beades their Agnus Deis their kissing the pax and the remnant of this absurd rabble are very helpfull to the forgiuenesse of sinnes because as the Masse doth so do all these apply vnto vs the death of Christ Thus they haue multiplied their deuises as the starres and filled the world with their eâ—chauntments and sorceries of other sacrifices merits and satisfactions of their owne to giue effect and working to the sacrifice merit and satisfaction of Iesus Christ And these bastard and misbegotten trumperies because they are of themselues so apparantly iniurious to the crosse of Christ that the diuel thought they would neuer go for sale-able ware wheÌ„ they should be examined and tried except some deceitfull colour were set vpon them he hath therefore somewhat graced and countenanced with these termes of applying the death of Christ to mollifie and extenuate so much as might be the horrible blasphemy that is conteined therein And yet the blinde and ignorant people were not acquainted with this shift but persuaded themselues to find merit and forgiuenesse of sinnes in the méere exercise of these spirituall fornications and whoredomes whereto they were bewitched of their blinde leaders They might with as good reason haue tolde them that to runne a mans head against a wall to weare a straight paire of shooes vpon his féete to lie naked vpoÌ„ thorns to eat wormewood and gall to wash his hands before meate are meanes merits of the forgiuenesse of sins They will say these things are fond Alasse blind men that cannot sée the like folly and madnesse in those things which they themselues approue But thus they haue iustled the blood of Christ out of place and fulfilled that which S. Peter prophecied of them g 2. Pet. 2. 1. There shall be false teachers which priuily shall bring in damnable heresies euen denying the Lord that hath bought them c. And through couetousnesse with feined wordes shall they make marchandise of you c. Of such feined and whorish counterfeit words the h Rhe. Annot. 2. cor 2. 11. 1. Tim. 4. â— câ—ll 1. 24. paâ—sim writings of Papists are very full not sauouring at all of the holy scriptures but arising méerely of their owne deuise to cloake and couer the monstrous and filthie abhominations of the Roomish harlot P. Spence Sect. 11. VVHere we say as you coÌ„fesse that the testimony of one Gelasius or what other Doctor may not preiudicate the whole faith of them all generally we say so indeed yea we goe further and will yeeld you that Reijcimus singulos probamus omnes all of them togither or the greatest part of them consenting are the a The church of God is built vpoÌ„ the foundations of the Apostles and Prophets Ephes 2. that is vpon the old and new Testament But here both old and new Testament are iustled out of their place and the Doctors are made the mouth eyes and spirite
himselfe to be chaunged by the water and not by faith Héereby it is plaine that Baptisme hath his force not of the verie worke done but of true and vnfayned faith working in the heart good conscience towards God So as touching the other Sacrament S. Austen referreth the vertue and effect thereof h August in Ioh. tr 26. de ciuit dei li. 21. cap. 25. to our eating inwardly and in the heart and this eating inwardly hée expoundeth to be our beleeuing in Christ and resolueth that hée that by this beleeuing in Christ abideth not in Christ and Christ in him he doth not spiritually eate and drinke the flesh and bloud of Christ though he receiue the sacrament thereof Therefore neither doth this Sacrament auaile by the worke wroughâ— but onely by faith whereby we abide in Christ and Christ in vs. A miserable doctrine it is whereby men are borne in hand that comming without faith voyd of knowledge without repentance or any good motion yet they may receiue the effect of the sacraments whereas the Scripture so plainly affirmeth that i Rom 14. 23. whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne and that k Heb. 11. 6. without faith it is vnpossible to please God and therfore precisely chargeth euery man before he come to the Lords table l 1. cor 11. 28. to examine himselfe m 2 Cor. 13. 5. in that behalf But for disproofe of this assertion it is reason enough that there can be no reason nor probable shew of reason giuen whereby to prooue it Of the difference of the Iewes sacraments and ours I haue spoken before We abase neither but lift both verie high The consent of the Euangelists auaileth with me to make me yéeld to that which can be soundly prooued thereby not to euerie thing that froward and peruerse men will péeuishly fancie thereof P. Spence Sect. 31. YOu tell me a matter out of S. Luke 22. but in good sooth to what purpose I cannot imagine Who euer denied but it was Metonymia when he said this cup is the new testament or rather two tropes in one sentence For the cup is taken for Christes bloud in the cup and to be the new testament is to be the seale establishment promulgation and consecration of the newe testament Who euer denied it but because we say that the true body and bloud of Christ is contained in the sacramentall formes and that Christ saying This is my body spake plainly a Be like wheÌ„ you list there is a figure and when you list there is none You might vnderstand the one by a Figure as well as the other without a figure therefore must we meane so grosly that no where the scripture speaking of this matter vseth a figure Oâ— would you conclude thus in these wordes This cup is the new testament there is a figure ergo in these words This is my body Logick will be good cheape if this may go for currant But good sir let me be bold a little with you to put you in minde of this place of S. Luke that b A popish peeâ—ish brag See the aunswere Qui calix so troubled Beza that he wist not what to say to it but he imagined that either some sorie fellow had foysted it into the text or els that S. Luke spake false greeke so sure he was that the text was awry it made so sore against him For setting it downe by the participle as it is in greeke thus it soundeth hic calix nouum testamentum in sanguine meo pro vobis effusus Which must needes respect Calix for his substantiue and then the cup that is the liquor in the cup was shed for them and vs all which if it were wine let euerie good christian man iudge I hope he shed for our saluation a farre more pretious liquor then wine And doctor Fulke to salue this sore telleth vs that in many places of the greeke text of other Scriptures there is incongruitie Very true I confesse but it is smally to the purpose For where no sense will helpe the syntaxis there we must needs graunt incongrâ—itie But how c There are reasons enough to proue it See the answere prooued doctor Fulke that the sense wherein this place is congrue and according to grammer is not the true sense Or why should he not allow it for congrue being indeede congrue Or why should Beza imagine and he allovv of a sense that is not congrue when the text was congrue enough This point being the state of the question Doctor Fulke stealeth away from and medleth not vvith it because it vvas too plain for vs and against his sacramentarie doctrine As likevvise vvas that place of S. Luke vvhere drinking at his Supper in vvine to his Disciples before hee instituted the Sacrament he told them hee vvould drinke vvine no more till in his kingdome vvhich vvas after his resurrection and yet a litle after he d VVhat did Christ drinke his owne bloud we can not beleue it drank to them in the Sacrament vvhich if it had beene vvine hee had contraried his former speech an absurditie I thinke not to be admitted R. Abbot 31. FOr further answere as touching the conformitie vsed in these wordes This is my body I shewed how S. Luke and S. Paul varie from S. Mathew and S. Marke as touching the other part of the sacrament For whereas these say this is my bloud of the new testament c. The other say This cup is the new testament in my bloud c. And these latter wordes I shewed to â—e the ouerthrow of transubstantiation But the Answ in good sooth telleth me that he cannot sée to what purpose this is alleaged I pray you therefore M. Spence put him in minde of his headlesse reason which he hath vsed before Christ saith he will call nothing by a wrong name If he should call fire water earth by the names of ayre stones or bread they would sooner become ayre stones bread then he would misname any thing He did not lie to his Disciples he did not â—eguile them Therefore when he said This cup is the new Testament without doubt the cup was substantially turned into a Testament Nay not so saith he there is a figure here Yea and may a thing be called by a wrong name by a figure is there now a figure in these words Why then is the man so straight laced that he cannot yéeld a figure in the other words especially séeing the auncient Fathers so expresly expounde them by way of figure and neither he nor his can make any certaine exposition of them but by a figure But it followeth not he saith that because there is a figure in the one spéech therfore there is so also in yâ— other Yet say I if it follow not that because Christ taking the cup said thereof This cup is the new Testament therefore the cup was turned into the testament then it followeth
yéelded no benefite vnto God yet deserued of God for vs the kingdome of euerlasting life As for that which he obiecteth out of y 2. Tim. 2. 21. 2. Tim. 2. I take his exposition for true but nothing contrary to that that I haue said We serue for such good vse as God hath created vs and appointed vs vnto and yet in doing all we doe but our duetie and therefore what can we be said to deserue thereby Whereas he affirmeth that the kingdome of heauen is gratuite and frée that is yéelded by grace and yet deserued also by works he gainsaieth the Apostle who telleth him z Rom. 11. 6. If it be of grace it is not of workes otherwise grace is no grace For as S. Austen saith a Aug. cont pelag ceâ—est lib. 2. cap. 24. Grace cannot be called grace in any respect vnlesse it be free in euerie respect and b Epist 105. it is not free saith he againe if it be not freely giuen but rendered vnto workes Yet the Answ shrowdeth himselfe vnder the name of S. Austen and to him he appealeth to prooue that heauen is merited by workes but he did wisely to alleage no place of Austen to that purpose S. Austens iudgement is cléere euerie where that eternall life is the frée grace and gift of God because although we haue good workes yet our good workes also come from that grace whereby God of his owne good will and frée promise in Iesus Christ hath intended to vs glorification and euerlasting life c August in Psal 109. God saith he hath made himselfe a debter vnto vs not by receiuing any thing of vs but promising all things vnto vs and therefore saith he in another place d In Psal 32. 83. We say not vnto him Lord repay that which thou hast receiued but pay that which thou hast promised And so S. Bernard according to the doctrine of Saint Austen calleth the crowne of heauen by S. Paules word e â—ernar de lib. arbâ—â— grat a crowne of iustice but not of mans iustice but of the iustice of God For it is iust with God to pay that which he oweth and he oweth that which hee hath promised And this saith he is the iustice of f 2. Tim. â— 8. which the Apostle presumeth euen the promise of God Whereby it appeareth that S. Austen though he vse the name of merite oftentimes yet vnderstandeth it not as whereby we properly deserue but which it pleaseth God of his grace to accept as our merite and by his promise vouchsafeth to reward it or rather to yéeld vnto vs vnder the name of reward thereof that which is indéede his méere promise and gift And this is most euident and vndemably prooued by S. Austens wordes in the place aboue cited g August in Psal 1â—9 God promised to vs men communion with God immortalitie to vs being mortall iustification to vs sinners glorification to vs castawaies Whatsoeuer he promised he promised to vs being vnworthy that it might not be promised as a reward to workes but being grace it might according to the name be freely giuen because that a man liueth iustly so farre as man can liue iustly it is nothing of mans desert but of the gift of God This one place setteth forth vnto vs sufficiently the iudgement of S. Austen as touching this whole point And to this accordeth yâ— saying of Basill h Baâ—in ps 11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eternal rest is laid vp for theÌ„ which lawfully fight the fight of this life not to be rendered for the merite of workes but prepared by the grace of our bountifull God for all those that trust in him How farre differeth the spirite that spake in these men from that proud and blasphemous spirite that now speaketh in the Church of Roome out of whose mouth the Rhemistes tell vs i Rhem Annot. Hâ—â— â— 10. that good workes be truely meritorious and the verie cause of saluation so farre that God should be vniust if hee rendered not heauen for the same Where may the man be found I maruelll whose workes are so far meritorious that God must be vniust if for the merite thereof hée render not heauen vnto him But this arrogant and more then Pelagian vaunt of merite is in verie expresse and direct termes contradicted by S. Bernard k Bernard de lib arbit gâ—at If saith he we will properly speake of those which we call our merites they are the way to the kingdome and not the cause of our obtaining the kingdome And in another place thus l Ibid in An 〈…〉 Marâ—ae Serm. 1. The merites of men are not such as that eternall life should be due vnto vs for them by right or as that God should doe iniurie if he gaue it not for the same For to say nothing that all our merites are the giftes of God and so man is rather a debter vnto God for them then God vnto man what are all merites to so great glorie and briefly who is better then the Prophet Dauid who yet was faine to say O Lord enter not into iudgement with thy seruaunt Let no man then deceiue himselfe c. The Rhemistes say that our merites are the verie cause of saluation S. Bernard saith they are not so They say that God should be vniust if hee rendered not heauen for them he saith that God should doe no iniurie therein They say heauen is m Rhem Annot 2. Tim. 4 8 our owne right deserued by workes hee saith it is not due vnto vs by right for our workes In like sort doe thâ—y ouerthwart those testimonies of Chrysostome Beda Marke Austen Basill which I haue mentioned before and yet forsooth they teach nothing but that which the aun 〈…〉 t fathers haue vniuersally receiued We must saith the Answ be cleane and whiter then snow But saith the scripture n Prou. 〈◊〉 Who can say my heart is cleane I am cleane from my sinne If none as in trueth none can then can none by that that is in himselfe be reckoned for iust in the sight of God Hilary rightly and truely admonisheth vs as touching this point o Hâ—lâ—r â—pud Augâ—st 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that our bodies are the matter of all vices by reason whereof being polluted and filthy wee haue nothing innocent in vs nothing cleane Euen our best workes are blemished and stained with the blot of originall corruption the remaines wherof sticke fast in vs whilest we continue in this life so that the Apostle in the midst of his graces and good workes is forced to crie out p Rom. 7. 14 I am carnall and sold vnder sinne And therefore S. Bernard teacheth vs to confesse of our righteousnesse that it is q Bernâ—â— de 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not pure or cleane except wee will perhaps presume that we are better then they who with no lesse trueth then humilitie said All our righteousnesses are like vncleane and
Which words amongst other it hath pleased those honest Censours of the King of Spains appointment to exempt from being Index Expâ— in censura Bertramâ— printed any more A shift wherewith the church of Romes factours haue made vs verie well acquainted in the workes of diuers Authors both old and new By the way as you touch this point you séeme to gleane for the defence of your Masse telling me that in the Canon aforesaid there is mention made of S. Iames and S. Basils Masse or Sacrifice left to the Church in writing By which spéech you put me in mind of that melancholy Athenian who standing at the sea shore would imagine of euery ship that he saw that it was his ship For in like sort whersoeuer you finde in any of the auncient Fathers mention made of the mysticall sacrifice you fancy it straight waies to be ment of your sacrilegious abhominable sacrifice of the Masse a cursed deuise of Satan therby to withhold men from the soueraign only sacrifice of the crosse of Christ Therfore wheras the Canon mentioneth only Sacrifice you alledge it to me Masse or Sacrifice But you shuld know that the Gréeke Fathers were not priuie to the name of your Masse how soeuer it please some of you to make a cogging argument to blinde the vnlearned by these titles S. Iames his Masse S. Chrysostomes Masse c. vsed by the translators but neuer meant by the Authors The Gréeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they vsed may rather import our diuine-seruice then your prophane Masse And if it must néedes signifie Masse you may turne the magistrate into a Rom 13. 6. The Minister of God Rom. 15. 27. Phil. 2. 25. to minister vnto Heb. 1 14. ministring spirits Act. 13. 2. as they were ministâ—ing to the Lord. Masse-priâ—st because he is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you may say that to relieue the necessities of Saints is to say Masse because the Apostle vseth thereof the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Angels shall be called Massing spirits because they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You remember since you wold néeds enforce the Apostles saying Masse by the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 how wel to the purpose you may hereby vnderstand Your Masse you call of the word Missa you should indéed rather of the word Massa as being an heape of vnprofitable ceremonies and wicked prophanations of the Sacrament of Iesus Christ But Missa importeth not sacrifice as you pretend it doth The olde vse of the word Missa discloseth the great abuse of your Masse It noted the sending away of non-communicants none being permitted to staie while the Sacrament was ministred but only such as did communicate So doth S. Austen declare speaking Au. de Temp. ser 232. as touching the Catechumeni that is such as were yet but nouices in religion and vnder chatechising and therefore as yet not permitted to be partakers of the holie mysteries nor to be present at the celebration thereof Behold saith he after the Sermon there is missa a dimission or sending away of such as are catechumeni the faithfull abide still we shall come to the place of praier c. And in the fourth Councell of Carthage order is taken that the Bishop shall forbid concil carthag 4. can 84. none to enter into the Church and heare the word of God whether he be Gentile hereticke or Iew vsque ad missam vntill the dimission or sending away of the catechumeni There is no such dimission in your Masse and of those that staie none are ordinarily partakers of the Sacrament but only the Priest The people are spectatours only of his stage-like and trifling iestures and go as emptie home as they came thither But in processe of time custome drew this wâ—râ— to note the celebration of the Sacrament which was administred to such as remained after this dimission Whence it is that the pretended Liturgies of S. Iames Basil and Chrysostome are by the translators tearmed by the name of Masse Whereas those Liturgies I doubt not if they were written by those men whose names they beare as some of them assuredly were not or if being written by them they remained as their Authors left them as by the varietie of the editions of Chrysostomes Liturgie it is plain they do not would rather resemble our communion wherein both the Minister and the people communicate togither in both kinds then your Masse wherein the people are either idle lookers on or when they are communicants are by your sacriledge communicants in one kinde onely and secluded from the other contrary altogither to the practise of the primitiue Church or which is more to the expresse institution of our Sauiour Christ And this is to be séene by those steps of antiquitie which as yet are found in those Liturgies neither do I sée what great aduantage you haue by them to set any colour vpon your Popish Masse saue only to blinde the eyes of the simple and vnlearned And whereas you alledged to me that there was in them praier for the dead there is good cause to thinke that those praiers were at the first but commemorations and thankesgiuings for the departed in the faith of Christ for that in Chrysostomes Liturgie we finde according to that which then I answered you thus We offer vnto thee ô Lord this reasonable seruice for those chrysost â—â—gia which rest in the faith our Auncestors Fathers the Patriarches Prophets Apostles Preachers Euangeliâ—tes Martyres especially for the most holie and pure virgin Mary c. But it is contrary to the custome of your church to your doctrine to pray for the virgin Mary for Martyrs c. And you vse to that purpose the saying of S. Austen He doth iniury to the Martyr which praieth for a Martyr Therfore August de verb Apo. ser 17. these were only spéeches of thankesgiuing vnto God for his louing mercy shewed to those through Iesus Christ make nothing at all for your praier for the dead To this being the auncient custome oâ— the Church S. Austen alludeth when he saith When the Aug. Euchiâ— cap. 10. sacrifices either of the altar or of any almes are offered for all that are dead they are for them that are very good thankesgiuings c. which custome of thankesgiuing generally we also vse for all that are departed hence in the faith of Iesus Christ As for that which he addeth For them that are not verie euill they are propitiations c. we take it to be a superstitious conceit which after crept into yâ— church contraried by many in S. Austens time as may appeare in his booke of questions to Dulcitius where proposing the question of Dulcitius whether oblations for the dead did auaile them whereby it appeareth it was a matter controuersed in that time he answereth To this many say that if there might be any good done herein August de 8. quaest
Dâ—lcitij q. 2. after death how much rather should the soule it selfe procure rest for it selfe by it owne confession of sinnes there made then that an oblation should be procured for the rest thereof by other man A reason not without some weight if it be well considered But in that place afore-named of S. Austen I would not you should be deceiued to thinke yâ— he meaneth the sacrifices of the altar for the offering or sacrificing of the bodie and blood of Christ wheras indéed he meaneth it of the offerings as we also call them which euery particular man offered at the Sacrament which were employed either to the seruice of the Sacrament or to the reliefe of the poore or to other sacred and godly vses Which maner of offering Hierom in 1. Cor. 11. S. Hierome declareth vpon those words of the Apostle When ye come togither c. This he speaketh saith he because when they met in the church they offered their offerings seuerally and after the communion eating a supper in common they spent there in the church whatsoeuer remained vnto them of the sacrifices To which purpose sundrie other like places might be alleaged And this is one reason amongst the rest why sometimes we finde mention of sacrifice offered in the Sacrament But I know M. Spence what sacrifice it is that you meane a sacrifice properly so called of the verie bodie and blood of Christ propitiatory for the sinnes of quicke and dead offered really and indéed euery day by the hands of a wretched and sinfull priest who must intreat God in behalfe of the sacrifice of Christs bodie and blood that he will looke downe mercifully vpon it and accept it c. The verie naming of which things cannot but be loathsome to a true Christian heart which simply beléeueth out of the word of God that Christ hauing purged our sinnes by once offering himselfe vpon his crosse Heb. 1. 3. 9. 26. 28. Cap. â— 27. Cap. 10. 1â— is ascended into heauen neither needeth to be often offered because by that once offring he hath fully perfected the worke of one attonement and forgiuenesse of sinnes and therefore that there is now no other sacrifice or offering propitiatorie for sinne I say not only no other thing offered but no other offering or sacrificing for remission of sin Reade vprightly M. Spence and with féeling of conscience the 7. 9. and 10. to the Hebrewes The sayings are cleare as the sun-light and in vaine do your Rhemists struggle striue to darken the light of them There is none almost that knoweth anie thing as touching religion but can see how their commentarie is controlled by the text CoÌ„sider this argument out of the tenth chapter where there is forgiuenesse of sinnes there is no more offering for sinne By the sacrifice of Christ vpon his crosse there is forgiuenesse of sinnes for his blood was there shead for the forgiuenesse of sinnes Therefore after Christs sacrifice vpon his crosse there is no more offering for sinne The Apostle in that place reiecting the sacrifices of the old law as which could not sanctifie as touching the Hebr. 10. 1. 2. conscience those that came vnto them for if they could they should not haue bene often offered substitateth in place therof the true entier and only sacrifice of Christ vpon his crosse Who hauing a bodie 5. 7. fitted him commeth according to the will of his father into the world to sanctifie vs by the offering of his bodie once And whereas 10. 11. saith he the priests of the old law do daily and oftentimes offer their sacrifices an argument that they tooke not away sinne this man hauing offered one offering for sinne is gone into heauen not to offer vp himselfe often saith he chap. 9. for then he should haue often cap. 9. 25. suffered since the foundation of the world but waiting hencefoorth till his foes be made his footestoole inferring withall that he néedeth cap. 10. 13. 14. not to be often offered because by one offering or oblation of himselfe he hath perfected and that for euer them that are sanctified Now that he hath persected vs and therefore that there néedeth no other sacrifice or offering for sinne he proueth by the words of Ieremy 15. who defineth the new Testament the ground whereof is the bloodsheading of Iesus Christ by the forgiuenesse of sinnes concluding thereupon Now where remission of these is there is no more 18. offering for sinne Collect the Apostles reason thus If after that once offering there be no more offering for sinne then surely by that once offering he perfected vs. But after that once offering there is no more offering for sinne therefore by that once offering he hath perfected vs. The assumption or minor he proueth thus Where forgiuenesse of sinnes is there is no more offering for sinne But by that once offering there is forgiuenesse of sinnes therefore after that once offering there is no more offering for sinne Examine this collection and sée how it goeth hand in hand with the Apostles words Which is so peremptory resolute against the sacriledge of the masse that your Rhemists without any colour or shew of probabilitie by the text do force vpon the word oblation a straunge meaning as if the Apostle had said There is no Rhem. Annot. Hebr. 10. 18. second baptisme wherby we may haue applied vnto vs the full pardon and remission of our sinnes What should I here say I maâ— Campian rat 1 iustly retort vppon them the wordes of Campian What is it so â— there such peruersnesse such presumption and shamelesnesse in men Cicer. epist 12. lib. 5. Lucceio But they practise that which the Heathen Orator saith He whicâ— hath once passed the bounds of modestie and shamefastnesse muâ— needes shew himselfe lustily impudent and shamelesse What hatâ— the Apostle to do with Baptisme in this text Why did they noâ— shew how this sence hangeth vpon the words gone before Whâ— did they forgo the expositions of the Fathers of Chrysostome Hee chrysost Oecumen Theodor c in Hebr. 10. forgaue sinnes when he gaue the Testament and he gaue the Testament by sacrifice If therfore he forgaue sinnes by one oblation or sacrifice there needeth not now any seconde of Oecumenius out of Photius What need is there of many oblations seeing that one which Christ hath yeelded is sufficient to take away sinne Theodoret There is now no offering for sinne For it is superfluous forgiuenesse of sinne beeing giuen alreadie of Theophylact If remission of sinnes be graunted by one oblation what neede we now any second of Primasius for Christ which is our sacrifice is not to be offered againe for sinne For this was once done and needeth not to be done a second time of Ambrose for one offering of the bodie of Christ maketh perfect them that are sanctified as which giueth full and perfect remission of sinnes c. Wherfore it needeth