vncleannesse and some Angels of the bottomles pit by couetousnes and a little after Not a few of our moderne Priests doe serue the most vild and filthy God Priapus Panormitane a man of great fame in the Councell of Basill after he had shewen the vowe of continencie not to be of the essence of Priest-hood nor by the lawe of God but a constitution of the Church addeth these words I beleeue that it were a wholesome ordinance for the good saluation of soules to leaue it to mâ—ns owne wils to marrie or not because experience doth show that now a daies they doe not liue spiritually and vndefiledly but that they are defiled by vnlawfull copulation whereas they might liue chastly with their owne wiues 37. I could adde vnto these testimonies the report of Iohn Gerson touching his time who complained that some Cloysters of Nunnes were become Stewes of strumpets and whores And of Mantuan a Carmelite Italian Frier whose verses touching this poynt are sufficiently knowne Patrum vita fuit melior cum coniuge quà m nunc Nostra sit exclusis thalamis coniugis vsu The life of the Fathers was better being married then ours to whom marriage is forbidden and of Polidor Virgill who liued in King Henrie the Eights daies whose censure is this that this enforced chastity is so farre from excelling that marriage-chastity that no crime hath brought more shame to the order of Priesthood more euill to Religion nor more griefe to all good men then that blot of the filthinesse of Priests But that I feare I haue too much offeÌ„ded chaste eares already with raking into this dunghill I conclude with the report of Martin Luther he saith that he saw Cardinals at Rome which were accounted holy for no other cause but that they were content onely to commit fornication and adultery with women and did not giue themselues to other vnnaturall lusts Thus as it were in a mappe I haue described the filthy and abominable fruites that proceed from that Romish doctrine of vowed chastitie Is it possible that the spring should be good when the streams are thus corrupt 38. The fift doctrine of Poperie giuing manifest occasion of liberty to the professours thereof is their doctrine of veniall sinnes By which they teach that many acts which are transgressions of the laws of God men yet are not properly sins nor deserue the wrath of God but of their nature are pardonable and therfore he which committeth any such doth neither offer iniury to God nor breake charity in respect of his neighbour and so deserues not hell nor is bound to be sorry for them but that the knocking of the brest going to Church being sprinckled with holy water or the Bishops blessing or crossing ones selfe or doing any worke of charity though we neuer thinke actually of them is a sufficient satisfaction for them This is the doctrine not onely of the Schoolemen but also of the finest and refyning Iesuites euen of Bellarmine himselfe who thus distinguisheth veniall sinnes that some are veniall of their own nature and kind to wit such as haue for their obiect an euill and inordinate matter but which is not repugnant to the law of God and of our neighbour others are veniall by the imperfection of the worke which imperfection ariseth partly ex surreptione that is by vnaduised falling into them without full consent of will and partly ex paruitate materiae by the smalnesse of the matter which is committed as if a man should steale a halfe-peny or some such trifle This is the Cardinals doctrine which as neere as I could I hauâ— word for word set downe And that wee may more fully vnderstand their meaning they affirme in very deede that they are no sinnes but aequiuoce that is so called but not â—o in truth for the word peccatum sinne doth not vniuoce aâ—â—ee 〈…〉 eniall sinnes as it doth to mortall and therefore it is their generall opinion that they are not against but beside the lawe that is in plaine words not sinne for euery sinne is a transgression of the law Now let the Readeriudge whether our doctrine that all sinnes of their owne nature are mortall and deserue condemnation except they be repeÌ„ted of or heirs that some are veniall and binde not the offender to condemnation doe more tend to liberty whether we restraine more the people from sinning that thus say vnto them All your sinnes though neuer so small are of their owne nature damnable except by faith in the bloud of Christ they be purged away and by repentance which is a fruite of faith sorrowed for and laboured against or they that say thus to them A number of your ordinarie sinnes are not damnable you neede not faith in Christs bloud to purge them nor repentance to bewaile them nor care and endeuour to preuent them who seeth not that our doctrine pulleth in and theirs letteth out the reynes of libertie to our corrupt nature for when a man beleeueth that he may do many things which are in deed transgressions of Gods lawe without offence to God or hurt to his neighbour or wounding of his owne conscience and that after he hath committed them he needeth not greatly to repent of them or to be sorry for them but that they are done away by saying a Lords prayer or hearing a Masse or creeping to a Crosse or receiuing a little Holy water what neede he make any conscience of these so sleight trifles nay how can hee choose but neglect and make light account of them This is one of the deuils subtile deuices or iuggling trickes which Saint Paul speaketh of where with hee laboureth to seduce simple soules for either hee will aggrauate our sinnes to driue vs to desperation or extenuate and excuse them to draw to presumption the rocke and gulfe whereat many thousand soules suffer shipwracke And this last the most dangerous wherein the Papists shew themselues the deuils agents and factours by this their doctrine of veniall sinnes for what is this but to excuse sinne and to extenuate it and so to make men presume to commit those things which they esteeme of no greater moment 39. The truth of this will more clearely appeare if wee take a suruay a little of those particular sinnes which they account as veniall To sweare by the bloud of God or wounds or bodie of Christ is no blasphemie saith Cardinall Caietane if it be spoken in a brawle or in some perturbation of mind neither is it to be counted any more than a veniall sinne Againe formall cursing saith Gregorie de Valentia although in it owne kinde it be a mortall sinne yet it may be onely a veniall to wit in respect either of the smalnesse of the matter or the want of deliberation in the speaker and hereby saith he Parents cursing their children with bitter words and deuoting them to the deuill may often be excused from mortall sinne An
in it selfe doth not deserue a iust reproofe 64. In the other place obiected hee writeth thus Qui seriò tanquam sub conspectu Dei c. i. They which shall earnestly as in the sight of God seeke the true rule of iustice shall finde for certainty all the words of men if they be censured by their owne dignity to be nothing but pollution and filthines and that which is commonly called righteousnesse to be before God meere iniquity that which is counted integrity to be impurity and that which is esteemed glory to be ignominie Let the Reader now iudge what notorious lyars these bee to fasten this opinion vpon Caluin whose wordes I haue sincerely and fully set downe that euery one may see their false dealing for in what one place nameth hee mortall sinne or what one word tendeth to that end The worse termes he◠giueth to good workes in the first place are these That they are sprinkled with imperfection mixed with the dregs of the slesh stained with corruption and in the second that they are filthines iniquity pollution and ignominy but how first if they bee examined by the strict rule of Gods iustice secondly if they bee compared to Gods righteousnesse and thirdly if they bee considered in their owne merite and worth without the merite of Christ whereby both their staines and imperfections are couered and an excellent dignity giuen vnto them 65. And indeed what I pray you doth Caluine say herein but that which the Fathers said before I will propound two or three vnto you in stead of al the rest Woe be to our righteousnesse sayth Saint Augustine if God remouing his mercy should search into it and againe All our righteousnes standeth rather in the remission of our sinnes then in any perfection of iustice Our best righteousnes sayth Saint Bernard if it be any is right perhaps but not pure vnlesse happily we thinke our selues better then our Fathers who no lesse truely then humbly said All our righteousnes is as a defiled cloth The holy man Iob sayth Saint Gregory because he saw all the merite of our vertue to be in vice if it be strictly iudged by the eternall Iudge did rightly adde in If I will contend with him I shall not be able to answere him one of a thousand Lastly all beauty sayth Arnobius in Gods presence is but deformity all righteousnes is but vnrighteousness all strength but weakenes all riches but beggery These Fathers with all the rest say no lesse then Caluine nor Caluine no more then they and therefore they must either bee condemned with him or bee iustified with them Now if any man should say that they affirmed that our best works were deadly sinnes all men would condemne him for a liar so may we iustly say of our malicious aduersaries in imputing that opinion to Caluine which hee neuer meant nor yet the words will beare and also which in all his writings hee directly crosseth 66. That which hath beene spoken concerning Caluine may bee applyed to the iustification of Luther and Melancthon who are so farre from esteeming good workes to bee mortall sinnes that they extoll them hyperbolically as hath beene already manifested Luther indeed sayth thus That a good worke done after the best manner that can be yet is a veniall sinne according to the mercy of God and a mortall sinne according to the iustice of God but what of this doth he therefore say that it is a mortall sinne simply as they would haue him no in no case for first hee calleth it a good worke which hee would neuer haue done if hee had iudged it no better then a sinne secondly hee sayth that it is mortall according to the iustice of God and veniall by the mercy of God which is the very same that all the Fathers affirmed before intending by mortall not that which is a high degree of sinne but that which in it owne nature deserueth death Thirdly Luther himselfe sheweth what his intendment is in the article going before where he sayth that not the good worke it selfe but the defect in the worke is truely sinne because it is an omission of that precept Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart By all which it is cleare that Luther doth not condemne a good worke but the euil in the worke and that though God doth in mercy pardon the euill for the goods sake being a fruit of faith so he might iustly condemne the good for the euill sake that cleaueth vnto it being a fruit of originall sinne so that Luther standeth cleare and innocent from this crime layd to his charge in all true iudgement and they stand guilty of a most foule slander imputed vnto him by their malice 67. Thirdly they slaunder vs that we slaunder God by making him the author of sinne This accusation Bellarmine Campion Stapleton Vasques Feuardentius and all the Iesuiticall rabble lay to our charge And they accuse Caluine Luther Peter Martir and all other Protestant-writers as guilty thereof but vpon what ground and with what shew of reason let them declare vnto vs for it passeth the reach of our capacities to finde out any such doctrine either direct in plaine words or indirect by logicall consequence in any of them direct doctrine I am sure Caluine thus writeth The cause of sinne is not to be sought out of mans will out of which the roote of euill ariseth and in the which sinne resideth And in his Comment vpon the Epistle of Saint Iames more plainely he affirmeth that God is not the author of sinne and that euils doe not proceed from any other roote but from the euill concupiscence of euery mans owne heart And this doctrine he iterateth againe and againe many score of times in his bookes Peter Martyr in like maner is most direct against this blasphemous doctrine for thus he saith That opinion of the Libertines which maketh God the author of sinne is a most detestable opinion then which nothing can be imagined more wicked nor a more compendious way to hell And in the same place he concludeth that though nothing in the world no not sinnes themselues come to passe besides Gods will and prouidence yet he is not truly to be called the cause of sinne but all that can be sayd is that he is such a cause which is tearmed by the Logicians the remoouing or hindering cause that is not efficient but deficient rather which in truth is no cause at all Luther is as direct for he auoucheth this proposition in many places God is not the author of sinne And this same is the constant affirmation of all our Diuines What a shamelesse forehead then haue our malicious aduersaries that dare lay vnto our charge this blasphemy which we all detest and abhorre 68. I but say they though in word you say so yet by consequence from your doctrine it may be necessarily gathered that you hold the contrary for you all teach that God concurreth with
for sinne that as by Chaucers Canterbury tales may appeare it deserueth rather to bee called a pastime than a penance If Almes be enioyned by the Confessor to the poore penitent then must an Abby be built or some religious house to nourish a company of idle drones good for nothing but fruges consumere or suppose an high-way bee repayred or a Church reedified or an Hospitall erected what terrour can this be from sinne when the penalty may thus be discharged by the purse As for their Fasting watching whiping going barefoote though it carry a shew of zeale in respect of not sparing the body yet it is a plaine imitation of Baals Priests and little profitable as Saint Paul saith to godlinesse but rather an incitation to loosenes For when a man is perswaded and taught that all his foule sins committed the whole yere before are vtterly blotted out and done away by fasting one meale euery Wednesday and Friday and eating nothing but Fish during the holy time of Lent except Iunckets and sweet meates and wine and Sugar which they gorge themselues withall and yet fast too and bearing ashes on Ashwednesday going woolward on Good-friday or giuing himselfe halfe a dozen lashes on the back or creeping to a crosse and such like trumpery I say when a man is perswaded that this short paine is a sufficient satisfaction for the punishment of all his former sinne for so they teach who would not returne againe to his vomit of wickednesse seeing the pleasures which he hopes to enioy by his sinnes are farre longer and greater then the punishment wherewith he maketh satisfaction 22. Secondly to shew that all this great noyse of satisfactions is nothing but a meere May-game and mockery obserue diligently their owne doctrine Thus they teach that all satisfactory punishments may be released by a pardon Aquinas their illumined Doctor giueth this reason thereof Christ might release the fault without any satisfaction and so might Paul ergo so may the Pope and this is one of their late definitions of a pardon Indulgentia est remissio harum actionuÌ„ quae sunt a Confessario iniunctae peccatori It is the remitting of that penance which is enioyned a sinner by his Confessor And therefore another Iesuite truely confesseth that the Indulgences haue taken away all vse of seuere discipline out of the Church haue they so good Iesuite Then thus it followeth you let out satisfactions which you so much extoll and withall let in great liberty into the Church not onely by opening the dore to pardons but bewray your own absurdities For what a ridiculous jest is this he that hath offended must do penaÌ„ce after his confession or else hee cannot be saued and after his penance is assigned get but a pardon and then there needes no further satisfaction And how is a pardon procured why for a little peece of money omnia venalia Romae The Pope hath his pardon Pedlers in all Countries thou needest not go farre for it they will bring it home to thy dores at least if thou beest sat and able to greaze them well Pope Boniface the ninth sent out his Buls into diuers Countries releasing for a certaine summe of money all offences whatsoeuer without any penance And Leo the tenth offered to free for ten shillings any soule you would name out of Purgatory much more a mans owne soule that it should neuer come thither here is a doctrine indeede of seuerity if any was among the Epicures who will not say but this is a Censorious and strict Religion 23. I but some will say peraduenture oh it is an hard matter to pay tenne shillings for a pardon this is the penance of the purse which to a couetous rich man or to a miserable poore man is worse theÌ„ the penance of the carkeis Why but thou mayst haue it cheaper if thou wilt and therefore indeed he is a foole which will part with a penny for the purchase of a pardon say but deuoutly a little short prayer in the Primer thou shalt haue three thousand dayes pardon of mortall sinnes and twenty thousand dayes of veniall giuen by Pope â—ohn the twenty two And if that Prayer bee too long say fiue Pater-nosters before the Vernacle and thou shalt haue tenne thousand dayes pardon graunted by the same Pope and if so many Pater-nosters be too tedious say but an Aue at the Eleuation thou shalt obtaine pardon for 20000. daies or if thou dwellest neere Rome doe but visite the Church of Saint Paul without the walls haue eight forty thousand yeres of pardon Who would stand vpon dayes when he may haue thus many thousand yeares If thou beest weake or sick and not able to visite a Church then doe but deuoutly worship the Crosse or the nayles whip launce heart or hands of Christ painted in thy chamber and that shall bee a sufficient satisfaction for all thy sinnes Here is stuffe with a witnesse for can a man forbeare laughter to heare these May-games and yet this is not the tenth part of these incredible absurdities But I passe them ouer being sufficiently discouered by others to the shame of the Romish Religion It sufficeth that by this little it is euident that satisfactions are so farre from restraining that they rather remit the reines to all liberty and licentiousnesse 24. Lastly to conclude if so be their imposed penance be at any time strict seuere it is when the Pope iâ— offended not when God Men may franckly sin against God no man will say vnto him blacke is thine eye or if vpon his shriuing they enioyne him penance either it shall be so easie that it will not much trouble him to endure it or if it be too hard he may either redeeme it with his purse or at least commute it into another kind But if their Lord god the Pope be offended so the Canonists stile him then not onely seuerity but cruelty must be exercised then the whip and the scourge then the fire and the fagot Et scutica dignum horribili sectere flagello That which deserued but a flap with a ferula must be chastised with a scourge As on the contrary if the offence was only against God and not the Pope then that which deserued to be seuerely corrected must haue nothing but three flaps with a Fox-tayle which is credibly reported by some Writers to haue beene the penance of a Nunne which was gotten with childe in her Cloyster Albeit another Nunne at Watton in Yorkeshire fared farre worse for her wantonnesse with a yong Monke of the same house for being gotten with childe by him she was first imprisoned saith the Story and then beaten vnreasonably and vnseasonably too being great with childe then the Monke that committed this trespasse being taken and stript and bound fast to a stoole a sharpe knife was put into the Nunnes hand and shee was compelled by most cruell
officious lye and a lye in sport are but veniall sinnes saith Molanus the same Authour affirmeth that if any man steale some little thing suppose an halfe peny as Bellarmine giueth instance whereby no notable hurt is caused this is to bee esteemed no mortall sinne Againe rash iudgement though consent bee added thereto is regularly but a veniall sinne so also is the painting of the face saith Molanus Cardinall Caietane reckoneth vp a number such like as for example Partiality in iudgement and acception of person if it be not pernitious Flattery when we praise one for veniall euils and it be without any manifest hurt Ambition that is an inordinate desire of honour if it be not for euill deeds or immoderate Arnogancie whereby a man attributeth that to himselfe which is farre aboue him if it be without preiudice of his neighbour Craft if it bee not ioyned with damage Couetousnesse as it is opposed to liberality that is an inordinate desire of money and greedy keeping of it being gotten because it is not against but besides charity Contempt of our neighbour and Superiour in small trifles To contend in words against a known truth if the opposite falshood be not pernitious To rayle vpon our neighbour to his face if it proceede from passion or bee but a light reproach Curiositie if it bee naked without some other euill ioyned with it To mocke and scorne our neighbour if in a small matter Drunkennesse if it be not full and compleat to wit if a man drinke till the house seeme to goe round and yet is not depriued of reason yea if it bee of purpose and with full intention For a childe not to reuerence his Parents so that it be free from notorious iniurie and contempt To deceiue if in a small mater Gluttony is then onely mortall when a man makes the delight in eating the last end Hypocrisie to wit thus farre forth if a man faine himselfe to be good in some thing when hee is not or better then he is Filthy speech is most vsuall but veniall To disdaine a mans neighbour is commonly but a veniall sinne To iudge rashly of our neighbour is either veniall or mortall according to the greatnes of the thing where of we giue iudgement Idlenesse if it haue no other mischiefe to accompany it These and a number such like are reckoned vp by that Author to which I might adde many more out of other Romish writers but these may suffice for our purpose to demonstrate what liberty this doctrine giues to loosnesse For hence men may be bold to sweare to curse to raile to back-bite to steale to be drunke to be idle c. cloke all vnder this vaile They are but veniall sinnes Yea and because the common people are not able to vnderstand their nice distinctions of against and beside charitie surreption and irruption great and small dammage c. therefore often grosse and great sinnes creepe in vnder the name of venials if this be not a doctrine of liberty what is 40. The sixt and last doctrine tending to loosnesse the last I meane of those which I intend to propound in this Discourse for there are many more that tend to the same end is their doctrine of implicite and infolded faith where by they teach that if a man know some necessary poynts of Religion as the doctrine of the God-head of the Trinitie of Christs incarnation and Passion c. it is needlesse to busie himselfe about the rest by a particular or distinct knowledge but it sufficeth to giue assent to the Church and to beleeue as the Pastors beleeue This implicite faith is the mother of ignorance and this ignorance say they is the mother of deuotion but what kind of deuotion I pray you such as the mother is such is the daughter a blinde mother and a blinde daughter such a deuotion and zeale which the Iewes had when they crucified Christ or as Saint Paul had when he persecuted the Church of Christ or which the Gentiles had when they thought they did God good seruice by putting to death the primitiue Christians Like Poliphemus when his eye was bored out by Vlisses dashed himselfe against euery rocke so doe these blinde Romanists the eye of knowledge being bored out by this pernitious doctrine dash themselues against the rocke of Heresie in matter of faith and impietie in manners for all errour in doctrine ariseth from ignorance of the Scriptures You erre not knowing the Scripture and the power of God saith our Sauiour and erring in manners proceedeth from the same fountaine for if the hyding of Gods word in the heart is a preseruatiue against sinne as the Prophet Dauid auoucheth then the ignorance of Gods word must needs be the cause of many errours and enormities in life To this agreeth the opinion of Chrysostome Scripturarum ignoratio haereses peperit haec vitam corruptam inuexit haec sursum ac deorsum omniamiscuit The ignorance of Scripture hath bred heresies brought in corruption of life and turned all things vpside downe And also of Saint Hierome who sayth plainely Ama scientiaÌ„ Scripturarum carnis vitia non amabis Loue the knowledge of the Scriptures and thoushalt not loue the vices of the flesh Whereby hee giueth vs to vnderstand that where there is no loue of knowledge there must needs be the loue of vice the reason is manifest because the Scripture is a most exquisite rule and exact squire to try all our actions by as Chrysostome calleth it and a straight and inflexible rule as Gregory Nissen termeth it Now if this rule squire and ballance be hid from vs how can we square our actions aright how can wee giue them their iust poyse and weight As the Carpenter that hath lost his rule and line cannot but erre grosly in his worke So the Christian that is depriued of this knowledge of Gods word must needs runne into infinite foule and grosse enormities 41. From this fountaine conioyned with those which went before springeth the monstrous corruption of manners in all places whâ—â— Popery raigneth especially in Italie and Rome vnder the Popes nose They obiect to vs the great and horrible disorder and corruption which is among Protestants but we on the other side as we stand not to iustifie our selues in this kind but rather be waile the prophanenesse of all estates in these dayes euen vnder the Gospell so we dare boldly say that in the time of Popery heretofore and in places where it now swayeth their impiety and prophanenesse doth as farre exceed ours as a great mountaine doth a little molehill Of all Countries in the world Italie is the Popes owne peculiar and yet that is the very siacke of the world for sinne witnesse Aencas Siluius who liued almost two hundred yeares since who sayth
grace not deluding their soules with a fond expectation of other mens deuotions Sure it is that the opinion of purgatorie and prayer for the dead must of necessitie nourish a presumption of veniall sinnes at the least which our doctrine adiudgeth to hell without repentance aswell as any other and because few are able to distinguish betwixt mortall and veniall sinnes but iudge them veniall which are to Gods iudgement mortall as their Iesuite Coster confesseth when hee sayth that that may seeme a light offence vnto man which is haynous in Gods sight therefore it must needs also bee in danger to breed a secret presumption of mortall sinnes also And so whilest they haue a blind conceit of the suburbes which is Purgatorie they cast themselues into the Citie it selfe which is hell 34. Lastly this may be demonstrated to the conscience of any not preiudiced with a blind zeale to the Romish Church by this reason for that neyther Purgatorie nor Prayer for the dead can directly be proued out of Scripture as hath bin proued before concerning Purgatory and is apparent concerning prayer for the dead there being neither precept nor promise nor direct example in the whole volume of Gods Booke for the same as is confessed by their owne Bredenbachius and besides hauing no sound foundation in the consent of ancient Fathers as hath beene also prooued but being founded vpon vaine apparitions and strange reuelations of soules departed which many of the Fathers were of opinion could not bee as testifieth Maldonate one of their owne Iesuites for feare lest vnder that colour we should be drawne to superstitions and others thought that Deuils did faine themselues to be the soules of dead men as witnesseth Pererius another Iesuite yea and some of their owne Doctours haue beene perswaded that all apparitions about Churches are eyther demoniacall or phantasticall whereas on the contrarie our doctrine of two places is direct in Scripture and was neuer denied by any authoritie either of olde or new Diuines I meane possitiuely that there is a Heauen and a Hell wherefore this wee may safely beleeue and repose our soules vpon but to entertaine the beliefe of the former is as dangerous to the conscience as doubtfull to the vnderstanding seeing hee that doubtingly vndertaketh any action is condemned as a sinner because hee doth it not in faith Faiths obiect being Gods Word alone and not the vncertaine coniectures of humane opinions much lesse the vaine apparitions of dead ghosts 35. Againe their doctrine of the absolute necessitie of baptisme excluding thereby infants from Heauen and confining them to a Prison in the brimme of Hell there to indure the euerlasting punishment of losse is a dangerous doctrine both in respect of pietie towards God and charitie towards our neighbour and certaintie to a mans conscience and consequently our doctrine that holdeth the contrarie is more safe in all those respects For touching pietie it is a great imbasing to Gods mercie and a detracting from the glorie of his grace to thinke that Almightie God should in iustice cast away the infinite myriades of vnbaptized infants or that his sauing grace is so tyed to the outward Sacrament that he cannot or at the least will not saue any without it the first of these is confessed by many of the learned Romanists themselues to be à Dei misericordia alienum not agreeable to the mercie of God which exceedeth not onely the deserts but euen the hopes of men The second is confirmed by a due comparing of the olde couenant of the Law with the new couenant of the Gospell for if it be true that children dying vnder the Law vncircumcised were saued by the faith of their Parents as Saint Bernard thinketh yea and is also agreeable to the tenure of the Scripture for many children dyed in the Wildernesse without the Sacrament of Circumcision it being omitted for those fortie yeeres by Gods own allowance and Dauid hearing of the death of his childe before hee had receiued the outward character of Circumcision as may be gathered out of the Text. did solace himselfe with this confidence that the childe was saued Then it must needs follow if the same priuiledge be not granted to the children of Christian Parents that the couenant of the Gospell is not so large as the couenant of the Law nor Gods mercie so bountifull to Christians as to Iewes nor the merits of Christ so effectuall after his comming in the flesh as they were before by all which the glorie of the Gospell and grace of Christ is much defaced and the vnbounded Ocean of Gods mercie limited and stinted 36. Touching charitie is it not an vncharitable conceit to despaire of the saluation of poore infants dying without Baptisme and that both towards the infants themselues who though they are borne in originall sinne yet are innocent from actuall transgressions and towards the Parents who being themselues within the couenant hereby are depriued of that chiefe comfort of the couenant which is that God is not onely their God but the God of their seed and towardes the Church that hereby is robbed of a great part of her children and made vnable to present young infants to her Husband Christ Iesus Children are little beholding to them for this doctrine Parents lesse and the Church the mother of the faithfull least of all And indeed so farre is it from charitie that it is full of damnable crueltie 37. Lastly touching the perilous consequences that follow vpon this doctrine I need name but these three to wit first that it maketh God more mercifull to men of yeeres then vnto tender infants for they teach that men of yeeres as Valentinian the Emperour may be saued by the Baptisme of the Spirit or by the Baptisme of bloud which is Martyrdome though they want the Baptisme of water but infants albeit they may haue the Spirit of sanctification euen in the wombe as Iohn Baptist had and may be Martyrs according to their opinion as the children that Herod caused to be slaine yet if they want the Sacrament of water they adiudge them peremptorily to be banished from Gods presence for euer Now then children and men being in the same predicament either the one must be admitted to Gods fauour aswell as the other or it must needs follow that God is partial and more fauourable to the one then the other If they say that men though they haue not the act of Baptisme yet they haue votum a desire vnto it which being intercepted by some sodaine accident is supplied by inward grace I answere with Bellarmine that as another mans sinne was the cause of the damnation of infants so other mens faith sufficeth them vnto baptisme Why should then the desire of one man be of more efficacie to his saluation then the desire and purpose of the Church for the saluation of infants To this purpose their owne learned Schooleman sayth that
a small neither shalt thou haue in thy house diuers measures a great and a small but thou shalt haue a right and a iust weight a perfect and a iust measure Let no man oppresse or defraude his brother in any matter How contradictory these plaine precepts and enunciatiue propositions of Gods word are vnto the positions of the Cardinall no man can but discerne that is not bewitched with the soâ—cerie of Iezabel either therefore let him shew out of holy writ some exception from these generall rules or let him acknowledge his Doctrine and Religion to be the vpholder of most grosse and palpable theft 22. If any man say that these be the opinions of priuate men and not the doctrine of the Church I answere that this is a most friuolous conceit for none of their bookes are admitted to the presse before they be examined by certaine Censurers deputed to that purpose by the Church and if any thing dislike them or seeme to sauour of heresie as they call the trueth presently it is either gelded out or corrected at their pleasures And that which goeth for currant hath his allowance subnexed That it containeth in it nothing contrary to the Catholike faith of the Church of Rome These positions then of these Iesuites standing thus approued by the common consent of their Censurers and priuiledged to be both printed and read of all men as containing nothing contrary to wholesome doctrine cannot be thought to be the vnaduised opinions of priuatemen but euen the doctrine and religion of their Church 23. Lastly that I may conclude this second argument they maintaine also the prophanation of the Sabboth which the Lord hath enioyned to be sanctified with so great and vrgent a precept Remember that thou keepe holy the Sabboth day Adding â— mâ—menâ—o before and fencing it with so many reasons after that it might not seeme a light matter but a coÌ„mandement of great consequence yet these impudent preuaricators make it a matter of no moment yea giue liberty to the open breach and transgression of it For thus writeth Cardinall Tollet Homo tenetur c. A man saith he is bound vpon paine of a mortall sinne to sanctifie the Sabboth but is not bound vnder the same paine to sanctifie it well As if forsooth it could be sanctified at all if it be not well sanctified or as if the prophanation of the Sabboth were the sanctifying of it for not to sanctifie it well is nothing else but to prophane it howbeit if this were all the iniurie hee doth to Gods Sabboth it might be borne withall but the bold Cardinall taketh vpon him to breake in pieces the barres thereof and to expose it being the Lords day and therefore fit to bee employed onely in the Lords worke to most vile and base offices for thus hee writeth in the same booke Licet iter facere c. It is lawfull to take a iourney on the feast day with this caueat that diuine seruice be first heard It is lawfull to hunt and doe such like things It is lawfull for Iudges especially rurall to giue iudgement on the feast day it is no sinne for a Barber to exercise his trade on the feast day for commodity if he had no leasure to doe it at another time they are excused also which sell flesh kill beasts and sell necessary victuals on holy dayes And if the occasion of a great gayne would otherwise bee lost as in fishing for Herring and Tunnes which come not but vpon certaine dayes it is lawfull to fish on the holy day In publique solemnities it is lawfull to prepare the wayes and to build for spectacles This is the doctrine of that renowned Cardinall whose writings are so approued of the Church of Rome that whatsoeuer hee speaketh is held for trueth But here it may be answered that he nameth not the Sabboth but the festiuall or holy day to which I answere First that the title of that Chapter is de Sabbathâ— and therefore if he meaneth not that hee swarueth from his purpose Secondly that the expresse words and drift of the whole Chapter demonstrates that vnder the name of the festiuall or holy day he includeth also the Sabboth And thirdly how could he giue instructions touching the cases of the Sabboth if he intended not the Sabboth seeing all his rules runne vnder this generall terme on the festiuall or holy day This therfore is but a mist to blinde mens eyes that they might not see their impietie 24. Can this Religion thinke you be of God which in thus many points crosseth and trampleth vnder foote the law of God Doth not the head of that congregation euidently shew himselfe to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that outlaw which S. Paul speaketh of 2. Thess 2. that is such an one as opposeth himselfe to the law of God Doe not the necke and shoulder which are supporters of that head I meane the Cardinals and Bishops shew themselues to be of the same nature and disposition with it and the whole body which is quickned by the life of his doctrine to be meerely Antichristian He that seeth not this is blinde and cannot discerne a farre off hee that seeth it and confesseth it not is carelesse of his owne saluation Let vs leaue them therefore either to bee conuerted which God graunt for Christ his sake or to bee confounded if they continue in their errours MOTIVE III. That Religion which imitateth the Iewes in those things wherin they are enemies to Christ cannot bee the truth but such is the Religion of the Church of Rome Ergo. THe malice of the Iewes towards Christ our Sauiour and his Church from the beginning vnto this day is so notorious that the whole world is witnesse thereof Saint Paul witnesseth of them that they killed the Lord Iesus and their owne Prophets and persecuted the Apostles and were contrary to all men and forbad them to preach vnto the Gentiles that they might be saued to fulfill their sinnes alwaies and that the wrath of God was come vpon them to the vttermost And as it was at that time so euer since they haue not any whit remitted but increased in their rancour for still they crucifie vnto themselues the Lord of Life though not in his person which is at the right hand of God yet in his meÌ„bers whoÌ„ they persecute vnto death asmuch as in them lyeth and in his Gospel which they still pursue with a deadly hatred Yea so great is their malice that many times they haue taken Christian children vpon their preparation day to the Passouer and nailed them vpon the Crosse loaded them with reproaches and scornes in disgrace of Christ and miserably tormented them to death as was done by the Iewes of Inmester a Towne scituate betwixt Chalchis and Antiochia as witnesseth Socrates in his Ecclesiasticall History and in Germany at Fretulium as also in England at Lincolne and Norwich as our Chronicles testifie Yea it
Religion to the experience of euery mans owne conscience But I leaue this to others who haue or shall meddle in this argument my taske is to shew how it contradicteth both it selfe and other doctrines of their Religion 44. It selfe thus They teach that works of supererogation grounded vpon Euangelicall Counsels are as you haue heard more excellent perfect and meritorious then those which are done in obedience to the law of God and that in three respects First comparing seuerall Counsels with seuerall Precepts which concerne the same matter As to sell all and giue to the poore is a more excellent worke then any commanded in that Precept Thou shalt not steale And the Counsell of Single life is more perfect then the Precept Thou shalt not commit Adultery As if men could bee more perfect then God had commanuded or then Christ himselfe was whose righteousnes consisted in this in being obedient to his Fathers will Or then the Angels whose perfection consisteth in executing the Commandements of God Or as if the law of God was not a perfect rule of righteousnes Secondly comparing the state of men obseruing Euangelicall Counsells with the state of them that onely yeeld obedience to Precepts as if a man could be in a higher and happier estate then they are which loue God with all their heart and their Neighbour as themselues which is the summe of the Law And thirdly marke this comparing Counsells with any precept whatsoeuer euen with that great Commaundement of the Law Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart and with all thy strength As if a man could loue God more then with all his heart and with all his strength Gods children labour for so much let them take the more for their shares Hence they conclude that in respect of matter the Precept is good but the Counsels better and in respect of the end the fulfilling of Precepts hath a reward but the execution of Counsels hath a greater reward This is their plaine doctrine And yet neuerthelesse the same men teach that the perfection of a Christian man consisteth essentially in the obseruation of Precepts and instrumentally in the obseruation of Counsels And secondly that the Precepts of charitie are the ends whereunto Counsels are ordayned and the works of Counsels are but the way and meanes for the better keeping of the Precepts Now to the purpose How can works of supererogation bee more perfect then works of obedience Counsels then Precepts seeing perfection consisteth in the one instrumentally and in the other essentially and Precepts are the end of Counsels and not Counsels of Precepts Is an instrumentall perfection greater then an essentiall or the meanes more perfect then the end This is contrary to naturall reason for Aristotle saith Maius bonum est finis quà m quod finis non est The end is a greater good then that which is not the end and the instrument is neuer so perfect as the essence of a thing 45. Againe it crosseth another of their doctrines thus They teach that though the law of God bee possible to bee kept by the regenerate the works of the faithfull be simply and absolutely iust yet they are mixed with many veniall sinnes and therefore there is none so iust but that sinneth sometimes and hath neede to vse that petition in the Lords Prayer daily Forgiue vs our trespasses According to that generall axiome of Sain Iames In many things wee sinne all Yea Bellarmine himselfe affirmeth that the regenerate may fall into many deadly sinnes and that hee cannot possibly auoyd veniall sinnes Nisi priuilegio singulari But by a singular priuiledge Which priuiledge hee cannot instance to haue beene granted to any man liuing or dead except Christ only who was God man Obserue now the contradiction to omit that this necessitie of sinning doth ouerthrow the possibility of fulfilling the law and doth imply an impossibilitie how can these two extremes be reconciled The regenerate cannot performe all they should do yet do performe more then they should do They cannot auoyd veniall sins and yet can supererogate It is as much as to say that a man is not able to pay his owne debts but must aske pardon for them yet hath ability to pay another mans far greater then his owne Or an Archer cannot by any means shoot home to the marke yet with the same Bow Arrowes sent forth by the same strength of his arme he can shoote farre beyond the marke He that is tainted and stained with many veniall sinnes in that respect is not perfect but hee that doeth supererogate is more then perfect For so they say when they giue a higher degree of perfection to these works then to the perfect obedience of the law If they say that veniall sinnes doe not hinder the perfection of good works I answere that neuerthelesse they hinder the perfection of the worker if they stick fast to the worke it selfe they hinder that also as the least spot of inke blemisheth the whole face and the lightest disease disableth the health of the whole body Eyther therefore they must deny them to be sinnes and so spots defects in the soules of the regenerate or they must confesse that they are not so perfect as they should be And how then can they be more perfect then they should be 46. Further they teach that one degree of superero gating perfection is the vow of Monasticall pouerty renouncing all propriety in worldly goods and holding in Common the vse of temporall things and yet they say that the state of Bishops who possesse lands and goods and enioy the propriety of them is more perfect then the state of Monks who depriue themselues thereof because Bishops haue alreadie atchiued this perfection and Monks are but in the way to it From which ground a man may thus argue If perfection consist in voluntary pouerty which is an alienation of all proprietie of worldly goods then Bshiops possessing Lordships and reuenues are not more perfect then Monks that haue renounced all and if Bishops possessing be more perfect then Monks not possessing then perfection consisteth not in the alienation of all proprietie of worldly goods One or the other must needes bee false except hee will place perfection in two contraries to wit possessing and not possessing And the rather may this absurditie appeare because aske them why Monks are more perfect then other men they will answere because they remooue from them all impediments of their loue to God in which ranke they place worldly wealth and consecrate themselues wholly to Gods seruice By which reason Bishops cannot bee more perfect then either they or other men because they retayne those impediments and so by their doctrine doe not wholly consecrate themselues to Gods seruice 47. From their actions let vs come to their passions to wit their Satisfactions or as Melanchton calleth them Satispassions
of nature then the Saints are no wayes our Mediatours for if they bee they must bee one of these two wayes vnlesse wee will say that they doe that which belongs not vnto them but like busy-bodies are pragmaticall in anothers charge which farre bee it from vs to thinke of those blessed creatures but both these wayes he sayth Christ is the onely Mediatour therefore the Saints by his owne conclusion are no Mediatours at all 58. His third distinction is that therefore Christ is called the onely Mediatour because hee prayeth for all and none for him but the Saints are such Mediatours that they themselues stand in need of a Mediatour I answere that therefore they are no Mediatours at all for if the Saints in Heauen stand in need of a Mediatour themselues then it must necessarily follow that they are not Mediatours at all for they that are parties cannot bee vmpiers And this is that which Saint Augustine plainely affirmeth though Bellarmine laboureth to distort his words to another sense when he sayth He for whom none intreateth but hee intreateth for all is the onely true Mediatour And thus it is cleare that the doctrine of the Church of Rome touching the mediation of Saints is directly contrary to the doctrine of the Gospell 59. The Gospell teacheth that Christ Iesus hath made a full and perfect satisfaction for all our debts and so is our full and perfect Redeemer But the Church of Rome teacheth that Christ hath satisfied but in part for our debts to wit neither for all our sinne nor for all the punishment due vnto all our sinne and so that he is not our full and perfect Redeemer 60. This doctrine of the Gospell is so euidently propounded in holy Scripture that our aduersaries themselues acknowledge it in generall to bee true for Aquinas where the Apostle sayth I suffer all things for the Elects sake that they may also obtaine the saluation which is in Christ Iesus asketh this question What was not the passion of Christ sufficient and answereth to the same Yes as touching the working of saluation And Bayus sayth that there is but one satisfaction onely vnto God and that of Christ yea Bellarmine himselfe acknowledgeth asmuch in generall for hee affirmeth that the merit of Christ is sufficient to take away all sinne and punishment neither dare any of the rest for shame in plaine words deny the same because if they did many manifest texts of Scripture would conuince them of impiety and heresie 61. And that the other is the doctrine of the Church of Rome the Councill of Trent will witnesse which thus defineth When God forgiueth a sinner hee forgiueth not all the punishment but leaneth the party by his owne workes to satisfie till it bee washed away Yea they affirme not onely that wee our selues must satisfie for the temporall punishment but also for the relikes of sinne and for the fault it selfe yea for that punishment that should bee suffered in hell excepting the eternity yea so impious and shamelesse are some of them whose bookes are notwithstanding authorized by the Church of Rome that they affirme that Christ dyed onely for originall sinne and that the satisfaction of Christ deserueth not the name of a satisfaction for our sinnes Let the world iudge now whether these positions of the Church of Rome bee not flat contrary of the Gospell of Iesus Christ for the Gospell attributeth to Christ all sufficiencie of meriting and satisfaction but these fellowes make him a Satisfier party parpale for the sinne but not the punishment yet not for all our sinnes neither but for a part of them as for originall not actuall or iffor actuall yet for mortall onely and not for veniall And this is the Romish Religion though palliated with the name of Catholicke and hidden from the sight of the common people vnder the vaile of an implicite faith which if they should but see they could not chuse but abhorre 62. For the healing of this wound Bellarmine applyeth his wonted playster of a distinction Christs satisfaction saith he is in vertue sufficient but not in act efficient except it bee applyed by our satisfaction and therefore that there is but one onely actuall satisfaction which is ours which by the grace and efficacy of Christs satisfaction taketh away the punishment of our sinne and maketh a iust recompence to God for the same 63. But this distinction first vndermineth it selfe for if Christs bee a satisfaction then it is an actuall satisfaction if it bee not an actuall one then it is none at all Did not he actually dye and rise againe Did not hee actually by that death of his satisfy Gods iustice for all the Elect Doth not the strength and efficacy ofhis death stretch it selfe backward to Adam and forward to the last beleeuing child of Adam vpon earth If all this bee true then it must needs bee intolerable blasphemy to say that actually there is no satisfaction but our owne and that Christs satisfaction which hee made for our sinnes is indeed no satisfaction except it bee by the meanes of ours which must apply it and as it were giue efficacy vnto it 64. Againe the ground of his distinction is absurd for where doth the Scripture make our satisfaction a meanes to apply Christs satisfaction vnto vs It telleth vs of other meanes of application to wit outward the Word and Sacraments inward faith in respect of vs and the Spirit in respect of God but no where of this new-deuised meanes which they talke of and besides how can our satisfactions apply Christs vnto vs whereas they are both satisfaction and that to God and that for our sinnes Nay when as hee sayth that our satisfaction doth include the satisfaction of Christ in it and so both together make but one compound satisfaction if they be of one naturâ—â— how can one apply the other If they bee one in mixture and composition how is the one seuered from the other These bee absurd inconsequences and irreconciliable 65. Lastly if the strength power of satisfying which is in our sufferings is wholly from the grace of God the vertue of Christs satisfaction why doe some of them hold that a man by power of nature without grace may bee able to satify for Veniall sinnes and expell them nay why doth Bellarmine say that a righteous man hath right to Heauen by a twofold title one of the merits of Christ by grace communicated vnto him and another of his owne merits By which he plainely diuideth our merits from Christ and ascribeth a satisfactory power to them equall to the death of Christ it selfe and that without the helpe of grace Nay why do they not say plainly that Christ hath satisfied for vs without any intermixing of our owne but that their wisedome perceiued that then Purgatory Masses Penance Romish pardons yea and the Popes Kitchin it selfe and the very marrow of all their Pompe shall fall
actour therein This is so grosse that it needs no refutation and it sheweth plainely the point I ayme at that there is no colour for their Masse in the new Testament seeing they are constrained to fetch it out of the old especially by so ridiculous and strange a deduction 61. Secondly if wee consult with the primitiue and pure antiquity wee shall neuer finde any iust testimony for the Romish propitiatory sacrifice for the expiating and purging away of sinnes for albeit the Fathers doe often call this Sacrament a sacrifice yet their meaning is not that it is a true proper and reall sacrifice but onely either a commemoration and representation of the sacrifice of Christ finished on the Crosse or an application and obsignation of the same to the faithfull receiuers which to bee their intendment may be gathered first from their owne testimonies which are so cleare and direct that I shall not need saue to referre the Reader to the places quoted in the margent And secondly by Lumbard their prime Schooleman and profest Epitomizer of the Fathers especially of Saint Augustine who sayth expresly that that which is offered and consecrated by the Priest is called a sacrifice and oblation because it is a commemoration and representation of the true sacrifice made vpon the altar of the Crosse And thirdly by their constant ascription to the sole sacrifice of Christ the onely power of propitiation and satisfaction for sinnes which if it be true then when they call the Masse A propitiatory sacrifice they must of necessity vnderstand not a reall sacrifice but onely a representation and application of that onely true sacrifice on the Crosse besides which there is no other externall and corporall sacrifice in the new Testament as Lactantius plainely witnesseth when hee sayth that those things which are wrought by the fingers or done without a man are not true sacrifices 62. Lastly if it bee granted that many of the ancients did speake of a proper and true sacrifice yet the theatricall pageant of the Romish Masse cannot bee vnderstood by them both because in the ancient description of the rites and orders of the Church found in Iustine Martyr Dionysius Chrysostome Augustine and others no such histrionicall representation in ceremonies gestures words and acts is to be seene and also because the Romish Doctours themselues confesse that the rites and ceremonies therein vsed were not in the Apostles times but crept in by little and little and were patcht together at diuers times and by diuers persons as their fancies led them now the sinewes of the Masse consisteth in these and therefore these beeing confessed nouelties how is it likely that the thing it selfe should be of a different nature 63. The fire of Romish Purgatory is a bird of the same feather it was neither kindled in the Scriptures neither is it found in ancient Councils or in the writers of the Primitiue Church nor yet in those that next succeeded the age therof I vnderstand here Romish Purgatory to wit such as is taught maintained in the Church of Rome at this day as an article of faith and is thus described A fire of hell adioyning to the place of the damned wherein the soules of the faithfull departing in the guilt of veniall sinnes or for the more full satisfaction of mortall sinnes already remitted are tormented which is nothing differing from the punishment of the damned in respect of the extremity of the paine but onely in respect of continuance of time the confession of this Purgatory sayth Bellarmine is a part of the Catholike faith and it is decreed by the Council of Trent to the same purpose 64. Concerning this Purgatory if wee consult with the places of the scripture alledged by them for the maintenance thereof wee shall find them either friuolously or falsly produced for either they are allegories which can affoord no strong conclusion in reasoning or they are vtterly of another sense except they bee wrung and stretched beyond their â—ether which to bee true may appeare First because none of them directly say that there is a Purgatory secondly the consequence extracted from theÌ„ is of so ambiguous an Interpretation that if one interpreter conceiue them that way two are of a contrary iudgment thirdly because they crosse one another in the Interpretation of them as for example Bellarmine obiects Mat. 5. 25. which Iansenius interprets cleane in another sense so Mat. 5. 22. produced by Bellarmine is confuted by Suarez and Maldonate so 1. Cor. 3. 2. is not vnderstood of Purgatory by Pererius and so of all the rest now how can an article of faith bee built out of these texts when neither the words themselues doe plainly affirme it nor by necessary consequence either in the opinion of Fathers or ioynt iudgement of their owne Doctours it can bee deduced from them and thus there is no fewell for this fire to bee found in Scripture diuine 65. Touching Councils it is to be noted first that the ancientest Councill which is alledged for the proofe hereof is the third Councill of Carthage which was about the yeere 398. Secondly the most of them speake not of Purgatory but of prayer for the dead which might bee done and was done without any conceit of Purgatory for they prayed for them of whose present possession of Heauen they doubted not as hath beene shewed before Thirdly that the first Councils alledged to mention Purgatory and decree it for a doctrine of faith were the Laterane vnder Innocent the third the Floreâ—tine vnder Eugenius the fourth and the Tridentine vnder Pius the fourth in the yeere 1563. and this sheweth directly and from their own confession that it is an article of no great antiquity 66. Lastly concerning the Fathers it cannot bee denyed but that many of them speake of a purging fire but it is to be obserued in them that they most of them intended not the Romish Purgatory but the fire of the day of Doome as the testimonies of Basill Ambrose Hilary Origen Lactantius and Ierome all alledged by Bellarmine doe euince if wee will either examine them by the contexts of the places themselues or giue credit to their owne Doctors so expounding them or to Bellarmine himselfe who in diuers places crosseth himselfe and yeeldeth asmuch as wee auouch Besides it is to bee obserued that many of the Fathers supposed that the Saints departed did neither receiue reward nor punishment till the last day but were kept in certaine hidden receptacles till that time and therefore they could not dreame of Purgatory which is an intermediall punishment ending at the day of iudgement Of this opinion were Irenaeus Iustine Martyr Tertullian Origen Lactantius Clements many others of the greatest ancients Againe it is to bee obserued that Augustine whom they challenge for the greatest patrone of this fire yet defineth nothing determinately of it but speaketh doubtingly and problematically and if he affirme it in
sentences heere and there that see me to make for their purpose contrary to the whole scope and drift of the writer or lastly by blemishing our whole Religion by some sinister or exorbitant opinion maintained by some one or other vnaduised fellow though it bee contrary to the whole current of all other writers on our side as if for one mans errour wee were all flat Heretikes or because one souldier playeth the dastard therefore the whole army were cowards These bee their tricks of Legerdemaine by which they indeuour to disgrace our Religion and to countenance their owne but Veritas magna est preualebit I hope so to dispell and scatter these mists by the light of truth that they shall vanish like smoake and the truth bee more resplendent like the Sunne comming out of a cloud 61. To the purpose first they exclaime that our Religion is an enemy to good workes and that wee esteeme of them as not necessary to saluation which damnable errour some of them ascribe vnto vs as our direct doctrine others as a consequence of our doctrine and our secret meaning but that both are lying slanders I appeal first to our doctrine it selfe which is so cleare in this point that no man can doubt thereof but hee that is musled with malice for this we hold that though faith be alone in the worke of iustification yet that saith euer worketh through loue and is great with good workes as a woman with child which it bringeth forth also when occasion serueth and that if it bee disioyned from good workes it is but a dead carkas of faith yea the faith of Deuils and hypocrites and not of the elect And this as it is the constant doctrine of all our diuines so is it principally of Luther whom our aduersaries accuse as the chiefest enemy to good workes for thus hee writeth in one place touching the efficacy of faith Faith is a liuely and powerfull thing not an idle cogitation swimming vpon the toppe of the heart as a fowle vpon the water but as water heated by fire though it remaine water still yet it is no more cold but hote and altogether changed so faith doth frame and fashion in a man another mind and other senses and altogether maketh him a new man Again in another place he sayth that the vertue of faith is to kill death to damne hell to be sinne to sinne and a deuill to the deuill that is to be sins poison and the Deuils confusion Thus hee speaketh concerning the powerful efficacy of that true iustifying faith which wee rely our saluation vpon and they condemne as a nulli-fidian portion And touching good works their necessity and excellency heare how diuinely he writeth in one place Out of the cause of iustification no man can sufficiently commend good workes in another One good worke proceeding from faith done by a Christian is more pretious then heauen or earth the whole world is not able to giue a sufficient reward for one goodworke and in another place It is as necessary that godly teachers doe as diligently vrge the doctrine of good workes as the doctrine of faith for the Deuill is an enemy to both what can bee spoken more effectually for the extolling of the excellency of good wâ—rkesâ— and yet these fellowes make Luther the greatest aduersarie to them 62. Secondly I appeale to themselues many of the greatest Doctors amongst whom doe cleare vs from that imputation Maldonate The Protestants doe say that iustifying faith cannot bee without good workes Viega The Protestants affirme that iustification sanctification are so ioyned together that they cannot be parted Stapleton All Protestants none excepted teach that faith which iustifieth is liuely working by charity and other good workes Lastly Bellarmine The Protestants say that faith cannot stand with euill workes for hee that hath a purpose to sin can conceiue no faith for the remission of his sin and that faith alone doth iustifie but yet is not alone and that they exclude not the necessity but onely the merite of good workes nor the presence but the efficacy to iustifie Now then with what face can they bolster out this slaunder against our doctrine and accuse vs to be like the Simonian Heretike who taught that a man need not regard good workes and Eunomians who defended that perseuerance in sinne did not hinder saluation so that wee beleeued This is the first blasphemie against our Religion wherein they doe not so much thwart vs as crosse themselues and that one may see yet more clearely this to bee a malicious slaunder hearken what Bellarmine sayth concerning Luthers opinion of Christian liberty Luther seemeth sayth he to teach that Christian liberty consisteth in this that a godly conscience is free not from doing good workes but from being accused or defended by them let Luther himself speake againe By faith sayth he we are freed not from works but from opinion of workes that is from a foolish presumption of iustification to bee obtained by workes by all which we may easily iudge of the meaning of those sentences obiected Faith alone doth saue and infidelity alone doth condemne and where faith is no sinne can hurt nor condemne that they are to be vnderstood partly of sinnes before iustification and partly of such sinnes after as destroy not faith nor raigne in the beleeuer nor are perseuered in but repented of and laboured against and thus our Religion is iustified by the very aduersaries thereof from this great crime imputed vnto it 63. Againe they accuse vs as maintainers of this doctrine that all the workes of iust men are mortall sinnes and of this they make Luther Calume and Melancthon to be Patrones but with what shamelesse impudency let the world iudge To begin with Caluine these be his words Dum sancti ductu Spiritus c. i. Whilst being holy wee walke in the wayes of the Lord yet least being forgetfull of our selues wee should waxe proud there remain reliques of imperfection which may minister vnto vs matter of humiliation againe the best worke that can be wrought by iust men yet is besprinkled and corrupted with the impurity of the flesh and hath as it were some dregs mixed with it let the holy seruant of God chuse out of his whole life that which he shall thinke to haue beene most excellent let him well consider euery part thereof hee shall without doubt finde in one place or other something which sauours of the fleshes corruption seeing our alacrity in well doing is neuer such as it ought to be but our weakenes great in hindering the course although we see that the blots where with the Saints workes are stayned are not obscure yet grant that they are but very small workes shall they not offend the eyes of God before whom the starres themselues are not pure we haue not one worke proceeding from the Saints which if it be censured
to will without our selues but when we are willing then he worketh together with vs. 10. But yet this is not all the danger which ariseth from this doctrine though euen this is of sufficient feare to terrisie any godly man from imbracing it but there is more perill in it then so the maine danger of it is this if it bee not pure Pelagianisme as it may well bee thought yet it marcheth on the verie edge of the banke so that if the foot doe but slip it is presently in the gulfe of that heresie for what did Pelagius hold which the Church of Rome in this doctrine of freewill doth not eyther directly maintaine or approch nere vnto he extolled mans nature as that a man without the name of Christ might bee saued by freewill so doe they for Andradius telleth vs from the Councel of Trent that Heathen Philosophers hauing no knowledge of Christ were iustified onely by the law of nature Hee taught that it was in mans free-will to giue entertainment or repulse to Gods grace so doe they Hee affirmed that a man might prepare himselfe to grace by his owne naturals without any speciall worke of the spirit so do they Hee to cloake all with some colourable pretence confessed that notwithstanding all this there was a necessitie of grace required to all good actions For thus he sayd as witnesseth Saint Augustine We so prayse nature that we alwayes adde the helpe of the grace of God so doe they albeit they striue for the freedome of mans will yet they dare not but speake of grace and grant vnto it some office in a mans conuersion and therefore labour to reconcile natures will and Gods grace together Which neuerthelesse in fine they are neuer able to do but are driuen to confesse that it passeth the capacitie and apprehension of mans wit and vnderstanding Howbeit both Pelagius and they vnderstand by this grace nothing but a thing that is common both to the wicked and the godly This to bee the grace which Pelagius required Saint Augustine testifieth and no other to be that which our Romanists speake of witnesse Bellarmine who affirmeth that the first grace of a sinners conuersion is but onely a perswading which doth not determine the will but inclineth it in manner of a propounding obiect And Coster that calleth it not grace dwelling in the soule but only an outward impulsion or motion knocking at the doore of the soule and not opening the dore it selfe as the Scripture sayth that God opened the heart of Lydia but perswading freewill to open and so standing at the Porters reuersion and like a poore man wayting his leasure much like vnto the attending of Henrie the Emperour at the citie gate three colde winters dayes barefoote and barelegged till it pleased the Pope to let him in Thus humble grace must attend till pride will be pleased to open the dore vnto it I will not say that in all this Papisme and Polagianisme are all one but that they may see how loth we are to wrong them in the least circumstāce this is too too apparent that they incline by this doctrine verie nigh to the borders of it and almost touch the skirts Who then will not thinke it a dangerous doctrine And what madde man will voluntarily come to a person infected with the pestilence when hee may well passe by him in further distance or walke in the verie brinke of a sleepe banke where if hee doe but tread awry he falleth into the Sea whereas hee may walke safely further off without any feare or danger our doctrine therefore touching freewill ascribing all vnto God and nothing vnto man and submitting the will of man to the grace of God hath no affinitie but opposition and contrarietie to Pelagius heresie is therefore the safer and of euerie wiseman to be imbraced rather then theirs which leadeth vs apparently into all these dangers 11. Their doctrine of satisfactions is also a most perplexed and dangerous doctrine and giueth no securitie to the conscience of a penitent sinner For first what safetie is there in a mans owne satisfactorie workes when as all the actions and passions of a Christian bee hee as absolute and perfect a man as possibly may be by reason of the manifold defects and imperfections which cleaue vnto his best workes are far short of that which they should be and vtterly vnproportionably to Gods iustice and this they themselues denie not for the Rhemists grant that euery man bee hee neuer so iust yet because he liueth not without veniall sinnes may truly and ought to say this Prayer Forgiue vs our trespasses But veniall sinnes are sinnes and stand in need of pardon and Gods iustice requireth such a satisfaction as is in euerie respect perfect therefore our owne workes being tainted and stained with such sinnes cannot stand in proportion with it Is it not a dangerous thing then to trust to our owne satisfactions which by their owne confession are subiect to veniall sinnes and is it not more safe to rely vpon his satisfactiō only which is free from all staine of the least sinne and able to answere the strist iustice of God in euery respect 12. Secondly the satisfaction which Christ hath made not onely admitteth no exception but is of infinite merit and valew to answere the infinite iustice of God but the satisfactions of a mortall man admit many exceptions and are if they were perfect of a finite and limitable nature and therefore cannot bee proportioned to the infinite iustice of God whether is it more safe then to trust to an infinite satisfaction that is without all exception or to a finite which may many wayes be iustly excepted against I know their cuasion is that indeed it doth require an infinite vertue to satisfie for the euerlasting punishment of sinne but the temporall punishment being limited may bee satisfied for by a temporall satisfaction a mere collusion for first if a temporall paine or finite action can merit and purchase an euerlasting reward as they teach why should not the same redeeme from an euerlasting punishment their confession in the one condemneth their assertion in the other and because they deny that our merits of satisfaction can rel ease from hell they must also of necessitie deny or at least blush to auouch that our merits of purchase are of sufficient valew to deserue heauen hell and heauen being as of equall distance from man so of equal merit or demerit to man Secondly satisfaction is not to be respected to the quantitie of the temporall punishment inflicted but to the iustice of him that inflicteth it and so though the temporal punishment be equalled by the penance of a sinner yet the iustice of God which is infinite is not satisfied nor equalled and therefore the greatest penance cannot be termed a satisfaction to God but Christs satisfaction being infinite equalleth the iustice of God Who would not then rather choose
iudgement because there must be by their doctrine aswell contrition in heart as confession in the mouth or else no pardon can follow but a Priest cannot discerne of the heart Nay further many if not most of their Romish shauelings are vnable to iudge of the nature and qualitie of sin much more of the quantitie and degrees thereof so consequently can neither impose a iust or proportionable satisfaction without which no releasement nor make the partie vnderstand the ease hee standeth in that hee may take vpon himselfe voluntarie penance or if need bee purchase indulgence from the Pope In all which respects it is danger to trust our soules vpon such a slipperie foundation but hee that confesseth to God his sinnes and expecteth pardon at his hand onely is sure that hee discerneth the secrets of the heart and that he shutteth and no man openeth and openeth and no man shutteth and therefore if hee absolue though all the World condemne hee is on a sure ground and if hee condemne though all the World acquite hee is in a miserable case In this doctrine there is no vncertainty but strong comfort to the penitent sinner and terrour of conscience to the obstinate and vnrepentant 30. If they say that the absolution of a Priest is certaine vnlesse there bee a barre in him that confesseth because our Sauiour saith Whosoeuers sinnes you remit they are remitted and whosoeuers sinnes yee retaine they are retained I answer that first de facto the Priest may erre but God cannot Secondly he cannot choose but erre in absoluing if the penitent doe erre in confessing which hee is verie likely to doe and thirdly that when God purposeth to absolute a sinner no barie can hinder the performance thereof yea hee infuseth grace into his soule to hate his sinne and power to forsake it Is it not better then to trust vnto God then to man and safer to confesse our sinnes to him that hath absolute power to pardon them then to a Priest whose pardon depends vpon the vncertaintie of a mans true confession These things be so cleare that no reasonable man can doubt of the truth of them 31. Lastly confession to God hath manifest and vndeniable grounds in holy Scripture but auricular Romish confession to a Priest is by the iudgement of their greatest Clarkes taken vp onely by a tradition of the Church and not by any authoritie of the olde and new Testament witnesse their Canon Law Panormitane Peresius Petrus Oxoniensis Bonauenture Medina Rhenanus Erasmus with many more and though the new Iesuites and Rhemists auouch the contrarie yet they but therein crosse their fellowes as learned and wise as themselues and yet are not able to alleadge any one direct proofe of their opinion Now is it not a safer practice to build vpon Scripture then tradition that is vpon God then man And to chuse that kind of confession which no man doubteth to be warranted from God rather then that which the Patrones thereof themselues are at variance from whom it commeth who that hath eyes seeth not which of these is rather to be chosen 32. Touching Purgatorie it breedeth diuers dangerous consequences as to their holy Pope first who taketh vpon him to haue plenarie power ouer all creatures especially ouer the soules in Purgatorie which the Canonists call peculium Papae the Popes peculiar for it proueth him eyther to bee a lying Prophet or a cruell Tyrant if hee haue full power ouer them why doth hee let so many thousand poore soules lye frying there without release His suffering them to continue in that cruell torment argueth him either to want power to relieue them or mercie to put that power in execution both which are vnbeseeming qualities for Christs Vicar If they reply against this as Antoninus doth and say that in respect of his absolute Iurisdiction he may absolue all that are in Purgatorie but if we regard the orderly execution thereof in that respect the Pope may not nor ought so to doe I say againe But why ought hee not if it bee in his power is it for feare to fill Heauen too soone with Saints but that would be a great blessing for then the consummation of all things would the sooner come or is it for feare lest the iustice of God should be fully satisfied by a proportionable punishment But the Popes indulgence can helpe that for hee hath in his Treasure-house such a surplussage of Saints merits that can serue to make good whatsoeuer is wanting in their behalfe and the Pope by their doctrine hath authoritie to dispence dispose of these merits at his discretion Or is it for feare lest purgatorie should bee emptied and so hee should lose one part of his Kingdome But our Sauiour contented himselfe with heauen and earth to be vnder him and his dominion and Saint Paul attributes to his regiment things vnder earth that is in hell and wil his Vicar needs haue a larger dominion then his Master But indeed this is the true reason For if hee should make a goale deliuerie out of this infernall prison then his chiefest sway were gone yea and his reuenue too It stands vpon him therefore not to bee pleased to deliuer any out of these paines vnlesse he bee well pleased for his paines and if hee bee so then the soules shall flye out of that place to heauen in whole troupes as they say they did at the Prayer of a certaine holy man c. In their leaden Legend this danger lighteth vpon the head of their head the Pope which according to their doctrine can by no meanes be auoided it were better then for him to forgoe his profit which ariseth by purgatorie then to vndergoe such foule discredit 33. Another dangerous consequence ariseth hencefrom to all the professors of Religion in generall that is a feareful presumption and securitie of sinning when they are perswaded that after this life they may be released from the paines of purgatorie by the prayers almesdeeds Masses and other meritorious workes of the liuing for who would bee afraid to sinne or carefull to make his saluation sure in this life with feare and trembling when hee beleeueth that by giuing a summe of monie at his death for Masses and dirges to be sung for his soule he shall be certainly deliuered out of purgatory This must needs cast men into manifest presumption if not of all sinnes yet of veniall sinnes and ordinarie offences which are to be purged by that fire as they teach Is not our doctrine more sound and safe that informeth vs that such as die in their sinnes sinke downe to the lowest Hell as hopelesse after death to bee relieued by anything that can bee done for their sakes by the liuing doth not this teach men betimes to bee wise and to finish vp the worke of their saluation before the night come and make their peace with God whilest they are here in the way of
Protestants condemne the worship of Images taught and practised in the Church of Rome but they are not alone therein but haue many Romanists for their abetters and companions Cassander concludeth out of Saint Augustine that there were no Images in all the Churches of his Diocesse And Polydore Virgil writeth that by the testimonie of Ierome it appeareth how in a manner all the ancient Fathers condemned the worship of Images for feare of Idolatrie thus speaketh he in his vncorrupted editions but in his later editions his tongue is tyed by the Belgicke Index others as Holcot Durand Alphonsus flatly affirme that no worship at all is due to an Image neither is it lawfull to worship it diuers Councels also decreed the same as the ancient Councell of Eliberis propounded this onely remedie against Idolatrie that no Images should bee painted in Churches but this Councell was not Romish for Poperie was then scarce in the Embrio therefore of later time a mere Romish Councell to wit that of Franckford consisting of many Romish Bishops and the Popes owne Legates condemned all worship of Images and a later yet to wit the Councell of Mentz held in the yeere 1549. decreed that the Image it selfe was not to bee worshipped but that by the Image of Christ men should bee stirred vp to adore Christ which is contrarie to the new professed doctrine of the Church of Rome 54. Many Romanists as well as Protestants reiect the intercession and inuocation of Saints as an Article not found eyther in the olde or new Testament In the olde Testament sayth Salmeron The Patriarchs vsed not to be inuocated both because they were not in perfect estate of blessednesse and also because there had beene then a danger of Idolatrie to offer that honour vnto them And for the new Testament the same Iesuite confesseth that this article is not expressed because the Iewes would haue thought it an hard matter to inuocate Saints departed and the Gentiles would haue taken occasion to haue thought that the worship of new Gods had beene prescribed vnto them Of the same opinion was Ecchius who peremptorily affirmeth that the inuocation of Saints departed is not commanded in the holy Scripture And Faber Stapulensis thus writeth I would to God that the forme of beleeuing might bee fetcht from the Primitiue Church which consecrated so many Martyrs to Christ and had no scope but Christ nor imployed any worship to any saue to the one Trinity alone 55. That a Christian may bee certaine of his owne standing in present grace and of his future saluation is the doctrine of Protestants denyed by the Church of Rome and yet approued by many of her deare children as for example Euery one that beleeueth seeth that he doth beleeue sayth Dominicus Bannes A Christian man by the infallible certaintie of faith which cannot bee deceiued certainly knoweth himselfe to haue a supernaturall faith sayth Medina Some spirituall men may be so certaine that they are in grace that this their assurance shall be free from all feare and staggering sayth Vega reported by Gregory de Valentia And touching assurance of eternall life the same Medina sayth that hee would haue euery beleeuer certainly to hope that he shall obtaine eternall life And of the same opinion are al the rest of them saue that they will haue this certainty to be of hope and not of faith and so the difference is in words and not in the thing for they make it to be without doubting or wauering firme and assured aswell as we 56. That concupiscence is a finne in the regenerate is affirmed by Protestants contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Church of Rome yet many Romanists themselues shake hands with the Protestants in this point as Ribera a Iesuite who writing vpon the twelfth of the Hebrewes sayth that by sinne hanging fast vpon is meant the concupiscence of the flesh against the holy Spirit which the Apostle vseth often to call by the name of sinne and Tanner another Iesuite acknowledgeing that concupiscence in the regenerate is called sinne by the Scripture sayth that it is a great wickednesse to traduce as blasphemous the manner of speech true in it selfe and imitating the Scriptures yea and Stapleton calleth it a certaine iniquitie and obliquity not onely against the dominion of the mind but also against the Law of God Now Bellarmine telleth vs that whatsoeuer is contrarie to the Law of God is mortall sinne Cassander playeth the Protestant in direct termes in this point for he sayth that if we respect sinne as an iniquitie or disease which must be resisted by the spirit lest it burst forth into vnlawfull acts concupiscence is not vnfitly called sinne but if we respect it as an offence to God and guiltinesse to which punishment and damnation is answering it is not thus sinne in the regenerate 57. Touching marriage of Priests which the Church of Rome condemneth as execrable filthie and abominable we allow as holy and lawfull we haue their owne Doctours on our side and against their owne mother Gratian sayth that marriage of Priests is not prohibited eyther by legall or Euangelicall or yet Apostolicall authoritie but by Ecclesiasticall onely Espenseus sayth that for many hundred yeeres after the Apostles time by reason of the want of others Priests were married Caietane affirmeth that if wee stand onely to the tradition of Christ and his Apostles it cannot appeare by any authoritie or reason that holy order can be any hinderance to marriage eyther as it is an order or as it is holy Pius the second one of their owne Popes affirmeth that it is better for a Priest to marry then to burne though hee haue vowed the contrary and that there be many reasons to forbid Priests marriage but more to allow it Panormitane Cassander Erasmus doe all agree that in regard of the monstrous and filthy effects that follow a vowed single life it were better both for Gods glory and the auoyding of scandall in the Church that libertie of marrying were granted to all men And Espenseus and Agrippa doe grieue and blush to behold rather Concubines and Stewes to bee permitted to their Clergy then lawfull wiues 58. The Popes Primacie or rather Supremacie in all affaires and ouer all persons challenging the iurisdiction of both swords and authoritie of supreme Iudicatures in cases of controuersie and interpretation of Scripture with an infallibilitie of Iudgement is the verie foundation of Poperie yet the same is razed not onely by Protestants but by many of their owne ranke that are both by name and profession Papists Concerning his temporall Iurisdiction so stiffely maintained by Bellarmine and the Iesuits our Wisbich Priests affirme that this power was neuer giuen vnto Peter Espensâ—us condemneth it in direct tearmes Tolosanus confesseth that for two hundred yeeres after Christ it was neuer read that Christians attempted any thing