examples of inuocation of Saintes praier for the dead purgatorie and the like if you can winne them either by manifest wordes or by necessarie conclusion we are content you shall weare them and we also wilyeald vnto them otherwise you prate without proofe of expressed in the scripture trifling vppon the terme expressed which either we vse not in this question or els we meane therbie certainlie declared and taught in the scriptures either in expresse wordes or by necessarie conclusion But now let vs see how Master Chark is distressed in answering these twelue particulers For the first of the seauen which he acknowledgeth to be contained in the scripscripture which is that there is two natures and two wills in Christ he citeth these wordes Rom. 1. of his sonne which was made vnto him of the seede of Dauid according to the flesh Also Math. 26. not as I will but as thou wilt here you saie that the interpretation of the Church being set aside and the bare text onelie admitted these places cannot conuict an heretike yes verelie the onelie authoritie of the textis sufficient to confit me faith and to conuince an heretike For the former point thus The diuinitie and humanitie are two natures in Christ is diuinitie and humanitie ergo two natures The maior is manifest the minor is plaine by the text the sonne of God one nature the seede of Dauid an other nature For the fecond point The will of God and the will of man the one contradictorie to the other are two willes In Christ was the will of God contradictorie to the wil of man ergo two wills The minor is prooued out of the text not as I wil but as thou wilt seeing Christ was both God man That the Monothelits in the 6. Councill of Costantinople could not be conuinced out of the scriptures it is an intollerable slaunder of that reuerend assemblie for euen by this text and manie other their error was made manisest wherunto albeit the consent of the aun cient fathers was added yet is there no word in all that 4. action which you quote to prooue that they were not sufficientlie confuted out of the holie scriptures The second point is the proceeding of the holie ghost from the father and the sonne equallie for which Master Chark quoteth Ioh. 15. 26. When the holie ghoste shall come which I will send you from my father the spirit of trueth which proceedeth from the father c. Against this you cauill that it prooueth not the proceeding equallie and cite Cyril for your witnes in 15. Ioh. who out of this place prooueth that equally as wel as the proceeding seeing the heretikes might be ashamed to say that the spirit of the father was sent by the son as by a minister which also if they should saie he disprooueth for that if the sonn were as a minister he should be of an other substance then the father and the spirit proceeding from the father being of the same substance with the father should be greater in nature then the fonne whereas the sonne saith plainlie of the holy ghoste he shal glorifie me c. An other cauil you haue that this place telleth not whether he proceeded by generation or without generation from the father But it is sufficient that neither this place nor any other place of scripture teacheth that the holie ghoste is begotten therefore we beleeue without generation The third point is the vnion of the word vnto the nature of man and not to the person of man which because you did set downe obscurelie M. Charke did not rightlie vnderstand yet the text that the quoteth 1. 〈◊〉 14. The word was made flesh includeth that assertion also seeing there was no person of the man when the vnion was made vnto the nature of man but the word in taking vpon him the nature of man did vnite him selfe to it in vniting tooke it as it is euident Luk. 1. 35. Mat. 1. 20. The fourth doctrine is the baptising of infants for which Master Charke quoteth Gen. 17. 12. the infant of eight daies shall be circumcised Against this you haue manie trifling cauills that baptisme is not expressed of the sexe of the eight daie Against which I oppose the authoritie of Saint Augustine which lib. 1. cont Crescon Grammat cap. 31. confuteth the rebaptization of such as were baptized by heretikes by example of them that were circumcised by the Samaritantes whose circumcision was not to be repeated to whome the like might be obiected But it is sufficient that wherein baptisme answereth to circumsion the reason is one in both Circumcision was the sacrament of regeneration as baptisme is the one giuen to infantes ergo the other The cerimonie of the eight day had an other reason not needefull to be obserued in baptisme The distinction of the sexe is taken awaie by Christ in whome there is neither male nor female That Beza was striken dumme with this question in the conference at Poyssie it is a slaunder of Cladius de Xanctes confuted by Beza him-selfe But you had rather followe Saint Augustine who contendeth and prooueth that baptizing of infantes is onelie a tradition of the Apostles and not left vs by anie written Scripture lib. 10. cap. 23. super Gen. ad lizeram So you write but I will set downe Saint Augustines wordes that the reader may see what contention and proofes he vseth hauing protested of his ignorance how the reasonable soule commeth into the bodie he concludeth that the baptisme of infantes fauoreth their opinion which thinke that soules are procreated of the parentes And of the baptisme of infantes thus he writeth Consuctudo tamen matris Ecclesiae in baptizandis paruulis nequaquam spernenda est neque vllo modo superflua de putanda nec omnino credenda nisi Apostolica esset traditio Habet enim illaparua aet as magnum testimonij pondus quae prima pro Christo meruit sanguinē fundere Yet the custome of our mother the Church in baptizing of infantes is not to be despised nor by any meanes to be thought superfluous nor to be credited at all if it were not an Apostolike tradition for euen that litle age hath greate weight of testimonie which first obteined to shed blood for Christ. You see that here is neither contention not profe that it is onelie a tradition not leftin writing for he alledgeth one testimonie out of Scripture of gods acceptation of that age to martirdome much rather to baptisme and manie other testimonies might be brought for the same purpose as Matt. 19. 14. 1. Cor. 7. 14. c. As for Origen he doth onelie make mention of the baptisme of infants according to the obseruance of the Church to prooue originall sinne But whether it stand onelie vpon tradition and not vpon the scripture he saith not one word The 5. Doctrine is the changeing of the Sabbath into Sondaie M. Charke quoteth Apo. 1. 10. I was in the spirit on
of his godhead which is proper vnto it Andwhatsoeuer in holie scripture is read to be exercised of him through the might of Gods spirit by the vertue of his annointing by the finger of God by the sending of the Father by power receiued from aboue by Priesthood praiers or sacrifice by the Sonne of man of the head of the Church or iudge of the liuing and dead whatsoeuer is in this sort said to be done it is not otherwise lightlie meant but in respect of Christs humanitie by which and in which he worketh the same not as by the proper and naturall power or force thereof but as by iurisdiction receiued of the blessed Trinitie and imploied vpon the sonne of man for the procuring of saluation to his people whereof he is become in our very nature the head FVLKE This generall rule is so abridged with the exception lightlie that it is hard to bring anie instance against it but Allen would haue his starting hole in it Neuerthelesse seeing he concludeth the examples before remembred to be included within this rule we maie be bolde to charge him with a spice of Nestorianisme seeing those workes which are certaine to haue beene the workes of the Mediator God and man he ascribeth to the onelie humanitie by iurisdiction receiued from the blessed Trinitie whereby it should followe that the worke of Christe in this respect should not differ from the workes of Moses Elias Dauid or anie of the Prophets whoe receiued iurisdiction from the blessed Trinitie whereby they performed manie workes which the same blessed Trinitie had appointed for the procuring of saluation vnto his people ALLEN Therefore no Christian man maie doubt but as our Sauiour by the omnipotent power of his Godhead might and did forgiue sinnes to the penitent so likewise that as he was Priest the sonne of man he might by the right of his office vnction and ministerie in the vertue of the holie Ghost remitte sinnes also And for that cause principallie in the Prophet Esay it is said Spiritus Dominisuper me eò quòd vnxerit me ad annunciandum mansuetis misit me vt mederer contritis corde praedicarem captiuis indulgentiam clausis apertionem The Spirit of the Lord vopn me because he hath annointed me and sent me to signifie vnto the meeke that I should heal the contrite in heart to preach pardon to the prisoners and freedome to the closed The which place of the Prophet our Sauiour applied vnto him selfe in the Church of Nazareth and is to be vnderstanded onelie of preaching and pardoning by the holie vnction of the Spirit of God and his Fathers calling And therefore it must needes according to Saint Augustines iudgement concerne the shape of his seruice and manhood taken on him in which he preached so that yet it pleased him to affirme that his Doctrine was not his owne but his Fathers that sent him and healed the contrite in heart which is nothing els but to forgiue sinnes to the penitent after such a sort that it might well appeare to be receiued and practised by the vnction of the Spirit of God and sending of his Father whereby the Sonne of man might doe that as Gods minister in his manhood in earth which both he and his eternall Father with the holie Spirit of them both doe worke by their owne one and equall authoritie in heauen euerlastinglie FVLKE And seeing he willeth vs to note the ground of the cause which is that Christ as he was Priest and the sonne of man might remit sinnes by a ministeriereceiued by vnction of the holie Ghost it is not lightlie to be passed ouer That the sonne of man had power vpon earth to forgiue sinnes he him-selfe affirmeth Mat. 9. 6. but this was the power of his godhead which was not restreined nor abased by the shape of a seruant in which he appeered on earth That he was authorized by vnction of the holie Ghost to preach remission of sinnes vnto the penitent it pertaneth indeede vnto him in respect of his manhood although Saint Augustine in the place by Allen quoted saieth not so but citeth the place of Esaie to prooue that Christ in respct of his humanity was inferior to the holy Ghost but that this is all the power that Christ had vpon earth to remit sinnes it is not prooued by anie argument For this ministerie of reconciliation to remit sinnes by preaching of the Gospell doth remaine still with the Church the other that was proper to his Deitie no mortall man without Sacriledge can arrogate or vsurpe ALLEN And though God hath neuer 〈◊〉 mans fall vsed the meanes and seruice of man to his restore againe and to the reliefe of his lackes and therefore hath giuen authority by his holie spirite and vnction to diuerse of the olde law to offer sacrifice praier and procure remission to the people of all their offences and no lesse 〈◊〉 occasion serued and the matter required to correct their misdeedes by iudgement and iurisdiction giuen vnto them for which soueraigne calling they were called the annointed of God an externall ceremonie of anoyting being solemnelie annexed thereunto yet our Lord an Master whether you consider his high Priesthoode by which in moste ample manner through commission receiued he maie procure our pardone or his calling to be head of the Church by which he ruleth and keepeth all the bodie in due subiection and order or his ministerie of preaching whereby farre aboue all the Prophets and preachers of the olde law he openeth to his flock the Church the secret mysteries of Gods trueth Christ I saie in all these respectes being man is yet much more abundantlie blessed and anointed without comparison aboue all his fellowes and copartners as the holy Prophet Dauid doth testifie Vpon whose wordes touching that matter Saint Hilarie writeth thus Vnxit te Deus Deus tuus oleo exultationis prae participibus tuis non secundùm sacramentum aliud quà m secundùm dispensationem assumpti corporis Vnctio enim illa non beatae illi incorrupt in natura dei man enti natiuitati profecit sed sanctificationi hominis assumpti Nam in Actis ait Petrus vnxit illum Deus in spiritu sancto virtute Thus he meaneth in English God etien thy God hath anointed thee with the oile of ioy farre aboue thy copartners not in anie other meaning but according to the dispensation of a bodie receaued For that vnction could not be beneficiall to the holie vnspotted and euerlasting natiuitie in the nature of his Godhead but onelie it was agreeable to the mysterie of his manhood and flesh assumpted in his temporal natiuitie whereof Saint Peter speaketh in the Actes that God hath annointed him with the holie ghost and with power The holie Father also Saint Cyrill agreeth hereunto confessing that all this honour power and authoritie which the Prophets haue signified so long before by the annointing of the sonne of God came vnto Christ in consideration
the scriptures of the authoritie of councels auncient fathers traditions of the Apostles and primitiue Church they binde them selues to nothing but to the present Popes authoritie and determi nation in thinges which he may choppe and chaunge at his pleasure against which they admitte neither scripture Councell Fathers nor Church For example brieflie The scripture moste plainlie forbiddeh the worshipping of Images will they giue soueraigne authoritie to the scriptures All the primitiue Church for six hundred yeares after Christ condemned the worshipping of Images euen Pope Gregorie that allowed the vse of them shall the authoritie of the primatiue Church or of Pope Gregorie in this point ouerrule them No I warrant you they will set them al to schoole and learne them a new lesson Theodoretus Bishop of Cyrus and Gelasius Bishop of Rome doe in plaine wordes affirme that the substance of bread and wine doth remaine in the Lordes supper after consecration doth either the antiquitie of these fathers or the determination of the Bishop of Rome which otherwise they affirme neuer to erre in doctrine preuaile with them against their new here sie of transsubstantiation The councells of Constantiople the first and of Chalcedon decreed that the Bishop of Constantinople should haue equall authoritie and dignitie with the Bishop of Rome The councells of Constans and Basill determined that the Councell is aboue the Pope The councels of Constantinople the sixt and Nice the second condemned the Pope for an heretike will the Papists of these daies trow you stand to the determination of these Councells you maie be assured they will not But the traditions of the Apostles they holde fast and binde them-selues vnto yea verilie as long and as much as they list What beareth a greater shew of the Apostles traditions then the Canons of the Apostles which excommunicate a Bishop priest or deacon that putteth away his wiffe vnder pretence of religion which excommunicate anie of the cleargie that is present at the communion doth not communicate except he shewe a cause whie he doth not Which admmitted him that is maimed in his eie or other partes of his bodie being otherwise worthie vnto the office of a Bishop because the maime of the bodie doth not pollute a man but the filthines of the soules These such like traditions of the Apostles how are they regarded of our Traditioners euen as much as they list and that is neuer a whit at this time and yet these men binde them selues to Councells Fathers traditions primitiue Church you see how farre Yea you see that while they raile vpon vs for appealing to onelie scriptures they themselues relie vpon the present Popes authoritie onelie Let all indifferent men therefore iudge whether it be more safe for a Christian man to bind him-selfe to the authoritie of scriptures onelie or to the Popes authoritie onelie and whether claime a priuiledge of ease they that will admitte no testimonie irrefragable but onelie the scripture or they which chattering of many other things in the end conclude vpon the Church onelie which when it commeth to triall is nothing els but the Pope onelie for if all the Church saie it and the Pope denie it it is nothing worth with them and if the Pope affirme it thoughe all the Church denie it it must stand for paiment But seeing the sense and interpretation of scripture is the cheefe matter we haue to speake of let vs consider whether Master Charke be iustlie charged by our answerer to haue abused that scripture by interpretation which is the chiefe ground of his preface and which he saith is a full and plaine rule whereby to discerne and trie the spirites namelie the text of Saint Iohn 1. Iohn 4. Euerie spirite which confesseth Iesus Christ being come in the flesh is of God and euerie spirite which confesseth not Iesus Christ being come in the flesh is not of God and this is that spirit of Antichrist c. This text Master Charke doth so expound as that it conteineth a confession not onelie of the person of Christ but also of his office for which office sake that wonderfull person of God and man Iesus Christ was ordeined and sent into the world to be a Prophet alone to teach a King alone to rule a Priest alone to sanctifie vs and to reconcile vs to his father by the obedience of faith And if any spiritte shall teach that Christ is not our onelie teacher by his Gospell but that we must admitte vnwritten beleefe and traditions from we know not whome to be of like authoritie with the written worde Secondlie if any spirite make not Christ alone our King and head to rule vs by his holie spirite but teach that a mortal and sinfull man must sit in our consciences and for hatred or gaine which is his practise binde or loose at his pleasure lastlie if anie spirite impeach the all-sufficiencie and entire vertue of Christes sacrifice offered vp once for euer and teach that themselues must enforce it from day to day by the continuance of their daylie sacrifice of the Masse offered for the quick and the deade it appeareth manifestlie that such spirits are not of God c. This interpretation of Master Charke saith the answerer conteineth manie absurdities For first the auncient fathers did expound this place as of it selfe it is moste euident against the Iewes which denied Christ to haue taken flesh also against Ebion Cerinthus and other heretikes that denied the Godhead of Christ. Note here by the aduersaries confession that some places of scripture are of them selues moste euident whereof this is one against the Iewes other heretikes that deny the godhead of Christ. And I hope you shall see it shortly as euident against the Papists that denie his offices To this interpretation of the auncient fathers we agree that whosoeuer denieth the person of Christ or any thing proper to his person is of Antichrist But none of the auncient fathers doe affirme that this text is to be vnderstood against such enemies onelie as denie the Godhead or manhoode of Christ. For Augustine and Oecumenius do interpret it against all heretikes and schismatikes which although they confesse this matter in wordes yet denie it in deedes and Oecumenius against all wicked persons which haue not the spirite of Christ mortifying their vngodlie lustes which carie not the mortification of Christ in their bodie c. Augustine also expoundeth the place against all that breake charitie Omnes negant Iesum Christum in carne venisse qui violant charitatem All they denie Iesus Christe to haue come in the flesh which doe breake or violate charitie whie so because not onelie the person that came but the end whie he came must be considered in the interpretation of this place as Saint Augustine rightlie iudgeth or els all heretikes will after a manner in tongue and wordes confesse that Iesus Christ came in the flesh But Quaeramus saith
conscience of men to sanctifie them by their worke whome Christ by his onelie oblation hath made perfect for euer They that holde these points denie Christ to be a perfect Prophet King and Priest But these be deepe mysteries of puritanisme saith the answerer Christ is a Prophet alone a King alone a Priest alone the ouerthrow of all gouernment No sir no to acknowledge Christe to be our onelie Prophet king and priest ouerthroweth not but establisheth all power that is ordeined vnder him to teach gouerne and sanctifie The scripture in deede Eph. 4. Acts. 5. doth allowe Prophets and teachers in the Church but not authors of new doctrine no makers of new articles of faith no traditions beside the Gospell of Christ which is written that we might beleeue and beleeuing haue eternall life in his name The scripture alloweth Kinges and rulers 1. Pet. 2. Act. 2. but the scripture giueth no authoritie to any king or ruler to dispense against the lawes of God nor to any Prophet or priest to discharge subiects of their oth made to their lawfull Prince to binde the conscience of man with new constitutions as necessarie to saluation c. But whereas you aske whether Priests may not sanctifie by the word of god 2. Tim. 4. you are neare driuen for proofes For to omitte that the Chapter you quote hath neuer a word either of priests or sanctifying and to take your meaning to be of 1. Tim. 4. verse 5. the Apostle speaketh not of the Priest or ecclesiasticall ministers power of sanctifying but of euerie Christian man and woman to whome euerie creature of God in the right vse thereof is sanctified by the word of God and praier and against them that forbid thinges consecrated and allowed by God as matrimonie and meates sanctifyed by his worde that hath giuen them to be receiued with thankesgiuing and by the praier of the thankefull receiuer as a mean to obtaine sanctification from God whoe onelie is holie and therefore hath onelie power properlie to sanctifie and to inioyne as more holie by their owne making and not by Gods sanctification virginitie then matrimonie fish then flesh yca take vpon them to sanctifie Gods creatures in an other vse then God hath appointed them as water fire garments boughs flowers bread and such like for religion and sanctifying of Christian men Againe he asketh what doe the traditions of Christ and his Apostles for of those onelie they talke when they compare them with scripture impeach the teaching of Christ and his Apostles I answere there are no traditions of Christ and his Apostles pertaining to a Christian mans dutie to obtaine erernall life but those that be comprehended in the holie scriptures as the spirite of God in the scripture which cannot lie doth testifie And therefore they are the traditions of men and not of Christ and his Apostles that areso called vnder which title all heresies fansies may be brought in without testimonie of the written worde of God Wherefore such traditions doe greatlie impeach the office of Christes teaching reproouing his Apostles and Euangelists of imperfection if they haue not comprehended the summe of all that Christ taught and did for our saluation which Saint Luke in the beginning of his Gospell doth professe that he hath done and that verie exactlie And further it is false that our answerer saith they talke of the traditions of Christ and his Apostles onelie when they compare them with scripture For they compare the decrees of their Pope and of their generall councells allowed by him to be of equall authoritie with the holie scriptures as well as traditions Secondlie he asketh what doth the spiritual authorttie of the Pope vnder Christ diminish the Kinglie power and authoritie of Christ I answere the Pope hath no spirituall authoritie vnder Christ by anie graunt of Christ but he vsurpeth authoritie aboue Christ when he will controll the lawes and institutions of Christ as denying the cuppe of blessing vnto the laie people and in taking vpon him to make newe lawes and to inioyne men to obserue them in paine of damnation as be his lawes of abstinence from mariage and meates for religions sake which Christ hath left free for all men euen for Bishops Priests and Deacons of the Church and in an hundred matters beside Last of all he asketh How doth the priesthood of men as from Christ or the sacrifice of the altar instituted by Christ disgrace Christs priesthood or his sufficient sacrifice once for all offered on the crosse I answere the priesthood of reconciling by sacrifice doth not passe from Christ to anie man because he hath by one sacrifice made perfect for euer all that are sanctifyed and liueth for euer to make intercession for vs therefore hath as the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a priesthood that passeth not to any other in succession as Arons priesthood did whereby he is able to saue for euer those that come vnto God by hym Againe I denie that Christ did institute that sacrifice of the altar whereof there is no worde in all the scripture and therefore a new priesthood and a new sacrifice must needes be blaspemous against the eternal priesthood of Christ and that one sufficient sacrifice which he offered and therebie found eternall redemption The texts alledged by Master Charke Heb. 7. 9. he saith doe not impeach this dailie sacrifice of theirs because they graunt that sacrifice once offered c. in that manner as it was then done meaning bloodelie whereas they offer it vnbloodelie c. But the wholl discourse of the Aposile throughout the wholl epistle almoste excludeth all repetition of that sacrifice in any manner For therepetition of the same sacrifice should argue imperfection in it as it did in the Iewish sacrifices and without shedding of blood there is noremission of sinnes Is Christ shoulde be often offered he should often suffer All which being impossible it remaineth that as Christ offered himselfe but once and not often so no man hath authoritie or power to offer him anie more neither is there anie neede he should be more then once offered seing by that one oblation he hath made perfect for euer all that are sanctified and hath found eternall redemption for all that beleeue in him But for proofe that there must be such a daylie sacrifice in the Church vntill the end of the world he alledgeiu the prophecie of Daniell 12. Malachie 1. whereas Daniell speaketh of the dailie sacrifice of the Lawe which should cease in the persecution of Antiochus and be vtterly abolished by the death of Christ. And Malachic of the sacrifice of praise and thankesgeuing which by all nations is offered as a pure sacrifice and acceptable to him through Christ. The former exposition is allowed by S. Ierome to be verified of Antiochus in a type of Antichrist whoe shall forbid culium Dei the worship of God which doth not require any such
Sacerdos qui est secundùin ordinem Melchisedech obtulit sacrificium effecit vt alia sacrificia non essent necessaria cur noui testamenti Sacerdotes mysticam liturgiam seu sacrificium peragunt Scd clarumest iis qui sunt in rebus diuinis eruditi nos non aliud sacrificium offerre sed illius vnius Salutaris memoriam peragere Hoc enim nobis proecepitipse dominus Hoc facite in meam recordationem vt per figurarum contemplationem earum quoe pro nobis susceptoe sunt perpessionum recordemur in benefactorem beneuolentiam couseruemus futurorum bonorum perceptionem expectemus 〈◊〉 therefore the priesthood which is of the law hath receaued an end and the Priest which is after the order of Melchisedech hath offered sacrifice and brought to passe that other sacrifices should not be necessarie why do the Priests of the new testament celebrate a mysticall liturgie or sacrifice But it is cleare to them that are instructed in diuine matters that we do not offer an other sacrifice but do celebrate a remembrance of that one and helthfull sacrifice For this our Lord him seife commaunded vs Doyee this in rememberance of me that by contemplation of the figures we might remember the passions that were suffered for vs and continew good will towards our benefactor and waite for the fruition of good things to come This saying of Theodoretus is a full and large answere in deede to the obiection by him made of the vnproper terme of sacrifice whereby the celebration of the Lords supper was commonlie called in his time but it is nothing fauorable to the Popish sacrifice of the Masse yea rather it sheweth the right vse and end of the sacrament which is an holie memoriall of Christs sacrifice not the same sacrifice it selfe nor anie sacrifice propitiatorie but onelie eucharistical of praise and thankesgiuing The other author to whome our answerer referreth his reader is Saint Augustine Ep. 23. ad Bonifacium who proposeth this doubt saith he how we sacrifice Christ euerie day vpon the altar seeing he is said to be sacrificed once for all vpon the crosse But in deede the question he answereth is how the godfathers in baptisme answere that the infants do beleeue whereas they do neither beleeue in deede and it is vncertaine whether they will beleeue for resolution of which question he bringeth in example of the Lords supper called the bodie of Christ and a sacrifice whereas it is not properlie either of both but a signe sacrament and memoriall of those things so is baptisme called faith and infants said to beleeue when they are baptised his wordes are these often alledged against the Papists Nempe saepe it a loquimur c. Verielie we do often times speake so that when Easter is at hand we saie to morow or the next daie after is the passion of our Lord whereas he hath sufferrd so manie yeares passed before and that passion was suffered but once in all For on the verie Sondaie we saie This daie our Lord arose againe whereas there are so manie yeares passed since he arose againe Whie is no man so foolish that would charge vs to haue lied when we speak after this manner but because we name these daies according to the similitude of those daies in which these thinges were done So that the daie is called the same which is not the same but in reuolution of time like vnto it and the thing is saide to be done on that daie for the celebration of the Sacrament which is not done that daie but was done long before was not Christ once offered in him-selfe and yes in the sacrament not onelie in euerie solemnitie of Easter but euery daie he is offered for the people neither doth he make a lye which being asked the question shall answere that he is offered for if Sacraments had not a certaine similitude of those things where of they are sacraments they should be no sacraments at all And of this similitude for the moste part they take the names euen of the things them-selues Therefore euen as after a certaine manner the sacrament of the bodie of Christ is the bodie of Christ the sacrament of the blood of Christ is the blood of Christ so the sacrament of faith is faith And to beleeue is nothing els but to haue faith And by this when it is answered that the child beleeueth which as yet hath not the effect of faith it is answered that he hathfaith because of the sacrament of faith to conuert him-selfe to God because of the sacrament ofconuersion because the answere it selfe perteineth to the celebration of the sacrament As the apostle of baptisme it selfe saith we are buried with Christ by baptisme vnto death He saith not we signifie his buriall but plainlie we are buried with him Wherefore he called the sacrament of so great a matter by none other name then of the verie thing it selfe This answer of Saint Augustine how full and large it is in that sense the Papists defend their sacrifice of the Masse or rather how directlie contrarie to the same I referre to the iudgement of anie indifferent reader that with anie conscience will consider it Neither hath Eusebius Demonstr Eua. lib. 1. cap. 6 or 10. nor Theophilact although a late writer in cap. 5. ad Heb. anie thing that maie vpholde the Popish propitiatorie sacrifice of the Masse Eusebius verilie hath these wordes to cleare him both of the heresie of transsubstantiation and of the masking sacrifice after he hath spoken of the dignitie and sufficiencie of the sacrifice of Christs passion Hauing receaued to celebrate the remembrance of this sacrifice at the table by the tokens or signes of his bodie and healthfull blood according to the rites of the new testament we are againe instructed by the Prophet Dauid to saie Thou hast prepared a table in my sight against mine enemies c. By which words it is manifest that Eusebius acknowledged no sacrifice of the naturall bodie and blood of Christ in the sacrament but a memorie of that onelie sacrifice celebrated in the symbols or tokens of his bodie and blood Likewise in the exposition of the prophecie of Malachy he saith That God by the voice of the Prophet hauing refused the sacrifices after Moses doth by oracle declare what should be done of vs saying For from the rising of the sunne vnto the going downe of the same my name is glorified among the gentiles and in euerie place incense is offered to my name and a pure sacrifice wherefore we sacrifice to god that is aboue all the sacrifice of praise we sacrifice a diuine reuerent and holie sacrifice we sacrifice after a new manner according to the new testament a pure sacrifice and the sacrifice to God is said to be a broken spirit for a contrite and humbled heart God will not dispise and we doe burne also the propheticall incense offering to him the sweete smelling fruite of the moste excellent
same that Christ said it to be we beleeue the same The whol discourse of the Doctor in that place is contrarie to the error of the carnall presence where he sheweth that the sacrament is the Image of Christ as man is the Image of God though he be not equall with God as the sacrament is not equall with Christ but an insensible thing yet neuerthelesse by grace is called and beleeued to be that which Christ said of it This saying of Epiphanius do we allow and vse as an inumcible argument against transsubstantiation and the carnal manner of presence as was well tried when in the conference at the tower it was opposed vnto your client Campian who had nothing but vaine wordes to anoide it being a place which he neither vnderstood in the authors tongue nor after it was expounded in English could tell the argument or occasion of it To the places cited out of Chrysostome I answered that albeit they be sometimes hyperbolicall yet as he vnderstood them and doth manie times expounde him selfe we confesse them to be true and yet no carnall presence prooued by them as In Mat. H. 83. which our answerer citeth in these wordes Sed quoniam ille dixit hoc est corpus meum credamus etiamsi sensui absurdem esse videatur Because Christ hath said this is my bodie we must beleeue it although it seeme absurd to our sense The saying is good and catholike but yet it is not altogether Chrysostomes neither in this homilie nor in the Hom 60. ad Pop. Antioch which also he quotech for it The wordes of Chrisostome in Math. Ho. 83. of the translation of Trapezuntius be these Quoniam ergo ille dixit hoc est corpus meum nulla teneamur ambiguitate sed credamus oculis intellectus id perspiciamus Because then he hath said this is my bodie let vs not be holden with anie doubtfulnesse but let vs beleeue and behold it with the eies of vnderslanding And ad pop Antioch Ho. 60. of Germanus Brixius translation these are his wordes Quoniam igitur verbum dicit hoc est corpus meum pareamus credamus intellectualibus ipsum occulis intueamur But because the word saieth this is my bodie let vs borh obey and beleeue and beholde him with the eies of vnderstanding A third place he cyteth out of this father in I. Cor. ho. 24. in these wordes Hoc idem corpus cruentatum lancea vulneratum quod in caelum extulit This is the verie same bodie whose blood was shed and which was wounded with the speare and which he carried vp with him We graunt as much that we receiue in the sacrament the verie same bodie of Christ that was crucified wounded dead and caried into heauen yet not comming downe to vs but we as Chrisostome saith in the same homelie by faith made Egles and ascending vp into heauen where Christ is yet the wordes be not altogether as our answerer citeth them for immediatelie after the word vulneratum followeth Fontes sanguinis aquae 〈◊〉 so orbi salutares scaturiuit Flowed forth 〈◊〉 of bloode and water healthful to all the world But he were to be pardoned that hath nothing of his owne reading but is faine to cite all out of other mens notes if he were not such a proude and malepert censurer of other men To proceede after these quotations and citations of the auncient Doctors he commeth to his aduersaries to shew how contrarie they are in vnderstanding of this text of scripture This is my bodie they haue found out saith he a new exposition affirming that it must be construed this is onelie the signe of my bodie for which they haue neither scripture nor auncient father for warrant or example But which of your aduersaries good sir giueth this construction This is the signe of my bodie some do interpret it and for that you maie haue warrant of auncient Doctors more then euer you read if you durst denie it but this is onelie the signe by which you meane a bare signe to exclude all true feeding vpon Christ in his supper none of the Protestantes your aduersaries did euer affirme What Libertines Anabaptists and other fantasticall heades haue imagined we haue nothing to doe with it no more then with the eight seuerall expositions numbred by Luther or those 84. gathered by Claudius de Xanctes from all which we disclaime and from all other sauing from one which is the true interpretation And yet it is certaine that Luther an enemie to this trueth streineth much Claudius ten times more the words of the Christian Protestants to so great numbers of interpretations Among whome if eighty more do vtter the same sense in diuers wordes you will make no lesse then 80. interpretations But because M. Chark acknowledgeth Luther to be illuminated singularlie by the holie ghost and he is compared to Elias by the common phrase of all Protestants our answerer taketh paines to repeat diuers bitter sayings of his against our interpretation of those wordes of Christ as which he had reuealed to him by his holie spirite A wife matter as though Luther being singularly illuminated by the holie ghost is made a Pope by M Charke that he can not erre in anie thing or being compared by some Protestants and in some respects for it is a lowd lie that he is compared by al Protestantes to Elias may not be deceiued in anie point as Eliashim-selfe was But doth our answerer trow you cite more truelie out of Luther then he did of late out of the olde writers that we might thinke perhaps he hath read the latter more diligentlie although he hath beene litle conuersant in the former I will giue you a taste by one or two places and first that which he citeth out of Luthers epistle ad Argentinenses wherein he clippeth and geldeth out diuerse wholl sentences at his pleasure or rather as his note booke did lead him So that it is plaine he hath read no more in Luther then in the auncient Doctors The wordes are these Hoc diffiteri nec possum nec volo c. This can I not nor will denie but if Carlostadius or anie manels could for fiue yeares past haue persuaded me that there had bene nothing in the sacrament but bread and wine he should haue bound me to him by a great good turne For I haue taken great care and anxietie in discussing this matter and haue endeuoured with all my power and synowes siretched out to ridde my selfe of the same Seeing I did well perceiue I might verie greatlie and especiallie hurt the papacie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Moreouer I had two men which did write vnto me of this matter more rightlie and sharplie then Carolostadius nor sowresting the wordes after the capacitis of their owne 〈◊〉 But I do se my selfe captine no waie being left to escape For the text of the Gospell is too plaine and strong and such as cannot easilie be ouerthrowen
her not doth better Whereof we inferre that virginitie is more acceptable and meritorious before God then mariage although mariage be holie No saie our adversaries Saint Paull meaneth onelie that he doth better before men and in respect of worldlie commmodities but not before God If you aske him which of his aduersaries doe saie so he is not able to name one for in truth we neuer saide so not thinke so But that which he saith they doe infer vpon the text that virginitie is more meritorious before God the mariage we doe vtterlie denie and we saie furthet that all the Papists in the world shal neuer be able by lawfull and true arguments to infer so much vpon these wordes of the text or to iustifie this kinde of inferring virginitie is better before God ergo it is more meritorious for the antecedent which we graunt doth not prooue the conclusion which we denie Therefore when out of the circumstances of the text he prooueth that virginitie is better in respect of God as a more excellent gift of God he taketh more paines then he needeth For we confesse as much that he that ioyneth not his virgin doth better not onelie in respecte of worldlie commodities or before men but also that shee maie be holie before the Lord in bodie and spirit c. then he that ioyneth her in mariage but that he doth better in respect of merite reward in the life to come as the answerer saith it doth not follow thereof I meane for the merite As for the reward which God bestoweth of his meere mercie doth not prooue anie merite or desert of the partie rewarded For he which vseth the gift of God well by the power and strength which he hath of God shall of Gods goodnesse not misse of his reward but he cannot therebie claime reward of dutie or of merit neither doth the text alleadged by him prooue any such thing Some Eunuchs haue gelded them-selues for the kingdome of heauen therefore they haue deserued the kingdome of heauen therebie Such licentious kinde of inferring will not onelie make poperie to stand if it were lawfull but also might be able to iustifie all heresies that euer were by scripture But bring these illations or inferrings to the iudgement seate of Logicke and they will easilie appeare to be voluntarie glosles and not true expositions or necessarie collections Yet these new doctors saith our answerer doe contemne and 〈◊〉 all authoritie antiquitie wit learning sanctitie of our forefathers and of all men yea of their owne new doctors and masters when they come to be contrarie to any new deuise or later fansie of theirs Because we may not receiue euerie interpretation or opinion of euerie of the fathers he maketh this hideous outcrie against vs. And yet we are alwaies readie to shew and haue often performed the same that in the most and greatest controuersies the auncient Doctors are against them verie cleere on our side Therefore it is an impudent slaunder that we reiect or contemne all authoritie antiquitie witte c. of our forefathers as it is a ridiculous argument that he bringeth of our dissent from our late doctors and masters as he termeth them because we follow not the error of Luther about the reall presence and the vse of Images as for the number of the sacraments and bookes of the Bible we holde with Luther in his last iudgement when he was best instructed in those cases The order of seruice is free for euerie Church to vse diuerselie as maie serue best for edification The popish Churches haue diuers vses of seruice as Sarum Yorke Bangor Hereford in England they had how manie then diuers orders abroade But Caluine he saith is reiected about the head of the Church in England which is a manifest vntrueth for Caluin is euen of the same iudgement concerning the Princes authoritie in causes ouer persons Ecclesiasticall as is euident in his Institutions that we are in England onelie he misliked the terme supreme heade as offensiue though not euill as it was vnderstood of the godlie and that terme is forborne in England for the same cause and another of supreme gouernour vsed which signifyeth as much as was ment by the other when it was rightlie vnderstoode As for the gouernment of the Church in Geneua Caluine did neuer binde all other Churches to vse the same what other pointes are reiected in Beza he hath no leisure to tell vs. But that all the Churches of the Protestants as he calleth vs in Europe do agree in the chiefe and principall articles of Religion the Harmonie of their confessions latelie set forth in print doth giue ful moste sufficient testimonie Ceremonies and for me of externall gouernment were neuer in gods Church accounted necessarie to be all one in euerie particular Church And some men maie haue their priuat opinions sometime perhapes vntrue yet retaining the vnitie of faith in the chiefe grounds and foundation of Religion with them that dissent from them either iustlie or vniustlie Wherefore our answerers finall conclusion doth not followe that Protestants will haue onelie that to be taken for trueth which they last agree vpon and their wordes must be the one ie proofe thereof whereas the worlde can testifye that the holie scripture is our ground and from thence we challenge the best proofe not refusing any other lawful proofes that wil stand with the iudgement of holie scripture where it is most plaine and easie to be vnderstoode euen without anie interpretations The bookes of the scripture we receiue which the Church of God among the Iewes before Christ and the moste auncient Church of the Gentiles since Christ hath receiued and allowed the sense we take euen out of the same bookes and bring no foreine sense vnto them all writtings of men olde and new we examine according to the same praising God for such helpe as we haue by his giftes in them to vnderstand his word yet leauing to them without reproch such things as proceeded from them selues without the warrant of that worde and this haue all true Catholikes alwaies done and no heretike is able to doe albeit he woulde professe neuer so much to doe To the former slaunders our answerer will haue vs adioyne this that our aduersaries saith he notwithstanding all request sute offer or humble petition that we can make will come to no publike disputation or other indifferent and lawfull iudgement but doe persecute imprisone torment and slaughter them which offer the same Touching anie lawful request sute or humble petition made in due manner to them that haue authoritie to graunt I neuer hard of anie onelie the seditious challenge of Campian is all the request sute offer and humble petition that he is able to prooue was euer made by them for anie such matter before the publishing of this answere of his As for them that persecute imprisone torment and slaughter them which offer disputation which he calleth
of necessarie collection For Logicke would stil iudge whether such meaning could be necessarilie gathered out of such wordes Seeing we are not bound to creditte any writings since the diuine inspired scriptures but so farre as they agree with the scriptures and receiue the light of trueth from them But those auncient writers to whome he would haue vs to referre our selues liued so many hun dred yeares after the Apostles and Euangelists the writers of the new testament as they could no more declare to them then to vs their meaning in their writings and therefore those auncient fathers which ground purgatorie prayer to saintes sacrifice of the altar vse of the crosse c. beside tradition vpon the scriptures as the answerer saith must shew the necessarie collection of them by the iudgement of demonstration seeing they neuer sawe the writers neuer heard them speake nor possiblie could liuing so long after them or els they can carie no credit of necessarie collection outof the expresse wordes of holy scripture As for tradition without scripture since God hath giuen the holie scripture is as good as the credit of men may be without a warrant from God A fourth waie of triall of spirites with him is Councells by which olde heretikes haue beene tried and they are content to referre themselues to all the Christian Councells that euer haue beene since Christ died We acknowledge Christian councells to be a godlie meane to exa mine and trie the spirites but according to the scriptures onelie for matters of faith as in the example of the first Councell of Christendome Act. 15. where the question was determined by authoritie of the scriptures But that the Papists dare abide the triall by al Councells it is false for they admit none but by the Popes consent they admitte nothing in them but that the present Pope doth allow Many Councells in Aphrica forbad appellations to Rome the general Councell of Chalcedon made the Bishop of Constantinople of equal dignitie with the Bishop of Rome the Bishop of Constantinople condemned and accursed a Pope sor an heretike the Pope of that time confirmed it yet now it is not holden for Catholike But I will spare examples vntill this lustie gallant dare aduenture the triall whereof he maketh the challenge But seeing there are many points of controuersies betweene vs and the Papists which in no auncient councell came in question he bobs vs with the last most learned Godlie and generall Councell of Trent which was gathered of purpose for triall of hercticall spirites whereunto all safe conduct being offered we refused to come for triall As though the Catholikes would haue come to the Councell of Nice if nothing might haue beene therein determined but that which pleased Arius or to the Councell of Constantinople if nothing might haue beene concluded but that Macedonius would allow Or to the Councells of Ephesus and Chalcedon if when all had beene saide that which liked Nestorius and Eutiches must haue bene holden for Catholike Such is our case we accuse the Pope to be an heritike yea and to be Antichrist the Pope will admit no councell but where he him selfe is iudge nor any to haue any voice determinatiue but onely such as are sworne to maintaine his heresies and ambition It is great pitie but the Protestants must come to such a councell Such were many councells holden of olde time by heretikes but for the most part not frequented by the Catholikes Some of our profession were at Trent but what entertainement had they euen such as their aduersaries could afforde them they were not permitted to haue any speach but as pleased their enemies wherefore when they saw noe equitie vsed as they could looke for no better before they came they left the heretikes to consult among them-selues by example of auncient fathers in like Chapters of heretikes The sift waie of triall is to referre the matter to the olde Doctors which liued before the controuersies began of which we haue spoken latelie and this we haue often vsed and still vse against the Papists in most controuersies although the authoritie of man is no certaine rule to trie which is the truth of God Augustine against Iulian vsed this waie rightlie first confuting the Pelagians by the authoritie of the holie scripture and then by the testimonie of the auncient fathers also Theodosius also in a case determined by the holie scripture did politikelie circumuent the heretikes after the aduise of Sisinius the Nouatian by the suggestion of Nectarius the Catholike to put them to a foile which had good successe because the others cause was naught But Epiphanius hath a hard saying against vs as our answerer thinketh It is enough to say against all heresies the catholike church hath not taught this the holy fathers haue not admitted this But I wene Epiphanius doth not meane that it is enough to saie so except men can prooue it to be so For els it is aseasy for heretikes to saie so against Catholikes as for Catholikes against heretikes And here out answerer voucheth Epiphanius quoting onelie lib. 2. contra haere but no Chapter of so long a booke wherebie knowing him to be a common foyster we maie well suspect his honestie in this voucher vntill he shew vs in what Chapter we shall finde it The sixtwaie of triall with him is to consider which is the Catholike or vniuersall Church or great multitude of Christians out of which the other part first departed But to consider which is the Catholike or vniuersal Church is no waie of triall but the matter to be tried And the description that he maketh of the Church is as vncerten the great multitud of Christians out of which the other part first departed For the Catholike Church is not alwaies the greatest multitude When the East Church was deuided from the West the one was as great a multitude as the other yea considering the number of prouinces of the East and the largenesse of them it was the greater And one heresie some times departeth out of another as the Rogatians from the Donatists the Eunomians from the Arrians the Iacobites from the Eutichians c. Neither doth Saint Augustine against the Manichecs make the consent of people and the name of Catholike of them-selues to be a sufficient waie of trial but among many thinges which altogether held him beside the authoritie of the holie scriptures he accounteth these which with the truth are a good confirmation but can be no preiudice against the manifest truth as he confesseth in the same place To the iudgement of Vincentius we will subscribe to holde that which euerie where which alwaies which of all hath beene beleeued so hath no point of Poperie Hoc est etenim verè proprièque Catholicum quòd ipsa vis nominis ratioque declarat quod omnia verè vniuersaliter comprehendit For that is truelie and properlie Catholike saith Vincentius which thing the verie force and reason of the name declareth
discharge your Iesuites of herisie and treason the wordes of scorpions and venemous spiders are no railing termes but apt to expresse their venemous and poisonous practises for they are vsed in scripture to describe the like mischeuous workes as Apocal. 9. Esa. 59. 5. The rest of his speaches haue either the same or the like phrases iustified in the scriptures against corrupters of Religion and enimies of publike peace as we shewe your Iesuites to be for the former and their practises to the confusion of some of them haue beene discouered for the latter With Master Hanmers termes I will not meddle who is to answer for him-selfe when you haue confuted his arguments or els when he shall see it conuenient Doctor Fulke the next man whom you condemne to be of a ruffianlike spirit because he saith shew me Allin if thou canst for thy guttes as though you raile not more of him in your ruffianlike terme then he in speaking of Allens guttes whatsoeuer the cause or affection were hath answered alreadie in his own behalfe in such sort as more shame redowndeth to you that haue gathered together his vehement and sharpe speaches vttered in manie bookes and to those whome you complaine by him to be abused while he giueth a reason of his speaches then all the eloquence you haue wil be able to wipe away in a larger treatise then your defense of the Censure as yet appeareth to be Confut of Topish quarrelles page 20. and so forth in 16. or 17 pages If it were no more but your marginall note Docter Fulkes talent in railing wherein you abuse an holie phrase of scripture like an Italian Atheist to mooue Sardonicall laughter it were much more able to conuince you of a ruffianlike spirit then anie terme that D. Fulke vseth seeing such vnreligious allusions vnto the termes and matters of holie scripture cannot be defended in anie man cause or manner The like you haue of Primitias spiritus and Luthers lying with a Nunne in the Lord all which argue a prophane spirite and a licentious intemperate and almoste blasphemous tongue or penne in anie that vse them or the like When you haue almoste done with Doctor Fulke you take vpon you to shew the like rayling in the Masters as you terme them that you haue done in the schollers and beginning with Iohn Caluin you saie that his ordinarie terme especially against Bishoppes and such like as are his superiours is to call them Nebulones knaues which beside the foull gall whence it proceedeth is vnseemelie For this you neither note nor quote anie one place where he vseth that terme in such sort as either his gall might thereby be espied or the same signfying light persons might not fitlie be applied vnto them vpon whome he bestowed the terme As for your popish Bishoppes are not his superiours but for the most part deserue sharper termes then Nebulones euen such as were fitte for Annas Caiphas Ananias and the rest of that race which were as great prelates as they Hauing nothing more against Caluin you passe ouer to Luther who in his booke against King Henrie the eight of England ministreth vnto you larger matter to triumph against him where in it maie be doubted whether you had greater pleasure in discouering of Lu ther 's intemper at stile then in displaying those odious and long since buried reproches against that noble Prince so great an enimie to your Romish Antichrist which as they were vnseemelie in respect of either of their persons him that did write the Prince against whom he did write so they were afterward misliked of Luther himselfe who in as great humilitie as before he did write in disdaine craued pardon at his handes not for the matter substance of his booke but for his vnreuerent handling of the same against a King of so great nobility of so good expectation the cause that mooued him to such destemper was for that he supposed that the booke was not endited by the King him selfe but by some enimie of his to procure his dishonour as he writeth in the same booke Crederes ab insigni hoste regis hunc librum editum in perpetuam regis ignominiam You would thinke that his booke was set forth by some notable enimie of the Kinges to the perpetuall shame of the King And in his Epistle of submission he declareth that he suspected cardinall Wolsey to be the author thereof which made him the bolder to write as he did against it And in the storie of Sir Thomas Moores life written by his sonne in lawe Master Roper which I haue seene it appeareth that Kinge Henrie tooke great displeasure against Sir Thomas Moore for the edition of that booke by which he receiued more dishonour then by anie thing in all his life Luther therfore writing against him that did abuse the name of the Kinge in defence of an euill cause thought he was not bound to spare him because of the Kinges title but that he might so much the rather be free to inueigh against him But this to saie the trueth might be some part of an excuse though not a sufficient defense of his doing neuerthelesse it followeth not here of that he could not be an elect vessell of God or that he had no part of Gods spirit or that he was herein worsse then anie russian or rakehell as our seuere Censurer saith without either malice or railing spirit I warrant you For Gods elect children they that haue a great part of his spirit do sometimes fal into far greater crimes then this and yet by his grace are brought to repentance as Luther was for this vntemperat stile and thereof made open confession in his epistle of submission againe he erred by immoderat zeale yet in defense of the truth which is not the cause that mooueth ruffians and rakehelles to rage Wherefore it is well with Luther that hath alreadie answered the matter before a more wise and merciful iudge and standeth not at the curtesie of our solemne Censurer But it is more to your purpose that you bring in Luther inueighing against the Caluinistes where he had not by our owne confession a good cause the Caluinistes againe as bitter against him a tast whereof though you refer the matter to another place you wil needes giue vs here by citing of one place in stead of all the rest and that is of the Church of Tygurine against Luther Tygur 〈◊〉 3. contra supermam Lutherij confessionem whole wordes you promise to rehearse out of what edition I cannot tell for the edition of Tigure by Froshere 1545. of Gwalters translation reporteth their wordes somewhat otherwise and therefore I thinke in this place as in diuers other you are but a broaker of other mens ware to put forth that you neuer sawe your selfe but gather out of some other mans notebooke which reported not al thinges either with such diligence or faithfullnes as had beene requisite to be found in
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
acceptus est quemadmodum paulò pòst dicemus omnibus sacrarum literarum candidatis qui adhue nonnihil propter parabolae obstacula haerebant omnem nebulam discussit c. There remained yet not the lest endeuour namelie that we should bring forth examples which wereioined with no parable Therefore we began to thinke of all that we could to vnfolde all that we could but yet none other example came to minde but that is set forth in our commentarie or els whatsoeuer came to minde was like vnto those examples But when the 13. daie drew neere I tell the trueth that so true that though I would conceale it my conscience compelleth me to vtter that which the Lord bestowed vpon me being not ignorant to how great reproches and scornes I lay forth my selfe when I say the 13. daie of Aprill drew neere me thought as I was a sleepe that with great tediousnes I was againe disputing with the scribe my aduersarie that my mouth was so stopped that my tongue denying her office I was not able to speake out that which I knew to be true which trouble as dreames are wont sometimes to mocke men in the deceitfull night for here I declare no higher matter then a dreame as cōcerning my selfe although it is no light matter that I learned by this dreame thankes be to God to whose onelie glorie I vtter these thinges which vexation I saie seemed to trouble me vehementlie Then sodainlie there seemed an admonisher to be present with me whether he were blacke or white I do not at all remember for I tell a dreame which said why dost thou not thou coward answere him that which is written Exod. 12. For it is the paschall which is the passeouer of the Lord. Immediatlie as this sight appeered I awoke withall and leapt out of my bed And first I considered the place in the Seauentie Interpreters on euerie side and thereof before the wholl congregation I preached as well as I could Which sermon when it was heard as soone after we shall declare draue awaie all mist or want of vnderstanding from all those that were studentes in the holie Scriptures which vnto that time did somewhat doubt because of the obiection of the parable Thus farre Zuinglius by whose wordes you may easelie perceiue what proofes he receiued of his Doctrine of the Sacrament of a spirit by night as our defender saieth when he sheweth onelie that he was admonished by Gods prouidence in a dreame ofthat example Exod. 12. in which the trope or figure is manifest being also in the doctrine institution of a sacrament whereunto the Lords supper doth most properly answere which is vsed in the words of the Lords supper this is my body without anie such parable as was obiected vnto him in the other examples Where he saith that he remembreth not whether the aduertiser were white or blacke he meaneth no more as all men that know the prouerbe must confesse but that he remembreth not what he was whether knowne to him or vnknowne of whom he dreamed that he receiued that example The same prouerbe he vseth not long before in the same discourse of him that disputed against him who whether he was white or blacke that is what manner of man he was he would not describe Surius quarelleth against him that he would attribute so much to a dreame when otherwise he will admit nothing but holie scriptures whereas euerie reasonable man may see that he admitteth no Doctrine vpon the bare credit of a dreame or of the admonisher were he whit or blacke but is onelie put in minde by a dreame of a place of holie Scripture that serued to stoppe his aduersaries mouth and to remooue all doubt from them that were nouices in the studie of the scripture And this is a thing that manie times commeth to passe that a man which earnestlie studieth of anie matter shall in his dreame be admonished of some better waie then he could thinke of waking Which when he hath considered to be the best for anie good purpose he neede not to doubt but that it came vnto him by the prouidence of God without being afraide to follow it because he thought of it first in a dreame What Luther thought of Zuinglius it skilleth not seeing as he was stiffe in his error of the carnall manner of presence so he was apt both to thinke and speake worse then the trueth was of all them that held the contrarie The last two were Caluine and Beza of whome it is needles to saie anie more then hath alreadie beene setforth in their defense in print these two yeares with out replie of anie papist Although God be praised the Church of England dependeth neither vpon these not vpon other men further then they were faithfull interpreters of the worde of God according to which our faith is framed and not after the decrees of men Concerning the death of Martine Bucer welknown in England whome the papists abroad as they doe of the rest imagine to haue died a foule death our defender quarrelleth with Master Charke for belying of Lindan and charging him to saie that Lindan auoucheth it where he onelie reporteth as he hearde of certaine worshipfull Marchants of Colene But in trueth Master Charke saieth not that Lindan doth auouch it but onlie that by vttering his false reports he maketh Bucers death as horrible and monstrous as may be suspected Pontacus the popish historian vttereth a like report as the defender confesseth that he died a Iew denying the Messias Surius addeth another tale that he circumcised his sonne begotten of I know not what woman Thus these lying papists heape lies vpon lies and when they haue neither sufficient author nor probabilitie of trueth to beare them out then certaine worshipfull Marchauntes then a certaine graue and most excellent learned man then some of Bucers owne disciples are the reportes vnder which cloake it is an easie matter to forge anie slaunder and turne ouer the enuie of it to the man in the moone in the meane time to burthen men with suspicion of infamie among credulous persons where no proofe of their false accusations can be demaunded and obtained Touching Bucers inconstancie The defender out of Surius and other of that stampe gathereth manie thinges peruerting to vnstedfastnes of iudgement what soeuer Bucer did saie laboring to make vnitie betweene Luther and Zuinglius Charging him also to recant the article of the baptisme of infants to be vnnecessarie as he had written before vpon the third Chapter of Saint Mathewes Gospell and vpon the 26. of Mathew to aske pardon of God and of the Church for that he deceiued so manie with the heresie of Zuinglius as he calleth it Both which matters are meere forgeries for in those commentaries vpon that Gospell which we haue seene there is no such matter Finallie where he affirmeth that Caluine differed from Zuinglius which Master Fulke in all his writings most impudentlie denieth he
thinke you haue prepared this as a bumme carde to wine the game That S. Auustine saieth concupiscence in the regenerate is not sinne I graunt so you wil confesse that he saith also that it is sinne When he saieth it is not sin he meaneth either because the guilt is forgiuen 〈◊〉 because it is not actuall sinne as Saint Iames doth distinguish sinne from concupiscence But that it is of it selfe sinne and damnable if it be not remitted he affirmeth cont Iul. Pel. lib. 5. c. 3. lib. 6. cap. 5. he saith it is euill alwaies and cap. 3. he condemneth it as the Pelagians heresie that 〈◊〉 it is not to be blamed Where Master Charke chargeth you with alteration of the text when you translate omnis qui facit peccatum euerie one that sinneth where you should saie euerie one that doth sinne you make sporte afteryour manner and aske what difference whether a man saie your wife spinneth or your wife doth spin where you shew your selfe to be a verie good Grammarian that can make no difference in our tongue betweene the signe of the actiue mode doth and the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 think that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 differeth nothing in vehemency from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which M. Chark told you you should haue translated to expresse the force of the phrase in our tongue euerie one that committeth sinne But this you count smal game and I would it were the greatest that you haue committed in your censure You cannot afford M. Chark to say that he knoweth he serueth the Lord because he hath not that knowledge by Aristotles demonstrations you are sure which yet are the onelie meanes of certaine science properlie So that the doctrine of the scriptures the testimonies of the holie ghost are no meanes of certaine science properlie Yet without them and Aristotles demonstrations also you are sure that Master Charke hath no certaine knowledge that he serueth the Lorde Or if you suppose you can gather your surenes 〈◊〉 Aristotelicall demonstrations it maie please you to thinke that Master Charke may by the same kinde of demonstrations gather the certaintie of his knowledge hauing the maior in the holie scriptures and the testimonie of his conscience and of the holie spirit for the minor and conclusion The examples you obiect of Luther and Bucer altering their opinions are not like the matter in question For as men may 〈◊〉 so maie they be deceiued in their opinion of 〈◊〉 God yet it followeth not that no man maie be certaine that he serueth God trulie Where you saie that Luther had beene a protestant manie yeares when he saide he did knowe there was a purgatorie it is false sor at the same time he acknowledged the Popes authoritie 〈◊〉 humano by the lawe of men as in the time of the Canstans Councell it was the opinion of manie Papists The ninth section intituled Of Concupiscence Art 2. THe doctrine of the Iesuites as Gotuisus reporteth is that Concupiscence remayning in the regenerate although it be against the law of God yet is it not 〈◊〉 properlie in it selfe or of his owne nature Here you will not accept the excuse which layeth the addition of these wordes although it be against the law of God vpon 〈◊〉 because Master Charke might haue seene them wanting in Canisius As though he was bound to examine the reporte of Gotuisus which he promiseth to rehearse by Canisius But Master Charke telleth you the excuse is needeles because those words must of aecessity be vnderstood For the question isof none other concupiscence but that which is against the law Secondlie you slaunder him when you saie he doth assure his Reader that you doe vnder hand graunt concupiscence to be some kinde of sinne when you denie it to be mortall sinnes for his sentence is disiunctiue namelie either you graunt c. or els you loade and disguise your sentence with waste wordes which is true for to what purpose should you denie that to be deadlie sinne which you do not acknowledge to be anie sinne as if one should saie an Asse is not a wise man he should speake fondlie seing an Asse is no man That concupiscence by Saint Paul is called sin vnproperlie as S. Augustine saith because it is the cause of sinne Master Charke denieth yet without anie malepertnes as you charge him or contumelie neuer so litle vnto Saint Augustine but with that libertie which he himselfe graunteth to all men that shall reade or examine his writings Neither is Saint Augustines iudgement alwaies the exposition of the primitiue Church when both he diffenteth from others and from himselfe also now and then But now let vs see how you cauill at Master Charkes exposition of Saint Paul to the Romanes where he calleth concupiscence sinne First he saith though the Lawe stirrcth vs to sinne yet is it no sinne and that maketh for you for so you may conclude of concupiscence But then your conclusion shal be false and your reasoning weaker then that you reprehend in Master Charke as weake reasoning where he saith If the lawe that is holie doe come in question of sinne for that it prouoketh our corrupt nature to sinne how much more concupiscence which is vncleane of it selfe This prooueth nothing say you but from the place à disparatis where children and distracted men take their arguments I will enter no logicall disputation with you of what force the argument à disparatis is if it be rightlie vsed but I maruell you could not see the argument à comparatis from the lesse to the more If the holie lawe maie come in question of sinne much more the vncleane lust But you woulde haue men thinke that Master Charke meant by this comparison to conclude that lust is properlie sinne wheras he onelie prepareth a waie to that conclusion by this comparison But the antecedent you saie is false that the law stirreth vs to sinne or the lawe prouoketh our corrupt nature to sinne Which Master Charke saith not absolutelie but that through our rebellion the law giuing no occasion but the occasion beeing altogether taken by our corruption rebelling against the commaundement You replie that the lawe doth no waie stirre to sinne but by discouering as a glasse doth spottes and that Saint Paul hath no such meaning as Master Charke saith But the text is too plaine to be denied That sinne taking occasion through the commaundement hath wrought in me all concupiscence the commaundement comming sinne reuiued Sinne taking occasion thorough the commaundement hath deceiued me c. that sinne might be made exceedinglie sinnefull Now to prooue that Saint Paul meaneth voluntarie concupiscence whereunto consent or delectation is yelded where he saith he had not knowne concupiscence if the lawe had not saide thou shalt not lust you cite S. Augustine lib. 1. de nupt concup cap. 29. where he hath the cleane contrarie iudgement Multum boni facit qui facit quod
of Colene in a moste apt similitude called the scripture a nose of waxe and Pighius the leaden rule of the Lesbian building But now concerning the matter it selfe You would shift it of by saying The Iesuites doe compare the hereticall wresting and detorting of scripture vnso the bowing of a nose of waxe vpon certaine circumstances which are these First not in respect of the scripture it selfe but in respect of heretikes and other that abuse it and that before the rude people that cannot iudge thirdlie to the ende to flatter Princes or the people in their vices Thus much was said before in the Censure But it was replied that Andradius confesseth the fathers of Colene doe saie that the holie scripture is as a nose of wax So doth Pighius and it is a thing more commonlie knowen then that it can be denied Therefore the wresting of the scripture is not compared by them to the bowing of a waxen nose but the scripture it selfe to a nose of wax as that which is as easie to be drawne into any sense as a nose of wax may be turned euerie waie The wordes of Pighius are plaine Sunt enim scripturae velut caereus quidam nasus qui sicut hor sum illor sumque facilè se trahi permittit quo traxeris haud inuitus sequitur ita illae se flecti duci atque etiam in diuer sam sententiam trahi accomodarique ad quid-uis patiuntur nist quis veram illam inflexibilemque earundem amussim nempe Ecclesiasticae traditionis authoritatem communemque sententiam ilsdem adhibeat For the holie scriptures are as it were a certaine nose of wax which as it easelie suffereth it selfe to be drawne this waie and that waie and whether soeuer you draw it is followeth not vnwillinglie so also they doe suffer them selues to be bowed to be led and also to be drawen into a contrarie meaning and to be applied vnto what you will except a man lay vnto them that true inflexible rule of them namelie the authoritie and common vnderstanding of the Churches tradition These wordes declare if the sense of all Papists be the same that the Iesuites do not onelie compare the scripture it selfe but also that they make this comparison in respect of the scripture it selfe which suffereth it selfe as easelie to be wrested and abused as a nose of wax abideth to be bowed nor before the rude and ignorant onelie nor to flatter Princes and people in their vices alone but before any persons or to any purpose whatsoeuer and that there is not in them a certaine and infallible sense to iudge of the Churches doctrine or to finde out the true Church from all false congregations by the trueth taught in the scriptures but that the authoritie and common vnderstanding of the Popish Churches tradition is the onelie true sense inflexible rule of the holy scriptures wherebie also it is manifest though you denie it neuer so stoutlie that you doe impute the wresting of the scriptures vnto the imperfection of Gods worde set forth in them and not onelie to the malice of the wrester For if the will of God be but as well expressed in them as the will of princes is in their written lawes and proclamations the one maie as well be found out by reading and weighing of the holie scriptures as the other may be out of prophane writings especially where the spirit of God graunted vnto the praiers of the elect openeth their vnderstanding not onelie to conceiue as the naturall man maie by studie and ordinarie helpes the true scope and purpose of God vttered in them but also to beleeue and embrace whatsoeuer the Lord their God hath propounded in them Therefore though the scripture may be wrested to the destruction of the vngodlie as Saint Peter sheweth yet Master Charke telleth you that it cannot so be wrested but that still it remaineth the light vnto our feet and the lanterne vnto our steppes and euerie parte thereof is like the arme of a great Oke which cannot be so wreste but that with great force it will returne into the right position to the shame and perill of the wrester which answere of his you doe so dissemble as though you had neuer seene it And you doe wiselie seeing otherwise then by silence you could not auoid it But howsoeuer Master Charke storme you will defend your blasphemie of the nose of waxe not onelie in a kingdome where the Ghospell is preached but also in the kingdome of vs ministers where the letter of the scripture is worsse wrested by vs to all errors and licentiousnes then euerie waxen nose was yet bended to diuerse fashions O ye senseles papists had you neuer a man of moderat iudgement to set forth against vs but this loosetongued Gentelman which so he maie raile with full mouth against vs hath no care how his slaunders maie be coloured Doe we peruert the scriptures to all errors then surelie we holde no trueth there neuer was anie heresie neither can there be anie heresie but that with manie errors it maintaineth and holdeth manie truethes Yea the Deuill him-selfe the father oflies beleeueth some truethes and for shame dare not professe the maintenance of all errors We thinke verie hardlie of Antichrist and his brood the papists yet we maie not saie that they wrest the scriptures to all errors and licentiousnes for if they so did they should not deceaue so manie by shew of trueth in errors except they did professe some articles of trueth in deede As for the wresting of the Scripture to all licentiousnes let God and all the world of reasonable and indifferent men iudge how iustlie we maie be charged therewith If we be licentious in our liues God will finde it out and let man where he findeth it punish vs. But if we wilfully peruert the scriptures to the maintenance of all licentiousnes the Lord reward vs according to our deedes and be not mercifull to them that sinne of malicious wickednes But it is no fault in the scriptures saie you that they may be abused For Christ him-selfe was called the rocke of offence and the stone of scandall not for anie faulte or imperfection in him but through the wickednes of such as abuse that benefit So if the Iesuites had said no more but that the scripture maie be abused no man could haue found fault with them And Christ is called a stone of offence or stumbling not altogether in respect of the wicked that abuse him for he is called a stone moste precious and necessarie to build vpon of stumbling to those that refuse to build vpon him which meeting with him must either stumble and fall or els if it fall vpon them they must be ground to pouder But the the scripture is compared to a nose os wax because it is in their imagination that vse the comparison as pliant to follow euerie waie and to yeald as probable a sence one waie as an other as
creature can haue except he be also creator and God himselfe therefore Christ truelie as man receiueth that which is giuen but in respect and right of his godheade he is able to receiue and exercise that power which none can haue but God onelie These thinges indeede maie seeme vnto the simple to be farre fetched and farre from the question of priests power to remit sinnes but they are much farther from the truth of our Catholike faith and Religion that our sauiour Christ in respect of his Diuine nature should be spoiled of his authority or els should thereby worke nothing in a manner in the cheife most necessarie partes of our redemption that Popish priests might be made equall or not farre vnlike him in the power of pardoning sinnes ALLEN For as the due consideration of Christes authoritie and excellent office touching his manhood will helpe vp the decaied honour and iurisdiction that the guides of Gods Church by the right of his high calling do iustlie challenge so it shall expresse the boldnesse of certaine miscreants of this age who to further their sundrie euil in tents and detestable doctrines haue dishonoured Christes dignitie touching his incarnation and office of his redemption exceeding much both in himselfe and in persons of his Pristes and substitutes some of them fearing as I take it lest the honour and office of Christes Priesthood might by participation descend to the Apostles and Priestes of the Church letted not to hold that Christ was his fathers Priest according to his diuine nature of which blasphemie Iohn Caluine was iustlie noted wherein the wicked man whiles he went about to disgrace the dignitie of mortall men became exceeding iniurious to the second person in Trinitie One other of that schoole and of his owne neast denied that Christ in his manhoode should iudge the world lest there might seeme to be some force of punishment and correction of wickednes practized by mans ministerie in this life for the resemblance of Christes iudgement to come And so taught one Richerius of a Carmelite a Caluinist Other deny Christ being now in heauen to make praier for vs according to his manhoode because it tendeth towardes the intercession as Saint Paulin expresse wordes recordeth of him Quòd saluare in perpetuum potest accedens ad Deum per semetipsum semper viuens ad interpellandum pro nobis That for euer he is of power to giue saluation hauing accesse to God by him-selfe and alwaies Iiuing to make intercession for vs. Yea most of the Sacramentaries for the aduantage of their vngodlie assertion that Christ in his owne person as he is God and man should not be present in the sacrament doe couertlie blaspheme the blessed and highlie sanctified fleshof our sauiour auouching it to be vnprofitable whereby they vnaduisedlie dishonour the dreadfull incarnation of Christ and all the workes wrought by the meane of his flesh and blood and ministerie of his manhoode for the remission of our sinnes and purchasing saluation to his Church FVLKE The due consideration of Christes authoritie and excellent office touching his manhoode will nothing helpe to restore the decaied honour and iurisdiction of Popish priesthoode except you can both prooue your Popish priests capable of such honour and power as the sonne of God is and also bring forth the recordes out of the holy scriptures for that high calling whereof you boast That any faithful Christian whome you to maintaine an Antichristian authoritie call Miscreantes haue dishonoured Christs dignitie touching his incarnation and office of his redemption it is a slaunder stronglie aduouched but slenderlie prooued For first Caluine affirming Christ to be a priest in his wholl person God and man derogateth nothing from that dignitie neither is he iniurious against the second person in trinitie for Christ is an high priest after the order of Melchesidech and our redeemer not as a minister and seruant onelie but as the sonne as the King os peace and righteousnes without father without mother without genealogy hauing neither beginning of his daies nor end of his life al which things can not be restrained to the humanitie of Christ but are proper to him as he is equall and eternall with his father That Richerius should denie that Christ in his manhoode should iudge the world it might well be a slaunder of that grosse potheaded Cyclops Villegagnon which when he durst not abide the inuasions of the barbarous people in Gallia antarctica where he had enterprised a conquest he quarelled with Richerius and other godlie persons to haue a colour of returne and a wellcome of the Papists And as touching his slaunderous libell that you send the reader vnto I referre you them to the answere confutation of Richerius Thirdlie that Christ doth make praiers for vs according to his manhoode it is not sufficiently prooued by the text of the Apostle to the Heb. 7. because he may and doth make continuall intercession for vs by the vertue and worthines of the sacrifice of his death although he conceiue no prayers for vs in forme of wordes as men vse vpon earth And if it be graunted that Christ so praieth for vs yet it tendeth nothing towardes the intercession of Saints but rather against it because the interceffion of Christ is sufficient without them yea if the intercession of Saints were prooued it draweth not of necessity praier vnto Saints after it and therefore there were smal purpose in them that denie Christ in such forme to praie for vs to controul the inuocatiō of Saints which thing being either graunted or denied prooueth neither too nor fro that Saints are to be praied vnto or 〈◊〉 That any one of those whome you cal Sacramentaries doth either ouertly or couertly blaspheme the blessed flesh of our Sauiour auouching it to be vnprofitable otherwise then our sauiour Christ himselfe auouched if it were separated from his diuine and quickening spirite doth profitte nothing you are not able to iustifie and therefore you send vs in the margent to Cyrill vpon Iohn lib. 4. Cap 14. whoe sheweth in deede that the flesh of Christ as it is the flesh of the sonne of God hath quickening vertue and power in it to our eternall redemption but otherwise affirmeth nothing thereof that we all are not readie to subscribe vnto ALLEN Let vs therefore Christianlie confes with the scripture and with the Church of Christ that our sauiour not onelie by power equall to his father concerning his diuine nature but also by the sending and graunt of his father and vnction of the holie spirit beeing farre vnder them both in his humane nature doth remit sinnes Whereupon it orderlie followeth that whosoeuer denyeth man to haue authoritie or that he maie haue power graunted him by God to forgiue sinnes he is highlie iniuriouse to our sauiours owne person dispensation of his flesh and mysterie of his holie incarnation For though there be great diuersitie betwixt his state and others because
30. entreating vpon this place Illud verò non praetermittendum quòd quando peccata paralytici dimisit non apertè potestatem suam manifesiauit Non enim dixit dimitto tibi peccata tua sed dimittuntur tibi peccata tua inimicis autem vrgentibus manifestius suam potestatem oftendit Ait enim vt sciatis quia potestatem habet filius bominis in terra peccata di mittere perpendisne quam longè abest vt nolit aequalis patri putari non enim dixit potestatem habere à deo filium hominis aut quia dedit sibi Deus potestatem sed potestatem habet filius hominis nec ad gloriam dico ait sed vt vobis persuadeam quia non blasphemo cùm meip sum patri aequalem faciam But this thing is not to be passed by that when he forgaue the sins of the palsy man he did not openlie manifest his power for he did not saie I forgiue thee thy sinnes but thy sinnes are forgiuenthes But when his enimies vrged him hee showeth his power more manifestlie for he saith that you maie knowe that the sonne of man hath power on earth to forgiue sinnes Doest thou not marke howe farre of it is that he would not bee thought equall to his father for he saide not that the sonne of man hath power from God or that God hath giuen him power but the sonne of man hath power neither saith he doe I speake it for to glorie in but that I might perswade you that I doe not blaspheme when I make my selfe equall with my father The same interpretatiō hath Euthymius vpon the place S. Ambrose also acknowledgeth the diuinitie of Christ to be prooued by forgiuenes of sinnes in Luc. 5. Cognosce interioris hominis sanitatem cui peccata donantur quae cùm Iudoaei asserunt a solo Deo posse donari deum vtique confitentur suoque iudicio perfidiam suam produnt vt opus astruant personam negent c. Acknowledge the healing of the innar man to whome his sinnes are forgiuen which when the Iewes doe affirme that they can be forgiuen by God alone they do confesse verely that he is god by their owne argument bewray their falshoode that they allowe his worke and denie his person Therefore euen of them the sonne of god receiueth testimonie of his worke requireth not the suffrage of their voice For falshoode can confesse but it cannot beleeue Therefore there wanteth no testimonie to his diuinitie but faith is wanting to their saluation for both it is more straunge for credit which they confesse vnwilling and also more pernitious to their fauls that they denie which are conuinced by their owne assertions Great therefore is the madnes of the vnfaithfull people that when they haue confessed that it pertaineth to God onelie to forgiue sinnes they will not giue credit to God when he doth forgiue sinnes And a litle after where he also acknowledgeth the power of remitting sinnes which is graunted to men he doth neuerthelesse affirme that God onelie doth forgiue sinnes Quamuis igitur magnum sit hominibus peccata dimittere quis enim potest peccata dimittere nisi solus Deus quiper eos quoque dimittit quibus dimittendi tribuit potestatein tamen multò diuinius est resurrecti onem donare corporibus For although it be a great thing to forgiue sinnes to men for who can forgiue sinnes but god alone whoe also forgiueth by them to whome he hath giuen power of for giuing yet it is a much more diuine worke to giue resurrection to mens bodies This 〈◊〉 of S. Ambrose sheweth not onelie that Christ by his diuine power as god forgaue sinnes in this place but that God onelie doth properlie 〈◊〉 when he vseth the ministery of men so that not 〈◊〉 S. Hilarie but euen the consent of al the auncient writers is a gainst your new imagination ALLEN But to returne 〈◊〉 to our 〈◊〉 when Christ had declared that the Sonne of man had in earth power to remit sinnes he then by this farther proofe and argument ouerturneth the wholl cause of their 〈◊〉 and inward 〈◊〉 against him for the same whether is it more easie to saie thy sinnes be forgiuen thee or to saie to the incurable person take vp thy bed and walke I due the one in all your sightes and he is cured at my worde why then mistrust you the other It was no lesse the propertie of God alone to he all him sodainlie of his corporall infirmitie that had beene desperatclie sicke so long then to forgiue sinnes but the one power though by 〈◊〉 it was proper to him selfe yet he gaue it in the sight of you all to the sonne of man in earth why then mistrust you but he might well giue the other This reason proceeding from the wisedome of Gods owne sonne shall helpe our faith much touching this article and shall not a litle further the dignitie of the 〈◊〉 whoe also after their masters example may prooue the force of their authoritie vppon mennes soules which cannot be open to our bodelie eyes by the apparant power that their wordes shal be seene openlie to worke on mens bodies especiallie if it be well weighed that Christ wrought miracles also not onelie by the excellent dominion and force of his godhead but also as Saint Augustine prooueth by the spirts of God in respect of his manhoode In quo spiritu sanflo saith he operatus est virtuies dicens Si ego in spiritu dei eiicto daemonia certè superuenit in vosregnum Dei In the pow er of which holie ghost Christ wrought miracles according to his owne saying in these words if I expel out deuils by the spirit of god then surelie the kingdome of God wil come on you The Iews therefore seing themselues thus ouercome in their cogitatiòns waxed affraied and glorified God who gaue such power to men For though no man euer had equall authoritie or like power to Christ who was both God and man yet of this plentifull spirit and vnction manie of his brethren haue through his ordinance recciued part as shortlie now is shall be prooued In the meane time arme thy selfe against 〈◊〉 with this approoued and certaine trueth that not onelie God by his passing prerogatiue maie forgiue sinnes but that he hath so soueraignclie 〈◊〉 Christ our Priest and head that as he is man and occupieth the said functions in earth he maie remit by the vertue of the holie Ghost our offences also 〈◊〉 That which before but doubtinglie and vnder correction of better learned men you propounded to the end that like a subull serpent you might writhe in your head now as a conquerer of the wholl cause you thrust in your wholl bodie and as though you had gained your purpose you affirme steadfastlie that although it was no lesse the propertie of God alone to heale the man sodainelie of his corporall infirmitie then to forgiue sinnes yet as he gaue the one power to
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
life the same should stand in force before God FVLKE Our sauiour Christ in this place doth first of all authorize his Apostles to execute the office of publike preaching of the Gospell in all the world vnto the which he had before chosen appointed them Then doth he furnish them with giftes of the holie Ghost meete for so high and painfull a calling last of all he ratifieth the effect of their ministerie to be accomplished in the remission of the sinnes of all them that beleeue their preaching and in the retaining of their sinnes that do not obey the voice of the Gospell to beleeue it For the power of remitting sinnes must not be separated from the office of teaching whereunto it is annexed by our sauiour Christ who doth not giue his Apostles authoritie to remit sinnes so that he would transferre into them anie thing that is proper vnto him-selfe For it is proper to him to remit sinnes which honour so farre forth as it pertaineth to his onelie person he doth not resigne to his Apostles but commaundeth them in his name to testifie the forgiuenes of sinnes that he might reconcile men to God by their ministerie For I haue shewed before in the words of S. Hilarie that to speake properlie God onelie by men remitteth sinnes not following the sentence of man but man following the iudgement of God which is to pardon all penitent sinners and to retaine the sinnes of vnbeleeuers vnto eternall condemnation Therefore it is much more then the place doth afforde that you affirme the iudgement and rule of our soules with al authoritie in correcting our sinnes in most expresse and effectuall tearmes and in moste ample manner is giuen to the Apostles and their successors in this place For Christ in this place doth constitute Apostles and not Iudges messengers and declarers of his good pleasure and will vnto men not rulers of mens soules he giueth them power to remit or retaine sinnes in his name to the inestimable comfort of all penitent sinners and to the terrour and in crease of damnation of all vnbeleeuers he giueth them not al authoritie and that in moste ample manner in correcting our sinnes neither are there in the place anie expresse or effectual tearmes our of which such omnipotent authoritie can be concluded as afterward when we come to your syllogisme we shall platnlie declare Againe there is no mention in the text of anie iurisdiction communicated vnto them but of the office of teaching whereunto Christ was sent for a time which he committeth to his Apostles and their successours For these wordes of our sauiour As my father hrth sent me I also do send you can not be enlarged generallie to all such purposes as God sent Christ but must be vnderstood according to the matter he speaketh of that is of the office of Preaching teaching which Christ at that time did cease to execute in his humanitie remaining yet still the onelie doctor and teacher of his Church because he is author of the doctrine that is taught and by his holie spirit teacheth continually in giuing effect to the labours of his Apostles Euangelists Prophets Pastours teach ers which he hath giuen vnto his Church for the external ministerie of instructing the same in al truth necessarie to the eternall saluation of his elect He substituteth therfore his Apostles in that necessarie office of preaching the Gospell he enableth them by his spirit which he testifieth vntothem by an holy signe to proceed from him He maketh an assured promis that they should not labour in vaine but that in pardoning retaining sinnes according to the doctrine of his Gospel whatsoeuer they did should stand in force before God ALLEN What dignitie could euer be giuen more in what tearmes more plain by what order more honourable for surelie if either Christ could remit sinnes as we haue at large prooued that he could by commission and sending of his father or if the holie spirit of God maie remit sinnes or if Christes word will procure man anie power to remit sinnes then vndoubtedlie maie the Apostles remit sinnes For they haue the expresse warrant of them all Much said Paul when he affirmed in the Apostles name and person of all Priestes Quòd 〈◊〉 erat in Christo mundum reconcilians sibi posuit in nobis verbum reconciliationis Pro Christo ergo legatione fungimur That God was in Christ reconciling the world to him selfe and hath put in vs the word of reconcilement therfore our calling is to serue as an Embasy in Christes owne stead These wordes be of great waight and exceedinglie set forth the vocation of the spirituall gouernours as of those that holde by the warrant of Gods sending and thereby occupie Christes owne roome Marie the place for all that appertaineth to their calling generallie as wel to preach as otherwise to guide the people of God in the behalfe of their Master to whome we al be subiect but this present text whereupon we now treat doth properlie concerne the commission giuen to the Apostles for the sacrament of penance and remission of sinnes For it doth in moste cleere and vndoubted sense giue to them the like right in that case that Christ him selfe had by the sending of God the father that is to saie the very same authority that he had in respect of his mediation and manhoode A Equalem patri filium nouimus saith Saint Augustine sed bîc verba Mediatoris agnoscimus medium quippe se ostendit dicendo ille me ego vus We know the sonne to be equall with the father but here we must acknowledge the wordes of a mediator For he shewed him selfe to be as a meane when he said He sent me and I send you That is to saie as Theophilact expoundeth it Take vpon you my worke and function and doe it with confidence For as my father did send me so I send you againe and I will be with you to the ende of the worlde FVLKE There is no dout but the Apostles had power to remit sins but yet for al your thetorical interrogations none other then I haue expressed before nor greater then may stand with the glory of Christ who maketh not men equal with him when he authorizeth them as his seruants to be ministers of his mysteries and stewardes of his gracious giftes And Paul trulie said much when he affirmed that god was in Christ recōciling the world to himselfe not imputing to them their offences which clause I know not why you haue omitted hath put in vs that word of recōciliation We are therfore embassadours for Christ c. For he said that it is proper to god to reconcile the world to forgiue sins or not to impute them that is but a ministery of reconciliation which he hath geuen vnto men she weth how this ministerie is executed namely by preaching reconciliation as the embassadours of God to desire men to be reconciled vnto God
otherwise but in his right name whosoeuer shall controlle or cōremne they not onely irreuerently touch gods annointed but they sacrilegiously laie handes on ipsum Christum Domini euen on him that is annointed aboue all his fellowes Well I conclud vp this matter with these few wordes of Saint Ambrose Vult Dominus plurimum posse discipulos suos Vult á seruis suis e a fieri in nominesuo quaefaciebat ipse positus in terris Our lordes pleasure is that his disciples should haue great prerogatiue he will haue the same thinges wrought by his seruants in his name that him-selfe did in his owne person when he was in earth FVLKE He that seeth not the difference of the ministerie of man from the power of God in those actions wherein God worketh by man gropeth in the darke seeth nothing as he ought to see Therefore let vs come to the light of your logick and thereby consider if we can the distinction of the one from the other If the maior or first proposition of your former syllogisme be vnderstood of a power or commission graunted to the manhood of Christ such as might haue beene graunted by God to anie other meere man then your Minor is not true that Christ by such a power and commission onelie setting his Godhead aside though truelie and effectuallie yet not in proper forme ofspeach by his fathers sending and commission remitted sinnes for then could he not be the author of remission of sinnes but onelie a minister thereof and therefore in proper forme ofspeach he could not be said to forgiue sinnes which is proper onely to god but to preach the forgiue nes of sinnes in Gods name or to testifie that God did forgiue sinnes as the ministers of the Church do Butif the Maior be vnderstood of such power commission as was giuen to Christ as the Mediator in respect of his manhood but yet such as he couldnot receiue exercise but in respect of his godhead such as could not be graunted to any but vnto that person which is God man such is the absolute principall power of remission of sinnes then I denie that such power was giuen to the Apostles at his departure For when Christ him-selfe did truelie effectuallie and in proper forme of speech remit sinnes he did it as God hauing equal and principall authoritie with the father and the holie ghost so to do The conclusion of your second syllogisme I graunt that the Apostles were sent to forgiue sinnes but retaining the former distinction of the authoritie of God and the ministerie of man For as Christ was sent of his father to preach the remission of sinnes so were the Apostles sent by Christ to preach remission of sinnes therefore such power as he had by preaching onely of remission of sinnes to forgiue sinnes such power be graunted to his Apostles whome he ordained preachers in his place but the proper pow er of his deity he graunted not nor any power which is proper to the person of the Mediator God and man Theresore these wordes of Christ As the father sent me so send I you must not be extended further then our sauiour Christ in that place meaneth For els infinite absurdities might be concluded thereof as that he sent his Apostles to redeeme the world to die for the sinnes of the world to be sauiours of the world c. or that he sendeth all ministers of the Church to whome this commission extendeth to clense leapers to raise the dead to giue sight to the blinde and to do all other miracles that he was sent to do According to this distinction that Rhetoricall amplification of Chrisostome is to be vnderstood and doubtles wonderfull great is the authoritie that man doth exercise in the name of God although that which is peculiar to God be not attributed to men The similitude that Chrysostome vseth in the same chapter Lib. 3. cap. 5. of a King graunting power to one of his subiects to imprison men and to release them sheweth that he knew the difference of the Lord from the seruant who if he abuse the authoritie committed vnto him deserueth sharpe punishment and therefore hath not absolute authoritie to do all things as his Lord and can not transgresse in doing And in the next Chapter he sheweth that Priestes do exercise this power of forgiuing sinnes by teaching admonition and by praier Not onelie by teaching and admonishing but also by the helpe of praiers and a manifest difference sheweth Saint Ambrose when he saith Christ would haue his disciples to do in his name the same thinges which he did on earth partlie in his fathers name and partlie in his owne name The power of priesthood touching remission of sinnes prooued by the solemne action of Christ in breathing vpon his Apostles and giuing them thereby the holie Ghost THE THIRD CHAP. ALLEN THe commission and power that our Master Christ receiued of his euerlasting father being in moste ample manner communicated with the Apostles made great proofe and euidence for the right that they claime in remission of sinnes but the present power of Gods spirit breathed by Christ vpon them and giuen vnto them for the ministerie and execution of that function helpeth our matter so much that whoso euer now denieth this authoritie of the Apostles concerning the pardoning of our offences doth not so much sinne against the sonne of man which of it selfe is greeuous inough as he doth controll the worke of the spirit of Christ which is the holie Ghost in whome both he and his Church doth remit sinnes The more plaine and more exact our master Christ was in the bestowing of that power to remit and retaine sinnes the more is our contempt in the disobedience and deniall thereof He sendeth them 〈◊〉 with his owne authoritie in this case he giueth them the verie spirit of God by whose diuine power they maie execute the function to which he called them he giueth them the expresse warrant of his owne word that sinnes they might pardon and punish and yet we make doubt of their vsurpation But how they might forgiue sinnes by Christes sending we haue alreadie said Now for the holie Ghostes power and prerogatiue in the same action which was breathed on the Apostles we must further conferre with such as call in question matters so plaine And first I am in goodhope that no man will denie but Christ gaue them the holie ghost for no other purpose so much as to remit sinnes Secondlie I doubt not of their faith and beliese in this point but they will confesse the holie ghost to be of power by nature and proprietie to forgiue sinnes Thirdlie I claime of their sinceritie thus much more that Christ being as well God as man was well able for the furniture of their calling to giue them the holie ghost all which being confessed of all men and denied of no Christian aline how the conclusion so beset with all
proofe on euerie side standeth not let the aduersaries tell me In the Apostles there can be no lack touching that officie for the execution whereof they receaued both Christes commission first and the holie spirit of God afterwarde In Christ there can be no default who was well able to giue and in deade did giue the holie ghost In the holie ghost there can be no let nor lacke whose power is infinie and his verie proprietie to remit sinnes All thinges then standing on so safe and sure groundes the giuer the gift and the receiuer competent and fullie answereable each to other on euerie side let the discontented ioyne in argument let him alledge why the Priests so authorized by Christ and so assured of the holie Ghost maie not either pardon or forgiue penance Neuer man auouched that he exercised the high action vpon his owne authoritie but that he maie not as a minister and seruant practize it vpon the warrant of Christ and present power of the holie Ghost that no faithfull person can affirme nor anie reasonable man stand in FVLKE The commission that our sauiour Christ receiued in his manhood to preach remission of sinnes was by him committed to his Apostles but in such ample manner as Christ had power to remit sinnes it is not prooued that Christ did communicate the same with his Apostles The visible signe of breathing by which our sauiour Christ testified that he did giue them the holie Ghost declareth that they were enabled with spirituall giftes to exercise their function the chiefe and principall end whereof was to pronounce in his name remission of sinnes to the beleeuers of the Gospell and condemnation to the contemners And this authoritie of the Apostles concerning the pardoning of our offences I know no man that denieth And therefore you spend vainlie the one halfe of your booke'in proouing that which no man doth denie namely that the Apostles and their lawful succesiours had and haue power by Christes graunt to remitte or to retaine sinnes The matters in question are these 1. Whither Popish Priestes be the lawful successours of the Apostles 2. What manner of power is this which is graunted and thirdly How it is to be exercised by Preaching the gospell or by Popish absolution and pardons For we denie your shauelings for the most part vnlearned to be the Priests or elders of the Church of god towhome this power is deriued from the Apostles we denie an absolute power to be graunted but a ministerie of testification and assurance of that which God onelie doth properlie and principallie Thirdly we deny that by Popish shrift absolution and pardons this power is to be exercised but by preaching of the Gospell whereunto are annexed the sacraments as seales of the doctrine These questions would haue beene directlie handled without such a tedious discourse to prooue confuselie the power that is graunted by Christ to his Apostles which is not denied but the kinde of power about which you wander vncertainly somtimes making it to be a meere ministery seruice vnder god the onelie worker therein sometime more then obscurelie insinuating that it is the verie same authoritie and none other but the same which Christ did exercise vpon earth and now hath committed it ouer or communicated it to Priestes as though he were bound to stand to their sentence in remitting or retaining sinnes or that they might remit as well as he and he must accept whatsoeuer they do in that case But seeing you wil not go directlie to worke we must follow you in your crooked path as well as we maie And for the first part of your conference where you are in good hope that no man wil deny but Christ gaue them the holy ghost for no other purpose so much as to remit sinnes I must say vnto you for my parte that forasmuch as remission of sinnes is the principall scope of preaching the Gospel they were indued with giftes of the holie ghost especially to call men to repentance forgiuenes of sinnes and to assure the repentant and beleeuers of the remission of sinnes by that authoritie and commission which they receaued of Christ. But if you meane that Christ gaue them the holie ghost for no other purpose so much as that they should heare mens shrift and giue them absolution in such forme of wordes as your Popish Priests do vse without preaching the gospell to them and setting forth the grace of god in Iesus Christ I denie that they receaued the holy ghost for any such purpose The other two partes I graunt but I know not what is your conclusion If you wil conclude that they haue power to remit sinnes I graunt it neither do I know anie man that denyeth it But if you meane to conclude thus because the holy Ghost which was giuen to the Apostles is of power by nature proprietie to forgiue sins therefore the Apostles did as properlie forgiue sins as god himselfe I denie your consequence And it seemeth you meane such a matter when you saie In the holie Ghost there can be no let nor lacke whose power is infinite and his verie propertie to remit sinnes which is verie true but yet it followeth not thereof that whosoeuer is endued with the holie Ghost hath infinite power and maie properlie remit sinnes For the holie Ghost is giuen in measure to all men not that his substance is diuisible that it maie be apportionated but that his gifts are distributed by him selfe in such measure as the wisdome of God seeth to be moste conuenient His essence is infinit and incomprehensible but he is said in Scripture to be present with them or in them on whome he bestoweth his graces and giftes Therefore I see not what consequence can be made of the holy ghostes infinit power and verie propertie to remit sins to conclude that the Apostles which receiued the holie Ghost rereiued infinite power or the verie propertie to remitre sinnes Where you will the discontented to ioyne in argument why the Priest so authorized by Christ and so assured of the holy Ghost may not either pardon or giue penance Thus I ioyne with you For remitting of sinnes I see authoritie but for giuing of penance none therefore I graunt the former and denie the latter For if by penance true repentance be vnderstood god onelie can giue repentance who onelie can turne the heart of man to feare him If you meane popish penance that is enioyning of satisfactorie works or punishment I denie that it is mentioned in the scriptures neither can it be contained in retaining of sinne Where you saie that neuer man aduouched that high action vpon his owne authoritie it is vntrue for Antichrist that lifteth him-selfe to be equall with God and Christ auoucheth vpon his owne authoritie although to cloke his manifest impietie that he might deceiue the simple he pretendeth the name authoritie of God Christ. But that the Apostles and their true successours by the
warrant of Christ his power receiued by the holy ghost maie as ministers seruants remit or retaine sins we do most willinglie consent and confesse But then they practise this power as seruants when they beinterpreters and declarers of the Lordes will and pleasure and require not that God should followe their sentence or attend how they be affected to forgiue or retaine and so to subscribe vnto their doing for that is an Antichristian vsurpation farre from the meaning of that power which Christ did graunt to his A postles ALLEN Some holie writers vpon this text of S. Iohn in which the order of Christes authorizing his Apostles for the remission of sinnes is described doe dispute of the difference of giuing the holie Ghost then to his Disciples and afterward on Whitsondaie some note the eternall ceremonie that our Master vsed when he gaue them the holie spirit which was by breathing on them that such outward actions might both be an euidence to them of that excellent gift which they inwardlie then receiued and should further be an euerlasting instruction to the Church that Gods grace and giftes be often ioyned to externall elements for the solace of our nature that delighteth to haue our outward man schooled as wel as the inward man nourished These and manie things moe be of profitable remembrance and consideration but not so much to our purpose Therefore let vs see whether the iudgement of the holie Fathers doe not wholie helpe our present cause prouing the Priests ministerie through the holie Ghostes authoritie that our declaration standing on the plaine wordes of scripture with their vndoubted sense maie obtaine inuincible force against the aduersaries worthie credit of the true beleeuers FVLKE If you had expressed what the writers are that thus dispute or discourse vpon this text we might better haue considred how pertinent or impertinent their opinions are to our matter in controuersie S. Chrysost. seemeth to allowe the opinion of some and Euthymius plainely affirmeth the same that the Apostles at this time did not presentlie receiue the holie ghost but onelie were prepared or made capable thereof which if it were true is contrarie to the title of your Chapter I like better of Cyrillus iudgement which thinketh they presentlie receiued the holie Ghost in some measure but not so plentifullie nor with such diuersitie of giftes as on the daie of Pentecost That the grace of God is testified assured and sealed vp vnto vs for the help of our infirmitie by outward signes and externall elementes ioined thereto we know confesse but as for the solace of our nature or delight to haue our outward man schooled I knowe not what they meane It is great mercie of God to beare with our weakenes but it agreeth not with the discipline of the Gospell that we should delight in outward thinges but rather to exercise our faith in spirituall and heauenlie meditations ALLEN We will make our entrance first with Saint Cyrill whoe debating with himselfe vppon the incomparable authoritie and power giuen to the Apostles for remission of sinnes standeth first as in contention with him selfe and with Christs words how it maie be that they being but men should forgiue the sinnes of our soules being sure of this that it is the propertie onelie of the true liuing god to assoile vs of our sinnes against whom onlie all sins be properlie committed And therfore being not of stomake as men be now a daies to denie that which Christes words so plainelie do import he made answere that the Apostles were in deed deified and made as you would saie partakers of Gods nature to worke Gods owne office in the world Qua igitur ratione saieth he diuinae naturae dignitatem ac potestatem discipulis suis saluator largitus est Quia certè absurdum non est peccata remitti posse ab illis qui Spiritum sanctum in seipsis habeant Nam cùm ipsi remmittunt aut detinent spiritus qui habitat in eis remittit detines By what meanes did our Sauiour giue vnto the Apostles the preheminence and power of Gods owne nature Surelie because it agreeth verie well that they should rimit mans sins that haue in themselues the holie Ghost For when they assoile or retaine sins it is the holie spirit that dwelleth in them which by their ministery doth remit or retaine sins Thus he I maruell not now whie this same father termeth the Apostles sometimes protectores curatores animarum corporum the protectors curers both of bodies soules it is not strange whie S. Ambrose should call the order of priestood Ordinem 〈◊〉 Neither that he should terme Officium Sacerdotis munus S. S. The Priests office to be the function of the holie Ghost No I doe not wonder at some of our forefathers that in the admiration of Gods Maiestic which they same to be so present in the execution of so high in office they did simplie and plainely terme the principall Pastours of the Church halfe Gods and not meere men not hauing respect to their persons which be compassed with infirmities as other the sinfull sort of people in the world be but casting eie vpward to the holie and excellent function which they practised by the spirit of God which dwelleth in them and deifieth their persons to make them of habilitie to exercise the workes of God FVLKE Saint Cyrill is farre from that blasphemie to saie that the Apostles were in deede deified and made partakers of Gods nature to worke Gods owne office in the world For ascribing to God that which is proper to him incommunicable to anie meere creature he maketh this obiection how our sauiour did graunt to his disciples the dignitie power of his diuine nature answereth that they were only made ministers instruments of the holy ghost to expresse his power in remitting sinnes by baptisme and repentance whereof S. Chrysostome also saieth vpon the same text that the Priest giueth onelie his tongue and his hand but the Father the sonne and the holie Ghost doth all things in this case I will rehearse the whole saying of Cyrillus that his iudgement maie more fullie appeare vpon this text Et certè solius veri Dei est c. And suerlie it pertaineth to the onelie true God that he is able to loose men from their sinnes For to what other person is it lawfull to deliuer the transgressors of the law from sinne but to the author of the law him-selfe for so in mennes affaires we see it to be done For no man without punishment doth reprooue the lawes of Kings but the Kinges them-selues in whome the crime of transgression hath no place For it is wiselie said that he is implous which shall saie to a King thou doest vniustlie By what meanes then did our Sauiour graunt to his disciples the dignitie and power of the diuine nature because trulie it is not absurde that sinnes may be remitted
by them which haue the holie ghost in them-selues For when they remit or retaine the spirit which dwelleth in them remitteth or retaineth by them And that shal be by them as I thinke by two meanes first by baptisme and then by repeatence for either they induce men that beleeve and are approoued for holines of life vnto baptisme and diligentlie expill from them that are vnworthie or where the children of the Church doe offend they rebuke them indeede and pardon them that repent As Paul did once commit the fornicator among the Corinthians vnto the destruction of his flesh that his spirit might be saued and receiued him againe lest he should be drowned with greater sorrowe Therefore when the spirit of Christ dwelling in men performeth the worke of the true God how shall he not be God by nature which naturallie possesseth the power and dignitie of the diuine nature when he hath so excellent authority vpon the lawe of God This last argument of Saint Cyrill by which he prooueth against the Macidonian heretikes that the holie Ghost is verie God declareth that he neuer meant to deifie Priests with the same authority that is proper to god by which it should follow that the holie Ghost were not God if men had that authority of remitting sin that god hath wherefore it followeth that men are onely instruments by which the holie ghost speaketh declareth his own will of remission of sins not that the holie Ghost is subiect to the Censure of man which were intollerable blasphemie And therefore if the same father did anie where cal the ministers of the Church protectours an̄d curers both of bodies and soules it cannot be drawne to anie such meaning as though they were in deede deified and made as you would saie partakers of Gods nature to worke Gods owne office in the world but the ministers of God appointed to serue for the eternall saluation of the Elect both in bodie and soule Their order is diuine and they exercise the office of the holie ghost as S. Ambrose saith but yet so that nothing is communicated vnto man that is proper to God Who they were that did simplie and plainlie tearme the principall Pastours of the Church halfe gods not meere men you do not expresse perhaps you meane the Author of that blasphemous verse writen to the the Pope and by him not refused Nec Deus es nec homo quasi neuter es inter vtrumque Thou art neither god nor man but a neuter between both I finde in the scripture that ciuil princes are called not halfe Gods but whole Gods because they execute some parte of Gods authoritie among men Yet he that shall saie their persons̄ are therebie deified might well be accounted a most blaspemous flatterer We may now see out of what pudle the toades of the familie of Loue are crept that vpon pretence of the spirit of god dwelling in men moste blasphemouslie affirme that it deifieth their persons to make them of abilitie to exercise the workes of God whereas the power of remitting of sinnes is graunted euen to wicked Priestes in which the holie Ghost dwelleth not although he hath bestowed his giftes vpon them to make them sufficient in knowledge and vtterance to preach the gospell ALLEN But Saint Ambrose helpeth our matter with a long discourse all I will not now reporte for the present purpose thus he saith disputing against the Nouarians for the assertion of Priestly dignitie in assoyling our sinnes Qui Spiritum sanctum accipit sic enim scriptum est Accipite spiritum sanctum quorum remiseritis peccata remittuntur eis quorum retinueritis retenta sunt Ergo qui soluere peccatum non potest non habet Spiritum sanctum Munus spiritus sancti est officium sacerdotis ius autem spiritus sancti in soluendis ligandis que criminib est He thatreceiueth the holy ghost his meaning is in the taking of orders receiueth therewith the power to binde and loose For so is it written Receiue you the holie Ghost whose sinnes you doe forgiue they are forgiuen them whose sinnes you doe reseine they are reteined Therefore they which cannot forgiue mens offences they haue not the holie ghost that is to saie they haue not the gift of the holie Ghost which is giuen to the officers for their execution of their function in Christes behalfe for the gift of the holie Ghost is the office of the priest and proper right of remission of sinnes standeth in the holie Ghost Thus wrote Saint Ambrose against the heretikes of his time and both toucheth and ouer ouercommeth all the falsehoode of our daies against the minesterie of man which so ioyneth Gods spirit in all these diuine functions that it cannot without blasphemie and special contempt of God be contemned FVLKE S. Ambr. helpeth your matter neuera whit if you be not content with a mynistery a seruise a power subiect to the wil of God But you wil be halfe gods and more then men you wil haue your persons deified you wil be able to exercise the proper works of God For S. Ambr. reasoneth against the Nouatians which would take vpō them to binde them that were fallen but would not loose them nor receue them againe into the Church vpon their repētance signifying that the power of the one is as wel graunted to the Church as of the other that it was as proper to God to reteine sinnes as it was to forgiue them so that if they renounced the one they must renounce the other also by the same reason for it is the proper right of the holie ghost to doe the one as well as the other And the Nouatian heretikes were found transgressours of Gods commaundement who willeth the repentant to be loosed as well as the obstinate offender to be bound Ambrose therefore sayeth nothing for the deifying of mens persons but for the executing of gods commaundement of mercy as well as of iustice ALLEN But I remember Saint Augustine the Churches great Captaine against her aduersaries of those daies did euer in disputation against the Pelagians and other like enemies of faith make the greatest accoumpt of victorie and their ouerthrow when they were driuen to denie that which euer before had beene not onelie acknowledged of all men for trueth but also had beene vsed as a graunted trueth ground and principle for the notable euidence thereof to the impugning of other falsehoodes For there can be no doubt but that which our holie Fathers did vse without controlling and contradiction euen of their aduersaries to impugne their aduersaries withall there is no doubt but that it hath in it selfe exceeding much light and force of trueth as a thing hauing so litle neede of proofe that it may be made and taken for a probation of other matters that be doubtefull and vncertaine The matter which we haue now in hand is of that sort For the authoritie and power practized of priests in the
holie ghost was God by whose authoritie and proper power they did alwaies since Christs word was spoken remitte the same The which beeing true as it cannot be false that is so agreeable both to scriptures and to all our fathers faith the heresy of our time must needes directly impugne the vertue and power of Gods owne spirit For as the proofe of mans ministerie in this foresaid function induceth the true and euerlasting Godhead of the holy ghost by whome they practize that power so the denial thereof and robberie of priesthoode of this their moste iust claime doth directlie spoile God of his honour and of the euerlasting right that he hath in remission of sinnes So whiles these goodmen seeke to abase man vniustlie they blaspheme God highlie and together with mans ministerie they bring vnto vtter contempt Gods owne authoritie FVLKE Your deifying of popish priests doth altogether weaken the force of that argument which our fathers vsed against the auncient heretikes to prooue the diuinitie of the holie Ghost For it were an easie matter for Eunomius Macedonius or anie other heretike that was against his godhead to replie that by ministerie of God the holie Ghost might as properlie forgiue sinnes as Priestes do by the ministerie of Christ and of the holie ghost yea so farre forth as thereby they are made halfe Gods yea deified and made Gods in deede But you vtter repugnancie when you saie that by Gods authoritie and proper power Priestes do forgiue sinnes Where you make it not proper to God which is common to others with him Therefore you should speake more properlie to saie that God the holy ghost by his owne authoritie and power proper to the deitie doth forgiue sinnes in their ministery men thereto authorized do no more in proper speach and sense but testifie and declare what God doth for which declaration and testification seeing they are the embassadours and messengers of God vnto the world to declare his pleasure of reconciliation or condemnation they are said to forgiue sinnes or to retaine them which they do not properlie but pronounce the sentence of God concerning the remission or retention of mens sinnes And that this was the meaning of the Auncient fathers concerning the authoritie and power of Gods ministers it is moste manifest by this argument whereby they choke the enuier of the holie ghostes diuinitie from which you cutte of all the sinnewes and force it hath to prooue it when you communicate to men that which is proper to God and aduance men aboue the nature of meere men when you deifie their persons by meanes of the giftes of the holie Ghost giuen to them and make them of abilitie to exercise the proper workes of God As for the deniall and robberie that you ascribe I can not tell to what heretikes of this time we detest as much as ye not seeking to abase man beneath the nature and condition of man norseeking to extoll him by robbing God of his glorie and proper effects to magnifie menne to deifie the persoas of men as you do in plaine termes Whereby it is manifest we are as far from blaspheming god or making mans ministerie contemptible which he exerciseth in the name of God as you are from sobrietie thus to iudge if your meaning be of vs or thus to reason if you would defend the argument of the auncient fathers against the auncient heretikes ALLEN But for the readersease and more light of our cause I ioyne thus in argument with them againe vpon the second part of Christes owne wordes and action had in the authorizing of his Apostles Whatsoeuer the holie Ghost maie doe in this case by the proper power of his Godhead that may the Apostles and Priestcs do by seruice and ministerie through the power of the holie Ghost But the holie Ghost properlie and rightlie doth remit sinnes Therefore the Apostles doe rightlie remit sinnes by their ministerie in the said holie Ghost All partes of this conclusion stand vpright and feare no falsehood they be guarded on euerie side by Christes action by wordes of scripture by the Doctors plain warrant and by all reason With all which whosoeuer is not contented but will needes extinguere spiritum extinguish Gods spirit and violentlie take from the Church the greatest comfort of all mans life that in this infirmitie of our flesh standeth in moste hope by his gift in remission of sinnes for which especiall cause the said spirit was mercifullie breathed vpon the Apostles peculiarly before the mare common sending of the same from heauen aboue If all this reason and iust demonstration of trueth will not serue them I will charge them with this graue conclusion of S. Augustine vttered partlie against the Nouatians especallie against the desperate that would not seeke for Gods mercie by the Churches ministerie in the sacrament of penance To be briefe I will speake it in English Whosoeuer he be that beleeueth no mans sinnes to be remitted in Gods Church and therefore despiseth the bountifulnes of God inso mightie a worke if he in that obstinate minde continue til his liues end he is guiltie of sinne against the holie Ghost in which holy ghost Christ remitteth sinnes FVLKE I doe greatlie commend you that you haue such regard of the readers ease and it seemeth you haue good confidence of your cause that you flie not the light of Logicall iudgement by which the trueth shall more plainelie appeere to all sortes of men then by anie discourses at large vnder which many great errors may be often couered vnder sophistical cloudes ambiguity of words which in a briefe syllogisme is soone and easilie espied To answere your argument therefore First I distinguish of your Maior for if you meane by seruice and ministerie the expressing and declaring of the will and pleasure of the holy ghost wherunto they are authorized I acknowledge your Maior proposition to be true whatsoeuer the holie Ghost maie doe in this case by the proper power of his godhead that maie the Apostles and Priestes doe by seruice ministerie through the power of the holie Ghost But if you meane by seruice and ministerie that the proper power of God is communicated to men I denie your Maior as false and absurde For the Apostles and Priests maie not by seruice and ministerie through the power of the holie Ghost forgiue sinnes properlie which the holie ghost by proper power of his godhead may doe for this is a proper power not com municable vnto any creature but a declaration of the will of him that hath such power is the ministeriall authoritie by which men forgiue sinnes Secondlie I answere that your conclusion is deceitfull For your Minor Extreame or Assumption is not perfectlie ioyned with your Maior or Proposition in the conclusion For your Minor is that the holie ghost properly rightlie doth remit sinnes So your conclusion should be therefore the Apostles properlie and rightlie doe remit sinnes by their ministerie
shall accept him for their Father and mercisull redemer ALLEN There were some of olde that droue the mysteries of Christs incarnation and speaches that prooue his equalitie with his Father in Godhead to figuratiue phrases and sought for the defence of their folie the like phrases in other of Christes talkes but neuer none were comparable in this kinde to our new deuisers For by the face and crake of gods word they haue brought to passe amongst fooles that no one text of scripture which pertaineth to anie of the Sacramentes can haue his meaning and such sense as the the verie word beareth and the world hath euer taken and confirued of it The blessed and moste soueraigne sacrament of the altar instituted in a solemne action in moste carefull manner amongst his moste secret seruants the last almoste of all his workes in earth in moste euident tearmes with sore charge giuen to the Apostles of the continuance of his euerlasting memorie in the same yet must meane nothing lesse then that which our Master made it and must by a thousand figures be wrasted and writhen to what you list like so that is be not to importe that which our Master said it did and the Church hath euer beleeued of the same Wordes of the like solemnitie were vsed for the ordering of the holie vse of Baptisme to be done as the worde doth also import necessarilie in the externall element of water with certaine most holie prescribed wordes vnder paine and perill of euerlasting perishing to the neglecters thereof yet in such plainnes figures are found out by these pernicious conueiers that neither water is counted so much necessary nor the wordes of such strength but that one of these malapert fellowes was bolde to write that it was much superstition to binde the Church to the same as to the prescribed wordes of art Magike sorcerie and witchcrafie Of the honourable act and sacrament of extream vnction what can be said with more euidence of wordes then is spoken of the holie Apostle Saint Iames If any man be sicke amongst you let him cal for the Priests of the Church and let them annoynt him with oile and yet so litle matter these men make of the Apostles spirit word and writing that they haue condemned the whole vse thereof as superstitious not helping them-selues by figures but by openforce Grace is giuen to Timothie as in a sacrament when he toke orders of Paull the Apostle saith so much in expresse tearmes yet this grace and the whole sacrament of orders these holie men reiect Matrimonie to S. Paule is a great sacrament and of our ministers not misliked so faire as concerneth their fleshlie coniunction which they onelie lust after but grace they list not receiue thereby lest it should be a sacrament whereby the vnitie of Christ and his spouse the Church which in no sauce they can abide might be fullie represented and signified FVLKE It is one thing ro drawe violentlie al things expressed in the scriptures vnto alligories other figuratiue speaches an other thing not to acknowledge any figures which yet be so vsuall in the institution of sacramēts The face crake of gods word with the sequele thereof that you speake of so long as it resteth vpon your owne cracked credit shal be litle regarded by any wise man But to examine the examples you bring to iustifie your saying first you begin with the Lords supper where you saie it was instituted in most euident tearmes Wherebie you meane termes properlie vsed and without figure as though you had forgotten the wordes of our sauiour Christ perteining to the institution of the cuppe This cup is the new testament in my blood Luk. 22. 1. Cor. 11. Where I maruell whether you haue the face to saie the wordes are not figuratiue which he vsed or whether you will saie the Euangelist and Apostle did expresse the words of Christ in more obscure tearmes then he spake them or whether there be not the same sense of these figuratiue wordes This cup is the new testament in my blood and those other reported by the other Euangelists This is my blood In saying we wold haue the words of our Sauiour Christ meane nothing lesse then the sacrament that he made it you slaunder vs without measure or cause For we would haue the words of our Sauiour meane nothing more nor lesse but euen altogether as much as our sauiour Christ did meane to teach vs by them And the hyperbolic all lie of a thousand figures by which we should wrest them may in respect of greater number of figures you make in your grosse and carnall exposition be iustified of you rather then of vs whose interpretation maketh but one figure and one meaning and that warranted by the wordes of diuerse of the most auncient and Catholike Doctors In the sacrament of baptisme who make the external element of water more necessary to be vsed they that re quire water for the vse thereof or els require that the external elemét be forborne rather then that it should be chaunged into wine milke broth or any othre more vile licour of which kinde of questions other mostrous cases your treatises of the sacraméts are ful What Brentius hath written I haue not to do to answer yet it seemeth that the words of Brentius are wrested of you to another meaning rather then that he would haue them either altered or the sense of them not reteined Wherein for any thing that I can see he varieth not from the iudgement of your Master of the sentences al sententionaries which allow baptisme ministred in the name of Christ to be as good as in the name of the blessed trinitie lib. 4. distinct 3. Of extreame vnction we finde nothing in Saint Iames but of a ceremonie of annointing with oyle ioyned with the gift of healing vsed in the primitiue Church but not to be drawne into example of them that confesse they are void of that mirarulous gift The vse of which ceremonie without the gift whereunto it was annexed without any force or figure we may be bolde to condemne as superstitious The grace that was giuen to Timothie and the order of the Ecclesiasticall ministerie distinct from the common people we acknowledge and reteine But that any gift of prophesie or of any other grace is dispensed by imposition of the handes of the presbyterie in these daies as it was in the Apostles time we cannot acknowledge before we see it for he that was voide of all spirituall giftes before his taking of orders remaineth as verie an asse among you as he was before Seeing matrimonie was instituted in paradise before the fall of man we cannot accoumpt it a sacrament of the new testament by which we are assured of grace in the forgiuenes of sinnes and yet we doe howsoeuer it pleaseth you to raile vpon our ministers acknowledge that great and excellent mysterie of the spirituall vnitie
gratia gratum faciens such a grace as maketh a man acceptable to God Therefore the holie Ghost breathed vpon the Apostles then by Christ and giuen yet to Priests in their ordering by Bishopes is a gift of God and a grace of the holy ghost not whereby man is made rertuous or cunning or happie before God but it is a gift onelie of God whereby man is called aboue his owne nature and dignitie to haue power and authoritie to doe and exercise anie function in Gods Church to the spirituall benefit of the people which is not onelie not alwaies ioyned to vertue and holie knowledge but it full often by calling due to them which are moste wicked persons without anie impaire of their authoritie And these kinde of giftes and graces of the holie Ghost be called gratiae gratis datae certaine giftes giuen to men for no desertes of their persons but freelie for the vse of other men to whome they be beneficiall euen there where they be hurtfull to the bestowers In which sense Saint Paule numbreth a great sorte in the fourth to the Ephesians and the first Epistle to the Corinshians and he calleth them not onelie the graces of the spirite but also the diuisions of functions and ministrations as the gift of working of miracles the gift of tongues the gift of prophecying the gift of preaching and so foorth all which being the giftes and graces of the spirit for the Churches edifying and of Saint Peter being called the holy Ghost in the Actes yet they were giuen to euill men often as well as to good without all imparing of Gods honoure yea with the great encrease of God glorie that euen by the wicked is able to worke his wil and holie purpose for the benefit of his Elect. And in this sense the spirite of God breathed vpon the Apostles was a gift of the holie Ghost whereby man should remit by lawfull power the sinnes of the people Whereupon Theophilact sayeth that Potestatem quandam donum spirituale dedit Apostolis vs remittant peccata ostendens quod genus spiritualium donorum eis dederit inquit quorum remiser it is peccata remittuntur eis that is to saie Christ gaue to his Apostles a certaine power and spirituall gift whereby they might remit sins for he shewed what power of the spirit it was that breathed on them when he said whose sinnes you doe for giue they be forgiuen Whosoeuer shall vndoubtedlie remit sinnes and absolue sinners must haue the same gift of the holie Ghost which the Apostles had whereby he cannot erre And this gift no man denieth but it maie be in a wicked and vngodlie man For euen such an one may preach the doctrine of Christ of remission of sinnes publikelie and priuatlie if he haue the calling that is required to that office Neither doth Caluine or any other that are of his iudgement otherwise require the like force of the holie ghostes assistance in al men that take vpon them to remit sinnes For there is not onelie a power but a knowledge required in him that shall assuredlie and vndoubtedlie forgiue sinnes And therefore the papistes doe vnreasonably make a diuorse of the keie of power from the keie of knowledge which power if it be no guided by knowledge doth nothing but insteade of opening and shutting with the keies committed to the Church throw forth the keies as the blinde man casteth his staffe which cannot happen so right in to the locke that they should open it to the penitent sinners For it is not the Priestes authoritie that can open the dore of comforte to a sinners conscience except he can declare vnto him out of the word of God how and by what meanes he maie be reconciled vnto God That the holie Ghost is giuen by Bishopes to Priestes in their ordering it is more boldlie affirmed then euer it can be prooued for Christ onelie hath authoritie to giue the holy Ghost and therefore to declare that it commeth from him alone among men he breathed vpon his Apostles which though the Bishops doe vntill their longues ake yet can they not furnish their parties by them ordered with giftes meet for their calling as Christ did his Apostles They must make choise therefore according to the Doctrine of the Apostle of those that haue those gratious and necessarie giftes of God before and to them they must commit the power and authoritie to exercise the same to the publike benefice of the Church But if they wil giue authoritie to them that haue no wisdome to exercise the same they make the most foolish iudges of all the world and such are worthelie contemned Therefore howsoeuer you distinguish grace you must not seeke to winne credit to them which haue nothing but pretense of authoritie when they be voide of all vnderstanding how to vse it as manie hundreds yea thousandes of your hedge Priests are if their calling were neuer so good as it is moste corrupt and vnlawfull ALLEN If our aduersaries be ignorant of these thinges which be so common in schooles of diuinitie yet we think they should remember that Saint Paul did not dissalow the authoritie nor power of preaching in such as were euil men and taught for emulation and not of sincere zeale of the Gospell and that Christ him-selfe stopped not such as cast out deuilles in his name and therefore were not without the gifte of workeing miracles though he professed that manie of them at the date of iudgement challenging some right of heauen vpou that acte should not be receiued to glory how the gift of prophecy was common in the olde 〈◊〉 not onelie to the wicked but to such as willinglie would deceiue the people And Caiphas he prophecied by the spirit of God as by force of his office being yet in purpose to worke wickednes against Christ himselfe for whose trueth he then by force of the spirit prophecied But of the Sacramentes of Gods Church euerie one that they may beministred beneficiallie to the receiuing in much wickednes of the giuer there is no man can be ignorant For it is a rule and a principle moste certaine that God worketh his will in them by the ministerie of men be they neuer so euill For elle they were mans sacraments and not Gods and we could not be certaine neither of our baptisme neither of right receiuing of Christes bodie in the holie sacrament of his eultar nor of any other spirituall benefit that we now by mans ministery receiue in the Church Much cōsort it were for al Christian people to hauesuch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then soules and such disposers of Gods mysteries as would could in all sinceritie and faithfulnes worke Gods 〈◊〉 and that would alwaies vse the high power giuen them to 〈◊〉 and neuer to destroie and that they would so doe both S. Peter and S. Paule doe often exhort them But neither the miserie of mans sinsull nature can suffer that nor our wickednes can
sentence of priests but the life of the parties accused in iudgement is enquired of We reade in Leuit. of the Lepers where they are commaunded to shew themselues vnto the priests and if they haue the Leprosie then they are made vncleane by the prieste Not that the priests doe make men Lepers and vncleane but for that they haue knowledge of a Leper and of him that is no Leper can discerne who is cleane who is vncleane Therefore looke how priest doth there make a Leper cleane or vncleane so here doth a Bishop or priest binde or loose not them that are vnguiltie or guilty but according to his office when he hath heard the variety of sinners he knoweth who is to be bound or who is to be loosed In this saying of S. Ierome diuerse things are to be considered First that the gift of the keies the power of binding loosing graunted to Peter by his iudgement and al mens in his time peiteineth to euerie Bishoppe elder or priest of Gods Church Secondlie that God onelie doth properlie and absolutelie forgiue sinnes and thirdlie that the priests sentence vpon earth is but declaratorie vpon his knowledge of the offendours of Gods sentence as the priests authoritie to make a Leper cleane or vncleane was onelie vpon certaine knowledge to pronounce that which God had wrought vpon him to his punishment or deliuerance and according thereunto either to seperate him or to receiue him into the congregation That penance in those daies was giuen greater then the fault required you finde not in Saint Ierome either in the one place or in the other that you quote Onelie in the later vpon the text of Mat. 23. which you cite of importable burthens he saieth Hoc generaliter aduersus omnes magistros qui grauiaiubent minora non faciunt This is spoken generallie against all such Masters as commaund burthenous things and them-selues doe not lesser thinges So that you would seeme to auoide Saint Ieromes iudgement vpon a false surmise For Saint lerome findeth as much fault with the prelates of his time for loosing them that are guiltie as for binding them that are innocent The contempt of your priests which you lament is both for there ignorance vnlawfull calling Whereas you assure them of the keie of remission and reteining of sinnes to be giuen them by God in their orders and then you send them to obteine discretion knowledge vertue with other qualities meete to exercise that office by praier and industrie you take a wrong course and contrarie to that which the Apostle prescribeth for he will haue men first to be tried and then to minister They must first by praier and other ordinarie meanes seeke to be fit for their office afterwarde lawfully be admitted thereto But where this order is peruerted they may haue calling and admission by men but I see not how they can haue power and approbation of God And therefore Saint Ieromes sentence standing your conclusion of the fruite of an ignorant priests absolution is nothing worth though there were no doubt of his calling ALLEN For this I dare be bolde to saie that the lacke of the appointed fruite of any sacrament ariseth a thousand times oftner by the vnworthines of the subiect and him that receiueth the sacrament then vpon any lacke of the giuer and minister thereof and namelie in this sacrament of the Churches discipline it chaunceth more often For as Saint Basil saith Potestas remittendi peccata non est absolutè data sed in recipientis obedientia in consensu cum eo qui animae ipsius curam gerit sita est The power of remitting sinnes is not absolutelie without condition giuen but it standeth in the obedience of the penitent and in his agreement with him that hath the charge of his soul. Therefore for Christs loue let vs cast perill oftner of our owne case then vpon other mens states for we are not so assured of the holie spirit or his grace to qualifie vs for the worthie receiuing as they are out of doubt for the right power of ministerie And to conclude against Caluin and all other that thinke the power of priestes either to be lesse for lacke of good life or want of much learning I alledge Saint Cyprian thus Remissio peccatorum per baptismum siue per alia sacramenta donetur propriè spiritus sancti est ipsi soli huius efficientiae priuilegium manet Thus in English Remission of sinnes whether it be by baptisme or by other sacraments giuen it properlie perteineth to the holie ghost and the preheminence of the foreceable effect is onelie his the solemnitie of wordes the inuocation of Gods name and the externall signes prescribed to the priests ministeries by the Apostles to make vp the visible sacrament but the thing it selfe and effect of the sacrament the holie ghost worketh and the author of all goodnesse putteth his hand inuisible to the externall and visible consecration of the priests So saith Saint Cyprian and maketh a farre long discourse how the diuersitie of the ministers desertes doe nothing alter the sacraments or the effect thereof but beeing a like to all receiuers of fit capacitie and condition by whomesoeuer they be serued and dispensed with iustice authoritie and calling thereunto The Baptisine of Iudas Iscarioth was no worsse then Simon Peters For S. Peter saith Connumeratus erat in nobis sortitus est sortem ministerij huius He was counted as one of our number had the lotte of the ministerie Nor the ministerie of Nicolas of lesse acceptation in it selfe then the function of Stephen being men of one office but of unlike deseruings The prophesie of Esate no more true then the prophesie of Caiphas nor the prophesie of Balaam lesse true then the prophesie of Baruc. If we were either absolued or baptized in the name of Peter and Paull or Iudas or Apollo then we might bragge who were best baptized or sureliest loosed from sinne and euery one might so either crake or be ashamed of his minister whereof Saint Paull earnestly checked the Corinthians But now euery one beeing both baptized and loosed and houseled and annointed and honoured in all other spirituall acts in no other name but in the name of Iesus his father euerlasting and the holie ghost proceeding from them both all must needes receiue the like benefite that be like qualified thereunto of whome soeuer the office is exercised if he be lawfullie called that is to saie haue by the handes of priesthood receiued the gift and grace of the holie ghost for his lawfull authorizing in that case the which gift of the holy Ghost being the selfe same that the Apostles receiued of Christ for the like functions continueth with them still though their life and desertes be neuer so euill and their ignorance neuer so much yea though they be by inst occasion as for heresie schisme or notorious life through the Censures of
the Church imbaryed from the vse and exercise of that office of remitting sinnes and such other the like spirituall functions FVLKE That the lacke of the fruit of any sacrament is most commmonlie in the receiuer rather then in the insufficiencie of the minister it prooueth that the minister doth not properlie giue the effect of the sacraments but the outwarde seales thereof as Saint Iohn Baptist doth moste wiselie distinguish them saying I baptize with water but he that commeth after me shall baptize with the holie ghost and with fire Saint Basill in the place by you quoted saying that the power of remitting of sinnes is not giuen absolutelie but in the obedience of him that repenteth c. declareth what manner of power this is contrarie to that you haue hetherto for the moste part maintained As also that he sayeth within few wordes after that the new testament doth promise remission of all sinnes to them that worthely repent he concludeth plainlie against your long discourse wherin you would haue it seeme as though the priest had absolute power of remitting and not an authoritie of declaring the sentence of God concerning such And Saint Cyprian or whoesoeuer is author of that worke De cardinalibus Christi operibus confirmeth that which I saide that the minister doth not properlie giue the effects of the sacrament but onelie the outwarde seales thereof as Iohn Baptist doth testifie His whol sentence I will repeate because you haue not so fullie set it downe not so truelie translated it Veniebat Christus ad Baptismum non egens lauacro in quo peccatum non erat sed vt sacramento perennis daretur autoritas tanti virtutem operis nulla personarum acceptio commendaret quoniam remissio peccaterum siue per Baptismum siue per alia sacramenta donetur propriè spiritus sancti est vt ipsi soli huius efficientiae priuilegium mancat Verborum solennitas sacri inuocatio nominis signa institutionibus Apostolicis sacerdotum ministerits attributa visibile celebrant sacramentum rem verò ipsam spiritus sanctus format efficit consecrationibus visibilibus inuisibiliter manum totius bonitatis author apponit plenitudinem gratiae vnctionis diuinae pinguedo sanctificationibus officialibus infundit remsacramenti consummat persicit Christe came to Baptisme not wanting that 〈◊〉 as he that was free from sinne but that perpetuall authoritie might be giuen to the sacrament and that no respect of persous might commend the vertue of so great a worke because remission of sinnes whether it be giuen by Baptisme or by other sacraments is properlie the holie ghostes and to him alone the priuiledge of this essectuall workeing remaineth The solemnitie of wordes and the inuocation of the holy name and the signes appointed for the ministery of the Preists by the Apostles doctrine and instruction doe celebrate the visible sacrament but the thing it selfe the holie ghost formeth and worketh and the author of all goodnes doth inuisiblie put his hande to the visible consecrations and the fatnes of the diuine vnction doth power the fullnes of grace into the ministeriall sanctifications and doth make consummate or make perfect the matter of the sacrament That the ministers desertes doth nothing alter the sacramentes or the effect of them it is no controuersie betweene vs howsoeuer you would make the ignorant beleeue that Caluine is of another opinion wherein his writings are moste manifest to the contrarie Where you approoued him that is lawfullie called to haue receaued the gift and grace of the holie Ghost which is the selfe same that the Apostles receaued of Christ for the like functions you take too much vpon you for the ordinarie and externall calling to exercise an outwarde ministerie where of Cyprian discourseth may be without receauing of the holie Ghoste Againe no man hath authoritie to giue the holie Ghost in ordaining more then in Baptisme or anie other parte of the ministerie of the Gospell Thirdlie where you require lawfull calling and ordaining in the minister of the sacrament that the receiuer being rightlie qualified maie obtaine like benefit of whomsoeuer the office is exercised you exclude lay men and women from ministring of the sacrament of Baptisme which your doctrine doth admitte Finallie where you assure the minister of the continuance of his authoritie by that gift of the holie Ghost be his life and desertes neuer so euill you saie verie much For what if he be an Idolater a persecutor of Christians or degenerated into Mahometisme wil you say his gift and authoritie doth still continue nay you saie it continueth though he be neuer so ignorant Then if he be a naturall foole or a mad man or one void of all Christian knowledge either when he was ordained or fallen since into such extremitie of ignorance yet by your rule he retaineth his gift Nay if he be for heresie schisme or notorious euill life lawfullie embarred from the vse and exercise of remitting sinnes and other like spirituall functions yet his gift of the holie Ghost continueth still with him This is in deede an indeleble character that is imprinted so deepe that nothing can scrape it awaie except perhappes a glasse or knife in degradation For as I take it you meane of him that is onely suspended from his office as though the practize onelie and not the authoritie for a time might be taken from him But to make an end of this matter I turne Caluins reason against him selfe He and his flocke be of that fond and blinde iudgment that the whole text of the twentith of S. Iohn wherin Christ giueth authoritie to the Apstoles to remit sinnes is meant onelie of preaching the Gospell for which function Christ gaue them the holie Ghost Now sir vpon this I vrge him with his owne reason I ask him first whether the ministers that by him cresent to preach the word of the holie ghost as for example Beza that he sent into Fraunce first or Richerus whome he sent to Coligninia or Hermam that came by the holie Ghostes sending vnto Flaunders Brabant had these the holie ghost or no If they saie yea as I think they will they be so bolde in an other mans house then demaund of them further whether the said spirit maie erre If they saie no as possiblie they will then conclude against them thus The holie Ghost can not erre ergo you haue not the holie Ghost and consequentlie you haue then no better right in preaching then poore Priestes haue in remitting or absoluing Therefore I leaue Caluine wrestling with his owne shadow and will follow on my purpose and course of matter which I haue in hande FVLKE Now we shall heare how cunninglie you can turne Caluins reason againste him selfe First you saie he and his flock be of that fond and blinde iudgement that the wholl text wherein Christ geueth authoritie to his Apostles to remit sinnes is meant onelie of Preaching the Gospell for which function
contrarie doings may be What Epiphanius writeth of his heresie and Saint Ambrose confuted the same is shewed before as also how truelie Caluine is charged to iumpe with Nouatus in denying repentance after Baptisme because he calleth baptisme the sacrament of repentance as before him the auncient writers vsed accustomablie whereof you maie reade in his institution the place before mentioned ALLEN Mary long before that his fall to heresie S. Cornelius writein that he was possessed in his youth with an euill spirit for which he had to do great while with coniurers that he lacked all the holie solemnitie of Baptisme and confirmation and consequentlie the Spirit of God which by them he should haue receiued and therefore tooke orders against the law vpon sinister fauour and afterward by vnlawfull artes attempted to get abishopricke with great othes protesting that he would not be a Bishop if he might But when indeede he could not attaine to that holie dignitie which he so inwardlie and intollerablie gaped for he fell in despite of Gods Church to heresie that he might get that without order whch he could not obtaine in the right manner of the Churches making And for that purpose he procured three base Bishops out of a straunge and remote part of Italie who neither knew the case the man nor his manners and them through ignorance he beguiled and by force caused them to consecrate him Bishop by the colour whereof for true imposition of hands was it none sodenlie he appeareth as a new creature a Bishop of a strange stamp apparuit Episcopus velut nouum Plasma saith Cornelius And for this attempt one of the poore Bishops did great penance the other two were deposed In the meane time this mocke Bishop vendicabat sibi euangelium challenged the word of the Lord for him-selfe denied him-selfe to be a Priest because he would not giue to the people as Theodoritus saith in their extremitie the remedie for their sinnes which is nothing els but to giue them absolution which worke he could neuer abide To be short he was so incensed against his lawful Paslour and superiour the holie Bishop of Roome that in the deliuerie of the blessed sacrament to the people he would force them to take an oth by the blessed bodie which they had in their handes readie to receiue that they should stick to him and for sake the Bishop of Rome Cornelius All these thinges in sense hath Eusebius of Nouatus the first patron of the Protestants doctrine concerning the impugning of the Churches title in remission of sins of which her right he would haue robbed her in pretence of maintenance of Gods honour Whereby he also abrogated the wholl Sacrament of penance This falsehood though it were streight with he author condemned in a great Councell holden at Rome and afterward in diuerse Prouinciall Synodes and by the holie councell of Nice it selfe repressed also Yet it spred very sort and cintinued long and was not onelie by S. Cyprian but also by Dyonisius Alexandrinus Saint Amb ose and Saint Chrysostome refused in sundrie workes written against the Nouatians By whome and other though the course of that false assertion was often broken in gods Church yet in some partes they did knit againe sometimes by certaine heretikes of Nouatus daies called Tessarescedecatitae qui auersabantur poenitentiam saith Theodoritus who did abhorre penance and sometimes by a sort called Iacobitae 〈◊〉 whiles by wrcliffe his else by the Waldenses now and than by the Anabaptistes latly by the Lutherans moste of the protestantes by the Caluinistes eueryone All which blacke band though they agree not at euery pinch of Nouatus heresit for it is not possible that such should euer fullie consent yet all these knit tailes together in this that there is no sacrament of penance after Baptisme in which the priest may forgiue sinnes and that it standeth not with gods honour so to remit the peoples offences Of other the like heresies which he lent our men as of forbidding holie Chrisme and annointing of such as were by him baptized in so much that the holie fathers were glad to make vp the lacke thereof in all such as came from their heresie to the vnitie of Christes Church I will not here speake purposing onelie because that onelie concerneth our matter to refute that olde heresie raised so long since against the prerogatiue of Gods priests and onelie helpe of our sinnes that at once both the author and the ofspring may be fullie ouer throwen FVLKE Nouatus as he is described by Cyprian but that he came too soone before the open reuelation of Antichrist had beene a man much more fit to make a Pope of the Church of Rome whereof he was mockbishop then a poore minister of the Church of England And whatsoeuer you gatherout of Euseb. Theodoret or any other writer against him declareth that he was an execrable man but maketh no resemblance of his heresie with our doctrine concerning the power of remitting of sinnes You saie that he lacked all the solemnitie of baptisme and confirmation and consequentlie the spirit of God which by them he should haue receiued Eusebius indeed out of the Epistle of Cornelius writeth that after he was helped by exorcistes he fell into dangerous sicknes and being at the point of death and not considering he receiued baptisme in his bed if it may be said that such a one receiued For after he escaped his sicknes he obtained not therest whereof he should haue bin partaker according to the canon of the Church that is to be sealed or confirmed of the Bishope and hauing not obtained this how obtained he the holie Ghost By which wordes Cornelius meant that he which was baptized in extreamitie when he knew not what was done vnto him and afterward when he was whole had no care to approoue his baptisme by the Bishoppes iudgement vpon his owne confession acknowledging of Christian Religion could not be taken for a right Christian much lesse according to the discipline of those daies might be admitted vnto the ministerie But being admitted by a singular and if you will a sinister dispensation in time of persecution he was so fearefull that he denied himselfe to be a Priest when he was desired to come vnto them and onelie by wordes to confirme them that were stricken with the terrour of the tyrant as Therdoret writeth The oathe that he exacted of such as receiued the Sacrament of the Lordes supper at his handes was more like the oath that the pope exacteth of all Bishopes at their consecration then anie ministred in the Queenes Maiesties visitation That Wickliffe the Waldenses Luther or Caluine do denie repentance or reconciliation of them that are fallen after Baptisme it is a meere slaunder although they denie the Popish sacrament of penance whereof there was no mention in the Chuch manie hundred yeares after Nouatus That the Nouatians did not anoint those that
executed by any other man but onelie by our sauiour Christ the mediarour of god and man In which power he hath ordained man but as a seruant to doe nothing after his owne will but onlie to declare and pronounce the will of God therof In working of miracles it is otherwise in which mā so exerciseth that power either receiued of god or of the deuil that often times he causeth effects according to his owne wil contrarie to the wil of God reuealed in his word though nothing can be contrarie to his absolute will But the power of remitting sins no man can execute contrarie to the reuealed wil of God For Peter could not forgiue the sinnes of Iudes Iscariot Smon Magus Alexander the copper smith or anie other that sinned against the holy Ghost or that was not truly penitent for his sinnes or that beleeued not the promise of God Neither could Peter or can anie man retaine the sins of him that repenteth and taketh holde of Gods mercie by faith but he shall haue remission of sinnes though all the men in the world would saie the contrarie so that man hath no power in reteining or remitting of sins but by declaring the will of God wherof he hath no warrant but out of his worde For I aske this question of you if two priests hauing heard one mans confession at the same time be in contrarie opinions so that the one doth forgiue sinnes the other doth reteine them Whether of these sentences shal take place No doubt but you will saie that which is agreeable to the will of God Then doth it follow of necessitie that man doth onelie declare Gods will and hath no absolute or proper power to exercise this authoritie according to his owne will But as Peter saide to the lame man that which I haue I giue to thee and yet he had it not of his owne right of might but from God euen so saie you The power of pardoning sinnes is truelie and properlie in the priests as the power of working mitacles is properlie in Peters hands Idenie your consequence For although the pow er of working miracles were properly in Peters hands yet it followeth not that the power of pardoning sins was properlie in him For as I haue shewed there is great diuersitie betweene the one power and the other The power of miracles is graunted to Peter to be exercised according to the direction of Gods holie spirit agreeablie vnto the secret and absolute will of God But the power of pardoning sinnes is not graunted to Peter or any man but as to a messenger and declarer of Gods will as it is reuealed in his worde beside which if any presume to remit he doth but spend his breath in vaine But a wicked man hauing the power of miracles maie sometimes abuse it contrarie to Gods law as to mainteine false doctrine and Idolatry to hurt or to murther innocents thereby and yet wee may saie in some respect that the power of working miracles is not properlie in Peters handes both because it is not in him to heale whome and when he will but after as he hath a secret instinct of him that is the author of his gift and also because he is but an instrument of God whoe onelie doth great maruells properlie Psal. 136. as he confessed in the healing of AEneas Acts 9. saying Christ Ie sus heale thee So Acts. 3 His name hath made him strong and the faith which is by him hath giuen him his perfect health Where you conclude that the priests may saie likewise to the sicke soull That which I haue I giue thee In the name of Iesus Thy sinnes my sonne be forgiuen thee Although the sorme of speach be somewhat insolent and strange yet you confesse that the priest hath nothing to giue him but a declaration of Gods will when he saieth thy sins are forgiuen thee in the name of Iesus Yea if he shall saie in the name of lesus I forgiue thee thy sins the sense were no more but this Iesus doth assure thee by me his seruant and messenger that he hath satisfied for thy sinnes and therefore they shall no more be imputed vnto thee for God hath forgiuen them ALLEN And this worke of remitting sinnes is much more certain then the miraculous healing of the bodie beeing ioyned by Gods promise to a sacrament that shall neuer cease in the Church where miracles for most part ceased long since yea the name and maiestie of God is a thousand parts more honoured not onelie that God in his owne person but in the frailtie of hu ministers is able to accomplish such mightie miracles both in the cure of bodie and soull But the fondnes of this heresie is so great that it maketh those things to tend to Gods disgracing which he hath appointed properlie and onelie in a manner for the purpose to set forth the name of his sonne Iesus For if both sinnes of mans soull and sores of his bodie could not visiblie by externall meanes be healed in the glorious inuocation of Gods name it would surelie be forgotten in the Church of Christ that such power is giuen by God the father to his onelie sonne mans minde would not reach to that inwardly whereof he had no proofe nor assurance outwardelie I beseech you Sir the working of strange miracles giuen to some as well of the Prophets as of the Apostles of Christ were they any whit preiudicial to Gods honour or were they giuento man aboue his naturall power for the setting forth of God honour that the Prophets should see long before thinges that afterwarde did fall which is the proprietie of God alone and theirs onelie by gift and graunt of him to who me onelie it doth belong doe they dishonour God or els was it not alwaies graunted to some men for the glorie of God That Eliseus could see the heart and inwarde thoughts of Giezi his seruant which is Gods onelie propertie did it dishonour God or rather wonderfullie augment his glorie The passing preheminence that Peter and the rest receiued when they were hable by laying on of handes to giue the holie ghost can it not be practized without the dishonour of God or ells was it not principallse giuen to them to set forth the glory of God This was so great power that it was much more astonied at of the beholders then either working of miracles or remitting sinnes in so much that Simon the forcerer whoe was so glorious before that he called him selfe the power of God would haue giuen the Apostles money largely that vpon whome soeuer he had practized the like laying on of hands he might receiue the holie ghost also Then if the power of giuing the holie ghost or power of giuing grace which both Peter and Paull practized in a visible sacrament by a solemne ceremonie in the sight of all the worlde by laying on of their handes if this passing worke and moste proper to God I
name and authoritie shall sufficientlie beate downe these mens boldnes Saint Ambrose in this case is moste plaine and standeth with the Nouatians as I doe now with the Zuinglians euen in the verie same argument in these wordes Sed aiunt se Domino deferre reuerentiam cui soli remittend orum oriminum potestatem reseruent imò nulli maiorem iniuriam faciunt quà m qui eius volunt mandata res indere commissum munus refindere nam cùm ipse in Euangelis suo dixerit Dominus Iesus accipite Spiritum sanctum quorum remiseritis peccata c. quis est ergo qui magis honorat Vtrum qui mandat is attemperat an qui resistit Ecclesia in vtroque seruat obedientiam vt peccatism alliget laxat That is to saie These Nouatians saie that they denie penance or power to remit sinnes in earth in respect of the maintenance of such honour as is due to God to whome onely they will reserue the pardoning of mans sinnes But in deede none doe so much iniury to Gods glory as those which breake his commaundements and make a diuision of that charge and commission which he giueth For seeing our Lord Iesus by his owne mouth spake these words Receiue ye the holy ghost whose sinnes you doe forgiue they be forgiuen and whose sinnes you holde they beholden who in this case more honoureth God He that obeieth his commaundement or he that resisteth the same The Church obeieth in both as well in binding as in loosing Thus there And a litle after Looke to whome this charge was giuen and that person may lawfullie and with Gods good leaue vse the same Au l therefore the Church may lawfullie both binde and loose heresie and her attendants can rightlie doe neither This right is onelie committed to priests and therefore the Church rightlie challengeth that authoritie because shee hath lawfull priests and so heresie cannot doe because shee hath not the priests of God in her cursed congregation Thus said Saint Ambrose for the answere of the Nouatians in his daies and so say I now in the Churches behalfe against the like affected enemies of Christs honour which whiles they in face of scripture and Gods word would seeme to defend they are become sworne aduersaries of his honour and open contemners of his commaundements and holy ordinance Saint Ambrose here taketh it for a ground that it is Gods ordinance that Priests should remit sinnes he is bolde to call the contrarie doctrine heresie he maketh a principle of this that it neuer dishonoureth God that man should doe that which God giueth him either commaundement or commission to doe in his behalfe he taketh it for a knowne trueth that as the Church of God hath true and lawfull priests so shee may by them vpon Christes warrant bath loose and binde and contrariwise that heresie may well enough giue ouer that right of remission of sinnes because shee hath lightlie no lawfull priests by whome shee may practize the same FVLKE First you make a vaine exclamation or outcrie as though heresie hath spoiled the Church of her treasures vnder pretence of Gods glorie but such rhetoricall vamties all wise men will deride The Church is not spoiled of her treasures when neither Christ nor his grace is conteined in the sacraments but when Christ her onelie treasure is spoiled of his glorie of sole redemption and fatisfaction for our sinnes or of any other parte of the office that belongeth to the mediator Therefore it is her greatest honour that Christ may haue his true honour in whome with whome she hath al things not to the glory of flesh bloode but to the glorie of God to whome all glorie of right belongeth what Saint Ambrose did write against the Nouatians pertaineth not to vs who denie neither the power of remitting nor of reteining of sinnes but graunt both But that Saint Ambrose did not meane of such a power as the Papists doe claime I haue shewed before out of his owne wordes in the same place where he saieth that our Lord hath chosen such Disciples as should be interpreters of their Lordes will This power is graunted to all true ministers of the Church that they are the Legates or embassadors of god to declare his wil pleasure vnto men aswel for remitting as for reteining of sins And therefore Nouatus or Nouatianus did very absurdlie by Saint Ambrose his iudgement that did arrogate vnto himselfe power to reteine sinnes while he pronounced that they which fell into Idolatrie after Baptisme might not be receiued into the Church vpon any trial of their repentance and would not yeald that the ministers of the Church by the same authoritie might pronounce that they which were truelie penitent of their former wicked behauiour were forgiuen in the iudgement of God which was to remit their sins vpon earth with faith in Gods promise that they shall be forgiuen in heauen Thus the answere of Saint Ambrose vnto the Nouatians doth nothing in the world make against vs which denie no power that Christ hath graunted to his Church vnder collour of maintenance of Gods honour ALLEN And surelie it is a maruclous force of trueth or rather the might of Gods prouidence that driueth Heretikes to disdaine destroie and dissanull the graces and manifold giftes of Christes Church that impugning them where the verie right of such holie actes doe lie they may plainlte confesse and to their shame acknowledge that they haue none such themselues nor cannot by Gods warrant challenge any such giftes which with all their might they would wholie if they could together with Gods spirit and Church extinguish Alas into what miserie hath this forfaken flocke willfullie cast them selues and their adherentes which can forsake Gods house vbi mandauit Dominus benedictionem vpon which God hath bestowed his blessing abide there where by their owne confession there is no Priesthood no penance no host no sacrifice no remission where they can let of sinnes no grace in sacramentes nor no gift of the holie Ghost All other herisies lightlie by force of the Fathers Doctrine and iudgement lost either their Priesthood because they had no waie out of the Church to make Priestes as Saint Hierome writeth of Hilarie the Deacon or els the vse and function of Priesthood by reason the workes of God cannot be orderly nor benefi iallie vsed out of the house of God and yet they euer claimed to themselues not onlie the order but for moste parte all other functions that by Christ and his Church were annexed to that order but ours wherein they passe all their forefathers in a manner willinglie giue ouer the wholl profession freelie and without compulsion denie them selues with Nouatus to be priestes denie to sacrifice denie to enioyne penance denie to giue the holie ghost either by imposition of handes or by Chrisme or by any other solemne right of Gods Church To be short take nothing from these fellowes that belongeth
to Christianitie for they will giue all ouer them selues But briefllie to conclude vp the answere to their reason founded vpon Nouatus his principle touching Gods honour thus I saie That neuer derogateth to Gods honour which is agreable to gods ordinance but that priests should remit sinnes is the ordinance of God as is declared therefore the vse thereof doth not derogate any whit to gods honour Againe as great workes and as proper to god as remission of sinnes was practized by the Apostles and yet is vsed by the Bishops of holie Church without all dishonour of god giuing the holie ghost and gods grace by laying on of 〈◊〉 Ergo remission of sinnes may be also practized of priests without all iniurie to God and the onelie right therein FVLKE Whethersoeuer the force of trueth or prouidence of God driue heretikes we haue no purpose to follow them The gifts which god bestoweth on his Church and the ministers thereof with all humilitie and thankefulnes we acknowledge receiue and exercise to his glorie and the benefit of his Church although we arrogate nothing vnto our selues either in them or in any other thing that is proper to God And therefore it is both a vaine and a false complaint that the Church adorned with Gods blessinges is forsaken and a congregation barren of all Gods giftes imbraced All offices of ministerie in the Church that God hath ordained we admit and practise neither will we giue ouer anie thing for all your childish prating whereof we haue warrant to enioie it out of the word of God To your syllogismes I answere thus to the first That to exercise the Power of remission of sinnes in such sorte as it is ordained of God is no dishonour to God but a great honour To the second I denie that anie thing proper to God as remission of sinnes giuing the holie Ghost and Gods grace as it is proper to God was or could be practised by the Apostles or anie mortal man properly otherwise I confesse that remission of sinnes as Christ hath commaunded it may be practised without all iniurie to God and his onelie right therein For further proofe of the forsaid matter it is declared that neither Christ nor his euerlasting Father nor the holie Ghost doe giue ouer vnto man or resigne the power of remission or anie other holie function of the Church but doe themselues continuallie worke all those graces by mans mynisterie and seruice THE EIGHT CHAP. ALLEN FVrthermore we must here consider that what worke soeuer God appointeth man to exercise in his Church either in remission of sinnes or giuing grace of Gods spirit or what other holie action soeuer may in his name be done for the benefite of the people by the ministerie and seruice of man either by the meanes and mediation of any other instrumentall cause we must learne that in these workes so wrought either by man or through other creatures God doth not resigne his right to the waies and workers thereof and giue ouer the wholl title that is due to himselfe in the saide diuine acts For then in deede mans practize should derogate from Gods power and he should as it were succeed God in the right of his proper power and euerlasting inheritance which onelie to surmise as heretikes do were meere follie Christ is by euerlasting right made the head of the Church and he resigneth not this office to anie mortall man For if he did then the partie that should by his graunt occupie for a season the same dignitie were his fuccessour and should holde in like right the same office as he did before But that notwithstanding he hath made his substitute and vicegerent by whom in his corporall absence he ruleth now the Church as he did before in his owne person not giuing ouer his preheminence supreame power therein but now practizing that by another which afore he exercised him selfe in his owne person It had beene a great derogation to Christ that Peter should haue bin Christes heir and successour for then Christ had lost the perpeiuitie an other man gouerning after him in like right and preheminence as he had before But for Peter to rule the Church vnder him in his steade as by his euerlasting right with commission from him that holdeth that soueraigntie for euer by whomesoeuer the Church shall be ruled till the worlds end in earth this I saie is no derogation to God nor his sonne Christ at all but it much prooueth that Christ according to his manhood is the head of the Church for euer because by man in earth he ruleth the same til his comming again the whichman though he be his vicar vicegerent yet he is not his successour Saint Augustine did trimlie allude to the vse of the olde law comparing the ministers of Gods Church to the yonger brethren who were charged to marrie the elder brothers wife when he died without issue in whose name they did practize the worke of mariage and therefore could not call their children by their owne names but by the name of their elder breethren For as they raised seede to their brother and for their brothers honour so the Priests that haue taken vpon them as it were in mariage to gouerne Christes Church and to bring forth children not in their owne names but in the name of their elder brother and her departed Husband As when they bring foorth children in Baptisme as through the wombe of the Church they bring them not forth as for them-selues and in their owne names but in the name of Iesus Christ beeing their elder brother euen so it is in remission of sinnes also in which case Christ resigneth not his authoritie as though he lacked that power him-selfe but practzeth that mightie worke by the ministerie of man which before he exercised in his owne person And as the baptzing not in the name of Peter nor Paull nor Apolle but in the name of Christ the first husband of the Church after whome the Children be called Christianes not Petrianes nor Paulianes doth much set foorth the honour of the eldest spouse so it prooueth and augmenteth Christes euerlasting honour and moste iuste title in remission of sinnes that till this daie no lesse now in absence by the seruice of his Priestes then before when he was present by his owne worde and will sinnes be in his name and faith fullie remitted yea euen the verie function of Preaching the Gospell which they saie is meant by remitting of sinnes although they say most foolishlie therein and against the common sense of all the fathers yet euen that function is Christs still though it be vsed of man in earth FVLKE You are as plentifull in proofe of that which is confessed as you are naked and barren in proouing that which is denyed The title of your Chapter we will graunt you without proofe and according thereunto we are content to decide this controuersie But you will no longer abide by it
that purpose And therefore hauing the grace of God and remission of sinnes ioyned vnto it by Christes promise it must needes be a sacrament as baptisme is which all the fathers doe insinuate when they make penance to be one prescribed ordinance of Christ to forgiue sinnes no lesse then Baptisme is Neither was it the preaching of the Gospell nor the inward sorowfullnes or repentance of former sinnes that Nouatus did condemne but it was the sacrament of penance and act of absolution by the Priestes ministerie which he so much abhorred and meant wickedlie to remooue For which cause as he was iustlie condemned of heresie by the Roman Nicen Councelles so were you Master Protestants both then in them and since in your Masters Wiclife Luther Caluine and the like accused by Gods Church and Councels FVLKE We will neuer graunt that baptisme or anie sacrament doth remit sinnes properlie but God by sacraments ministered by man doth assure vs that he doth remit our sins vnproperly we may say the sacraments and the ministers of them doe remit sinnes because the one is the mouth of god to declare his sentence of forgiuenes of our sins the other are the seals of god to confirme our faith in his promises of remission of sins To holde that the children of Christian Parentss in whome is no contempt or neglect of baptisme cannot be saued and receiued into heauen without it is to abridge the power of God as though he could not giue saluation without sacraments neither hath he declared anie necessitie of his will to the contrarie For the text of Iohn 3. Except a man be borne againe of water and of the spirit pertaineth not to the externall sacrament of baptisme more then the like saying of our sauiour Christ Iohn 6. Except you eate the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke hu blood you haue no life in you pertaineth to the sacrament of the Lordes supper That Originall sinne remaineth in the baptized though it be not imputed to the elect both the scripture and our owne experience teacheth Saint Paull did see another lawe in his members withstanding the lawe of his minde and bringing him captiue vnder the law of sinne which is in his members The Doctrine of onelie faith iustifyng and of imputed iustice although they be the Doctrine of the holie Ghost your blasphemous spirit calleth pelting paradoxes as your slaunderous malice not onelie imagineth but stoutlie affirmeth that we haue a secret Doctrine of Epicurisme which we teach secretly to certaine strangers at home c. Whereof let God who knoweth all secretes be iudge and reuenger Your argument of remission of sinnes in baptisme confirmed by testimonie of Saint Ambrose we graunt that it is no dishonour to God that man should remit sinnes by that power which god hath graunted him But whereas in his wordes you would haue the good reader to marke that poenitentia doth not signifie repentance but your popish sacrament of penance I will desire the good reader to marke the contrarie For Saint Ambrose by making obiection doth plainelie distinguish mysteriorum gratiam which is in baptisme from panitentia in which is onelie the inuocation of Gods name or the name of God aduouched for assurance of remission of sinnes which whether it be in the solemne act of reconciling those which are open penitents or in preaching and declaring remission of sinnes to al trulie repentant sinners it commeth all to one end For there is not in that repentance mysterium gratiae that is a promise adioyned to an outward sacrament which spirituallie worketh that which externallie it representeth Yet you saie there is an externall and visible action appointed by Christ 20. of Saint Iohn to reconcile sinners by the forme of absoluing which the Church vseth c. Here wanteth nothing but proofe of that you saie Here such syllogismes as you make at the end of euerie Chapter were necessarie to demonstrate this conclusion For we can see no external or visible action inthese words whose sins you retaine they are retained whose sins you remit they are remitted therefore no sacrament But all the fathers you saie doe insinuat the same when they make penance one prescribed ordinance of Christ to forgiue sinnes by no lesse then baptisme I denie this argument for euerie ordinance of Christ whereby sinnes are forgiuen is not a sacrament But it was not the preaching of the Gospell or repentance saie you that Nouatus did condemne but the sacrament of penance act of absolution by the Priestes ministerie Epiphanius and others doe writ that he denied remission of sins to thé that had fallen into idolatrie after baptisme although they were repentant Other more fauourablie write of him that he denied onely the outward reconciling vnto the Church or act of absolution by the priests ministerie for them that had so fallen But of the sacrament of penance there is no mention in any auncient writer of those or much later times Therefore Wiclif Luther Caluin and we all doe subscribe to the auncient Churches condemnation of Nouatus for an heretike and his opinion for heresie ALLEN The doctours therefore as I haue said ioyne lightlie in talking of remission of sinnes Baptisme and penance and some time extreame vnction also that you neede not doubt but they tooke them all three for sacraments workeing remission of sinnes For they doe not talke of inwarde repentance but of an action solemlie exercised in Gods Church whereof the priest as you heare by Saint Ambrose and Saint Chysostome is the minister And therefore Epiphanius saieth that the Church hath two penances one for an other insinuating thereby the double act of the Church and sacrament whereby sinnes be remitted As Saint Augustine also saieth by the Nouatians quòd poenitentiam denegant that they denie penance By which penance Lactantius teacheth vs also a way to discerne the true Church from the false as in which there is both confession and penance for the healing of mans frailtie Whereby it is euident that this penance which they speake of was an vsuall ceremonie and holy sacrament of the Church whereby sinnes were remitted FVLKE Such a sacrament such arguments the Doctorsioyne lightlie in talking of remission of sinnes baptisme and penance and sometime extreame vnction Therefore you neede not doubt that they toke them all three for sacraments And yet you haue not brought one Doctor that speaketh of extreame vnction For Chrysostome speaketh of the effect of praier made by the priest to obtaine remission of sinnes although the gift of healing be ceased in the Church And it is manifest that Saint Iames speaketh not of extreame vnction which you minister to none but such as are ready to die when he promiseth restitution of health to the diseased that were anointed in those daies Againe his vnction was onelie with oyle yours is with I cannot tell what slibbersauce cōsecrated by the Bishop That anointing was not extreame when it might be repeated
as sickenes might often take holde of men Yours is not extreame it may be repeated if it may not be repeated it is not the vnction that S. Iames speaketh of Of the sayings of Epiphanius and Lactantius we haue spoken before which it were needeles here to repeate That there was a ceremonie vsed in reconciling of publike penitents I denie not but that there was a sacrament of penance you haue hetherto brought no good euidence For your argument to prooue that they talke not of inward repentance but of an action solemnly exercised because we heare that the priest is minister is no good euidence for the priest is minister of the worde as well as of the sacraments ALLEN Which trueth Saint Cyrill vttereth most plainlie for our purpose treating thus vpon the words of institution of this sacrament Cùm ipsiremittunt aut detinent spiritus qui habitat in eis per ipsosremittit aut detinet fit autem id duobus modis primùm Baptisme deinde Poenitenita When the priestes remit sinnes or reteine them the holie ghost which which dwelleth in them doth remit or retein by them Which is done two manner of waies first in Baptisme and then afterward in penance Saint Cyprian also said that the holie ghost worketh remission of sinnes whether it be in baptisme or by other sacraments Whereby he cleerelie vttereth his meaning that there should be moe sacraments then one instituted by Christ for that purpose In all which congruitie of Gods holie working by diuerse sacraments the remission of sinnes we conclude against heresie that the priesis power herein derogateth no more to god nor our sauiour in the sacrament of penance then is doth before by baptisme or after by extreame vnction in none of al which as I haue prooued before Christ doth resigne his power and proper iurisdiction to the priestes but continuing euerlastinglie in like preheminence and power as before worketh his grace and remission of sinnes in all these Sacraments by the priests seruice and ministerie that it maybe yet as truelie as in his life time said and so shall be to the worlds ende Christ baptizeth Christ shriueth assoileth and anointeth sinners for remission of their offences Although Iesus doth none of these now nor much did in his life time but his disciples then and his disciples now doe the same holie actions in his name FVLKE There is nothing in Saint Cyrills wordes to prooue that there is a sacrament of repentance beside baptisme but that the holie ghost doth remit or reteine by his ministers by two waies namelie by baptisme by repentance after baptisme For if you will restraine the worde poenitentia to your pretended sacrament then this absurditie will follow that seeing there are but two waies by which the spirit remitteth sinnes they are not remitted without that sacrament neither by true contrition of heart without any sacrament not by receiuing the Lordes supper nor by your extreame vnction Therefore poenitentia in Saint Cyrill signifieth repentance and is necessarilie required in them that shall obteine remission of sinnes by participation of the Lordes supper or by faith without any sacrament That Cyprian maketh moe sacraments then one instituted by Christ to assure vs of remission of sinnes it is true For by the sacrament of the bodie and bloode of Christ worthelie receiued we haue this assurance also as well as by the sacrament of baptisme To conclude the power of Christ or of his ministers graunted by him we denie not but the institution of the sacrament of penance we require to be shewed out of the holie scriptures if you will haue vs to beleeue it ALLEN To conclude this matter I argue thus It is no dishonour to God for the priest to remit sinnes as well originall as actuall of all sortes and grauitie in the sacrament of Baptisme by the Protestantes owne confession nor by extreame vnction by the warrant both of scripture and Doctors Ergo remission of sinnes is not vnlawfull nor dishonourable to God to be giuen by the priest in the solemne sacrament of penance And further I ioyne with them thus The word of God is much more plaine and expresse for the priests warrant to remit sinnes in penance then in Baptisme but they may lawfullie doe it in Baptisme Ergo they may doe it no lesse lawfullie in penance Compare the wordes of institution of them both and iudge your selues of your indifferencie and sinceritie by what right you remooue the one and reteine the other I praie God you seeke not shortelie to baptize vs onely by your preaching as you now will onelie absolue vs by the same But truelie I thinke you be in the case that Saint Ambrose tooke Nouatus your forefather to haue bene in not onelie for that that he saieth Nouatus where he listed would admit power to priests of remission But where he listed not there the grace giuen to them must be dishonoured to God So that of thinges equallie commended by scripture and commaunded by God the good man must haue choise for his tooth not onelie in this point I now compare our choise men but much more in that which followeth in the saide Saint Ambrose of all Nouatians whome he trippeth pretelie with this terme delicati mei My delicate gentlemen saith he with their lustie lookes and swelling hartes can not abide in their brauerie to looke vpon a poore caitisse weeping for his sinnes abundantlie apparelled mourninglie in sad and sorowfull companie and so forth And this surelie is the disease of our daies which hath not onelie infected the vnfaithfull but also hath made these holie thinges lothsome euen to the better sorte of Gods people So much is mans will and pleasure pampered where Gods worde and writing should be onelie followed For the necessarie bearing with such frailtie euen of the good almost generallie the Church of God hath sought and allowed much more gentle remedies then the worlde had wont full gladlie to beare for their greeuous sinnes FVLKE We confesse that it is no dishonour to God that the minister lawfullie authorized should remit sinnes in such sorte as he hath commission namelie by declaring the wil of God that they are by him remitted and giuing the seales or sacraments of God for more full assurance of performance as euen the Master of the sentences teacheth out of S. Augustine and other Doctors whose words I wil set downe that the indifferent reader may see how you agree with your owne principal piller and post of Poperie who in this point seemeth to be more sound yet then you Cùm veraciter ad Deum conuerso peccata dimittuntur ab iis dimittuntur quibus ipse veraci conuersione coniungitur Spiritus sanctus ea dimittit qui datus est omnibus sanctis sibi charitare cohaer entibus siue se nouerint corporaliter siue non Similiter cum alicuius tenentur peccato ab eis tenentur quibus ille cordis prauitate disiungitur siue
some to be obstinate or dissemblers he may know who is to be bound and who to be loosed which he cānot do by hearing the diuersity of their sins For if their sins be as red as scarlet if they be truelie penitent they are to be loosed and if they seeme neuer so small if they be not repentant nor humblie contrite in heart for them they are to be bound While you seeke to make a difference betweene the authoritie of the minister in the Ghospell of pardoning sinnes more properlie then the priest clensed the Leper you declare that you are not content with the sentence of Saint Ierome nor of so many of the auncient fathers as made the case all alike And where you saie it was not said vnto them as vnto ours whomsoeuer you punish with Leprosie or make vncleane he shal haue a Leprosie you speake beside the booke For this authoritie was giuen to them that they should make cleane or vncleane and whomesoeuer they made cleane he was admitted into the congregation and whomesoeuer they made vncleane he was so accounted of all men Yet properlie they made neither cleane nor vncleane but declared them so to be according to the institution which they had of Gods law in exercise whereof although they erred and so the partie might be receiued or refused according to their error yet was he neither cleane nor vncleane in deede by their sentence but by the work of God and so be sinners The blasphemie that you ascribe to Saint Hilarie I haue confuted before Your distinction of prius natura and quoad nos is foolish sophistrie in this case For except God first worke in our hearts by his holie spirit faith of forgiuenes we can haue but small comfort in the priests absolution That God doth alwaies wörke at the instant in which Baptisme is ministred it is false if Saint Augustines doctrine be true who reacheth that Baptisme may be receiued out of the Church but cannot haue effect but in the Church that is if the partie came from heresie and submit him selfe to the Catholike Church ALLEN And so it is in penance where God the principall and the priest the secondarie or seruisable cause ioyntlie forgiue together For so the words of institution of this sacrament doe moste plainlie conuince whose sinnes you shall forgiue they beforgiuen he speaketh in the present tence as though he would saie as you forgiue them or reteine them ipso facto I forgiue them or reteine them And therefore sauing the honour of the Master of the sentences he had not good consideration when he did holde as some other did after him that first mans sinnes be remitted by God in his contrition and purpose to come to the sacrament and afterwarde the same remission to be declared by the priests and as it were confirmed by his approbation in confession being therein partlie deceiued by the saying of Saint Hierome before alledged whome he tooke perchaunce to haue compared in all respects the office of the olde Priest for the viewe of the vncleane and ours of the new law in the iudgement vsed vpon mans sinnes and partlie as I take it by a sentence of Saint Augustine which compared together the receiuing of Lazarus by Christ and the Disciples loosing his bandes to Christes pardoning of sinnes first and then the priests loosing the same afterward in the face of the Church This to be shorte is a peece of Saint Augustines sentence Quid ergo facit Ecclesia cui dictum est Quae solueritis in terra erunt soluta nisi quod ait Dominus soluite illum sinite abire What doth the Church then to whome it was said vhatsoeuer you loose it shall be loosed Marie she doth that which our Lorde saied loose him and let him goe Wherein Saint Augustine meaneth nothing els but that Christ is the principall agent and that he properlie doth giue life to the soull the Priest for all that beeing his seruant and minister therein and therefore by nature is a latter agent in the same worke which els as I haue prooued ioynilie perteineth to them both for that the effect of a Sacrament commeth not to any man till it be receiued except it be in certaine cases of necessitie where the parties can not obteine the externall rse of the appointed element though they earnestlie desire the same But how the olde Priests office touching the Lepers of the law representeth our sacrament of the priests ministerie in the new Testament and how farre ours which is the truth excelleth that which was but a shadow of ours Saint Chrysostome doth excellentlic declare and therewith fullie may put out of doubt all men that our Priests properlie worke remission of sinnes as ministers in the same diuine action and not as declarers or approouers of that effect which before was wrought by God himselfe Thus he saith Corporis lepram purgare seu veriùs dicam haud purgare quidem sed purgatos probare Iudaeorum sacerdotibus solis liccbat at verò nostris sacerdotibus non corporis lepram verùm animae sordes non dico purgatas probare sed purgare prorsus concessum cst Quamobrem mco iudicio qui istos despiciunt contemnuntque multò sceleratiores ac maiori supplicio digni fuerint quà m fuerit Dathan vnà cum suis omnibus That is to saie To purge the Leprosie of the bodie or ells to saie as it was in deede not to purge but to discerne who were cleane was graunted onelie to the Priests of the olde law but it is fullie graunted to our Priests not to purge the bodilie lcprosie nor to snew who are cleaner purged but vtterlie to purge the verie filth of mans soull Therefore by my iudgement whosoeuer doe contemne or despise them they are much more worthie punishment then the disobedient Dathan with all his companie Thus saith this holie Father with many wordes moe which were worthie all consideration and rememberance in this case if the matter were not so abundant that it may not suffer ouer long abode in one place lest iniurie be done to other braunches of the cause no lesse necessarie to be knowne for full vpholding the truth thereof FVLKE Your argument taken of Christs speaking in the present tense is vaine and of no force to prooue that the forgiuenes or reteining of God and man concurre in one instant For in the latter sentence of reteining the verbe is of the preterperfect tense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but in the same sense that the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the former sentence which is of the present tence proouing Gods forgiuenes to goe before mans declaration thereof The Master of the sentences is litle beholding to you that doc so flatlie condemne him of error whereas he did write nothing in this point which was not commonly receiued in the Church of Rome in his time and long after For among the articles in quibus Magister non tenetur there is
that he speaketh in the next chapter of the first repentance that in men of discretion might goe before baptisme although it be true of all true repentance and conuersion vnto God ALLEN And let no man think that true repentance can be in anie or effectuall for the remission of sinnes if he follow not the appointed ordinance of God for remission of sinnes For I dare be bolde to saie that as since the time that our Sauiours wordes tooke place Nisi quis renatus fuerit Except a man be borne againe of water and the holie Ghost he can not enter into the kingdome of heauen that as since these words no man can be saued without baptisme so likewise since Christ spake these wordes Whose sinnes you do forgiue they be forgiuen I dare saie neuer man was saued nor can be saued that either contemneth or neglecteth confession or earnestlie seeketh not for it if he fall in relapse of deadlie crimes after his baptisme I will speake it plainlie because I would haue it thought on earnestlie As no man ordinarilie can be saued without baptisme so can no man that euer after baptisme committeth deadlie sinne be saued without sacramentall confession or the earnest desire and seeking for the same This maie seeme sharpe to some but this will prooue true to all contemners of Gods ordinance For whensoeuer God worketh his giftes and grace among men by anie ordinarie meanes appointed for the purpose it is great sinne to seeke for the same eitherwithout it or to presume to haue it at Gods handes otherwise then he hath prescribed But the sacrament of penance and confession made to the priest is the appointed meanes that God vseth in his Church for remission of mortall sinnes therefore whosoeuer thinketh to haue remission immediatly at Gods hand he shall first be voide of his purpose and then further be charged of high presumption and contempt of his will and ordinance The remission of originall sinner as properly pertaineth to God as of mortall sinner yet because Christ hath instituted a sacrament as an instrument meanes to conuey that singular benefit to man he that would now claime the same immediatly at Gods owne hand and therefore neglecteth the sacrament of baptisme or would minister it to him selfe without the Priests office he should neuer obtaine remission of his originall sinne but adde to that high persumption and disobedience of gods commaundement which of it selfe without originall sinne were damnable FVLKE No wise man thinketh that true repentance can be in any or effectuall for the remission of sins if he dispise to follow the appointed ordinance of God for remission of sins but you shalneuer prooue that shrift or auricular confession is a necessarie and generall ordinance of god for al that shal obtein forgiuenes of sins committed after baptisme How manie mortall sinnes are committed by children and others where of they haue no remembrance to confesse them so that if confession were necessarie remission of those sinnes for them were impossible That you dare be bolde to saie that no man can be saued without externall baptisme of water it argueth more boldnes then wisdome except you were able to prooue that the wordes of Christ by you cited are necessarie to be vnderstood of the baptisme of water And you are bolder then Fulgentius for he as you hard erewhile excepteth them that suffer martyredome for Christs name before they be baptized in water And Saint Ambrose is bolde against you to affirme that the Emperour Valentinianus the yonger who was slaine before he was baptized was vndoubtedlie saued For comforting his sisters he saith to them in that seueral oration which he made vpon the death of Valentinian the Emperour Sed audiui vos dolere quod nō acceperit sacramentū baptismatis Dicitemihi quid aliud in nobis est nisi voluntas nisi petitio Atqui etiam dudum hoc votum habuit vt antequam in Italiam venisset initiaretur proximè baptizari se à me velle significauit ideo prae coeteris carsis me accipiendum putauit Non habet ergo gratiam quam desiderauit non habet quam poposeit quia poposcit accepit vbi est illud iustus quacunque morse praeuentus fuerit anima eius in refrigerio erit Solue igitur pater sancte munus seruo tuo quod Moses dum in Siritu vidit accepit quod Dauid quia ex reuelatione cognouit emeruit Solue inquam seruo tuo Valentiniano munus quod concupiuit munus quod poposcit sanus robustus incolumis Si affectus aegritudine distulisset tamen non penitus à tua misericordia esset alienus qui celeritate temporis esset non voluntate sraudatus solue ergo seruo tuo munus tuae gratiae quam ilie nunquam negauit qui ante diem mortis templorum priuilegia negauit insurgentibus quos reuereriposset astabat virorum catcrua gentilium supplicabat senatus Non metuebat hominibus displicere in Christo qui habuit spiritum tuum quomodo non accepit gratiam tuam Aut si quia solenniter non sunt celebrata mysteria hoc mouet ergo ne martyres si catechumeni fuerint coronentur non enim coronantur si non initiansur Quòd si suo abluuntur sanguint hunc swa pietas abluit voluntas But I haue heard that you are greeued because he receiued not the sacrament of baptisme Tell me then what other thing is there in vs but our will but our desire But long since he had this purpose that before he came into Italie he would be dedicated and next he signified that he would be baptized by me And therefore before other causes he thought that I was to be taken Hath he not then the grace which he desired hath he not the grace that he called for receiued it because he called for it And where is then that saying the iust by what death so euer he be preuented his soule shal be in rest performe therfore holy Father that gift vnto thy seruant which Moses while he sawe in spirit receiued which Dauid because he knewe by reuelation obtained performe I saie vnto thy seruant Valentinian the gift which he called for being sounde strong in good health If being stroken with sicknes he had differred yet he should not be vtterly estranged from thy mercie which was depriued by swiftnes of time not by his owne will Performe therefore vnto thy seruant the gift of thy grace which he neuer denied which before the day of his death denied the priuiledges of the Idols temples to them that rose vp of whome he might haue stood in awe There stoode by a great rout of heathen men the senat made supplication Neuertheles he feared not for Christ to displease men He that had thy spirit how did he not receiue thy grace Or if this doth mooue because the mysteries were not solemnlie celebrated therefore let neither martyres be crowned if they haue not beene baptized for
they are not crowned if they be not didicated But if they be washed in their own blood this mans will pietie also hath washed him Againe he saith speaking in an Apostrophe to him Quis dabit tefrater fratrem mihi lactentem vbera matris meae hoc est non quicunque te sed Christus illuminabit gratia spirituali ille te baptizauit quia humana tibi officia defuerunt Who shall giue thee brother to be my brother sucking the papes of my mother that is not euerie one but Christ him selfe shall lighten thee with spirituall grace He hath baptized thee because the seruice of man was wanting to thee By all which wordes it is manifest that S. Ambrose vnderstood not those wordes of our sauiour Christ of externall baptisme as you doe when he refuseth not them that haue a purpose and will to be baptized and are preuented by necessity of time But where you proceed and dare be bolde to saie that neuer man was saued that either contemned or neglected confession if you meane popish auricular and as you after call it sacramentall confession I dare be bolde to saie you speake vntrulie because the word of God prescribeth no such confession as necessarie to saluation Confession of that we beleeue and of our sins before God I knowe to be necessarie to saluation Neither can you prooue that they which dispise popish shrift be contemners of Gods ordinance for the Minor of your syllogisme that followeth is a lowd lie that your popish sacrament of penance and confession made to the Priest is the appointed meanes that God vseth in his Church for remission of mortall sinnes for God hath appointed no such sacrament or confession as necessarie meanes without the which remission of sinnes may not be obtained Your similitude of baptisme will prooue nothing except you can first prooue your confession to be of Gods institution as necessarie for doing awaie sinnes committed after baptisme as baptisme is by Christs ordinance the seale of regeneration by which we are assured of the remissiō of our sins ALLEN And yet me thinke I heare alreadie the sounde of the deceitfull voices of our Preachers It is Christes bloode that remitteth sinnes Come to me all ye that are heauie loaden and I shall refresh you I am he saith the Lord that putteth awaie thy sinnes with a thousand such like as though Christes bloode did not stand with Christes ordinances and sacraments as though they came not to Christ that keepe the waie of his will and sacraments to come vnto him as though God did not remit those sinnes which in his name and in his sacraments and by his appointed minister be remitted Protestant saie plainlie will thou refuse baptisme because Christes bloode washeth awaie originall sinnes If thou darest not openlie so preach although couertly thou maie chaunce so intend how darest thou deceiue the people and draw them from penance and confession because Christes blood doth remit sinnes For if the one sacrament may stand with the honour of God and with all those places that thou bringest so deceitfullie out of the scripture why may not the other seeing both are prooued alike to be instituted of Christ For the same selfe sauiour which said Come to me ye that be loaden and I shall refresh you he and no other said except you be borne of water and the holie Ghost you cannot enter into the kingdome of heauen The same God that said I am he that putteth awaie thy sinnes saith now to the Apostles and Priestss whose sinnes you doe forgiue forgiuen be they The same Spirit of God that said in the Prophet Confesse your selues to the Lorde for he his good said now againe in the Apostle confesse your sinnes one to another that you maie be saued By which he meaneth not as Origen venerable Bede and other doe declare so much brotherly acknowledging sor counsellor other causes the greefe of minde ech man to his fellowe as he doth the order of sacramentall confession to be made vnto gods Priests as it may well appeere by the circumstance of the letter For there he had willed them to send for the Priestes of the Church to annoile them streight after addeth this alledged text of confession and praing ouer the sicke The which place the heretikes sawe to sounde so manie waies as well towardes the sacrament of extreame vnction as the sacrament of confession both which they haue vnworthilie abandoned that they thought it not amisse either to denie the Apostles authoritie and the wholl epistle as no peece of holie scripture as Luther and other did or else which was after thought more handsome conueiance to corrupt the text and write instead of send for the Priestes of the Church thus call the elders of the congregation For they thought it might sounde euill to haue in one sentence priestes Church confession remission of sinnes release of paines for sinne annoiling praying ouer the sicke and so forth FVLKE It is no deceitfull voice of our preachers to affirme by these and a thousand such like textes of scripture that it belongeth to God onelie to forgiue sins properlie satisfaction being made for them by the bloode of Christ. And yet we derogat nothing from Christes ordinances and sacraments by which he worketh effectuall assurance of the same We acknowledge the ministerie of the Apostles and their lawful successours for the remission and retaining of sinnes both by preaching and by ministering of the sacraments instituted by our sauiour Christ. But we denie and dare stand to the deniall with all the papists that hath beene are or shal be that popish penance and confession is anie sacrament of our sauiour Christes institution for he that said whose sinnes you forgiue forgiuen be they hath not said whosoeuer will haue his sinnes forgiuen by you must haue some penance by you inioyned for satisfaction of Gods iustice yea there is nothing more contrarie to forgiuenes then satisfaction made by the partie to whome sinnes should be forgiuen And he that said confesse your offences one to another and praie one for an other that you maie be healed saith no where confesse all your sinnes vnto a Priest that you may be saued but willeth a mutuall acknoledgeing and reconciliation of one Christian man to another where there hath bin anie trespasse of such offences as one man hath committed against another and a mutuall acknowledging of our sinfullnes one to another that we may be sturred vp to mutuall praier By which textre the Priest is asmuch bounde to shriue himselfe to his parishioner as the parishioner to the Priest But Origen and Bede are alledged to prooue that the Apostle meaneth not onlie of such acknowledgeing nor so much thereof as the order of sacramental confession Verilie when the wordes of the scripture are plaine the sense 〈◊〉 to be gathered of the plaine words we may not restin anie mans opinion that is contrary to the same The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
courage you shall cast him into the waues together with your selues Vnderstād what Christ saith of the Iewes Vpon the chaire of Moses the Scribes and Pharisies did sit do ye all things whatsoeuer they shall saie to you Now we must not saie the priestes are set vpon the chaire of Moses but vpon the chaire of Christ for they haue receiued his doctrine wherefore Paul saith we are embassadours for Chist as though Christ did exhore by vs Doe ye not se that all men are subiect to the Princes of the worlde and that often times the worse in birthe life and wisdome are preferred before the better Neuerthelesse men consider the reuerence of the Prince that hath preferred them not the persons whatsoeuer they be so that if man appoint one ouer vs there is so great feare if God haue appointed anie man we despise him 〈◊〉 on him and vexe him with innumerable contumelies and whereas we are forbidden to iudge our breethren we whet our tongues against the priests Of what excuse are these thinges worthie when we se not a beame in our owne eye and iudge so seuerelse a mote in our neighbours eye Doest thou not know that thou prescribest to thy selfe a more heauie iudgement when thou so iudgest another This I saie not that I allowe vnworthie persons to be taken into the priestes office but hauing compassion and weeping For they are not therefore to be iudged by their subiects although they liue euillie and vitiouslie But if thou looke well to thy selfe thou shalt not affend end in anie'thing that is committed to them For if he made an Asse to speake and gaue spirituall blessinges by a southsayer and wrought in a dumbe mouth and the vncleane tongue of Balaam for the stumbling Iewes much more for you that be faithfull although the priests be naught God shall persorme all thinges by them and send his holie spirite for a pure minde doeth not therefore loose his purenes but grace worketh all things for all are yours saith he whether it be Paule or Apollo or Cephas For whatsoeuer the priest goeth about it is the gift of God alone and when he exerciseth mans wisdome his grace appeereth lesse Neither doe I saie this that we might liue more slouthfullie but least while they that are set ouer you liue slouthfullie you that are committed to them should at anie time procure euill to your selues And what speak I of the Priest Neither an Angell nor an Archangell can bring anie thing to passe in those thinges which are giuen by God But the father the sonne and the holie ghost doeth all things The priest giueth his tongue and his handes for it is not iust that for malice of an other man they that come to our saluation should be offended All which thinges considered let vs both seare God and greatlie reuerence his priestes that honour being giuen both to our workes and to them we maie receiue great reward of God by the grace and goodnes of our Lorde Iesus Christ to whome with the father and the holie ghost be glorie for euer and euer Amen These wordes of Chrisostome declare that the ministration of the worde and of the sacraments in which the Priest lendeth his tongue and his handes are not defiled by the euill life of the Priest so he sit in the chaire of Christ preach the doctrine receiued by him confirming the same by the sacrament of his institution But of the popish sacrament of penance or auricular confession they speake nothing at all Contrariwise they shewe by what meanes the Priestes doe execute the authoritie graunted them in remission of sinnes namelie in the whole office of their ministerie consisting principallie in preaching and ministring the sacraments not in giuing priuate absolution onelie or principallie ALLEN But to leaue him and fall to other of great antiquitie and learning whose iudgements also will prooue not onelie for the trueth of his doctrine but also which is much more for the vniformitie of this open Ceremonie which the Church of olde vsed and therefore in the like trueth of thinges yet keepeth Theodoritus therefore a Greeke author also doth plainelie insinuate not onelie the whole sacrameut but euen this Ceremonie of laying on handes in the acte of absolution Sunt medicabilia saith he etiam quae post baptismum fiunt vulnera medicabilia autem non 〈◊〉 olim per solam fidem data remissione sed per multas lachrymas fletus iciunium orationem laborem facti peccati quantitate moderatum Quienim non sic affecti sunt eos nec admittere quidem didicimus nee diuina sunt manu impertienda Nolite inquit dare sanctum canibus nec margaritas porcis The woundes which are made euen after Baptisme be to be healed marie they cannot be remedied as before in Baptisme by remission obteyned by onelie faith but they must nowe be cured by teares and weeping by fasting and praying and by penance measured after the quantitie and nature of the fault For whosoeuer be not so qualified we haue not learned to receiue them to grace neither be the holie giftes to be bestowed vpon them by our hand Giue not saieth he holie thinges to dogges nor precious stones to swine Thus doth Theodoritus allude also to our manner yet vsed in the sacrament where remission is giuen by the priestes worde and hand For which cause Saint Aogustine calleth this sacrament of reconciliation sometimes Imposition of hands as he doth other sacraments moe also where the priests by this externall Ceremonie of laying on of handes vse to giue grace FVLKE Theodoret which liued so long after confession was abrogated by Nectarius in the Greeke Church speaketh nothing for it but that repentance muste best be testified by manie teares weeping fasting and praier and such like labour moderated according to the quantitie of the sinne committed otherwise they are not to be admitted into the Church nor to be made partakers of the holie communion So that he speaketh of them that for grieuous sinnes are excommunicated whoe are not to be receiued but vpon their hartie repentance nor the diuine mysteries to be deliuered vnto them Wherefore there is no allusion in his wordes vnto the popish manner of absolution with the worde and hande For he speaketh of admission and deliuerie with the hande Which must be vnderstoode of them that were excluded and debarred from receiuing which are accounted dogges and hogges For I hope you account not all sinners for dogges and hogges before they be shriuen if they be not by the sword of excommunication cut of from the Church But Saint Augustine as you saie calleth this your sacrament Imposition of handes If you meane the place De bapt contr Donatistas lib. quinto cap 20. Because there is no eight booke whereunto your margent sendeth vs he speaketh in deede of them on whome handes are laide which maie be them that are confirmed or ordained to the ministerie of the Church as
but much be confirmed in my faith thereby And yet all this while though the matter of pardons seemed to me to be more and more sound in it selfe and as true as the Spirit of God is true who was the author thereof in the Church yet I did not then consider of it as a thing of anie great importance but I conceiued it to be a small matter subiect to a certaine iugling in reason such as wicked men lightlie make their close and craftie entrance by to more mischiefe and further attemptes against the common faith of the Church I could not then conceiue which I after ward so plainlie and now more and more by the better surueie of the cause do perceiue that in this one falsehood there was couertlie conteined the verie pith of falsehood and improofe of the greatest matters which life and faith doth stand vpon FVLKE Your first motiues to this faith of yours were not more feeble then your confutations in the same were fond and foolish You did reade the storie of the alteration in religion that hath fallen in our time But of whose writing I praie you euen of such as were proctors for the Popes pedlarie ware or pillers of his pretensed power which was none other but according to the prouerb before mentioned aske my fellow if I be a thiefe If you had read the storie written indifferentlie without partialitie to either partie you might haue iudged better of the wholle matter Some perhapes are liuing that can testifie of the things that were done publike monuments are extant totestifie the same so much more intollerable is your arrogancie to iudge vpon the onelie sinister report of the aduersaries of Luther of holie and blessed memorie with all true Christians that onelie contention and couetousnes mooued him to condemne that which himselfe in conscience knew to be true and lawfull Like boldnes you shew in affirming that Luther was the first in all mans memorie sauing one 〈◊〉 that despised pardons forgetting the Waldenses that were long before Wiclefe and the Bohemians that were after him before Luther who condemned popish pardons as much as Wiclife or Luther For they condemned the Pope to be Antichrist as much as these did But now let vs examine the storie as it is knowne to be moste true in Saxonie where Luther first found fault with pardons When Pope Leo. 10. had sent abroad his pardons which were preached by Terelius a Dominike frier in such impudent manner that they seemed to serue for no end but the Popes couetousnes and the licentiousnes of the people Luther at that time hauing a zeale of God but not according to knowledge did mildelie and modestlie admonish the people of the deceites and abuses of pardons and pardoners which long before his time were reprooued in the Councells of Latrean and Vienna he complained to the Archbishoppe of Ments to the Bishop of Branderburg to the prouinciall of the Augustine friers and to the Pope him selfe in all thinges submitting him selfe to the Pope and Church of Rome so it were not against the holie scriptures When he could finde no equity nor redresse of these abuses which euen Surius the papist confesseth to haue bene iustlie complained of by him and vniustlie manteined or dissembled by the prelates he proceeded farther as God gaue him knowledge and at length compelled by intollerable iniurie and neglect of manifest trueth and reformation of lise did cast of the Anrichristian yoke of the Popes obedience Now whereas you charge him with contention and couetousnes the world your iudge before maie gather whether Luther if against his conscience he would haue set forth the Popes pardons especiallie at such time as the Pope had great neede of monie for warre against the Turkes might not haue made a more easie waie for him selfe to honour and ri hes then by setting himselfe against them But howsoeuer it was your fault faith was thus confirmed and that to such blasphemous boldnes that without authoritie of the holie scriptures the matter of pardons seemed to you as true as the spirit of God is true and hauing none other arguments to perswade you but that Papistes called them selues the Catholike Church and condemned Luther of manie heresies and write in their stories that Luther was mooued by contention and couetousnes to oppose him selfe against them you nothing doubted but that the spirit of God was author of popes pardons in the Church Beeing now resolued of the substance you were not yet perswaded of the quantitie but thinkeing the matter at the first was but small at length you came to a perfect knowledge how great and weightie it is and how it draweth with it all other waight in so much that the verie pith of the greatest matters of popish life and faith doe stand vpon it If then the pith of the greatest matters of poperie doe stand in Popes pardons and this pith hath no ground either in the scriptures or the fathers of the Church for a thousand yeares after Christ we maie the more easily see that the plant of poperie whereof pardons is the pith is not of Gods owne planting and therefore shal be plucked vp by the rootes ALLEN Thou wouldest not thinke I dare saie into what a summe and abridgment heresie hath by the Deuilles deuise and Luthers seruice drawne her selfe into For by this one false conclusion and for maintenance thereof this man and his posteritie haue taken awaie all penance and satisfaction for sinne haue spoiled the Church of her iust and and moste necessarie discipline controlled Gods owne holie vsage incorrection of his children haue entered into his secrets of the next world and there abandoned the place of his iustice and iudgement for sinnes that be remitted but not enough to his wisdome and will corrected haue robbed the holie Saints of all their merites that is to saie Christ of his giftes and grace whereby onelie they besosoneraigne and satisfactorie haue imbarred the bodie mysticall of Christ of the benefit which the wholl and euerie member thereof should receiue by the satisfaction and holie workes of the common head which is Christ haue broken the communion of Saints and the sweet felowship of all the holie members of Gods Church and the benefit which riseth frometh to other by mutuall participation of their good works and desertes and to be short haue by this one falsehood preached against pardons done iniurie to Christ to his Church to his Saints and to his sacraments and haue mightelie shaken the whole frame of Christian religion and doctrine I doe not here riot in wordes to ouerrunne my aduersaries in talke or to make more of the matter then it is but assuredlie without destruction of all these so necessarie articles of our faith there can no man defend Luthers doctrine against Indulgences I knowe he fumbled at the beginning otherwise then his fellowes and followers to disgrace the same sometimes by holding the pardons to be lawfull but not
though vnperfect as they proceede from vs vnpure and vnworthie vessells yet neuerthelesse to be acceptable before God vnto rewarde which he giueth of meere mercie and not of merite or deserte Therefore there is no shadow for Popish pardons to shroude themselues vnder the winges of the good workes of Saintes which are the fruites of faith to declare them to be iustified not anie cause by which in the sight of God they can appeare iust and much lesse be able to iustifie other ALLEN Would God euerie man could feele how happie a thing it is to dwell as brethren together in the house of God vnder the appointed Pastours of that familie in which onelie Gods fauour is euerlastinglie found that they might therewith be partakers of all their workes that feare God might haue some sense and taste of that holie ointment of Gods spirite and gift of his grace that first was vpon the head of this householde our Master Christ Iesus and then dropped downe abundantly to his beard euen to the verie beard of Aaren whereby as S. Augustine saith the holie Apostles be signified and by them is ishued downe to the homme of Christes coate and imbrued all the borders of his garments that euerie one of the felowship might receiue benefite and feele the verdure thereof Quoniam 〈◊〉 mandauit Dominus benedictionem vitam vsque in seculum For in this happie felowship onlie our Lord bestoweth his manifold blessinges and life for euermore Amen FVLKE Who so looketh for sense from anie other fountaine or beginning then from the head alone shall feele no more then a stone But who so thorough faith is become a liuelie member of the mystical body of Christ by the operation of his holie spirite shall vndoubtedlie haue a moste sweete feeling of that moste happie spirituall coniunction of himselfe first vnto the heade which is Christ then vnto his bodie which is the Church and maie cheerefullie sing with Dauid Beholde how good and pleasant a thing it is that breethren dwel together But such is the abundance of grace and vertue in the head Christ that he seeketh not for merite or desert in himselfe or in anie of his fellow members although he receiue the gracious ointment of spirituall doctrine as S. Augustine doth expound it flowing from Christ to his Apostles and from them into all parts of his Church by which he is not taught to trust in himselfe or to depend vpon other mens merits or pardons but to repose the wholl hope of his saluation deliuerance from the wrath of God in the merites and satisfaction of Iesus Christ his heade towhome with the father and the holy ghost be euerlasting praise of our redemption reconciliation saluation glorification in his holie Church and felowship of Saints throughout all generations world without ende Amen God be praysed for euer AN APOLOGIE OF THE PROFESSORS OF THE GOSPEL IN FRAVNCE AGAINST THE RAILING DECLAMATION OF PEter Frarine a Louanian turned into English by Iohn Fowler Written by William Fulke AN APOLOGIE AGAINST THE RAILING DECLAMATION OF PETER FRARINE IT is pitie that the president of the Quodlibeticall disputations of Louane had no more discretion then to propounde in steede of exercises of learning a question perteining to the estate and doeings of other people with whome neither the speaker nor the hearers had any thing to doe neither were hable by knowledge of their affaires to discearne the cause nor by authoritie of their place to decide the controuersie But seeing they are disposed otherwise then wise men woulde be to be curious in a foraine common wealth and Fowler hath fantafied that the same also may apperteine to England which in Flaunders was de claimed against Fraunce Let vs see what Peter Frarine bringeth which may concerne the comon cause of religion where in they of France against whome he hath shot his bolt doe agree with vs in England First he saith as moste wicked persons they haue disturbed religion and peace A grieuous accusation But where is the proofe The question of religion he leaueth to be handled of others the deciding whereof neuerthelesse would purge the persons accused for the most part of the other crime of disturbance of peace Well the respōdent is not to be blamed that standeth vpon that question which according to the custome of the schoole was propounded to be the argument of his talke at that time And therefore he wil open declare first that there was no cause or iust occasion why these men should rise and make insurrection Then that they tooke weapon in hand without authoritie contrarie to law and in dispite of all Magistrates and Rulers Last and finallie that they vsed themselues to cruellie handled their sworde to bloodelie to the greatest dammage hindrance and losse that euer was felt in Christendome These are the diuisions of the circle with in which the orator hath inclosed himselfe But al these points so farre as they concerne the troubles in France are fullie and directlie confuted by all the edictes of pacification giuen forth to the knowledge of the world by Charles the ninth and Henrie the third Kings of Fraunce in which they haue alwaies acknowledged that the Protestants vpon iust cause with sufficient authoritie and in their seruice and to their honour haue put them selues in armes and done whatsoeuer the necessitie of warre lawfullie taken in hande hath inforced them to doe Then iudge whether against the publike testimonie of two Kings whome the matter moste concerned and that more then once or twise repeted I need to stand in the cōfutation of Peter Frarines petty priuate declamation Notwithstanding although I haue with one hatchet hewen a sunder the wholle stoke of this rayling oration yet I will not spare to brattell out the bowes and branches thereof in answering to euerie particular quarrell and cauil of the same There was not anie good or reasonable cause saith he why the founders and brokers of this new Gospell should be driuen to put them-selues in armes against the Catholikes See how the vaine declaimer which refused before to handle the question of religion now taketh vpon him most arrogantlie to decide the same For if the Protestantes be founders and brokers of a new Gospell and the Papistes be good Catholikes there is no cause why they should once open their mouthes against the Papistes much lesse arme them-selues as he said they did against the Catholikes But if this matter pertaine to the question of religion the debating whereof is not presentlie intended let vs pardon him these preiudiciall tearmes as well now as hereafter and consider onelie what reasons he bringeth to prooue his purpose No lawes ought to be chaunged with out great cause least of all the lawes of religion So farre we both agree but there is great cause to change lawes ofreligion when Antichristes decrees haue displaced the lawes of God the onelie rule of true religion Yet saith he