See afterward Part. 2. chap. 1. §. 2. For all Papists are of this opinion viz. that no sinnes but veniall onely shall be expiated in Purgatory fire Secondly the imputation of POPERY fastened vpon him from whom we English-men receiued our first instruction in the faith This was a good motiue vnto me to embrace Popery as passionate Sir Martin Luther phraseth the Catholick Religion whom I might more justly call a foule mouthed dogg then b Against D. Bishopp Part. 1. D. Abbott bestoweth this homely courtesy vpon a very learned * T. W. Priest since we were translated immediately from Paganisme vnto this belief by the wonderfull and gracious operation of almighty God Thirdly his confession of S. Gregories judgement concerning the remission of some sinnes after this life which D. Field would infrindge as you see by misinforcing his testimony against his euident purpose in that * Lib. 4. dial 39. place and his resolution elswhere 8. For in his exposition of the penitentiall Psalmes he deliuereth in * Psal 1. 3. in the beginning of each two seuerall places and strengtheneth himself in the first with the authority of S. AVGVSTINE whom he there expressly nameth that some men passe into heauen by the fire of purgation and are expiated thereby in the future life Could I desire a more copious satisfaction in the truth of this matter Or could I wish a more abundant redargution of D. Fields falsehood in traducing the Testaments of the dead for so their works are to establish that doctrine which they did wholly disclayme 9. Now a word or two concerning S. Bernard whom he coupleth very plausibly with S. Gregory as you may see to inferr a conclusion against that faith which they both professed I turned vnto the place in S. Bernard which truly can by no meanes admitt such an interpretation as M. Doctor doth colourably pretend For it is not the meaning of S. Bernard to deny that God doth at any time inflict a temporall payn after the remission of the guilt of sinne because this position were extreamely repugnant vnto Scriptures and Fathers and Reason as I shall briefly declare * Part. 2. chap. 1. §. 2. afterward and vnto the very condition of the Sacrament of Pennance it self wherein S. Bernard knew right well that sinne is remitted and yet all future punishment is not thereby taken away This was the conforme doctrine of the Catholicks in his time and who is so meanely skilled in S. Bernards faith as to conceiue that he would oppugne a matter of such sublimity and so correspondently intertayned by the Church 10. But the truth is this S. Bernard perswadeth men to flye from the contagion of sinne the effect whereof is such that as by naturall death it seuereth the soule from the body so by spirituall death it sundreth God from the soule And as sinne brought forth punishment so the cessation from sinne preuenteth punishment because no punishment doth follow where no sinne is gone before What then doth no effect of sinne remayn where the guylt of sinne is remitted S. Bernard * He esteemeth death it self to be a punishment of sinne as you may see by the sequele denieth it and therefore shewing in what sense he there intendeth that VVhen ALL sinne shall be * Prorsus D. Field himself coÌ„fesseth pag. 98. that Death tyrannizeth ouer the body c. Serm. in â—bitu Huberti VVHOLLY taken out of the way then shall no effect of it remayn he subnecteth this sentence in his sweet and diuine manner viz. Happy is our expectation and blessed is our hope whose Resurrection shall be much more glorious then our first estate of creation before our fall forasmuch as neither sinne nor punishment neither euill nor scourdge shall raigne or dwell or haue possibility to raigne or dwell either in our bodies or soules 11. To conclude it may please you to read and to ponderate this one little saying of S. Bernard by which you may take an estimate of his iudgement in theis matters My brethren while you think to auoyd a very small punishment in this world you incurr a greater in the next For you must vnderstand that you shall pay an hundred fold in * In purgabilibus locis Purgatory for those things which you neglect in this life 12. I know most kind Readers that you meruayle no lesse now then I did by what art D. Field can distill his Church out of the writings of theis worthy and learned men or how their authorities may be honestly alleadged to prooue that Papists are nothing els but a faction in the Church forasmuch as those Authors generally whom he produceth in his glorious Appendix are really interessed in that faction and enimies of our Protestanticall Church Wherefore I did now sufficiently vnderstand that we Protestants assuming the name of Israell vnto our selues and imputing the name of Philistims vnto the Papists could not iustify our affectation therein by any better resemblance then this viz. As the poore 1. Sam. 13.19.20 distressed Israelites were constrayned to repayr vnto the Philistims for the sharpening of their dulled tooles so we miserable Protestants hauing no better meanes are inforced to go vnto the Papists to procure some weapons for our defence from them which we turne vngratefully and vniustly against their owne bowells §. 2. S. AVGVSTINE abused by D. Field 1. YOu haue * Pag. 13. seene the goodly pretense of D. Field assuring you that the Protestants honour and reuerence the Fathers much more then the Papists do Which venditation if it did proceede from a syncere heart then D. Field should not stand in need of his inflexions and corruptions to sustayn his cause with their disgrace and much lesse with infaming the greatest of them all in this manner which I will here represent vnto your Christian view 2. The Romish manner of praying for the dead saith c Pag. 99. he hath no certayn testimony of Antiquity for NO MAN euer thought of Purgatory TILL Augustine to auoyd a worse errour did DOVBTINGLY runne into it d And none before that is false after whom e And not all that is false many in the Latin Church embraced the same opinion but the * See befor pag. 54. Greek Church neuer receiued it to this day 3. He is yet more seuere vnto S. Augustine vnto the Papists and vnto this doctrine saying that f Pag. 79. Augustine doubtfully broached that opinion which gaue occasion to the Papists of their HERESY touching Purgatory This imputation of heresy doth cleaue as strongly vnto the Fathers whom he pretendeth to honour and reuerence as vnto any Papist at this day for what should I speake of g Part. 4. Serm. de defunct in Querelâ defunct GERSONS heresy in this point whom he honoureth and reuerenceth so farr as to intitle him a * Pag. 85. worthy guide of Gods Church c. 4. Now though I obserued many
children the payn is more durable then the fault as * Tract 124. Ioh. S. Augustine speaketh least the fault should seeme small if the payn were finished with it 6. Now as the temporall payn of sinne is justly reserued after the remission of the guilt so it is not alwayes inflicted in this life De Ciuit. Dâ—l 21. c. 13. but sometimes in the next Wherefore S. Augustine confessing that God doth designe poenas teÌ„porarias pro peccatis praeteritis distinguisheth immediately and saith poenas temporarias alij in hac vit a tantùm alij post mortem alij hîc illîc patiuntur 7. Thus I found a double reason of Purgatory the FIRST because some smaller sinnes wherewith grace may consist in the soule are there expiated both in respect of guilt and payn the SECOND because some temporall payn reserued by the justice of God after forgiuenesse of the guilt by his mercy is there sustayned by them who haue not bene exercised with condigne pennance in this life And here ariseth a proper solution vnto the subtility of D. Field See before pag. 103. who would conclude that if all sinne be taken away which is the cause the effect must cease which is punishment c. For though the obligation vnto eternall punishment ceaseth actually vpon remission of the guilt yet the obligation vnto temporall punishmeÌ„t doth remayn by the justice of God his ordinance concurring with our desert is a sufficient cause to produce such effect Therefore till his justice be satisfied the cause of punishment doth still endure 8. To coÌ„clude Whereas M. Rogers would inforce an absurdity vpon Eckius other men as though they were distracted into great variety of opinion coÌ„cerning the cause of Purgatory he misreporteth their intentions For though some few men did conceiue that all veniall sinne is wasted and taken away from the soule immediatly vpon hir separation from the body yet I saw that they and all other Papists to speake in my old language do concordably and vniformely teach that no mortall sinne such as * See D. Field pag. 146. excludeth grace from the soule and * See S. Au. Enchirid. ad Laur. c. 69. excludeth the soule from heauen is purdged after this life otherwise then in reference vnto temporall payn reserued and inflicted after remission of the guilt But M. Rogers would lead his reader to conceiue that the Papists are singularly diuided in their opinions some affirming that onely Veniall sinnes others resoluing that Mortall likewise are cleansed in a penall estate 9. Many such collusions and deuices I obserued in this Author but I will not trouble your patieÌ„ce any longer with the recapitulatioÌ„ of his vntruths forasmuch as by this little which you haue already seene you may coniecture of the rest which I conceale VVhat can you expect from them whose Religion is founded vpon the sands of falsehood and not vpon the rock of truth Do men gather grapes of thornes or figges of thistles Wherefore I will now make hast vnto the conclusion of all and I will end my discourse briefly with him froÌ„ whom my conuersion did happily beginne CHAP. II. Of D. HVMFREY and his booke intituled Secunda pars Iesuitisini coÌ„tayning his answer vnto the 5. former Reasons of EDM. CAMPIAN COncerning the Authour and his work I will say little it is the iudgement of many principall Diuines in EnglaÌ„d that D. Humfrey was worthy to endito such a booke that the booke is worthy to proceed from Arch a man who was reputed sound in the fayth for which he suffered voluntary banishment profound in that science wherein he was a Doctour by his degree * At Oxon Professour by his place Besides as the qualitie of the aduersary deserued good respect and the weight of his reasons required condigne satisfaction which neither himself nor D. VVhitaker haue yealded thereunto so it did greatly import him to deale vprightly substantially in his answere forasmuch as he designed two * Burleigh Leycester honourable Persons to be the Patrones of his labour two learned * Oxford CaÌ„bridge Vniuersities to be the Iudges of his exactnesse But when I found his vnfaithfullnes in his relatioÌ„s his digressions from the matter Non ideò vera mihi videbantur quia deserta c. See S. Aug. Conf. l. 5. c. 6. the generall imbecillity of his discourse flourished with a certayn streame of eloquence and beautified with pleasing phrases I could not esteeme that to be a true venerable Religion which is so basely slenderly supported by theÌ„ who are accompted Pillars in our Church §. 1. S. AVGVSTINE notoriously depraued by D. HVMFREY Rat. 3. 1. VVHereas that excellent and renowned F. Campian in those short Reasons which bring eternall memory vnto their Authour doth obiect vnto the Protestants the inuisibility of their Church and that it was not otherwise visible for many ages then in some scattering hereticks AERIVS Vigilantius Berengarius c. from whom they receiued not an entyre religion but begged certayn pestiferous fragments alone D. c In resp ad Camp p. 261. 262. Humfrey finding himself taken in an inexplicable difficulty windeth vp and downe to find some plausible euasion and therefore he sayeth VVherein Aërius did erre we reject it wherein he held any thing agreably with the Scripture we receyue it c. 2. After this obscure and vncertayn oracle he resolueth most plainely that he and his Church will not digresse from Aërius in this poynt and therefore he addeth We do not disapproue that which Aërius thought and Augustine hath related that we ought not to pray nor to offer oblation for the dead because this is not contayned in any precept of the Scripture which d He quoteth Aug. de cura pro mortuis Augustine also doth seeme to signify when he sayeth that this commendation of the dead â—s an ancient custome of the Church Thus Aërius is iustifyed against the vniuersall Church and his heresy is preferred before the Catholicke faith But of this matter I haue intreated more particularly * Pag. 14. I wanted D. HuÌ„frey his booke when I cited his opinion which I haue faithfully deliuered though the word rectè be not in my author yet it iâ— sufficiently implied in him before 3. The thing which I yeald now vnto your coÌ„sideration is the subtile and artificiall collusioÌ„ of this renowned Doctor For wheras he pretendeth Scripture negatiuely against prayer for the dead and that S. Augustine had only custome to maintayne it I found that S. Augustine premiseth Scripture in defence therof then confirmeth it by that authority which to †Epist 118. impugne is the part of most insolent madnesse For e de curâ pro mort cap. 1. sayth he VVe read in the bookes of the * 2. 12. 4â— Machabees that Sacrifice was offered for the dead But if this were read no where in the OLD
32. See also de curâ pro Mert. cap. 1. Non est dubium c. There is no doubt but that the dead receiue helpe by the prayers of holy Church by the healthfull Sacrifice and by almes The SECOND t De Ciuit Dei lib. 21. c. 24. Non veraciter diceretur c. It could not be sayd truly that the sinne against the holy Ghost shall not be forgiuen in this world nor in the world to come vnlesse some sinnes were remitted in the future life And in the same place he speaketh most constantly of temporall paynes which the soules of some men sustayn after their dissolution from the body 16. Wherefore I reflected now vpon D. Fields assertion and was amazed to behold such a repugnancy betwixt theis things viz. Augustine ranne doubtingly into Purgatory and yet he affirmeth There is no doubt but that some soules are relieued by the Sacrifice c. Agayn Augustine did broach this opinion doubtfully and yet he sayeth in great confidence It cannot be sayd truly that one sinne shall not be forgiuen in this world nor in the next vnlesse some sinnes not remitted here should be forgiuen there Was S. Augustine so simple as not to regard his owne positions or are not other men dishonest rather in contorting his words against his purpose and intention 17. But forasmuch as I knew that our best and most respected Authors do insist euerlastingly in this poynt I adhibited all possible diligence to find out the doubtfull sentences in S. Augustine which may seeme to giue way vnto this pretensed IRRESOLVTION and specially such as belong vnto this businesse directly without deductions inferences glosses interpretations NOT ◠or the like deuises whereby men are wont to heape vp many testimonies out of the Fathers and to make their conclusions against some doctrine which is not particularly handled by the Fathers in those places whence they assume such proofes 18. The principall therefore and most pertinent sentences which I could find are two which here ensue FIRST Some men are of opinion saieth u Enchirid. ad Laur. cap. 67. S. Augustine that such as are baptized and continue Christians not diuided by any schisme or any heresy from the Catholick communion how wickedly so euer they liue and neuer wash away their sinnes by repentance nor * Daniel 4.24 Is this doctrine repugnant vnto our Redemption by the bloud of Christ alone Truly as much as the former doctrine of Propitiatiō c. See before pag. 29. redeeme them with almes but persist therein most pertinaciously vnto their last day yet they shall be saued by fire howbeit their punishment shall be extended according to the quality of their offence But they who say thus and yet are CATHOLIQVES viz. not separated from the Church by any heresy as Arrians Marcionites c. seeme in my opinion to be deceiued by a certayn humane beneuolence 19. Here S. Augustine in his mild and gentle disposition though he reiecteth this conceipt in some priuate men yet he referreth the cause of their errour vnto the simplicity of their loue Neither doth he propound any scruple against Purgatory but onely he denieth it vnto such persons as by an euill life and impenitent death make themselues vncapable of this * Misericor Iudi◠cantabo tibi Domine c. Psal 101. Which S. Augustine and his cōpany did sing after his mothers decease See Confess l. 9. c. 12. mercifull iustice As for example The law in England doth prouide a mitigation of penalty for some offendours as burning in the hand pillory or some like chastisement and depriueth them not of their life because she would in hir justice punish sinne and yet in mercy she would preserue the person Now if any man would exceed the purpose of the law and in his affection would grant this indulgence vnto Murtherers also his errour must be corrected by such as are more equall in the courses of iustice then he is and yet they who deny this benefit vnto a Murtherer do not thereby subuert the Law which sheweth mercy vnto some transgressours but they reduce the practise of it vnto the intention of them by whom it was respectiuely decreed 20. The SECOND sentence in w Enchirid. cap. 69. S. Augustine is this It is not incredible that some such thing may be done after this life and yet it may be questioned whether it be so or not For it may be found out or it may lye hid whether many faithfull men shall be saued by a certayn Purgatory fire either more slowly or more speedily as they haue more or lesse affected theis temporall goods Howbeit theis men also are not such of whom the Scripture sayeth * 1. Cor. 6.10 they shall not possesse the kindome of God that is to say vnlesse their sinnes be remitted vnto them vpon their conuenient repentance 21. Here S. Augustine doth not leaue it as a thing vncertayn and disputable whether there be any temporall payn or penall expurgation of some soules after this life for he doth affirme it confidently in many places and doubteth of it in none but he leaueth it as a thing questionable whether any earthly affections remayning actually in the separated soule and cleauing thereunto be purdged out after this life He might doubt also de qualitate poenae viz. whether FIRE be the Instrument which God vseth in the purgation of soules or not For though this be most credible yet no man is obliged to receiue this opinion by absolute necessity of faith by affliction payn and sorrow as they are purdged out in this life very often by tribulation and grief This is clearely imported by his owne words TALE aliquid fieri c. It is not incredible that some such thing may be done after this life and yet we may doubt whether it be so or not 22. Wherefore as in the * num 18. former sentence S. Augustine disputed of the PERSONS vnto whom Purgatory may appertayn so here he disputeth of the QVALITIES which are to be cleansed out of their soules but he disputeth or doubteth in neither of Purgatory it self or a penall estate for to litigate concerning names words it were a childish folly wherein the soules of some men shall receiue a castigation for their sinnes That this is the true and genuine sense of S. Augustine in the aforesaid places all intelligent Readers will easily perceiue by the connexion and dependency of his discourse 23. But I proceeded yet a little farther and considered yet more exactly with my self that the very prescription ensuing x Cap. 110. there in S. Augustines profound discourse doth inuincibly and substantially demonstrate vnto me alwayes presupposing him to be no simple fellow nor grosse companion that he had no purpose nor intention in the aforesaid places to admitt any doubt concerning PVRGATORY really and purely conceiued in the nature of the thing it self but onely concerning some accidentall respects For sayth he
a sottishnes in me to conceiue that Saint Hierome let not D. Field nor Luther be offended with this reuerence and honour which I yeald vnto the Fathers by their just title of SAINTS is guilty of that errour which S. Augustine disprooueth since he also controlleth it by the validity of the same reason precisely which S. Augustine hath alleadged and vrged to this purpose Were there any congruity or coherence in such a fancy 10. Wherefore as I was directed by theis considerations to intertayn a more reuerent opinion of S. Hierome then euer I admitted vnto this time so that high conceipt which I had of D. Fields extraordinary value languished in me daily and the * The Protestants CHVRCH cause it self which he vndertaketh to defend seemed worse and worse in my thoughts forasmuch as the chiefest Patrones thereof are continually driuen vnto such dishonourable and vnworthy shifts § 4. S. AMBROSE abused by D. Field 1. SAint Ambrose maketh vp the messe and beareth his part of disgrace amongst his friends 2. But as the cariadge of this matter is very smooth so it seemeth to be very syncere and graue For when the learned Doctour hath layd forth the sense See before pag. 31. and intendment of Antiquity in hir prayers for the dead he goeth forward with a specious pretense Pag. 98. to vnfold the truth more amply and to detect such errours as were embraced by some men contrary vnto the designement and purpose of the Catholick Church 3. It was an opinion sayth he of many of the Fathers that there is no judgement to passe vpon men till the last day and that all men are holden either in some place vnder the earth or els in some other place appointed for that purpose so that they come not into heauen nor receiue the reward of their labours till the generall IudgemeÌ„t c. Of this opinion was Iustin Martyr * He taught the doctrine of Purgatory and so did Lactantius also by the confession of sondry ProtestaÌ„ts 1 De natué Dei l. 4. c 4. Tertullian Clemens Romanus Lactantius Victorinus Martyr AMBROSE Ioh. Pontifex Rom. and sundry other 4. Here I did suspect the integrity of D. Field in his manifold turnings and inflexions because I was informed long before by n Hierome Zanchy that prayer for the dead had not a reference particularly vnto the soule but rather vnto the body a poynt not omitted by o Pag. 98. D. Field himself and his collection is framed in this manner Ambrose in his funerall oration vpon the death of Valentinian the Emperour confesseth that * Aeterna vi â— fruitur viluptate aâ—e S. Ambrose his words his soule is in heauen and yet he addeth farther that he will be mindfull of him in his prayers and oblations Wherefore either Ambrose doth contradict himself which in so little a passadge is vnlikely or els he referred his prayers vnto the resurrection of the Emperour and vnto his corporall estate 5. But Zanchius is egregiously mistaken in this collection and his partition is vnsufficient for S. Ambrose doth not contradict himself neither yet did he referr the execution of theis religious duties vnto the body alone and resurrection of the Emperour as it appeareth by his expresse testimony in this oration viz. Let us prosecute the godly SOVLE with our oblations likewise in his oration for Theodosius he desireth God to take the Emperours SOVLE into his rest thus also in his oration for Satyrus he maketh a speciall commendation of his SOVLE vnto almighty God and this was the practise of the Church but as many probable reasons did induce him to conceiue that Valentinians soule was now in actuall possession of eternall joy so for want of infallible assurance in this behalf he would not intermit his duty nor neglect his office toward the dead which charity prescribed and the Church appointed in this case In like manner p In obitis Humberti S. Bernard out of his singular hope which was founded vpon very probable reason saith that Humbertus lately deceased iam obtinet gaudium c. doth now obtayn those ioyes which shall endure for euer Notwithstanding it were a folly to imagin that S. Bernard would neglect the accustomed piety and deuotion of the Church which haply might be expedient for his soule To conclude Hence it is that S. q Confess l. 9. c. 13. Augustine supplicating vnto God for his deceased Mother saith I belieue o Lord that thou hast already performed the thing which I desire for she was a woman of singular virtue and the premisses of hir good life inferred the conclusion of hir happy death but yet accept the voluntary petition of my lippes The first proceeded out of a pious belief the second out of a wise feare and there was charity in both Which point I wish that r Cathol Apolog Part. 1. l. 1. c. 87. q 2. D. Morton had duly waighed within his heart before he branded S. Augustine with this improper censure Magis affectionis quam rationis oratio the oraison of Augustine for his mother came rather from affection then reason I returne now vnto D. Field 6. Being tormented with a necessary suspition rather of D. Fields vnfaithfulnesse in his report then of S. Ambrose his folly in this matter I made hast vnto the Author whom he alleadgeth to iustify his assertion viz. SIXTVS SENENSIS bibliothec sanct lib. 6. annotat 345. I turned vnto the place where I found Senensis discoursing to this effect The opinion of Bernard viz. that the blessed soules content themselues with the aspect of our Sauiours humanity c. though it be condemned as Castrensis doth obserue yet I think that the Author is to be excused with a gratefull and benigne affection because many excellent Fathers in the Church SEEMED by their testimonyes to giue authority vnto his opinion as namely Irenaeus Iustin Martyr Lactantius AMBROSE Chrysostome Augustine c. 7. When I had diligently perused the place I noted a subtile collusion in the Doctour forasmuch as he singleth forth S. Ambrose omitteth S. Augustine knowing that the first might be jaded more coulorably then the second and that euery nose would not haue this crafty dealing so quickly in his sent because the sauour is not so strong I considered also if D. Field had neuer bene acquaynted with S. Ambrose his works or if he had not distinctly remembred his opinion in this poynt yet the learned Authour whose testimony he abuseth to the injury of an other did prohibit him to condemne S. Ambrose with such hast for he sayth that many of the Fathers * Visi sunt SEEMED to giue warrant vnto this opinion and therefore if Senensis had not added any interpretation to cleare S. Ambrose from that folly yet this limitatioÌ„ it self might haue mitigated his ceÌ„sure and it could be sayd at the vtmost that Ambrose did seeme to be of this opinion thus one half of the wrong had
he pretendeth that the Fathers in their prayers for the dead did seeke to expresse a kind affection vnto them but inteÌ„ded not to procure ease vnto their soules Which vntruth because it is notorious and suggested out of malice Bellarmine calleth it a lye and saith that it is refuted by the testimony of x Euchir ad Laur. c. 110. Augustine himself 7. I pretermitt the two other poynts it was a copious satisfaction for me to vnderstand that Bellarmine doth distinguish here betwixt the action and the intention and consequently that D. Field doth calumniate a worthy person to defend the inexcusable folly of our Geneuian Apostle who depraueth all things in the excessiue liberty of his Spirit CHAP. III. D. Field doth nothing but trifle in his accusation of BELLARMINE and defence of CALVIN His vntrue construction of the heresy of Aërius the great contradiction of Protestants in this poynt being all guilty of this heresy and consequently no Catholicks §. 1. D. Field refuted by S. Epiphanius and S. Augustine 1. AS the confession of Caluin and practise of our Congregations did informe me that the Protestants renounce the custome of prayer for the dead and wholly disclayme the ACTION it self so many forcible reasons did resolue me that the Papists retayning the action do likewise herein preserue the INTENTION of the ancient Church notwithstanding the glosse of D. Field who to confirme and establish the injury which he hath already done vnto the Cardinall annexeth this passadge immediately vnto the * After those words to deliuer men from thence See before Chap. 2. num 1. former viz. But Bellarmine will reply that the custome of praying for the dead was most ancient We answere The custome of remembring the departed naming their names at the holy Table in the time of the holy mysteries and offering the Eucharist that is the sacrifice of prayse for them was a most ancient and godly custome neither is it any wayes disliked by vs. And surely it appeareth this was the cause that AERIVS was condemned of hereticall rashnesse in that he durst condemne this laudable and ancient custome of the commemoration of the dead 2. How doth it appeare that SVRELY this was the cause c Behold the proof Epiphan haeresi 75. But surely this is a miserable proof For when I consulted with Epiphanius I found that our forefather Aërius did pick a quarrell against this religious duty in the same manner and to the same effect as we do at this day saying if the prayers of the liuing may be profitable vnto the dead then let a man liue as he liâ—t onely let him procure some to pray for him when he is dead ne quid patiatur that he may suffer no paynes 3. Here I considered that if the Catholick Church against which Aërius coÌ„tended in the vanity of his heart did not belieue and teach that the Sacrifice of our Lords body was offered and prayers were powred forth to relieue the soules of the dead not all but some afflicted with temporall payn the exception of Aërius were senselesse and the defence of Epiphanius were absurd for as the first doth object that opinion vnto the Church so the second denieth it not nay he declareth that the prayers of the liuing are beneficiall vnto the dead 4. But this poynt was more excellently cleared vnto me by S. Augustine the best and most faithfull witnesse of the ancient Church For this worthy Father contexing a catalogue of heresies registreth this heresy amongst the rest viz. Haeres 53 VVe must not pray nor offer sacrifice for the dead A fancy begotten by Aërius and by him first hatched into the world See the Peroration of S. Augustines treatise 5. Now whereas Quod-vult-Deus vnto whom S. Augustine directeth the aforesayd catalogue desired to receiue instruction how he should deport himself against all heresies and what opinion he should intertayn thereof the reuerend Father maketh this short and waighty answere It is a superfluous demand to aske what the Catholick Church thinketh of * As namely of this particular all theis heresies For it sufficeth thee to know that the Catholick Church doth hold and maintayn the CONTRARY assertion vnto each 6. Wherefore it now remayned that I should acquaynt my self with the purpose of the Catholick Church in hir prayers and oblations for the dead since she defended the contrary opinion vnto Aërius in theis laudable and Christian offices as S. Augustine prescribeth vnto his well respected friend 7. What was the successe of my study and meditation in this poynt you may see * Booke 1. part 1. chap. 2. §. 4. before where this matter is more particulary discussed There you shall find that the intention of the vniuersall Church in theis things was precisely to relieue some soules and hence it followeth that Aërius teaching the CONTRARY hereunto vomited out this heresy viz. VVe must not pray nor offer sacrifice for the soules afflicted with a temporall payn and this is licked vp by S. Luther our GREAT Reformer 8. Thus the Papists concurr with the ancient Church in prayer for the dead and Protestants joyne hands with Aërius to deride and subuert the same And now I perceiued that a Ratione 3. Edm. Campian did not object this infelicity vnto vs without a graue consideration and necessary cause viz. The Protestants are inforced to venditate such a Church as lay in obscure and dark corners vnlesse perhapps they will reioyce in some hereticall Progenitours AERIVS Iouinian Vigilantius Berengarius c. from whom they haue begged the fragmeÌ„ts of certayn pestileÌ„t opinions §. 2. How some Protestants seeme to defy Aërius and how others yeald him their protection Their contradictions vanities and falsehood 1. I Found that our Authours are here distracted into variable and vncertain conceipts some in their subtility dissembling the truth of the matter and some in their vanity neglecting the judgement of the Church 2. In the FIRST rank this learned Doctour may challendge a due place and he shall be assisted with his compeeres M. Iewell and Ph. Melancthon men of great accompt The one commeth forth with this plausible suggestion b Iuell in Apolog. VVe hold * Therefore not this of Aërius But here you speake vntruly none of those 80. heresies which are mentioned by Epiphanius nor any of those which are recorded by Augustine The other flourishing at randon saith expressly c MelaÌ„cth in apolog Augustana confess art 22. VVe do not forbyd prayer for the dead and much lesse do we defend Aërius c. 3. In the SECOND rank the Magdeburgians gentlemen of the freest spirits that euer liued to censure the sacred writt the holy Councells the reuerend Fathers and all antiquity in ignominious sort may vendicate the highest roome The things d Centur. 4. c. â— col 401. say theis good fellowes which Augustine and Epiphanius noted as errours in AERIVS seeme not so but rather the contrary And so in
not be but finite and seeing it hath no personall subsistence of it owne but that of the Sonne of God communicated vnto it which is infinite and without limitation it can not be denied to haue an infinite subsistence and to subsist in an incomprehensible and illimited sort and consequently euery where Thus then the body of Christ secundum esse naturale is contayned in one place but secundum esse personale may rightly be sayd to be euery where So he and then he glorieth of the facility to reconcile all the assertions of your Diuines touching this part of Christian faith to stopp the mouths of your pratling aduersaries c. Truly the Geneuians themselues who excell in the art of * See D. Bancrofts Suruay pag. 195. reconciliation may yeald the buckler vnto him 5. But yet he hath fayled exceedingly in two poynts FIRST in saying that there is no place where the body of Christ is not vnited personally vnto that God who is euery where and that it doth subsist euery where c. For though the diuine Person wherein the humane nature subsisteth be euery where yet the humane nature subsisteth therein finitely and in one determinate place the vnion it self being a created thing You may take a familiar example to illustrate this poynt for your more exact comprehension thereof tota in tato tota in qualibes parte So the whole diuinity of Christ assumed the humanity The soule of man is euery where in the body and is not diuided in quantity but hath different operations according to the disposition of the organicall parts wherein and whereby she exerciseth hir functions Now though it be indiuisibly in all the parts of man the head and feete being vnited vnto the same soule yet the head is not vnited vnto the soule in the feete nor the feere vnto the soule in the head howbeit she is the same equally impartibly in both Likewise the similitude holdeth in this case For the diuine Person is essentially present in all places alike as much without heauen as within but yet to say that the body of Christ hath vnion with his person in all places because it is vnited vnto that which filleth all places it is an heresy which the Doctours falsehood hath cast him into as you may sensibly perceiue 6. The SECOND errour is notorious viz. the humane nature of Christ may rightly be SAYD to be euery where in asmuch as it is vnited personally vnto that which is euery where For it is a knowen infallible maxime in your schooles that by virtue of the personall vnion in Christ the proprieties of the diuine nature are attributed vnto the Person in concrete viz GOD and MAN not vnto the humane * quando â—a quae sunt propria diuina natura non possuÌ„t participari ab humanaÌ„ c. See S. Thomas p. 3. q. 16. art 5. ad tertium nature in abstracte viz. vnto the manhood For as we may say truly that GOD suffered but not the Luther sayth that diuinitas passa est GODHEAD and MAN raised vp Lazarus but not the MANHOOD so in regard of the personall vnion we may truly say that the Man Christ is euery where but not the manhood And therefore in this poynt also your learned Doctour hath abused you with a pseudotheologicall conclusion 7. This shall suffice briefly concerning the matter of Vbiquity and no doubt when he hath scanned the doctrine of the SACRAMENT but his reconciliation therein will be proportionable vnto his deuice in this And that you may be furnished to expect his skill therein I will prepare some obseruations for your better direction in this important matter 8. To this end you must conceiue how your Euangelicks differ from the Catholicks and from themselues also in this issue The CATHOLICKS teach with one consent that after the words of consecration This is my body 1. Transubst This is my bloud there is the true reall body and bloud of Christ contayned vnder the similitude of bread and wyne For benedictious etiam natura mutatur by the benediction the nature it self is chandged As the word of Christ can make something of nothing De mysterijs init cap. 9. 2. Consubst so it is able to turne one thing into an other as S. Ambrose doth perspicuously and irrefragably deliuer vnto vs touching this sacred transelementation 9. The LVTHERANS teach that in the Sacrament there is the true reall body and bloud of Christ together with or vnder the bread Sir Th. More and wine A good child was Luther that would not eate his flesh without bread for feare of breeding wormes in his belly 10. The SACRAMENTARIES so stiled by Luther and you may not forget it because the Doctour sayth that some meÌ„s malice called them so haue many idle and base interpretations of this mystery The Sacramentary sect hath now six heades as I take it sayth M. Luther borne in one yeare See Fabric in loc com Luth. part 5. pag. 48. it is a wonderfull spiritt that so dissenteth from himself But the fayrest and best exposition which any Sacramentary hath made is this viz. the body of Christ is truly and really exhibited vnto vs in the Sacrament to be participated onely by a true and a liuely faith This is the proper doctrine of Iohn Caluin whereby he would seeme to speake more magnifically then Zwinglius and the rest Howbeit they and he concurre absolutely in two poynts wherein they all differ from the Catholicks and from M. Luther himself FIRST that Christ is not otherwise in the Eucharist then by a sacramentall vnion of the thing signified in and with the signe SECONDLY that he can not be participated there otherwise then by the act of faith and consequently the faithfull onely do eate his body and drink his bloud in the holy communion This also is the doctrine generally of your English Church See M. Rogers in his Cathol doctr pag. 178. 11. Now whether your learned Doctour can possibly excogitate or scanne out any reconciliation betwixt the Lutherans and Sacramentaries in this matter you may informe your self by him and vse him as the liuing commentary of his dead letter Meane while three reasons do very strongly perswade yea assure me that their difference herein is not capable of any reconciliation My FIRST reason is deriued from M. LVTHER writing thus vnto his friend See Fabricius in loc com Luth. part 5. pag. 49. Fabric ibid The opinion of Zwinglius and Oecolampadius spreadeth it self farr and hath diuers sects within it self But thou if thou regardest my counsayle shalt fly it as the pestilence for it is blasphemous against the word of Christ and against our faith 12. To the same effect he enditeth a letter vnto an other friend and sayeth Vnlesse I knew the wrath of God and saw the experience of it I could neuer haue bene perswaded that so many and so great men could be seduced by such
an HERETICK and no member of hir communion For which consideration I am as tenderly affected in this article as in any other of my Creed esteeming my self obliged thereunto for two respects FIRST because the essentiall truth thereof is clearely reuealed vnto me by God both in his word written and by Apostolicall Tradition In his word written for what can be more perspicuous then this saying * Act. 2.27 Thou wilt not leaue my soule in hell c. By Apostolicall Tradition for what can be more playn then this article He descended into hell That the common Creed is an Apostolicall Tradition your chiefest writer H. †de PedeÌ„pt Zanch us doth confesse and as I conceiue * pag. 238. D. Field dissenteth not from his iudgement therein What †de Antichr pag. 48. M. Powell or his proud Peacock or some precipitate Spiritts imagine to the contrary I am not to regard But if this Creed be an Apostolicall Tradition then it is * See D. Fields rule which I haue cited before Booke 1. part 1. c. 2. §. 2. num 3. equall vnto the written word of God euen for that cause For it proceedeth from diuine inspiration and so it hath sufficient authority of it self Wherefore it was not respectiuely decreed by your †Artic. Relig 8. Bishopps that this Creed ought throughly to be receiued BECAVSE it may be prooued by most certayn warrants of holy Scripture 3. SECONDLY I am mooued by the authority of the Church For who sayth * epist 99. S. Augustine denieth that Christ descended into hell vnlesse he be an INFIDELL And for the sense of this article †Tract 78. in Ioh. he hath this cleare resolution Who is he that was not left in hell Christ Iesus but in his SOVLE onely Who is he that lay in the graue Christ Iesus but in his FLESH onely For the NATVRALL vnion of his body and soule was dissolued but not the HYPOSTATICALL vnion of either with his Person 4. This truth being so potent and perspicuous I aske you now what reason haue you for any part of your faith if you haue not assurance in this And if you fall from this See Luthers saying before pag. 40. what certainty haue you in any other poynt Therefore it importeth your Church to shew a due conformity in this article of the Creed Finally you may remember that S. Athanasius in his Creed which your †Artic. Relig 8. Church pretendeth to admitt throughly c. hauing premised this denunciatioÌ„ Whosoeuer keepeth not the Catholick faith entire and inuiolate without doubt he shall perish euerlastingly doth afterward subnect this article of Christ his descent into hell as parcell of that CATHOLICK faith §. 2. D. Mortons pretense of his Churches vnity in this poynt is clearely refuted 1. NOw see your Doctours syncerity who may call God to reuendge it vpon his soule if he deceyue any man with his knowledge First he citeth the opinion of * l. 4. de Christo cap. 15. Bellarmine in theis wordes Opinio Catholica haec est CHRISTVM VERE SECVNDVM ESSENTIAM FVISSE IN INFERNO As much as to say Christ in his soule substaÌ„tially did descend into hell Then he addeth Hanc vestram sententiam NOS quoque iuxià cum Augustana confessione libentissimè profitemur non tamen quatenus vestram sed quatenus veram WE also together with the Augustane confession do most willingly professe this opinion c. 2. It is well that he left out the Scottish French Belgian and Heluetian confessions for he knoweth that the true Caluinists are hereticks in this behalf And this is an incuitable conclusion because they do obstinately and wilfully reiect the true and Catholick opinion and so defending an opinion CONTRARY vnto CATHOLICK verity they can not be exempted from the crime of heresy which casteth them into a damnable estate But I beseech you do YOV that is to say your Church of England most willingly professe this Catholick opinion Alas that your Apologist hath so iustly called God to reuendge this falsehood vpon his soule let him intreate our Lord to pardon that prouocation of his iudgement and in the meane time I will demonstrate his falsehood by foure euidences FIRST if YOV be of this opinion as he pretendeth why are your Bibles infected with this absurd Translation Act. 2.27 some say life or person some body or carrasse Thou wilt not leaue my soule in graue Is this to submitt your sense vnto the Scripture or is it not rather to draw it vnto your preiudicate opinion This is to measure the yard by the cloth and thus while you should be faithfull Translatours you become corrupt Interpreters of the Scripture SECONDLY why was your Church so distracted in this matter vpon the Sermon and Treatise of D. Bilson How came it to passe that D. Rainolds his Caluinian resolution in this matter was confuted by M Perks and why did M. VVillet the Synopticall Theologue as he is phrased by †in his epist prefixed before the booke of ConfereÌ„ce at Hampton Court D. Barlow oppose himself against M. Perks his answere Why do your Ministers publiquely in Sermons and in print impugne this true and Catholick opinion THIRDLY Why is no Minister punished for his repugnancy vnto this truth which is of greater consequence then crosse cap surplice or any ceremonious thing or whatsoeuer institution of your Church for which many haue suffered depriuation of their liuings FOVRTHLY the testimony of M. Rogers whose booke hath a speciall approbation as you may see * pag. 160. before will conuince D. Morton of notorious falsehood For though his purpose was to deliuer the †that is the title of all his pages Catholick doctrine of YOVR Church yet when * pag. 16. he commeth vnto this article he sayth that in the interpretation of it there is not that consent which were to be wished some holding one opinion thereof and some an other Wherefore yealding no certayn doctrine but leauing men vnto their choyce he addeth TILL we know the natiue and vndoubted * Faith coÌ„sisteth not in the words but in the sense sense of this article c. 3. If this be not a sensible conuiction of M. Doctours singular vntruth I must confesse that I haue done him iniury and will be ready to make any satisfaction that he can reasonably demand Meane while he must giue me leaue to detect an other of his excellent sleights and then I will referr him vnto his best thoughts As it was a notable vanity in him to affirme that YOV do willingly embrace the Catholick opinion in this article so that is a delicate collusion which ensueth within the compasse of three lines viz. à VOBIS c. WE in England differ from YOV Papists concerning the place vnto which Christ descended For WE say that he descended vnto the hell of the damned but YOV say that he descended onely ad limbum Patrum the region of the Fathers 4. The authour cited by him is * Theomach l. 7. c. 1. Feuardentius whose opinion he imputeth here as generally vnto the Papists as he applied the other vnto your English Church But forasmuch as M. Doctour doth continually deale with BELLARMINE and in the words immediately precedent alleadged him particularly also in this matter as you †num 1. see why did he now pretermitt him and select an other I will shew you the reason for Bellarmine himself in the very next chapter is of a contrary opinion vnto that which M. Doctour deriueth generally vpon the Papists What piety then or humanity was in this preposterous deuise 5. Know you therefore FIRST that the opinion which he here imputeth vnto VS without exception is as falsely attributed vnto all Catholicks as the other vnto YOVR English Church SECONDLY that your difference is in the substantiall sense and meaning of this article but our difference is a scholasticall disceptation in a matter of greater or lesser probability which being a doubt not resolued by the Church may be indifferently accepted by hir children without breach of charity or violation of faith 6. Thus I haue giuen you a little signification of those many vntruths which I haue obserued in this Doctour If it consist not with his credit or profitt to yeald yet it concerneth you to beware of his Sirenicall incantations Your benefitt shall be my reward if not so yet this schedule may be a token of my loue and be you well assured that either by following my counsayle TRY BEFORE YOV TRVST you shall preuent an heauy doome or by neglecting it you shall increase your iudgement FINIS A TABLE OF THE GENERALL CONTENTS IN THE FIRST PART CHAP. 1. § 1. GERSONS testimony alleadged by D. Field to iustify the pretensed REFORMATION § 2. It is impossible that GERSON could wish or tolerate this REFORMATION § 3. A detection of D. Fields vntruths in citing the testimonyes of GERSON § 4. The name and authority of GROSTHEAD abused by D. Field to the same effect CHAP. 2. § 1. D. Fields vntrue suggestion concerning the vnity of Lutherans and Caluinists is refuted Their difference touching Vbiquity the Sacrament § 2. D. Fields excuse of their litigation is refelled They neither haue nor can haue any conclusion of peace CHAP. 3. § 1. D. Field deuiseth criminations against Bellarmine § 2. His inciuility toward the CARDINALL whose excellent parts are briefly noted IN THE SECOND PART CHAP. 1. § 1. D. Mortons vntruth in defence of Luther § 2. His vntruth in protection of Caluin CHAP. 2. § 1. Of the article concerning Christ his descent into hell § 2. D. Morton doth vntruly pretend the vnity of his English Church in the sense thereof The PARTICVLAR contents are many which I referr vnto the diligence of the courteous Reader THE CORRECTION OF FAVLTES PASSED IN SOME COPIES P. signifieth page I line M. mâ—â—gent p. 10. l. 40. reade the same p. 12. â—â— num 15. p. 22. l â— proceed p. 26. l. 6. brimtione p. 60. l. 27 â—â—dery p. 44 l. 15. 〈◊〉 p. â—5 l 4. improbation 12. l. â—â—ist 17. 〈◊〉 p. 48. l. 1â— Iudes p. 5â—â—â— with any p. â—â— l. 8. his stile and sayd pag. 58. l. 15 what 〈◊〉 p. 59. l. 22. your p. 64. l. 26. â—â—clâ—sastiâ—