be read of euerie man amonge you with your confutations And Doctor Windham then saide that no wise state would suffer it Neuerthe lesse our state God be thanked vpon conscience of trueth on our side hath with no lesse wisedome then good successe alwaies permitted your bookes with our answers to them to be read of all men to iudge indifferentlie so they conteine nothing but question of religion and not shamefull diffamations and inuectiues against the prince and the state of gouernement which matters deserue to be answered with an axe or an halter rather then with penne and paper But to permitte your bookes vnconfuted to haue free passage althoughe they passe with an hundred times lesse daunger then ours maie doe among you as you require it were neither wisedome godlines equitie nor reason AN OVERTHROVVE OF THE ANSVVERE TO Master Charkes preface touching Discerning of Spirites M. Chark beside the matter in question c. IF this answerer beside the matter in question had not made manie vnnecessarie and vnpertinent digressions the substance of his answere might haue bene contained almoste in as fewe lines as nowe it filleth leaues The triall of the Spirites which Saint Iohn requireth that is by the kinde of doctrine in teaching Christ and not the qualitie of the teachers Master Charke desireth the aduersaries refuse allowing nothing finallie but the onelie and falselie named title of the Catholike Church of Rome for them-selues and accusations of the persons some perhapes true some vtterlie false against vs. To this practize so manie popish treatises and this especiallie in hand doe giue testimonie This is the summe of Master Charkes preface Nowe commeth our answerer and because he had manie by-quarrels to deliuer he taketh occasion to vtter them in this place though litle or nothing pertaining to the direct confutation of Master Charkes preface First he chargeth Master Charke to saie that the Papists refuse Saint Iohns triall which is false for their bookes are extant wherebie they haue called to triall all sectaries of our time among whome he nameth Munster and Stancarus against whome I neuer heard what Papists haue exercised their style especiallie Stancarus holding one principle comming verie neare to their position of Christs priesthood to be onelie according to his manhood as Stancarus taught that Christ was a mediatour onelie after his humanitie but reade their bookes who shall and he must needes confesse Master Charkes saying to bee true For first or last they draw all triall to Rome and not to examine which doctrine giueth al glorie to God by Iesus Christ our onelie Sauiour which is the scope of Saint Iohns triall But if wee had not desired triall of Spirites saith he wee would not haue laboured so much to obteine the same of our aduersaries in free printing preaching or disputation You speake of great labor which none of vs euer heard that you tooke except it were in spreading a fewe coppies of Campians seditious libell not to the end of triall of spirites for discerning of trueth but to the stirring vp of mens bodies and mindes to treason and rebellion as the like labors by the like messengers tooke effect and make manifest demonstration in Ireland But if free printing preaching and disputation be a goodway for discerning of Spirites that Christ maie be knowne from Antichrist whie doe not you Papists graunt the same in Spaine Italie and other countreis thrall to the Popes tirannie yet assaulted by the doctrine of the gospell as by the power of Christ against Antichrist if it be not a good waie as it seemeth you thinke because you take it not your selues how can you saie that you require in those places this triall of spirites No no it is an other triall of the sharpest swordes that you meane when you require such triall of Spirites You adde further of the aduenturing of your liues in comming and offering the same to vs at home with so vnequall conditions on your side as you haue done and dailie doe for the triall of trueth There is no daunger of life among vs in offering the triall of Spirites according to Saint Iohns rule but in seeking to auerte the Queenes subiects from their duetifull obedience vnto her Maiestie to make a waie for the execution of the Popes moste blasphemous and traiterous Bull and this hath procured moste iuste and necessarie execution of some fewe of you and not as you slaunder iustice that offering to trie the truth hath obtained nothing hitherto but offence accusations extreame rackings and cruell death Againe these inequall conditions these daily offers these manie petitions and supplications that you speake of whoe hath made to whome haue they bene offered when were they presented where were they seene or heard by whome were they refused except Campians ridiculous challenge be all in all with you But what will a Papist spare to affirme that he maie make falsehood haue some likly shape of truth yet being admitted that you offer trial it must be seene whoe doe offer best meanes of triall And here you will endeuour to shew that all meanes of triall which Master Charke and his fellowes will seeme to allow in worde For they offer none in deede are neither sure possible nor euident but meere shifts to auoide all triall and that your selues do offer all the best and surest waies of triall that euer weere vsedin the Church for discerning an hereticall spirit from a Catholike Your indeuour is great but your abilitie is small for you shall neuer be able to demonstrate either the one or the other howsoeuer with vaine sophistications and wrested authorities you seeke to dasell the eies of the simple Let vs heare therefore howe you beginne The onelie meanes of triall you say which Master Charke will seeme to allowe is the scripture But this is a shift common to all heretikes especiallie of our time First you slaunder Master Charke in saying that he alloweth the scripture to be the onelie meanes of triall of spirites whereof he speaketh not at all in this preface but of triall of spirites by the doctrine of Christ which is moste plainlie and certenlie set forth in the holie scriptures and therefore by the holie scriptures the doctrine maie best and moste certenlie be tried and iudged But that Master Charke by referring him selfe to the holie scriptures onelie as suffiâ—â—â—n and â—â—le to decide all controuersies of Religion doth denie or exclude all other meanes of 〈◊〉 whereby the true meaning of the scripture may be knowne it is impâ—dent he affirmed without either proofe or likelihood of truth as hereafter more plainlie will appeare Saint Augustine as though he were an enimie of conâ—â—â—â—ing heresies by the authoritie of the scriptures onelie is quoted in the margent de nupt Concup lib 2. cap. 31 whose words are these Non est miâ—â—am si Pelagiani dicta nostra in sensus 〈◊〉 volunt detoâ—quere conaâ—tur quando de scripturis sanctis non vbi obscurè
witnesses concerning the rumor of Martine Luthers departure out of this life But Hosius was a Bishoppe and a Cardinall forsooth as though a malitious Papist when he hath a white rochet put on his backe or a redde hat clapt on his head were sopriuileged by his titles that he must needes be credited though he lie neuer so impudentlie Touching the dissention of Luther with others that professed the Gospell Master Charke doth graunt that in some points he disagreed from them and yet he saith there was a singular care among them of the vnitie in the Gospell But this our defender taketh in so euill part that he calleth it in tollerable impudencie speciallie that for profe thereof Master Charke citeth the acte of concorde agreed vpon at Marpuge Anno. 1529. vpon the reporte of Brentius which since hath shewed him selfe an obistinate heretike and author of the opinion of the vbiquitie of Christes bodie who reporteth that the Zuinglians were vanquished and yet he giueth them this testimonie that they desired with teares to be called bretheren which Luther refused But what the agreement was the booke of Acts printed both in Latine and Dutch doth testifie vnto the worlde The 15. Chapter of which conuention con cerning the matter in controuersie was this Credimus profitemur omnes de caena domini nostri Iesu Christi Vsum illius sub vtraque specie iuxea Christi institutionem obseruandans dum esse Quodque missanon sit vllum eiusmodi opus quo alto alteri qutsquam siue mortuo siue viuo gratiā consequi possit Quod item sacramentum altaris sit sacramentum veri corporis sanguinis Iesu Christi Et quòd esus spiritualis eius 〈◊〉 corporis sanguinis sit vnicuique Christiano homini inprimis necessarius Adhaec quòd vsus huius sacramensi perinde atque verbum ipsum à Deo opt max. sit institutus atque ordinatus ad excitandas ad fidem infirmas hominum conscientias per spiritum sanctum Quanquam autem inter nos hactenus non planè potuit conuenire num verum corpus 〈◊〉 sanguis Christi pani ac vino corporaliter insit debebit nihilominus tamen vtraque pars altera erga alteram declarare Christi anam charitatem quatenus idomnino cuiusque conscientia ferre potest Et vtraque pars deum opt max. diligenter precabiturrot is nobis per spiritum suum verum eius rei intellectum constabilire dignetur Amen Martinus Lutherus Ioann Brentius Iustus Ionas Ioan Oecolampadius Philippus Mclancthon Huldricus Zuinglius And. Ostander Martinus Bucerus Stephan Agricola Gaspar Hedio We all beeleeue and profes concerning the supper of our Lord Iesus Christ that the vse thereof in both kinds according to the institution of Christ is to be obserued And that the masse is not any such work whereby any one man may obtaine grace for another whether he be dead or a liue Also that the sacrament of the altar is the sacrament of the true body blood ofIesus Christ. And that the spirituall eating of the same his body blood is very necessary for euery Christian man Moreouer that the vse of this sacrament euē as the word it selfe is instituted ordeined of almighty God to stir vp vnto faith the weake consciences of men by his holie spirite And although it could not hetherto be altogether agreed amongst vs whether the true bodie and true blood of Christ be in the bread and wine corporallie yet neuer 〈◊〉 both parties ought to declare Christian charitie one towards the other so farre as euerie mans conscience can beare And both partes shall diligentlie pray vnto almightie God that he by his spirite may vouchsafe to establish vnto vs the true vnderstanding of that matter Amen Martine Luther c. The subscriptionof their names appeareth before You heare how farre forth they agreed and to a full 〈◊〉 indeed the Lutherans could neuer be brought nor Luther himselfe who in this point was out of measure hard intractable which seeing it is not denied by Master Charke or any of vs it is altogether needles that our defender spendeth two leaues and more in citing testimonies of his dissent from the rest that professe the Gospell which he calleth Zuinglians and Caluinists And to make the matter more large he 〈◊〉 the writings of Brentius Stankatus Ochinus men fallen from the truth into open errors condemned of all pattes against the professors of the truth But what care the godlie had to maintaine the vnitie of the Gospell may appeere by the harmonic of confessions of so manie diuerse Churches in the somme of Christian Religion and doctrine of the most necessarie points of faith vnto eternall saluation thoroughlie agreeing within them selues and against the heresies of the Papists and all other sectaries both olde and new That the Lutherans notwitstanding continue still their vncharitable iudgement against the other it is in deede to be lamented but yet noe cause for Papists to reioyce whoe whether it be by vs or them in al other points of their heresies are beaten downe and brought to confusion And still that remaineth true that Master Charke saide of Oecolampadius Bucer others although in some pointes they disagreed from Luther and other of his side yet was there among them a singular care of vnitie in the Gospell The entercourse of louing letters that you so earnestly require may be seene among Caluins epistles where there are louing letters betweene Caluine Melancthon Vitus Theodorus and other And now we are come to the odious inuectiues against the liues of Caluine and Beza taken out of a vile libell written by Ierome Bolsec an vnlearned vngodlie and vnshamefast knaue who once was a Carmelite frier and flying from his cloister came first aud deceiued the Dachesse of Ferrara for a time but his knauerie being knowne and he espied he was banished from her and then within three daies studie he professed him selfe to be a Phisition and came to Geneua where being contemned of the learned in that science he would take vpon him to be a diuine openly inueighed against the doctrine of prae destination not as a Papist out as a meere Pelagian for which he was condemned and banished the Citie and after for like troubles he was twyse banished the territorie of Berna After that when he thought the Churches of Fraunce should haue continued in peace he fained repentance and sought reconciliation of the Church of Geneua labouring ambitiouslie to be admitted into the ministery but when warre persecution befel vnto the Church contrary to his expectation he returned to his leech craft and reuolted againe to Poperte and in satisfaction of his Apostasie hath forged and refined these lies against Caluine and Beza Anp this is that reuerend man whome our defender commendeth for wisedome learning and honestie Whose impudent slaunders with noc indifferent man can finde anie credit seeing all law and common equitie alloweth exception against such a vile person to be
a witnesse much more to be an accuser witnes and iudge him-selfe alone The law of God will haue no man condemned but vnder two or three witnesses and the discipline of the Gospell will not haue anie accusation to be admitted against an elder of the Church vnder two or three witnesses much lesse ought the slaunder of such an impudent aduersarie being a most vile and absurd person to be receaued to the condemnation of so excellent learned teachers whose life in publike vew and fame where they haue liued hath alwaies bene blameles and vnreprooueable Wherefore the accuser being thus notoriouslie knowne by open factes and iudgements against him there needeth none other detence of the persons slaundered but their simple deniall of the crimes obiected whose nay by al reason must be better then his yea seeing no man is by lawe presumed to be euill before he be lawfullie conuicted Beside this the particular slaunders haue bin so diligentlie confuted by him that first answered this lewd defense for that purpose principallie that I shall not neede to spend anie longer time in declaring the vanitie and fasehood of them But because our defender will needes make a briefe recapitulation of the matter and tell vs that there were six reformers of all our English Religion it shall not be amisse to consider what waightie matter he can bring The first saith he was Luther him-selfe who confesseth expressely him-selfe without glose that the first motion thereof came from the diuill him-selfe in proper person lib. de missa priuata vnctione sacerd How false and slaunderous this reporte is the reader maie see by Luthers owne wordes before sette downe The second Carolostadius saith the defender was by Luthers procurement as vnworthie to liue among Christians banished out of all the dominions of the Duke of Saxonie and so ended his life miserably in labouring the ground as your owne Historiographer Sleidan writeth lib. 5. Sleidan in deede doth write that he was banished as one that seemed to fauour the Anabaptistes but he writeth also that by Luthers procurement he was admitted to purge him-selfe of that crime But that he ended his Life miserabliein labouring the ground Sleidan our owne historiographer doth not write and it is an impudent lie as it is manifest by your owne Historiographer Surius who in Anno 1530. writeth that Carolostadius of an Archdeacon of Witemberge became a deacon of Zurich and after the death of Zuinglius he remooued to Basile and there in the ministerie of a Zuinglian Church as he saith ended his miserable life miserablie Certaine it is that Carolostadius was a vaine man and had great imperfections yet it is a shame to lie vpon the deuill The third you saie Oecolampadius was so lewd a man as by Luthers affirmation he was slaine by the deuill himselfe lib. de missapriuata vnct sacerd or as some other thinke killed him selfe with his owne handes Lind. dial 3. dubit It is true that Luther vttereth his rash and falle sentence of Oecolampadius vpon occasion ofsome fly ingtale that he had heard of the soden death of Oecolampadius She like he affirmeth in the same place of Emser the Papist if his authoritie be good for the one whie is it not for the other But the trueth is that Oecolampadius as he liued holilie and vp rightlie so he made a Godlie and quiet end and was sicke in his bedde 15. daies before he departed as is testified in the storie of his death set forth by that reuerend learned man Symon Grinaeus who was present and saw and heard all that he writeth with manie more witnesses of sufficient credit In his sicknes he was visited by all his friendes both of the Senators of the vniuersitie and of the people So that it is a most shameles fiction either that he died sodainlie or that he killed himselfe as that malitious Papist Lindan writeth The fourth reformer saith our defender was Zuinglius who hauing receaued the proofes of his new doctrine of the sacra ment from a spirit in the night as him-selfe writeth and confesseth that he knew not whether he were black or white liued in such sorte as he was detested by Luther and finallie stirring vp the Suitsers his countrimen to fight was slaine himselfe in the field and his bodie burned That Zuinglius was flaine in the field and his bodie burned by the Papists it is confessed but that he stirred vp his countriemen to battell which were prouoked by intollerable iniuries it is false He went with his countriemen as a Preacher according to their custome and it pleased God that he was martyred by the enemies of the trueth As for the proofes that he receaued from a spirit in the night you shall heare the wholl matter in his owne words lib. de subsid Euchar. But first you must vnderstand that he rehearseth the whole storie concerning the abolishing of the masse at Zurich sheweth that a certaine scribe opposed him-selfe against it the 12. of Aprill and obiected that those phrases vnto which Zuinglius compared the wordes of the institution This is my bodie the seede is the word of god the fielde is the world the enuious man is the deuill c. were spoken parabolically Zuinglius maintained that neuertheles there was in those sayings the same trope or figure that is in the wordes of the supper so the decree was made concerning the abolishing of the masse After this he writeth after this manner Restabat adhuc haud minimus conatus quo scilices exempla proderemus quae nulla cum parabola coniuncta forent Caepimus ergo cogitare omnia omnia reuoluere attamen aliud nihil exemplorum occurrebat quà m quod in commentario proditum est aut quod occurrebat erat illorum simile Cùm verò decima tertia Dies adpeteret vera narro adeoque vera vt caelare volentem conscientia cogat effundere quod Dominus impertiit non ignorans quantis me contumeliis risibusque exponam Cùm inquam decimatertia Aprilis lux adpeteret visus sum mihi in somno multo cum taedio denuo contendere cum aduersario scriba sicque obmutuisse vt quod verum scirem negante lingua beneficium suum proloqui non possem qui me angor vs solent nonnunquam somnia fallaci ludere nocte nihilenim altius quà m somnium narramus quod ad nos attinet tametsi leue non sit quod per somnium didicimus gratia Deo in cuius solius gloriam ista prodimus vehementer turbare videbatur Ibi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 visus est monitor adesse ater fuerit an albus nihil memini somnium enim narro qui diceret Quin ignaue respondes ei quod Exod. 12. Est enim Phase hoc est transitus Domini Protinus vt hoc Phasma visum est simul expergefio èlecto exilio Locum apud 70. primùm vndique circumspicin ac de eo coram 〈◊〉 concione pro virili dissero qui sermo vbi
the sonne of man which was proper to him-selfe so he might well giue the other Your argument in à posse adesse which is not worth a strawe among them that knowe that argumentes doe meane That power which God might giue to meere mortall men whoe doubteth but God might also giue to Christ his sonne to exercise according to his humaine nature but that he did exercise the same onelie as man not as God by what argument is it prooued we knowe that in casting out of deuilles he vsed his diuine authoritie and in his owne name commaunded them to come forth and they obeied Marke 1. 27. he raised the dead by his owne authoritie as God and in his owne name Luke 7. 14. Saint Iohn restifieth that of the eternall worde which was made flesh and dwelt among vs he and his fellowe Apostles did see the glorie as the glorie of the onelie begotten Jonne of God full of grace and trueth From whence come you therefore with a Ghospell to teach vs that Christ did forgiue sinnes heale the sicke cast out deuills and doe miracles but as a man onelie by power receiued from God whereby you shew your selfe to be a good procter for the Arrians if those works which were proper to Christ in respect of his diuinitie you wil draw downe to his humanitie so that he raised the dead clensed the leapers c. not otherwise thē by power receiued frō god as Elizeus did or as anie of his Apostles which did al things in his name whose dignitie you are so careful to further that you care not how you abase the honour of their Master al to bring in a popish that is an Antichristian tyrannie ouer mens soules which is blasphemous against the authoritie of God For if the plaine text of the scripture Iohn 20. 23. whose sinnes you forgiue they are forgiuen c. would yeald you so much authority as you would gladly excercise you would not trouble your selfe to make such impertinent and inconsequent collections by which you would haue it seeme as though Christ in respect of his diuine nature was vnoccupied as concerning the worke of our redemption in the world but that he did all thinges in respect of his humane nature by power receiued from God But Saint Augustine you saie prooueth that by the spirit of God in respect of his manhood Christ wrought miracles which although it be not the matter in question yet you drawe S. Austen to another matter then euer was in his meaning For although it be true that Christ did cast out Deuills in the spirit of God as man yet it followeth not that he did not cast out deuills by his owne authoritie as God seeing the workes of the Trinitie are vndeuided and Saint Augustine in the place by you quoted distinguisheth between those sayings that speake of him as in the forme of God and those that pertaine vnto him in respect of the shape of a seruant But an other argument you haue of that the Iewes which seeing themselues thus ouercome in their vaine cogitations waxed afraid and glorifyed God who gaue such power to men That the Scribes and Pharises which first mooued the question of forgiuenes of sinnes were mooued with reuerence of our sauiour Christ or yealded glorie God I finde not but that al the rest of the people glorifyed to god which had giuen such power to men What power saie you to forgiue sinnes The text saith not so but of working such miracles to heale the man sicke of the palsie so that he was presentlie changed from extreame weaknes to perfect strengh whereof as S. Luke reporteth they said we haue seene sirange things to day and as S. Marke rocordeth it they said we neuer sawe it thus But as for the ordinarie power of making attonement for sinnes which the Priests vsed according to the lawe it was no strange thing vnto them and they had seene it often times before These therefore are the best interpreters of S. Math. which did write by the same spirit But because mans authority with you is many times preferred before god you shal heare what S. Hilarie saith in that place which ere while you affirmed to make nothing against your meaning his interpretation of the text Et honorificauerunt deum quòd tantā dedit potestatem hominib c. is this Conclusa sunt omnia suo ordine cessante iam desperationis timore honor Deo redditur quòd tantam dederit hominibus potestatem sed soli hoc Christo erat debitum solide communione paternae substantiae hoc agere erat familiare All thinges are concluded in due order and the feare of disperation now ceasing honour is rendered to God because he hath giuen so great power to men But this was due onelie to Christ to him alone it was familiar or accustomable to doe these thinges by the communion of his fathers substance These wordes doe plainelie shew that Saint Hilary dissenteth euerie whit from your meaning and that you arme your schollers with no armour of proofe when you wil them to looke for the like power of remitting sins in Christs humanity which he did exercise according to the authoritie of his diuinitie ALLEN Let the proud cogitations of men here attend that so highlie disdaine the ministerie of mortall men in the remission of their sinnes let them controulle the wounderfull wisdome of God which would no otherwise saue the pitifull sores of our soules but by the seruile forme of our owne nature ioined meruelouslie in our person to the worde and eternall Sonne of God the father let them reprehend the vnsearchable secret councell of the holie Trinitie which being of power infinite to worke their wil in al creatures yet would not repaire the world nor remit our sinnes anie otherwise but by the seruice of the Sonne of man let them mislike that flesh blood and the soule of our blessed sauiour being al creatures should ioyne with the onelie almightie creator of all thinger in the remission of all our offences let the presumptuose thus doe and let vs humblie reuerence Gods ordinance and glorifye him in his Sonnes high calling in our kinde through whose singular prerogatiue we shall vndoubtedlie finde exceeding power to be giuen to his bodie and brethren in earth to his moste deare spouse the Church FVLKE The ministerie of mortall men in remission of sinnes no man I hope is so madde to disdaine when Christ him-selfe in so plaine termes hath authorized the same But where you saie that the wisdome of God would no otherwise salue the pittifuli sores of our soules but by the seruile forme of our nature ioined meruelouslie in one person to the word and eternall sonne of God I cannot but maruaile at your Nestorian blasphemie For although it be moste certaine that in the forme of a seruant the wisdome of God preformed that which to the glorie of his iustice was expedient yet that the deitic was altogether idle
in this age by the singular mercie of God to the vndoubted saluation of many thousands The outward preaching of Christes Doctrine is not the proper worke of Christ but common to all his true and faithfull seruantes the Prophettes Apostles and their successoures Bishopes Pastours and teachers It is Christ as Austine saieth that teacheth inwardly by his spirit from heauen and is the author of the doctrine that is taught on earth in which respect he saith He that heareth you heareth me c. But it is the voice of man that vttereth this Doctrine in the outward eares of men and not the voice of Christ. ALLEN But to beare downe the aduersaries of trueth fullly we will ioyne with them touching the sacrament of extream vnction the sacrament of baptisme and such other in which they cannot nor doe not denie concerning one of them but man without all derogation to Gods honour remitteth sinnes And how can it here seeme strange that in the sacrament of penance God should by mans office remit mortall crimes seeing it cannot be denied but God vseth not onelie mans ministerie but also the externall seruice of bare and base water which is much inferiour by nature and dignitie to a Priest or anie other man to take awaie sinnes both originall and actuall in the sacrament of baptisme in which sacrament seeing aswell the Priest is the minister as the water an instrument whereby God remitteth all sinnes be they neuer so many and grieuouse whether they be committed by their owne acte or by our fathers ofspring why doth it dishonour God any more that the Priest should be the minister of remission in the sacrament of penance then it doth by as great an office almoste in remitting of sinnes in the sacrament of baptisme Againe read the Epistle of S. Iamer and you shall finde the Priest made a minister the oile an instrument in the extreamitie of sicknes to forgiue sinnes how much more is the priest without anie imparing of Gods power the worker vnder him of our reconciliation and pardoning in the sacrament of penance in which especiallie the grace of God is giuen aboue all other sacraments to that onlie end and purpose I may be more bold to vse this comparing of sundrie Sacraments together because not onely Saint Ambrose refuteth the Father of this fond heresie by the same reason but also because moste of the Doctors of the Church doe confesse that she euer had these waies to remit mans sinnes by without derogation to Christes soueraigntie herein of whome onelie she holdeth her right as well in the sacrament of penance as in baptisme or extreame vnction Saint Chrysostome saith Neque enim solùm cùm nos regenerant sed postea etiam condonandorum nobis peccatorum potestatem obtinent infirmatur inquit inter vos aliquis Accersat presbyteros Ecclesiae Neither haue Priests power in baptisme onelie but afterward also they haue good authoritie to forgiue our sinnes Is any man feeble amongst you saith he Call for the Priests of the Church let them saie praiers ouer him annoint him with oile and the praier of faith shall saue the sicke and if he be in sinnes they shall be forgiuen him But this sacrament instituted by Gods word and Christes authoritie vsed of olde and well knowne to all the Fathers is now become nothing in our building Sinne is now a daies so fauored that no sacrament may be abiden for the release thereof The verie expresse wordes of Scripture can take no place where flattering of wickednes and phantasie ruleth to the contrarie FVLKE Touching extreame vnction we shall speake anone but of baptisme we saie that to speake properlie man baptiseth with water vnto repentance as an outward seale of the forgiuenes of sinnes Christ onelie baptizeth with the holie Ghost and with fire actuallie and effectuallie to purge and clense our sinnes Of the sacrament of penance we must first be resolued before we can acknowledge any office of man to remitte mortal crimes therein If Christ had instituted a sacrament of penance as he hath of baptisme we wold acknowledge the like effectes in the one that we doe in the other Concerning the anointing with oile spoken of in Saint Iames whereunto besides bodelie health remission of sins was promised it was a sacrament while that special gift of healing continued but no instituriō of perpetuall continuance Chrysostome citeth this text of Saint Iames to prooue that not onelie in the sacrament of regeneration but afterwards also the Priests hath power to remit sinnes not onelie by teaching and admonishing but also by helpe of praier But of anie perpetuall sacrament there is no mention in him neither was it instituted by our sauiour Christ with anie commaundement of perpetuall continuance as babtisme the Lordes supper are but onely so long as the gift should continue Neither doth Saint Iames giue it in charge as a perpetuall sacrament but onelie admonisheth the Church to vse that benefit of healing so long as it should remaine with men ALLEN There be some that affirme this annoiling to haue beene a miraculous practise to take awaie the diseases of the sicke and therefore that it did decaie with the working of other the like miracles which after the spring of our religion were not vsual But that is a fond glosse For I aske of thē whether the people then Christianed were instructed or rather commaunded to call for the Apostles or others to heale them miraculously of their diseases or whether all Priestes had the gift of working miracles in the Primitiue Church If they saie yea touching the first piont then as well were they charged to send for them to reuiue them after they were dead because the Apostles so could doe when they same occasion and so did by some But that is plaine absurde and false that euer Apostle gaue in charge to anie man much lesse to make a generall precept as S. Iames here doth to seeke after miracles for that were to tempt God And for the second they are not so vnreasonable to answere me that all Priestes could worke miracles which is a seuerall gift of the holie Ghost from the power of their ministerie and therefore Saint Iames would not haue charged the sicke persons to haue called indifferentlie for Priestes to heale them miraculouslie the gift of miracles being not common to them all nor perpetuallie promised to anie of them all Againe I would knowe of them whether there was anie miraculous healing that had the remission of sinnes ioyned vnto it or to the externall creature by which they healed any person If they saie yea then it followeth that the Priestes might by the office of that creature heale a man of his sinnes which they affirme to be blaspemie and dishonour to God But to what absurditie so euer you bring them they will not confesse mortall men in externall Sacraments to remit sinnes FVLKE You are better aduised now concerning Caluines iudgement of the oile where