all kind of sinne another guilty of mortall the third only spotted with some veniall fault The first whither goeth he To Heauen immediatly The second whither goeth lie To Hell no doubt The third whither goeth he Not to Hell because he is departed in the grace and fauour of God Not to heauen immediatly Apoc. 21. v. vlt. because Nothing defiled can enter that kingdome Therfore to some purging place where his soule may be cleansed froÌ„ the staines of infection 22. No such place is necessary sayth M. Field for Field in appen 1. p. fo 65. 66. by the dolours of death at the moment of dissolution all impurity of sinne is purged forth But how can this be so Death is the punishment of Originall and not any remedy against actuall sinne It is the state and condition of our corruptible nature inflicted on the Reprobate as well as on the Elect. And so neither by it selfe nor by the ordinance of God hath force and vertue to scoure out of our souls all the rust of sinne a prerogatiue denyed by you to the holy Sacraments of God And such a prerogatiue as is proper indeed to the excellency of Martyrdome and not common to the departure of euery faythful sinner whose panges are often more short and farre lesse painefull then the grieuous dolours of the cleane and vnspotted 23. Besides to procure this abolishment of sinne Field ibid. fol. 60. M. Field requireth Charity and sorrow in such perfection as may worke our perfect reconciliation to God And may not thousands or some at least with the spot of veniall or remainder of mortall crime be taken out of this world either in their sleep or vnawares before they arriue to that depth of sorrow It being so hard a thing in perfect health much harder in the agony of death impossible in tyme of sleep to attaine vnto it Or if you pretend the prouidence of God to be so carefull of his elect as they cannot be surprised vpon a sudden to what effect I pray are those exhortations of Christ so often repeated in Scripture Matt. 24. Matt. 25. That we pray and be watchfull least death preuent vs before we are aware To what effect the Parable of the foolish Virgins the Parable of Death stealing vpon vs like a thiefe To what effect are the labours and works of Pennance many zealous followers of Christ vndertake to expiate the faults of their former life when euery faythfull belieuer let him be neuer so slouthfull in this behalfe shal be sure in the last houre to haue grace inough to redeeme the debt and cancell the obligation of his sinnes This is a doctrine I graunt sutable to Protestant professioÌ„ it tendeth to the restraint of vertue it tendeth to all vitious and Epicurean liberty it ministreth occasion of slouth to Christian people and maketh God tooto indulgent to their idle sluggishnes But they that make him authour of the horrible iniquityes of the Reprobate what meruaile though they would haue him a fauourer of the smal imperfections and negligences of his Elect And rather then they will iniury as they fondly surmise the bloud of Christ they iniuriously blaspheme and truly wrong heerin the Iustice of God 24. To be briefe Caluin and Plessy Mornay affirme The hereditary naughtines and corruption of Originall sinne drowneth Calu. lib. 2. Iâ—st cap. 1. §. 8. 9. l. 3. inst cap. 15. §. â— Plessy l. 3. de Eucbar cap. 2â— as it were with a deluge the whole nature of man so that no part remayneth free from this filthy contagion Secondly they auouch No worke proceedeth from man be he neuer so perfect but is defiled with the staines of sinne Graunt these assertions true which commonly all Protestants defend how can there be either charity or sorrow in such perfection as is able to purge out all impurity of sinne When the most perfect Charity it selfe is impure and stayned how shall these staynes be taken forth By some other act of charity or worke of repentance But this worke also issuing from the inward rottenes of mans corrupted nature shall still be putrifyed with Originall infection 25. For this cause D. Field is so vnconstant in resoluing Field in append 1. part p. 66. p. 65. ibid. in appeâ— 1. par p. 4. p. â—4 65. how or when the whole vncleanes of sinne is washed from the soule as he wauereth and reeleth vp and downe not knowing where to take hold One while he sayth It is purged out by Charity and sorrow of sinning otherwhile by the dolours of death then by the very separation of soule and body wrought by death but when he dareth not auouch and therefore stammeringly vttereth It is in or immediatly vpon the dissolution of soule and body in the first entraÌ„ce of the soule into the state of the other world What giddines is heere If by the dolours of death al sinnefullnes be expelled how in the moment of dissolution If in that moment how immediatly vpon it How in the first entrance into the next life Or if in that entrance how doth Charity then worke or sorrow procure it Read his wordes Field in append 1. part p. 4. 26. The vtter deletion and full remission of their sinnes the perfect purging out of sinne being in or immediatly vpon the dissolution in the last instant of this life and first of the next and not while the body and soule remaine conioyned Pitty it is great pitty to see vnto what distresse a man of wit and learning may be driuen by the weaknesse of his cause For heere M. Field in these few wordes maketh either two instances immediatly togeather the last of this life and first of the next and so composeth diuisible tymes of indiuisible moments against the principles of Philosophy or he supposeth the instant in which sinne is remitted to be intrinsecall to this life and extrinsecall to the next and so crosseth himselfe in his owne speach affirming this full remission of sinne both to be and not to be while the body and soule remaine conioyned Or he taketh the instant of Purgation to be extrinsecall to this life and intrinsecall to the next And contrary to the whole stream of Sectaryes he alloweth with vs a remission or Purgation of sinne and Purgatory-place after this life at least for a moment For that which is done must be done in some place or els it is not done at all To which of these inconueniences he will yield I know not to one he is constrained And if I may gesse at the meaning of his variable and vnconstant speaches seeing he will not haue the perfect purging out of sinne c. while the body and soule remaine conioyned he alloweth it after the dissolution and so admitteth a remission and purgation of sinne in the next life which his fellowes renounce he himselfe would seeme to impugne 27. But when I pray is this perfect purging out of of sinne
them into his true and proper flesh that the body of life may be in vs as a certaine quickening seed Eusebius Emissenus The inuisible Euseb Emiss ser de cor Domi. Cyp. de coens Dom. Priest Christ Iesus turneth by his word with a secret power the visible creatures into the substance of his body and bloud saying Take and eate for this is my body S. Cyprian who liued before any of these This bread which our Lord gaue to his Disciples not in outward apparence but in nature changed by the omnipotency of the word is made flesh The like he hath in other places In so much as a famous * Vrsin in commonef cuiusdam Theol. de sacra Coen Aug. ser citato à Bedain c. 10. â— Cor. Humfrey Iesu pâ— 2â— ca. 5. pag. 626. Matth. 4. v. â— ProtestaÌ„t confesseth That in Cyprian are many sayings which seeme to conforme TraÌ„substantiation S. Augustine and sundry others euidently also graunt our Reall mutation or Transubstantiation of the elements Which doctrine Gregory the Great and Augustin our Apostle brought into England as D. Humphrey teacheth and the Diuell himselfe acknowledged to be possible when he sayd vnto Christ Dic vt lapides isti panes fiant Commande that these stones be made bread 18. Secondly if we respect the conueniency it was meet we should really eate and really drinke of the reall victime truly slaine and offered for vs. It was meet that he who became our companion in the manger our teacher in the Temple our Priest at the Altar our price sacrifice and ransome on the Crosse should likewise be our food and sustenance at the table It was most meet that he who imparted his owne diuine person and all the riches of his Godhead by Hypostaticall vnion to the flesh and bloud of a pure and vnspotted man should also coÌ„municate the same flesh and bloud and all the treasures of his diuine and human nature to the soules and bodyes of As our first Parents were not infected by a Metaphoricall but by a true eating of the accursed Tree so we cannot be healed by a Metaphoricall but by a tru eating of the Tree of life NisseÌ„ orat catech ca. 37. Ignatius Ep. ad Ephes Athan. de huâ—â—atur suscep Cyril in Io. â—p ad Calosy â—re 1. 4. c. â—4 l. 5. c. 2 alibi Cyr. Alex. 1. 10. in â—o c. 13. Spaâ—kes in his answer to M. Iohn d'Albins pag. no. 257. his faithfull seruants The wisedome of God requireth that as our Forefathers and we were first impoisoned not by the desire but by the true and real eating of the forbidden apple so we should be cured by the true and substanciall feeding of this blessed fruit For S. Gregory Nissen proueth After the manner of the poyson so likewise the medicine must enter into our bowells the vertue therof be traÌ„sfused into all partes of the body 19. Againe the poyson which Adam receaued was a venemous fountaine of a double contagion ioyntly infecting both body and soule two wounds it inflicted it defiled our soule with sinne our body it enthralled to death and corruption What could be more behoofull for our Redeemer then to prepare a medicine against both these wounds A medicine to wash our soules from sin and rayse our body from dust to beautify the one with grace and cloath the other with incorruptioÌ„ And what could sooner worke this admirable cure then the glorious flesh of this holy Sacrament Which is not only the Ocean of Grace but the medicine of immortality the preseruatiue as S. Ignatius calleth it against death The first fruites of glory as Athanasius writeth The liuely and reuiuing seed of our bodyes as S. Cyrill sayth The pledge the earnest the hope or expectation of Immortall life as Irenaeus affirmeth According to that of Christ He that eateth my flesh drinketh my bloud hath life euerlasting and I will rayse him at the later day The body then must eate his flesh and drinke his bloud that it may partake the benefit of Resurrection our soule by fayth might enioy the dowryes of blisse But this terrestriall nature of our body cannot as S. Cyrill of Alexandria teacheth be aduanced to immortality except the body of naturall life be conioyned vnto it 20. Yet D. Sparkes maugre S. Cyril or whosoeuer els obstinatly persisteth that the body of Christ cannot be really conioyned with ours Because Christ is ascended into heauen sitting at the right hand of his Father and the heauens must Bils 4. par pag. 788. 789. c. Ioan. 20. Read S. Aug. ep 3. ad Volus Amb. l. 10. in cap. 24. Luc. Hila. l. 3 de Tri. Iustin q. 117. Cyril l. 12. in Io. c. 53. Bede Theoph. Euthym. Ruper boc loco whoproue Christs entrance the dores being shut containe him vntill the restitution of all thinges As though good Syr he could not be at the same tyme in diuers places to wit in heauen sitting on the right hand of his Father and heere vpon earth in euery consecrated hoast not naturally as the Fathers copiously quoted by M. Bilson constantly teach but supernaturally by the power of him vnto whome nothing is impossible For so he hath wrought many wonderfull workes aboue the course of nature He came forth of the Virgins wombe preseruing her virginity rose out of the sepulcher not remouing the stone entred into his Disciples the dore being shut ascended to his Father not deuiding the heauens when he penetrated them But as in these examples diuers bodyes were supernaturally in one place so by the same supernaturall power one body may likewise be at the same tyme in diuers places for it is a common Axiome approued by Philosophers that Contrariorum eadem est ratio Amongst contraryes the same reason holdeth on both sides Moreouer we are instructed by fayth that the single person of Christ is vnited to most distinct diuers natures to the nature of God and to the nature of man that the sole essence of God is in three persons really distinct that one and the selfe same moment of eternity is answerable correspondent to most different and contrary tymes to tyme past tyme present and tyme to come But as one person sustaineth diuers natures one nature is communicated to diuers persons one moment coexisteth to diuers Amb. orat in Auxen Aeges l. 3. de exid vrbis Hieros cap. 2. â—o Dams orat de B. Virgine tymes why cannot one body be resident in diuers places 21. Els how could our Sauiour after his Ascension haue met S. Peter flying the persecution of Rome as S. Ambrose and Aegesippus record How could he haue descended to honour the funeralls of our B. Lady as S. Iohn Damascen and Nicephorus witnesse How could he appeare to S. Paul as in the 9. Chap. of the Actes of the Apostles in the 22. and 23. For in none of these apparitions could he Calu. in c. 9. act l. 4. Instit c. 17. §.
for euer He that belieueth and is baptized shall be saued Euery one that shall inuocate the name of the Lord shal be saued to wit if he inuocate and call vpon him in fayth and charity as he ought if he belieue aright and doth not finally loose his fayth nor the grace of Baptisme and water of the holy Ghost once receaued as I shall proue heereafter he may Therefore this argument of theirs maketh no more against the corporal then spirituall feeding for as euerlasting life is promised to the faythfull and pious belieuer so to the reall and worthy Receauer and as the one may fall from his worthy dignity so the other make shipwracke of his liuely fayth and eternally perish Perchance you will obiect that this answere suteth not with the prerogatiue which our Sauiour giueth to the holy Eucharist aboue Manna That Ioan. 6. v. 49. 50. the Fathers did eate Manna in the desert and they dyed this is the bread that descendeth froÌ„ heauen that if any man eat of it he dye not For whosoeuer did worthily feed on that dainty Manna and continued in the same state neuer tasted the bitternes of spirituall death therefore according to this construction it is not inferiour to the blessed Sacrament I answere first that such as then liued for euer enioyed not the priuiledges of life by the vertue and force of Manna but by their loue of God and fayth in Christ their true Messias and yet they that worthily receaue the Eucharist truely liue by the vertue power and efficacy of Christs reall presence the spring of life and fountaine of grace therein contained 9. Secondly I reply that Christ doth not only compare the Eucharist with Manna in respect of the life and death of the soule but of the body also after this sort Manna could not affoard to your Fathers life of body much lesse of soule during their short passage through the desert This bread affoardeth life to the soule much more to the body during the length of all eternity They that eate Manna dyed in body a temporall death they that eate this bread shall not dye the eternall death neither of the body nor soule And heerein consisteth as Maldonate commenteth vpon this text the singular grace elegancy of our Sauiours comparison in passing from Maldonatâ— in hunc loeum Matt. 8. v. 22. Ioan. 4. v. 13. one kind of life and death to another which plesant digression he often vseth as the same Author discourseth in other places In S. Matthew Let the dead bury the dead The first he calleth dead in soule the next in body In S. Iohn Euery one that drinketh of this water shall thirst againe but he that shall drinke of the water that I will giue him shall not thirst for euer First he speaketh of the corporall Matt. 26. v. 29. water and thirst of the body then of the spirituall water and thirst of the soule Likewise I wil not drinke from hence forth of this fruit of the vine vntill that day when I shall drinke it with you new in the kingdome of my Father Heere he first mentioneth the naturall wine of the grape then the metaphoricall wine of celestiall ioyes So now he first speaketh of the corporall then of the spirituall and euerlasting life which our Blessed Sacrament of his owne nature yeildeth to all such as daily receaue it although Manna yielded not as much as the corporall if they doe not after by sinne willfully destroy the quickening grace and liuely seed it imparteth vnto them And thus the wordes are of more emphasy the comparison more pithy and the preheminence of the Eucharist aboue Manna more remarkable then if our Sauiour had spoken in both places only of the spirituall Lastly if our Sectaryes expound S. Iohn of the eating by fayth how vncongruously will they make S. Paul to speake writing of the same matter and saying He that eatech vnworthily which 1. Cor. 11. v. 27. cannot be properly attributed to the belieuer because he that belieueth not as he ought doth either falsly or fainedly belieue we cannot with any congruity of speach say that he belieueth vnworthily therefore as S. Paul so likewise S. Iohn ought to be vnderstood not of the spirituall but of the corporall eating of Christs sacred flesh 10. That which M. Bilson alleadgeth out of Gelasius S. Leo condemning the Communion vnder one kind Bils 4. par pag. 684. 685. Gelas can Comperiâ—ê° dist 2. Leo. ser 4. de quadra is of no force at all For they condemne the dry Communion not of the Catholiks but of the Manichees who teaching that Christ brought into this world and walked vpon earth with a meere empty and phantasticall body deuoyd of true and natural bloud they in testimony of this errour abstained from the bloud with great sacriledge as Gelâ—sius writeth deuided one and the selfe same mistery which all Catholikes had iust cause to reprehend in them no Protestant any cause to obiect against vs who neither deuide the mistery nor abstaine from the bloud but constantly teach that by fequele concomitance we receaue it wholy and entirely contained in the body we inioy the full participation of Christ Fulke loco â—itato Bils 4. par pag. 682. as M. Fulke requireth 11. At last both he and D. Bilson ioyntly oppose the Practise of the vniuersall Church which for many ages togeather ministred the Sacrament vnder both kinds euen to the Laity I grant that the Church vsed it as a thing lawfull not as a Aug. epist 23. ad Bonif Tolet. Con. cap. 11. Tho. 3. p. q. 80. art 9. ad 3. Cypr. serm de lapsis thing prescribed or decreed by God or vniuersally without exception in all times and places practised Which manner of receauing the Church might after change when her Communicaâ—ts were so many as wine sufficient could not be fitly consecrated nor without eminent perill of shedding or danger of abusing be conueniently ministred It was an vsuall custome both in the Greeke and Latine Church for many ages to communicate with the Chalice young sucking babes of which S. Augustine the x j. Toletan Councell and S. Thomas make mention And S. Cyprian writeth of the consecrated Bloud powred into the mouth of an Infant But as the Church vpon iust cause abrogated that custome leauing the children the benefit of neither kind without any wrong vnto them and Protestants allow hereof why write they so bitterly against debarring the people vpon as many important reasons from the vse of the Chalice where notwithstanding the whole fruit and benefit thereof to their comfort remayneth 12. Besides in many things you your selues who count it in vs a crime so damnable stray from that which Christ practised in the institution of the Sacramenâ— for example Christ communicated only men you women also he in a priuate house you in a publike Temple he at night you in the morning he with * For
the diseases of the body famine sicknes and death it selfe 5. And although Original sinne be now the cause of all these euils yet it doth not properly consist in them all but in the priuation of that prime grace by which the soule of Adam was enriched adorned and conuerted vnto God For as Originall righteousnes included these three prerogatiues or triple rectitude to speake in S. Thomas language first the vnion of the mind with soueraigne goodnes secondly the subiection of the inferiour powers of the soule to reason thirdly the like subordination of all the members of the body to the soule yet it did truely and principally reside in the former and contayned S. Thom. 1. p. q 95. â—â—t 1. the later two as accessaryes or dependants thereof So Originall sinne which is only knowne by his contrary habit is truly formally nothing els then the voluntary priuation of the same Originall iustice which ought to be in vs as it maketh the soule deformed blemished Feild in his 3. booke c. 26. and auerted from God Wherefore seing this want and priuation is taken away by Baptisme and the whole grace as it cloathed beautifyed and adorned the soule entierly restored the whole guilt of sinne is forgiuen the formall cause or true essence of Originall iustice recouered againe by the passion of Christ and the other deordinations the remaynder of concupiscence are only the effects or punishments of the precedent fault and not any true and proper fault For if man had beene created in the state of pure nature as the Philosophers thought he was and many Deuines against M. Feild teach he might be because it inuolueth no contradiction neither in respect of the creature nor Creatour Then I say he should haue beene pestered with the same inordinate concupiscence and rebellion of the inferiour parts as now he is but then it had been a meere infirmity langour or fayntnes of nature growing out of the matter whereof man is compounded and not any wound or punishment also of sinne as in our case it is The reason appeareth for as man in the state of pure nature must haue been coÌ„pacted of two diuers and repugnant natures of soule body flesh and spirit and consequently of a corporall and reasonable of asensuall and spirituall appetite which could not chuse but maintaine a perpetuall warre of contrary and repugnant desires it being naturall to euery thing according to Philosophy to couet that which is conuenient and sutable to it selfe so the sense euen then would hunt after sensible pleasant delight-some obiects and the spirit would seeke for spirituall the spirit would often checke restrayne and bridle the pursuit of Aug. de pec merit remis l. 2. cap 4 de nuptijs concup l. 1. c. 27. l. 13. de Triâ— c. 10. contra Iul. Pelag. l. â— 1. retract c. 15. sense and sense would likewise hinder weaken and repine at the heroicall workes and endeauours of the spirit Thus the winds of diuers opposite passions the fluds of contrary inclinations would naturally striue and resist one the other yet as in that case this contrariety had beene no sinne but a sequele a disease a feeblenes of nature so now the same abiding in the regenerate from whome the dregs of all impurity are cleansed it is only according to S. Augustine left as an exercise of vertue to wrastle against or as a punishment of sinne and not as any true or proper sinne Which by two irrefragable arguments I conuince in this manner Ezech. 36. v. 25. Mich. 7. v. 19. â—01 lasâ— v. 12. Ioan. 1. v. 29. Psal 50 v. 6. Whatsoeuer filth or vncleanes our soules contracted by the sinne of Adam is wholy washed away in Baptisme by the grace of Christ But the filth or guilt of concupiscence descended from Adam therefore it is clean abolished by the vertue of Christ The Maior or first proposition is euery where testifyed in holy Writ by the Prophets and Apostles who often witnes that there shal be left no sinne in vs after we are once new borne in Christ for he shall cleanse vs from all our iniquityes he shall drowne our sinnes in the bottome of the sea he shall discoast them from vs as far as he East is distant from the West he taketh away sinnes blotteth them out wipeth them away dissolueth them like a clowd he shall forgiue the iniquity to the house of Iacob and this is all the fruit that the sinne thereof be taken away But none Isa 44. v. 22. Isa 27. v. 9. Ad Rom. 8. v. 1. Hier. in Com. in hunc locuÌ„ Ad Rom. 5. v. 19. of these Prophesyes not one of these assertions were true if the guilt of concupiscence still lurked in the soule of the regenerate It were not true which S. Paul teacheth There is no damnation to them that are in Christ Iesus to wit Nihil damnatione dignum nothing worthy damnation as S. Hierome commenteth vpon that place if any damnable sinne remayned in them Not true which the same Apostle auoucheth As by the disobedience of one man many were made sinners so also by the obedience of one many shall be made iust if we be not as truely iustifyed and purged from the drosse of sinne Psal 50. v. 9. Ad Ephes 1. v. 4. ad Collos 1. v. 22. ad Ephes 4. v. 22. 24. ad Colos 3. v. 9. ad Rom. 6. ad Ephes 5. 2. ad Corinth 6. Chrys ho. 40. in 15. 1. Cor. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the merits of Christ as by the fall of Adam we were infected therewith 7. Secondly King Dauid speaking of the purity of the soule cleansed by grace sayd Thou shalt wash me and I shall be made more white then snow S. Paul writeth that the iustifyed are holy and immaculate that they cast off the old man and put on the new that they liue in Christ are light in our Lord temples of the liuing God Therefore free from the darknes free from the impurity death and idolatry of sinne for what participation hath iustice with iniquity what society is there betweene light and darknes what part hath Christ with Beliall what agreement hath the temple of God with Idolls Only God sayth S. Chrysostome can deliuer from sinne which in this lauer of regeneration he effecteth he toucheth the soule it selfe with grace and plucketh from thence the rooted sinne he who by the fauour of the King is pardoned his cryme hath his soule still defiled whome Baptisme washeth not so but he hath his mind more pure then the beames of the Sunne and such as it was when it was first created Which testimony of his so euidently discouereth the spot of Originall guilt to be quite abolished as the Magdeburgian Protestants censuring this place doubt not to say Chrysostome speaketh of the efficacy of Baptisme very dangerously And yet he speaketh no otherwise then the word of God and generall voyce of
AN ANTIDOTE OR TREATISE OF THIRTY CONTROVERSIES VVith a large Discourse of the Church IN WHICH The soueraigne truth of Catholike doctrine is faythfully deliuered against the pestiferous writinges of all English Sectaryes AND In particuler against D. WHITAKER D. FVLKE D. RIYNOLDS D. BILSON D. ROBERT ABBOT D. SPARKES and D. FIELD the chiefe vpholders some of Protestancy some of Puritanisme some of both Deuided into three Partes By S. N. Doctour of Diuinity THE FIRST PART Deut. 32. vers 30. How should one be able to pursue a thousand and two put tenthousand to flight Is it not therefore because their God hath sold them and our Lord hath inclosed and made them thrall Permissu Superiorum M. DC XXII THE principall maintainers of Protestancy of whome I spake in the former page are D. BILSON and D. FIELD THE pillars of Puritanisme are D. REYNOLDS and D. SPARKES who were chosen Proctours for the Preâ—isian faction in the Conference before his Maiesty at Hampton-Court THE abbettours of both are D. WHITAKER D. FVLKE and D. ROBERT ABBOT who sometimes defend the articles of the one sometymes of the other TO THE RIGHT WORTHY STVDENTS OF THE TWO FAMOVS VNIVERSITIES OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE ARISTOTLE in penning his Morall Instructions of Arist. l. r. Eth. cap. 1. Philosophy thought all his endeauours well bestowed if he might profit as he saith any one thereby much more if Townes and Citties How happy then may I thinke my labours imployed if by these small paines I may rightly instruct some few of You not in Morall Vertues but in Diuine and Heauenly Verities not in Precepts of Manners only but in Articles of Faith in Mysteries of true Beliefe on which I will not say the ciuil Nurture or gay Deportment of the outward man but the inward Carriage Grace of the Holy Ghost the life of your Soules the loue of God and hope of all eternity dependeth By instructing You I shall cleere the beames which giue light to thousands I shall purifie the Waters and purge the Fountaine of which many must drinke You are the Seedes you are the Lights of the Kingdome you are the Mines whose treasures are to be dispensed riches of learning hereafter deriued to the whole body of the Realme Wherfore least you should both beguile others and be your selues deceiued with counterfeite drosse in lieu of true and perfect mettall I haue opened vnto you these veines of Gold with which if you couet to enrich your soules two things I request at your hands The one is not to frame an ouerweening conceit or beare too partiall Affection to the men of your own side the other to peruse this Treatise with an indifferent and single eye and with a greedy zeale of imbracing Truth from whose mouth soeuer 2. You are not I hope of Agesicles the Lacedemonian his mind who taking great pleasure to heare smooth eloqueÌ„t discourses would not intertaine Philophanes Plutarch in his Laconike Apophtheg the famous RhetoriciaÌ„ being a straÌ„ger vnto him because as Plutarch reporteth he would be Scholler only to them whose sonne he was that is he would learne of them alone amongst whom he was borne Much lesse can I thinke you bewitched with Philostorgius the Eunomian his folly who was so besotted of his Maister Eunomius as he admired his very naturall defects set the glosse of vertue on them For his faltering tongue as Nicephorus writeth he vainely Niceph. l. 12. c. 29. commended as the Key of Eloquence his flow words he prized as precious Margarites the spots and blemishes of his leaprous face what did he account them but the rarest markes and ornaments of beauty If any of you shold be infected with these bastardly humors if you would heare none but those in whose bosomes ye haue beene bred or be so farre enamoured of your first Teachers wits as to loue their errours applaud their forgeries praise the beauty of their deformed writings little hope should I haue to gaine your soules But if yee be as I trust ye are louers of truth enemies of falshood desirous of your owne saluatioÌ„ then here you may discouer that Euangelical Pearle which Maâ—â— 13. vers 4â— he that findeth selleth all that he hath to buy so rare a Iewell 3. I know the subtilty of Sathan and snare of Heretikes hath euer beene as the Rom. 16. v. 18. 2. Petr. 2. v. 3. Apostle saith By sweet speaches and benedictions to seduce the hearts of Innocents By faigned words to make merchandize of You. Their chiefest proiect and principall study is with meretricious and painted eloquence to intertaine their followers and whilest they fill their eares with delight to instill into their soules most poysoned doctrine But a great * The saying of Demosthenes mentioned by S. Aug. con Crescon Gram. l. 2. cap. 1. 1. Cor. 2. v. 1. 4. 5. ver 13. Oratour can tell you That the riches of Greece consist not in words And the Apostle pronounceth Not in loftinesse sublimity of speach not in the perswasible words of humaine wisedome are the Mysteries of Christ but in the power of God and Doctrine of the spirit Be not therefore be not I beseech you inueagled with the smooth tongue or filed stile of your flourishing Sect-maisters but coÌ„sider the matter weigh the reasons examine the proofes they alledge and you shall find such silly arguments Aug. l. 5. confes c. 2. such slender stuffe as S. Augustine espied in the eloquent and lofty discourses of Faustus Manichaeus and the rest of his crew when not regarding as he saith what gallant dish or vessell of speach but what food of knowledge he propounded vnto him not harkening to the sound of words but to the pith of matter Albeit they bragged much and promised nothing more then Truth Truth yet he discouered as he witnesseth No truth amongst Ibid. l. 3. c. 9. them nothing but Lies Vanities and vile Superstitions 4. The like shall you discerne in the Ghospellers of our time For although they vaunt of the word of God vaunt of Scriptures and Scriptures only seeme to follow Ambr. in c. 3. ep ad Titum yet because as S. Ambrose teacheth By the word of the law they impugne the law framing their priuate sense and construction to couÌ„tenance the peruersity of their minds by the authority of the law it is more then euident they follow not the Oracles of God but rather the Fancies of their owne braine the suggestion of Sathan For by peruerse interpretation as S. Hierome testifieth of â—â—ier l. â— in â— 1. ep ad Galat. the Ghospell of Christ is made the Ghospel of man or which is worse the Ghospell of the Diuell And Martiall the Poët speaketh to this purpose Quem recitas meus est â— Fidentine libellus Sed malè cùm recitas incipit esse tuus The Booke thou doest recite o Fidentine is mine Reciting it amisse it groweth to be thine 5. Secondly they
boast of the pure preaching of the Word whereas you shall discouer in my third Part that they haue no authority to preach no mission no vocation at all They are Theeues who enter Ioan. 10. v. 2. 10. not by the doore but climbe another way to steale kill and destroy your soules They are the Ezech. 13 v. 3. 6 7. false Prophets who crie Thus saith our Lord when our Lord said it not nor sent them nor gaue them commission to speake And the purity of which they crake is as Hieremy Hierem. 14. 1 v. 4. declareth A lying Vision and Diuination Deceit and Beguiling of their heart which they prophesie vnto you Thirdly they glory to haue purged and reformed the Church of many errours which by little and little haue crept into her and restored her againe to the ancient integritie of the Apostolike Faith But you shall see their Reformations haue beene al corruptions abuses innouations they haue broken the peace departed from the vnity of the flocke of Christ are indeed no Church at all but a Rebellious Faction an Hereticall Assembly You shall finde their Ancient Faith a new Beliefe as S. Gregory Nazianzen said of the Arians their refined Greg. Nazian orat in Ariaâ—os Doctrines meere nouelties new broached Heresies which I pray God both you and all others may haue grace to discerne in time least you open your eyes and begin to lament these things to late as Constantius the Emperour did of whom the same S. Gregory Nazianzen writeth That lying on his death-bed he repented him of three things Greg. Nazian in Laudem Athanas First that he had commanded his Sonne in law to be slaine The other that he had nominated Iulian the Apostata to succeed him in his Imperiall Throne The third that he had giuen eare to new deuised Doctrines And with these words he yielded vp his ghost 9. O yee flourishing Academians But what should I restraine my speach to you O England my dearest Country I would to God this fearefull president might so mooue thy Heart as to make Thee now whilest time serueth and grace is offered more fruitfully bewaile the like or more grieuous crimes committed by Thee Thou perchance hast not murdered thy carnall Kinsfolkes or Allies but thy spirituall Pastours Guides and Curates of thy soule Some thou hast spoyled vexed imprisoned and pined away with extreamest misery some thou hast arraigned executed and barbarously massacred as Rebels to thy Prince and Traytours to thy Crowne their bloud like water thou Psal 78. v. 3. hast powred forth round about Hierusalem their quarters thou hast set vp as preyes to be deuoured by birds and foules of the aire Thou hast vniustly nominated and entitled others to inherite their roomes possesse their benefices discharge their functions many of them reuolted Apostata's many mercinary Hirelings all tyrannicall Vsurpers who seeke not so much to oppresse the bodies as exercise their tyrannie ouer the soules of thy subiects and pittifully enthral them to euerlasting seruitude Lastly thou hast dammed vp the passage by which the cleere waters of Antiquity should flow into thy Kingdome thou hast opened the sluse to the puddles of nouelty to new flouds of Doctrine new fayned Sacraments new Articles of Faith new worship of God which I beseech his Diuine Piety thou maist haue grace to detest learne of the Lacedemonians who would not permit any strang merchandise or vnusual wares to be transported into their Citty to banish and abandon these vnwonted Doctrines and imbrace againe that ancient Faith which once thy whole Realme then happie Iland daughter of God and Dowry of the B. Virgin deuoutly sucked from the breast of Rome which all thy former Kings and Princes vntill now of late supported thy Lawes established thy People honoured thy Vniuersities defended To this end I present you Noble Students with these first fruits of my labours and will not cease to sacrifice vnto God my continuall praiers THE EPISTLE TO THE READER TWO of the first stoutest Champions of the Primitiue Church Tertullian and Arnobius writing against the Pagans auouch Tertul. Arno. coÌ„tra Gent. that many of them impugned at the beginning our Christian fayth not so much of inueterate hatred as either of ignorance not knowing what we maintainde or of weaknes transported by the streame of Idolatry which euery where disgraced and opposed it selfe against it S. Augustine likewise writeth of himselfe Aug. l. 7â— Confess c. 19. and his friend Alipius how slowly they imbraced or rather refrained from the Catholike Church by reason of some erroneous conceits they framed of our beliefe the one that we were infected with the heresy of Apollinaris the other not discerning the purity of our doctrine from the dregges of Photinus 2. The same opinion I haue of sundry Protestants who renounce our Religion not of any malicious mind but for that they ignorantly mistake the true grounds of faith or easily giue eare to the pernitious obloquies of their fayth-lesse Ministers who without feare of God or regarde of conscience perfidiously appeach vs of innumerable Sacriledges of such worship of Images as was vsed by Reyn. de ido Rom. Eccles lib. 1. c. 2. c. Fulke in c. 2. ad Col. sect 3. Fulke in 1. ad Tim. c. 4. sect 4. 5. Sutclif in his suruey of Popery cap. 8. Sparks in his answer to M. Iohn D'Albines p. 219. 120. VVhitak contro 1. quaest 5. Rich. Stoch in his ep Dedica to the Lord Knowles prefixed before M. VVhitak answere to M. Camp 10. reasons Bils in his booke of Christian subiection c 4. par part 1. Reyn. in his conference with M. Hart. the Carpocratians of such inuocation of Angels as the Apostolikes practised of deniall of Marriage with the Tatians and Encratites of selling the guifts of the holy Ghost with Simon Magus of honouring our Blessed Lady in offering her a wafer cake with the Collyridians of many such execrable blasphemies which our harts detest farre more then theirs Wherefore after the excellent and worthy labours of diuers memorable men both forraine and domesticall who with large volumes and inuincible reasons haue purged vs of these slaunders manifestly defended the vnconquerable truth of our ancient beliefe I haue endeauoured to make a short abridgment of all our most weighty and important proofes that heere the Reader may see as in a mappe described or pourtraited in a table what in the spacious feild of sundry mens workes is in diuers things more amply enlarged 3. My purpose is not seuerally to encounter any one particulâ—r aduersary but to trace the steppes and ioyntly to desâ—ry the errours of many according as the proiect of my intended discourse or force of their opposition shall minister occasion for my intention is to wade by Gods help into the maine Ocean of all the greatest and most difficult questions controuerted at this day betweene our English
and approaching receiue it with pure lips S. Augustine That Christ carried his owne body in his owne hands when he said This is my body and that secundum literam according to the letter and so as King Dauid could not carrie himselfe Which two points are worthilie noted because the Apostles eat with their corporall mouthes what Christ held in his corporall hands In fine S. Cyril saith We doe not deny our selues with assured faith and sincere charity to be spiritually conioyned to Christ but that we haue no manner of coniunction with him according vnto the flesh this truely we deny 15. Is it not strange M. Sparkes should vaunt of all these learned Writers within eight hundred years when all disclaime his false imputation when all confesse the Reall Presence not only to fayth but also to the mouth Bils 4. par pag. 754. 755. c. to the tongue to the lips to the hands to the flesh to the bowells of all Communicants Is it not as strange M. Bilson should goe about to defeate these and the former authotityes with his accustomed sleight of Seales Sacraments bearing the names of the things themselues For if the outward seales onely were receaued into the mouth the outward seales only were eaten by fayth bare figures and seales nourish the soule seeing the same flesh the same bloud the same body the same Mediatour of God and Man Christ Iesus which is belieued by fayth is auouched as you see to be receaued into the hands mouths harts bowels of the faythfull Deny then M. Bilson the true reall flesh to the mouth of the body deny it also to the mouth of the soule and so become a Manichee a Marcionist a denyer of Christ Or giue leaue at least to them and other Heretikes to subuert by like sophistry the chief principles of our beliefe LiceÌ„ce them to expound by sound of names without sense of wordes whatsoeuer is written of the true flesh bloud and body of our Lord of his Incarnation Passion and glorious Resurrection 16. What pretense then can any Protestant make vnlesse he open the gate to a floud of blasphemyes why he should delude such ineuitable proofes Why he should discredit so many lights Lampes and Ornaments of the Church and preferre the hard wrested construction of some new fangled teachers before such vndeniable texts of Fathers and testimonyes of Scripture Perchance he may pretend with D. Bilson and D. Sparkes the impossibilty inconueniency and contradictions our doctrine Bils 4. par pag. 790. 794. 795. 796. Sparks p. 180. sequentibus implyeth To which I might answere Philosophers Infidells obiected such stuffe against the true IncarnatioÌ„ and Passion of our Lord I might say that he yieldeth assent to diuers articles of our fayth more contrary and repugnant to the reach of our naturall reason as to the mistery of the holy Trinity to the fecundity of our B. Lady remayning a Virgin to the Resurrection of putrifyed and decaied flesh c. I might also reply that we should not measure the works of the Almighty by the weakenes of our feeble vnderstanding as S. Basil singulerly teacheth against Eunomius by the example of the Emmet Basil Epist â—68 But what if I demonstrate the Reall Presence to be possible conuenient and without any repugnance or contradiction at all 17. To begin with the possibility of our conuersion or Transubstantiation We do not as M. Bilson iniuriously fathereth vpon vs make the creature the Creatour or the dead Bils 4. par pag. 729. element of bread the Sonne of God We only teach the bread and wine to be changed into the flesh bloud of Christ And that one substance may be turned into another yea and bread into flesh experience it selfe aboundantly teacheth For the bread which we eate and wine which we drinke by the naturall heat and concoction of our stomacke is conuerted into the flesh and bloud of man the same effect had the food which Christ receaued Likewise the graine of seed sowed in the ground altereth in nature buddeth vp into a faire eare of Corne. Wax cast Niss orat cate ca. 37. Damas l. 4 defi c. 14. Irenaus l. 5. cap. 2. Chryshom de Euâ—h Centurywrit c. 4. col 4â—6 Ambro de init myst cap. 9. Cyr. Iero. cate 4. mystag into fire is melted consumed and turned into fire Which similitudes the Fathers of former ages haue vsed to illustrate this mistery S. Gregory Nissen and S. Iohn Damascen the first S. Irenaeus the second S. Chrysostome the third who annexeth thereunto that as Nothing of the substance of Wax remaineth so heere the Misteryes are consumed by the substance of the body By which passage if the Century-writers may be credited S. Chrysostome doth seeme to confirm TransubstaÌ„tiation S. Ambrose whome they likewise reproue for not writing well of the same matter sometime coÌ„pareth the substantiall mutatioÌ„ of bread in the Eucharist to the creation of heauen and earth of nothing Otherwhile to the conuersion of the Rod of Moyses into a serpent of bloud into water water into bloud and the like S. Cyrill of Hierusalem conuinceth it by the miraculous change our Sauiour made of water into wine disputing thus Christ confirming and saying this is my bloud who Gauden tract 2. de Exo. will euer doubt and say it is not his bloud He once conuerted water into wine in Cana of Galily and is he not worthy to be belieued that he hath changed wine into bloud S. Gaudentius hath the like who flourished within the 400 yeares after Christ He that produceth bread out of the earth of bread againe maketh Greg. Nyssen oracate cap. 37. his owne body for he is both able and promised it and he that made of water wine maketh of wine his owne bloud S. Gregory Nissen We rightly belieue the sanctifyed bread to be changed by the word of God into the body of the Sonne of God S. Ambrose Thou sayest perhaps to me I see another manner of thing How Ambro. lib. de â—js qui iniâ— myst cap. â— then tellest thou me that I receaue Christs body Then this is yet to be established by vs. And how many exampls may we vse to proue 〈…〉 is not that which nature framed but that which the blessing consecrated and that the power of blessing ouer commeth nature because by blessing euen the very nature it selfe is changed Behould that is not sayth S. Ambrose which nature made but what did nature make The substance of bread what becommeth of it It is changed quoth he how by blessing into what Into that which the blessing consecrateth What it that The body of Christ for he tooke Ciryl ep ad Colas bread blessed and sayd This is my body S. Cyrill of Alexandria who succeeded them in the next age God condescending to our frailtyes instilleth into the thinges offered the power of life Conuertens ea in veritatem propriae carnis onuerting
29. Act. 9. v. 17. Act. 23. v. 11. 1. Cor 15. v. 5. Act. 23. v. 11. Act. 22. v. 78. 15. depart from the right hand of his Father as Scripture teacheth and Protestants do confesse He must needes therefore be at the same tyme in heauen and vpon earth in most remote and separate places For if M. Sparkes answere with Caluin and his consortes that Christ appeared either in the heauens to S. Paul or that these were not true but imaginary apparitions S. Luke himselfe reproueth them saying That Christ appeared to S. Paul not in the heauens but in via in the way Not a farâ—e off but neere at hand assistens ei standing by him Not as to S. Steuen but as to Cephas to Iames to the fifty brethren Not aboue the cloudes in any vnknowne place but vpon the earth in the Castle of Claudius Lysias Tribune of the souldiers Not in a traunce or illusion by night but in a cleare vision in a plaine conference at noone day so as he might see the iust one and heare his voyce out of his owne mouth Lastly not by any imaginary reprâ—sentation but by such a true and perfect apparition as the Resurrection of Christ is proued therby 1. Cor. 15. Chrys hom 38. in c 15. 1. Cor. Tho. 3. p. 4. 57. art 6. ad 3. Bils 4. par pag. 793. Chrys lib. 3. de Sacer. For which cause either at some of these tymes he appeared truly to S. Paul as S. Chrysostome and S. Thomas conclude euen in his owne proper person and with his naturall body or S. Paul deceiptfully proueth Christs Resurrection by his apparition vnto him To accuse S. Paul is to appeach the holy Ghost of fraud and deceipt to graunt he truly appeared is to subscribe to his being in many places And consequently that of S. Chrysostome which M. Bilson phraseth an Hyberbolicall vehemency is an absolute verity In the tyme of our Sacrifice he that sitteth aboue with his Father at that very instant and moment of tyme is handled with the hands of all 22. Another repugnance against which M. Bilson Bils 4. par pag. 794. 795. c. mightily inueygheth is That we make the body of Christ in the Eucharist without the propertyes of humane shape length extension c. because we defend it to be wholy and indiuisible in euery part of the Blessed Host as the soule of man is wholy in the head wholy in the feet and wholy in euery part of the body But this likewise by the Almighty hand of God may easily be effectuated For to be corporally or locally confined to any determinate place is no such absolute and inherent necessity no essentiall Bils locis citatis property as M. Bilson how diligent soeuer in other points not diuing in this into depth of Philosophy inconsideratly mantayneth but only an accidental quality relation or sequell which naturally followeth euery bodily substance as heate floweth from the nature of fire and grauity or weight from the condition of any earthly or heauy thing Yet as God supernaturally suspended Dan. 3. v. â—0 Matth. 14. v. 26. the actioÌ„ of heate in the Furnace of Babylon froÌ„ burning the three Children the poyse of his earthly body when he walked vpon the waters so he may also separate and seclude all locall extension from the quantity of his flesh and bloud whose essence only consisteth in the inward proportion of shape extension of parts in respect of themselues wherby one part is truely distinguished and immediatly conioyned to this and not to that other which inward extension distinction and proportion the body of Christ retayneth albeit it be wholy in the whole and wholy in euery part of the consecrated Host Eutychius the Patriarch of Constantinople Euty apud Nic. lib. 3. â—nnal about one thousand yeares agoe expressed this by the voice of man which being one only collision or beating of the ayre is wholy notwithstanding heard of many hundred togeather and wholy receaued into the Organ of euery particuler mans hearing as the body of Christ is wholy contayned vnder euery particle of the sacred host 23. The third false supposed implicancy by our Aduersaryes is the separation we affirme of the externall formes of bread and wine and making them abide without their substances for therein we destroy as they imagine the Nature it selfe of accidents whose innate and essentiall property is in their conceite to inhere in their subiects But heere in they bewray the like ignorance as before Because all the best Philosophers deny inherency to be any essentiall condition of an accident and the chiefe of Peripatetickes Aristotle himselfe Arist lib. 3. de anima tex 9. sayth greatnes is one thing and the existency of greatnes another Now if the existency be different much more the inherency which is the quality and manner of existency Basil in Hexam ho. 6. The same is taught and proued by S. Basil who affirmeth that the accident of light was first created in the beginning and remained without a subiect and that the spheare or globe of the Sunne was after made as a waggon or chariot for that original light Then meeting with this our Protestants cauillation that an accident caÌ„not be without a subiect he addeth Say not vnto me it is impossible that the light should be separated from the body of the Sunne For neither do I affirme this separation possible to thee or me but I iudge it auoucheable that such thinges as by the thought and cogitation of the mind may be seuered the power of him that created both can actually and indeed part and disseuer The adustine and burning force of the fire thou truly canst not separate from the gloming brightnes thereof but God diuided them in the fiery bush wherin he appeared to his seruant Moyses Yea and the like strange anatomy his mighty hand will make as that great Doctour goeth forward of the whole element of fire when in the later day he will separate according to him The hoat and scorching violence from the cleare light or Basil ibid. splendour thereof and depute that to hell for the due punishment of the reprobate aduance this to heauen for the comfort of his elect Besides al learned deuines auer the personality of Christ S. Thom. â— part q. 4 art 2. Cyril epist ad Nestor 5. Synod can 5. â—ulg lib. de incar c. 4. which is a substantiall mode or manner of being alike intrinsecal to substaÌ„ce as inherency is to any accident to be secluded froÌ„ his humane nature the humane nature to subsist without his proper person which although it be a greater and deeper mistery theÌ„ that we haue now in hand yet this parity I find betweene them that as the humane nature of Christ doth efficiently subsist supported by the person of the word without the formal effect of subsistency so the accidents of bread and wine doe heer remaine efficiently preserued by the
body of Christ without the formall effect of their inherency Which is an example so fit and sutable to my purpose as our Aduersaryes haue nothing to oppose against it vnles they ouerthrow that article of our fayth and by attributing vnto Christ the person of man annihilate with Nestorius the value of his sufferings worke of our Redemption 24. Many other obiections M. Bilson and his fellowes make as the vnseemlinesse of Christs passage through vile loathsome Bils 4. par pag. 78. c. places But he that thoght it not vnseemly to be torne with whips wounded with nailes massacred by his cruel enemyes to purchase our Redemption he that maketh the beames of the Sunne to shine vndefiled vpon the foulest dâ—â—ghil will not feare for the benefit of our souls to enter without horrour passe without infection the vncleanest harbour of our harts Then saith he the elements Aug. l. de fide sym cap. 4. may putrify the flesh of Christ caÌ„not Neither do we say it can but when the formes of Bread Wine are putrifyed or destroyed the body without putrifaction detriment or consumptioÌ„ ceaseth to be vnder them as the soule without Bils 4. par pag. 783. destruction leaueth to informe any dead decayed or deuided member For when our finger or arme is cut or rotten away the soule neither rotteth nor receaueth hurt no more doth the flesh of Christ when the Accidents of bread are putrified stabbed consumed to dust because it existeth in the Eucharist albeit in substance truly yet after an indiuisible impassible now glorious manner 25. Others demand how the body of Christ is not wholy spent deuoured so many dayly feeding therof To which Innocentius the third briefly answereth As the Innocen l. 3. de offio missâ—e 3. Reg. 17. Widdow of Sarepâ—ha did daily eate neuer diminish the Meale of her Pot or Oyle of her vessell so the vniuersal Church doth daily receaue and neuer consume the flesh bloud of Iesus Christ Let not then Gentle Reader any faygned difficulty or forged incouenience any seeming repugnance euer withdraw thee from allowing our Real Presence euidently defined in holy writ strongely warranted by the Fathers honourably recorded in all Antiquity THE SECOND CHAPTER IN WHICH D. Bilson D. Sparkes and all Sacramentaries are more particulerly refelled and other their chiefest arguments answered ALMIGHTY God accounteth it not sufficient to haue his Temples raised and true worship aduanced vnlesse the Altars of Ieroboam be destroied 3. Reg. 22. and the prophanations of Idolators vtterly abolished It is not then iÌ„nough for me to haue confirmed the right and Orthodoxall belief of the Catholick Church in this chiefest point of faith except I beate downe the errours raze the fortresses our enemies mantaine to strengthen Biâ—s 4. par pag. 725. cum sequeÌ„tibus Sparks pag 116. Bils 4. par pag. 785. their follies Which will seeme by so much more intricate and cumbersome vnto me by how much I find them in this question most slippery and inconstant For M. Bilson vtterly renounceth the Reall Presence M. Sparkes with their Communion-Booke alloweth it M. Bilson will haue vs mount like Eagles with the winges of faith to fasten on the Lords flesh Caluin will haue Christ descend and feed vs not by fayth alone but with the substance of his Body M. Bilson with Calu. in c. 16. Mat. Bils 4. par pag. 783. 785. 786. c. Sparks p. 114. 115. Bils 4. par pag. 710. 711. 712. his Adherents hold That we are nourished in the Sacrament wiâ—h the liuely impassible body and bloud of Christ M. Sparks with others contend that we haue not here to do with his impassible and glorified but with his dead passible and broken body and bloud shed vpon the Crosse Zuingilus and Oecolampadius teach the Eucharist to be a bare signe or figure of our Lord. M. Bilson not pleased with that admitteth besides some diuine vertue thereunto annexed Thus the builders of Babylon are deuided thus they say and gain-say auerre and reuerse like men amazed they know not what 2. For aske M. Bilson what he meaneth when he said That we must mount with wings of faith to eat Christ in the Sacrament If his meaning be that to lift vp our thoughts and hearts to Christ to beleeue in him be to eate him Then the Patriarkes and Prophets who reposed their affiance in the Messias to come were partakers of this Sacrament long before it was instituted Then the Heretikes who should denie the Eucharist yet beleeued and reuerenced our Sauiour Christ should both reuerence and dishonour partake and detest the benefit of their Communion Then likewise to beleeue the Diuels were to eate the Diuels to beleeue the fire and torments of Hell were to be fed with flames to be nourished with torments Then what need we runne to your Churches What need we be sollicitous of your morsels of bread when in euery corner by the faithfull remembrance of Christs death and Passion we may farre easilier enioy the Bils 4. par pag. 763. Calu. lib. 4. instit c. 14. alibi fruit of your Sacrament We ought to repaire saith Bilson to the Communion table to receaue the confirmation and seale of Gods mercies Or the assurance as Caluin writeth of our beliefe and incorporation with Christ. Is it only so And what if we should not receiue this outward seale and testimony of grace would God be so iniurious as to depriue vs of his gifts bestowed vpon vs or so faithlesse as not to fulfill his promise vnlesse he assured it by his letters Patents Nay how often by this meanes should Truth it selfe deceiue and beguile vs by sealing a false warraÌ„t to all those Rom. 11. Cor. 11. as receiue vnworthily eating as S. Paul sayth their Iudgment yea their death and damnation To these God should become a lying witnes a pernitious surety affoarding them that outward communion as a publike assurance of his inwrad grace and their right beliefe when notwithstanding they are vtterly voyd and depriued of them Oh tymes most perilous what monstrous heresies haue you hatched what men are these who cannot acquit themselues of folly without viperlike appeaching their Creatour of so great impiety 3. Another traine M. Bilson layeth to beguile with Bils 4. par pag. 71â— more cunning yet to beguile too For finding the Eucharist honoured by the Fathers aboue the basenes of a figure he alloweth not with them the Diuine preseÌ„ce of Chryst but he deuiseth Some diuine vertue annexed to the outward signes A meere deuise For what vertue I pray will you haue it of what quality or condition Spirituall or Corporall If Spirituall how is it conioyned to corporall elements of bread and wine What vnion without proportion What proportion will you make betweene this spirituall vertue and those bodily things If Corporall eyther the same you adde to euery element or seuerall vertues according
to the multitude of externall seales Not the same least one and the selfe same thing which you abhorre should be at the same tyme in sundry places Not seuerall vnlesse you make many seuerall and distinct Communions not all to partake as S. Paul sayth of the 1. Cor. â—oâ— Bils 4. par pag. 7â—0 711 712. c. same bread And therfore when neyther of these retraites will serue M. Bilsons last craft and subtilty is That Christ is present in the Sacrament not mixing his substance with the elements but entring the harts of the faithfull Then tell me I beseech you how doth he enter Accidentally by some supernaturall quality infused into our soules Or Substantially by the entrance of his substance it selfe What Accidentally Then the Holy Eucharist is not as S. Paul waiteth The Communion of the bloud and participation of the body of our Lord but the participation only of your 1. Cor. 10. new created accident Of which I likewise demand whether the same or distinct accidents be produced in euery soule and so entangle you in all the former briars What Substantially How then doth the substance enter Whole or deuided into parts If by parts the glorious body of Christ should be mangled disfigured and remayne imperfect If whole the whole substance should be at the same tyme in diuers places cherishing the soules of diuers persons Besides how is he who sitteth at the right hand of his Father substantially vnited with vs vpon earth Can he enter our soules as M. Bilson dreameth not departing from the heauens and can he not enter the Hoast as Catholikes teach not departing from thence 4. M. Sparkes perchance will be more dexterous and expert in auoyding these difficulties As intricate and perplexed euery whit For he not contented with Christs spirituall Sparks p. â—16 presence only by faith auoucheth him to be also truly and really present to the harts of the faithfull Yet with such a strang and hidden presence as no tearmes can expresse no wit conceaue For answere M. Sparkes in what sort is Christ really present Withall his locall dimensions or without dimension Without is to destroy * Sparkes pag. 110. Vvhitaker cent 2. q. 5. c. 7. fol. 389 Spark pag 114. 115. 116. as you vrge against vs the nature of his body With all his dimensioÌ„s is impossible without penetration of Christs body with the body of his Communicant without multiplication rarefaction condensation and many other in your Shoole condemned absurdities Also how conioyne you Christ with vs Are our harts by the communion aduanced to heauen to be really vnited to him aboue or doth he descend to be personally conioyned with vs vpon earth Without a reall coniunction no Reall Presence by fayth can be framed much lesse such a Reall Presence as you imagine of Christs body broken and bloud shed of his passible and crucified body and bloud shed long since vpon the Crosse and not of his glorified and impassible body which now existeth Especially when you affirme in the same place That the body once broken and bloud shed haâ—h not beene really at any tyme iterated nor can be Are you not heere entrapped in your owne discourse Do not these words imply most palpable contradiction Is it possible for that which neyther really is nor really can be to be really present Doth not Aristotle and all Philosophers accord that Prius est esse quà m esse praesens A thing must first be before it can be present What leuity then what ignorance is this M. Sparkes in you and your fellows who auouch Christs body broken to be really present and not to be at all 5. Poore deceaued soules I lament your misery who in no trifling matters credit such triflers as mind not what they say nor how they write so they dazell the eyes and inueigle the harts of their vnhappy followers Yet least their hideous outcries fright the simple from imbracing the truth I will make answer to the residue of their pretended Calumnies Bils 4. par p. 731. c. Exod. 7. Matth. 11. Gen. 18. Aug. epist 23. Amb. l. 4. de Sacram. c. 3. 4. Orig. in 15. Matth. Ioan. 6. Gen. 49. Psal 77. Matth. 6. The greek hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Hebrew Segula 6. First M. Bilson and his Sect-mates often argue That the Eucharist is called by S. Paul and the ancient Fathers bread the Chalice wine euen after Consecration I graunt that for diuers causes the elements retaine these names First because they were bread and wine before as Araons rod was sayd to deuour the rods of the Aegyptians when they were Serpents The men healed by Christ were termed Blind Lame Deafe and Dead when they Saw Walked Heard and were Reuiued because such they had byn before Secondly because they reserue the outward formes of bread and wine as the Three that appeared to Abraham in humaine shape were called men whereas they were Angels Thus S. Augustine is to be vnderstood thus S. Ambrose thus Origen in the places cited in the margent where they attribute vnto the sacrament the name of bread Thirdly it is termed Bread for that it coÌ„teyneth the Bread of life The true Bread which came downe from heauen Christ Iesus And therfore called in Scripture Fat bread Bread of Angels Supersubstantiall bread according to the Greeke Hebrew copies S. Hierome nameth it Egregious and most singuler Hier. in c. 6. Matth. Iere. 11. v. 19. Aug. l. 1. loquutio in Gen. n. 138. 178. 172. quaest 34. in Exod. bread And Ieremy the Prophet alluding hereunto calleth his true body Bread without any Epithete saying Mittamus lignum in panem eius Let vs fasten the wood on his Bread Lastly it is called Bread after the Hebrew phrase which stileth all sorts of meats by the name Lechem Bread as in the 34. of Genesis 4. Regum 6. Witnesse also S. Augustine in his speaches vpon Genesis and Exodus 7. But M. Bilson produceth some ancient writers who do not only giue vnto the Eucharist the name of bread but determinately auow the nature and substance of bread to abide after consecration Among whome Gelas coÌ„t Eutichen Gelasius leadeth the way writing thus against Eutiches The Sacraments which we receaue of the body bloud of Christ are a diuine thing and by them we are made partakers of the diuine nature and yet for all that ceaseth not the substance or nature of bread and wine to be Then Theodoret The mysticall signes do not after Theod. dialog 2. sanctification depart from their owne nature For they remaine in their former substance figure and shape I answere They are sayd to remaine because they perseuer still in vertue power and efficacy For the outward formes and qualities which continue haue the same operations and worke the same effects which the substances before performed Or because the accidents which abide haue a miraculous yet substantiall manner of being not stayed not
Figura ergo est It is therefore a figure It is a Sacrament because albeit the same body be really eaten the same bloud really drunke yet in a mystery in a figure in a Sacrament after a sweet spirituall and vnbloudy manner 16. Nay S. Augustine as our Sacramentaries contend saith What doest thou prepare thy teeth and belly Beleeue and thou hast eaten True he writeth there of the spirituall eating of Christ the bread of life by faith beleefe onely he had not begun to discourse of the Sacrament or Sacramentall eating At least after say they he speaketh of the Sacrament yet vseth these wordes He that feedeâ—h wiâ—h Aug. tra 2â— in Io. the hart not he that grindeth with the tooth True not he that grindeth only can partake the fruit of this Sacrament he that feedeth with hart without corporall eating may benefit himself but he that corporally eateth without faith can receaue no profit at all They vrge againe that S. Aug. tra 59. 2â— in Ioan. Augustine sayth The Apostles eat the bread our Lord Iudas the bread of our Lord. And in another place he denyeth The wicked to eate the body of Christ. Most true He denyeth theÌ„ to eate the bread our Lord or to feed of his body because they are not incorporated in his mysticall body Or because they do it not fruitfully by grace to the benefit Psalm â—â— Augu. de Bapt cont Donatist l. 9. â— 8. con Pulgent c. 6. cont lit Petil. l. 2. c. 20. c. 55. Biâ—s 4. pâ— pag. 772. 773. 774. 776. of their soules as King Dauid sayth The wicked shall not rise in Iudgment Because they shall not rise to saluation but to damnation Otherwise S. Augustine graunteth that Iudas did and the wicked do truely eaâ—e the body of Christ in his booke of Baptisme against the Donatists against Fulgentius and against the letters of Petilian 17. In summe many Fathers obiected by M. Bilson exhort vs to eate the Sacrament by fayth to cleanse our soules prepare our harts they call it spirituall food the bread of the mind and not of the belly no bodily but ghostly meat the proper nourishment of the spirit All most true for a liuely fayth a cleane soule a pure hart are necessarily required in the worthy receauer and the purer he approacheth the more plenty he receaueth of Gods heauenly graces Then it is stiled spirituall food ghostly meate the bread of the mind the proper nourishment of the spirit because the spirituall repast and refection Cyr. Alex l. 10. in Ioan. c. 13. of our mind the perfect vigour and increase of spirit is the chiefe and most soueraigne effect of this diuine banquet Neuertheles it excludeth not as S. Cyrill noteth but presupposeth the corporall from which as from the fountaine and sea of grace the spirituall is deriued Our Aduersaryes reply The Fathers exclude it by certaine negatiue tearmes which they vse calling it No bodily but Ghostly meate the bread of the mind and not of the belly They call it so indeed and speake in the Scriptures phrase euen as Almighty God spake when he sayd I will mercy and not sacrifice yet thereby he neither excluded Ose 6. v. 6. Matth. 9. v. 13. nor forbad sacrifice which himselfe prescribed exacted and commanded but only preferred mercy as an act of charity more acceptable vnto him So the Fathers by the like words exclude not the bodily but preferre the ghostly as the dayntiest food of our soules Or they deny it to be any bodily sustenance as bodily is commonly taken for that which is opposite to ghostly This is not so this is both bodily and ghostly both spirituall corporall meate this relisheth the mouth and cheereth the hart quickneth the body and refresheth the soule Therefore it is not a meere corporall but a spiritual dainty because it hath a spirituall manner of being is seasoned with spirituall qualityes affoardeth all spirituall comfort and is principally ordained to our spirituall nourishment For the flesh as Tertullian writeth is fed Tertul. l. de resurr carnis with the body and bloud of Christ that the soule may be fattened with God 18. And if Protestants would be as ready to defend as they are to cauill at the former sayinges they might learne by the like speaches which the Apostle vseth how to explaine the Fathers wordes for as they call the body of Christ in the Sacrament spiritual so he the body which 1. Cor. 15. v. 44. shall rise in the later day It is sowen a naturall body it shal ryse a spirituall body as they account it a barbarous and sauage thing to eate the flesh and drinke the bloud of Ibid. v. 50. Christ so he a thing impossible that flesh and bloud can possesse the kingdome of God as S. Augustine sayth Not that Ibid. v. 37. body which you see shall you eate c. so he not the body that shall be dost thou sow Which place togeather with the former Eutichius vrged against the corporall resurrection of our flesh with no lesse colourable pretense then Sectaryes do the precedent sayings against the bodily presence of Christ in the Sacrament But as they are constrained vnles they deny that article of our fayth with S. Gregory and other of our Deuines to construe S. Pauls meaning Greg. lib. 4. in lob c. 32. 33. that the body which ryseth shall be both spirituall and corporall spirituall by reason of the glorious dowryes it shall receaue and corporall in respect of the true and tractable substance it shall still retaine That flesh and bloud according to humane misery and corruption cannot possesse the Kingdome of God but according to immortality and corruption that not the body which is sowed shall rise but another another in quality the same in substance another in perfection of glory the same in property and condition of nature another in powerfull vertue the same in corporall verity another in manner and forme the same in realty and essence of being Apply the like constructions to the fornamed sentences written against the reall presence and you shall rightly expound those learned writers and soundly answere your owne obiections 19. To conclude when these new-fangled teachers with no euidence of Scripture or sentence of Father can disproue the truth of our doctrine they fall to their accustomed Pulk in c. 6. Io. sect 13. Bils 4 par pag. 791. Ambr. l. 30 de Spirit sanct c. 12. Aug. in Pâ—al 24. in 1. Cor. Bils 4. par p. 710. c. rayling They tearme vs Capharnaites Vbiquitaries Idolaters c. whereas we detest the inhumane grosse imagination of the Capharnaites condemne the Vbiquity or euery where being of Christ adore not with diuine honor as M. Bilson is pleased to impose vpon vs the elements of bread and wine but we adore to vse S. Ambrose words the flesh of Christ in the mysteries That flesh which â—ce man eateth as S. Augustine
sayth before he adore it That body sayth S. Chrysostome we adore on the Altar which the Sages did in the Cribbe All impregnable proofes of our Reall Presence as pregnant reproofes of M. Bilsons forgery Yet some thing he must say because he will not yield And to S. Augustine he answereth That he taketh adoring for eating because eating is belieuing As if S. Augustine had foolishly said No man eateth before he eateth or belieueth before he belieueth A like miserable shift is he faine to vse to auoid S. Ambrose S. Chrysostome and S. Gregory Nazianzen as all may see who haue leasure to peruse them 20. I will not heere offend my Reader with the filth of Caluins Sutclifâ— and Sparks reuiling quil who defame vs Calu. l. 4. instit c. 17 Sutclife in his Suruey cap. 8. Sparks in his answer to M. Iohn Albins p. 219. 220. Sap. â— v. â—1 with the Antichristian heresy of the Valentinians Manichies Eutychians and Marcionits as though we denyed with them the solidity and other properties of Christs naturall body which all men know to be a most shameles calumny Awake then awake you beguiled soules and vncharme your harts of these dangerous enchantments you that are bewitched with the tounges and pens not of one venemous Sparke but of many vile CaluÌ„niators Awake I beseech you in the behalfe of God and your owne eternall good Remember the words of King Salomon The mouth which rageth with lyes killeth the soule It ruineth the soule of the detractor and soules of those that listen vnto him Remember that these slanderous speaches chase you from the table of God from the food of Angels feast of heauen They depriue you of your daintyest repast of your cheifest banquet of the pledge of your saluation of Ioan. 6. v. 53. the medicine of immortality of the tree of life of which our Sauiour sayth Vnlesse you eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud you shall haue no life in you THE FOVRTH CONTROVERSY WHEREIN â—s vpholden the Sacrifice of the Masse against D. Bilson D. Reynolds and D. Sparkes CHAP. I. IT is a foule yet common fault of our Aduersaries when they espie the names and words of holy Write to bewray their errours they cauill as in the precedent Chapter about the seÌ„se meaning and construction of them when the meaning and thing questioned is playne and vnauoidable they contend at least for the precise words tearmes and names themselues as for the name Purgatory the name Transubstantiation c. and M. Bilson in this present Controuersy striueth much for the Bils 4. paâ— pag. 70â— name Sacrifice demanding Where it is expressed by the Apostle in playne words others for the name Masse To whom we reply as S. Augustine did to Pascenâ—ius the Arrian Nothing Aug. â—p 174. is more contentious then to quarell about the name when the thing it selfe is apparantly knowne We grant that as the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was first defined by the Councell of Nice against Arrius the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the CouÌ„cell of Ephesus against Nestorius so the name Sacrifice the name Masse hath byn frequently vsed by the ancient Fathers The Scripture indeed mentioneth not the wordss but the sense and meaning of them it fully conteineth Yea Christian Religion necessarily requireth some externall Sacrifice our duty to God exacteth it the very instinct of nature teacheth it against all which our aduersaries make warre when they labour to impugne this holy mystery 2. If we suruey forraine Countries and search the customes of all ages past we can neuer find any nation so barbarous any people at all as Plato noteth so rude and Plato de leg dial â—0 sauage who with vowes victimes and outward Sacrifices haue not acknowledged the soueraignty of some God or other For which Plutarch aduersus Coloâ— cause Plutarch sayth If you passe ouer all the world you may find Citties without wales Characters Kings c. without Riches Coyne Schooles and Theaters but a towne without Temples and Gods to whom Sacrifices are offered you shall neuer find Neyther could this continued practise and generall agrement Tul. l. 1. Tuscu q. of all nations which Tully calleth The voyce of nature proceed from any other fountaine then the secret worke and instinct of God All people as Xenophon obserueth could neuer meete by common consent to agree Xenoph. de dict fact Socrat 4. in this point or if they did meete could they impart their minds or being of diuers languages vnderstand one another We must needs therfore conclude with him in the like case that it floweth from the cheife cause and authour Aug. epist 49 ad Deo gra quaest 3. of nature And with S. Augustine That this is not to be blamed in the rites of Pagans that they builded Temples ordined Priests offered Sacrifice but that these were exhibited to Idols and Diuels that was to be condemned Wherfore except our Auersaries after such plenty of grace will wholy extinguish in vs the liuely sparks and fruits of nature we caÌ„not but allow some outward oblation in honour of God 3. Againe the act it selfe of Sacrificing in which by the change and * Note that the body of Christ is consumed according to his sacramentall manner of beeing which sufficeth the nature of an vnbloudy Sacrifice Aug. l. 10 de ciuit Dei cap. 4. consumption of some sensible Host by a lawfull Minister with solemne rite consecrated to God we make protestation of our dependancy seruice and submission vnto him the supreme and soueraigne gouernour and moderatour of all things is so proper and peculiar to the highest Maiesty that whereas the Religious worship of adoration prayer kneeling lifting vp hands haue byn often challenged and attributed to men to Amon Assuerus Nabuchodonozor and the like Yet the diuine worship of Sacrifice as S. Augustine witnesseth No man liuing euen presumed to say it was due to any but only to the true or supposed God So that to despoile him with M. Reynolds of this externall homage soly principally allotted vnto him is to robbe him of his especiall right dignity and preheminency it is to make vs Christians who aboue all nations are most obliged vnto our Lord aboue all others by denying him his chiefest honour to remaine most vngratefull 4. Moreouer euery Religion euery law and gouernment of Gods Church is so inwardly linked with some outward forme of Priesthood with some visible manner of Gen. 4. v. 4. 8. 20. 14. 18. Exod. 12. Num. 28. Leuit. 4. Cyp. de coena Dom. Bils 4 par pag. 699. Reyn. c. 8. diuis 4. Sacrifice as they can neyther stand flourish or perseuere without them In the law of Nature there were the Sacrifices of Abel Noe Melchisedech c. In the law written diuers prescribed by Almighty God In the law of grace what Sacrifice grant you by which it standeth in which it consisteth by
which it is distinguished from the former lawes To abrogate all kind of Sacrifice is to disanull the law to abolish our Religion as S. Cyprian proueth And to fly as D. Bilson and D. Reynolds are here constrained to spirituall only is vaine and friuolous First because euery true Religion is a seuerall and peculiar worship wherby people vnited professe their duty and obedience to God which is not inough inwardly to acknowledge vnlesse we also expresse it by some outward and sensible signe And in the chiefest Religion that euer was by the perfectest and most principall signe of subiection to wit by the externall oblation I mentioned before Secondly we haue not only as all Catholikes teach against the Manichees Our soule from God we receaue from him both body and soule both the flesh and the spirit both our S. Iren. l. 4. cap. 34. S. Tho. l. 4. c. 56. con GeÌ„tes visible and inuisible our corporall and spirituall substance Therefore besids the secret and inuisible prayers of our hart it is necessary we likewise serue him with corporall bodily and visible things in token that he only is Authour Creatour and Lord of all things Thirdly spirituall Sacrifices of prayer almesdeeds and the like were continually practised and obserued by the Iewes not proper to vs Christians as that Sacrifice ought to be by which our Religion is established and distinguished from others 5. D. Reynolds D. Sparkes and their associates otherwhile Reyn. c. 8. diuis 4. Sparks in his answer to M. Iobn Alb. p. 7. 8. 23. answere That the Sacrifice of Christ vpon the Crosse is the peculiar and perpetuall Host in which our Priesthood law and Religion is constituted But they satisfy not For that was only offered in one place and at one tyme to that all Nations christened could not refort to do homage vnto God that was not any rite or ceremony instituted by him but if we speake of the action a detestable Sacriledge committed by the Iewes that also was common to all the former true states of Religion who belieued in Christs Passion to come And yet the externall and diuine worship in which Christian Religion florisheth and consisteth ought to be apointed by God proper to Christians in all tymes and places practised ought to be such vnto which all faithfull people might repaire which can be Reyn. pag. 539. Luc. 22. v. 19. Iewel in his Reply against the Sacrifice Bils 4. par p. 690. 691. none other then the Oblation of the holy Eucharist as I will manifestly proue notwithstanding M. Reynolds impiously traduceth it as the Monster of abhomination 6. Christ offered and instituted this Sacrifice in S. Luke This is my Body which is giuen for you He doth not say which shall be giuen hereafter only as M. Iewell commenteth nor which is giuen in bare Mistery and signification as M. Bilson glozeth but which euen now in the present is giuen as an Host and Sacrifice offered to his Father truly really in propitiation pardon and forgiuenes of sinnes as more plainly appeareth by the Greeke text which Bezae for this cause chargeth with corruption where all copies read The Cuppe or bloud as conteyned in the Chalice to be truly Cyp. l 2. Epist 2. Aug. in Psal 33 â— con 2. Chrys bo 24. â—â— Corinth NisseÌ„ orat deresur Andreas Crastouâ— de opif. miss l. 2. ser 164. Cyr in 1. Cor. c. 10. bo 24. Aug. 17 de ciuit Dei cap. 20. shed that is offered vnto God as a Propitiatory Sacrifice in remission of sinnes Which all the Fathers with vniforme consent most constantly confirme S. Cypryan S. Augustinè S. Chrysostome and innumerable others by Coccius and Garetius abundantly cyted Amongst which S. Gregory Nissen whom our Aá¸uersaries hereupon shamfully calumniate hath these words Christ after an ineffable and hidden manner of Sacrifice preoccupated the violent force to wit of his death and offered himselfe for vs an Oblation and victim the Priest to geather and lambe of God When was this done When he exhibited his Body to be eaten and Bloud to be drunke to his familiar frinds This is that marueilous and honourable Sacrifice where in lieu of the slaughter of brute beasts Christ coÌ„maunded as S. Chrysostome sayth himselfe to be offered this is that Sacrifice which succeeded all those Sacrifices of the old law that were offered in shaddow of that to come as S. Augustine testifyeth This is that soueraigne worship of God in which the law of Christianity is established as the allusion it selfe importeth which our Sauiour here maketh betweene the dedication of the old Testament and this of the new 7. Moyses when he ratified and began the old law Exod. 2â— dedicated it in the bloud of Calues Christ beginninng to confirme the new solemnizeth the same in his owne bloud Moyses powred his bloud into a goblet Christ consecrateth his in a Chalice Moyses tooke that bloud and sprinkled the people Christ taketh this and inwardly washeth the harts of his Apostles Moyses said This is the bloùd of the couenant or testament Christ sayth This is the bloud of the new Testament Moyses added which God hath deliuered vnto you Christ annexeth which shall be shed for you So as that which Moyses performed was an euident figure of this which Christ accomplished And therefore as that was a true Sacrifice so this being the truth it selfe must be a farre more true and perfect Sacrifice As that was the bloud of a victime offered vnto God before it was spinkled vpoÌ„ the people so this ought to be the bloud of a purer victim of Christ himselfe before it cleanseth the soules of his Disciples As that was the solemne seruice in which the state of the Iudaicall law consisted so this must be the proper and publike worship of God on which the externall form of Christian Religion dependeth 8. As we may yet more manifestly gather out of that Luc. 12 v. 19. precept of our Sauiour Christ Do this for commemoration of me By which words we are strictly commanded to execute 1. Some outward visible act signifyed by the Pronowne This. 2. That it must be an act of doing not of belieuing only the Verbe Doe conuinceth 3. That the doing of this external actioÌ„ should represent the Passion of Christ is manifest by the Nowne which followeth for a commemoration of me And by S. Paul As often as you shall eate this Bread and drinke the Chalice you shall shew the dead of 1. Cor. 11. v. 26. our Lord vntill he come 9. It is not inough To take bread and wine to excite stirre vp an inward remembrance as M. Bilson faigneth of his death and Passion We must also do as Christ commandeth Bils 4. par pag. 693. 694. 695. an outward action commemoratiue of him sensibly shewing as S. Paul writeth the death of our Lord. The Iewes belieued and visibly sacrificed their Calues and lambes in token of Christ Wherefore least we
crucifyed his bloud shed And therefore if vve exactly scan the povverfull and effectuall vvordes of Consecration vvhich immediatly produce no more then they signify vve may truly auerre that Christ in this svveet and admirable manner is heere dayly killed and crucifyed againe For if he vvere sayd to be killed in the Apoc. 5. 9. 138. imperfect thaddovves and darke resemblances of the old Lavv and tearmed by S. Iohn The Lambe slaine from the beginning of the world because the Goates Lambes and other victimes were slaine which obscurely shadowed and resembled him how much more truely may he be said to be daily crucified in our dreadfull mystery of the Masse which is not onely a bare and naked figure but so liuely an Image so neere a Character such a perfect representation of that on the Crosse as it is the same body the same bloud the same Host Oblation which there was made And no difference at all but that that was sacrificed vpon the ignominious wood of the Crosse and this vpon the hallowed Altar of the Church That was all imbrued with bloud this cleane from the effusiō of bloud That offered by the treacherous hands of the Iewes this by the annoynted hands of the Priests That in his true proper and natiue shape this in a couert hidden and Sacramentall manner Heereupon S. Cyprian Cyp. ep 63. Pascha de cons◠dist ◠c. Iteratur Greg. do Conse dist 2. c. Quid sie hom 37. in euan Aug. de fide ad Petrum c. 19. The Sacrifice which we offer is the Passion of Christ. Paschasius Daily Christ is mystically immolated for vs and the Passion of Christ in mystery is deliuered S. Gregory Christ in himselfe immortally liuing dieth againe in this mystery S. Augustine speaking of the carnal Sacrifices of the Leuiticall Law and this Commemoratiue of the new In them he saith Christ was foreshewed as to be killed in this he is shewed as killed The reason heereof is manifest because the seuerall substances of bread and wine as I touched aboue are not directly changed and transubstantiated into the whole person of our Sauiour Christ as here he liued vpon earth or as he now raigneth in heauen but the bread into his body apart from the bloud and the wine into his bloud apart from the body In so much that if nothing else ensued but that which the words precisely signifie and effectuate the body should be there truly dead deuoid of bloud and the bloud truly shed seuered from the body 28. Notwithstanding al this we constantly beeleue that per concomitantiam as the Deuines tearme it or by sequell of all parts each to other the body of our Sauiour is in the Sacrament as it is in it selfe that is glorious immortall and fully replenished with his pretious bloud His bloud is likewise vnder the other kind as it now existeth conteyned in his veynes his veynes in his body his body conioyned to his soule his soule and body Hypostatically vnited to the Sonne of God so that Christ by this sequell or Concomitance is here wholy vnder both kinds his whole body his whole bloud his whole soule his whole Godhead his whole man-hood Yea by essentiall connexion of one with the other all the persons of the holy Trinity the Father Sonne and holy Ghost 29. O most rare and vnspeakable mysterie which M. Bell M. Reynolds and their vnhappy Consorts either blinded with ignorance or transported with malice can Heb. 5. ver 11. not conceaue O great and inexplicable speach which S. Paul thought vnfit to vnfold to the Hebrewes feeble in faith and weake in vnderstanding And indeed it is too deepe a point to explaine to the itching eares of our captious Heretikes if the calamity of our times importunity of our Aduersaries did not presse vs thereunto 30. Besides these cauils gathered out of Scripture M. Bils 4. p. pag. 692. 693. 752. Rey. p. 536. Bilson and M. Reynolds huddle vp certaine obiections out of the Fathers writings as that S. Gregory Nazianzen calleth our daily Sacrifice An Image of that on the Crosse S Chrysostome A signe a remembrance of Christs death Others say That Christ is ossered in a Sacrament in mysterie in memory Some tearme it A spirituall Sacrifice A Sacrifice of praier S. Augustine A Sacrifice of praise and thankesgiuing But how do these sayings infringe our doctrine We allow it an Image yet the truth it self A signe yet the thing signed An image in respect of the outward forms the truth in respect of the inward substance A signe in shew the thing it selfe indeed We agree with the Fathers That Christ is offered in a Sacrament in mysterie c. in regard of the visible elements and outward representation as I haue already declared we call the Masse A spirituall Sacrifice A Sacrifice A Sacrifice of Praier for that it is made with blessing and praier mysticall for that the manner of consecrating this victime is not grosse carnall and sensibly bloudy as the Iewish victimes were but cleane spirituall and vnbloudy Vnbloudy in Sacrification in substance bloudy Aug. con lit Petil. l. 2. ca. 86 ◠Tertul. ad Mar. li. 4. Iren. l. 4 ca. 33. 34. the manner spirituall the thing corporall We subscribe to S. Augustine Tertullian Irenaeus and the rest That it is a Sacrifice of praise and thankesgiuing because hereby God is highly praised aboundant thankes are surrendred vnto him And whatsoeuer the old Law with many Hosts and burnt offerings nakedly resembled by our sole and singuler Sacrifice is wholy honorably fully accomplished In which respect we are the true worshippers of God Who neither in the Temple of Ierusalem nor in the mount Garizim but in euery Coast and Climate of the earth adore the Father of Heauen according of our Sauiours prophesie in spirit and truth He saith in spirit by reason of the life and spirit of God which our Host containeth Ioan. 4. 23. In truth because it is indeed the truth it selfe the true body of Christ which the figures of the old Law shadowed and resembled Or he addeth in spirit not to debar vs from all externall Sacrifices or outward ceremonies as Caluin misconstrueth the word but to exclude the grosse corporall victimes of the Iewes as S. Chrysostome Caluin in his Com. vpon this place Chrys and Euthy vpon this place Amb. de Spi. l. 3. ca. 11. Cyr. in Io. l. 2. ca. 93. and Euthymius expound this place In truth to oppose it against the false and vnlawfull worship of the Samaritans which is the interpretation of S. Ambrose S. Cyril and Theophilact 31. And this is sufficient to cleare the Fathers sufficient if not to stop the mouth of clamous Aduersaries yet to quiet the minds of indifferent Readers sufficient to acquit our Sacrifice from calumny our selues from Idolatrie our Priests from iniury and incroachment vpon Christs incommunicable right in their immaculate and daily immolation of his body
and bloud THE FIFTH CONTROVERSY WHERE IN The Communion vnder one kind is defended against D. Bilson D. Fulke and all other Protestantes CHAP. I. THe late Nouellists of our tyme not contented to impugne our Sacrament controule our Sacrifice eagerly also inueigh against our manner of Communion Amongst whome a chiefe Ensigne-bearer M. Thomas Bilson condemneth Bils 4. Par pag. 684. 685. of Christian subiection Fulk in bis answere to the Rhem. Test. in â— 6.10 sect 12. it as mangled broken imperfect He presumeth to say That we chase the people from the Cup of their saluation from the Communion of Christs bloud and fellowship of his holy spirit D. Fulke auoucheth The Chapter of Trent so he scornefully tearmeth that Venerable Councell vainely goeth about to proue that one halfe of the Sacrament is not necessary But they purposly misconstrue or ignorantly mistake the truth of our doctrine For if they knew that vnder the formes of bread alone or wine alone and that in euery part and parcell of them the whole body of Christ and all his pretious bloud is contained Conc. Triden seâ— 13. cap. 13. as we with that sacred Councell mantaine they must needes belieue that he who enioyeth the least particle of either kind receaueth not a mangled or imperfect but an absolute complete entire and perfect Sacrament the true Author and giuer of life the whole refection of Christs body and bloud And whereas more then the whole more then all none can expect he that partaketh the least portion is no way defrauded but aboundantly replenished with whatsoeuer he can desire Secondly we teach that not only the entire Sacrament and totall substance thereof but the whole fruite grace and vertue Conc. Triden sel 21 cap 3. Ioan. 6. 1. Cor. 10. Iraâ— l. 4. cont haer cap. 34. Hilar. l. 8. de Trinit Greg. Niss orat cate c. 36. 37. Cyr. lib. 10. 11. in Ioan. which proceedeth from both kinds togeather is fully also exhibited vnder one alone For which cause our Blessed Sauiour attributeth the same effect and life of our soules to one as he doth to both speaking only of the bread he sayth This is the Bread descending from heauen that if any eate of it he may not dye Againe He that eateth this Bread shall liue for euer And S. Paul He that eateth the Host is partaker of the Altar Which S. Irenaus S. Hilary S. Gregory Nissen S. Cyril of Alexandria very notably confirme in sundry places 2. Hence it followeth that the Priest receaueth not any more benefite by both kinds then the people by one For albeit the Chalice by it selfe be both the wel conduit of grace yet taken at the same tyme with the body it infuseth no more then was enioyed before Euery particle of a deuided Host euery drop of the Chalice is a maine Ocean of spirituall blessings yet many of them by the same morall action successiuely receaued affoard no more grace then one alone because that one instilleth the whole fountaine it selfe which cannot at that tyme be further increased or produced a new In the mistery of the Holy Trinity we belieue the same we belieue the vnderstanding of the Sonne to be alike fruitfull powerfull as the vnderstanding of the Father yet it begetteth not any Image of it selfe any word of the mind because the true and consubstantiall Image the eternall and perfect word of the vnderstanding is already begotten So in earthly thinges where the burning lampe once casteth his clearest beames of light although it shineth still it enlightneth no more Where the fire hath inkindled all degrees of heate although it worketh still it can heate no more In the Holy Sacraments we find the like When the Character of Baptisme is once imprinted let the child be baptized againe it cannot be imprinted anew When the body of Christ is once consecrated vnder the formes of Bread let the wordes be repeated it cannot be consecrated againe After the same manner in our Communion when the full and plenteous refection of our soule with the whole Body and bloud of Christ is by any parcell of either element perfectly accomplished let new Hosts be imparted let another element be applyed as long as the former heauenly repast morally nourisheth and remaineth we cannot be fed anew or be more daintily refreshed Why then say you do the Priests communicate vnder both kindes I answere Not to partake more aboundantly the vertue of the Sacrament but more perfectly to represent the Passion of Christ the inregrity of his Sacrifice the violent separation of his body bloud which is most liuely signifyed as I haue already declared by the seuerall consecration and separate consumption of distinct and diuers elements 3. But Christ sayth M. Fulke instituted both kinds the Apostles ministred the Sacrament in both indifferently to all Our Sauiour sayth M. Bilson commanded the Chalice to be M. Fulke in c. 6. 10. Bils 4. par pag. 679. drunke of the people aâ— well as of the Priests when he sayd Drinke yee all of this What Was this spoken to all vniuersally Was it spoken to Iewes Turkes and Infidels Was it spoken to Infants to whome the Protestants themselues doe not minister the Cup No. It was spoken only to them that sate downe at supper with Christ to them to whome before he brake and distributed the formes of bread to them to whome he reached the Chalice to them who after songe the Hymne and went into the mount Oâ—iuet with him to them to whome he sayd All you shal be scaÌ„dalized in me this night But these only were the Marc. cap. 14. Apostles of Christ as the Euangelist witnesseth Therfore to them alone and in their persons to all Bishops and Priests their successours it way sayd Drinke yee all of this This history of the institution of the Sacrament S. Paul Math. â—6 v. â—8 1. Cor. 11 V. 23. deliuereth to the Corinthians yet neither commandeth himselfe all to drinke of the Chalice nor auoucheth any I. Cor. II v. 23. such ordinance or decree to haue been enacted by Christ 4. M. Bilson presseth further To whome then were these wordes spoken Take yee eate yee Not to the selfe same partyes to whome it was sayd Drinke yee If none may drinke but Priests Bils 4. par pag. â—79 then by the same logicke none should eate but Priests I answere that by the force of that commandment Take eate the Laity are not tyed to tast of the Holy Eucharist for these wordes were spoken to the Apostls only but they are obliged by the institution of this holy Mistery as a Sacrament necessary to saluation They are obliged by those threatning words of Christ Vnlesse you eate the flesh of the Ioan. 6. 〈◊〉 53. Sonne of Man and drinke his Bloud you shall haue no life in you 5. He doth not heere command the manner of eating and drinking but the substance of the thing He doth
Alexan. 4 par sum â— 53. in I. iuxta edit antiquam Alex. l. 1. Euchar. c. 41. not say as our Aduersaryes would wrest his meaning vnlesse you eate my flesh vnder the shape of bread and drinke my bloud vnder the forme of wine But vnlesse you eate my flesh and drinke my bloud which may be truely performed vnder one kind alone For he that eateth the bread is entyrely nourished not only with the flesh but with the whole substance of Christ his precious bloud as certaine monkes of whome Alexander de Hales and Cardinall Allan write were miraculously instructed by aboundance of bloud which issued from the signs of bread And he that drinketh the Chalice is likwise fed with the whole quantity of our Sauiours flesh And so he that participateth one kind which perfectly containeth the meate Claud in repe vle de Eucha 1. Cor. 3. v. â— 9. v. 7 Cyp ser de coen Dom. Vvald to 2 de SacaÌ„ rap 93. Pasch l. de Cor. Christi Aug. l. 3. q in Leuit. cap. 57. Chrys ho. 18. m 2. ad Cor. Bils 4. par pag. 632. S. Igna. ep ad Philad Amb. l. de mit myst cap. 9. Hier. in c. 2. Mala. Cyp. ser de coen Dom. Toles in c. 6. Ioan. Exod. 22. v. 15. Iob. 31. Eze. 13. Psal 129. 1. Cor. 11. v. 27. cap. 10. v. 17. and drinke of both may truly be sayd to eate in regard of the one and drinke in respect of the other As Claudius Xainctes proueth by the authority of many Fathers and excellently gathereth out of S. Paul to the Corinthians where the same milke is tearmed drinke and meat which S. Cyprian verifyeth of the food of the holy Eucharist After the like manner Thomas Waldensis expoundeth Paschasius when by these wordes Drinke yee all of this he willeth all faythfull belieuers To drinke the Bloud that is vnder the outward accidents and shew of bread Which is also the meaning of S. Augustine S. Chrysostome and others alleadged by M. Bilson where they say We are all exhorted to drinke the Bloud And That the cup is ministred to all Or they speake of the vse and practise of the Church in their tymes as S. Ignatius S. Ambrose and S. Hierome do Or lastly they speake of the necessity of receauing both kinds at least by some in the Church but not by all As S. Cyprian doth when he sayth The lâ—â— prohibiteth the eating of bloud the Ghospell commandeth it to be drunke 6. Otherwise we may auerre with the renowned Cardinall Tolet in that passage of S. Iohn Vnles you eate c. and drinke his bloud that the Coniunction and is according to the Hebrew phrase disiunctiuely taken for or As in Exodus where the Hebrew text hath He that striketh his Father and his Mother Let him dye the meaning is as our vulgar translation interpreteth and readeth He that striketh his Father or his Mother The like we find in Iob Ezechiel and other places the like in S. Paul in plaine confirmation both of this exposition and doctrine of the Sacrament For wher some read Whosoeuer shall eate this bread and drinke the chalice our of Lord vnworthily in the Greeke it is or drinke And in the immediate chapter before where the ancient latin copies haue We are one bread and one body all that partake of one bread and one Chalice the Greeke only readeth All that partake of one bread Because by one kind we receaue the true nourishment and perfect substance of both 7. Thus we easily put off the force of that argumeÌ„t but how our Aduersaryes will auoyd it I know not For they interpreting S. Iohns wordes of the spirituall eating of Christs flesh bloud by fayth I would vnderstand of them what difference they make betweene eating and drinking For certes in the sole act of faith there is no difference no difference in belieuing his flesh wounded from belieuing his bloud shed in respect of beliefe therefore you neither obey the precept nor feare the coÌ„mination of Christ Vnles you eate the flesh of the Sonne of Man and drinke his bloud you shall haue no life in you Heere Christ Ioan. 6. v. 53. commaundeth the reall eating which you renounce mentioneth the drinking which you haue not the belieuing which in that place he neither commaundeth nor mentioneth you imbrace and yet you would be the Ghospellers of Christ Neuerthelesse at your importunity let vs leaue his words leaue his meaning and admit your false construction Then I propose this questioÌ„ whether he that stedfastly belieueth in Christ the Sauiour of the world with one firme assent without separatly thinking of the wounds of his Body and effufion of his bloud doth truly fullfill according to you the former precept and enioy the promised life or not Without doubt you must graunt he doth as our Sauiour often auoucheth saying He that belieueth in me hath life euerlasting Ioan. 6. v. 47. Ioan 3. v. 16. Ioan. 11. v. 25. euery one that belieueth in the Sonne of God shall not pèrish c. Besides He that belieueth in me although he be dead shal liue Wherefore as this satisfyeth in the spirituall eating why should it not also satisfy in the corporall by one act and vnder one kind to receaue the authour himself and price of our redemption without receauing him twise by two seuerall acts of eating and drinking Because you will say in the corporall Christ commandeth both and doth he not so in the spirituall supposing you spiritually expound his wordes Or will you say that in the spiritual eating of our Redeemer his death and Passion and by consequence his body broken and bloud shed are inuolued So say I that in the corporal teceauing of one kind both are not only consequently inuolued but perfectly contained and in the sole act of eating the other of drinking is vertually implyed Which this very passage Ioan. 6. v. 57. ensuing apparently conuinceth He that eateth me the same also shall liue by me For what doth the word me comprehend but the whole person of Christ his flesh his bloud his body his soule his deity whatsoeuer els belongs vnto him Therefore he that eateth only eateth him eateth and drinketh all 8. But out of the former sayings of S. Iohn M. Bilson with his confederates picke a new quarrel that the wicked according to vs eate Christ yet dye the death of sinners therfore our Sauiour speaketh not of the corporall but only of the spirituall eating by fayth by which we perish not but liue for euer I answere that the former sentences many such like are vnderstood conditionally if he eate worthily and still perseuere in that happy state he shal liue for euer otherwise if he eate vnworthily he eateth as the Apostle sayth iudgment to himselfe Ioan. 4. v. 13. Marc. 16. v. 16. Ioel. 2. v. 32. So it is sayd He that shall drinke of the water that I will giue him shall not thirst
the Iewes had no other then vnleaâ—ened bread at that tyme. Exod. 12. Ther shall not be found leanened in your houses Luc. 24. Aug. l. 3. de consen Euang. c. 25. Chry. hom 17. oper imperfect in Matth. Theoph. in eumlocum Beda in iâ— loc Luc. Act. 2. v. 42. 20. v. 7. vnleauened you with leauened bread his Communicants receaued sitting yours kneeling his after yours before meat may you in these points vary from Christ and may not we by the ineriable warrant of his Church alter that which he hath left indifferent vnto her Especially seeing she followeth herein the president of Christ who ministred the Sacrament vnder one kind only to the two Disciples at Emaus as S. Augustine S. Chrysostome Theophilact and Venerable Bede auouch the example of the Apostles who did often the like the practise of S. Paul who at Troiâ—s before he fell into danger of Ship-wracke as S. Chrysostome teacheth performed the same the prescription of Chry. hom 17. oper imperf Tertul. l. 2. â—â—vâ—or Cypr. serm de lapsis Amb. or â—â— de obitu Satyâ—i Basil ep ad Casar Euse lib. 6. bist c. 36. Pauliâ—us in vita Ambros Amphilo in vi Basil Fulke in c. 6. 10 sect 11. Conc. Tol. 2. cap. 11. August serm 252. detemp Conc. Anâ—ifiod cap. 3â— 38. Ambr. in orat de obitu Satyrifratris sui Basil ep ad Caesar am Patric Alâ—uinus l. de Offi. Eccles c. de Parasâ—eue Inno. â— ep 1. cap. 4. Euseb loc citato Fulke vbi suprâ— the ancient Church which ministred to Children only the bloud reserued most commonly the body alone both in priuate houses and in Wildernesses for the Ermites as Tertullian S. Cyprian S. Ambrose and S. Basil testifie housled the sicke often vnder one kind after which manner Serapion S. Ambrose S. Basill receiued their Viaticum lying on their death beds witnesse Eusebius Paulinus and Amphilochius 13. M. Fulke laboureth to auoid the authorities of these Fathers by two Sophisticall shifts First by the figure of Synecdoche which taketh the part for the whole secondly by disgracing the practise S. Tertullian S. Cyprian S. Basil S. Chrysostome Eusebius and others record with the note of a superstitious custome Where on the one side he ouerthroweth himselfe he contradicteth on the other those learned writers He ouerthroweth himselfe calling it a superstitious custome which must consequently sauour of some point of Popery conformable to our ancient prescription and wholy disagreable to his new inuented doctrine He contradicteth those learned Fathers who expresly speake of the sole infusioÌ„ of the bloud into the mouthes of yong sucking babes or into the mouths of the sicke who could not for drinesse receaue the body as it was decreed in the second Toletan Councell Of fine Linnen clothes called Dominicaâ—â—a prouided by deuout women to in wrap the body vnfit to infold the bloud Of a sole particle of the body which S. Ambrose his brother inclosed in a Pix and hanged for safegard about his necke Of keeping the body so long in Alexandriâ— Aegypt those hoat Countries where the wine without corruption could not be reserued nor carried with safty nor kept with decency Of the Custome of the Roman Church whose Priest vpon Good-friday many yeares agoe communicated only vnder one kind as Alcuinus and Innocentius the first â—elate Of the moysture which was vsed for the better swallowing downe of the Host mentioned by Eusebius altogeather needlesse if the Cup had beene exhibited Where I desire the Reader to register the folly of M. Fulke who affirmeth the moistned Sacrament whereof Eusebius speaketh To be the Cup dropped into the mouth of â—erapion whereas it was the body dipped in some prophane liquor the easier to swallow downe that diuine food But any Common liquor faithfully receaued is wholy as good as the wine of their Table therefore he may wel entitle it the Cup of his Communion 14. Not the Fathers only our Sectaries also Vrbanus Vrbanus Regius in li. de locis com 69. Luther ep ad Bohemoâ— christus inquit hac in re nihil tâ—quaÌ„ necessarium praecepit Melanct. in Centu. ep thâ—o pag. 252. Bucer in Colloq Raâ—isbon Iewel in his Reply p. 110. 106. Regius a Lutheran Doctour confesseth the Sacramont in one kind to haue beene ordained in the first Councell at Ephesus about a thousand yeares before the Synode of Basill or Constance for extinguishing Nestorious heresie who held the Body without the Bloud in the one the Bloud without the Body in the other kind comprised Yea M. Luther the Protestants first Progenitour and chiefest Patriarch affirmeth That Christ commanded nothing as necessary touching Communion vnder one or both kinds And Melancthon his scholler and Bucer with him accounteth it as a matter of indifferency as many other Protestants doe whom M. Iewell in his Reply neither reproueth or gaine-sayth And it is strange the Sacramentaries should begin to plead for the necessity of both who beleeue their bread and wine to be nothing els but outward tokens to stirre vp their faith memory and deuotion which may be farre better excited by the sight and view of the seuerall Hosts which our Priests doe offer then by the participation of the signes their Ministers exhibit Or if they will needs tast of the Cup we allow our faithfull Communicants whatsoeuer they for their Sect-mates prouide and the same for which they contend We minister to our Laity the wine of the Grape the dayntiest Nectar of their Communion Table we affoard them besides the precious food of Christs Body and Bloud a Celestiall banquet infinitely surpassing their poore prophane and hungry feast 15. Goe then M. Bilson goe M. Fulke goe you Sectaries reuile and vpbraid vs as transgressors of Christs commandement goe you their fauoruits declaime in your Oratories and crie out in the Pulpits that we defraud the people of the Cup of their saluation of the Communion of Christs Bloud Whereas you are they who rob them indeed of the sacred Bloud and Body also bereaue them of their spirituall life and of all the heauenly delights and treasures of their soule yeelding bare signes vaine figures in lieu of the diuine verities and reall substances our Blessed Sauiour bequeathed vnto them And we fensed by Christ by his Apostles by the Church the neuer-erring Spouse of our Lord refreshing all with the maine fountaine of life performe it in that manner as is most behoofull for time for place for Priests and People THE SIXTH CONTROVERSY CONVINCETH The Necessity of Confession against D. Sparkes and D. Fulke CHAP. 1. I May fitly compare the Sectaries of our tyme as S. Gregory NazianzeÌ„ doth that enemy of God Iulian the Apostata Nazian orat 1. in Iulianum Sparkes in his answer to M. Iohn de Albins pag. 3. 6. 337. Eu. ke in cap. 20. 10. sect 5. Kemnitius in Censu ad c. 5. Conâ—ilâ— Trident. to the Camclion For as he changeth himselfe into all variety
of colours but only white the most true natiue colour so our Reformers admit all manner of Doctrine and in this present all sorts of Confession but that which is most important and beneficiall for their soules 1. They allow the Confession of sinnes to God in generall 2. The Confession of some sinnes in particuler to a learned Minister to receaue comfort and direction from him 3. The Confession of certaine enormo us crimes publikely made in the sight of the congregation for their satisfaction and terrour of others 4. The Confession of priuate iniuries to the party offended to be reconciled to him But the Confession of all particuler faults to a lawfull Priest to receaue pardon and absolution they vtterly disauow Wherein to proceed more perspicuously they chiefly deny three principall points First the power in Priests to absolue from sinnes Secondly the necessity of sinners to confesse Thirdly the necessity of numbring euery particuler offence All which notwithstanding I will clearly deduce out of that soueraigne Commission Christ gaue to his Apostles when breathing vpon them he sayd 2. Receaue yee the holy Ghost whose sinnes yee forgiue they Iohn 20. v. 23. are forgiuen and whose sinnes yee retaine they are retayned For by this passage it is euident that authority is giuen to the Priests of Gods Church not only to preach the Ghospell and denounce retention to the impenitent remission to the Sparkes P. 323. Fulke in c. 20. Ioan. sect 4. 5 Math 28 Mar. 16. Ioan. 20. penitent belieuer as D. Sparkes D. Fulke with their adherents perfidiously wrest the words but absolute power is granted vnto them as the Vicars and Vicegerents of Christ truly to remit and pardon sinnes 1. Because commission to preach was giuen before in S. Matthew S. Marke 2. That was extended to all Teach all nations this is restrayned to some alone who submit their faults to the keyes and censure of the Church Whose sinnes yee remit c. 3. Forgiuenes of sinnes in heauen is not alwayes annexed to the Preachers exhortation it is to the absolution of the Priest if no obstacle hinder it in the party absolued 4. The Preachers voyce declareth on earth what God hath already persormed in heauen but heere quite contrary God ratifieth in heauen what the Priest by his mynisteriall power pronounceth vpon earth The Iudgment Hila. Can 26. in Mat. Chrâ— hom 5. de verbis Isa Vidi Dominum or sentence on earth sayth S. Hilary goeth before that which is giuen in heauen Heauen sayth S. Chrysostome borroweth principall authority of iudging from the Earth So as it cannot be the meere vocation to preach but some other extraordinary and singular Iurisdiction which our Sauiour here bequeathed to his Apostles 3. A Iurisdiction signified before by the power of keys which are chiefly giuen to magistrates and rulers of Cittyes not to betoken thinges already locked or vnlockt but to open and shut as occasion requireth A Iurisdiction for the due exercise whereof the Sacrament so a Aug. l. 2. cont Parm. c. 13. Greg. l. 4. Com. in l. ReguÌ„ c. 5. Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 19. S. Augustine and others tearme it of Ordination was instituted b Chrys hom 85. in Ioan. Greg. Niss ora de lap Isa 44. v. 12. Cyr. lib. 12. c. 56. in 10. Atha ser in illaverba Profecti in pagum Hier ep ad Hedibi Bafil quaest breuib inter 288. Leo ep 91 ad Thâ—oâ— Pacian ep 1. ad Sym. pro. Ambr. de poenic l. x. c. 2. 7. Chris l. 3. de Sacer. Spirituall grace infused the Holy Ghost purposely imparted and imparted after a speciall manner of insufflation or breathing on them to denote that the breath of his Priests pronouncing the words of absolution should disperse and dissolue the mists of sinne according to that of the Prophet Esay I haue disolued like a cloud thy sins This ceremony then was vsed to declare the effect of extinguishing sinne the Holy Ghost was giuen to manifest the cause by whom it is abolished For as S. Cyril sayth It is neyther absurd nor yet inconuenient that they forgiue sinnes who haue the Holy Ghost For when they pardon or retaine sinns the Holy Ghost pardoneth or retayneth sinnes by them and that they doe two wayes by Baptisme first afterwards by Penance 4. Lastly that this rare prerogatiue graunted to Priests was not only by the mystery of the word to declare but by the authority of the keyes to forgiue sinnes many other of the Fathers directly teach S. Athanasius tearming it Power giuen by our Sauiour to Paiests to loose sinnes S. Hierome S. Basil S. Leo Pacianus haue the like S. Ambrose expresly proueth this authority in Priests of remitting sins against the Nouatians cuen ouer them to whom they denyed the ministery of absolution albeit they graunted the benefit of preaching S. Chrysostome extolling the dignity of Priests aboue Kings and Angels amplifyeth the same after his fashion with this goulden streame of wordes They that inhabite the earth and conuerse thereon to them comission is giuen to dispense those thinges that are in heauen To them that power is giuen which Almighty God would not communicate either to Angell or Archangell For to â—hem it is not sayd whatsoeuer yee shall bind in earth shal be bound in heauen c. Earthly Princes indeed haue also authority to bind but the bodyes only but that * Sacerdotum vinculum ipsam eâ—i im animam contingit atque ad caelos vsque peruadit c. binding of Priests which I treate of toucheth the very soule it selfe and reacheth euen to the Heauens In so much as whatsoeuer the Priestes performe beneath the very same Almighty God doth aboue and the sentence * SeruoruÌ„ sententiam Dominus confirmat of the seruant our Lord doth confirme And what is this truly elso but that the power of heauenly things is graunted by God vnto them Whose sinnes soeuer sayth he yee shall retaine they are retained What power I beseech you can be greater then this The Father gaue all power to the Sonne but I see the same power deliuered altogeather by the Sonne vnto them Wherefore as Christ had a speciall power of pardoning sinnes distinct from his power of preaching so had the Apostles to whome he gaue al power committed vnto him as S. Chrysostome auoucheth and our Sauiour himselfe witnesseth when before he imparted this authority he mentioneth his owne commission Ioan. 20. v. 22. saying As my Father sent me I also send you 5. The power of Priests to remit sinnes being thus established it remaineth I declare how Confession to a Priest the second point which our Aduersaryes deny is heerein implyed M. Fulke sayth Neither doth it follow of M. Fulke in c. 20. Io. sect 5. any necessity that men are bound to submit themselues to the Iudgment of Priests if they haue authority to forgiue sinnes But S. Augustine more ancient more holy more
Eue of Cain by which Tertullian S. Ambrose and others confirme Gen. 3. 4. Tertul. l. 2. ad Mar. Amb. l. de para c. 14 l 2. de Cain Abel c. 9. Chrys l. 3. de sacer Numb 9. v. 5. Lenit 5. v. 5. our doctrine I come to the Leuiticall Priests who being ordained by God to iudge of corporall Lepers al such as were insected with this disease were tyed to present themselues vnto them to acquaint them with their infirmityes and according to their iudgement to be admitted or expelled the Tents Whereupon S. Chrysostome vseth these wordes The Iewish Priests had leaue to iudge or try such as were purged from corporall leprosy but to our Priestes it is graunted not to try the purged but al â—ogeather to purge not the leprosy of the body but the infection of the soule The second figure is that confession which God commanded in the 5. Chapter of Numbers and 5. of Leuiticus where the circumstance of the text and Hebrew phrase most clearely demonstrate an expresse and distinct manner of Confession as Petrus Galatinus learnedly proueth by the refragable testimonies of many ancient Rabbins But if the Hithuaddu Gala. l. 10 cap. 3. figure required a particuler confession how much more the thing figured by it 10. Of which the Apostles likewise mention S. Luke Many of these that beleeued came confessing and declaring their Act. 19. V. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Meschthahhin Sachel cuthebin deeds Or as the Greeke Hebrew or Syriacke word importeth Numbering their sinnes And it followeth that S. Paul to whome this Confession was made caused them that had imployed their time in the study of curious matters to burne their bookes which he could not haue done vnles they distinctly specifyed their faults vnto him S. Paul himselfe sayth God hath giuen vs the ministery of reconciliation c. Which is not only meant of the office of reconcilement 2. Cor. 5. V. 18. by publique preaching the word but by ministring also of the Sacrament as Caluin is pleased to allow acknowledging these wordes to be spoken of the Calu. l. 4. Instit c. 1. â— 22. Iac. 5. Orig. hom 2. in Leuit. Beds m hunc loc Conc. Laodic Can. 2. Sexta Syn. Can. 102. Basil in Regulis breuior inter 288. Leo ep 91. ad Theod. ep 80. ad Episc Campan Pausimus in Vita S. Ambros power and vse of keyes S. Iames exhorteth Confesse your sinnes one to another which Origen and Venerable Bede directly expound of Sacramentall Confession to a lawfull Priest Bede sayth The vncleanesse of the greater leprosy let vs according to the law open to the Priests and at his pleasure in what manner in what time he shall command let vs be carefull to be purified 11. The continuall practise of the Catholik Church euer after approued the same long before the tyme of Innocentius the third For of the custome of the Greeke Church not only the Councell of Laodicea and the sixth Synod but S. Basil also testifyeth who liued many hundred yeares before him It is necessary to confesse sinnes vnto them to whom the dispensation of the misteries of God is committed The vsage of the Latin Church S. Leo describeth in his Epistle to Theodorus and in his Epistle to the Bishop of Campania where he mentioneth secret confession to Priests to be the institution of Christ And Paulinus writeth of S. Ambrose That he wept so bitterly hearing secret confession as he wrong teares from the Penitent The practise of the Church of France and Germany is witnessed by the Councels assembled at Turin at Paris at Rhemes at Wormes and at Mogunâ—ia Concil Tu. 10. 3. c. 22. Concilium â—â—hem can 12. 16. Concil Paris c. 32. 46. VVorms cap. 25. Mogun cap. 16. Aug. ep 180 Victor l. 2â— de â—ersecutione Vanda. Orig. hoÌ„â— 17. in Luc. hom 32 in Leuit. Cyp. ser 5. de Laps Atha in illa Verba Profecti in pagum Chrysost bom 33. in 10. l. 2. 3. de Sacerdo Lactantius de vera sapien lib. 4. prope fineÌ„ Hier. in c. Isa l. 2 ep 18. ad Demetriadem Pacian ep â— ad Symp. Tertul. de Paniten cap. 7. Iero. ep ad Marcel 10. Damas de haeres c. 80. Guido de haeres Mat. Paris in Henric. 3. Haynâ—o in Psal 31. Bern. in medita c. 9. Damia ep 1. Sparkes p. 322. p. 329. Hugode de S. Vict. l. 2. part 14. cap. 1. where the same manner of Confession is generally defined The doctrine vsage of the Church of Africke S. Augustine Bishop of Hippo shall declare saying It is a pittifull case when by the absence of Gods Priests men depart this life either not baptized or not absolued from their sinnes Which the very people of that Country vnderstood when they lamented the banishment of their Priests by the Arian Heretikes as Victor reporteth in this manner Who shall baptize these Infants Who shall minister pennance vnto vs and loose vs from the bands of sinnes 12. It would be too tedious to set downe the words of Origen S. Cyprian S. Athanasius S. Chrysostome Lactantius S. Hierome For Lactantius assigneth Confession and penance a note of the true Church S. Hierome tearmeth it The second table after shipwracke Pacianus and Tertullian do the like who liued notwithstanding many yeares before Innocentius the third So did the Montanists whom S. Hierome the Messalians whom S. Iohn Damascen the lacobites whom Guido and Matthoeus Parisiensis record to haue byn condemned they in former ages these in the yeare of our Lord 600. for affirming That we are to confesse our sins to God only and that Confession of sinnes to a Priest is not needfull So did Haymo so did S. Bernard Petrus Damianus Hugo de Sancto Victore who estsoones inculcate the necessity of Confession to the Preists of Gods Church In so much as D. Sparks shewed small sparks of grace when he affirmed our Confession first imposed as necessary in the Lateran Councell by Innocentius 3. about the yeare of our Lord 1115. No sparks of fidelity in citing Scotus and Antoninus as witnesses hereof who witnesse it not but witnesse the contrary For they both teach with vs that the generall Councell of Lateran determined the circumstance of tyme when Confession should be made and grant withall that the substance it Sozom. l. 7. c. 16. Sparkes p. 330. 331. Chrysoft hoâ—â— 4. de Lazar. hom 3â— in ca. 12. ad Haeb. in Psal â—0 Cassiâ— Costa 20. eap 8. Aug. l. 10. Confess c. 3. selfe and manner of Canfession was ordained by God 13. In lik sort he wrongfully abuseth Necturius Patriarch of Constantinople auouching him to haue abrogated secret Confession whereas it appeareth out of Socrates and Nicephorus that Nactarim only disanulled publike Confession to a publike and determinate Priest by reason of great scandall that theron ensued left euery one iudicio conscientiasuâ— To the Iudgment
excellencyes so we distinguish three kinds of adorations Godly Ciuill Religious 3. There is first in God a supreme infinite and illimited Excellency to which a Godly worship or adoration is due commonly called Latria There is secondly in Men in Kings Magystrats Maysters Fathers c. a humayn and naturall excellency to which our will by the apprehension of their worthinesse inclineth to exhibite an honour tearmed by Aristotle conformable to the nature of their dignity Ciuill or Humane Thirdly there is a meane or midle preheminence betweene these two an higher then the last yet inferiour to the first seated not in the naturall but in the supernaturall giftes and graces of God to which supernatural preheminence a supernaturall worship more then Ciuill lesse then Diuine Aug. ser 58. de verb. Dom. sup Ps 98. ought to be attributed commonly called Religious or Dulia For Hyperdulia is only a more eminent and remarkable degree yet contayned vnder the same kind of reuerence properly belonging to our Blessed Lady as she is mother of God and to the humanity of Christ as considered apart from the diuinity albeit as it is inseparably conioyned and Hypostatically vnited with the Word it ought to be worshiped with the adoration of Latria as the fifth generall Councell of Constantinople defined Rey. l. 1. de ldo Ro. Ec. c. 3. 8. Fulke in c. 4 Matth. sect 3 in Act. 14. sect 2. Aug. de ve reâ—g c 55. Hiero. ep ad Ripa con Vigil Augustquaest 61 supr Gen. Huro aduer Vigil cap. 20. agaynst Theodore the Heretike And S. Augustine answering the Gentils who obiected agaynst the Christians as now the Protestants doe against vs the crime of adoring Christs flesh in the Eucharist I adore sayth he the flesh of Iesus Christ because it is vnited to the Deity euen as one adoreth the King and his Royall robe with the same adoration 4. Notwithstanding these three sorts of honour be ech of them most different in nature the one from the other yet the names are most of them promiscuously vsed and according to the ten our of the discourse sometyme restrayned to one kind of adoration sometyme to another Which if M. Reynolds and M. Fulke had diligently weyghed they would neuer haue cited S. Augustine agaynst vs Affirming the worship of Religion neyther to be due to Angels or men departed but only to God Nor S. Hierome That neyther Angels nor Martyrs Reliques nor any created thing can be worshipped and adored Nor Ep phanius saying God will not haue Angels adored how much lesse Mary Nor S. Cyril nor S. Gregory nor any of the rest who in those places take Quis o insanum caput aliquando Martyres ador auis quis hominem putauit Deum Aug. l. 3. de trin c. 10. the name Religion Adoration and Worship for the supreme and soueraygne worship which is only proper vnto God as S. Augustine explayneth himselfe in his questions vpon Genesis S. Hierome in the same place and agaynst Vigalantius not for that inferiour kind of adoration which is often ascribed vnto creatures and which Abraham exhibited vnto the people of Heth wherupon S. Augustine gathereth That it is not sayd Thou shalt only adore thy Lord thy God as it is sayd Him only thou shalt serue Which in Greeke i◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in his â— booke of the blessed Trinity writing of the brasen Serpent and other holy signes he sayth They may haue honour as Religious thinges not admiration Fulke in 4. Matt. sect 3. Aug. l. 10. de Ciui c. 1. as strange thinges So that the Fathers only deny the Religious worship of Latria to Angels and other creatures the Religious worship of Dulia they assigne vnto them Which M. Fulke forced to confesse sayth S. Augustine a meane Grecian imagined a distinction betweene Latria and Dulia c. and that by them which haue interpreted Scripture Latria is taken for that seruice which pertayneth to the Religion of God But Lodouicus Viues in his notes vpon that Chapter telleth you otherwise But Lodouicus Viues O base comparison Was it not inough to disgrace S. Augustine with his meane knowledge in Greeke but must a late Gramarian be compared opposed preferred before him whome D. Couell esteemeth the chiefest Doctour that euer was or shal be excepting the Apostles Let his skill in Greeke be what it was shall his D. Couell in his book against M. Burges doctrine his distinction the diuersity of Religious worships which he and other Interpreters from these Greeke wordes deriue be vtterly exploded and reiected by you Shall Viues be accepted and S. Augustine outcouÌ„tenanced 5. Consider M. Fulke how farre heerein you iniure your cause wrong your conscience dishonour that graue ancient and incomparable Deuine Agayne vve ought to obserue that as the names so likewise the outward actions of kneeling prostrating lifting vp hands the like are generally vsed in euery particular kind of worship yet by the inward acts of the mynd they are wholy different the one from the other For he that kneeleth to God reuerently acknowledgeth by the light of his vnderstanding a certayne supreme incomprehensible and increated excellency authour and cause of all rare and excellent thinges he loueth with his will a bounty vnmatchable and with profound submission humbly adoreth an infinite and vnsearchable Maiesty He who kneeleth to his King or Prince dutifully agnizeth and aflectionatly reuerenceth his naturall or Ciuill dignity He who kneeleth to a Saint to their Tombes Reliques or Pictures deuoutly apprehendeth and piously worshipeth some supernaturall preheminence Three things necessary to the nature of honor quality or relation Wherby it followeth that three thinges concurre to the nature of honour 1. The apprehension of the vnderstanding which acknowledgeth an excellency worthy of adoration 2. The propension and inclination of the will which vnfainedly prosecuteth the same with honour 3. The externall obeysance of capping kneeling or bowing the body which is an outward obsequie of inward reuerence And although the vnderstanding be the root origen or rather motiue which exciteth the will yet the act of the will is the life soule and proper essence of adoration without which the sole notice and apprehension of dignity is no worship at all and the outward and externall action may be as well a sinne of mockery as any marke of honour As it was in the souldiers who adored Christ Matt. 27. Ioa. 19. and sayd All hayle O King of the Iewes 6. By which you may easily discerne the blindnesse of Protestants who distinguish not the outward worship by the inward mynd but seeme to make all externall Bils 4. par pag. 576. 577. honour belong to God whether it proceed from the acknowledgment of naturall supernaturall or intreated excellency Submission sayth M. Bilson of knees hands and eyes parts of Gods honour Agayne The outward honour of eyes hands and knees God requireth of vs as his due Then
Christ by water and the holy Ghost in the regenerate it is wholy cleansed and washed away against our Protestants who stifly contend Originall sinne to be an inheritable peruersnes an vniuersall corruption spread ouer the whole man and defiling him in all parts powers both of body and soule Whereby from the head to the foote he is so ouerwhelmed as with an ouerflowing of water that no part of him is free from sinne Neither doth this prauity in their opinion euer cease but like as a burning fornace bloweth out flame and sparkles or as a spring doth without ceasing cast out water So that peruersnes neuer ceaseth in vs but continually bringeth forth the works of the flesh In so much as whatsoeuer we thinke speake or labour to effect is stayned with the floud of this infectious streame and which is worst of al they affirme this cankred corruption to cleaue so fast vnto vs as it can neuer be scoured forth not by the oyle of grace not by the strength of fayth not by the pretious bath of Christs sacred bloud not by any help of vertue or fauour from aboue as long as coÌ„cupiscence the law of the flesh which perseuereth vntill death according to them is formally sinne inordinatly resisteth or stubbornely rebelleth against Greg. de valent 12. disp 6. q. 12. tom 1. Field in his 3. booke of the Church c. 26. f. 131. Feild ibid. Abbot in his defence cap. 2. VVhitaker l. de pecca origin the law of the mind 3. Whose grosse absurdityes concerning this point chiefly spring from these three heades of falshood first that Originall sinne doth nor formally consist in the losse or depriuation of any iustice grace or perfection euer restored by the merits of Christ in this earthly warfare as we maintaine but in the defect and want of the whole righteousnes which Adam enioyed before his fall The property whereof according to M. Field is to subiect all vnto God and leaue nothing voyd of him Not any inordinate appetite not any contrariety betweene the flesh and the spirit which still abyding Originall sinne also remayneth Secondly that this Originall righteousnes was essentially required to the integrity of Nature Thirdly that all declinings and swaruings from that perfect subiection vnto God and entyre coniunctioÌ„ with him which grace worketh are sinnes and decayes of natures integrity and consequently that concupiscence being a declyning from that entier subiection c. is truely and properly sinne Thus they We againe otherwise teach that the former disorders be defects woundes and decayes of Nature but not properly sinnes which that I may more clearely demonstrate I will briefly declare from whence our concupiscence or rebellion naturally ariseth what Originall sin is and what was the originall Iustice of our first Parents before they fell or felt in themselues those dangerous coÌ„flicts 4. Great was the felicity and thrice happy was See S. Iohn Damas l. 2. de fide ortho cap. 11. S. Greg. in prol 3 psal Poenit. Pererius l. 5. in Genes the state and condition of Adam at his first creation when being framed in the terrestriall Paradise by the immediate hand of God he had his soule beautifyed with grace or inherent iustice his vnderstanding endued with the perfect knowledge of all naturall and supernaturall misteryes his will rectifyed by the loue of God and strong bias of his owne inclination directly carryed to the mark of vertue he had the inferiour powers of his soule the motions of his flesh subiect vnto reason the sterne of reason pliable to the spirit the spirit alwayes obedient vnto God he had no ignorance no errour no perturbation of passions in his mind no inordinate concupiscence no Aug. l. 14. de ciuit Dei c. 26. rebellion in his flesh no propension to euill no difficulty to good No corruption sayth S. Augustine in his body no trouble or distemper by his body bred or ingendred in his senses no Read Pererius in Genes l. 5. de statu innocentiae and Gab. Vas quez in 2. 2. q. 8. dis 131. c. 7. intrinsecall disease could breake from within no extrinsecall hurt was feared from abroad perfect health in his flesh and all peace tranquility raigned in his soule There were the admirable effects this the sweet harmony which Original iustice caused betweene the flesh and the spirit Now whether these extraordinary priuiledges flowed from iustifying grace which was formally all one as the best Deuines accord with Originall Iustice or whether they were caused by the seuerall habits of sundry vertues infused to this purpose or whether some of them proceeded from the sweetnes of diuine contemplation or from the speciall care and prouidence of God I will not heere dispute only I say they could not be any naturall propertyes springing from the roots of nature because in some thinges they eleuated and perfected nature far aboue her naturall course in others they stooped bridled and restrained the maine current of her naturall desires and sensuall appetites as God supernaturally suspended the heat Originall iustice no naturall property but a gift supernaturall of fire in the furnace of Babylon or as he tempered and asswaged the naturall and irreconciliable fiercenes of the wild and sauage beastes in the Arke of Noë neither of which could proceed from nature the one being as I say aboue the other repugnant thereunto for who can think that the dowry of grace is the right of nature or that the gift of immortality is essentially due to a morall body or that contrary qualityes should not naturally resist and oppositely fight the one against the other Who can think that Adam and Eue our first progenitours were essentially iust a prerogatiue only due vnto God or dismantled of that iustice were impayred yea changed in their essence And so not the same after as before their fall in parts essentiall The righteousnes therefore which they lost especially the chiefe and formal part was a diuine accident or heauenly quality not essentially required Feild in his 3. booke of the Church chap. 26. which M. Field misdeemeth to the integrity of nature for that implyeth if nature be taken as it ought to be distinct from that which surmounteth nature but supernaturally added to the perfection thereof and with this couenant imparted to Adam that if he had not trespassed it should haue beene perpetually propagated and transfused Augu. de peccat merit remis l. 2. c. 22. l. 13 de ciuit Dei cap. 13. to his posterity But he transgressing and disobeying the Commandment of his Lord and Maister was iustly plagued with the disobedience of his flesh his hand-mayd vnto him a reciprocall punishment so S. Augustine tearmeth it of his disobedience vnto God Hence proceedeth the rage of concupiscence the commotions of the inferiour and baser parts rebelling against the superiour the auersion from good the proâ—esse to euill hence the disorder of passions the infirmityes of the mind
it were the ciuill or domesticall war of inward vices to remayne with the baptized For they are not such vices which are now to be called sinnes if concupiscence draw not the spirit to vnlawful workes conceaue and bring forth sinne By which wordes I may resolue and end this mayne coÌ„trouersy that the repugnance betweene the flesh the spirit the vntowardnes to good the forwardnes to euill other defects of nature are vices indeed but no sinne in the faythfull I may note also by the way the extrauagaÌ„t examples which Protestants bring of a woman in trauaile of a womaÌ„ child of one Viper ingendring another to proue thereby that coÌ„cupiscence a sinne may coÌ„ceaue and bring forth sinne For that we willingly confesse we graunt that voluntary concupiscence which is a sinne Abbot c. 2 sect 6. fol. 211. may cause and beget another sinne But we say that the suddaine motions of concupiscence which inuade our mind against our will and that concupiscence of it owne nature is not sinnefull vnles by winning our consent it conceaue and consumate sinne as S. Iames and S. Augustine heere expresly auow Yet who was euer so mad as to teach a womaÌ„ not to be a womam vnles she conceaue or a viper no viper except it breed and ingender vipers Their examples therefore are impertinent and all the oiections they make against vs either friuolous or fully VVillet contr 17. q. 1. p. 558. answered 12. Neuerthelesse before I finish this questioÌ„ some may expect I should more largly vnfold what Originall sinne is and how it stayneth our soules against the Anabaptists the Albigensians and Zuinglian Protestants Likewise how all the whole progeny of Adam is infected there with against the Caluiuists Puritans of our tyme Calu. l. 4. instit c. 16. §. 24. 25 Fulk in c. 3. Ioan. sect 2. in cap. 7. 1. ad Cor. sect 11. VVhitak controu â— q. 6 c. 3. who imagine the children of the faythfull to be receaued of God into the inheritance of the couenant from their mothers wombe be regenerated by the Holy Ghost and may be saued without Baptisme Vpon which wicked ground M. Dod a silenced Minister once Preacher at Banbury resused to christen the Lady Popes child vntill their meeting day before which tyme the poore infant dyed without domage or hurt to his soule as that wretched fellow deliuered Against these and many such errours some I say may looke I should reason a little but because they are only mayntained by old condemned Heretikes or new Schismaticall Precisians and not generally imbraced by the Synagogue of England whose common heresyes I heere impugne it shal be sufficient to descry the rockes and dangerous shallowes you ought to â—huâ— least you suffer shipwracke sayling in this difficulty without the card of direction First then beware of the Pelagians who say we incurre the corporall death and punishment but not the guiltines of our forefathers fault vnles byimitation we follow his transgressions Whome S. Paul refuteth teaching That we all trespassed in Adam Are by nature Rom 5. Ephis 2. v 3. the children of wrath Borne and conceaued as King Dauid sayth in sinne On the other side take heed of Matthias Illyricus his drunken phrensy who fayneth our birth-sinne not to be any relation or accident but the defiled substance Psal 50. Matth. Illiric in l. de essentia iustit iniustit original it selfe of man Making thereby either God the author and abettour of sinne who createth propagateth preserueth our humane nature or some other Creatour of thinges then God with the Manichean Heretikes From whome wicked Caluin whose steps our Sectaryes precisely follow departeth not much affirming The whole nature of man is a certaine seed of sinne whereby not the flesh or sensuall parts alone but the very soule is so corrupted that it Calu. l. 2. c. 1. §. 9. needeth not only to he healed but in a manner to put on a new nature Detest and flye these dotages and that of Origen who dreamed our sinne of nature to be the dayly crimes Ibid. §. 9. oursoule committed before it was vnited to the body Which dreame he tooke from the Platonists and it is condemned Concil Brach. c. 6. in the first Bracharan Councell and by S. Leo Epiphanius and others The dotage likewise of Tertullian and Apollinaris who imagining that oursoules descended S. Leo ep ad Turb c. 10. Epipha ep ad Ioan. Ierosol S. Aug. l. de â—aeres c. 86. S. Thom. 2. 2. q. 8â— artic â— Genes 2. Vasq in 1. 2. disp 232. c. 4. sup q. 83. by propagation from nature as the soules of plantes and beasts accordingly thought Originall sinne to be the naturall contagion which one polluted soule deriueth from another Which the whole Schoole not only of Deuines but also of Philosophers constantly abhorre and truely teach the soule of man to be immediatly created by the hand of God and at the same tyme infused to the body as Moyses intimated in the second of Genesis Our Lord formed man of the slyme of the earth and breathed into his face the breath of life and man became a liuing soule O ther 's more neer then these yet not conformable to truth affirme our radicall crime to be a positiue accident and vitious quality But vvho I pray doth produce this accident Not God he cannot be the cause of finne nor Adam nor the Diuel nor any earthly creature they haue no power to effectuate any such positiue and hereditary quality or if they Vâ—sq ib iâ— disp c. 2. could it being corporall as themselues graunt how can it infect the spirituall soule Neither yet is Originall sinne the meere fault which Adam committed imputed vnto vs as Pighius and Catharinus teach for that maketh vs by extrinsecall Rom. 5. Concil Trident. sess 5. denomination only not truely and properly sinners as S. Paul and the Councell of Trent define we are 13. Nor is it the only binding ouer or desert of punishment because these be sequels both which follow of Vasq ibid. cap. 3. sinne for no man is iustly designed or obnoxious to punishment but he that hath deserued it no man deserueth it but he that hath trespassed offended Sinne therfore goeth before the lyablenes or desert of punishment What then shall we say What is the natiue and home-bred crime of which we speake I answere as before that it is the want and priuation of Original iustice as it is voluntarily caused in vs by the disloyalty and transgression we committed in our first fathers reuolt whereupon we gather out of S. Anselme this pithy definition of it It is the S. Ansel l. de coÌ„ep virg c. 26. Dionys l. de Eccles Hierar Concil Trid. sâ—ss 5. Can. 2. Aug. l. 1. de nâ—â—pt concup c. 28. nakednes or want of iustice due to the children caused by the disobedience of Adam Which S. Dionysius meaneth
when he tearmeth it The state of dissimilitude with God And the Councel of TreÌ„t calling it the death of our soules which is only caused by the defect and absence of grace the true life of them If you aske with Pelagius how this death seizeth on the harts of infants by what chinke it passeth into their soule I answere with S. Augustin What dost thou seeke for a hidden â—hinke whereas thou hast a wyde open gate By one man sayth the Apostle sinne hath entred into the world Behold a wyde gate Adam transgressed and in him we all fell into the curse malediction of sinne for he receauing from God the mantle of Originall righteousnes with this expresse pact and condition that if he perseuered loyal we should all be cloathed therewith if he reuolted we should be disrobed of the same hence it was that in respect of this we were all vnited in him all one and the same in him as in the head of mankind or first origen from whom not only our nature but togeather with it the fruit of his obedience or fault of his treachery was to ensue therefore he willingly sinning we all offended he disobeying we all violated the Commandment of God After which manner the Apostle as S. Augustine witnesseth declared the Aug. l. 3. de peccat merit c. 7. propagation of original infection when he auouched by one man sinne hath entred into the world c. in whom all haue sinned All sayth S. Augustine sinned in him because in that first planted nature which could engender all adhuc omnes vnus Aug. ibid. l. 3. cap. 7. ille homo fuerunt all were as yet that one man But if all the posterity of Adam were in him and if all as S. Paul testifyeth Ambr. in c. 15. Luc. Ansel l. de concep vir gin c. 27. Vasq in 1. 2. disp 131. â— 2. sinned in him in him also were the children of the faythfull in him they likewise sinned To which purpose S. Ambrose writeth Adam was in him we are all Adam perished and in him haue perished all Which default of ours S. Ansâ—lme and a great Deuine seemeth to describe by the example of a subiect and his wife aduanced to great preferment by the meere fauour of their Prâ—nce and being after depriued of their dignity and brought into slauery for some treacherous conspiracy complotted against him their children partake of the same misery they are thrall to the subiection and seruitude of their parents The ancient Rabbins amongst the Iewes vvere vvont to expresse it as Galatinus reporteth by this pretty similitude There Galat. de c. fidei Cath. l. 6. c. 10. vvas a vvoman great vvith child cast into prison vvho there in captiuity fell in labour and brought forth a Son vvhome there she nursed there she vveaned there she cherished and there leauing it she dyed a fevv dayes after the King passed by the gates of the prison vvhome the Sonne of this vvoman seeing began to call out and expostulate vvith him in this manner My Lord and Soueraigne loe heere I haue beene borne heere I haue beene nursed and I knovv not for vvhose offence I am heer desained To vvhome the King maketh ansvvere for the â—espasse of thy Mother she vvas iustly committed to this iayle where she was deliuered of thee a prisoner borne and a prisoner after bred by her Some men are all born in the house of captiuity all conceaued in the thraldom of sinne 14. But you may reply that this example â—itteth not my purpose because faythfull parents are redeemed Manâ— soule is created pure by God his flesh not the subiect of sin by what chinkes then en treth Originall infection by Christ from that captiuity of their birth-sinne therfore their children cannot be enthralled in that miserable bondage Or to display the forces of this argument presse it to the vttermost two parts there be in man his soule and his body his soule he immediatly receaueth from God no way stayned by the benefite of creation his body or flesh which is deriued from Adam is not properly capable of any sinne By what conduits then by what secret conueyances is that hatefull bane transfused from him to his ofspring so farre distant and through the channels also of such as are regenerate and pure themselues from originall guilt I answere and must often repeate that similitudes neuer consort in all points but only in some one for which they are alleadged Secondly I say that Christians baptized in respect of their owne priuate persons are cleansed and purifyed yet the common nature which is conueyed vnto others is stil contaminated with vitious corruption that remayneth still captiued in the iayle of sinne from which all A particular and full answere to euery part of the former demaund men descending must needs be borne in vnhappy seruitude Lastly I answere more clearely and in particuler to euery branch of the former argument the soule I grant is created most pure by the hands of the highest the flesh is not properly taynted with the guilt of sinne yet by the vnion of the soule and body the child becommeth the Sonne of Adam a member of mankind a branch of that vyne which dyed in the stocke yea he becommeth one of them who in their roote and origen trespassed and Augu. â— 1. retract c. 13. infringed the law of the Almighty and so is iustly depriued of the ornament of Grace and is borne in disfauour of him when he by the will of another as S. Augustine writeth voluÌ„tarily offeÌ„ded before he was borne Wherfore although the Parents be free froÌ„ the staine of sinneful contagion yet making their children by generation the Sonnes of Adam they necessarily inwrap them in the bondes of his captiuity 15. Notwithstanding if any wrangling Caluinist should further contend and say that as infants draw poyson from Adam from whome they deriue the succession of their pedigree so they should sucke the dew of grace from their baptized parents because they more immediately issue and spring from them You may well deny his illation and assigne this difference because the couenant of transfusing either sinne or righteousnes God made with Adam and not with other parents the will of all mankind was only included in him and not in other progenitours therfore as we partake not the dregs of any of their proper faults so neither the dowryes of their heauenly grace And yet how the guiltines of Adams Aug. l. 3. de peccat merit remis cap. 8. 9. fall is distilled vnto vs how regenerated parents breed vnregenerated children S. Augustine maketh manifest by these similituds by the example of the circumcised Iew who begetteth infants vncircumcised of the grayne of wheate purged from chaffe and so sowed in the ground yet growing vp againe with reed chaffe and eares likewise of Christian parents who bring forth vnchristned babes of consecrated or annoynted persons who glory
k Chrys hom 7. in 2. ad Tim. feruour of Charity destroyeth all thinges The l Gregor hom 33. in Euang. fire of Charity burneth and consumeth the rust of sinne Only m Aug tract 1. ep Ioan. Abbot c. 4. sect 22. Aug. despir lit c. 17. Aug. l. de nat gra c. 63. qua vna iusti sunt quicumque iusti sunt Abbot c. 4. sect 22. fol. 477. 478. Charity extinguisheth sinnes Which places I more willingly and diligently cyte because they cannot be passed ouer with that common answere which the Aduersary vseth That Charity is the chiefe and principall vertue for outward vse as the instrument of Faith for mouing or stirring abroad Fayth the only vertue which worketh our iustification For that which is the life the health the beauty of our soules is not the outward instrument but the inward quality which iustifyeth vs before God that which vniteth weddeth vs vnto him maketh vs his friendes conuerteth and conformeth vs vnto him couereth our iniquityes extinguisheth our sinnes that which is the head life of Religion the spirit which quickneth the louer cannot be a signe or effect but the cause the soule of iustification Which intrinsecally iustifyeth sayth S. Augustine By which one Charity they are iust whosoeuer are iust 7. Besides if Charity as M. Abbot confesseth Giueth the outward and accidentall mouing and working to fayth c. is the performance of all dutyes recommended vnto vs both to God and men that is touching all externall actions of righteousnes or iustice it cannot be denyed but that Charity also is the inward guift the heauenly quality which maketh vs iust for so we see in all both naturall and morall thinges the faculty which giueth external power and ability to worke is the inherent forme vertue or accident which worketh within For example the grauity or heauynes which causeth the stone outwardly to descend and couer the center is the innate property which indueth it also with inward heauines The quality which affoardeth power to the fire to warme and send forth the ardour of heate abroad is the inward accident which maketh the fire hoate and ardent it selfe In man that which enableth his body to stir moue that which ministreâ—h ability to performe all externall offices and function of life is the inward soule the internall life which quickneth the body In morall affaires the habit which facilitateth vs outwardly to exercise the actes of temperance is the vertue it selfe which maketh vs temperate That which readily exciteth and stirreth vp the souldier to enterprises and exployts of valour is the inherent valour which incourageth his hart Therefore in thinges supernaturall that which rayseth and eleuateth vs externally to accomplish the workes of iustice is the internall vertue the internall iustice wherby we are iust And seeing Charity ministreth power euen in our Aduersaryes opinion to atchieue all outward dutyes acceptable to God Charity also must needes be the ornament it selfe and splendour of our soules which maketh vs acceptable For as Vega wittily argueth from Vega l. 7. in Conâ— Trid. c. 2â— the deriuation of the word If whitenes maketh white wisedome wise valour valiant Faciet nimirum Charitas charos Charity vndoubtedly shall make vs deere and gratefull vnto the highest Hence it is that Charity is the heauenly spring or spirituall fountaine from whence the riuers of all good workes the streames of all vertues Gal. 5. cap. 2â— August tract 87. in ep Ioan. receaue their purity and perfection whereupon the Apostle S. Paul as S. Augustine teacheth when against the workes of the flesh he wovld recommend vnto vs the fruit of the spirit he beginneth with this The fruit sayth he of the spirit is Charity and the rest be receiueth after August ibidem as flowing and depending of this head which are ioy peace long animity benignity goodnes Fayth c. For who doth solidely reâ—oyce that loueth not the good from whence he ioyeth Who can haue true Abbot in his defence cap. 4. Hier. in c. 5. epist ad Gal. Aug. loc citato August tract 5. in ep Ioan. Haec est margarita pretiosa Charitas sine qua nihil tibi prodest quod cumque habueris quaÌ„ si sola habeas sufficit tibi Aug. ser 50. de verb. Domini peace but with him whome he vnfeignedly loueth Who is long animous in good workes constantly perseuering vnles he burne with louing Who is benigne and mercifull vnles he loue him to whom he exhibiteth mercy Who is good except by louing he be made good Who is profitably faythfull but by that fayth which worketh by loue So that not Charity as Abbot dreameth from fayth but fayth it self I meane liuely Fayth and all other vertues deriue their chiefest dignity and preheminence from Charity For what other vertue sayth S. Hierome ought to hold the primacy among the fruits of the spirit but Charity without which other vertues are not accounted vertues and from which all things that are good take their beginning 8 Worthily therefore I returne againe to S. Augustine our good maister so often commendeth loue as if that alone were to be commanded without which other good things cannot profit And in another place I take this to be the margarite for which the merchant is described in the Ghospell who found one pretious stone and sold all that he had to buy it This Charity is that precious margarite without which whatsoeuer thou hast it profiteth nothing which only if thou hast it sufficeth thee Likewise add Charity all thinges profit thee take away Charity other things auaile thee naught a Aug. ser 42. de temp Charity is the light the oyle which surpasseth all other vertues b Aug. tract 17. in Euang. Ioan. By Charity only the law is fullfilled c Greg. hom 38 in Euang. Charity is the nuptiall garment which adorneth our soules d Ruper Hugo Card. in eum locum Charity is the fire-tryed gould which maketh vs rich with al celestiall treasures e Chry. de incomp Dei nat hom â— Richard de sanct Vict in psal 44 Charity is the Queene of vertues f Richard in eum locum Chrys in psal 232. hom de Char. The mother and mistresse of heauenly vertues g Augu. serm 42. de tempor By which the soule is happy and blessed that deserueth to haue it It is the height and consumation of spirituall life Origen I thinke that the beginning or ground worke of our saluation is Fayth the increase or augmentation Hope the perfection and top of the building Charity S. Clemens Clemen Alexand. l. 2. Strom. Aug serm 20. de verb. Apost Cent. 4. â— 4. Colum. â— 92. Ephrem l. de vera poenit c. 1. Cent. 5 c. 4. Colum. 505. Sedul in c. 5. ad Philip. of Alexandria Fayth precedeth Feare rayseth the building Loue doth consumate or end it S. Aug. The house of God by beliefe is
these three meanes is Aug. l. 2. in Iulian c. 8. imparted vnto vs. First by the lauer of regeneration in which all sinnes are remitted Then by wrastling with vices from whose guilt we are absolued Thirdly when our prayer is heard by which we say forgiue vs our trespasses Finally S. Iames Do you see that Iac. 2. v. 24. by workes a man is iustifyed and not by fayth only which as I haue declared aboue cannot be vnderstood of outward Gen. 15. v. c. Rom. 4. v. 9. but of inward iustification before the face of God of that wherin Fayth doth iustify yet not only not alone Of that wherein Abraham was iustifyed when it is sayd of him Abraham beeleued and it was reputed to him to iustice the chiefe place which D. Whitaker M. Abbot and their confederacy so often alleadge for their true iustifying and internall VVhitak l. 8. aduers Duraeum Abbot in his defence c. 4. VVhitak in his preface to the reprehens p. 4. Cent. 2. c. 4. Colum. 71. Sciendum est esse eam adulterinaÌ„ Fayth In so much as many of the Lutheran and Zuinglian Protestants either traduce that saying of the Apostle or discard the whole Epistle out of the Canon of holy Scripture by reason he disputeth heere so mightily against them For this moued Luther to account it no better then an Epistle of straw in comparison of the Epistles of Peter and Paul as Whitaker after impudent denyalls was constrayned to confesse by finding an old edition wherein Luther disgorged that blasphemous paralell that poysoned speach which his whelps the Magdeburgian Centurists licking vp after him cast forth in this manner It is to be vnderstood that that is a bastard or an adulterous Epistle Among other reasons they alleage this Because against Paul and against all Scriptures the epistle of Iames ascribeth Iustice to works and peruerteth as it were of set purpose that which Paul argueth out of Genesis that Abraham was iustifyed by only fayth without workes and auoucheth that Abraham obtayned iustice by workes Rom. 4. Gen. 15. Cent. 2. c. 4. Colum 71. Cent. 1. c. 4. Colum 54. Pomeran ad Rom c. 8 Musculus in locis coÌ„mun c. de iustific num 5. p. 271. Vitus Theod. in annot in nouum Testam p. vltim Illiricus in praf Iac. Rom. 4. And in the first Century The Epistle say they of Iames swarueth not a little from the Analogy of the Apostolicall doctrine whereas it attributeth iustification not to only Fayth but to workes and calleth the Law a Law of liberty 4. Pomeran another Lutheran of singular fame among them accuseth S. Iames of no lesse then three notorious faults heerin First of making a wicked argument Secondly of concluding ridiculously Thirdly of cyting Scripture against Scripture Wolfgangus Musculus also a famous Zuinglian rebuketh S. Iames That he alleadgeth the example of Abraham nothing to the purpose c. He confoundeth the true and properly Christian Fayth which the Apostle euer preacheth with that which is common to Iewes and Christians Turkes and Diuells c. and setteth downe his sentence so different from the Apostolicall doctrine The like is affirmed by Vitus Theodorus once preacher of Norimberge and by Illyricus a great Sholler of Luther who ioyne with vs against their owne sect-mates the Caluinists and all English Protestants in these two poynts First that S. Iames cannot be expounded of fayth outwardly professed but of the inward Christian fayth Secondly that Fayth alone doth not iustify according S. Iames but workes also in the same sense as S. Paul attributeth iustification to Fayth Therfore Luther boldly confesseth a contradiction betweene them which cannot be Luth. in collo conutualib latin tom 2. de libris noui Test. Idem in c. 22. Genes reconciled Many saith he haue taken great paines in the epistle of Iames to make it accord with Paul as Philip endeauoureth in his Apology but not with good successe for they are contrary faith doth iustify faith doth not iustify c. In another place he hath these wordes Abraham was iust by fayth before he is knowen such an one by God Therfore Iames doth naughtily conclude that now at the length he is iustified after this obedience for by works as by fruits faith and iustice is known but it followeth not vt Iacobus delirat as Iames dotingly affirmeth Therfore the fruites do iustify From whence we also gather that the spirit of our English Reformers is different from the spirit of Lutherans from the spirit of Zuinglians and so one of them a lying spirit in a capitall point in receauing the epistle of S. Iames for Canonicall and conteyning the true doctrine of the Apostles which they contemnâ— as apocriphall and varying from the Apostolicall doctrine in a substantiall article of fayth 5. But these things I leaue and come backe againe to my former discourse After the example of Abraham he confirmeth it with another of Rahab saying Also Rahab the harlot was not she iustified by workes receauing the Messengers Rom. 4. putting them out another way And then he coÌ„cludeth for euen as the body without spirit is dead so also fayth without good works is dead From which words these consequences may be manifestly drawn First as the body is a true body depriued of the spirit of life so fayth may be true fayth bereft of the life of Charity although dead fruitles without vigour force or actiuity to iustify as the body is dead without Iac. c. 2. v. 25. the soule SecoÌ„dly the spirit is not any outward effect only or sign of life but the true inward forme which giueth life to the body no more are works the effects only as Whitaker Ibidem v. 26. calleth the manifestations of righteousnes but the true causes also therof They do as Hugo commenteth vpon that passage by the works the fayth was consumate perfect Faytlr declare it augment and consumate it Yea they giue it the life VVhitak in his answere to M. Camp 8. reason Huge in illum loâ—uÌ„ Iac. c. 2. v. 22. efficacy both of the first and second iustification for if we vnderstand by workes the spring or fountaine from whence liuely workes proceed whch is Charity they formally impart to Faith the first life efficacy of Iustice If other actions operations which flow from Charity they meritoriously attribute the second life of iustification which is the augmentation perfection and full accomplishment of the former S. Ambrose interpreteth them of the fountaine and first life explicating those words of the Apocalyps I know thy workes that thou hast the name that thou liuest thou art dead He hath the name that he liued that Ambr. in c. 3. Apo. is the name of a Christian but he was dead because he had not the works of fayth which is Charity c. as the body is dead without the soule so also if all good things we seem to haue they are
l. de Euchar opinion of the Church concerning imputatiue Iustice. The like accusation of the most ancient Fathers made by Bullinger D. Whitguift Humfrey Whitaker and others you may see heereafter recyted in the Treatise of merit and in the first part of this worke in the Controuersy of Satisfaction which more then aboundantly conuinceth the consent Feild in append 1. p. fol. 19. of the Primitiue Church for of the later there is no doubt to be wholy with vs in this substantiall point of Fayth and that our Reformers bandy against it and the long continued current of truth in all tymes and Countryes euer since Howbeit M. Field to win credit with the simple audaciously craketh We no way oppose our selues against the vniuersall resolution and practise of the whole Church which to do Augustine pronounceth insolent madnes Let this then M. Field be your taske or let some of your * Thus S. Ambrose derideth ProtestaÌ„ts before they were hatched l. 10. ep â—p 82. new Maisters take the payns to discouer some other publick or hidden Congregration of theirs some other pastours besids the fornamed who taught your doctrine and reproued our errours in S. Cyprian S. Hierome S. Austine the rest as the true sheepheards watchmeÌ„ ouer the house of God haue alwayes done Were they reckoned such small defects as might be cloaked dissembled And not essentiall not fundameÌ„tall points of fayth which shake the whole ground of Religion Were they whispered in corners by some vnknowne or obscure companions not printed in books preached in pulpits diuulged to the whole world by sundry troups of learned men in such vast Regious kingdomes and not one of your â—olifidian professours to open their mouth against them Shall we expect after so long tyme your wresting of their words to some fauourable exposition of your deuising The Centurists your own Collegues partners in beliefe wanted neither will wit diligence or cunning to haue performed it had they not found their sayings vnanswerable their words vndefeatable the mayne drift scope of their discourses wholy vncapable of other construction Shall we thinke they also fauoured the opinion of Protestants and so breathed out of the same mouth truth falshood fire water heate Pomeran vbi supra cold as Pomerane blasphemeth or which is all one that they contradicted themselues as the Centurists sticke not in plaine tearmes to auerre of Clemens Alexandrinus that famous Cent. 2. c. 4. Colum. 6â— Cent. 5. c. â— Colum. 1008. Writer and Maister to Origen and of Theodoret Bishop of Cyrus It were too notorious a stumbling and headlong course not heard of before that so huge an army of deuout and learned pillers of the Church should all vniformely precipitate and contradict themselues in this sole point In a chiefe point of Fayth and that not once or twice but ech of them diuers and sundry tymes and none to haue the grace to see so great an ouersight or seeing it to amend it to recant it to seeke to reconcile it with other of their sayings no zealous man in the whole world for so many ages who durst note or twite them of it vntill drunken Lutherans enraged with the fury of an Apostata Frier began to espy that horrible Antichristian and often repeated contradiction It is incredible it cannot be imagined or of it could certes they were no Protestants who maintayned beleeued an article of Fayth quite opposite to the life of Protestancy or worse then Infidells who sought to perswade and inculcate to others that which they beleeued not or knew to be falfe Fye vpon such impious Chams as cannot vphold their follyes without disgracing their predecessours who cannot enter the kingdome of heauen without they condemne these Saints into the pit of hell nor become Christians themselues without making them impious Luth. tom 5. in Gal. c. 4. f. 382. hypocrits damnable Idolaters for no better doth Luther account such as dissent from him and his mates in the iustice of only Fayth Let vs heare his words 13. Whosoeuer falleth from the article of Iustification he becommeth ignorant of God and is an Idolater therefore it is all Luth. ibid. fol. 400. one whether he be a Monke a Turke a Iew or Anabaptist for this article once taken away there remayneth nothing but meere errour hipocrisy impiety idolatry although in shew there appeare excellent truth worship of God holynes c. And some VVhitak l. 8. aduers Dureum and in his answere to 〈◊〉 Câ—mpiaÌ„â— râ—ason Abbot in his defence caâ— 4. Fulke vpon sundry of these places against the new Testam few lines after If that face and forme of old papistry stood now if that discipline were obserued now with so much seruerity and rigour as the Hereâ—its as Hierome Augustine Gregory Bernard Francis Dominicke and many others obserued it little perhaps should I profit by my doctrine of Fayth against that state of papistry yet neuertheles after the example of Paul inueighing against the false Apostles in appearance most holy good men I ought to fight against such Iustice workers-of the Papistical kingdome Thus he confessing S. Hierome S. Augustine S. Gregory S. Bernard c. to haue beene iustice-workers of our kingdome and to haue beene bondmen of the law of sinne and the Diuell cast out of the house of God as he wretchedly auoweth in the same place of which some of his followers being since ashamed haue clipped and pared off much of this his discourse in the later editions But it is high time to view the forces wherein the Aduersary confideth 14. The huge host of obiections which the mutinous enemy disorderly leuieth against vs the Tenent of their Ancestours in â—his and the former two Controuersyes I for more perspicuity and orders sake sunder and part into diuers wings or squadrons In the first I rank those texts of Scripture which attribute vnto Fayth the corporall benefite of health or saluation by which the Matth. â— v. 22. Luc. 18. v. 42. Luc. 8. v. 50. Luc. 17. v. 19. Matth. â— v. 2. spirituall was betokned because our Sauiour seldome cured any in body whome he cured not also in soule As when to the woman troubled with an issue of bloud he sayd Haue a good hart daughter thy Fayth hath made thee safe To the blind man Do thou see thy fayth hath made thee whole To the Prince of the Synagogue Feare not beleeue only and she shal be safe To the cured leaper Aryse go thy wayes because thy fayth hath made thee safe Likewise Iesus seeing their fayth sayd to the sicke of the palsey Haue a good hart Sonne thy sinnes are forgiuen thee These and the like which our aduersaryes produce rather witnes against them then speake in their behalfe for not one of them mentioneth their speciall assurance and particuler fayth relying on the mercy of God remitting their sinnes of which the fornamed Calu. l.
Law in euery action he goeth about as he hath alwayes sufficient ayde and help from God if he earnestly craue it and craue it he may if he answere his motions Leo ser 16. de Passione to auoyd the infection of any new crime whensoeuer the danger thereof occurreth Whereupon S. Leo sayth God doth iustly vrge vs with his Precept who preuenteth vs with his grace to eschew the enormity of euery fault Thirdly such is the benignity and goodnes of God in seeking 1. ad Cor. 1. v. 3. to mollify the obstinate will of rebellious sinners that albeit not at euery moment nor for any desert of theirs yet in due tyme and place through the merits of Iesus Christ euery one who is held in the prison of vice hath meanes sufficient not only to resist any new offence but also to deliuer himselfe from that wretched thraldome and state of sinne The Father of mercyes and God of all comfort and consolation often vouchsafing to call inuite and being alwayes ready to help him forth 27. Cease therefore O vngratfull man cease to excuse thy selfe that thou art vnwillingly subiect to the tyranny Aug. l. 1. ad Bonifa cap. 3. of sinne Cease to lay the blame of thy misdeeds to blamelesse Necessity Charge not Adams fall as the only cause of thy voluntary faults but confesse with great and humble S. Augustine that euery one who offendeth God all who are bound in the chaines of iniquity By their own will are detayned in sinne by their owne will are tumbled headlong from sinne to sinne THE XXV CONTROVERSY SHEWETH The cooperation of Free-will to our conuersion and to workes of Piety against D. Whitaker D. Fulke and M. White CHAP. I. ALBEIT the perfect decision of this Controuersy now in hand may easily be gathered out of the former Chapter where I treated of mans Liberty not only to Ciuill and Morall actions in the state of corruption but also of his absolute freedome from Necessity in what state soeuer yet least I should be thoght to huddle vp many thinges togeather and lappe them in obscurity after the fashion of our darke and obscure Reformers I purposly handle this difficulty a part that is Whether man clogged and loaden with sinne hath any freedome of will before he be iustifyed to lift vp his hart and giue assent to Gods heauenly motions when he of his boun tiful mercy vouchsafeth to call and stirre him vp All Protestants defend the Negatiue all Catholikes the Affirmatiue part 2. M. Whitaker teacheth that man wants Free-will to Whitak l. 1. contra Dur. p. 78. Fulke in c. 3. Apoc. sect 4. In c. 6. 2. Cor. sect 2. In cap. 9. Rom. sect 4. VVhite in the way to the true Church §. 40. fol. 283 the dutyes of Fayth because till the Sonne hath made him free he must needes be a seruant to sinne And M. Fulke more plainely It lyeth not sayth he in the freedome of mans will to giue consent to Gods calling It lyeth not in mans Free-will to follow the motion of God Man hath no Free-will vntill it be freed Mans will worketh nothing in our conuersion vntill it be conuerted And M. White semblably Our will quoth he when Grace first enters is meerely passiue c. As my paper whereon I am writing receaueth the inke passiuely and bringeth nothing of it to the writing c. Whence it followeth that in those whome God effectually will renew their will can make no resistance as my paper cannot reiect my writing Thus they 3. We on the other side acknowledge indeed that mans will is much weakned his vnderstanding dimmed and all the powers of his soule and body made faint and feeble by the infirmity of sinne incurred by his first Parents reuolt In so much as neither the Gentills by the force of Nature according to the decree of the holy Councell of Trent nor the Iewes by the letter of Moyses Law could arise ou◠Conc. Trid. sect 6. can ◠2. of that sinnefull state c. except God the Father when the happy fulnesse of tyme was come had sent his only Sonne to redeeme both Iewes and Gentils and make vs all his adopted children We grant moreouer that the freedom of mans will cannot preuaile without the speciall concurrence and help of God to any Diuine or Supernaturall work nor to the due performāce of Morall duty nor to the true loue of God with all our hart nor to the vanquishing of any one temptation nor to perseuere long without falling into sinne nor so much as dispose our selues or vse any meanes to win Gods fauour We sav with S. Berna d The endeauours of Freewill are both Ber◠l. de grat liter arbit voyd and frustrate vnles they be ayded and none at all vules they be stirred vp by him Notwithstanding we hold that as by his assistance we may accomplish many Morall good workes and ouercome any offence whatsoeuer so when he in the aboundance of his sweetest blessings calleth vpon vs and affordeth his helping hand we may likewise by the faculty of our Free-will truly consent and actiuely cooperate to our Conuersion Iuc c. 10 4. And therefore the condition of man is resembled in this case to him that descended from Ierusalem to Iericho and fell amongst theeues who robbed him of his temporall riches and maymed him in his corporall members so man by sinne is despoyled of his Supernaturall gifts wounded in his naturall powers and therin left not starke dead nor wholy aliue but halfe dead and halfe a liue aliue Maldon in c. 10. Luc. ver 30. fol. 222. Ioa. c. 11. in body dead in soule Aliue as Maldonate well noteth out of the ancient Fathers because he had remorse of Conscience and liberty of Free-will dead because he lay buried in the sepulcher of sinne out of which he could not rise vnlesse it pleased our Sauiour Christ to call and say Lazarus come forth Vnlesse he by the Oyle of his mercy and Wine of his precious bloud healed the wounded refreshed the languishing not restored the perished powers of our soule all naturall faculties remayning after sinne Thom. 1. 2. quest 85. Dionys c. 4. de diuinominib Concilium 〈…〉 c. 1. Tridentinum ses 6. cap. 1. whole and vncorrupted as the Deuines proue out of S. Dionyse So that Free-will was not vtterly lost as M. Fulke aboue contended but lesse able to worke not enthralled but maymed not altogether bound but vehemently inclined to the corruption of vice It was as the sacred Arausican and Tridentine Councells define Non extinctum sed attenuatum Not extinguished but weakned and diminished yet being moued and strengthened by our Lord it is full able to accept or reiect his offered grace Wherein we haue the voice of God on our side not darkely deliuered in any particuler place but often and many waies perspicuously vttered by the Prophets Apostles and by the heauenly mouth of his beloued Sonne 5.
themselues haue also arriued The third is perpetually without intermission withall the forces and powers of our soule to be actually carryed away with the supernaturall streames of loue This only is proper to the Saints in heauen and not axacted by God of any mortall creature besieged with the infirmityes of flesh and bloud in respect of this our iustice on earth yea the iustice and perfection of S. Paul is tearmed vnperfect it is an image or shaddow of vertues it may be sometymes touched with the spots of vncleanes and therfore of this Philip. 3. v. 12. 1. Ioan. 1. v. 5. only the Apostle auouched Not that now I haue receaued or now am perfect yet in regard of the former two degrees he arriued to perfection and was already perfect euen by the phrase of holy Scripture which speaking of the first degree sayth He that keepeth his word in him in very deed the Charity of God is perfected Of the second it is also written If Matth. 19. v. 21. thou wilt be perfect go sell the things that thou hast and come and follow me By these degrees therefore of perfection all the obiections may be easily warded which our aduersaryes bring either out of Scriptures or Fathers as when they affirme our Iustice to be imperfect defiled with the touch of impurity they speake of the first degree soyled with the dust of wordly cares and too often distayned with veniall defaults When they exhort vs to greater perfection that is not to the common of all the iust but to that singuler of the mortifyed and feruent persons finally when they teach that we can neuer be perfect in this life it is true in the last acceptation of the word according to the third degree heer specifyed Which triple diuision of perfection keepeth the aduersary at such a bay as he knoweth not whither to turne him how to escape or what to mutter against it THE XXVII CONTROVERSY WHEREIN Our good workes are acquitted from the spottes of sinne against Doctour Whitaker Doctour Fulke and Doctour Abbot CHAP. I. THIS calumniation is euery where so rife and frequent amongst Protestant writers as M. Abbot in his defence c. 4. sect 44. 45. 46. VVhitak in his an swere to the â— reason of M. Camp f. 250. in the translation whereunto is added in brief marginal notes the summâ— c. Abbot spendeth many Sections to attach his owne paynes and endeauours iustly all other mens good workes wrongfully yea perniciously with the guilty stayne of sinne and M. Whitaker vndertaking the patronage and approbation of that drunken sentence of Luthers All good actions be sinnes if God be seuere in iudgement they are damnable sinnes If he be fauourable they â—e but small ones auoweth Luther sayd this and he sayd it truly for in euery action of a man though neuer so excellent there is some fault which may wholy marre the action and make it odious to God if that which is done be weighed in the ballance of diuine iustice 2. But if Luther sayd truly then as Duraeus most pithily argueth against M. Whitaker the Apostle S. Paul sayd not truly If thou take a wife thou sinnest not theÌ„ S. Peter sayd not truly Doing these things you shall not sinne at any time VVhitak ibid. fol. 251. 1. Cor. 7. v. 28. 2. 2. Pet. 1. vers 10. 1. Ioan. 3. v. 8. 1 Ioan. â— v. 9. 1. Cor. 3. v. â—1 Matth. 6. v. 22. Luc. 11. v. 36. August l. 2. qq Euang c. 15. Maldon in c. 11. Luc. Matth. 5. v. 17. S. Iohn sayd not truly For this appeared the sonne of God that he might dissolue the workes of the Diuell If there be no worke which is not diuellish and sinnefull he sayd not truly Euery one that is borne of God committeth not sinne Neyther did S. Paul wel to compare good workes to siluer gould and pretious stones nor did the Prophets and Apostles well to exhort vs to good workes Christ did not well as Cardinall Bellarmin prosecuteth the argumeÌ„t saying If the eye be simple thy whole body shal be lightsome and If then thy whole body be lightsome hauing no part of darknes it shal be lightsome wholy and as a bright candle it shall lighten thee Where by the eye S. Augustine and others vnderstand the intention of maÌ„ By the whole body Maldonate expoundeth all his facultyes by the whole absolutely of which it is also sayd the whole shal be lightsome he interpreteth all his human actions which proceed froÌ„ the powers faculties of the soule All these sayth Christ flowing from the iust and leuelled by a right intention to a good end and obiect are so bright as they inlighten the whole man so pure and vnspotted as they haue no part of darknes no blemish of sinne to destaine them For which cause he calleth them in another place light So let your light shine before men c. Matth. 5. v. 17. 3. Lastly if Luther sayd truely God himselfe sayd not truly writing of Iob In all these things Iob sinned not with his lips neyther spake he any foolish thing against God And in the next Chapter he calleth him A right man fearing God Iob. c. 1. v. 22. Iob. 2. v. 3. departing from euill and retaining innocency Whereby it is euident that Iob in all his troubles committed no sinne neyther in thought word nor deed not in word because he sinned not with his lips not in deed because he departed from euill not in thought because he still retayned innocency in his hart And if we follow the Hebrew Text all this may be gathered out of the former words of the first Chapter For the Hebrew addeth not with his lips but without restriction absolutely readeth Iob sinned not or as our Protestants translate In all this did not Iob sinne Which Origen and the Grecians according to Pineda reférre to his Origen in his commeÌ„tary vpon Iob. Pineda in â—um loc Nihil peccauit Iob coram Domino Psal 16. v. 3. Psal 7. v. 9. 1. Tim. â— v. 17. 18. Matt. 5. v. 17. cogitations to wit that he entertayned no euill thought or cogitation against God but iudged wel of his goodnes and the 70. Interpreters subscribe hereunto who read in all these things which hapned vnto him Ioâ— sinned not at all in the sight of our Lord. The like King Dauid affirmed of himselfe Thou o Lord hast tryed me in fire and there was no iniquity found in me Therefore albeit he otherwise offended yet at that tyme he was cleane from sinne as also when he sayd Iudge me o Lord according to my iustice and according to my innocency Moreouer some workes of the iust are pronounced by the holy Ghost to be good God giueth vs all things abundantly to enioy to do well to become rich in good workes That they may see your good workes and glorify your Father which is in heauen And yet they could not be good nor commendable in