with Hierome and Iustine Martyr and when he entred into the house the dores being shut that the dores and walls yeelded vnto him a passage as vnto their Creator with Theodoret and Cyrill and that when hee appeared vnto Paul going to Damascus if it was in the aire or on the earth as it may be doubted that then this body was not in heauen at the same instant for farre bee it from vs so to pin vp our Lord in the Heauens that he cannot be where he pleaseth And this is Thomas Aquinas opinion in expresse words which Bellarmine as expresly contradicteth 15. Thirdly by discourse of reason hee thus laboureth to reconcile these contradictions and thus disputeth God being but one simple and inuisible essence is in infinite places at once and he might create another world and fill it with his presence and be in two worlds at one instant and the soule of man is wholy in euery part of the body and God is able to conserue the soule in a part that is cut off from the body therefore it implieth no contradiction to be in two places at once againe one place may containe two bodies and yet be not two places but one as when Christ rose out of the graue the Sepulchre being shut therefore one body may be in two places at once and yet not two bodies but one Lastly there be many other mysteries of religion as strange and difficult to be conceiued as this and yet are beleeued therefore this also is to be beleeued as well as they 16. A miserable cause sure that needeth such defences the weakenesse of these reasons argueth the feeblenesse of the cause for who knoweth not but that there is no similitude betweene the infinite God and a finite Creature nor any proportion betwixt a Spirit and a body and that à posse ad esse from may bee to must bee is no good consequence Adde that one place cannot hold two bodies nor euer did except they were so vnited that in respect of place they made but one And lastly that all those mysteries of Religion which he nameth to wit the Trinity the Incarnation the Resurrection the Creation and Annihilation c. haue their foundation in holy Scripture and therefore are to be receiued as doct ines of truth though transcending the spheare of nature and reason but this strange mysterie of Transubstantiation hath no ground in Scripture as he himselfe confesseth and therefore it is not to be beleeued as the other are without better reasons then he bringeth for the defence thereof but like lips like lettuces such as the cause is such are the defences both nought and weake as any man may see that is not muffled with errour and thus this second contradiction remaines irreconciliable 17. A third contradiction is also in and about the Sacrament which is this they teach that the matter in Sacrament is partly the outward Elements and partly the thing signified and represented by them and that betwixt these there is a certaine relation and similitude as in Baptisme the outward signe which is water and the thing signified which is the bloud of Christ make the matter of that Sacrament or the outward wasting by water and the inward by the Spirit and the relation is as the water washeth and purgeth away all filthinesse of the body so Christs bloud purgeth away both the guilt and filth of sinne from the soule and so in the Eucharist the Elements of Bread and Wine together with the bodie and bloud of Christ are the matter of the Sacrament and the relation is as those elements doe feed nourish and strengthen and cheare the bodie of man so the body and bloud of Christ doe seed nourish and strengthen and cheare the soule vnto eternall life and as those elements must be eaten and digested or else they nourish not so Christ must also be eaten and as it were digested and after a sort conuerted into our substance or else he is no food vnto our soules This is the very doctrine of the Church of Rome and it is agreeable to the truth for Bellarmine thus speaketh Species illae significant quidem cibum spiritualem sed non sunt ipsae cibus spiritualis that is The signes in the Scrament signifie our spirituall foode but they are not the spirituall foode it selfe And in another place he saith that signum in Sacramento reisignatae similitudinem gerit The signes in the Sacrament doe beare the similitude of the thing signified And in the same Chapter hee sayth more plainely that God would neuer haue ordained one thing to signifie another vnlesse it had a certaine analogie or similitude with it And herein he accordeth with the Master of sentences who defines a Sacrament thus To be a visible forme of an inuisible grace bearing the Image of that grace And with Hugo who saith That a Sacrament is a corporall or materiall element propounded outwardly to the senses by similitude representing and by institution signifying and by Sanctification containing some inuisible and spirituall grace And that this relation is in eating and nourishing Bellarmine in another place confesseth in direct words when he saith that That same outward eating in the Sacrament doth signifie the inward eating and refreshing of the soule but is not the cause thereof and that that is so necessarie a condition that without it we should not be partakers of that diuine nourishment And to this agreeth Saint Augustine who plainely affirmeth that if Sacraments had not a certaine similitude of those things whereof they are Sacraments they were not Sacraments at all And what this similitude is he declareth in another place where hee saith that We receaue visible meate in the Sacrament but the Sacrament is one thing and the vertue of the Sacrament is another And Thomas Aquinas giueth this as a reason why Bread and Wine are the fittest matter of this Sacrament because men most commonly are nourished therewith his words are these As water is assumed in the Sacrament of Baptisme to the vse of spirituall washing because corporall washing is commonly made by water so bread and wine wherewith most commonly men are nourished are taken vp in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper to the vse of the spirituall eating By which it followeth that if water did not wash it was no fit element for the Sacrament of Baptisme so if bread and wine doe not nourish they are no fit signes for the Lords Supper and for this cause our Sauiour at the institution of this Sacrament gaue this commandement to his Disciples that they should take and eate and the Apostle calleth it the Lords Supper and the Lords Table 18. This therefore is their own doctrine and it is grounded vpon the truth But listen a little how they contradict this by their miraculous monster Transubstantiation for when they say that the substance of the bread and wine is vtterly
grace not deluding their soules with a fond expectation of other mens deuotions Sure it is that the opinion of purgatorie and prayer for the dead must of necessitie nourish a presumption of veniall sinnes at the least which our doctrine adiudgeth to hell without repentance aswell as any other and because few are able to distinguish betwixt mortall and veniall sinnes but iudge them veniall which are to Gods iudgement mortall as their Iesuite Coster confesseth when hee sayth that that may seeme a light offence vnto man which is haynous in Gods sight therefore it must needs also bee in danger to breed a secret presumption of mortall sinnes also And so whilest they haue a blind conceit of the suburbes which is Purgatorie they cast themselues into the Citie it selfe which is hell 34. Lastly this may be demonstrated to the conscience of any not preiudiced with a blind zeale to the Romish Church by this reason for that neyther Purgatorie nor Prayer for the dead can directly be proued out of Scripture as hath bin proued before concerning Purgatory and is apparent concerning prayer for the dead there being neither precept nor promise nor direct example in the whole volume of Gods Booke for the same as is confessed by their owne Bredenbachius and besides hauing no sound foundation in the consent of ancient Fathers as hath beene also prooued but being founded vpon vaine apparitions and strange reuelations of soules departed which many of the Fathers were of opinion could not bee as testifieth Maldonate one of their owne Iesuites for feare lest vnder that colour we should be drawne to superstitions and others thought that Deuils did faine themselues to be the soules of dead men as witnesseth Pererius another Iesuite yea and some of their owne Doctours haue beene perswaded that all apparitions about Churches are eyther demoniacall or phantasticall whereas on the contrarie our doctrine of two places is direct in Scripture and was neuer denied by any authoritie either of olde or new Diuines I meane possitiuely that there is a Heauen and a Hell wherefore this wee may safely beleeue and repose our soules vpon but to entertaine the beliefe of the former is as dangerous to the conscience as doubtfull to the vnderstanding seeing hee that doubtingly vndertaketh any action is condemned as a sinner because hee doth it not in faith Faiths obiect being Gods Word alone and not the vncertaine coniectures of humane opinions much lesse the vaine apparitions of dead ghosts 35. Againe their doctrine of the absolute necessitie of baptisme excluding thereby infants from Heauen and confining them to a Prison in the brimme of Hell there to indure the euerlasting punishment of losse is a dangerous doctrine both in respect of pietie towards God and charitie towards our neighbour and certaintie to a mans conscience and consequently our doctrine that holdeth the contrarie is more safe in all those respects For touching pietie it is a great imbasing to Gods mercie and a detracting from the glorie of his grace to thinke that Almightie God should in iustice cast away the infinite myriades of vnbaptized infants or that his sauing grace is so tyed to the outward Sacrament that he cannot or at the least will not saue any without it the first of these is confessed by many of the learned Romanists themselues to be à Dei misericordia alienum not agreeable to the mercie of God which exceedeth not onely the deserts but euen the hopes of men The second is confirmed by a due comparing of the olde couenant of the Law with the new couenant of the Gospell for if it be true that children dying vnder the Law vncircumcised were saued by the faith of their Parents as Saint Bernard thinketh yea and is also agreeable to the tenure of the Scripture for many children dyed in the Wildernesse without the Sacrament of Circumcision it being omitted for those fortie yeeres by Gods own allowance and Dauid hearing of the death of his childe before hee had receiued the outward character of Circumcision as may be gathered out of the Text. did solace himselfe with this confidence that the childe was saued Then it must needs follow if the same priuiledge be not granted to the children of Christian Parents that the couenant of the Gospell is not so large as the couenant of the Law nor Gods mercie so bountifull to Christians as to Iewes nor the merits of Christ so effectuall after his comming in the flesh as they were before by all which the glorie of the Gospell and grace of Christ is much defaced and the vnbounded Ocean of Gods mercie limited and stinted 36. Touching charitie is it not an vncharitable conceit to despaire of the saluation of poore infants dying without Baptisme and that both towards the infants themselues who though they are borne in originall sinne yet are innocent from actuall transgressions and towards the Parents who being themselues within the couenant hereby are depriued of that chiefe comfort of the couenant which is that God is not onely their God but the God of their seed and towardes the Church that hereby is robbed of a great part of her children and made vnable to present young infants to her Husband Christ Iesus Children are little beholding to them for this doctrine Parents lesse and the Church the mother of the faithfull least of all And indeed so farre is it from charitie that it is full of damnable crueltie 37. Lastly touching the perilous consequences that follow vpon this doctrine I need name but these three to wit first that it maketh God more mercifull to men of yeeres then vnto tender infants for they teach that men of yeeres as Valentinian the Emperour may be saued by the Baptisme of the Spirit or by the Baptisme of bloud which is Martyrdome though they want the Baptisme of water but infants albeit they may haue the Spirit of sanctification euen in the wombe as Iohn Baptist had and may be Martyrs according to their opinion as the children that Herod caused to be slaine yet if they want the Sacrament of water they adiudge them peremptorily to be banished from Gods presence for euer Now then children and men being in the same predicament either the one must be admitted to Gods fauour aswell as the other or it must needs follow that God is partial and more fauourable to the one then the other If they say that men though they haue not the act of Baptisme yet they haue votum a desire vnto it which being intercepted by some sodaine accident is supplied by inward grace I answere with Bellarmine that as another mans sinne was the cause of the damnation of infants so other mens faith sufficeth them vnto baptisme Why should then the desire of one man be of more efficacie to his saluation then the desire and purpose of the Church for the saluation of infants To this purpose their owne learned Schooleman sayth that
that the Spirit of God witnesseth vnto our spirits that wee are the sonnes of God Neither is this witnesse of the Spirit a doubtfull and vncertaine certificate for Saint Paul in the words going before calleth it the Spirit of adoption whereby we cry Abba Father and not the spirit of bondage to feare any more When therefore God doth shead abroad his Spirit into our hearts crying and making vs to cry Abba Father in faithfull not formall prayer that is a certaine testimony to our spirits that we are the sonnes of God For as Saint Ierome well noteth Wee neuer durst call God our Father but vpon conscience of the Spirit dwelling in vs. Neither doe we euer vpon this ground call God our Father but withall we are or ought to be perswaded that we are his children 15. Againe why doth hee say in another place that all they which beleeue the Gospell are sealed with the holy Spirit of promise Are Gods children sealed and can they not see nor know the Seale Is not this one vse of a seale to confirme a couenant assuring the certainty of the performance thereof to him to whom it is made Yea doth not Saint Iohn say Hereby we know that we dwell in him and he in vs because he hath giuen vs of his Spirit And againe doth not the holy Ghost so ascribe this knowledge of iustification and saluation on to a mans selfe that he denyeth it to all others To him that ouercommeth I will giue a white stone and in the stone a new name written which no man knoweth saâ—â— he that receiueth it What is this white stone but the absolution and remission of a sinner what is the new name written in it but the childe of God This no man knoweth but he that hath it therefore he that hath it knoweth it What can be more plaine And yet this is the exposition almost of all Diuines vpon that place To omit all other testimonies doth not the Scripture now teach this doctrine touching the certainty of saluation 16. I but saith Bellarmine all Gods promises for the most part are conditionall and no man can certainely know whether he hath performed the condition and therefore cannot assure himselfe of the promise To which I answere that albeit in regard of our infirmitie we are not able to fulfill the conditions required in Gods promises yet wee are assured that we shall fulfill them through him that strengthneth vs and so as the Apostle Paul said in one place Wee can doe nothing no not so much as thinke a good thought Yet in another place he saith I can doe all things through Christ that strengthneth me So may we say of our selues We cannot do anything of our selues yet in Christ Iesus wee can doe all things By his might wee can keepe his Commandements though not perfectly yet so as our defects are made vp by his perfection and our endeuours accepted in his mediation for his sake it is giuen vnto vs not onely to beleeue in him but also to suffer for him and by his neuer-fayling grace and euerlasting loue we are assured that we shall perseuere vnto the end And therefore Origen saith that it is impossible that that which God hath once quickned should either by himselfe or any other be killed Thus there is no condition required of the children of God but they are assured that they can performe it though not in full measure and by their owne strength yet in that measure which God will accept and by the strength of his Spirit which dwelleth in them and sanctifieth them to doe his will And thus this third Antithesis is nothing empeached by Bellarmines cauill 17. The Gospell telleth vs that there is but one onely propitiatory Sacrifice in the world which is Christ Iesus the Sauiour of the world who offered vp himselfe once and no more for to take away the sinnes of his people But the Church of Rome teacheth that euery Masse is a propitiatory Sacrifice for the quicke and the dead and that euery Priest as often as he saith Masse doth offer vp Christ vnto God the Father as a Sacrifice for sinne 18. Bellarmine here distinguisheth againe and saith that indeede there is but one onely propitiatory Sacrifice in the world to wit that which was once offered vpon the Crosse but yet that one Sacrifice may be reiterated in mysterie by the same high Priest Christ Iesus by the hands of a carnall Priest And againe he in another place distinguisheth this Sacrifice into bloudy vnbloudy saith that there was but one bloudie Sacrifice of Christ and that on the Altar of the Crosse but there are many vnbloudy sacrifices of the same Christ in their dayly Masses And lastly that the sacrifice of the Masse is but an application of the Sacrifice of the Crosse vnto mens soules for the actuall remission of sinnes purchased by Christ vpon the Crosse 19. Here is much adoe to little purpose three distinctions and all not worth a rush for all of them are mutually contrary to each others and vaine and friuolous in themselues first if the sacrifice of the Masse bee a repetition of the sacrifice of the crosse then it is not an application of it for it is one thing to reiterate and another to apply and therefore if the Priest doth reiterate it then hee doth not apply it and if hee doth apply it then hee doth not reiterate for to reiterate is to doe againe that which was done before and to apply is to make vse of that which was done but not to doe it againe Beside if the masse bee a repetition and application of the sacrifice of the crosse then how is it an vnbloudy sacrifice can that bloudy sacrifice bee repeated and applied after an vnbloudy manner that is asmuch as to say it is a sacrifice and yet not a sacrifice especially no propitiatory sacrifice seeing as the Apostle speaketh without the shedding of bloud there is no remissioÌ„ of sinnes Againe if the masse be a repetition of that bloudy sacrifice of Christ on the crosse then it is a repetition of Christs death and a crucifying of him againe for the sacrifice of Christ and the death of Christ is all one and if it bee so then it must needs be bloudy aswell as that for the repetition of a thing is the doing of the same thing againe And lastly if it bee an application of it then it cannot bee a repetition of it nor indeed the same in specie with it for the application of a thing is not the thing it selfe in any reason and thus these distinctions are at ciuill warre with each other and indeed like deadly enemies doe cut each others throats 20. But let one of their own learned masters Peter Lumbard conclude this point for vs who saith that Christ dying vpon the crosse offered himselfe is sacrificed dayly in the Sacrament because in