his spirit which secretly he powreth into Infants also as they then so likewise we are iustifyed not by actuall and imputatiue but by habituall and inhabtant Iustice inwardly cleansing and adorning our soules 8. Sixtly as no man can be truly accounted the obiect of Gods hatred and worthy of damnation by the meere imputation of fault vnles he be faulty indeed and guilty of crime so as Gabriel Vasquez solidly disputeth none can be reputed the obiect of his loue and worthy Gab. Vasquez in 1. 2. disp 206. cap. 3. of heauen by the extrinsecall will of God not imputing sinne or imputing Iustice vnles he be truely free from sin and endowed with Iustice Againe as no man can be made truly and formally wise by the wisdom which is in another or liue by the life which another enioyeth so neither formally iust by the iustice which is in another Abbot in his defence c. 4. fol. 423. 424. and so not by the Iustice which is in Christ M. Abbot in his defence answereth That a man may be formally iust two manner of wayes A man is one way formally iust in quality another way formally iust in law And then he graunteth That it were absurd indeed that a man should be formally iust in quality by the iustice of another But he may be sayth he formally iust in law For in the course of Law and iudgment the forme of Iustice is not to be subiect to crime or accusation he is formally iust against whome no action or accusation is lyable by law c. And this is the state of our Iustice and righteousnes in the sight of God Hath not he shaped a fine answere very sutable to Scriptures and much to the credit of Christ his Maister For did he giue Tit. 2. v. 24. himselfe for vs that he might redeeme vs from all antiquity and might cleanse to himselfe a people acceptable Did he shed his pretious bloud to take away our sinnes purging vs by the lauer of water in the word And hath he only performed it by immunity from punishment not by cancelling and purging Ioan. 1. v. 29. z. loan 3. v. 5. ad Ephes 5. v. 26. Ioan. 17. v. 19. Rom. 8. v. 15 2. Petr. 1. v. 3. ad Ephes 4. v. 14. Feild l. 3. c. 44. of the Church fol. 178. our faults The Scriptures manifestly teach That he sanctifyed himselfe that we might also be sanctifyed in truth giueth vs his spirit of adoption most great and pretious promises that by these we may be made partakers of the diuine nature created a new in iustice and holynes of truth And is all this done in the externall proceeding and course of law remaining in our selues still tainted with the inherence of sinne 9. All Philosophers accord that the denomination of a subiect is more truly and properly taken from the inherent quality which abydeth in it then from the outward forme which is referred vnto it as a Black Moore although he be apparelled in a white liuery is properly notwithstanding tearmed blacke of his innate blacknes not white of his outward habit Therefore if vve be truly sinners by invvard infection If the inherence of sin as Field confesseth be acknowledged in euery iustifyed person notwithstanding his iustification howsoeuer the iustice of Christ be Feild ibid. imputed vnto vs to free vs from the processe of the Law yet we cannot be truly tearmed iust holy innocent and imâ—aculate the children of God and heires of heauen as we are often called in holy Write Being as I say in very deed impure defiled channels of sinne by the inherence therof and consequently in our selues slaues to Sathan worthy hell worthy damnation Neither is it inough to say we may be accounted innocent because no inditement can be drawne no accusation heard no attachement take place against vs for as the guilt of sinne and heynousnes of treason goeth before the desert of punishment much more before the action or accusation which is layd to our charge so the exemption or immunity from the executioÌ„ of the law is no acquittance or freedome from the desert much lesse from the guiltynes or treachery of our harts Therefore the holy Ghost who iudgeth of vs as we are indeed should falsly tearme vs holy iust c. once darknes now light in our Lord if we be still darckned with the mists of sinne and are only freed from the punishment thereof 10. Moreouer what if M. Feild the polisher of the rough and crabbed speaches of other Protestants the refiner of their impure doctrine what if himselfe auow that sinne still lurketh in the faythfull not wholy exempted from all action in law but only from dominion and Feild 3. l. c. 44. f. 178. guilt of condemnation Read his wordes once againe and returne your verdict of him The inherence of sinne the iustifyed man acknowledgeth in himselfe notwithstanding his iustification which still subiecteth him to Gods displeasure and punishments Feild ibid accompanying the same Againe in the same page continuing his discourse of the iustifyed he sayth They are not already freed actually from the inherence of sinne and the displeasure of God disliking it But how can he be formally iust by course of law free from all crime action and accusation in whose spotted soule sinne still inhereth lyable to punishments and which is worse obnoxious to the disfauour of God hating and disliking it Shall I not thinke these iarring Ministers like the ancient Southsayers of whome Tully reporteth laugh the people to scorne and make merry among themselues in their secret meetinges when they remember with what contrary tales and lying fables they beguile their Readers For shall not I thinke this a cosening deuise a most exorbitant course that the Father of heauen should not absolutly extinguish but wincke at our faults cloake our iniquityes fauour whome he hateth wrong his Iustice and falsify his word in not punishing sinners according to the rate of their misdeserts for the loue of his Sonne vvho either vvould not or could not offer an equiualent ransome for Cal. 4. v. 6. the cleansing of our soules heere vpon earth 11. The seauenth is that we all participate of the same spirit with Christ our Sauiour Because you are sonnes Ioan. 1. v. 16. God hath sent the spirit of his Sonne into your harts We liue with his spiritual life of his fullnes we all haue receaued We receaue of the same fullnes life of grace in substance although not in perfection that in substance which the Angels enioyed in their state of merit for all the members of one mysticall body partake of one life the members enioy the same property of life with the head the branches are nourished with the sapp or iuyce which springeth from the vyne but the spirituall life and Iustice of Christ both is and was heere vpon earth inherent the Iustice of Angells inherent and pleasing to God therefore ours must of necessity
In 6. Syn. gen act 4. 9. â—6 with Sergius with the Monothelites their wills and operations who for this cause are enrolled in the rancke of heretikes and aboue 1000. yeares ago condemned by Pope Agatho in the sixt generall Councell 23. Wherefore to draw to an end I intreate you all who peruse this Treatise if the filth sucked out these miry puddles haue not dammed vp the passage of truth if these dregges of heresyes haue not quenched in you all sparkes of grace renounce the Patrons of such iniquity beware the infection of their folly the fury of them who proclaime Christ a Priest Christ a Mediatour according to his Deity and acknowledge with vs how he dischargeth these dutyes only as man notwithstanding how his actions his Sacrifice his prayers and teares were all of infinite and incomparable merit through the excellency of his diuine person Which I would to God his Royall Maiesty would also vnderstand for whose worthy satisfaction I haue diligently laboured to decide this question THE TENTH CONTROVERSY DEMONSTRATETH The Primacy of S. Peter against D. Bilson and D. Reynoldes CHAP. I. ARISTOTLE the chiefe and Prince Arist â— 3. polit â— 5. 6. 7 of Philosophers assigneth three seuerall manners of gouerning a Common-Wealth For eyther many of the meaner sort beare sway or some few of the Nobility or only one as absolute Soueraigne If many it is called Democracy if few Aristocracy if one a Monarchy The first is often ruined with the tumults and garboyles of the vnconstant and diuersly-headed multitude The second commonly deuided with the strifes and factions of the ambitious Peeres The third as it is lesse subiect S. Thom. de regim principum l. 1. cap. 1. 23. â— to diuision so most conuenient as S. Thomas learnedly noteth to order guide and keepe many in peace and vnity the finall scope to which all gouernments should be directed and all rulers ayme 2. Whereupon Plato Aristotle Isocrates and diuers other affirme in peace in warre in managing al affaires Plato in polit Arist l. 3. polit c. 11. 12. l. 4. cap. 2. Isocrates oratione 3. this to be the most diuine forme of a Common-Wealth where one most singular man hath the supreme power and administration of things which both God and Nature confirmeth For in the mystery of the most holy Trinity there is the Father from whom the Sonne and the Holy Ghost who from the Father and the Sonne as from one only origen or beginning proceedeth They euery way equall in properties distinct in Persons three are only one in ouer-ruling and disposing all things Amongst the immortall spirits and quires of Angels there is one illuminated by God who giueth light to the rest In the Heauens there is one first moueable by which the inferiour orbes and planets are moued One Sunne from whence the light of the Stars is borrowed and influence of the signes in the Zodiacke determined In earthly thinges in this little world of man there is one hart from which the arteryes and vitall spirits one braine from whence the sinewes one lyuer from which the veines channels of bloud haue their head or of-spring in euery element there is one predominate quality Amongst the birdes the Eagle among the beasts the Lyon among the fishes the Whale doth also dominier In Trees Cyprian tract do Idolorum â—anitate Hearbes and Plants in Townes Villages Families priuate Houses the like head-ship or Monarchy might be shewed if it were not too long for my professed breuity in so much as S. Cyprian writeth The very Bees haue their guide and captaine whome they follow Apo. 2â— 2. Cant. 6. 3. Mat. 13. v. 38. 41. Ioan. 10. 16. Luc. 10. 34. 1. Tim. 3. â—â— 3. Now sith the Church of Christ militant vpon earth is a perfect yet spirituall Common-wealth sith it is An holy Citty A campe well ordered and established by the wisest Captaine Gouernour and Law-maker that euer was Who doubteth but that he placed in it the most worthy Regiment of all others that Monarchicall preheminence which in all his other creatures so perfectly raigneth especially for that he resembleth it to A kingdome to A sheepefold to An Inne to An House in which one King one Pastour one Host one Maister beareth sway For that it ought to be correspondent to the ancient Mat. 16. 18. 19. Synagogue in which one High-priest answerable to the celestiall hierarchies and orders of Angels among whom one Seraphim is chief And who was this visible Monarch this Ministeriall head of the Church vnder Christ but S. Peter To whom our Sauiour said Thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not preuaile against it And I will giue to thee the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt binde vpon earth it shall be bound also in the Heauens and whatsoeuer thou shall loose in Earth it shall be loosed also in the Heauens In which seÌ„tence foure rare prerogatiues are promised vnto Peter and by euery one of them his supereminent dignity aboue the rest of the Apostles manifestly declared 4. For first he calleth him Rocke by which Metaphore he doth insinuate that he as a Rocke or Stone vnmoueable Amb. ser 47. Orig. hom 5. in Exod. saith S. Ambrose vpholdeth the whole weight and fabrike of Christian worke That he saith Origen is the great foundation or most solide stone vpon which Christ builded his Church Secondly he addeth To thee I will giue the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen by which words is signified all power to enact or repeale Lawes sommon or confirme Councels appoint or displace offices consecrate or degrade Bishops all power and authority which is requisite for the rule gouernment or instruction of the Church For euen as when the keyes of a Citty are giuen vp to the Magistrate the administration and rule of the State is surrendred into Greg. l. 4. epi. 32. Luc. 11. 52. Apoc. 1. v. 18. his hands so now when the Keyes of the kingdome of Heauen are imparted to Peter The whole charge and principality of the Church as S. Gregory writeth is committed vnto him And whereas there be two sorts of Keyes the Key of knowledge to teach and instruct of which S. Luke You haue taken away the Key of knowledge and the Key of authority and iurisdiction to guide and gouerne whereof S. Iohn speaketh I haue the Keyes of death and of Hell and Esay I will giue the Key of the house of Dauid vpon his shoulder Both these Keyes were here delegated vnto Peter by Isa 21. v. 22. It was vsuall amongst the Hebrewes to giue power and authority by the Keyes vid. Azor. Insti mor. p. 2. c. 9. the one he had the Chaire of infallible doctrine to decide all controuersies and define all matters of faith by the other the scepter of Ecclesiasticall gouernment to rule order correct and
Figura ergo est It is therefore a figure It is a Sacrament because albeit the same body be really eaten the same bloud really drunke yet in a mystery in a figure in a Sacrament after a sweet spirituall and vnbloudy manner 16. Nay S. Augustine as our Sacramentaries contend saith What doest thou prepare thy teeth and belly Beleeue and thou hast eaten True he writeth there of the spirituall eating of Christ the bread of life by faith beleefe onely he had not begun to discourse of the Sacrament or Sacramentall eating At least after say they he speaketh of the Sacrament yet vseth these wordes He that feedeâ—h wiâ—h Aug. tra 2â— in Io. the hart not he that grindeth with the tooth True not he that grindeth only can partake the fruit of this Sacrament he that feedeth with hart without corporall eating may benefit himself but he that corporally eateth without faith can receaue no profit at all They vrge againe that S. Aug. tra 59. 2â— in Ioan. Augustine sayth The Apostles eat the bread our Lord Iudas the bread of our Lord. And in another place he denyeth The wicked to eate the body of Christ. Most true He denyeth theÌ„ to eate the bread our Lord or to feed of his body because they are not incorporated in his mysticall body Or because they do it not fruitfully by grace to the benefit Psalm â—â— Augu. de Bapt cont Donatist l. 9. â— 8. con Pulgent c. 6. cont lit Petil. l. 2. c. 20. c. 55. Biâ—s 4. pâ— pag. 772. 773. 774. 776. of their soules as King Dauid sayth The wicked shall not rise in Iudgment Because they shall not rise to saluation but to damnation Otherwise S. Augustine graunteth that Iudas did and the wicked do truely eaâ—e the body of Christ in his booke of Baptisme against the Donatists against Fulgentius and against the letters of Petilian 17. In summe many Fathers obiected by M. Bilson exhort vs to eate the Sacrament by fayth to cleanse our soules prepare our harts they call it spirituall food the bread of the mind and not of the belly no bodily but ghostly meat the proper nourishment of the spirit All most true for a liuely fayth a cleane soule a pure hart are necessarily required in the worthy receauer and the purer he approacheth the more plenty he receaueth of Gods heauenly graces Then it is stiled spirituall food ghostly meate the bread of the mind the proper nourishment of the spirit because the spirituall repast and refection Cyr. Alex l. 10. in Ioan. c. 13. of our mind the perfect vigour and increase of spirit is the chiefe and most soueraigne effect of this diuine banquet Neuertheles it excludeth not as S. Cyrill noteth but presupposeth the corporall from which as from the fountaine and sea of grace the spirituall is deriued Our Aduersaryes reply The Fathers exclude it by certaine negatiue tearmes which they vse calling it No bodily but Ghostly meate the bread of the mind and not of the belly They call it so indeed and speake in the Scriptures phrase euen as Almighty God spake when he sayd I will mercy and not sacrifice yet thereby he neither excluded Ose 6. v. 6. Matth. 9. v. 13. nor forbad sacrifice which himselfe prescribed exacted and commanded but only preferred mercy as an act of charity more acceptable vnto him So the Fathers by the like words exclude not the bodily but preferre the ghostly as the dayntiest food of our soules Or they deny it to be any bodily sustenance as bodily is commonly taken for that which is opposite to ghostly This is not so this is both bodily and ghostly both spirituall corporall meate this relisheth the mouth and cheereth the hart quickneth the body and refresheth the soule Therefore it is not a meere corporall but a spiritual dainty because it hath a spirituall manner of being is seasoned with spirituall qualityes affoardeth all spirituall comfort and is principally ordained to our spirituall nourishment For the flesh as Tertullian writeth is fed Tertul. l. de resurr carnis with the body and bloud of Christ that the soule may be fattened with God 18. And if Protestants would be as ready to defend as they are to cauill at the former sayinges they might learne by the like speaches which the Apostle vseth how to explaine the Fathers wordes for as they call the body of Christ in the Sacrament spiritual so he the body which 1. Cor. 15. v. 44. shall rise in the later day It is sowen a naturall body it shal ryse a spirituall body as they account it a barbarous and sauage thing to eate the flesh and drinke the bloud of Ibid. v. 50. Christ so he a thing impossible that flesh and bloud can possesse the kingdome of God as S. Augustine sayth Not that Ibid. v. 37. body which you see shall you eate c. so he not the body that shall be dost thou sow Which place togeather with the former Eutichius vrged against the corporall resurrection of our flesh with no lesse colourable pretense then Sectaryes do the precedent sayings against the bodily presence of Christ in the Sacrament But as they are constrained vnles they deny that article of our fayth with S. Gregory and other of our Deuines to construe S. Pauls meaning Greg. lib. 4. in lob c. 32. 33. that the body which ryseth shall be both spirituall and corporall spirituall by reason of the glorious dowryes it shall receaue and corporall in respect of the true and tractable substance it shall still retaine That flesh and bloud according to humane misery and corruption cannot possesse the Kingdome of God but according to immortality and corruption that not the body which is sowed shall rise but another another in quality the same in substance another in perfection of glory the same in property and condition of nature another in powerfull vertue the same in corporall verity another in manner and forme the same in realty and essence of being Apply the like constructions to the fornamed sentences written against the reall presence and you shall rightly expound those learned writers and soundly answere your owne obiections 19. To conclude when these new-fangled teachers with no euidence of Scripture or sentence of Father can disproue the truth of our doctrine they fall to their accustomed Pulk in c. 6. Io. sect 13. Bils 4 par pag. 791. Ambr. l. 30 de Spirit sanct c. 12. Aug. in Pâ—al 24. in 1. Cor. Bils 4. par p. 710. c. rayling They tearme vs Capharnaites Vbiquitaries Idolaters c. whereas we detest the inhumane grosse imagination of the Capharnaites condemne the Vbiquity or euery where being of Christ adore not with diuine honor as M. Bilson is pleased to impose vpon vs the elements of bread and wine but we adore to vse S. Ambrose words the flesh of Christ in the mysteries That flesh which â—ce man eateth as S. Augustine
which it is distinguished from the former lawes To abrogate all kind of Sacrifice is to disanull the law to abolish our Religion as S. Cyprian proueth And to fly as D. Bilson and D. Reynolds are here constrained to spirituall only is vaine and friuolous First because euery true Religion is a seuerall and peculiar worship wherby people vnited professe their duty and obedience to God which is not inough inwardly to acknowledge vnlesse we also expresse it by some outward and sensible signe And in the chiefest Religion that euer was by the perfectest and most principall signe of subiection to wit by the externall oblation I mentioned before Secondly we haue not only as all Catholikes teach against the Manichees Our soule from God we receaue from him both body and soule both the flesh and the spirit both our S. Iren. l. 4. cap. 34. S. Tho. l. 4. c. 56. con GeÌ„tes visible and inuisible our corporall and spirituall substance Therefore besids the secret and inuisible prayers of our hart it is necessary we likewise serue him with corporall bodily and visible things in token that he only is Authour Creatour and Lord of all things Thirdly spirituall Sacrifices of prayer almesdeeds and the like were continually practised and obserued by the Iewes not proper to vs Christians as that Sacrifice ought to be by which our Religion is established and distinguished from others 5. D. Reynolds D. Sparkes and their associates otherwhile Reyn. c. 8. diuis 4. Sparks in his answer to M. Iobn Alb. p. 7. 8. 23. answere That the Sacrifice of Christ vpon the Crosse is the peculiar and perpetuall Host in which our Priesthood law and Religion is constituted But they satisfy not For that was only offered in one place and at one tyme to that all Nations christened could not refort to do homage vnto God that was not any rite or ceremony instituted by him but if we speake of the action a detestable Sacriledge committed by the Iewes that also was common to all the former true states of Religion who belieued in Christs Passion to come And yet the externall and diuine worship in which Christian Religion florisheth and consisteth ought to be apointed by God proper to Christians in all tymes and places practised ought to be such vnto which all faithfull people might repaire which can be Reyn. pag. 539. Luc. 22. v. 19. Iewel in his Reply against the Sacrifice Bils 4. par p. 690. 691. none other then the Oblation of the holy Eucharist as I will manifestly proue notwithstanding M. Reynolds impiously traduceth it as the Monster of abhomination 6. Christ offered and instituted this Sacrifice in S. Luke This is my Body which is giuen for you He doth not say which shall be giuen hereafter only as M. Iewell commenteth nor which is giuen in bare Mistery and signification as M. Bilson glozeth but which euen now in the present is giuen as an Host and Sacrifice offered to his Father truly really in propitiation pardon and forgiuenes of sinnes as more plainly appeareth by the Greeke text which Bezae for this cause chargeth with corruption where all copies read The Cuppe or bloud as conteyned in the Chalice to be truly Cyp. l 2. Epist 2. Aug. in Psal 33 â— con 2. Chrys bo 24. â—â— Corinth NisseÌ„ orat deresur Andreas Crastouâ— de opif. miss l. 2. ser 164. Cyr in 1. Cor. c. 10. bo 24. Aug. 17 de ciuit Dei cap. 20. shed that is offered vnto God as a Propitiatory Sacrifice in remission of sinnes Which all the Fathers with vniforme consent most constantly confirme S. Cypryan S. Augustinè S. Chrysostome and innumerable others by Coccius and Garetius abundantly cyted Amongst which S. Gregory Nissen whom our Aá¸uersaries hereupon shamfully calumniate hath these words Christ after an ineffable and hidden manner of Sacrifice preoccupated the violent force to wit of his death and offered himselfe for vs an Oblation and victim the Priest to geather and lambe of God When was this done When he exhibited his Body to be eaten and Bloud to be drunke to his familiar frinds This is that marueilous and honourable Sacrifice where in lieu of the slaughter of brute beasts Christ coÌ„maunded as S. Chrysostome sayth himselfe to be offered this is that Sacrifice which succeeded all those Sacrifices of the old law that were offered in shaddow of that to come as S. Augustine testifyeth This is that soueraigne worship of God in which the law of Christianity is established as the allusion it selfe importeth which our Sauiour here maketh betweene the dedication of the old Testament and this of the new 7. Moyses when he ratified and began the old law Exod. 2â— dedicated it in the bloud of Calues Christ beginninng to confirme the new solemnizeth the same in his owne bloud Moyses powred his bloud into a goblet Christ consecrateth his in a Chalice Moyses tooke that bloud and sprinkled the people Christ taketh this and inwardly washeth the harts of his Apostles Moyses said This is the bloùd of the couenant or testament Christ sayth This is the bloud of the new Testament Moyses added which God hath deliuered vnto you Christ annexeth which shall be shed for you So as that which Moyses performed was an euident figure of this which Christ accomplished And therefore as that was a true Sacrifice so this being the truth it selfe must be a farre more true and perfect Sacrifice As that was the bloud of a victime offered vnto God before it was spinkled vpoÌ„ the people so this ought to be the bloud of a purer victim of Christ himselfe before it cleanseth the soules of his Disciples As that was the solemne seruice in which the state of the Iudaicall law consisted so this must be the proper and publike worship of God on which the externall form of Christian Religion dependeth 8. As we may yet more manifestly gather out of that Luc. 12 v. 19. precept of our Sauiour Christ Do this for commemoration of me By which words we are strictly commanded to execute 1. Some outward visible act signifyed by the Pronowne This. 2. That it must be an act of doing not of belieuing only the Verbe Doe conuinceth 3. That the doing of this external actioÌ„ should represent the Passion of Christ is manifest by the Nowne which followeth for a commemoration of me And by S. Paul As often as you shall eate this Bread and drinke the Chalice you shall shew the dead of 1. Cor. 11. v. 26. our Lord vntill he come 9. It is not inough To take bread and wine to excite stirre vp an inward remembrance as M. Bilson faigneth of his death and Passion We must also do as Christ commandeth Bils 4. par pag. 693. 694. 695. an outward action commemoratiue of him sensibly shewing as S. Paul writeth the death of our Lord. The Iewes belieued and visibly sacrificed their Calues and lambes in token of Christ Wherefore least we
it had byn long before sweetly song in the East and in all the Prouinces Concil Cart. 2. c. 3. Conc. Agath cap. 47 Conc. Calc act 3. S. Cyril cat myst 5. S. Amb. l. 5. epist 33. Greg. l. 7. Ep. 63. l. 12. Ep. 15. Bed l. 1. hist â—â—cles cap. 19. Aug l. 10. confâ—ss c. 1â— â—o l. 22. de Ciui Dei cap. 8. Chrys l. 6. de Sacer. Bils 4. par pag. 993. Caluin de coen â—ni the like he hath lib de vâ—ra Eccles refor in cap. 7. ad Heb. Magdeb. Câ—nt 2. c. Io. col 107 Cent. â— c. 4 col 63. Cent. 3. c. 4. 5. Mâ—lanct l. 4 Chroâ—iâ— Henr. 4. of Italy Was it not there further enacted that the thrice sacred Anthymne Holy Holy should be repeated in morning Masses in the Masses of Lent or in such as were offered for the dead as it was accustomed to be in solemue Masses Is not our Sacrifice of the Masse or vnbloudly Host mentioned also in the second Councell of Carthage of Agatho of Chalcedon and in many others Did not S. Cyril Patriarch of Ierusalem S. Ambrose Bishop of Millan S. Gregory the great Pope of Rome did they not say Masse 19. And the same S. Gregory did he not send all Priestly ornaments to S. Austen our Apostle Did not S. Augustine likewise the Doctour say Masse Did he not in treat others to doe the same for his fathers and mothers soule And which is more doth he not write of a Priest of his who sacrificed the Body of our Lord in a house infected with euill Spirits and the infestation ceased Doth not S. Chrysostome teach That the Angells themselues with reuerence assist our sacrificing Priest in honour of him that is offered on the Altar Which maketh me wonder how M. Bilson should ouershoot himselfe so farre as to auouch That for twelue hundred yeares after Christ our Sacrifice was not knowen to the world Was he so litle conuersant I will not say in these learned Fathers but in the Century-writers his Companions in Caluin his Coronell in Melancthon and other his Protestant Peeres as not to know what they had written in this behalfe Or was he so bold as against vs against them all to broach this stander Caluin sayth It is well knowen the olf Fathers called the Supper a Sacrifice c. Neyther can I excuse the custome of the ancient Church for that with gesture and outward rite they did set forth a certaine forme of Sacrifice with the same ceremonies in a manner that were practised in the old law saue that they vsed the Host of bread in lieu of a beast 20. The Century-writers blame Ignatius the scholler of the Apostles Irenaeus S. Cyprian Tertullian and diuers others in all ages within the compasse M. Bilson speciâ—yeth for the like Melancthon writeth of S. Gregory the First who liued about the 600. yeare of our Lord He allowed sayth he by publike authority the sacrifice of Christs body and bloud not only for the living but also for the dead M. Bale Bale in his Pageans sal 27. Fulk in his confut of Purgat p. 264. 265. c. Beacon in his Treat intituled The reliques of Rome sol 344. Luth. l. de cap. Baby l. de abrog Missae auerreth of S. Leo the first who florished about 440. years after Christ He allowed the sacrifice of the Masse not without great blasphemy to God M. Fulke reprehendeth Tertullian for the same M. Beacon concludeth The Masse was begotten conceaâ—ed borne auone after the Apostles tyme if all be true that Historiographers write So as it was the badnes only I suppose of M. Bilsons cause which made him bolster that foule report 21. Yet I will examine what he and his associates pretend against vs The Eucharist say they is a Sacrament which we receaue from God therfore it cannot be likewise a Sacrifice we offer to God because it implyeth the same thing should be both offered and receaued I answere that one and the self same thing diuersly considered may be both offered and receaued proceed from vs and be giuen to vs be a sacrament and a sacrifice And so the holy Eucharist is a Sacrament imparted vnto vs in that it is a signe of inisible grace ordained by God to nourish our soules with heaueÌ„ly food It is a sacrifice offered vnto God in that this signe or gift consecrated with sacred Ceremony is surrendred vnto him in acknowledgment of his highest Maiesty in protestation of our lowest duety and allegiance In this sense Cyp. ser de â—â—n Dom. it is called by S. Cyprian Medicamentum simul HolocaustuÌ„ Both a medicine and a sacrifice A medicine to heale our spirituall infirmityes A sacrifice to appease the wrath of God A medicine composed by him for the behoofe of vs A 1. Para. 29. v. 14. sacrifice offered and consumed by vs in honour of him This the Prophet Dauid rightly obserued when he sayd All thinges O Lord are thyne and the things we haue receaued from thy hand we haue restored vnto thee Thus we offer our spiritual Hosts as S. Peter exhorteth we offer vnto God â— Pet. 2. â—ers 5. Iac. 1. v. â—7 the Sacrifice of prayer of prayse of thankefulnes c. yet they are all mercifull guifts Descending from aboue from the Father of Lights from whom euery good motion and thoght proceedeth 22. The second and chiefest bulwarke which M. â—eynolds M. Bilson M. Sparks raise to batter the Forr of our Reyn. c. 8. diuis 4. p. 474. Bils 4. par pag. 695. Spark pa. 7. 23. sequen Haeb 10 v. 12. 14. v. 18. ad Heb. c. 9. v. 28. blessed Sacrifice is that S. Paul often inculcateth to the Hebrewes How Christ by one Host one Oblation once offered redeemed vs all How Christ was once offered to exhaust the sinnes of many I graunt that he was only once bloudily sacrifyced in his proper forme and shape yet vnbloudily sacramentally couered vnder the veiles of his creatures he is dayly offered vpon the Altar of his Church Which S. Paul impugneth not but only the iteration of the former bloudy as may be gathered out of the drift and scope of his discourse in that epistle to the Hebrewes 23. Secondly I answere that S. Paul speaketh of the chiefe generall ransoming Host of the full redeeming Heb. 10. v. 14. sacrifice Which once perfected on the Crosse consumated for euer them that are sanctifyed Yet it is nothing repugnant but altogeather correspondent heereunto that we should likewise haue our particuler Oblation to communicate the priuiledges of that vniuersall For so all generall Melchior Canus l. 12. de lo. Theo. c. 12. 1. Tim. 2. v. 4. causes as Melchior Canus noteth are determined and restrained by their particulers The Sunne is the generall cause of light yet we receaue the benefite thereof by many seuerall and particuler illuminations The will of God
crucifyed his bloud shed And therefore if vve exactly scan the povverfull and effectuall vvordes of Consecration vvhich immediatly produce no more then they signify vve may truly auerre that Christ in this svveet and admirable manner is heere dayly killed and crucifyed againe For if he vvere sayd to be killed in the Apoc. 5. 9. 138. imperfect thaddovves and darke resemblances of the old Lavv and tearmed by S. Iohn The Lambe slaine from the beginning of the world because the Goates Lambes and other victimes were slaine which obscurely shadowed and resembled him how much more truely may he be said to be daily crucified in our dreadfull mystery of the Masse which is not onely a bare and naked figure but so liuely an Image so neere a Character such a perfect representation of that on the Crosse as it is the same body the same bloud the same Host Oblation which there was made And no difference at all but that that was sacrificed vpon the ignominious wood of the Crosse and this vpon the hallowed Altar of the Church That was all imbrued with bloud this cleane from the effusiō of bloud That offered by the treacherous hands of the Iewes this by the annoynted hands of the Priests That in his true proper and natiue shape this in a couert hidden and Sacramentall manner Heereupon S. Cyprian Cyp. ep 63. Pascha de cons◠dist ◠c. Iteratur Greg. do Conse dist 2. c. Quid sie hom 37. in euan Aug. de fide ad Petrum c. 19. The Sacrifice which we offer is the Passion of Christ. Paschasius Daily Christ is mystically immolated for vs and the Passion of Christ in mystery is deliuered S. Gregory Christ in himselfe immortally liuing dieth againe in this mystery S. Augustine speaking of the carnal Sacrifices of the Leuiticall Law and this Commemoratiue of the new In them he saith Christ was foreshewed as to be killed in this he is shewed as killed The reason heereof is manifest because the seuerall substances of bread and wine as I touched aboue are not directly changed and transubstantiated into the whole person of our Sauiour Christ as here he liued vpon earth or as he now raigneth in heauen but the bread into his body apart from the bloud and the wine into his bloud apart from the body In so much that if nothing else ensued but that which the words precisely signifie and effectuate the body should be there truly dead deuoid of bloud and the bloud truly shed seuered from the body 28. Notwithstanding al this we constantly beeleue that per concomitantiam as the Deuines tearme it or by sequell of all parts each to other the body of our Sauiour is in the Sacrament as it is in it selfe that is glorious immortall and fully replenished with his pretious bloud His bloud is likewise vnder the other kind as it now existeth conteyned in his veynes his veynes in his body his body conioyned to his soule his soule and body Hypostatically vnited to the Sonne of God so that Christ by this sequell or Concomitance is here wholy vnder both kinds his whole body his whole bloud his whole soule his whole Godhead his whole man-hood Yea by essentiall connexion of one with the other all the persons of the holy Trinity the Father Sonne and holy Ghost 29. O most rare and vnspeakable mysterie which M. Bell M. Reynolds and their vnhappy Consorts either blinded with ignorance or transported with malice can Heb. 5. ver 11. not conceaue O great and inexplicable speach which S. Paul thought vnfit to vnfold to the Hebrewes feeble in faith and weake in vnderstanding And indeed it is too deepe a point to explaine to the itching eares of our captious Heretikes if the calamity of our times importunity of our Aduersaries did not presse vs thereunto 30. Besides these cauils gathered out of Scripture M. Bils 4. p. pag. 692. 693. 752. Rey. p. 536. Bilson and M. Reynolds huddle vp certaine obiections out of the Fathers writings as that S. Gregory Nazianzen calleth our daily Sacrifice An Image of that on the Crosse S Chrysostome A signe a remembrance of Christs death Others say That Christ is ossered in a Sacrament in mysterie in memory Some tearme it A spirituall Sacrifice A Sacrifice of praier S. Augustine A Sacrifice of praise and thankesgiuing But how do these sayings infringe our doctrine We allow it an Image yet the truth it self A signe yet the thing signed An image in respect of the outward forms the truth in respect of the inward substance A signe in shew the thing it selfe indeed We agree with the Fathers That Christ is offered in a Sacrament in mysterie c. in regard of the visible elements and outward representation as I haue already declared we call the Masse A spirituall Sacrifice A Sacrifice A Sacrifice of Praier for that it is made with blessing and praier mysticall for that the manner of consecrating this victime is not grosse carnall and sensibly bloudy as the Iewish victimes were but cleane spirituall and vnbloudy Vnbloudy in Sacrification in substance bloudy Aug. con lit Petil. l. 2. ca. 86 ◠Tertul. ad Mar. li. 4. Iren. l. 4 ca. 33. 34. the manner spirituall the thing corporall We subscribe to S. Augustine Tertullian Irenaeus and the rest That it is a Sacrifice of praise and thankesgiuing because hereby God is highly praised aboundant thankes are surrendred vnto him And whatsoeuer the old Law with many Hosts and burnt offerings nakedly resembled by our sole and singuler Sacrifice is wholy honorably fully accomplished In which respect we are the true worshippers of God Who neither in the Temple of Ierusalem nor in the mount Garizim but in euery Coast and Climate of the earth adore the Father of Heauen according of our Sauiours prophesie in spirit and truth He saith in spirit by reason of the life and spirit of God which our Host containeth Ioan. 4. 23. In truth because it is indeed the truth it selfe the true body of Christ which the figures of the old Law shadowed and resembled Or he addeth in spirit not to debar vs from all externall Sacrifices or outward ceremonies as Caluin misconstrueth the word but to exclude the grosse corporall victimes of the Iewes as S. Chrysostome Caluin in his Com. vpon this place Chrys and Euthy vpon this place Amb. de Spi. l. 3. ca. 11. Cyr. in Io. l. 2. ca. 93. and Euthymius expound this place In truth to oppose it against the false and vnlawfull worship of the Samaritans which is the interpretation of S. Ambrose S. Cyril and Theophilact 31. And this is sufficient to cleare the Fathers sufficient if not to stop the mouth of clamous Aduersaries yet to quiet the minds of indifferent Readers sufficient to acquit our Sacrifice from calumny our selues from Idolatrie our Priests from iniury and incroachment vpon Christs incommunicable right in their immaculate and daily immolation of his body
are not imputed but pardoned in Christ all Mortall in the Reprobate M. Fulke conformably deliuereth Allsinnes are pardonable to the Penitent and faythfull and without fayth and repentance euen the least and ligh est sinne are damnable and deadly Against whom I reason thus 2. If there be any sinnes which euen then wheÌ„ they are voluntarily committed without repentance can stand with grace and Iustice the life of our soules they are of their owne nature neyther damnable nor deadly but there are some suchsinnes Therefore there are some sinnes which neyther of their owne nature Prou. 24. v. 16. cause the spirituall death of our soules in this life nor damnation in the next That there are some such sinnes I proue out of Scripture out of the Prouerbes Seauen tymes doth the Iust man fall and rise againe If he be Iust how falleth he into sinne If a sinner how is he called Iust vnlesse some sinne may consist with Iustice Out of Ecclesiast There is not a Iust man vpon earth who doth good and doth not sinne Out of S. Iohn If we shall say we haue no sinne we seduce Eccles 7. v. 21. 1. Iohn 1. Aug. l. dâ— natu gra c. 36. Haeb. 5. our selues and the truth is not in vs. Where S. Augustine expoundeth S. Iohn of the sinnes of the Iust and speaking of our Blessed Lady absolutly pronounceth This Virgin excepted if all holy Persons whilest heere they liued were assembled togeather with how great sanctity soeuer they shined c. they would all crie out If we say we haue no sinne we seduceour selues Out of S. Paul Euery Bishop ought as for the people so also for himselfe to offer for sinnes Whence S. Hierome collecteth He Hier. apud Panigarol part 2. lect 12. Iaco. 3. v. 2. lacob 1. v. 14 Hier. in CoÌ„menta c. 5. Mat. Psal 31. Math. 5. 1. Cor. 3. Orig. bo 5. In Leuit. Amb. in Psalm 118. Naz. or at 2. Iulia. in Cbrys bo 24. in Mat. Hier. l. 2. con Pelag. Aug. l. de natura gra ca. 38. in Enchir c. 22. 71. ser 41. de Sanct. Fulke in c. 1. Iaco. sect 6. Ezech. 18. 4. Rom. 6. 23. Iacob 2. 10. Aug. Ep 29. Cbrys bo 35. in Mat. should neuer be commanded to offer for others vnlesse he were Iust nor for himselfe if he wanted sinnes Out of S. Iames In many things we all offend And in his first Chapter Euery one is tempted of his owne concupiscence abstracted and allured afterward concupiscence when it hath conceaued bringeth forth sin but sinne when it is consummate engendreth death Behold three things in man Concupiscence the ground or entisement to sinne Conception the first and imperfect motion which yeeldeth therunto ConsuÌ„mation the absolute deliberate consent Concupiscence is no sinne Conception is a sinne but not damnable not deadly ConsuÌ„mation or full consent is only that which engendreth death S. Hierom agreable heereunto maketh a great difference betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Desire with Consent and withous Consent Many other places I omit cited out of King Dauid S. Mathew and S. Paul I omit the Fathers who acknowledge this diuersity of Veniall and Mortall sinnes Origen S. Ambrose S. Gregory Nazianzen S. Chrysostome S. Hierome S. Augustine c. 3. M. Fulke obiecteth by Ezechiel and S. Paul Of all sinnes in generall it is sayd The soule which sinneth shal die And The wages of sinne is death I answere They speake of haynous sinnes not of euery small offence For God were too seuere his leagne of friendship intollerable if for the least idle word or sleight default he would depriue his Friends of grace and persecute them to death S. Iames also writeth of grieuous sinne the breach of Gods Commandment in the place you commonly alleadg against vs He that offeudeth in one is made guilty of all For S. Augustine teacheth that he is made guilty of all because he breaketh the band of Charity which is the totall summe and perfection of the law Or can no lesse escape the sentence of death and damnation who transgresseth one commandement then if he were guilty of all as the Authour vpon the imperfect worke vpon S. Matthew singularly well expoundeth S. Basil and S. Augustine I grant make great account of Veniall sinnes in that they diminish the feruour of Charity are somewhat contrary to the Easil in quaest q. 4. q. 293. Aug. Con. 3. super Ps 118. tract 12. in Ioan. law and now and then dispose to the transgreslion of it in that they truly offend the infinite maiesty of God yet in a matter so light and with such imperfect apprehension as it diminisheth the indignity and wholy altereth the quality of the fault For if the want of all knowledge and all consent in children and mad men vtterly taketh away the guilt of sinne then imperfect knowledge imperfect consent must needs cause imperfect sinnes Not such as absolutly violate the law of God or throughly incurre his high displeasure but such as are to be shunned notwithstanding as dangerous infirmities and diseases of our soule Which is all that S. Augustine and the rest of the Fathers intend when they exaggerate the enormity of small offences Thus much in confutation of our Aduersaries second ground Concerning the third 4. We stand not vpon the name but vphold the thing that is a certaine penall estate or cleansing of some soules after this life which cleansing we call as Suarez Tom. 4. in 3. par disp 45. sect 1. Esay 4. Malach. 3. Suarez well noteth Purgation and the place where it is made Purgatory which the ancient Fathers themselues haue constantly gathered out of sundry texts of holy Write In the old Testament S. Augustine teacheth it from the mouth of Isay Our Lord shall purge the dregs of the daughters of Syon and shall wash the bloud of Hierusalem out of the middest therof in the Spirit of iudgment and in the Spirit of Aug. l. 20. de â—iuit Dei c. 25. Hiero. in hunc locuÌ„ Amb. in Psalm 36. Orig. ho. 6. in Exod. combustion or as the English Protestant translation readeth By the spirit of burning He teacheth it likewise from the mouth of Malachy Our Lord is like a purging fire and like fullers sope he shall sit downe to trye and fine the siluer he shall euen fine the Sonnes of Leui and purify them as gold and siluer Where S. Augustine addeth That these wordes cannot signify a separation only of the polluted from the pure in the last penall iudgment c. but must intimate a purgation of the good who haue need thereof With whome S. Hierome S. Ambrose Origen consent in the interpretation of that place The same S. Augustine and Venerable Bede deduce out of that passage of Aug. in Ps 7. Beda in Psal 37. Psalm 65. Amb. in Psal 36. ser in Psal 118. Orig. hom 25. in Numer the
ashes no clowd of sinne can depriue the iustifyed person of his right to heauen which do not dismantle him of the robe of Iustice Answere therfore heereunto what you list escape you cannot vnles you leape into some detestable heresy 6. My fourth argument is when the Protestant perswades himselfe or vndoubtedly beleeues the remission of his sinnes either he hath his sinne by that act of fayth remitted before or after he that sayth it is after alloweth his precedent perswasion to be false and deceitfull beleeuing the forgiuenes of his sinnes which then was not he that will haue it before admitteth a remission of sinnes and consequently a true iustification before his beliefe which cannot be for without Fayth it is impossible to please God he who holdeth that his beliefe causeth the remission which it beleeueth will haue his beliefe Gab. Vas in 1. 2. disp 110. c. 3. and knowledge so omnipotent as to make the obiect which it knoweth the mystery it beleueth as if a man by beleeuing himselfe to be a great Lawyer a great Physitian a great Deuine should endow himselfe with the Aug. l. 4. de Genes ad lit c. 32. perfect knowledge of Law Phisicke and Diuinity wherein they seeme to surpasse the nature of God whose knowledge being most efficacious and practicall yet it followeth as Gabriel Vasquez teacheth the obiect it knoweth according to the posteriority of vnderstanding It followeth I say in affirming or knowing it to be true In which sense S. Augustine teacheth that no knowledge can be vnles things knowne precede and we may auow that no fayth can be vnles it first presuppose the article beleeued for as our knowledge is true or false because the obiect we know is such so our beliefe is certaine and vndoubted because the thing is infallible which we beleeue 7. M. Field beholding the ruines this Cannon-shot makes in the walls of their perfidious and faythles perswasion rayseth the engines of his wit to diuert the battery and annoyance thereof and first proposeth the argument thus When men begin to beleeue either they are iust and then their fayth iustifyeth them not being in nature after their iustification Field in his 3. booke of the Church c. 44. or els they are not iust then speciall fayth making a man beleeue he is iust is false and so man is iustifyed by alye To this horned argument we answere sayth he that speciall fayth hath sundry acts but to this purpose specially two the one by way of petition humbly intreating for acceptation and fauour the other in the nature of comfortable assurance consisting in a perswasion that that is graunted which was desired Fayth by her first act obtayneth and worketh our iustification and doth not find vs iust when we begin to beleeue by her second act she doth not actiuely iustify S. Thom. 1. 2. q. 83. â—â—t 3. but finding the thing done certifyeth assureth vs of it c. So then quoth he fayth in her first act is before the iustification procureth or obtayneth it Hitherto M. Feild and very profoundly without doubt distinguisheth fayth into two acts whereof the first he mentioneth is no act of Fayth but a prayer or petition humbly intreating for acceptatioÌ„ Fulk in c. 2. Iacobi sect 9. circa finem Abbot in his defence cap. 4. fol. 487. and fauour which properly as S. Thomas proueth is an act of Religion as much different from fayth as a man from a Calfe And the second seemeth rather to be an assured confidence of the will then any supernatural assent of the vnderstanding in which Fayth consisteth But these thinges I let passe The opposition heere he maketh against his owne adherents the contradicting of Doctour Fulke the ouertwharting of M. Abbot the impugning of another principall and generall article of Protestancy is more remarkable then a priuate absurdity or ignorance of his For to affirme That fayth by way of petition humbly intreâ—â—eth for fauour obtaineth and worketh our iustification and doth not find vs iust is to graunt a certaine kind of preparation congruency merit or disposition to go before the life of grace and iustification of our soules which how earnestly M. Fulke and Doctour Abbot gainesay I haue declared and refuted in the precedent Controuersy Then it is opposite to that common principle which Protestantes maintaine That the captiued will of man concurreth passiuely only to his iustification vntill he be truely iustifyed in Christ. Howbeit M. Field heer teacheth this petition to obtaine to procure to worke our iustification before it be effected which M. Abbot writing against our preparatiue workes of prayer and petition reproueth thus There can be no true prayer without the spirit of grace without the spirit of adoption whereby we cry Abba Abbot c. 4. sect 20. fol. 4 â— Father the spirit of adoption and grace is the spirit of sanctification It followeth then that we pray not but by being first sanctifyed and because sanctification is consequent to iustification it must follow also that iustification must go before prayer Hitherto he warring against M. Feild one Sectary against another as Esay prophesyed of them saying I will make the Aegyptians to run togeather against the Aegyptians a man shall fight against his brother euery man against his friend But I will not further exaggerate these horrible breaches betweene him Isa 29. v. his fellowes I will not intreate M. Field to reconcile his assertion with their other fornamed principles I only desire him to tell me whether the petition which worketh our iustification and doth not find vs iust be in his opinion an act of true iustifying fayth or no Let him answere that it is and he yieldeth that fayth alone doth not iustify he yieldeth this first act to be an act of true fayth and yet that it doth only impetrate and procure iustice and not make vs formerly iust but if the first act of true fayth doth not iustify neither can the second or third or any other ensuing act affoard that benefit for they being all and euery one of the same speciall nature they hauing all the same essentiall forme that effect which in no degree is performed by one cannot be effected by any other except they dreame that one the same vertue should consist of diuers essentiall formes and so by diuers actes yield diuers formall effects which very nature it selfe and euery Puny in Philosophy will condemne of implicancy and contradiction 8. Let him deny it to be an act of iustifying fayth and he denyeth his owne diuision of speciall fayth into sundry acts he deludeth our argument proposed not of any other vertue but of their speciall fayth and of the first act thereof which can be but one and of that one it proceeds whether iustification be before it after it or caused by it as is vrged aboue 9. Againe supposing these two actes into which he brancheth his speciall fayth how is
in their power by Gods helpe to Basil Orat in illud Attende tibi Chrys ho. 8 de poenio Aug. tom 7. denat grat c. 6â— Hier. ep ad Damas de expos Symboli keep them Therefore to quit the soueraigne goodnes from this merciles cruelty the Fathers vniformely define That it is a wicked thing to teach the Precepts of the spirit cannot be obserued S. Basil Accuse not God he hath not commanded things impossible S. Chrysostome We stedfastly beleeue God to be iust good not able to command things impossible hence we are admonished what we ought to do in things easy what to aske in things hard and difficile S. Augustine S. Hierome accurseth their blasphemy who teach any impossible things to be imposed by God vnto man Which argument hath beene handled heertofore in the CoÌ„trouersy of Free will where the Aduersaryes cauils theretunto are reiected The like impiety it were in God to cooperate with vs in such speciall manner to affoard his heauenly grace his supernaturall ayde to the keeping of his Commandments if we transgresse and sinne in keeping of them For as our August de pec mer. remis l. 2. c. 5. great Doctour S. Augustine teacheth To commit sin we are not ayded of God but to do good things or wholly fullfill the precept of iustice we cannot vnles we be ayded by God Marke heere that by the ayde of God we may not in part but wholy fullfill the precept and that in fullfilling it we do not sinne because thereunto we could not be holpen by God To which my aduersaries cannot shape their worne-out and thrid-bare reply That our obseruation our loue of God Abb cap. 4. sect 44. for example is no sinne but a good deed by acceptation For as I haue often answered God cannot accept that for good which is in it selfe naught and sinnefull but it is good in the Abbot ibid. sol 579. originall of grace from whence it proceedeth Explane your selfe a little better whether you meane it is perfectly or imperfectly good Graunt perfectly and you go on our side yield only imperfectly and you stand at the stay you were before perhaps you imagine that it springeth perfect from the fountaine of grace and after receaueth a blemish from the weaknes of flesh You imagine amisse for the same indiuiduall morall act which once is enriched with the dowry of perfection caÌ„not be after impouerished with any basenes of vice Or is it partly good as it is wrought by grace and partly euill as it runneth through the conduct of depraued nature No such matter the thing contradicteth it selfe as hath beene often signifyed neither is nature the conduct or pipe but true cause of the act in which there is not any part good assignable to grace distinct from that which is ascribed to man but the entiere action perfect or lesse perfect is wholy assigned to mans freewill wholy thereunto ayded by grace as the characters which the scholler frameth by the Maisters guiding of his hand are not seuerally drawne fayrely by one and rudely by the other but the same fayre or deformed rude or well fashioned are wholy from both Which forceth M. Abbot from that incongruous shift We Abbot cap. 4. sect 44. fol. 579. by our corruption do disgrace that which proceedeth holy and pure from God In like manner he is ferretted out of his other berry-hole That the action is good in the will and endeauour of Abbot ibid. the person by whom it is done For the will is weake the endeauour mean the person cloathed with human corruption who if he may will and endeauour that which is good then some good may proceed from a fleshly man perfect and entiere free from all spot and blemish or els the will and intendment is no better then the worke and VVhitak in his answere to the 8. reason of M. Camp VVhitah l. 8. aduers Duraum Abbot cap. 4. sect 44. fol. 578 this assignement of goodnes which you make to the will is a meere shew or treachery to cloake the badnes of your cause 2. Lastly you say although you place it not in order last that the duty we obserue is in substance good Well I am contented with this but see you recant not for heere I haue that the substance at least of louing God the substance of euery obseruation of the law which we achieue is perfect and entiere able to satisfy the will of God able to make vs acceptable vnto him Yes say they If he fauourably looke vpon it and impute not the fault but if he Abbot c. 4. sect 47. fol. 596. should strictly narrowly deale with vs he should haue iust cause of reiecting vs in the doing thereof Forbeare these ifs ands and come to the point Is the substance of the action done entierely good in it selfe or no abstracting from the fauour or dislike of God whose indulgence or seuerity VVhitak in his answere to the 8. reason of M. CampiaÌ„ being extrinsecall doth not make the substance of the worke better or worse It is not so good as it may endure the try all of the precise and perfect rule of righteousnes truth This is not the question but whether it may stand with satisfaction of his law It cannot stand with it in such full complete and absolute manner as that nothing at all may be added thereunto Neither is that the thing demanded who euer dealt with such slippery companions Must I still put you to the torture to draw out the truth My question is whether the substance of the act satisfyeth the obligation of the law Let vs heere what you say to this They answere as heertofore It is short of that which the law requireth it cannot be such VVhitak in his answere to the 8. reason of M. Câ—mplan and lib. 8. aduer DuraeuÌ„ Abbot cap. 4. fol. 60â— as it ought to be as long as the flesh lusteth against the spirit there can be no such entiere good in vs. Alwayes a man doth lesse then he ought to do I thought you would flinch from your word but I pursue you also flying The act then of louing God is substantially short of that the law requireth substantially lesse then it ought to be and not only lesse of that which ought to be by perswasion or counsaile but by precept binding to more vnder payne of morall sinne therefore the substance of this lesser act is not morally good but mortally defectuous substantially faulty a deadly sinne and true transgression of the law to which God cooperating must needs cooperate in particuler manner to the accomplishment of sinne Protestants are bound to surcease from louing praying or endeauouring to performe those mortall crimes and bound to performe them because God commandeth them as I further demonstrate by this dilemma Either God commandeth the complete perfect fullfilling of his law which Protestants teach no man in this