Chap. 2. Of the sufficiencie of the Scripture 232. Chap. 3. Of the originall text of Scripture of the certainty and truth of the originals and of the authority of the vulgar translation 238. Chap. 4. Of the translating of the Scripture into vulgar languages and of the necessitie of hauing the publique liturgie and prayers of the Church in a tongue vnderstood ibid. Chap. 5. Of the three supposed different estates of meere nature grace and sinne the difference betweene a man in the state of pure and meere nature and in the state of sinne and of originall sinne 250. Chap. 6. Of the blessed virgins conception 264. Chap. 7. Of the punishment of originall sin and of Limbus puerorum 270. Chap. 8. Of the remission of originall sinne and of concupiscence remaining in the regenerate 272. Chap. 9. Of the distinction of veniall and mortall sinne 277. Chap. 10. Of free will 279. Chap. 11. Of iustification 290. Chap. 12. Of merit 324. Chap. 13. Of workes of supererogation and Counsels of perfection 331. Chap. 14. Of Election and Reprobation depending on the foresight of something in the parties elected or reiected ibid. Chap. 15. Of the seauen Sacraments 332. Chap. 16. Of the being of one body in many places at the same time ibid. Chap. 17. Of transubstantiation 333. Chap. 18. Touching orall Manducation 334. Chap. 19. Of the reall sacrificing of Christs body on the Altar as a propitiatory sacrifice for the quicke and dead 335. Chap. 20. Of remission of sinnes after this life ibid. Chap. 21. Of Purgatory 336. Chap. 22. Of the Saints hearing of our prayers 337. Chap. 23. Of the superstition and idolatrie committed formerly in the worshipping of Images 338. Chap. 24. Of Absolution ibid. Chap. 25. Of Indulgences and Pardons 339. Chap. 26. Of the infallibility of the Popes iudgment 340. Chap. 27. Of the power of the Pope in disposing the affaires of Princes and their states ibid. The fourth Booke is of the Priuiledges of the Church CHAP. 1. OF the diuerse kindes of the priuiledges of the Church and of the different acceptions of the name of the Church 343. Chap. 2. Of the different degrees of infallibility found in the Church 344. Chap. 3. Of the meaning of certaine speaches of Caluine touching the erring of the Church 345. Chap. 4. Of their reasons who thinke the present Church free from all error in matters of faith 346. Chap. 5. Of the promises made vnto the Church how it is secured from errour of the different degrees of the obedience wee owe vnto it 348. Chap. 6. Of the Churches office of teaching and witnessing the truth and of their errour who thinke the authority of the Church is the rule of our faith and that shee may make new articles of faith 350. Chap. 7. Of the manifold errors of Papists touching the last resolution of our faith and the refutation of the same 351. Chap. 8. Of the last resolution of true faith and whereupon it stayeth it selfe 355. Chap. 9. Of the meaning of those words of Augustine that he would not beleeue the Gospell if the authority of the Church did not moue him 358. Chap. 10. Of the Papists preferring the Churches authority before the Scripture ibid. Chap. 11. Of the refutation of their errour who preferre the authority of the Church before the Scripture 359. Chap. 12. Of their errour who thinke the Church may make new articles of faith 361. Chap. 13. Of the Churches authority to iudge of the differences that arise touching matters of faith 362. Chap. 14. Of the rule of the Churches iudgment 364. Chap. 15. Of the Challenge of Papists against the rule of Scripture charging it with obscurity and imperfection 365. Chap. 16. Of the interpretation of Scripture and to whom it pertaineth 366. Chap. 17. Of the interpretation of the Fathers and how farre wee are bound to admit it 368. Chap. 18. Of the diuerse senses of Scripture 369. Chap. 19. Of the rules we are to follow and the helpes wee are to trust to in interpreting the Scriptures 372. Chap. 20. Of the supposed imperfection of Scriptures and the supply of Traditions 373. Chap. 21. Of the rules whereby true Traditions may be knowne from counterfeit 378. Chap. 22. Of the difference of bookes Canonicall and Apocryphall ibid. Chap. 23. Of the Canonicall and Apocryphall bookes of Scripture 379. Chap. 24. Of the vncertainty and contrariety found amongst Papists touching books Canonicall and Apocryphall now controuersed 382. Chap. 25. Of the diuerse editions of the Scripture and in what tongue it was originally written 385. Chap. 26. Of the Translations of the old Testament out of Hebrew into Greeke 387. Chap. 27. Of the Latin translations and of the authority of the vulgar Latine 388. Chap. 28. Of the trueth of the Hebrew Text of Scripture 390. Chap. 29 Of the supposed corruptions of the Greeke text of Scripture ibid. Chap. 30. Of the power of the Church in making Lawes 393. Chap. 31. Of the bounds within which the the power of the Church in making lawes is contained and whether shee may make lawes concerning the worship of God 394. Chap. 32. Of the nature of Lawes and how they binde 397. Chap. 33. Of the nature of Conscience and how the conscience is bound ibid. Chap. 34. Of their reasons who thinke that humane Lawes do binde the Conscience 399. The fifth booke is concerning the diuers degrees orders and callings of those men to whom the gouernment of the Church is committed CHAP. 1. OF the Primitiue and first Church of God in the house of Adam the Father of all the liuing and the gouernement of same 409. Chap. 2. Of the dignity of the first borne amongst the sonnes of Adam and their Kingly and Priestly direction of the rest 410. Chap. 3. Of the diuision of the preeminences of the first borne amongst the sonnes of Iacob when they came out of Aegypt and the Church of God became Nationall 411. Chap. 4. Of the separation of Aaron and his sonnes from the rest of the sonnes of Leui to serue in the Priests office and of the head or chiefe of that company 412. Chap. 5. Of the Priests of the second ranke or order 413. Chap. 6. Of the Leuites 414. Chap. 7. Of the sects and factions in religion found amongst the Iewes in latter times ibid. Chap. 8. Of Prophets and Nazarites 416. Chap. 9. Of Assemblies vpon extraordinary occasions 417. Chap. 10. Of the set Courts amongst the Iewes their authority and continuance 418. Chap. 11. Of the manifestation of God in the flesh the causes thereof and the reason why the second Person in the Trinity rather tooke flesh then either of the other 423. Chap. 12. Of the manner of the vnion that is between the Person of the Sonne of God and our nature in Christ and the similitudes brought to expresse the same 429. Chap. 13. Of the communication of the properties of eyther nature in Christ consequent vpon the vnion of them in his Person
which they are found and so leaue him in a state wherein hee hath nothing in himselfe that can or wil procure him pardon and other which though in themselues considered and neuer remitted they bee worthy of eternall punishment yet do not so farre preuaile as to banish grace the fountaine of remission of all misdoings All sinnes then in themselues considered are mortall a as Gerson doth excellently demonstrate First because euery offence against God may iustly bee punished by him in the strictnesse of his righteous iudgments with eternall death yea with annihilation which appeareth to be most true for that there is no punishment so euill and so much to be avoided as the least sin that may be imagined so that a man should rather choose eternall death yea vtter annihilation than committe the least offence in the world Secondly the least offence that can be imagined remaining eternally in respect of the staine and guilt of it though not in act as do all sinnes vnremitted must bee punished eternally for else there might some sinnefull disorder and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 remaine not ordered by diuine iustice But wheresoeuer is eternity of punishment men are repelled from eternall life and happinesse and consequently euery offence that eternally remaineth not remitted excludeth from eternall glorie and happinesse and is rightly iudged a mortall and deadly sinne All sinnes then are mortall in them that are strangers from the life of God because they haue dominion and full command in them or are ioyned withsuch as haue and so leaue no place for grace which might cry vnto God for the remission of them But the elect and chosen seruants of God called according to purpose doe carefully indevour that no sinnes may haue dominion ouer them therefore notwithstanding any degree of sinne they runne into they retaine that grace which can and will procure pardon for all their offences Thus all sinnes in themselues considered and neuer repented of forsaken nor remitted are mortall All sinnes that against the Holy Ghost excepted are veniall ex eventu that is such as may bee and oftentimes are forgiuen through the mercifull goodnes of God though there be nothing in the parties offending while they are in such state of sinne that either can or doth cry for remission The sinnes of the just not done with full consent and therefore not excluding grace the property whereof is to procure the remission of sinnes are said to be veniall because they are such and of such nature as leaue place in that soule wherein they are for grace that may and will procure pardon By that which hath beene said I hope it doth appeare that we teach nothing touching the difference of veniall and mortall sinnes that Bellarmine himselfe can except against and that wee differ very much from the Pelagians who thought that no sinfull defect can stand with grace or a state of acceptation and fauour with God For we reject this their conceit as impious and hereticall doe confesse that all sinnes not done with full consent may stand with grace and so be rightly named veniall CHAP. 33. Of the heresie of Nestorius falsely imputed to Beza and others THe next heresie it pleaseth this heretical Romanist to charge vs with is that of the Nestorians Let vs see how he indeauoureth to fasten this impiety vpon vs. First saith he the Nestorians contemned the Fathers and so doe the Protestants therefore they are Nestorians The consequence of this argument we will not now examine But the Minor proposition is most false For we reverence and honour the Fathers much more then the Romanists doe who pervert corrupt and adulterate their writings but dare not abide the tryall of their doctrines by the indubitate writings of antiquity Secondly saith he the Nestorians affirmed that there were two persons in Christ and so divided the vnity of his Person But the Protestants thinke so likewise Therefore they are Nestorians The assumption we deny and he doth not so much as indeavour to proue it but proceedeth particularly to proue Beza a Nestorian heretique in which hee hath as ill successe as he had in the rest of his slanderous imputations Beza saith he teacheth that there are two hypostaticall vnions in Christ Ergo two hypostases or persons which was the heresie of Nestorius The consequence of this argument is too weak to inforce the intended conclusion For when Beza saith There are two hypostaticall vnions in Christ the one of the body and soule the other of the nature of God and man hee doth not conceiue that the vnion of the body and soule doe in Christ make a distinct humane person or subsistence different from that of the Sonne of God for hee euery-where confesseth that the humane nature of Christ hath no subsistence but that of the Sonne of God communicated to it but hee therefore calleth it an hypostaticall vnion because naturally it doth cause a finite distinct humane person or subsistence and so would haue done here if the nature flowing out of this vnion had not beene assumed by the sonne of God and so prevented and stayed from subsisting in it selfe and personally sustained in the person of the sonne of God This doctrine is so farre from heresie that he may justly be suspected of more then ordinarie malice that will traduce it as hereticall Yet hath Beza to stop the mouthes of such clamorous aduersaries long since corrected and altered this forme of speech which hee had sometimes vsed CHAP. 34. Of the heresies of certaine touching the Sacrament and how our men denie that to bee the body of Christ that is carried about to bee gazed on THe sixteenth heresie imputed to vs is the heresie of certaine who what they were the Iesuite knoweth not nor what their heresie was as it should seeme by his doubtfull and vncertaine manner of speaking of it This vnknowen heresie defended by he knoweth not whom he sayth Caluine Bucer Melancthon and other worthy and renowned Diuines with whom he is no way matchable either in pietie or learning though hee weare a Cardinals hatte doe teach But what monster of heresie is it that these men haue broached Surely that Christs body is not in the Sacrament or sacramentall elements but in reference to the vse appointed by Almighty God nor longer than the Sacrament may serue for our instruction and the working of our spirituall vnion with Christ and that therefore it is not the body of Christ that dogs swine and mice doe eate as the Romanists are wont to blaspheme and that it is not fit to dispute as their impious Sophisters doe of the passage of it into the stomacke belly and draught of vomiting it vp againe and resuming it when it is vomited with infinite other like fooleries which euery modest man loatheth and shameth to heare mentioned Secondly that it is not the body of Christ which the Popish Idolaters carrie about in their pompous solemne and pontificall Processions to be
that the Church of God taught as wee do that concupiscence in it owne nature is a sinne making guilty of grieuous punishment that when it is weakned and ceaseth to be so potent as formerly it was yet it ceaseth not to be of the same kind that formerly it was as Gregorius Ariminensis sheweth and therefore seeing it was before a sin it is still in some sort a sin that God hating it before he hateth it still we also are to hate it by all meanes to seeke to weaken and destroy it Cassander sayth that a very worthy and famous diuine affirmeth that it is sin in the regenerate though it be not imputed And he addeth that the difference between them that say it is sin and them that say it was sin properly made guilty of condemnation but now being weake ned the guilt taken away it is not properly sinne is a meere logomachia And therefore in the conference at Wormes the colloquutors agreed touching this point the forme of their agreement is this We confesse with vnanimous consent that all that come of Adam according to the ordinary course are borne in originall sinne and vnder the wrath of God Originall sinne is the priuation and want of originall righteousnes ioyned with concupiscence We agree also that the guilt of originall sinne is remitted in baptisme together with all other sinnes by the merit of Christs passion But we thinke that concupiscence a vice or fault of nature an infirmity and disease remaineth taught soe to thinke not only by the apostolicall scriptures but by experience also And touching this disease wee agree that that which is materiall in originall sinne remaineth in the regenerate that which is formall being taken away by baptisme And wee call that the materiall part of originall sinne that tooke beginning from sin that inclineth vnto sinne and repugneth against the law of God as Paul also calleth it and in this sort it is briefely sayd in the Schooles that the materiall part of originall sinne remaineth in the baptized and that the formall is taken away By the formall part of sinne they vnderstand the priuation or want of those diuine graces that should cause the knowledge loue and feare of God the inordinate inclination to loue ourselues and finite things so as not to regard God and the consequent guilt of condemnation accompanying such priuation and inordinate inclination by the materiall part they vnderstand not concupiscence as it is in strength captiuating all to the sinister loue of our selues and things finite but as weakened it still solliciteth to evill but so that easily it may be resisted if wee make right vse of the grace that God hath giuen vs this remainder of concupiscence is euill inclineth to euill God hateth it and we must hate it c. And therefore it is most absurd that the councell of Trent hath that God hateth nothing in the regenerate and the reason they giue is very weake that therefore he hateth nothing in them because there is no condemnation vnto them for many things may be disliked in them that shall not be condemned It remaineth that wee speake concerning first motions Bonauentura describeth first motions to be the motions of sensuality according to the impulsion of concupiscence impetuously tending to the fruition of a delectable creature First motions saith hee are either primò primi or secundò primi primò primi sunt naturales secundò primi sunt sensualitatis primò primi sequuntur naturalium qualitatum actionem secundò primi imaginationem these first motions hee pronounceth to be sinne for three causes First because they moue to that which they should not and to that which is vnlawfull Secondly because they are in a sort voluntary though not in themselues yet in that they are not hindred by the will or in respect of precedent apprehension Thirdly they are sinne in respect of delight annexed for when the soule is ioyned by delight to the creature it is darkned and made worse as when it is ioyned to God it is inlightened and bettered These sayth he are veniall sinnes because the will hath not a compleate dominion ouer these motions of sensuality as ouer those acts that proceed from the command of the wil but yet it might haue hindered them therefore they are veniall sins so they continue so long as they stay proceed not so farre as to haue the willes consent but if they proceede so farre as that the will consenteth to take delight therein though not to proceede to action it is a mortall sinne This is the opinion of Bonauenture a cardinall and a canonized Saint and with him agree sundry others soe that in this point the Church formerly taught as wee do now CHAP. 9. Of the distinction of veniall and mortall sinne BEllarmine saith that the Romanists with one consent do teach that some sinnes in their owne nature no respect had to predestination or reprobation to the state of men regenerate or not regenerate are mortall other veniall and that the former make men vnworthy of the fauour of God and guilty of eternall condemnation the other onely subiect them to temporall punishments and fatherly chastisements But wee knowe the Church of God beleeued otherwise For first Gerson proueth that euery offence against God may iustly be punished by him in the strictnesse of his righteous iudgment with eternall death yea with vtter annihilation because there is no punishment so euill and so much to be auoyded as the least sinne that may be imagined So that a man should rather choose eternall death yea vtter annihilation then committe the least offence in the world Secondly he proueth the same because all diuines do agree that wheresoeuer there is eternity of sinne there must be eternity of punishment now where there is no remission there sinne must of necessity remaine for euer for though sinne soone cease in respect of the act yet euery sinne remaineth after the act is past in respect of the staine and guilt till it be remitted whence it followeth that euery sinne in it owne nature and without grace to remitte it remaineth eternally and deserueth eternity of punishment and is mortall Wee say therefore that some sinnes are mortall and some veniall not because some deserue eternity of punishment and others do not for all deserue eternity of punishment and shall eternally be punished if they remaine without grace and vnremitted eternally but because some sins either in respect of the matter wherein men do offend or ex imperfectione actus in that they are not committed with full consent exclude not grace the roote of remission and pardon out of the soule of him that committeth them whereas other either in respect of the matter wherein they are conuersant or the full consent wherewith they are committed cannot stand with grace Soe that contrary to Bellarmines position no sin is veniall in it owne nature without respect had to the
state of grace And this is proued against him by the authority of such mē liuing in the Church in the dayes of our fathers as he must not except against Thomas Aquinas saith eternity of punishment answeareth not to the grieuousnesse of sinne but to the eternall continuance of it without remission and that therefore eternity of punishment is due to every sinne of the vnregenerate so continuing ratione conditionis subiecti in respect of the condition and state of him that committeth it in whom grace is not found by which only sinne may be remitted Whence it will follow that euery sinne of the vnregenerate so continuing is worthy of eternall punishment and shall soe be punished and therefore is mortall And on the contrary side euery sin of the regenerate that may stand with grace and not exclude it is rightly sayd to be veniall that is such as leaueth place for that grace that can and will procure remission of which sort are all the sins of the elect of God called according to purpose which are not cōmitted with full consent Cardinall Caietan writing vpon those words of Thomas Aquinas cleareth this point exceeding well Grace onely saith hee is the fountaine whence floweth remission of sinne nothing therefore positiuely maketh sin veniall or remissible but to be in grace nor nothing maketh a sin positiuely irremissible or not veniall but the being out of the state of grace for to be in the state of grace is to haue that which will procure remission of sin to bee out of the state of grace is to be in a state wherein remission cannot be had So that that which positiuely maketh sin veniall or not veniall is the state of the subiect wherein it is found if we respect therefore the nature of sin as it is in it selfe without grace it will remaine eternally in staine guilt and so will subject the sinner to eternall punishment so that euery sin in it selfe deserueth eternall punishment and is mortall but yet such is the nature of some sinnes either in respect of the matter wherein they are conversant or their not being done with full consent that they doe not necessarily imply an exclusion of grace out of the subiect in which they are found so doe not necessarily put the doers of them into a state positiuely making them not veniall by remouing grace the fountaine of remission So that to conclude no sin is positiuely veniall as hauing any thing in it that may claime remission for no sinne implyeth or hath any thing in it of grace the fountaine of remission but some sin either ex genere or ex imperfectione actus in respect of the matter wherein a man offendeth or in that it is not done with full consent to the exclusion of grace may bee saide to bee remissible or veniall negativè per non ablationem principii remissionis in that it doeth not necessarily imply the exclusion of grace the fountaine of remission and some sinnes either in respect of the matter or manner doe imply such exclusion and are therefore named mortall Richardus de Sancto Victore agreeth with the former and more clearely confirmeth our opinion then they doe The circumstances of that wee finde in him touching this point are these One had written vnto him desiring to be resolued in a certaine doubt the doubt was this how it could bee true that hee had learned of his teachers that veniall sinnes deserue onely temporall punishments mortall eternall whereas yet in those that goe to hell if any of those sinnes that they call veniall bee found they must bee punished and euery punishment sustained in hell is eternall seeing out of hell there is no redemption whence it will follow that euen those sinnes that are named veniall deserue eternall punishment for they are punished eternally in the damned and it must not bee thought that the punishment inflicted for them is more then they deserue All this concerning the eternity of the punishment of euery sinne of the reprobate hee acknowledgeth to bee true and therefore sheweth that some sinnes are said to bee veniall and mortall but for other considerations then some supposed His resolution therefore of the doubt proposed is expressed in these words That sinne seemeth vnto mee to bee veuiall which found in the regenerate in Christ of it selfe alone neuer bringeth vpon them eternall punishment though they repent not particularly of the same that is mortall which though it be alone bringeth eternall death vpon the doers of it without particular repentance that therefore is a veniall sin which of it selfe alone if there be nothing else to hinder is euer sure to be pardoned and remitted in the regenerate so as neuer to bring condemnation vpon them that is mortall that of it selfe alone putteth the doer into a state of condemnation and death Here we see sins are distinguished some are said to be veniall some mortal but none are said to be veniall without respect had to a state of regeneration as Bellarmiue imagineth To these we may adde Almain and Fisher Bishop of Rochester and sundry other but it needeth not for howsoeuer our Adversaries make shew to the contrary they all confesse that to bee true that wee say for every sinne eternally punishable deserueth eternall punishment but euery the least and lightest sin that wee can commit without grace and remission remaineth eternally in staine and guilt and is eternally punishable whence it will follow that euery sinne deserueth eternall punishment and so is by nature mortall So that in this poynt as in the former the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died is found to haue bin a Protestant Church CHAP. 10. Of free will CArdinall Contarenus hath written a most diuine and excellent discourse touching free will wherein hee sheweth the nature of free will how the freedome of will is preserued or lost in this discourse First hee sheweth what it is to be free and then 2◠what that is which wee call free will What it is to be free he sheweth in this sort As he is a servant that is not at his owne dispose to do what he will but is to do what another will haue him to do so he is sayd to be free who is at his own dispose so as to do nothing presently because another will haue him but what seemeth good vnto himself he hath a liking to do The more therefore that any thing is moued by of it self the more free it is So that in naturall things we shal find that accordingly as they are moued by any thing within or without themselues in their motions they come neerer to liberty or are farther from it so that a stone is in a sort free when it goeth downeward because it is carried by something within but it suffereth violence and is moued by something from without when it ascendeth yet doth it not moue it selfe when it goeth downward but
of the same Waldensis who sayth that some supposed the conuersion that is in the Sacrament to bee in that the bread and wine are assumpted into the vnity of Christs person some thought it to be by way of Impanation and some by way of figuratiue or Tropicall appellation The first and second of these opinions found the better entertainment in some mens mindes because they graunt the essentiall presence of Christs body and yet deny not the presence of the bread still remayning to sustaine the appearing accidents These opinions hee reports to haue beene very acceptable to many not without sighes wishing the Church had decreed that men should follow one of them Wherevpon Iohn Paris writeth that this way of Impanation so pleased Guido the Carmelite sometimes Reader of the holy Palace that hee professed if hee had beene Pope hee would haue prescribed and commaunded the imbracing of it Neither was it lesse pleasing to many in Waldensis time who as hee sayth did as it were wish in their hearts it were free from them to defend it and that a decree in the Church were passed in the favour of it CHAP. 18. Touching or all Manducation ALexander of Hales and Bonaventura doe teach that no man can eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his blood without faith and that the eating of Christ is mysticall not corporall Bonaventura sheweth for that whereas there are three things implied in corporall eating to wit a mastication or chewing a traiection into the stomacke and bellie and a conversion of the thing eaten into the substance of the eater this later which is most essentiall in eating cannot agree vnto the body of Christ which is not turned into our substance but rather in mysticall sort turneth vs into it selfe It appeareth by that of Waldensis cited before that many thought the wicked doe not eate the flesh of Christ seeing they supposed so much onely of the bread to be turned into the body of Christ as is to be receiued by the beleeuers or if all bee turned that yet the body of Christ ceaseth to be in the Sacrament when a wicked man is to receiue it and that the bread returneth againe CHAP. 19. Of the reall sacrificing of Christs body on the Altar as a propitiatory sacrifice for the quicke and dead TOuching the reall sacrificing of Christs Body on the Altar the Church neuer taught any such thing as the Romanists now teach as appeareth by these testimonyes following Although sayth Biel Christ were once offered when he appeared in our flesh he is offred notwithstanding dayly hidden vnder the vailes of Bread wine not touching any of those things which import punishment or suffering for Christ is not dayly wounded he suffereth not he dyeth not but for two other causes the consecration and receiuing of the holy Eucharist may be named a sacrifice oblation first because it is a representation and memoriall of the true sacrifice holy oblation made on the Altar of the Crosse secondly because it maketh vs partakers of the effects of the same now the resemblances of things as Augustine noteth writing to Simplicianus are called by the names of those things whereof they are resemblances as we are wont to say when we behold a paynted table or wall this is Cicero this Salustius Wherefore seeing the celebration of this sacrifice is a liuely resemblance of the Passion of Christ which is the true sacrificing of him it may rightly bee named the sacrificing of him Peter Lombard Thomas and the other Schoolemen sayth Bellarmine were not carefull of that which is now in question touching the dayly renewed Reall sacrificing of Christ but only sought to shew how the sacrifice of the Masse may be called an offering of Christ that is a slaying of him therefore proposing the question whether the Eucharist be a sacrifice they answer for the most part that it may be sayde to bee an offering or sacrifice because it hath a resemblance of the true and Reall offering which was on the Altar of the Crosse and because it communicateth vnto vs the effects of the true and Reall killing of Christ. CHAP. XX. Of Remission of sinnes after this life THat Remission of sinnes after this life was not taught nor beleeued in former times by the Church appeareth by the judgement of these Divines who teach the contrary The prayers of the liuing sayth Durandus may be vnderstood to benefit the dead two wayes either in respect of remitting the fault or diminishing or taking away the punishment in the first sort the prayers of the liuing cannot profit the dead because either the sin wherein they depart out of this life is mortall or veniall if it be mortall hee that so departeth is not capable of Remission if veniall he needes no helpe because such remission of sinne consisteth in the ordering the will aright againe whereby men rightly dislike that they ill affected before now the willes of them that depart hence in grace yet with veniall sinne so soone as they are out of the body are brought into due order because as weight and lightnesse carry the things that are heavy or light if there be no impediment to their owne places so Grace and Charity carry men going hence to the possessing of eternall happinesse so that all things hindering or staying from the present enjoying thereof are bitter and vnpleasant Now because not onely punishments for mortall sinnes formerly committed but also veniall sinnes if any bee found in him that dyeth in state of grace hinder from such desired enjoying therefore they must needes bee disliked in which dislike the will is reordered againe which in the liking of that it should not was disordered c. The merites sayth Scotus of him that dyeth in charity are a sufficient cause of the remission of veniall sinnes neither is this cause hindred from working the proper effect thereof in him that dyeth as it often is in him that liueth for in him that liueth there is a stop and hindrance so long as hee remaineth actually in sinne but after death there is no stop because then a man committeth no sinne and therefore by such merits sinnes are remitted Whence it followeth that in the instant of death all veniall sinnes are remitted to men dying in state of grace Alexander of Hales maketh grace to be of three sorts the first that which is giuen in baptisme the second that which is found in men repenting of sinne committed after Baptisme and the third that which is in men departing hence which he calleth finall grace this last he saith taketh away all sinfullnesse out of the soule because when the soule parteth from the body all pronenesse to ill and all perturbations which were found in it by reason of the conjunction with the flesh do cease the powers thereof are quieted and perfectly subjected to grace and by that meanes all veniall sinnes remooued soe that no veniall sinne is remitted
away and this was said by the Auncient but now it is commonly holden that many carry venial sinnes with them out of this world euen in respect of the staine and fault Caietan agreeth with those Auncient Diuines that this Author speaketh of his words are these Patet quòd nec pro fomite purgando qui etiam in baptizatis remanet nec pro reliquis quibuscunque nisi satisfactione debit â pro commissis velomissis poenae sunt purgatoriae sicut nihil acquirit grave ex remotione prohibentis sed iuxta pristinam gravitatem tendit ad proprium locum it a anima ex remotlone prohibentis iuxta sortitam prius charitatem in coelestis patriae mansionem sibi paratam intrat That is It is evident that Purgatory paines serue neither for the purging out of the remaines of concupiscence which still abideth euen in the Baptized nor for the taking away of any other thing whatsoeuer but onely for the satisfying for the sinnes of omission and commision that are past and therefore if that bee once performed as a heauy thing when that is taken away which hindered getteth no new quality or vertue but by force of that waight and heauinesse it formerly had goeth to the proper place where nature hath appointed it to rest so the soule so soone as that is taken away which hindered by force and vertue of that charitie it formerly had entereth into the mansion of the Heauenly Countrey provided for it Further hee addeth that as after death charitie is extra statum merendi that is in a state wherein there is no farther meriting so likewise it is in a state wherein it is capable of no increase the increase of charitie being the bound of the merite of it whence it followeth that there is no purging out of any sinne after death for if after death there bee no new increasing of that grace and charitie which during life stood together with veniall sinne there is no purging out of any such sinne after death seeing it is charity stirred vp and enkindled that consumeth sinne as the burning Furnace doth a droppe of water and nothing else This is the resolution not of a few or meane men but of many and those the greatest and best esteemed of in the Churches wherein our Fathers liued and died To these I say Gregory seemeth to agree saying That the very feare that is found in men dying purgeth out the lesser sinnes But heere Maister Higgons hath noted three points of fraudulencie as hee saith committed by mee in a few words First by an omission in that whereas Saint Gregory saith plerunque for the most part it is so I omitte and leaue out this particle Secondly by a reddition in that whereas Gregory saith the Smallest I say the Lesser Thirdly by an extension in that whereas Gregory saith the Soules of the iust are purged I say in a more generall sort the soules of men dying are purged For answere hereunto I say I haue no way misalledged Gregory nor deriued any conclusion out of any words of his contrary to his purpose and Doctrine in other places for Gregory seemeth to bee of opinion that the feare that is found in the soules of good men dying doth alwayes purge out the lesser sinnes so often as it is found in them but that it is not alwayes found in them but for the most part whereas I haue onely said it doth purge out such sinnes without adding alwaies or for the most part And that hee addeth the particle for the most part to shew that this feare is not alwaies found in good men when they are to die and not to deny the effect of purging out the smaller sinnes vnto it wheresoeuer it is found appeareth in that immediatly after by way of opposition he saith that nonnunquam that is sometimes God strengtheneth and confirmeth the mindes of men ready to die that otherwise would feare so that they doe not feare at all but if wee take the words as Higgons would haue vs yet am I no whit disaduantaged for if the feare of Gods iudgements alone doe for the most part purge out the lesser sinnes it is likely that other good motions and the strengthning of grace and putting of it into a state of perfection by the subtraction of impediments should take away the rest which is all that I haue said For I doe not say that hee doth agree with those that thinke all sinfulnesse is purged out in the very moment of dissolution but that hee seemeth to agree with them or that in consequence of reason hee should agree with them Neither is his next exception of least and lesser any better then this For Gregorie himselfe in the thirty ninth chapter of the same booke speaking of those sinnes that are compared to timber hay and stubble and are to be purged out by the fire the Apostle speaketh of to the Corinthians calleth them indifferently peccata parua minima leâ—…ia leuissima minuta atque leuissima that is small and smallest light and lightest sins so that small or light sinnes in the positiue degree are the same with him that least or lightest and therefore it was no fraudulencie in mee not translating any sentence of Gregorie but reporting his opinion touching veniall sinnes indifferently and freely to name them small lesser or smallest and lightest sinnes seeing in his meaning and phrase of speech and trueth of the thing it selfe they are all one The last exception is more friuolous then the two former for speaking onely of the soules of the iust and the purging out of such sinnes as are found in them till death in my whole discourse what neede was there that I should adde iust seeing no man could possibly vnderstand mee to speake of any other but it seemeth the pooreman knoweth not well what hee saith for hee will haue Gregorie to meane by iust men men of singular sâ—…ctity and not generally all that are in the state of grace and yet denieth that all the sins of these are purged out in death so casting into purgatorie not only those of the middle sort but the best and perfittest also contrary to the opinions of his owne Diuines So that wee see here is much a doe about nothing and as the poore man said when he shore his Sowe heere is a great crie and a little woolle For I doe not absolutely say that Gregory fully agreeth with these worthy Diuines before mentioned who thinke all sinnefullnesse to be vtterly abolished and remoued out of the soule in the very moment of dissolution but that hee seemeth to agree vnto them or that in consequence of reason hee should agree vnto them in that hee maketh the very feare that is found in men dying to purge out their lesser sins when it is found in them though alwayes it be not found in them which is not my priuate conceit but the Grecians in their Apology touching Purgatory long before deliuered
Iesabel which called her selfe a Prophetesse to deceiue the people of God make thē cōmit fornication eate things sacrificed vnto Idols c. yet it is not to be thought that all that were of these Churches with one consent denied the resurrection fell into al the errours euils aboue mentioned For then doubtlesse these societies had ceased to be the true and Catholicke Churches of God so though sundrie dangerous and damnable errours were broached in the midst of the Church and house of God in the dayes of our Fathers which did fret as a canker as Gerson confesseth yet were they not with full approbation generally receiued but doubted of contradicted refuted and rejected as vncertaine dangerous damnable and hereticall And as in the reformation of those Churches of Corinth Galatia Pergamus and Thyatira if some had still persisted in the maintenance of those errours and abuses reproued by the Spirit of God and the blessed Apostles of our Sauiour Christ whiles other moued by the admonition of the Spirit of God and the wordes of the holy Apostles reformed themselues and so a diuision or separation had growen it had beene a vaine challenge for the stiffe maintainers of errours and abuses to challenge the reformed part for noueltie to aske of them where their Church was before this reformation began seeing it was euen the same wherein in one communion they formerly liued together with toleration of all those euills which the one part still retained and the other justly rejected So when many Princes Prelates and great States of the Christian world haue in our dayes shaken off that yoke of miserable bondage whereof our fathers complayned remooued those superstitious abuses they disliked condemned those errours in matters of doctrine which they acknowledged to bee daungerous and damnable fretting as a canker and insnaring the consciences of many It is no lesse vaine and friuolous for the Patrons of errour to aske vs which and where our Church was before the reformation beganne for it was that wherein all our Fathers liued longing to see things brought backe to their first beginnings againe in which their predecessours as a daungerous and wicked faction tyrannized ouer mens consciences and peruerted all things to the endlesse destruction of themselues and many others with whom they prevayled If they shall further reply that that Church wherein our fathers liued was not ours because there were many things found in it which wee haue not who seeth not that this reason stands as strong against them as against vs For there are many errours and superstitions which they haue reiected and doe not retaine at this day which were in being in the dayes of our Fathers And besides this obiection would haue serued the Patrons of errour in the Church of Corinth Galatia and the rest For they might haue sayd after those Churches were reformed that they were new and not the same that were before For that in the former the resurrection of the dead was denied circumcision vrged and practised discipline neglected and the Apostles of Christ contemned which things afterwards were not found in them As therefore this had beene a shamelesse objection of those erring miscreants against the godly and well-affected in those times so it is in ours And as those errours were not generall in those Churches so were not they which we haue condemned in the Churches wherein our Fathers liued As those errours and heresies were not the doctrines of the Churches of Corinth Galatia and the rest but the lewde assertions of some perverting and adulterating the doctrine of the Churches so likewise the errours which wee condemne at this day whereupon the difference groweth betweene the Romish faction and vs were neuer generally receiued nor constantly deliuered as the doctrines of the Church but vncertainly and doubtfully disputed and proposed as the opinions of some men in the Church not as the resolued determinations of the whole Church CHAP. 7. Of the seuerall points of difference betweene vs and our adversaries wherein some in the Church erred but not the whole Church FOr neither did that Church wherein our Fathers liued and died holde that Canon of Scripture which the Romanists now vrge nor that insufficiencie they now charge it with nor corruption of the originals nor necessitie of following the vulgar translation nor the heresies touching mans creation brought into the Church by certaine barbarous Schoolemen as that there are three different estates of men the first of pure nature without addition of grace or sinne and two other the one of grace the other of sinne That all those euils that are found in the nature of man since his fall as ignorance concupiscence contrariety betweene the better and meaner faculties of the soule difficulty to doe well and pronenesse to doe euill were all naturall the conditions of pure nature that is of nature as considered in it self it would come foorth from God That these euils are not sinfull nor had their beginnings from sinne that they were the consequents of Nature in the state of creation but restrained by addition of supernaturall grace without which the integrity of nature was full and perfect That men in the state of pure nature that is as they might haue beene created of GOD in the integritie of Nature without addition of grace and in the estate of originall sinne differ no otherwise but as they that neuer had and they that haue lost rich and precious cloathing so that originall sinne is but the losse of that without which natures integrity may stand that no euils are brought in by the fall but Nature left to her selfe to feele that which was before but not felt nor discerned while the addition of grace bettered Nature None of these errours touching the estate of mans creation were the doctrines of the Church but the private fancies and conceits of men So likewise touching originall sinne there were that taught that it is not inherent in each particular man borne of Adam but that Adams personall sinne is imputed onely that the propagation of sinne is not generall Mary being conceiued without originall sinne That the punishment of it is not any sensible smart or positiue euill but privatiue onely and that therefore there is a third place neither hell nor heauen named Limbus puerorum which is a place where as some thinke they who are condemned thither though they bee excluded from the kingdome of Heauen and all possibility of euer comming thither yet are in a state of naturall happinesse and doe enioy the sweet content of eternall life These Pelagian heresies were taught in the Church of God but they were not the doctrines of the Church being condemned rejected and refuted as contrary to the Christian verity by many worthy members and guides of the Church who as they neuer receiued these parts of false doctrine so likewise the Church wherein they liued neither knew nor approved that distinction and difference of veniall and mortall sinnes
which the Romanists now teach nor power of nature to doe the workes of the Lawe according to the substance of the things commanded though not according to the intention of the Law-giuer to loue God aboue all and to do actions morally good or not sinfull without concurrence of speciall grace nor election and reprobation depending on the foresight of some thing in vs positiue or priuatiue nor merit of congruence and condignity nor workes of supererogation nor counsels of perfection as they now teach nor iustification by perfection of inherent qualities nor vncertainty of grace nor seaven Sacraments properly so named nor locall presence nor Transubstantiation nor orall manducation of the body of Christ nor reall sacrificing of it for the quick the dead nor remission of sinnes after this life nor tormenting of the soules of men dying in the state of saluation in a part of hell hundred of yeares by divels in corporall fire out of which prayer should deliver them nor that the Saints heare our prayers know or are acquainted with our particular wants nor the grosse Idolatry in those times committed and intollerable abuses found in the number fashion and worship of their images nor their absolution as now they define it nor treasure of the Church growing out of the superfluitie of Saints merits not rewardable in themselues to be disposed by the Pope for supplie of other mens wants to release them out of Purgatorie by way of indulgence nor the infallibility of the Popes iudgment and plenitude of his power such and so great that he may depose Princes and dispose of their crownes and dignities and that whatsoeuer he doth he may not be brought into order or deposed by authority of the whole Christian world in a generall Councell These are the errours which wee condemne and our adversaries maintaine and defend these wee are well assured were not the doctrines of that Church wherein our Fathers liued and dyed though wee do not deny but they were taught by some in that Church All these we offer to proue to be errour in matter of our Christian faith and that seeing wee could no longer haue peace with our adversaries but by approuing these impieties wee had iust cause to divide our selues from them or to speake more properly to suffer our selues to be accursed anathematized and rejected by them rather than to subscribe to so many errours and heresies contrary to the Christian and Catholike verity CHAP. 8. Of the true Church which and where it was before Luthers time THus then it appeareth which wee thinke to haue beene the true Church of God before Luther or others of that sort were heard of in the world namely that wherein all our Fathers liued and died wherein none of the errours reproued by Luther ever found generall vniforme and full approbation in which all the abuses remoued by him were long before by all good men complained off and a reformation desired And therefore though wee accknowledge Wickliffe Husse Hierome of Prague and the like who with great magnanimity opposed them selues against the Tyranny of the See of Rome and the impiety of those who withheld the trueth of God in vnrighteousnesse who being named Christians serued Antichrist as Bernard complained of some in his time to haue beene the worthy servants of God and holy martyrs and confessours suffering in the cause of Christ against Antichrist yet doe wee not thinke that the Church of God was found onely in them or that there was no other appearance of succession of Church and ministerie as Stapleton and other of that faction falsely impute vnto vs. For wee most firmely beleeue all the Churches in the world wherein our Fathers liued and died to haue beene the true Churches of God in which vndoubtedly salvation was to be found and that they which taught embraced and beleeued those damnable errors which the Romanists now defend against vs were a faction only in the Churches as were they that denied the resurrection vrged circumcision and despised the Apostles of Christ in the Churches of Corinth and Galatia If any of our men deny these Churches to haue beene the true Churches of of God their meaning is limitted in respect of the prevailing faction that was in the Church and including them and all the wicked impieties by any of them defended in which sense their negatiue is to bee vnderstood For howsoever the Church which is not to be charged with the errours and faults of all that in the midst of her did amisse held a sauing profession of the trueth of God yet there were many and they carrying the greatest shew of the Church that erred damnably and held not a sauing profession of diuine trueth wherevpon Gerson sayth that before the councell of Constance the false opinions touching the power of the Pope did fret like a Canker preuailed so far that he would hardly haue escaped the note of heresie that had said but halfe so much as was defined in the Councell of Constance by the vniuersall consent of the whole Christian world Gregorius Ariminensis sheweth that touching the power of nature to doe things morrally good and to fulfill the law without concurrence of speciall grace touching the workes of infidels predestination reprobation and punishments of originall sinne the heresies of Pelagius were taught in the Church and that not by a few or contemptible men but so manie and of soe great place that he almost feared to follow the doctrine of the Fathers and oppose himselfe against them therein The same doth Gerson report concerning sundry lewd assertions preiudiciall to the states of Kings and Princes which the Councell of Constance could not bee induced to condemne by reason of a mighty faction that preuailed in it though many great ones much urged it and though they made no stay to condemne the positions of Wicklife and Hus seeming to derogate from the state of the Clergie though many of them might carry a good and Catholike sense if they might haue found a fauourable construction Whereupon he breaketh into a bitter complaint of the partialities and vnequall courses holden in the Church and protesteth that he hath no hope of a reformation by a councell things standing as they then did The like complaint did Contarenus make in our time that if any man did debase the nature of man deiect the pride of sinnefull flesh magnifie the riches of the grace of God and vrge the necessity of it hee was iudged a Lutheran and pronounced an Hereticke though they that gloried in the name of Catholikes were themselues Pelagian heretickes if not worse then Pelagians Alas saith Occam the time is come the blessed Apostle Saint Paule 2. Timoth. 4 prophecied of When men will not suffer wholesome doctrine but hauing their eares itching after their owne lustes get them a heape of Teachers turning their eares from the trueth and being giuen vnto fables This Prophecie is altogether fullfilled in our
doe those things he prescribeth to them in like sorte God seeing that sinne was entred brought in punishments to represse it and seeing that it would be eternall if man did continue immortall he brought in death to make an end of it For saith Epiphanius sin is so deepely rooted in vs that it cannot bee quite killed nor pulled vp by the rootes while the body and soule remaine together Euen as sayth hee when some wilde figge tree groweth in the walles of a Goodly and stately building and defaceth and hideth the beauty and glory of it the boughes and braunches may be cut or broken off but the roote which is wrapped into the stones of the building cannot bee taken away vnlesse the walles bee throwen downe and the stones cast one from another So the sinne vvhich dvvelleth in vs hath the rootes of it so invvrapped into our nature the parts of it that hovvsoeuer the boughs and braunches may be cut and broken off the roote remaineth vvhile vve carry about vs this body of death vvill cause more branches to grovv foorth till by death the parts of our nature to vvit the soule and the body bee sundred and diuided And as the vvall may be raised againe and the stones thereof in due sort laid together when the rootes of the trees which formermerly grew into it be taken forth So when the roote of sin is remoued by death out of mans nature God will bring these parts of his nature together againe and giue him that immortality both of body and soule which he intended to him in his creation and would haue giuen him had not death beene necessary for the rooting out of that sinne hee voluntarily fell into That sinne is soe deepely rooted in the nature of man that it cannot bee plucked vp but by death Epiphanius saith it is euident by that of the Apostle who pronounceth of himselfe that to will was present with him but he found no ability to performe That the good hee would do hee did not and the euill that bee would not doe that hee did And that yet it was not hee that did it but sinne that dwelleth in him By this sayth hee it is proued that sinne is not pulled vp by the rootes that it is not dead but liuing that there is no man but hath euill thoughts and desires which growe from this bitter roote of sinne which neither Baptisme nor faith do wholly remoue or kill that sinne is only repressed resisted and stilled from raging and preuailing in such sort as it did before but not wholly taken away Thus then wee see that Epiphanius most excellently deliuereth that in the defence of the trueth against Origen and such like heretickes which Bellarmine imputeth vnto vs as heresie condemned by Epiphanius Wherein surely he was either grosly abused by others making him beleeu Epiphanius sayth that which most peremptorily hee denyeth or else hee was vvilling to deceiue and abuse others Howsoeuer this aduantage wee haue gotten thereby that our assertion that sinne remaineth after Baptisme and that the roote of it is not taken away nor killed till by death the soule and body be diuided is proued to be the auncient doctrine of the Primitiue Fathers But if Epiphanius faile him Bellarmine hath another author whereon to relye For hee saith Theodoret reporteth that the Messalians were condemned for heretickes because they thought that Baptisme as a Razar shaueth away sinnes past but doth not take away the roote of sinne and that therefore for that purpose wee must flye to the force of prayer This opinion of the Messalians touching the not taking away the roote of sinne in such sort as they vnderstoode it and Theodoret disliked it wee also condemne For wee thinke that Baptisme doth not only take away sinnes past but the very roote of all sinnes which is Originall sinne though not wholly for then wee should dissent from Epiphanius before alleaged yet in such sort as I will deliuer in that which followeth The errour of the Messalians Bellarmine attributeth vnto vs because wee teach that concupiscence in the Regenerate is sinne For the better clearing of this point wee must obserue that the Romanists doe erre most daungerously in the matter of originall sinne and naturall concupiscence For first they teach that the contrariety betwene the spirit and the flesh the pronenesse inordinately to desire things transitory sensible and outward and the difficulty to that which is best are the primitiue conditions of the nature of man And consequently that concupiscence neither after nor before Baptisme in the Regenerate nor vnregenerate is sinne or punishment of sinne but a condition of pure and sole nature For if man had beene created in a state of pure nature that is hauing all that pertaineth to the integrity of nature and nothing else it would haue beene found in him Neither doe they make any doubt but that GOD might haue created man in the beginning with all those defects hee is now subiect vnto and yet without all sinne For the beeing subject to them argueth not sinne but whereas they were restrained bridled and suppressed by addition of supernaturall qualities the hauing of them at libertie by voluntarie losse of those qualities is not without sinne Thus then howsoeuer they talke of concupiscence in the Regenerate and would seeme to deny it to be sinne in them onely yet they doe as well deny it to be sin in men not Regenerate as in the Regenerate and make it onely a punishment of sinne if yet they yeeld so much vnto the truth For indeede according to their erroneous conceit concupiscence is a sequele of nature and not a punishment of sinne so that all that they doe or can say is nothing but this that concupiscence was naturall and such a thing as might bee found in the integrity of nature that it was restrained by supernaturall grace added aboue that nature requireth for the perfecting of her integritie that the hauing it now free and at libertie to prouoke moue and incline vs to sinne is the punishment of that sinne whereby we depriued our selues of supernaturall grace But wee say contrary to this absurd conceite of theirs First that all these defects and euils to wit contrariety betweene the better and meaner faculties of the soule pronenesse to doe euill and difficultie to doe good doe arise and grow out of the want of that originall righteousnesse the property whereof is to subject all vnto God and to leaue nothing voide of him Secondly that this righteousnesse was essentially required to the integrity of nature So that there is no state of sole and pure nature without addition of sinne or grace as the Papists fondly imagine for that the nature of man is such as must either be lifted aboue it selfe by grace or fall below it selfe and be in a state of sinne Thirdly that all declinings and swaruings from that perfect subjection vnto God and entire conjunction with God which grace worketh
liue at one time and may be limited also in respect of place for it is not necessary that the Church be in all places at one time but it sufficeth if it bee successiuely Fiftly vniuersality may be a note of the true Church in respect of particular societies of Christians limited in time and place though not by hauing it yet by demonstrating themselues to pertaine to the vnity of that Church that hath it This no particular Church can do but by prouing that it holdeth the common faith once deliuered to the Saints without hereticall innouation or schismaticall violation of the vnity and peace of the Christian world This being the way for particular Churches to demonstrate themselues to be Catholike by prouing they hold the Catholike faith it is easie from hence to conclude that the reformed Churches are the Catholike Churches of God First for that that being Catholike as Vincentius Lirinensis defineth it which is and hath beene holden at all times and in all places by all Christians that haue not beene noted for noueltie singularity and diuision whatsoeuer hath beene so receiued wee receiue as the vndoubted truth of God neither is there any of the things which wee impugne and the Papists defend that is Catholike but they all carry the markes of nouelty and vncertainty Secondly touching the communion the people of God should haue among themselues our aduersaries shall neuer proue that wee haue at any time giuen occasion of those breaches that now appeare But wee will proue against them that they haue and so the note of Vniuersality maketh nothing for them or against vs. Touching the name of Catholike devised to expresse those both men and societies of men which hold the common faith without faction or division I haue spoken sufficiently in the former part touching the notes of the Church and so need not here to insist vpon it Thus haue we runne through the examination of the principall notes of the Church assigned by our adversaries but because they adde vnto these certaine other I will briefly examine their proofs taken from thence for themselues or against vs. CHAP. 44. Of the Sanctity of Doctrine and the supposed absurdities of our profession THese notes are Sanctity and efficacie of doctrine our own confession miracles and predictions the felicity and infelicity of such as defend or impugne the trueth and lastly the holy and religious conversation of the Professours of the truth Let vs take a view of these in such sort and order as they are proposed by them They place in the front the Sanctity and efficacie of doctrine A lyer they say should haue a good memory but surely our adversaries of all the lyers that euer were haue the worst memories by reason whereof euery second page of their writings if not euery second line is a refutation of the first Bellarmine divideth his tract of the notes of the Church into two parts In the first he sheweth what things are required in the notes of the Church and there he saith trueth and Sanctity of doctrine is no note of the Church In the latter he doth particularly assigne the notes whereby he supposeth the Church may be knowne and reckoneth truth sanctitie and efficacie of doctrine amongst the rest But let vs pardon him this ouersight and see how he proueth by this note that we are not and that their faction is the true Church of God Our doctrine is false absurd and vnreasonable and theirs full of truth reason and equitie Therefore our Churches are not the true Churches of God and theirs are Both parts of the Antecedent of this argument we deny For he shall neuer bee able to proue the absurdities he imputeth vnto vs but we are able to demonstrate against him that the whole course of Popish doctrine is most absurd false and impious But least hee should seeme to say nothing hee produceth foure instances wherein he supposeth there is apparant and very grosse absurditie The first he proposeth in this sort The Protestants teach that a man is justified by speciall faith whereby he perswadeth himselfe that he is just Now then he reasoneth thus When men beginne to beleeue either they are just and then their faith justifieth not being in nature after their justification and finding them already just when it beginneth or else they are not just and then speciall faith making a man beleeue he is just is false and so a man is justified by a lye To this horned argument wee answere that speciall faith hath sundry actes but to this purpose specially two the one by way of petition humbly intreating for acceptation and fauour the other in the nature of comfortable assurance consisting in a perswasion that that is graunted which was desired Faith by her first act obtaineth and worketh our justification and doeth not finde vs just when wee beginne to beleeue by her second act shee doeth not actiuely justifie but finding the thing done certifieth and assureth vs of it and so is no lying perswasion as this lying companion is pleased to pronounce it to bee So then speciall faith in her first act which is a kinde of petition is before justification and procureth or obtaineth it but then shee hath not the perswasion of it in her second act shee presupposeth the thing done and already obtayned and so truely perswadeth the beleeuer of it but procureth not the doing of it The second palpable and grosse absurdity of the Protestants doctrine is that it is not lawfull to say the Lords prayer This the Cardinall proueth because no man of the Protestants Religion can without dissimulation aske forgiuenesse of sinnes which is one of the principall petitions of that prayer This petition they cannot make because they hold that all right beleeuing and iustified men are without sinne and know themselues so to be and therefore cannot be excusable from vile dissimulation and mocking of God in asking the remission of their sinnes The impudencie of this imputation is such as I thinke all moderate Papists are ashamed of it For doth any of vs thinke that the iustified man is voyd of all sinne Or is it consequent if a man know himselfe to be iustified that then he may not aske remission of his sins Doe not many right learned and wise amongst themselues teach that a man may be sure he is in state of grace and iustification by the ordinary working of Gods spirit and doe not all Papists thinke that by speciall reuelation men may be sure they are in state of grace as Paul and sundry others were Doe all these teach that men thus assured of their iustification know themselues to haue no sin consequently nothing whereof they should aske forgiuenesse Surely herein I thinke both they we agree that in the iustified the dominion of sinne ceaseth sin hath no longer dominion ouer them that proportionably the guilt of condemnation is taken away but that there are still remainders of sin in them
the Emperor cōcerning the necessary reformation of the Church one was that Happily it were to be permitted that in some places prayers faithfully translated into the vulgar tongue might be intermingled with those things that are sung in latine Likewise in the articles of reformation exhibited to the councell of Trent by Charles the 9◠In sacrificio paraecialibus Euangelium apertè dilucidè pro populi captu copiose ex suggestu exponatur quo in loco quae plebano praeeunte fient preces linguâ fiant vernaculâ peractâ autem re diuinâ latine mysticis precibus lingua etiam vernacula publicae ad Deum preces fiant ibidem plura Which thing if it had bin granted by the councell no new nor strang thing had bin brought in for as Hosius testifieth the Church neuer forbad to sing in the Churches in the vulgar tongue in time and place It were to be wished sayth Erasmus that the whole service of God might be celebrated and performed in a tongue vnderstood of the whole people as in auncient times it was wont to bee and that all things should bee soe plainely and distinctly sounded out that they might bee vnderstood of all that list to attend And Cassander fully agreeing with Erasmus and alleadging to this purpose the Popes permitting of it to the Slauonians vpon the hearing of a voice frō heauen the authority of Caietan sayth It were to be desired that according to the mandate of the Apostle and the auncient custome of the Church consideration might be had of the people in the publike praiers of the Church and in the hymnes and lessons which are there read and sung for the peoples sake and that the ordinary and vulgar sort of beleeuers might not for ever bee wholly excluded from all communion of prayers and diuine readings and hee addeth that vnlesse there bee a reformation in this and other things there is no hope of any durable peace or consent of the Church and professeth hee cannot see but that they to whom the government of the Church is committed shall one day giue an account why they suffered the Church to bee thus miserably disquieted and rent in sunder and neglected to take away the causes whence heresies schismes do spring as in duety they should haue done So that in this poynt as in the former we see the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died was a true Protestant Church CHAP. 5. Of the three supposed different estates of meere nature grace and sinne the difference betweene a man in the state of pure and meere nature and in the state of sinne and of originall sinne THey of the Church of Rome at this day imagine that God might haue created a man in the state of pure nature or nature onely aswell without grace as sinne and that in this state of pure or meere nature without any addition of grace hee might haue loued God aboue all and haue kept all the commaundements of God collectiuely so as to breake none of them at the least for a short time though happily hee could not haue holden on constantly so to keepe them all as neuer to breake any of them seeing there would haue beene a contrariety betweene reason and that appetite that followeth the apprehension of sense in that state of pure or meere nature So that according to this conceipt grace was added not to inable man to loue God aboue all to keepe the severall cōmaundements which hee hath giuen to doe the workes of morall vertue For all these hee might haue beene able to performe out of the power of nature without any such addition but to make him able constantly to keepe all the commaundements of God collectiuely so as neuer to breake any one of them and to keepe them so as to merit eternall happines in heauen Hence they inferre diverse things First that the losse of grace or originall righteousnes that was given to Adam doth not depriue those of his posterity of the power of louing God their Creator aboue all of keeping his commaundements divisiuely and doing the seuerall workes of morall vertue though happily not with that facilitie that in the state of grace hee might haue done them Secondly That Infidels and such as haue no fellowship with the Saints people of God nor any part in his grace may decline sinne and doe the workes of morall vertue Thirdly That all the contrariety that is found in the powers of the soule the rebellion of the inferiour faculties against the superiour the pronenesse to euill and difficultie to doe good would haue beene the conditions of meere nature without addition of grace or sinne and consequently that they are not sinne in the state wherein wee are that these evills are not newly brought into the nature of man by the fall that as man would haue beene mortall in the state of meere nature because compounded of contraries so out of the contrariety of sensitiue and rationall desire hee would haue found a rebellion in himselfe of the inferiour faculties against the superiour that as a heauy thing falleth not downeward while it is stayed but falleth so soone as the stay is taken away by reason of the same nature it had while it was stayed and as a ship that lay quietly while it was stayed with an anchor vpon the remouing of the same is driuen with the windes yet in no other sort then it would haue beene before if it had not beene stayed so all these contrarieties differences and pronenesse to desire things contrary to the prescript of right reason would haue beene in meere nature as the conditions of it would haue shewed themselues if grace had not hindered them and that there is no other difference betweene a man in the state of pure or meere nature and in the state of originall sinne then there is betweene a man that neuer had any cloathing and him that had but by his owne fault and folly is stript out of all betweene whom there is no difference in the nature of nakednesse but all the difference standeth in this that the one is in fault for not hauing cloathes the other not so For they suppose man would haue beene carried as strongly to the desire of sinfull things in the state of pure nature as now that freewill is not made more weake then in that state it would haue beene nor the flesh become more rebellious then it would haue beene without grace before the entrance of sinne This opinion ◠Bellarmin followeth and professeth that though some of excellent learning thinke that both Thomas and the best and most approued of the schoolmen were of a contrary iudgment yet they are deceiued in so thinking and that this is the opinion of them all Against these erroneous conceipts that are indeede the ground of all the points of difference betweene them and vs touching originall sinne freewill the power of nature the workes
of infidels and the like we oppose this proposition That no state of pure or meere nature can be conceiued but that either a man must be lifted aboue himselfe by grace or fall below himselfe by sin And this proposition is proued by vnanswerable reasons For if the principall powers of the soule cannot performe their owne proper actions by any naturall facultie nor without the addition of grace and a kinde of divine force and helpe then can there be no conceipt of a state of pure or meere nature seeing the nature of a thing implieth the powers pertaining to it and a possibility to bring forth the actions of such powers But it is evident that the principall powers of mans soule cannot by any naturall facultie performe their proper actions because the first trueth and chiefest good are the obiects of the reason and the will and these are infinite and the naturall capacitie of reason and the will is finite so that whatsoeuer we vnderstand and conceiue concerning God is so much lesse and commeth so much short of his infinite perfection as the capacitie of our vnderstanding is lesse then the infinite being of God But how then will some man say can man attaine his good beeing so high excellent farre remoued from him and so infinitely beyond without the cōpasse of his naturall facultie The answer hereunto is that though nothing can be lifted vp to be any thing aboue the nature of it yet by forrain helpe a thing may bee carried or lifted aboue it selfe or aboue the nature of it that is aboue that to which the naturall facultie of it extendeth it selfe as a stone may by the hand of man be cast vp on high whether it hath no facultie to moue it selfe so the soule may be raysed and lifted by grace in the acts of her powers aboue that to which by any naturall facultie they can extend themselues For though by nature men cannot know God as he is in himselfe but onely so farre forth as by his effects and glorious workes he may be knowne yet God may present himselfe vnto them in the light of grace as he is in himselfe and make his infinite greatnesse to appeare vnto them and so he must or else man can neuer attaine that which is is his proper good Actus rationalis creaturae sayth Alensis p 3 q 61 memb 1. oportet quod ordinetur ad bonum quod est supra naturam quod est summum bonum infinitum quia ergo non est possibilis extensio rationalis creaturae supra seipsam ideo non est eipossibile per naturā vt ordinet suum actū siue perueniat in suum finem ideo necesse est quod iuuetur à gratiâ The act of a reasonable creature must be directed to a good aboue nature which is the chiefe good and infinite because therefore a reasonable creature cannot raise it selfe aboue it selfe therefore it is not possible that by the power of nature it should order its act or attaine its end and therefore it must be holpen by grace So then there is no immediate knowledge of God as hee is in him selfe no knowledge that in time for his owne sake he made all things of nothing no knowledg how and in what sort wee depend on him how his prouidence reacheth to vs how hee guideth us in all our wayes and consequently how wee should loue him feare him and trust in him and depend vpon him And if within the compasse of nature there bee no such knowledge of God then is there no right loue of God For no man can rightly loue God vnlesse hee rightly know him And if we doe not rightly loue God wee can do nothing well nay wee cannot but continually doe evill For euery thing that a man willeth and affecteth is either God or some other thing besides God If a man loue God not for himselfe but for some other thing this act is sinfull and culpable and not morally good If a man loue any other thing besides God and loue it not finally for God the act of his loue resteth finally in some other thing that is not God and hee loueth it for it selfe without any further reference and soe inioyeth some other thing besides God as if it were the vttermost and most principall good which act is culpable Now if a man remaining within the compasse of nature withour addition of grace cannot but doe euill then can there bee noe state of nature that is not sinnefull without grace and consequently there can bee no state of pure or meere nature seeing euerie thing that is culpable and faulty in any kind is contrary to the nature of the thing wherein it is found and a corruption of nature But that all the principall actions of men without grace are culpable and faulty it is euident because they loue God for some other thing and not for himselfe neuer coming to any knowledge of him as hee is in himselfe and they loue other things for themselues and finally without any reference to God So that grace is necessarily required in man for the performance of his actions so as not to sinne And it is true that Gregorius Ariminensis hath that Adam in the state of his creation was not sufficiently inabled to performe any act morally good or soe to doe any good thing as not to sinne in doing it by any thing in nature if hee had not had speciall grace added Whence it will follow that there is no power to doe good or not to sinne in the nature of a man but from grace that when grace is lost there is an impossibility of doing good and a necessity of doing euill The Papists and wee agree that originall sinne is the privation of original righteousnesse but they suppose there was in nature without that addition of grace a power to doe good and that it was not giuen simply to make man able to do good but constantly and so as to merit heauen so that it being taken away a man may decline each particular sinne and doe the seuerall workes of vertue though neither so as neuer to sinne nor soe as to merit heauen thereby But wee say there neither was nor could be any power in nature as of it selfe to doe any act morally good or not sinnefull that grace was giuen to inable men to performe the actions of their principall powers about their principall obiects and to do good and that it being taken away there is found in them an impotencie to doe any act of vertue and a necessity of sinning in all their morall actions till they be restored again to the state of grace that the difficulty to do good pronenesse to euill contrariety betweene the powers and faculties of the soule and the rebellion of the meaner against the superiour and better are not the conditions of nature as it was or might haue beene in it selfe before the entrance of sinne but that all
entrance of sin precisely by the strength of his naturall faculties to do an act morally good then hee might haue made him selfe good of not good supposing that sometimes in the state of meere nature he had no act of will or at the least he might haue made himselfe of good better without the speciall helpe of God but this consequent must not be admitted for if Adam might thus haue done the good Angels might haue done soe but that is contrary to St Augustine his words are these Si boni Angeli fuerunt prius sine bonâ voluntate eamque in seipsis deo non operante fecerunt ergo meliores à seipsis quam ab illo facti sunt Absit At si non potuerunt seipsos facere meliores quaÌ„ eos ille fecerat quo nemo melius quic quam facit profecto bonam voluntatem quà meliores essent nisi operante adiutorio creatoris habere non possent that is If the good Angells were first without any good motion of will or the goodnesse of the will and afterwards God not working wrought it in themselues then they made themselues better then they were made of him which God forbid wee should euer thinke But if they could not make themselues better then he made them then whom no man can do any thing better truly vnles the helpe of their Creator wrought them to it they could not haue that goodnesse of wil whereby they might become better then they were before That which hee thus proueth touching the state of man before the fall is vndoubtedly true in the state of the fall and therefore all the most pious and iudicious men in euery age haue taught as wee now do that since the fall of Adam there is no power left in any of his posterity before they be renewed by grace to decline sinne or to doe any worke morally good and that may be truly named a worke of vertue And these cannot but farther agree with Ariminensis and vs touching the impotencie of nature before the entrance of sin to do any good act or act of vertue of it selfe without the addition of grace For if grace had not bin giuen in the state of the creation simply to inable to do good but that there had bin a power of doing good in nature without and before the addition of grace then vpon the losse of it there had followed no such impotencie in the present state as these men affirme there did and they that hold the other opinion denie All these affirme that all the posterity of Adam are plunged into such an estate of ignorance by this fall that without speciall illumination of grace they know not sufficiently concerning any thing that is to bee done or committed that it is to be done or committed and wherefore in what sort into such an estate of infirmity impotencie in respect of the will that they cannot will any thing that is to be willed for such cause and in such sort as it is to be willed and withsuch circumstances as are required to make an act to be morally good and truly vertuous St Austine sayth that Adam and Eue so soone as they had sinned were cast headlong into error misery and death that it was most iust they should soe be for what sayth hee is more iust then vt amittat quisque quo bene vti noluit cum sine vlla posset difficultate si vellet id est vt qui sciens rectè non facit aâ—…ittat scire quid rectuÌ„ sit qui rectè facere cum posset noluit amittat posse cuÌ„ velit that euery one should loose that which when with ease he might hee would not vse well that is that he that hauing knowledge doth not right should loose the knowledge of that which is right that he that would not do well when he might should loose the power of doing well when hee would And elsewhere speaking of the first sinne of the Angells and men hee sayth that when they fell Subintrauit ignorantia rerum agendarum concupiscentia noxiarum that is there entred in ignorance of things to bee done and desire of things hurtfull that are to be declined Prosper in his booke in defence of the preachers of grace against Cassian reprehendeth him because he had said in his collation de protectione Dei that Adam gained the knowledge of euill after his fall but lost not the knowledge of good which he had receiued telleth him that both these propositions are vntrue so that hee thinketh that Adam lost the knowledge of good Hugo de sancto Victore saith the first man was indued with a threefold knowledge cognitione scilicet creatoris sui ut cognosceret à quo factus erat cognitione sui ut cognosceret quid factus erat quid sibi faciendum erat deindè cognitione quoque illius quod secum factum erat quid sibi de illo in illo faciendum erat That is he was indued with knowledge of his Creator that he might know of whom he was made with knowledge of himself that he might know what he was made and what he was to doe lastly with knowledge of that which was made together with him what he was to doe with in it For no man is to doubt but that man had perfect knowledge of all those visible things that were made for him with him as much as pertained either to the instruction of his soule or the necessity of bodily vse This knowledge man hath not lost by the fall neither that whereby hee was to prouide things necessarie for the flesh and therefore God was not carefull afterwards to instruct him touching these things by the Scriptures but he was to bee taught that knowledge that concerneth the soule onely when hee was to be restored because he had lost that only by sinning And in the same place hee excellently describeth the knowledge of God that Adam had to haue bin not by hearing only from without as now but by inspiration within not that whereby now beleeuers by faith seeke after God as absent but that whereby by presence of contemplation he was more manifestly seene of him as knowing him And concludeth it is hard to expresse the manner of the diuine knowledge the first man had but that onely this is certaine that being taught visibly by inward inspiration he could no way doubt of his Creator In like sort the same Hugo sheweth most excellently that man hath lost all rectitude of will for whereas there was giuen to man a double desire iusti commodi of that which is just and that which is pleasing the one voluntary the other necessary that by the one he might merite or demerite by the other he might be punished or rewarded for if he had no desire of that is pleasing hee could neither be rewarded by hauing nor punished by being depriued He hath lost the one
this body they would all crye out with a loud voice If we say we haue no sinne wee deceiue our selues and there is no trueth in vs. Gregorius Ariminensis noteth that Augustine speaketh not of originall sin but actuall and that this ample grace to ouercome sinne was not giuen her till the spirit ouer-shadowed her and the power of the most High came vpon her that shee might conceiue and beare him that neuer knew sinne so that before shee might commit sinne which yet hee will not affirme because the moderne Doctours for the most part thinke otherwise so intimating that all did not And surely the wordes of Augustin doe not import that shee had no sinne but that shee ouercame it which argueth a conflict neither doth hee say he will acknowledge shee was without sinne but that hee will not moue any question touching her in this dispute of sinnes and sinners So passing by the point and not willing to enter into this dispute with the Pelagian who conceiued it would be plausible for him to pleade for the puritie of the Mother of our Lord and disgracefull for any one to except against her By that which hath beene said it appeareth that the Church of God neuer resolued any thing touching the birth of the blessed Virgin without sinne nor whether shee were free from all actuall sinne or not If happily it bee alleadged that the Church celebrated the Feast of her nativitie and therefore beleeued that shee was borne without sinne First touching the celebration of this Feast it is evident that it was not auncient That it was not in the dayes of Saint Augustine as some imagine because on that day there is read in the Church a Sermon of Saint Augustines touching the solemnitie of that day it is proued out of Saint Augustine himselfe for in his 21 Sermon de sanctis he hath these wordes Wee celebrate this day the birth-day of Iohn the Baptist which honour wee neuer read to haue beene giuen to any of the Saints Solius enim Domini beati Ioannis dies nativitatis in universo mundo celebratur colitur That is For the birth-day of our Lord onely and of Iohn the Baptist is celelebrated kept holy throughout the whole world illum enim sterilis peperit illum virgo concepit in Elizabetha sterilitas vincitur in beatâ Mariâ conceptionis consuetudo mutatur That is A woman that was barren bare the one and a virgin the other in Elizabeth barrennes is ouercome in blessed Mary the ordinary course of conceiuing is changed And in his 20 â—h sermon hee hath these words Post illum sacrosanctum Domini natalis diem nullius hominum nativitatem legimus celebrari nisi solius beati Ioannis Baptistae In aliis sanctis electis Dei novimus illum diem coli quo illos post consummationem laborum devictum triumphatumque mundum in perpetuas aeternitates praesens haec vita parturit In aliis consummata vltimi diei merita celebrantur in hoc etiam prima dies ipsa etiam hominis initia consecrantur pro hac absque dubio causà quia per hunc Dominus adventum suum ne subito homines insperatum non agnoscerent voluit esse testatum That is After that most sacred day of the birth of our Lord wee reade not that the nativity of any one amongst men is celebrated but of Iohn the Baptist onely touching other Saints and other the chosen of God wee know that that day is celebrated in which after the consummation of their labours after their victories and triumphs ouer the world this present life bringeth them forth to begin to liue for euer In others the consummate vertues of the last day are celebrated in this the first day and the beginnings of the man are consecrated for this cause no doubt because the Lord would haue his comming made knowen to the world by him least if his comming had not beene expected and looked for it might happily not haue beene acknowledged Neither doth the reading of the sermon of Saint Augustine on that day pertayning to the solemnity of the day proue that this day was kept holy before his time for as Baronius sheweth the sermon was fitted originally to the solemnity of the feast of the Annunciation the words were these Let our land reioyce illustrated with the solemne day of so great a virgine which are altered and read in the breviarie in this sorte Let our land rejoyce illustrated by the birth day of so great a virgin And it is evident by the councell of Mentz holden in the time of Charles the great in the yeare 813 that this feast was not celebrated in the Church of Germany and France in those times As likewise it appeareth by the constitutions of Charles and Ludovicus Pius Secondly the celebrating of the birth-day of the blessed virgine will no more proue that shee was borne without all sinne then that Iohn the Baptist was so borne concerning whom Bernard sayth hee knoweth he was sanctified before he came out of the wombe but how farre this sanctification freed him from sinne hee dareth not say or define any thing Thus wee see that the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died was a Protestant Church in these poynts touching the conception birth of the blessed virgine aswell as in the former CHAP. 7. Of the punishment of originall sinne and of Limbus puerorum BEllarmine sheweth that there are foure opinions in the Roman Church touching the punishment of originall sinne and the state of infants dying vnregenerate for Ambrosius Catharinus in his booke of the state of children dying vnbaptized Albertus Pighius in his first controversie and Savanarola in hâ—…s booke of the triumph of the crosse doe teach that infants dying without baptisme shall after the iudgement enioy a kinde of naturall happinesse and liue happily for euer as it were in a certaine earthly paradise howsoeuer for the present they goe downe into those lower parts of the earth which are called Limbus puerorum These men suppose that infants incurre no staine or infection by Adams sinne but that for his offence being denyed the benefit of supernaturall grace which would haue made them capable of heauen happines they are found in a state of meere nature in which as they cannot come to heauen so they are subiect to no euili that may cause them to sorrow For though they see that happines in heaven whereof they had a possibility yet they no more greiue that they haue not attained it then innumerable men doe that they are not Kings and Emperours as well as others of which honours they were capable as well as they in that they were men The second opinion is that infants dying in the state of originall sinne not remitted are excluded from the sight of God and condemned to the prison house of the infernall dwellings for euer so that they suffer the punishment of losse but
vniversally so as to merite heauen But Augustine Prosper Fulgentius Gregory Beda Bernard Anselme Hugo many worthy Divines mentioned by the Master of Sentences yeaâ—…he Master himselfe Grosthead Bradwardine Ariminensis the Catholique Divine that Stapleton speaketh of those that Andradius noteth Alvarez and other agree with vs that there is no power left in nature to avoide sin to doe any one good action that may be truely an action of vertue therefore they say grace must change vs and make vs become new men Cardinall Contarenus noteth that the Philosophers perceiuing a great inclination to euill to be found in the nature of mankind thinking it might bee altered put right by inuring them to good actions gaue many good precepts directions but to no purpose for this euill being in the very first spring of humane actions that is the last end chiefly desired which they sought not in God but in the creature no helpe of Nature or Art was able to remedie it as those diseases of the body are incurable which haue infected the fountaine of life the radicall humiditie GOD onely therefore who searcheth the secret most retired turnings of our soule spirit by the inward motion of his holy spirit changeth the propension inclination of our will and turneth it vnto himselfe And in another place he hath these wordes Wee must obserue that at this present the Church of God by the craft of the diuell is divided into two sects which rather doing their owne busines then that of Christ seeking their owne glory more then the honour of GOD the profite of their neighbours by stiffe pertinacious defence of contrary opinions bring them that are not wary and wise to a fearefull downefall For some vaunting themselues to be professours of the Catholique Religion enemies to the Lutherans while they goe about too much to maintaine the libertie of mans will out of too much desire of opposing the Lutherans oppose themselues against the greatest lights of the Christian Church and the first principall teachers of Catholique verity declining more then they should vnto the heresie of Pelagius Others when they haue beene a little conversant in the writings of S. Augustine though they haue neither that modestie of minde nor loue towards God that he had out of the pulpit propose intricate things such as are indeed meere paradoxes to the people So that touching the weakenes of nature the necessitie of grace we haue the consent of all the best and worthiest in the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died The nextthing to be considered is the power of freewill in disposing it selfe to the receipt of grace Durandus is of opinion that a man by the power of free will may dispose and fitte him selfe for the receipt of grace by such a kind of disposition to which grace is to be giuen by pact and diuine ordinance not of debt Amongst the latter diuines there are that thinke that as one sinne is permitted that it may be a punishment of another soe God in respect of almes and other morall good workes done by a man in the state of sinne vseth the more speedily and effectually to helpe the sinner that hee may rise from sinne and that God infallibly and as according to a certaine lawe giueth the helpes of preuenting grace to them that doe what they can out of the strength of nature this is the merit of congruence they are wont to speake of in the Roman Schooles But as I noted before Gregorius Ariminensis resolutely rejects the conceipt of merit of congruence Stapleton saith it is exploded out of the Church And Aluarez that S. Augustine Prosper whom Aquinas the Thomists follow reiect the same August l. 2. contra duas epistolas Pelagii c. 8. Si sine Dei gratià per nos incipit cupiditas boni ipsum caeptum erit meritum cui tanquam ex debito gratiae veniat adiutorium ac sic gratia Dei non gratis donabitur sed meritum nostrum dabitur c. 6. lib. 4. lib. de praedest sanctorum de dono perseuerantiae Et Prosper lib de gratiâ libero arbitrio ad Ruffinum ait Quis ambigat tunc liberum arbitrium cohortationi vocantis obedire cum in illo gratia Dei affectum credendi obediendique generauerit Alioquin sufficeret moneri hominem non etiam in ipso nouam fieri voluntatem sicut scriptum est Praeparatur voluntas à domino Neque obstat sayth Aluarez quod idem Salomon Prouerb cap. 16. inquit hominis est praeparare animam Intelligit enim hominis esse quia libere producit consensum quo praeparatur ad gratiam sed tamen id efficit supposito auxilio speciali Dei inspirantis bonum interius mouentis sic explicat istum locum August lib. 2. contra duas epistolas Pelag. cap. 8. And so those words are to be vnderstood If any one open the doore I will enter in Reuela 3 and Isaâ—… 30. The Lord expecteth that he may haue mercy on you for he expecteth not our consent as comming out of the power of nature or as if any such consent were a disposition to grace but that consent hee causeth in vs. Fulgentius lib de incarnatione cap. 19. Sicut in nativitate carnali omnem nascentis hominis voluntatem praecedit operis diuini formatio sic in spirituali natiuitate quâ veterem hominem deponere incipimus Bernard de gratiâ libero arbitrio in initio Ab ipsâ gratiâ me in bono praeuentum agnosco provehi sentio spero perficiendum Neque currentis neque volentis sed dei miserantis est Quid igitur agit ais liberum arbitrium breuiter respondeo saluatur tolle liberum arbitrium non erit quod saluetur tolle gratiam non erit vnde saluetur opus hoc sine duobus effici non potest uno á quo fit altero cui vel in quo fit Deus author est salutis liberum arbitrium tantum capax nec dare illam nisi Deus nec capere valet nisi liberum arbitrium quod ergo a solo Deo soli datur libero arbitrio tam absque consensu esse non potest accipientis quam absque gratiâ dantis ita gratiae operanti salutem cooperari dicitur liberum arbitrium dum consentit hoc est dum saluatur consentire enim saluari est Yet must we not thinke that God moueth vs and then expecteth to see whether wee will consent Concilium Arausicanum Can. 4. Si quis vt a peccato purgemur voluntatem nostram Deum expectare contendit non autem vt etiam purgari velimus per sancti spiritus infusionem operationem in nos fieri confitetur resist it ipsi spiritui sancto per Salomonem dicenti praeparatur voluntas a domino Apostolo salubriter praedicanti Deus est qui operatvr in nobis
desinit esse gratia quoniam id adiuvat quod ipsa est largita Hugo de Sancto Victore Benefaciendi tres sunt gratiae praeveniens cooperans subsequens prima dat voluntatem secunda facultatem tertia perseverantiam So that in the matter of free will and grace the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died is found to haue beene a Protestant Church CHAP. 11. Of Iustification THey of the Church of Rome doe teach that there is a threefold iustification The first when a man borne in sinne and the childe of wrath is first reconciled to God and translated into a state of righteousnesse and grace The second when of righteous hee becommeth more righteous And the third when hauing fallen from grace he is restored againe The first Iustification implyeth in it three things remission of sinnes past acceptation and receiuing into that fauour that righteous men are wont to find with God and the grant of the gift of the holy spirit and of that sanctifying renewing grace whereby we may be framed to the declining of sinne and the doing of the workes of righteousnesse These being the things implyed in the first justification of a sinner it is agreed by all that when in sorrowfull dislike of former mis-doings wee turne vnto God all our sinnes past are freely remitted thorough the benefite of Christs satisfaction imputed vnto vs as also that for the merite of Christs actiue righteousnes consisting in the fulfilling of the Law wee are accepted and finde fauour with God as if wee had alwayes walked in the wayes of God and pleased him And both these are necessary for if a man cease to bee an enemie he doth not presently become a friend and though hee pardon him that offended him so as not to seeke revenge of the offence yet doth it not follow that presently hee receiueth him into fauour but it is possible hee should neither respect him as an enemie nor as a friend and neither will euill vnto him as to an enemie nor good as to a friend So likewise it sufficeth not that God remitte our sinnes and seeke not our euill for Christs passion but it is necessary also that hee bee so reconciled as to embrace vs as freinds and to doe good vnto vs this wee haue by the merit of Christs actiue righteousnes who having a two fold right to heaven the one of inheritance because borne the sonne of God the other of merit because he had done things worthy the reward of heauen made vse onely of the one and communicateth the other vnto vs. Neither is this all that the sinner when he is to bee iustified seeketh after for hee neuer resteth satisfied till hee haue not onely obtayned remission of sinnes past and acceptation with God but the graunt of the gift of the spirit also and of that grace that may keepe him from offending God so as formerly and incline him to doe the things that are pleasing vnto him And therefore in the conference at Ratisbon the Diuines of both sides agreed that no man obtayneth remission of sinnes nisietiam simul infundatur charitas sanans voluntatem vt voluntas sanata quemadmodum ait Augustinus incipiat implere Legem Fides ergo viva est quae apprehendit misericordiam Dei in Christo credit iustitiam quae est in Christo sibi gratis imputari quae simul pollicitationem spiritus sancti charitatem accipit So that it is evident that to bee iustified hath a three fold signification For first it importeth as much as to bee absolved from sinne that is to bee freed from the wofull consequents of that disfauour and dislike that vnrighteousnes and sinne subjecteth vs vnto Secondly To bee accepted and respected so as righteous men are wont to bee And thirdly to bee framed to the loue and desire of doing righteously And in this sort doth Dominicus à Soto explicate this poynt and with him doe all they agree who say that grace doth justifie formaliter charitas operativè and opera declarativè that is that grace doth iustifie formally charitie as that which maketh men doe the workes of righteous men and that good workes by way of declaration make it manifest that they are righteous that doe them For they vnderstand by grace a state of acceptation that is such a condition wherein men are not disfavoured as hauing done ill but respected as if they had done all righteousnes which is in trueth a relation as the Protestants teach For what is it but a relation in reference to another to bee respected by him and accepted to him And in this sense a man may bee iustified that is accepted as if hee had neuer done ill or failed in any good for the righteousnes of another Nay they all confesse that all they that are justified are so accepted for the obedience merit and satisfactory sufferings of Christ when they are first reconciled to God So that it is strange that they should vrge as sometimes they doe that a man canne no more bee justified that is accepted as if righteous for the righteousnes of another then a line canne bee or bee accounted straight for the straightnes of another For as Durandus rightly noteth though one mans merit and well doing cannot bee imputed to another as to bee or bee accounted his merit and hee esteemed to haue merited and done well yet it may bee so communicated as that the fruite benefit good of it shall redound to him he be accounted worthy respect for the others sake as if he had done well Neither doe they nor can they make any question hereof if they will but vnderstand what they say For whereas three things are required of a man if hee will bee subject to no euil and enjoy good viz. not to haue done euill to haue done good and to doe good in the present and time to come though we be framed to the doing of good hereafter yet wee canne neither bee freed from the punishment our former evill doings deserued but by the benefit of his sufferings that suffered what hee deserued not to free vs nor to be accepted hauing done nothing worthy acceptation but for his merit who did all good in our nature to procure vs acceptation Andreas Vega confesseth that men may be absolued from their sins that is freed from the punishment of them by the imputation of Christs righteousnesse and that they may become acceptable and deare unto God in such sort as iust men are formally by being beloued of him but that if we speake Philosophycally of iustice it is in the predicament of quality not of relation which we willingly yeeld vnto And though he say no man euer in expresse words affirmed before Bernards time that Christs righteousnesse is imputed to us yet he thinketh it may rightly be sayd to be imputed both for satisfaction merit that is so as to free us from punishment bring good vpon us
his merite and not for the dignity and perfection of the righteousnesse which is communicated vnto vs in Christ And farther they say that the faithfull soule doth not rely vpon that righteousnesse that is inherent in it but vpon the onely righteousnesse of Christ giuen vnto vs without which there neither is nor can be any righteousnesse And they adde hereunto that they that truly repent of their sinnes should most firmely and with great assurance of faith resolue that they please God for Christs sake who is a Mediatour betweene God and them because he is a worker of propitiation a High Priest and an Intercessour for vs whom the Father hath giuen vnto vs and all good things together with him And therefore though they say not as the Canons of Colen that Christs righteousnesse is the formall cause of our justification yet Vega thinketh they followed the same opinion because besides inherent righteousnesse they affirme that another righteousnes namely that of Christ is communicated to vs by which especially wee are made righteous and vppon which only we must rely The Interim published by Charles the 5 with the assent of the imperiall states deliuereth the same touching iustification that the former authors haue done And the diuines of both sides in the conference at Ratisbon agreed in the same explication of the article of iustification that wee haue hetherto deliuered A great contention there is and hath beene whether the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to vs bee the formall cause of our justification and whether we be formally justified by his imputed righteousnesse or not But Andraeas Vega supposeth that it is a meere logomachie and verball contention which his conjecture I thinke will be found more then probable For as I haue already shewed in the justification of a sinner three things are implyed 1 To be free from dislike disfauour and punishment as if he had neuer offended Secondly to be respected fauoured and indeared vnto God in such sort as righteous men are wont to be as if he had done all righteousnes And thirdly To haue the grant of the gift of righteousnesse to keepe from euill and incline him to good in the time to come All these denominations are respectiue and a man may be so denominated from something without For one man is reconciled to another in that hee no longer intendeth euill vnto him and one man is deare vnto another and we are deare vnto God formally by that loue whereby we are beloued of him And because that which giueth satisfaction to God and that which maketh him well pleased towards vs is that for which formally or in respect whereof God willeth our good not euill by both these we may be sayd though in a different sort to be formally iustified Wherefore hauing sufficiently cleared the point of controuersie touching the first justifying and reconciling of a sinner to God and made it appeare that the Church euer beleeued as we now do it remaineth that we speake of the second justification The second justification consisteth in the remission of such sinnes as the justified man dayly through infirmity falleth into and the progresse and going on in well doing and the dayly preuailing against sinne whereby the kingdome of sinne is weakened and the kingdome of grace and righteousnesse is confirmed and more strongly established in us Touching the second justification there is no difference between vs them that so deliuered the doctrine of the first justification as I haue before expressed but between the Romanists vs there are sūdry things cōtrouerted For 1 t many of thē deny the veniall sins into which the regenerate do fal to be properly sins therefore think not aright of the remissiō of thē 2◠They imagine that sūdry externall obseruatiōs ex opere oper◅to giue grace remit those sins whereas in truth in the opiniō of others they auaile no otherwise then they stirre vp deuotion and raise in vs good motions and desires to purge out the remaines of sinne and to seeke the remission of it Thirdly they make the good workes of men justified to deserue increase of grace the reward of eternall life of condignity But I will shew in that which followeth that the doctrine of merit was neuer admitted in the Church neither before nor after Luthers time In this justification men are justified meerely by faith as in the first so farre forth as it importeth remission of sins but in that it importeth an increase confirmation and growth in that good that is begun in us our working of vertue and good indeauours causing the same may be sayd to justify that is to make vs more iust inherētly then before more strōgly inclined to good in which sense S. Iohn saith Qui iustus est iustificetur adhuc The third kind of justification which is sayd to bee the restoring of men once justified and afterwards fallen from grace to the state of grace againe is meerely imaginary For they that are called according to purpose and soe justified do neuer totally nor finally fall from God The sins which men run into I haue elsewhere shewed to be of 2 sorts Inhabiting only or Raigning the former in the judgment of our aduersaries themselues do stand with grace the state of iustification Sins regnant are as Theodoret writing vpon the sixt to the Romans after him others do rightly note of 2 sorts for either they raigne as a tyrant or as a king a king reigneth with the loue liking of his subjects who wish nothing more then to liue vnder him think there is no happines but in his slauery a tyrant with dislike They that are justified called acording to purpose neuer haue sin raigning in them as a king but somtimes as a tyrant they haue For though Dauid Peter were strangely transported with the violēt passions of feare lust yet who will euer think that these lost all their former good affections towards God thought it their happines to be subject to his enemies Nay it is cleerly deliuered concerning Peter by Theophylact and sundry others that though the leaues were shaken off yet the roote remained vnmarred Iustification likewise as I haue shewed in the same place importeth 2 things An interest right title to the kingdome of heauen a claime to it by vertue force of the same right title the one of these may cease be suspended when the other remaineth If a man that hath much due vnto him vpon good assurances do some act for which he is excommunicated or outlawed he looseth not the title right he had to the things due vnto him vpō those assurāces but if the same things be detained all prosecution of his right is suspēded all actuall claime ceaseth during the time he continueth in that estate So in like manner if a man called according to purpose justified who can neuer finally fall from God fall
any Papist at this day If Gerson or any other whom I honour held this heresie they held it not heretically as the Romanists now doe euen as Cyprian helde the heresie of rebaptization and sundry of the Auncient the heresie of the Millenaries but not heretically so that Vincentius Lyrinensis saith The Fathers were saued and the children condemned the authors of errours acquited the followers of them in the same cast into the pit of hell But Mr Higgons saith Bernard whose sayings touching the not punishing of such as are freed from the impurity of sin I alleadge thereby to ouerthrow the erroneous conceipt of Papists touching Purgatory admitteth Purgatory therefore I traduce the Testaments of the dead to establish such doctrines as they impugne For answer whereunto I say that whether Bernard admit Purgatory or not yet may hee haue a sentence which supposing all sinfulnes to be purged out in the moment of dissolution proueth that there is no Purgatory to which purpose I alledge him therfore traduce not the testaments of the dead to establish any Doctrines they impugned as M ◠Higgons vntruely vnjustly chargeth me For my distilling our Church out of the writings of learned men liuing vnder the Papacie I shall haue a sitter place to answere him when I come to his Appendix where I will make it appeare that the Israel of God hath not binforced as he vntruely saith it hath to seeke to the Philistines as the distressed Israelites did for the sharpening of their tooles when there was no Smith in Israel but that the Israel in Canaan deriueth it self from that Israel that sometimes was in Egypt in misarable bondage enjoyeth the jewels and treasures fighteth against the enemies of God with the weapons brought from thence And thus much touching Gregory §. 2. IN the next place hee commeth to Augustine whom he saith I haue likewise abused The words wherein the supposed abuse is offered vnto him are these The Romish manner of praying for the dead hath no certaine testimony of antiquity for no man euer thought of Purgatory till Augustine to avoide a worse error did doubtingly runne 〈◊〉 after whom many in the Latine Church embraced the same opinion but the Greeke Church neuer receiued it to this day 〈◊〉 inwhich words he saith I note the temerity irresolution and folly of Augustine the Reader I doubt not will note his temerity and folly in censuring me thus without a cause for I note not Saint Augustine for temerity nor make him the Author of a new fancy as hee falsely chargeth mee but shew that whereas there were very dangerous opinions in the Church in his time touching the state of the departed many of great esteeme thinking that men dying in mortall sinne and adjudged to hell shall in the end come out thence and be saued hee sought to qualifie the matter in the best sort hee could with least offence vnto them and to bring them from that error and therefore sayth If they would acknowledge the punishments of such to be eternall and thinke onely that they may bee mitigated or suspended for a time or that men dying in the state of grace yet in some lesser sinnes are afflicted for a time in the other world though he know not whether these things be so or not yet he would not striue with them This is not to be the author of a new fancy but in hope to reclaime men from a great extremity to leaue something lesse dangerous in the same kind doubtfull and this is all that I say of Saint Augustine neither is this my priuate fancy but the Graecians in that learned Apology before mentioned haue the same obseruation to wit that hee wrote not those things which hee hath touching Purgatory out of a certaine perswasion and as vndoubtedly holding them to be true but as it were in a sort inforced and for the avoiding of a greater euill which was this that there is a purging of all sinnes after death as some then thought So that as it seemeth thinking it something a violent course directly to go against the opinion of many and fearing his words would not seeme probable if whereas others thought all sins may be purged out after death he on the contrary side should say none may be purged hee chose rather to goe in a middle way not contradicting that which is lesse absurd and inconuenient that so he might more easily bring them he had to deale with from that which was farre more inconuenient then too much to exasperate thē This was the apprehension the Grecians had of Augustines writings touching this point which whosoeuer shall without any sinister affection peruse will find to bee righte and true Touching irresolution it was farre from Augustine in matters pertaining to the rule of faith but in other things wherein men may bee ignorant and doubtfull and dissent one from another without danger of eternall damnation no man was more slow to resolue no man more inclined to leaue things doubtfull But howsoeuer that hee was doubtfull and vnresolued in the points concerning the state of the dead it is euident in that he sayth If they whose mercifull error he refuteth would onely thinke the paynes of them that are in hell to bee mittigated or suspended hee would not greatly striue about it though I am well assured hee would not willingly haue resolued that these things are so The like may be sayd touching the temporall affliction of good men dying in the state of grace but yet with some lesser sinnes for hee was euer doubtfull concerning the same and neuer resolued that they are vndoubtedly in a state of temporall afflictions as Maister Higgons vntruly reporteth and thence inferreth many things childishly against mee but that they are in a state wherein prayers may auaile thē which two things are very different For the Graecians in their Apology before cited admit remission of sinnes after this life and yet deny that there is any estate of temporall affliction And I haue shewed before how sinnes may be sayd to bee remitted after this life in the enterance into the other world without admitting Purgatory-punishmēts But it cannot be excused that I say Augustine fearefully opposed himselfe against the error of thē who thought all right-beleeuing Christians how wickedly soeuer they liued shall in the end bee saued Surely the Graecians said as much before and are in good hope to be excused and therefore I am in some hope that I may be also for I do not say that he so feared any thing as to conceale any truth he was thorowly resolued of and which hee held necessary to be knowne of all but that he feared to offend them hee dealt with farther than of necessity hee must and therefore resolued to yeeld to them as farre as possibly hee might without impugning knowne and resolued truthes they being many and of great esteeme that were otherwise minded then he was Thus
haue I no way wronged St Augustine but done him the the greatest right I could for I haue shewed that he impugned not onely the error of Origen touching the saluation of all euen the Diuell and his Angels and of such as thought that all men or at least all Christian men though Heretickes and Schismatickes shal in the end be saued but of them also that thought only that all right-beleeuing Christians shall be saued how wickedly soeuer they liue affirming that noe such thing may be yeelded and yet professing himselfe doubtfull touching the mitigation and suspension of their paines for a time as also whether men dying in the state of grace and yet with some lesser sinnes bee afflicted for a time and after deliuered So that hee brought the conceit concerning the saluation by fire and punishment of men departing hence in the state of sinne from that exceeding large extent to this straite assuring himselfe more might not be yeelded and professing he knew not whether so much might or not And therefore hee was the author of this limitation that the errour should not be so dangerous but not of the errour it selfe touching the saluation of men dying in the state of sinne which no way tendeth to his disgrace but to his commendation But Master Higgons will proue that hee was not the first that fell into the opinion of this Purgatory of men dying in the state of grace first out of the Magdeburgians and secondly out of the testimonies of sundry Fathers teaching the same Purgatorie before Augustine as he pretendeth To the Magdeburgians it may be answered in a word that they speake of the Purgatorie of such as departe hence in mortall sinne when they attribute the errour of Purgatory to Origen and others before Augustines time For Origen made all punishments euen those of the Diuell and Damned ones to be but Purgatory-punishments and therefore that they say is nothing to our purpose Wherefore let vs see what testimonies of Fathers before Augustine Master Higgons canne produce for confirmation of his supposed Purgatorie The first hee bringeth is Saint Basil who writing vpon those wordes of Esay Iniquity shall â—…ee burned as fire and deuoured of the fire as any grasse and burned vp in the thicknesse of the wood and againe all the earth shall bee set on fire in the furious and fierce wrath of the Lord and all the people shall be as it were burned by fire First sheweth that iniquity may fitly be compared vnto grasse the generation whereof is infinite in that sinne begetteth and succeedeth it selfe fornication fornication lying lying and so in the rest Secondly that if wee reueale and make bare our sinne by confessing and acknowledging it we make it like drie grasse fitte to bee deuoured and consumed by the purging fire but that if it become not like drie grasse it shall not bee deuoured by the fire Thirdly hee interpreteth the thicknesse of the wood to bee men darkned in their cogitations and keeping many euills in the secret of their hearts Fourthly whereas it is said the earth is set on fire by the fierce wrath of the Lord hee saith the Prophet meaneth that earthly things are deliuered to the punishing fire for the good of the soule according to that of the Lord I come to send fire into the earth and my desire is that it be kindled assoone as may bee Fifthly hee sheweth that whereas the Prophet saith The people shall be burned as with fire he threatneth not destruction but promiseth purgation according to that of the Apostle If any mans worke burne c. Heere indeede mention is made of purging-fire but it is the fire of tribulation in this world and of diuine affections which it kindleth for the consuming and burning vppe of the sinnes of them that acknowledge them and make them bare by feeling confessing how displeasing they are to God whereas otherwise it worketh no such effect But heere is no word nor circumstance whence it may be collected that Basil speaketh of any Purgatory after this life nay it is plaine he speaketh of that fire which Christ came to bring into the world and to cast out vpon the earth and which hee desired to bee kindled as soone as might bee which things I thinke are not appliable to Popish Purgatorie The Scripture saith Gregorie Nazianzene mentioneth a purging-fire which CHRIST came to send into the earth and himselfe anagogically is called fire the nature of this fire is to waste and consume away the grosser matter and vitious disposition of the minde and therefore CHRIST desireth to haue it kindled as soone as may bee that wee may haue the benefit of it which I thinke can hardly bee vnderstood of Purgatorie vnlesse we suppose CHRIST wisheth vs all to be in those torments with speed Nicetas writing vpon Nazianzene expoundeth the purging-fire hee speaketh of to be loue and faith towards God which purge our soules from sinne and ignorance diuide the godly from the vngodly and vnbeleeuers Another fire Nazianzene saith there is which is not a purging but a reuenging fire whether it bee that Sodomiticall fire which mixed with brimstone tempest God powreth on the heads of sinners or that which goeth before the face of the Lord and burneth vp his enemies on euery side or lastly that which is more horrible then all these which is ioyned with the restlesse worme and which neuer goeth out So that wee see neither Gregory nor Nicetas knew any thing of the Papists Purgatory-fire after this life mentioning all the kindes of fire that are spoken of in Scripture and omitting it cleane To Basill Mr Higgons addeth Eusebius Emissenus who was more auncient then hee But his owne friends will tell him these Homilies which he citeth that goe vnder his name are none of his but that they were collected out of the Latine Fathers by Beda or some other the sentence doubtlesse which he citeth is found word for word in Augustines Homilie vpon the Epiphanie But howsoeuer the Author of these Homilies seemeth to speake of a trying fire through which all must passe not of the Papists imagined Purgatory The next testimony he bringeth is out of Gregory Nyssen but as the Graecians in their Apologie note they are not well advised that alledge Gregory Nyssen to this purpose seeing he speaketh not of a particular purging of some but of a generall restoring of all of which opinion also Didymus and Euagrius were This his grosse errour they excuse first for that happily these things might be roisâ—…ed into his works by Heretickes And secondly for that hee wrote before the time of the Fifth Generall Councell wherein the errour of Origen was condemned From these Greeke Fathers Master Higgons proceedeth to the Latine And first produceth Ruffinus vpon the Psalmes and then Ambrose That Ruffinus wrote vpon the Psalmes was neuer heard of before that of late one Antonius de Albone Arch-Bishop of
ever after restore them againe Hoc est Angelis casus quod hominibus mors saith Damascene The reason why God limited so short a time to them and assigned so long a time to men was because they were spirituall substances all created at once and that in the empyreall heauens and so both in respect of nature condition and place were most readily prepared disposed and fitted for their immediate everlasting glorification so that it was fit there should be set vnto them a short time to make choice of their future state never after to be altered againe to wit till their first deliberate conuersion vnto him or auersion from him But man being created in a naturall body to fill the world with inhabitants by procreation being set in a place farre remooued even in an earthly paradise had a longer time set him before he should be in finall stay or haue his last judgement passe vpon him to wit till death for particular and till the end of the world for generall judgement when the number of mankind shall bee full These are the reasons that mooued Almighty God that spared not the Angels to shew mercie vnto the sonnes of men So that as god in the day of the creation called foorth all both men and Angels from among the rest of his creatures to whom he denied the knowledge enjoying of himselfe that these onely might know feare and worship him in his glorious Temple of the world and be vnto him a selected multitude and holy Church so when there was found amongst these a dangerous Apostasie and departure from him he held of the Angels so many as hee was pleased and suffered them not to decline or goe aside with the rest and raised vp and severed out of the masse of perdition whom hee would among the sonnes of men The Angels now confirmed in grace and those men whom in the multitude of his mercies he deliuereth out of the state of condemnation and reconcileth to himselfe doe make that happie society of blessed ones whom God hath loved with an everlasting loue This society is more properly named the Church of God than the former consisting of men and Angels in the state of that integrity wherein they were created in that they which pertaine to this happie company are called to the participation of eternall happinesse with the calling of a more mighty potent and prevailing grace then the other For whereas they were partakers onely of that grace which gaue them power to attaine vnto and continue in the perfection of all happie good if they would and then In tanta felicitate non peccandi facilitate in so great felicitie and facilitie of not offending left to themselues to doe what they would and to make their choice at their owne perill These are partakers of that grace which winneth infallibly holdeth inseparably and leadeth indeclinably in the wayes of eternall blessednesse CHAP. 4. Of the Church of the Redeemed ALl these aswell Angels that stood by force of grace vpholding them as men restored by renewing mercy haue a most happie fellowship among themselues and therefore make one Church of God yet for that the sonnes of men haue a more full communion and perfect fellowship being all delivered out of the same miseries by the same benefit of gracious mercie Therefore they make that more speciall society which may rightly be named the Church of the redeemed of God This Church began in him in whom sinne beganne euen in Adam the father of all the liuing repenting after his fall and returning to God For we must not thinke that God was without a Church among men at any time but so soone as Adam had offended and was called to giue an account of that he had done hearing that voice of his displeased Lord and Creator Adam where art thou that so he might know in what estate he was by reason of his offence the promise was made vnto him that the seede of the woman should breake the serpents head Yet for that Abel was the first that the Scripture reporteth to haue worshipped God with sacrifice and to haue beene divided from the wicked in whom GOD had no pleasure euen cursed Cain that afterward shed his innocent blood therefore we vsually say the Church or chosē company of the redeemed of the Lord began in Abel who being slaine by Cain God restored his Church again in Seth in whose race and posterity he continued his true worship till Noe. In whose time the wickednesse of men being full hee brought in the flood destroyed the whole world Noe onely and his family excepted whom he made a preacher of righteousnesse to the world before and after the flood and chose from among his children Sem his eldest sonne in whose race hee would continue the pure and sincere knowledge of himselfe and the expectation of that promised seede that should breake the serpents head This Sem was the father of all the sonnes of Heber of whom the people of god were afterwards named Hebrewes who was also as some thinke Melchisedech in whose posterity the true Church continued so that God vouchsafed to be called the God of Sem till the dayes of Abraham in whose time there being a great declining to Idolatry after the flood as there was in the dayes of Noe before the flood so that the defection was found not onely amongst those that descended of Cham and Iaphet but euen among the children of Sem and the sonnes of Heber also of whom Abraham was God called him out from his fathers house and gaue him the promise that he would make his seede as the starres of heaven in number that in his seede all the nations of the world should bee blessed and gaue him the seale of circumcision so that all posterities haue ever honoured him with the name and title of the father of the faithfull This man obtayned a sonne by promise in his old age when Sara his wife was likewise old and it ceased to bee with her after the manner of women and named his name Isaac of whom came Esau and Iacob concerning whom GOD pronounced ere they were yet borne or had done good or euill The Elder shall serue the yonger I haue loued Iacob and hated Esau. Iacob therefore prevailed with God and was named Israel the father of the twelue Patriarches of whom came the twelue Tribes of Israel and that chosen Nation of holy Hebrewes who were also named Iewes of Iudah the Patriarch to whom the Scepter and kingly dignity pertained to whom his fathers sonnes bowed according to the tenour of Iacobs blessing concerning whom the Lord did promise that the Scepter should not depart from Iudah nor a law giuer from betweene his feete till the Shilo were come Great was the honour of this people aboue all the Nations of the World for vnto them were committed the
nature that by violence and the vniust courses holden by wicked men wee may be hindred from it without any fault of ours If the sentence of excommunication be iust yet it doth not cut the excommunicate off from the mysticall body of Christ but doth presuppose that they haue already cut off themselues or that if this sentence being duely and aduisedly pronounced make th◅ not relent but that still they hold out against it they will cut off themselues and depriue themselues of all inward grace and vertue From the visible Church of Christ it doth not wholly cut them off for they may and often doe retaine the entire profession of sauing trueth together with the Character of Baptisme which is the marke of Christianitie and so farre forth notwithstanding their disobedience still acknowledge them to be their lawfull pastours and guides by whose sentence they are excommunicate that they would rather endure and suffer any thing thē schismatically ioyne themselues to any other communion It doth therefore onely cut them off from communicating with the Church in the performance of holy duties and depriue them of those comforts which by communicating in the sacraments c. they might haue enioyed This excōmunicatiō is of two sorts the greater and the lesser The greater putteth the excōmunicate frō the sacrament of the Lords body blood depriueth them of all that cōfort and strength of grace which from it they might receiue it denieth to thē the benefit of the Churches publick prayers so leaueth thē to thēselues as forelorn miserable wretches without that assistāce presence protection which frō God she obtaineth for her obedient children Whence it is that they are said to be deliuered vnto Sathan because they are left naked void of all meanes to make resistance vnto his will pleasure as if this were not enough they are denied that solace which they might finde in the company and conversation of the people of God who now doe no lesse flye from them than in olde time they did from the Lepers who cryed I am vncleane I am vncleane The lesser excommunication excludeth onely from the Sacramentall pledges and assurances of Gods loue which when it is pronounced against them that stubbornely stand out and will not yeeld themselues to the Churches direction disposition is properly named excommunication but when it is pronounced against them that yeeld when they haue offended and seeke the blessed remedies of the euils they haue committed it is not so properly named excommunication but it is an act of the discipline of repentance and of that power and authority which Christ left vnto his Church whereby shee imposeth and prescribeth to her obedient children when they haue offended such courses of penitency whereby they may obtaine remission of their sinnes and recouer the former estate from which they are fallen CHAP. 16. Of the errours that are and haue beene touching the vse of the discipline of the Church in punishing offenders TOuching this discipline of repentance and power of the Church in ordering offenders and the vse thereof there are and haue beene sundry both errours and heresies The first of the Pelagians in former times the Anabaptists in our times who for euery the least imperfectiō cast men out of their societies denying that any are or can be in or of the Church in whom the least imperfection is found Which if it were true there should be no Church in the world all men being subject to sinne and sinfull imperfection that either are or haue beene For it is a vaine dispute of the Pelagians whether a man may be without sinne or not whereof see that which Augustine and Hierom haue written against the madnesse and folly of those men For confirmation of their errour touching absolute perfection they alleage that of the Canticles Thou art all faire my Loue and there is no spot in thee And that of the Apostle to the Ephesians that Christ gaue himselfe for his Church that he might make it to himselfe a glorious Church not hauing spot or wrinkle but that it should be holy and without blame For answere wherevnto first we must remember that which formerly was obserued to wit that sundry glorious titles are giuen to the Church which agree not to the whole totally considered but to some parts onely so it is said to be faire glorious and without spot or wrinkle not for that all or the most part of them that are of the Church are so but because the best and principall parts are so and for that the end intent and purpose of the gift of grace giuen to the Church is to make all to be so if the fault be not in themselues Secondly we must obserue that there is a double perfection purity and beauty of the Church without spot or wrinkle to wit absolute and according to the state of this life The first is not found in any among the sonnes of men while they are clothed with the body of death And therefore if we speake of that absolute purity and perfection the Church is said to be pure all faire and to haue no spot or wrinkle not for that actually and presently it is so but for that it is prepared to be so hereafter as Augustine fitly ◅teth The second kinde of purity which is not absolute but according to the state of this life consisteth herein that all sinnes are avoyded or repented of and in Christ forgiuen and his righteousnesse imputed In this sense the Church is now presently pure and vndefiled and yet not free from all sinfull imperfection as the Pelagians and Anabaptists vainely and fondly imagine contrary to all experience and the wordes of the Apostle If wee say wee haue no sin we deceiue our selues and there is no trueth in vs. The second errour touching the power of the Church in the ordering of sinners and the vse thereof was that of the Novatians who refused to reconcile and restore to the Churches peace such as grievously offended but left them to the iudgment of God without all that comfort which the sacraments of grace might yeeld vnto them and if any fell in time of persecution and denied the faith how great and vnfained soever their repentance seemed to bee they suffered them not to haue any place in the Church of God The third of certaine of whom Cyprian speaketh that would not reconcile nor restore to the Churches peace such as foradultery were cast out The fourth of the Donatistes who would not receiue into the lap bosome of the Church such as hauing in time of persecution to saue their owne liues deliuered the bookes and other holy things into the hands of the persecutors did afterwards repent of that they had done and with teares of repentant greefe seeke to recouer their former standing in the Church of God againe yea they proceeded so farre in this their violent and
cleering of this point and the answering of this obiection we must remember that whereas the ordinary and set meanes of saluation is Baptisme so that no man carelessely neglecting or wilfully contemning it can be saued The Fathers notwithstanding doe constantly teach that if men be excluded by ineuitable impossibilitie they may be saued without it and that faith and the inward conuersion of the heart flying vnto GOD in Christ through the gracious instinct and sweete motion of the sanctifying spirit may bee reckoned a kind of Baptisme because thereby they obtaine all that which should haue beene sought in the Baptisme of water And because if an ordinary degree of faith doe sometimes obtaine saluation without the Baptisme of water much more that which maketh men willing to suffer death for CHRIST therefore they affirme that Martyrdome and the constant suffering for Christ is also fitly named Baptisme So that there are three kinds of Baptisme Flaminis Fluminis Sanguinis Of water of the spirit and bloud It appeareth by Bernards Epistle to Hugo de sancto victore of this Argument that there were some in his time who though they thought that Martyrdome doth supply the defecte of Baptisme yet would not grant that faith and the inward conuersion of the heart without such suffering doth so and therefore though they confessed that Martyrs not baptised with the Baptisme of water may be saved yet they denyed that others though repenting beleeuing and conuerting vnto God can possiblie obtaine remission of their sinnes without the sacramentall washing Against these Barnarde reasoneth in this sorte If Martyrdome doe supply the defect of Baptisme it is not poena but fides not the suffering but the faith of the sufferer that makes it bee of so great force Nam absque fide quid est Martyrium nisi poena For were it not for faith what were the passions of Martyrs but bitter and vncomfortable torments onely Shall then that which maketh Martyrdome bee esteemed in steade of Baptisme be so infirme and weake that what it giues to another thing it shall be denyed to haue it selfe The sheading of our blood for Christ is an vndoubted proofe and demonstration of a very great constant and vnmoueable faith but it is not God but men that take notice of faith by these proofes For God doth often see and pronounce the faith of a man dying in peace to be as great as the faith of a Martyr for that though it be not proued by Martyrdome it is ready for Martyrdome and animates him that hath it to suffer any thing if neede should require This which Barnarde hath thus deliuered touching this point is the constant doctrine of the Fathers neither doe wee or the Authours of the Centuries dislike any thing in it but wee condemne the vaine and idle disputes of the Romish Schools touching these three kinds of Baptisme especially in that they teach concerning Martyrdome that it giueth grace ex opere operato so that if a man not iustified nor yet in the state of grace come vnto it and do not ponere obicem hee shall by vertue thereof obtaine grace haue the effects of it wrought in him in such sort as in the Baptisme of water This not onely wee condemne but many amongst themselues affirming that Martyrdome hath no force to worke or procure our good farther then the greatnesse of our faith and loue which is therein tried approued and made manifest doth worke it The Centurie writers reproue not the Fathers for any such errour as the Papists doe maintaine touching the force of Martyrdome but they dislike that the Fathers did vse so many Hyperboles and Rhetoricall amplifications in the praysing of Martyrdome though in a good sense that the Romish Sophisters haue from thence taken occasion of their errour touching the merite satisfaction and expiation of sinnes which they fancie to bee in the blood of Martyrs of which impietie the Fathers neuer thought Thus then it doth not appeare by any thing which Bellarmine hath or can alleadge that wee confesse the faith of the Romanists to bee the auncient profession of the primitiue Christians but rather the contrary is constantly defended by all our Diuines in the places produced by him CHAP. 22. Wherein is examined their proofe of the Antiquitie of their doctrine taken from a false supposall that our doctrine is nothing else but heresie long since condemned LEt vs therefore come to his third part wherein hee vndertaketh to proue that the doctrine of the reformed Churches opposite to the faith and profession of Rome is the same with the old heresies long since condemned by the vniuersall consent of the whole Christian world In this part hee is so shamelesse that I blush at the very thought of that hee so doctorally and grauely deliuereth as if it were truer than trueth it selfe whereas in his conscience he knoweth it to be an vntrueth so grosse and apparant that the diuell himselfe will bee ashamed of it Hee reckoneth twenty seuerall heresies of damned Arch-heretickes euery of which he pronounceth that wee silly men defend and imbrace as the sacred trueth of God Let vs for our better satisfaction and refutation of so vile a slaunder take a view of the particulars Hee placeth in the front the heresie of Simon Magus and his disciples which was that the Angels made the world that the Prophets were inspired from them and deliuered their pleasure not the will and pleasure of the high God and that therefore the things commaunded by them were not in themselues good or to bee respected that God was displeased with their gouernment and would exempt his own from it haue them free to doe what they list for that men are saued by his fauour and not in doing those things which though they were commaunded and imposed as good by Moyses and the Prophets mis-ledde by the Angels yet were not naturally so but by accident onely This he saith is the errour of the Protestants for they thinke God made the world and not the Angels that Moyses and the Prophets spake as they were inspired of him that the things they cōmaunded are just and holy that there is no way of saluation but by hauing that righteousnesse the Law of Moses prescribeth which all they that are saued haue First by imputation of that perfect righteousnesse and obedience to Moses Law which was found in Christ to merit our good secondly by the operation infusion of sanctifying grace from him making them to hate sinne to loue righteousnesse walke in the wayes of Gods commaundements so that sinne hath no more dominion ouer them Surely I thinke if the diuell himselfe fate as Iudge in this case hee could not but condemne the impudencie of this his shamelesse disciple But he addeth Eunomius taught that if a man would embrace his profession he should bee saued though he continued without repentance remorse in all maner of most damnable wickednesse
that others whom Augustine refuteth in his booke De fide operibus were of opinion that all Christians how damnably soeuer they liue holding the trueth of Christian profession may and shall be saued This he saith is the doctrine of the Protestants If any of vs euer wrote spake or thought any such thing let GOD forget euer to doe good vnto vs and let our prayers bee rejected from his presence but if this bee as vile a slaunder as euer Satanist devised the Lord reward them that haue beene the Authours devisers of it according to their workes But let vs see doth he make no shew of proofe doubtlesse he doeth Luther saith he pronounceth that there is no way to haue accesse vnto God to treate with him touching reconciliation acceptation into his fauour but by faith that God regardeth not workes that a true Christian is so rich in faith that he cannot perish though he would nor how wickedly soeuer he liue vnlesse he refuse and cease to beleeue For the cleering of these places of Luther wee must remember that which Illyricus hath fitly noted to this purpose that there are two Courts of Gods Iudgements most righteous proceeding towards the sons of men the one he calleth forum iustificationis the other novae obedientiae In the first hee saith God requireth perfect righteousnesse fully answering that his Law prescribeth which being no where to bee found but in Christ no way apprehended but by faith in this respect sitting in this Court of exact tryall he regardeth no workes vertues or qualities finding nothing of worth or worthy to be respected but looketh to our faith onely for Christs sake onely at the sole and onely suite of Faith forgiueth sin imputeth righteousnesse Notwithstanding because he neuer saith to any sinner Thy sinnes are remitted but that he addeth goe and sinne no more that vpon perill of forfeiting the benefite receiued and that some worse thing should betide vnto him therefore there is another Court wherein he sitteth giueth commaundement for new obedience and workes of righteousnes though not requiring so strictly that perfection which formerly hee did but accepting our weake indevours study of well doing and in this sort it is that hee will judge vs in the last Day according to our workes Thus then wee see how that though Faith be neuer alone yet in procuring vs acceptation with God it is alone and that though God regard none of our vertues actions qualities as being of any worth in the strictnes of his Iudgment but reject them as vnpure vncleane respect nothing but the humble sute petition of Faith for the purpose of justification yet when we are justified he requireth of vs a new obedience judgeth vs according to it crowneth vs for it That which Luther addeth that a man cannot perish though hee would and how wickedly soeuer hee liue vnlesse he cease to beleeue may seeme hard at the first sight but not to them that doe knowe that Luther is farre from thinking that men may bee saued how wickedly soeuer they liue for he constantly teacheth that Iustifying faith cannot remaine in that man that sinneth with full consent nor be found in that soule wherein are peccata vastantia conscientiam as Melancthon speaketh following Augustine that is raging ruling preuailing laying wast and destroying the integrity of the conscience which should resist against euill and condemne it This is all then that Luther saith that no wickednesse with which faith may stand can hurt vs soe long as faith continueth but if sinne once become regnant and so exclude faith wee are in the state of damnation Against this doctrine of Luther or any part thereof neither Bellarmine nor the gates of hell shall euer be able to prevaile Wee see then how iustly wee are charged with the heresies of the Simonians Eunomians and the like monsters surely as iustly as Bellarmine may be charged with true and honest dealing in this imputation and other that follow CHAP. 23. Of the heresie of Florinus making God the author of sinne falsely imputed to Caluine and others THe next heresie which they say wee are fallen into is the heresie of Florinus who taught that God is the cause and author of sinne This he sayth Caluin Luther Martyr and sundry other of the greatest Diuines of the reformed churches haue defended in their writings Of this sinfull wicked and lying report wee are sure GOD is not the Author but the diuell and therefore wee doe not fully accord with Florinus But that it may appeare how truly these men write and speake of things of soe great moment I will onely positiuely lay downe what wee thinke of this matter and the adversaries slaunders will bee sufficiently refuted For the clearing of our opinion touching this poynt I will first set downe the different kinds of sinne Secondly what God may be sayd to will or decree touching the first entrance thereof And thirdly what when it is entred Sinne as wee know is nothing else but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a transgression of the law The law is partly affirmatiue requiring partly negatiue forbidding the doing of a thing Hence it followeth that all sinne is either of omission or commission Sinne of omission is the not doing of that the Creature is bound to do Sinne of Commission is the doing of that the creature is bound not to doe The not doing of that the creature is bound to doe God may be sayd to will and decree foure wayes First by effectuall opposing against the doing of it in this sort it is impious to thinke that God decreed the omission or not doing of that the creature stands bound to doe Secondly by discouraging and disswading from the doing of it which is no lesse absurd and impious then the former Thirdly by deniall of that grace concurrence and assistance without which it cannot be done this cannot bee imagined in respect of the state of mans first creation but wee must make God the Author of sin and therefore there is none of vs that doth attribute any such thing vnto God But contrarywise Caluin whom Bellarmine seemeth most to challenge noteth fitly to this purpose out of Augustine that God gaue Adam posse si vellet sed non velle quod potuit power to stand and continue in his vprightnesse if he would though hee did not inseparably hould him to it but left him to his owne choice whence followed that euill we now complaine of Fourthly by deniall of that grace assistance and concurrence without which he seeth the creature will not be moued nor wonne to doe it though it haue other more then sufficient graces motiues and encouragements to induce it therevnto In this fourth sense many feare not to say that God negatiuely or privatiuely decreed the sinne of omission or the not doing of that the creature was bound to doe in that he decreed the deniall of
omission are become euill such actions as are euill There are saith Cameracensis who hold that God hath an efficiencie and is a cause producing the action that is sinfull and that he may and doth cause will that which is sin as Ockam Bradwardine and sundry other renowned Doctors And elsewhere he saith that according to the opiniō of the master of the sentences God only permitteth those euils which are sinne that he neither willeth their being or not being For if he did will their being hee should be the cause of them which he thinketh must not bee graunted and if hee did will their not being they should not be But Bradwardine and others hold that God willeth those euils that are sinnes that in respect of euery thing he hath an act of will either that it shal be or not be and not a meere negation of such act If wee speake saith Ockam of the sinne of commission wee must not thinke that the will of the creature hath an efficiencie and is so the cause of that act but that God also who as immediately produceth euery act of the creature as the creature doth it selfe hath his efficiencie and is a cause also euen of the difformity that is found in such an act aswell as of the substance of the act Seeing as we haue already shewed the difformity in an act of commission is nothing else but the very act it selfe that is done contrary to the precept Yet doth not God originally moue the creature to doe any such euill act but contrarywise so made it and would haue so continued it if the fault had not beene in it selfe that it should neuer haue done any euill act But finding it by it owne fault averse and turned from him notwithstanding all the gracious meanes he vsed to retain it hee goeth on mouing carrying it forward with restles motions and produceth in and with it thus averse actions fitting to such an estate and such as it must needes bring forth if it bring forth any at all that is such as are euill Thus he doth without all fault of his who must not cease to doe his worke of mouing and carrying forward all things with restlesse motions though by their owne fault being put out of due course they doe not attaine their wished good but runne themselues into endlesse euills Thus then God did onely by substraction and denyall of that grace without which hee saw the creature would not be wonne to continue in that state of good wherein it was to be created decree purpose the entrance of the sinne of omission and auersion but presupposing this purpose and foreseeing that which would follow vpon it by his consequent conditiouall will he positiuely decreed the other which is of commission For seeing man must needes seeke an infinite good loue it infinitly if he seek it not in God must seeke it elsewhere God did decree that man not continuing to adhere to him should seeke his chiefe good in him selfe so consequently fall into selfeloue pride all other euils of that kind This is the opinion of many worthy diuines in the Romane Church and this is that Zuinglius Caluin Beza the rest meant if any where they affirmed that God doth effectually moue impell and incline sinfull creatures to do such things as are euill namely that God hath setled such a course in things that they that wil not do what they should shall do that they should not that hee will not suffer them that fall from him to doe nothing but will effectually moue them to will desire do that which is fitting to the estate into which they put themselues so long as they continue in the same will not be reclaimed wonne to returne to him againe And this is agreable to that of S. Augustine that God enclineth or moueth no man to euill but that hee enclineth such as are euill to this or that euill With whom Anselm writing vpon the epistle to the Romans agreeth where he saith that God may be said to deliuer men vp to their owne harts desires when being prone to euill he stayeth them not addeth that it is also manifest that God doth work in the harts of men to incline their wills whither soeuer he pleaseth either to choose things that are good out of his mercy or to choose things that are euill according to their deserts the reasons of his iudgement being sometimes manifest sometimes hid but alwaies iust For because men haue run into some sins they afterwards fall into many God that long expecteth the sinner looking that hee should returne when he findeth that he returneth not but cōtemneth both his iustice mercy he casteth some thing in his way at which hee may stumble fall yet worse then before Inter primum peccatū apostasiae vltimam poenā ignis media quae sunt peccata sunt poenae peccati Whatsoeuer sins do come between the first sin of apostasie the last punishment which is that of eternall fire they are both sins punnishmēnts therefore God may iustly deliuer vp such as fall from him by the first sin of apostasie depart from him vnto their owne harts desires for the committing of such things as are not seemly Thus then we may resolue touching the entrance of sinne First God purposed eternally to make man a rationall and intellectuall creature indued with knowledge of all things and faculty and power to make choise of what hee would Secondly Man could not be thus made and bee naturally free from possibility and danger of making an euill choise disposing amisse of himselfe offending against the lawes of his righteous Creator Thirdly God wanted not gracious meanes whereby to hold him inseperably to himselfe and to preserue him infallibly from falling away though hee were not nor could not be naturally free from possibility of falling Fourthly God foresaw that if man were so created and left to himselfe as afterwards hee was hee would sinfully depart from him Fifthly hee saw that it was best to create and leaue him so and that if sinne should enter hee could take an occasion thereby of the manifestation of greater good then the world otherwise could ever know Sixtly seeing the determination of mans will that if he should be thus created and left hee would auert from him and sinne would enter hee determined soe to create him and leaue him and to giue way that sinne might enter Thus then wee doe not say that God did absolutely without all prescience of the determination of mans will determine and decree that sinne should enter but that foreseing what would be the determinatiō of his will if he were so created and left to himselfe as in his diuine wisedome he saw it to be fittest he determined so to create and leaue him and purposed by subtraction of grace to giue way vnto the sinne of auersion
haue it not bee neuer so good they haue no true vertue Bernard in his booke de gratiâ libero arbitrio Liberi arbitrii conatus ad bonum cassi sunt si non gratiâ adiuventur nulli si non excitentur caeterum in malum dicit scriptura proni sunt sensus cogitationes hominis That is the endeavouring of freewill to doe good is in vaine if it bee not holpen by grace and none at all if it be not stirred vp by grace but the scripture saith the senses and thoughts of men are prone to euill Neither can they say that hee speaketh onely of meritorious good and such as is rewardable in heauen for hee speaketh generally of good as it appeareth in that hee opposeth it not to some other kind of good but to euill Anselme Archbishoppe of Canterbury fully agreeth with the rest affirming in the same words that Prosper and Beda did before that the whole life of infidels is sinne that there is nothing good without the chiefe good and that where the knowledge of the eternall and incommutable veritie is wanting if the manners and conuersation of them that haue it not bee nouer soe good and commendable they haue no true vertue Peter Lombard the master of the sentences sometimes Bishoppe of Paris writing vpon the same place hath the same words and soe hath the ordinary glosse Grosthead the renowned Bishoppe of Lincolne in his sermon vpon the Aduent the beginning whereof is this There shall be signes in the sunne and in the Moone hath these words Bright and glittering starres of vertue seemed to shine and appeare in the morall doctrine of naturall men and in the conversation of many Gentiles as of the Scipioes and others but now it is truly manifest and cleare that without the faith of Christ there is no true vertue in the doctrine or conuersation of any man And in his Enchiridion hee sayth that this was the opinion of St Augustine where treating of the foure Cardinall vertues and proposing the question whether Cato and the Scipioes had such vertues hee sayth thus Wee grant with Augustine that no man euer had or could haue true vertue without the faith of Iesus Christ and proueth it immediately after in this sort Non enim potest esse amor ordinatus vbi contemnitur non amatur quod maximè amandum est cum non ametur nisi quod scitur aut creditur vnde patet quod qui nescit aut non credit dominum Iesum Christum non amat aut contemnit quod maximè amandum est quapropter in tali virtus non est quod etiam probat Augustinus talibus argumentis dicens Absit vt in aliquo sit vera virtus nisi sit iustus c that is There can bee no orderly loue of things where that is contemned and not loued that is to be loued most of all whence it is cleere and euident that seeing nothing can bee loued but that which is knowne or beleeued hee who knoweth not or beleeueth not the Lord IESVS CHRIST contemneth or at least loueth not that which is most of all to bee beloued and therefore in such a one there can bee noe true uertue which also Augustine proueth by arguments of this sort saying GOD forbidde that true vertue should be conceiued to bee in any man vnlesse hee be iust c. By these passages of the Bishoppe of Lincolne it appeareth sayth Ariminensis that hee thought as wee doe that noe act morally good canne bee done without the speciall grace of GOD for if there bee noe vertue without such grace then canne there bee noe act morallie good which is yet more fully cleared for euery vertuous and morall good act either is orderly loue or presupposeth it soe that if there can bee noe orderly loue without GODS grace there can bee noe act of vertue or act morally good With this famous Bishoppe of LINCOLNE wee may ioyne Thomas Bradwardine the noe lesse famous and renowned Archbishoppe of CANTERBVRIE who is his Summe de causa Dei contra Pelagium at large confirmeth and proueth the same Soe that it seemeth by Beda Anselme Grosthead and this BRADWARDINE that this was euer the doctrine of the Church of England as now it is Pupperus Gocchianus that liued a litle before Luthers time saith The whole life of infidels is sinne there is nothing good without the chiefe good where there wanteth the knowledge of the eternall trueth if mens manners be never so commendable they haue no true vertue hee that offendeth in one that is in charity is guilty of all hee therefore that hath not faith and charitie every action of his is sinne And he addeth that when Augustine sayth that they that haue not charity may doe good things but not well his words are not to bee vnderstood as if the things which they doe without charitie were good when they doe them without charitie but that they would bee good if they were done in charity or that they are of such nature and kind which being done in charity may bee good otherwise hee should bee contrary to himselfe where hee sayth that every action of him that hath not charity is sinne Andradius saith that there was much difference touching this poynt not onely amongst the latter but the more auncient divines also and that some did so deiect all the actions and endeavours of infidels as to affirme that none of them are or can bee without sinne It is true indeede that there were ever some in the latter ages of the Church that contradicted this verity which wee haue hitherto proved but they were such as had a touch of Semipelagianisme Prosper speaketh of a rule found in the collations of Cassian Cauendum nobis est ne ita ad Deum omnia sanctorum referamus vt nihil nisi id quod malum est humanae ascribamus naturae That is Wee must take heed least wee so attribute all the merits of the Saints to God as to ascribe nothing to nature but that which is evill and perverse This rule sundry carefully followed in the midst of the Church in all the latter ages who so acknowledged that no man can merit heauen without Gods grace that yet they thought they might doe many things morally good by nature without grace But Prosper bitterly reprehendeth this his wordes are these Quasi natura ante gratiam non sit in damnatione non sit in caecitate non sit in vulnere aut non gratis iustificati sint quorum inde sunt merita vnde iustitia That is As if nature before grace were not in a state of condemnation were not in blindnesse and greivously hurt or as if wee were not freely justified all whose merits are from thence whence is our righteousnesse And all they that rightly vnderstood the doctrine of the Church cleared by Saint Augustine against the Pelagians concurred with Prosper and taught as wee doe now
not of sense and that they are subiect to no dolour or greife inward or outward this he saith is the opinion of Thomas Aquinas and some other Schoolemen The third opinion is that they are in a sorte subiect to the punishment of sense that is to greife and dolour which floweth out of the consideration of their great and inestimable losse of eternall happines but because they cannot haue remorse not hauing lost that eternall good by their owne negligence and contempt therefore they are not subiectto that dolour that is properly named the worme that neuer dieth whereof wee reade in the ninth of Marke Their worme dieth not and their fire neuer goeth out There is a fourth opinion which is that of Augustine who sayth Wee must firmely beleeue and no way doubt that not onely men that haue had the vse of reason but infants also dying in the state of originall sinne shall bee punished with the punishment of eternall fire because though they had no sinne of their owne proper action yet they haue drawne to themselues the condemnation of originall sinne by their carnall conception To this opinion Gregorius Ariminensis inclined fearing exceedingly to depart from the doctrine of the Fathers and yet dareth not resolue any thing seeing the moderne doctours went another way And to the same opinion Driedo inclineth likewise Thus then wee see that Pelagianisme was taught in the midst of the Church wherein our Fathers liued and that not by a few but many For was not this the doctrine of many in the Church that there are foure mansions in the other world of men sequestred from God and excluded out of his presence The first ofthem that sustaine the punishment as well of sensible smart as of losse and that for euer which is the condition of them that are condemned to the lowest hell The second of those that are subiect to both these punishments not eternally but for a time onely as are they that are in purgatory The third of them that were subiect onely to the punishment of losse and that but for a time named by them Limbus patrum The fourth of such as are subiect onely to the punishment of losse but yet eternally and this named by them Limbus puerorum nay were there not that placed these in an earthly paradise and was not this Pelagianisme Surely August telleth vs that the Pelagians excluded such as were not made pertakers of Gods grace out of the kingdome of heaven and from the life of God which is the vision of God and yet supposed that they should be for euer in a kind of naturall felicity so that they imagined a third state and place betweene the kingdome of heauen and hell where they are that endure not onely the punishment of losse but of sensible smart also where they are whose worme neuer dieth and whose fire neuer goeth out and this is the opinion of Papists against which Saint Austine mightily opposeth himselfe The vnregenerate is excluded out of the kingdome of heauen where Christ remaineth that is the fountaine of the liuing Giue mee besides this another place where there may bee a perpetuall rest of life the first place the faith of Catholiques by diuine authoritie beleeueth to bee the kingdome of heauen the second Hell where euery apostata and such as are aliens from the faith of Christ shall suffer everlasting punishment but that there is any third place we are altogether ignorant neither shall wee finde in the holy Scripture that there is any such place There is the right hand of him that sitteth to iudge and the left the kingdome and hell life and death the righteous and the wicked On the right hand of the Iudge are the iust and the workers of iniquity on the left There is life to the ioy of glory and death to weeping and gnashing of teeth The just are in the Kingdome of the Father with Christ the vnrighteous in eternall fire prepared for the divell and his Angels By which words of Augustine it is euident that there is no such place to bee admitted as the Papistes imagine their Limbus puerorum to bee neither did the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died beleeue any such thing though many embraced this fancie And therefore Gregorius Ariminensis hauing proued out of Augustine and Gregory that infants that die in the state of originall sinne not remitted shall not onely suffer the punishment of losse but of sense also concludeth in this sort Because I haue not seene this question expressely determined either way by the Church and it seemeth to me a thing to be trembled at to deny the authorities of the Saints and on the contrary side it is not safe to goe against the common opinion and the consent of our great Masters therefore without peremptorie pronouncing for the one side or the other I leaue it free to the Reader to judge of this difference as it seemeth good vnto him CHAP. 8. Of the remission of originall sinne and of concupiscence remaining in the regenerate IN the remission of all sinne there are two things implyed the taking away of the staine or sinfulnesse and the remouing of the punishment that for such sinfulnesse justice would bring vpon the sinner In actuall sinne there are three things considerable First an act or omission of act Secondly an habituall aversion from God and conversion to the creature remaining after the act is past till we repent of such act or omission of act and this is the staine of sinne remaining denominating the doers sinners and making them worthie of punishment And thirdly a designing to punishment after the act is past In remission therefore of actuall sinne there must bee first a ceasing from the act or omission secondly a turning to God and from the creature and thirdly for Christs sake who suffered what we deserued a taking away of the punishment that sin past made vs subject to In originall sinne there are onely two things considerable the staine or sinfulnesse and the designing of them that haue it to punishment The staine of originall sinne consisteth of two parts the one privatiue which is the want of those divine graces that should cause the knowledge loue and feare of God the other positiue and that is an habituall inclination to loue our selues more then God and inordinately to desire whatsoeuer may be pleasing to vs though forbidden and disliked by God and is named concupiscence This sin first defileth the nature and then the person in that it so misinclineth nature as that it hath the person at commaund to be swayed whether it will The remission of this sinne implieth a donation of those graces that maycause the knowledge loue and feare of God a turning of vs from the loue of our selues to the loue of God and forChrists sake a remouing of the punishment we were justly subiect to in that we had such want and inordinate inclination The donation of grace maketh
quae in suo genere sunt bona sed ex affectu sunt mala But he sayth there are others of another opinion making the actions of men to be of three sorts denying all the actions of infidels to be sinne Opera cunsta quae ad naturae subsidium siunt semper bona esse astruunt Sed quod Augustinus mala esse dicit si malas habeant causas non ita accipiendum est quasi ipsa mala sint sed quia peccant mali sunt qui ea malo fine agunt Thomas Bradwardin in his summe against the Pelagians of his time cleerely resolueth that the will of man since the fall hath noe power to bring forth any good action that may bee morally good ex fine circumstantiâ—…s And Aluarez though hee thinke that all the actions of infidels are not sinne yet sayth that none of them is truly an act of vertue noe not in respect to the last naturall end CASSANDER sayth that the article of the Augustane confession touching originall sinne agreeth with the doctrine of the Church when as it teacheth that the will of man hath some kinde of liberty to bring forth a kinde of ciuill iustice and to make choyce in things subiect to reason but that without the spirit of God it hath no power to doe any thing that may bee just before God or anything spiritually iust And all orthodoxe divines agree against the Pelagians that it is the worke of grace that wee are made iust of vnjust truely and before God that this grace createth not a new will nor constraineth it against the liking of it but correcteth the depravation of it and turneth it from willing ill to will well drawing it with a kinde of inward motion that it may become willing of vnwilling and willingly consent to the divine calling The Pelagians the enemies of Gods grace being vrged with those texts of Scripture wherein mention is made of grace sought to avoyde the evidence of them affirming that by grace the powers faculties and perfections of nature freely given by God the Creator at the beginning are vnderstood when this would not serue the turne they vnderstood by grace the remission of sins past and imagined that if that were remitted wherein wee haue formerly offended out of that good that is in nature wee might hereafter so bethinke our selues as to doe good decline euill Thirdly When this shift failed likewise they began to say that men happily will not bethinke themselues of that duety they are bound to doe or will not presently and certainely discerne what they are to doe without some instruction or illumination but that if they haue the helpe of instruction and illumination they may easily out of the strength of nature decline evill and doe that they discerne to be good Against this it is excellent that Saint Bernard hath Non est eiusdem facilitatis scire quid faciendum sit facere Quoniam diversa sunt caeco ducatum ac fesso praebere vehiculum Non quicunque ostendit viam praebet etiam viaticum itineranti aliud illi exhibet qui facit ne deviet aliud qui praestat ne deficiat in viâ Itanec quivis doctor statim dator erit boni quodcunque docuerit Porro duo mihi sunt necessaria doceri ac iuvari tu quidem homo rectè consulis ignorantiae sed si verum sentit Apostolus spiritus adiuvat infirmitatem nostram Immo vero qui mihi per os tuum ministrat consilium ipse mihi necesse est ministret per spiritum suum adiutorium quo valeam implere quod consulis When they were driven from this device also they betooke themselues vnto another to vvit that the helpe of grace is necessary to make vs more easily more constantly and vniuersally to doe good then in the present state of nature vve can and to make vs so to doe good as to attaine eternall happines in heauen And this is and vvas the opinion of many in the Roman Church both aunciently and in our time For many taught that men in the present state of nature as now it is since Adams fall may decline each particular sinne doe vvorkes truely vertuous good fulfill the severall precepts of Gods law according to the substance of the vvorke commaunded though not according to the intention of the lavv-giver that they may loue God aboue all as the authour and end of nature So that to these purposes there vvas no necessity of the gift of grace but that grace is added to make vs more easily constantly vniversally to doe good and to merit heaven And therefore Stapleton confesseth that many vvrote vnaduisedly aswell amongst the Schoolemen heretofore as in our time in the beginnings of the differences in religion but that novv men are become vviser I vvould to God it vvere so but it vvill bee found that hovvsoeuer they are in a sort ashamed of that they doe yet they persist to doe as others did before them for they teach still that men may decline each particular sinne doe the true vvorkes of morall vertue doe things the lavv requireth according to the substance of the things commaunded though not so as to merit heauen or neuer to breake any of them Bellarmine indeede denyeth that vvee can loue God aboue all in any sorte vvithout the helpe of grace But Cardinall Caietan saith that though vvee cannot so loue God aboue all as to doe nothing but that vvhich may be referred to God as the last end yet so as to doe many good things in reference to him as the last end And Bellarmine if he deny not his owne principles must say so for first he defendeth that man may doe a worke morally good without grace and doe it to obey God the author of nature And elsewhere he proueth that man cannot perpetually doe well in the state of nature without grace because it is so turned away from God to the creature by Adams sinne specially to himselfe that actually or habitually or in propension hee placeth his last end in the creature not in God so cannot but offend if he bee not watchfull against this propension Whence it followeth that seeing a man must place his chief good in God if he doe good that naturally he can doe good he can naturally place the same in God That which he some-where hath that it is enough to intend the next end explicitè that it will of it selfe be directed to GOD the last end seeing euery good end moueth virtute finis ultimi is idle for it moueth not but virtute finis ultimi amati nam finis non movet nisi amatus ergo amat finem ultimum So that many formerly almost all presently in the Church of Rome are more then Semipelagians not acknowledging the necessitie of grace to make vs decline euill doe good but to doe so constantly
pollution of originall sin and if perhaps any did sometimes vse any forme or rite it was rather a matter of priuate voluntary deuotion than of necessitie For whereas parents stand bound by the generall law of God and nature with all thankefull acknowledgment to receiue their children as a great and speciall benefit from God this their faith pietie and thankefullnesse joyned with desire of and prayer for their Good prosperous and happy estate was accepted and found fauour with God on the behalfe of their children Whereupon Gregory pronounceth that the faith of the parents was of the same force with them of the old time that the Baptisme of water is with vs. And whereas Augustine sayth it is not likely that the people of God before the institution of Circumcision had noe Sacrament wherewith to present their children to GOD though the Scripture haue not expressed it it is not to bee vnderstood sayth Andradius of any outward ceremonies necessary for the sanctification of those Infants but of any rite offering them to GOD whether mentall onely or outwardly object to the eye and sense That which Andradius addeth that it could not be knowne but by tradition onely that the faith of the parents was in stead of circumcision before circumcision was instituted and after the institution of it to them that might not lawfully or could not possibly be circumcised is frivolous for men knew it concluded it out of the generall and common rules of reason and equity Touching the state of the people of God since the comming of Christ our adversaries make no doubt but they can easily proue that the writings which the Church that now is hath are defectiue and imperfect This they endeauour to proue First because the Scriptures of the New Testament were written vpon particular occasions offered and not of purpose to containe a perfect rule of faith Secondly because they were written by the Apostles and other Apostolique men out of their owne motions and not by commandement from Christ the Sonne of GOD. But vnto both these Arguments alleadged by our Adversaries we answere that they containe matter of very grosse errour For first who seeth not plainly that the Evangelistes writing the historie of Christs life and death Saint Luke in the booke of the Acts of the Apostles describing the comming of the Holy Ghost the admirable gifts of grace powred vpon the Apostles and the Churches established and ordered by them and the blessed Apostle Saint Iohn writing the Revelations which hee saw concerning the future state of things to the end of the world meant to deliuer a perfect summe of Christian doctrine and direction of Christian faith It is true indeed that the Epistles of the Apostles directed to the Christian Churches that then were were occasionally written yet so as by the providence of God all such things as the Church beleeueth not being found in the other parts of Scripture purposely writtē are most clearely at large deliuered in these Epistles Secondly touching the other part of their Argument which they bring to convince the Scripture of imperfection because they that wrote it had no commaundement to write wee thinke it needeth no refutation for the absurditie of it is evident and cleare of it selfe For who knoweth not that the Scriptures are not of any priuate motion but that the holy men of God were moued impelled and carried by the spirit of truth to the performance of this worke doing nothing without the instinct of the Spirit which was vnto them a Commandement The imperfection defect supposed to be foundin the Scripture our adversaries endeavour to supply by addition of traditions The name of Tradition sometimes signifieth euery Christian doctrine deliuered frō one to another either by liuely voyce only or by writing as Exod. 17. Scribe hoc ob monumentum in libro trade in auribus Iosuae Write this for a remembrance in a Booke and deliuer it in the eares of Iosuah Act. 6. 14. The written Law of Moses is called a Tradition Audivimus eum dicentem quoniam Iesus destruet locum istum mutabit traditiones quas tradidit nobis Moses We heard him say that Iesus shall destroy this place and change the traditions which Moses deliuered vnto vs. Sometimes the name of tradition signifieth that which is deliuered by liuely voyce onely and not written That which I receiued of the Lord saith the Apostle that I deliuered vnto you In this question by tradition we vnderstand such parts of Christian doctrine or discipline as were not written by them by whom they were first deliuered For thus our Adversaries vnderstand Traditions which they diuide into divers kindes First in respect of the Authors so making them of three sorts Divine Apostolicall Ecclesiasticall Secondly in respect of the matter they concerne in which respect they make them to be of tvvo sorts for either they cōcerne matters of faith or matters of manners and these latter againe either temporall or perpetuall vniuersall or particular All these in their seuerall kindes they make equall with the wordes precepts and doctrines of Christ the Apostles Pastors of the Church left vnto vs in writing Neither is there any reason why they should not so doe if they could proue any such vnwritten verities For it is not the writing that giueth things their authoritie but the worth credite of him that deliuereth them though but by word and liuely voyce onely The only doubt is whether there be any such vnwritten traditions or not Much contention there hath beene about Traditions some vrging the necessity of them and other rejecting them For the clearing whereof we must obserue that though we reiect the vncertaine and vaine traditions of the Papists yet wee reiect not all For first wee receiue the number and names of the authors of bookes Diuine Canonicall as deliuered by tradition This tradition we admitte for that though the bookes of Scripture haue not their authority from the Approbation of the Church but winne credite of themselues and yeeld sufficient satisfaction to all men of their Diuine truth whence wee judge the Church that receiueth them to bee led by the spirit of God yet the number Authors and integrity of the parts of these bookes wee receiue as deliuered by tradition The second kinde of tradition which wee admitte is that summarie comprehension of the cheefe heads of Christian doctrine contayned in the Creed of the Apostles which was deliuered to the Church as a rule of her faith For though euery part thereof be contayned in the Scripture yet the orderly connexion distinct explication of these principall articles gathered into an Epitome wherein are implyed and whence are inferred all conclusions theologicall is rightly named a tradition The 3d is that forme of Christian doctrine and explication of the seuerall parts thereof which the first Christians receiuing of the same Apostles that deliuered to them the Scriptures commended
Euery cōmon-wealth must be perfect in it selfe able to defend it self frō all injuries that any other may offer vnto it if it can no other way free it selfe it must haue power to depose the Prince and change the gouernment Therefore the Church must be able to defend it self against all injuries of wicked Kings whether Infidels Heretickes or Apostataes if otherwise it cannot defend it selfe frō their violences and wrongs it must haue power to depose them This consequence I thinke will neuer be found good in the judgement of any indifferent Reader For the kingdomes and cōmon-wealths of the world the good prosperity happines whereof is outward must haue outward meanes to represse the insolencies of all such as seek to impeach or hinder the same But the Church being a society the happines good wherof is not outward but inward cōsisting in the graces of God the hope of a better life in the world to come may be perfect in it selfe though it want meanes to represse outward violences insolencies The Apostle himself who was a chief cōmander in it professing that the weapons of his warfare were not carnall but mighty through God for the casting down of proud thoughts but not for the ouerthrow of cities townes or the subduing of the Princes of the world So that the perfectiō of this society or cōmonwealth standing in the inward graces of the spirit the expectatiō of future happines she may attain her own end enioy her own good flourish in the midst of all pressures more thē in any state of outward prosperity so vndoubtedly she doth For as the gold is more pure the more it is tried in the fire as the cammomill smelleth the sweeter the more it is troden on as the palme tree spreadeth the further the more it is pressed down as the ark of Noe rose the higher the more the flouds did swell so Gods Church did then most grow increase prosper when the persecutiōs were hottest And therfore S. Austin saith speaking of the primitiue Christians Includebantur ligabātur torquebātur trucidabātur multiplicabātur that is they were shut vp in prisons and dungeons they were bound in fetters and chaines they were tortured racked yea they were slaine with the sword and yet they increased and multiplied And S. Bernard distinguishing three seuerall times of the Church in all which shee complained of bitternesse the first vnder persecuting heathen Emperors the second in the conflicts with heretickes the third when she had rest from both these saith the state of the church was worst in her peace bringeth her in complaining and saying Amarissima amaritudo mea in pace mea that is My bitternesse is most bitter in the daies of my peace For now omnes amici omnes inimici omnes domestici nulli pacifici serui Christi seruiunt Antichristo that is All are friends all are enemies all are of my houshold but none are at peace with me the seruants of Christ serue Antichrist So that it followeth not that if the church must haue meanes to attaine her owne end and enioy her owne wished good that she must haue power sufficient to procure her outward peace and represse the insolencies of outward enemies And yet besides this reason chargeth Christ with want of care of his Church who left it without meanes to defēd it selfe against outward violence for the space of 300 yeares together during the time of the heathen Emperors afterwards also vnder the reigne of Apostataes and heretickes For Bellarmine saith that the primitiue Christians did not depose Nero Dioclesian Iulian the Apostata Valens the Arrian and other like because they wanted temporall forces The next reason is more strange then this For first forgetting what they are to proue in steed of prouing that the Pope may depose Princes they endeuour to proue that the people may depose Princes when they fall into heresie and that the Pope is to iudge of heresie Secondly they conclude that Christian people may not endure their King if he fall into heresie because they may not chuse a king that is an infidell or hereticke That they might not chuse an hereticke which no man denieth they proue because the Iewes might chuse none to be their king that was not of their brethren lest he should draw them to idolatry But the consequence they goe not about to proue which we deny and they will neuer be able to confirme For there is no question but people are bound to bee subiect to such a king as in conscience they might not chuse if they were free to make choice When Moses was counselled by Iethro to chuse Elders rulers to assist him he told him what maner of mē they should bee to wit men fearing God dealing truely hating couetousnesse and none but such ought electors hauing freedome of choice to chuse and yet I thinke though a king bee couetous hee is not presently to be deposed And therefore Bellarmine like an honest man confuteth his owne argument and saith that infidels that had dominion ouer people before they became Christians are to be tollerated by Christians if they seeke not to draw them to idolatry whom yet I thinke Christians might not chuse to reigne ouer them if they were free Besides this if Bellarmine say true that subiects sinne as much in tollerating kings that are infidels Apostataes or heretickes as in chusing such to rule ouer them when they were free all the primitiue Christians that tollerated Nero Dioclesian Iulian the Apostata Constantius Valens other heretickes sinned damnably in so doing Neither will Bellarmines answere that they are to be excused though they did not depose thē because they wanted strength auoid the same For it is euident by Tertullian that they wanted not strength if they had thought it lawfull If we should goe about to auenge our selues saith Tertullian we should not want meanes For behold we are more in number and greater in strength then any one nation people of the world We are strangers vnto you and yet behold we haue filled all places pertaining vnto you your Cities your Isles your Villages your Towns your Councel-houses your Castles strong Forts your Palaces your Senates your market places only your Idoll Temples we haue left free vnto you What warre should not we be able to take in hand or what attempt should seem hard vnto vs though we were too weake who so willingly are slaine if it were not more lawfull to be killed then to kill in our profession Nay though wee should neuer arme our selues nor lift vp our hands against you but only depart away and withdraw our selues into some remote parts of the world how should we confound and amaze you How could you endure so great a losse How would your cities be left desolate none found to dwell in them So that it was not
there either paine or ease and refreshing that there the rich man is in paine and the poore in a comfortable estate for sayth hee why should wee not thinke that the soules are tormented or refreshed in this invisible place appoynted for them in expectation of the future Iudgement In quadam vsurpatione candida eius The Iudgement doubtlesse is begunne there So that neither is good altogether wanting to the innocent nor the sence and freling of euill to the nocent Heere wee see Tertullian maketh but two sorts of men departing hence and that hee thinketh that presently after their departure hence the good are in a kinde of imperfect possession or enioying of that good they looke for hereafter and the euill and wicked in a kinde of state wherein they already beginne to taste of those euerlasting miseries that shall swallowe them vppe in the daie of judgement So that according to his opinion there is no Purgatorie nor state of temporall paine and affliction after this life out of which there is hope of escape or deliuerance Gregory Nazianzen in his Oration made in the praise of Caesarius after many comforts against the sorrowes conceiued for the losse of so worthy a man addeth this as the chiefest of all other Verbis sapientum adducor vt credam generosam omnem Deoque charam animam posteaquam corporis vinculis soluta hinc excesserit protinus bonum quod eam manet persentientem contemplantem vtpote eo quod mentem caligine obducebat vel purgato vel abiecto vel quo verbo eares appellanda sit nescio mirabili quadam voluptate affici exultare atque hac vita veluti gra◅issimo quodam ergastulo relicta excussisque compedibus quibus animi penna deprimi solebat hilarem ad Dominum suum conuolare beatitudinem recondita Imaginatione quadam iam percipere That is I am induced and inoued by the sayings of the wise to beleeue that euery generous soule and such as is beloued of GOD presently after the loosing from the bonds of the body and departure hence that which darkened the minde beeing either purged out or cast from it or done away in what sort I cannot well expresse beginneth sensibly to discerne and behold that good which remaineth for it to bee filled with wonderfull delights and to leape for ioy and that leauing this life as a most grieuous prison and hauing cast off those fetters that depressed and held her downe desiring to mount vpon high with her siluer wings shee flieth ioy fully to her Lord and presently in a certaine apprehension beginneth to tast of that hidden happinesse that shall be reuealed Epiphanius speaking of the Godly departed remembred in the praiers of the Church sayth they are and liue with God Ambrose is more full to this purpose then any of the former for in his booke de bono mortis first he sayth all soules remaine in certaine habitations till the day of Iudgment whence they shall be called forth in that great day of resurrection Secondly that till the fulnesse of time appointed they all are holden in an expectation of the reward due vnto them are not in full possession of it Thirdly that in the meane time neither the soules of the wicked are without some present sence of euill nor the other without some enioying of good The ioy of the good and righteous he sheweth to bee in respect of the victory which they haue obtained ouer the flesh the deuine testimony which they haue in their consciences of their former walking in the waies of God making them not to feare the future iudgment their escape out of the prison of the body of death the liberty they are come to and the possessing of the promised inheritance c. Heare we see plainely that Ambrose maketh but two sorts of men two sorts of soules separated from the body and two estates assuring vs that all good faithfull-ones ordained to eternall life are presently after their seperation in a state of happinesse boldly hastening to the view and and sight of that God whom they haue so carefully serued to which purpose he alleageth that of the Prophet to the Angell shall there be giuen a time to soules after they are seperated that they may see the thing thou hast spoken of and the Angells answer Seauen daies shall their liberty endure that in those seauen daies they may see the things that haue beene spoken and after they shall bee gathered into their dwelling places out of which as I noted before he thinketh they shall not bee called till the resurrection so that according to the opinion of Saint Ambrose there is no place of temporall paine and punishment after this life appointed for the soules of men dying in state of Grace Neither was this the opinion of Dionysius Irenaeus Iustin Martyr Tertullian Nazianzen Epiphanius and Ambrose only but all the auncient were of the same judgment touching the state of the faithfull departed and therefore neuer any of them made any praiers for the deliuering of them out of temporall paine and punishment but as it hath beene before obserued they made prayers for them respectiuely to their passage out of this world and the entrance into the other as also for their resurrection publike acquitall in the day of judgment and perfit consummation This the Masse-booke and all the prayers that are found in any auncient bookes of Ecclesiasticall prayers doe clearely shew George Cassander hath published a booke of Ecclesiasticall prayers gathered out of the old Liturgies and Bookes of diuine seruice that hee could meete with amongst which there are many pro commendatione animae some few of them I will produce for example The first We beseech thy clemency O God mercifully to receiue the soule of thy seruant returning vnto thee Let Michaell the Angell of thy couenant be present with it and vouchsafe to place it amongst thy Saints and holy ones in the bosome of Abraham Isaacke and Iacob that beeing freed and deliuered from the Princes of darkenesse and the places of punishment he may be confounded with no errors of his first birth of ignorance or of his owne iniquity frailty but that rather he may bee acknowledged of thine and enioy the rest of holy blessednesse and that when the day of the great Iudgment shall come being raised vp amongst thy Saints and chosen ones hee may be satisfied with the glory of the cleere beholding of thee The 2d Vouchsafe O Lord to giue to thy seruant a lightsome place a place of refreshing and quiet Let him passe by the gates of hel the punishments of darkenesse let him remaine in the mansions of the Saints and in holy light which of old thou promisedst to Abrahā to his seede let his spirit sustaine no hurt but when the great day of resurrectiō reward shal come vouchsafe to raise him together with thy Saints chosen ones blot out doe away his sins euen to the
it is time for mee to looke about mee for I heare a horrible outcry as if Hanniball were at the gates of the cittie Theophilus Higgons causeth it to be proclaymed with sound of Trumpet that I haue shewed my selfe a notable trifler in the question of Purgatory and prayer for the dead to the vtter confusion of my booke and the Protestanticall Church When Moyses came downe from the Mount and heard the noyse in the Campe he sayd It was not the noyse of them that ouercome in battel nor of them that are ouercome but of singing So is this hideous clamor but the venting of the boyish vanity of a foolish youth in sporting sort calling companie to come and play with him for all that he saith will be found to be lesse then nothing The occasion of this strange out-crie is this In the Appendix to the third booke I shewe that there was nothing constantly resolued on in the Romane Church in the dayes of our Fathers before Luther beganne touching that Purgatory that is denied by vs and defended by the Papists which I haue demonstrated in such sort that this fellow hath nothing to oppose against it but flourishes of his youthfull Rhetoricke For the more cleare and perfit vnderstanding whereof the Reader must obserue that wee all acknowledge a purging out of sinne in the dissolution of soule and bodie and in the first enterance of the soule into the state of the other world But all the question is of the nature kinde qualitie of it Luther saith Bellarmine admitteth a kind of Purgatory but of most short continuance For hee supposeth that all sinnes are purged out by the dolours of death or by the very separation of soule and body wrought by death Which opinion of Luther wee all follow and the same was embraced by many in the Romane Church in the daies of our Fathers before Luther was borne who taught then as wee doe now that all veniall sinnes are done away and purged out in the moment of dissolution and in the first entrance into the other world as I haue shewed before So that concerning Purgatorie properly as it serueth to purge out the impuritie of sinne there was nothing resolued on in the daies of our Fathers but that which wee willingly admitte But the Papists at this day deny that all veniall sinnes are purged out in the dissolution of soule and body and the first enterance into the state of the other world They imagine that they are long in purging out that they are purged in materiall fire and that the place of their purging out is below in the earth nearely bordering vpon the Hell of the damned This is the true difference betweene Protestants and Papists and rightly deliuered by me howsoeuer it please Master Higgons to say I yeeld not the true difference in this matter nor propose the question as in learning and honesty it became me It is true that he saith that wee must distinguish matter of substance from matter of circumstance and that it is sufficient to haue fundamentall vnity in the first howsoeuer there may be accidentall diversitie in the second But it is a matter of substance whether all sinnefulnesse bee purged out in the moment of dissolution they deny it wee affirme it and are well assured they canne neuer proue that all our fathers agreed with them in this matter of substance and therefore Master Higgons may soone be answered when hee asketh where that man is who in the time of our fathers denied Purgatorie or shewed any doubtfulnesse therein against the essentiall Doctrine in which the true difference betwixt Papists and Protestants doth stand most eminently at this day seeing there were found very many as I haue shewed before who not onely doubted of the circumstances of materiall fire place and instruments of punishment but taught as wee doe against the Papists in the most substantiall point of all other that all sinnefulnesse is purged out of the soules of men departing hence in the state of grace not by materiall fire in a place of Purgation vnder the earth or neare Hell nor by being afflicted by the ministerie of Deuills or otherwise but by the completion of the state of grace getting full dominion in the soule vpon her diuiding from the body in the moment of dissolution Now if all impurity and staine of sinne bee purged out in the moment of dissolution by the taking away of impediments and leauing grace to her selfe that shee may fill all with her diuine effects as many of our fore-fathers beleeued and taught there is no such Purgatorie as the Papists at this day imagine If it be said that though all sinne be purged out by death in respect of the staine or sinfull impurity yet the punishment remaineth and so there is a kinde of Purgatorie wherein men are to suffer the punishments due to sinnes past though now perfectly blotted out It will easily be answered that whatsoeuer is of force to doe away all impurity of sinne offending God is likewise able to reconcile God vnto vs so perfectly as that no guilt of punishments shall remaine For seeing it is the nature of grace to expell sinne offending God and to make men acceptable to God that stood in termes of disfauour before where grace is so perfect as that it expelleth all sinfulnesse there it must needes worke and procure a perfect reconciliation with which guilt of punishment cannot stand Besides charity implieth a dislike of all that which is displeasing to God whom we loue and a sorrow that wee haue offended him therefore charitie in such perfection as is able to purge out all impuritie of sinne implieth dislike of that which in sinning was ill affected and desired before and sorrow for the same aequivalent to the pleasure and delight taken in sinning and consequently doth satisfie God in such sort as that no punishment shall come vpon him that so sorroweth Thirdly the punishments of men pure and cleane from sinne for such sinnes as they formerly committed if any such be imagined cannot be named Purgatory punishments but satisfactory onely So that if all sinfulnesse be purged our there remaineth afterwards no Purgatory properly so named Lastly if it were doubtfull in the dayes of our Fathers as Master Higgons confesseth it was whether the fire bee materiall or not in which men are to satisfie GODS displeasure what kind of suffering it is that is to satisfie whether of sorrow onely or some thing inflicted from without and likewise how long it doth continue it is evident that notwithstanding any thing resolued on in former times God may be so satisfied by the first conversion of the soule vpon her separation turning vnto him in mislike of her former misdeeds as that all guilt of punishments may be vtterly taken away in the very moment of dissolution Whence it will follow that nothing was constantly certainely and genelally resolued on in the dayes of our Fathers
sort was diuided vpon a meere mistaking and that Athanasius by making either part rightly to vnderstand the other procured a reconciliation Neither neede this to seeme strange for oftentimes controversies are multiplied and by ill handling made intricate that in trueth indeede are no controversies and might easily bee cleared if there were a due proceeding in the discussing of the same So that the Treatiser had no reason to say that an indifferent reader will hardly excuse me frō error in this behalfe Wherefore let vs goe forward and see what other proofes hee bringeth to proue that my assertiō cannot be true First whereas I say there is no difference touching the Sacramēt the vbiquitary presence the like between the Lutherans Sacramētaries as he maketh me to speak he saith I may easily be cōvinced of vntruth because Caluin avoucheth that by the vbiquitary presence Marcion an anciēt heretick is raised vp out of hell a thousand bookes are written about the same point shewing how great dissentions there haue beene in the world touching the same But this proofe is easily disproued for though it bee true that Caluine hath that to imagine that the body of Christ hath no finite dimensions but such as are extended as farre as heauen earth and that it is euery where by actuall position or locall extension is to make it a fantasticall body and to raise vppe the old hereticke Marcion out of hell yet to thinke that Christs body is personally euery where in respect of the conjunction and vnion it hath with God by reason whereof it is no where seuered from God who is euery where neither Calvine nor any other Oxthodoxall Diuine euer condemned So that the Diuines of Germany condemning that kinde of vbiquitary presence that Caluine doth and Caluine allowing that other whereof they speake they must of necessity agree together notwithstanding any thing the Treatiser can say to the contrary but because I haue largely handled this matter touching the vbiquitary presence and the Sacrament in my fifth Booke of the Church and in my answere to Higgons I will no longer infist vpon it but referre the Reader to the former places Secondly whereas I affirme that none of the differences betweene Melancthon and Illyricus except about certaine ceremonies were reall hee sayth whosoeuer readeth the actes of the Synode holden by the Lutherans at Altenberge and the writings of the Flaccians against the Synergists and Adiaphorists shall finde dissentions touching greater matters For the cleering of this objection it must bee obserued that the supposed differences betweene those whom the Treatiser calleth Flaccians and the other whom he nameth Synergists were touching the co-operation of the wil of man with the grace of God in her first conuersion vnto GOD and the necessity of good workes to saluation Concerning the former of these two poynts it was euer agreed on between both these sorts of men that after the first conuersion there is a co-operation of the will of man altered renewed by the worke of Gods Spirit with grace in all ensuing actions of piety and vertue and in this sence both of them as defending a Synergy or co-operation of mans wil with Gods grace might rightly bee named Synergists 2ly It was likewise agreed on by both sorts that man by the fall of Adam and in the state of sinne is not onely wounded in the powers of his soule in respect of things naturall externall and politicall so that hee cannot performe any action so well in any of these kindes of thinges as before hee could but that hee is vtterly spoyled of all power strength and ability to doe any spirituall and supernaturall actions of true vertue and piety and is not onely halfe dead but wholly dead hauing no more power of himselfe to doe any thing that is good then a dead man hath to performe the workes of life Thirdly it was agreed on that there is not left in men corrupted by Adams fall the least sparke of morall or spirituall good desire or inclination which being blowed vpon and stirred may concurre with Gods grace for the bringing forth of any good worke So that neither of them were Synergists in this sense though Illyricus Museus and other supposed that Victorinus and some other did thinke so Fourthly it was with like vnanimous consent agreed on that there remaineth still in man after the fal a desire of good and of that good wherein there is no defect of good no mixture of euill no mutability nor feare of being lost though such be the infelicity of sinfull man that hauing his vnderstanding darkned and his will peruersly inclined he seeketh and supposeth he may finde this good where it is not to be found So that when God commeth to conuert and turne a sinfull man to himselfe he needeth not newly to put a desire of good into him for that is naturally found in him but by inlightning the vnderstanding that it may discerne and see what true good is and where it is to bee found and by turning the will from desiring that as good which is not or not in such degree as is supposed he maketh him a good and happie man that was euill and miserable before Neither doth he create a will in man but changeth the will he findeth in him that it may affect that which it did not and so createth a new will and heart in him that is frameth him to the desire of that from which hee was most averse before There is then no spirituall nor morall good in man when he is to bee conuerted vnto God no knowledge of true and spirituall good nor no desire of the same which being stirred vp may concurre with the grace of God and therefore no synergy or co-operation of any such good knowledge or desire of good with the grace of God in our first conuersion but that confused knowledge of good and naturall inclination to desire it that is found in man before his conuersion when good desires are to be raised in him concurreth with the grace of God directing the vnderstanding to seeke that good where it is to bee found and turning bending and bowing the heart to the loue and liking of it For that man desireth that which seemeth good vnto him he hath of nature that he desireth that which seemeth and is not hee hath from the corruption of nature and it argueth sinfull defect and that hee desireth the true good and rightly it is of grace directing the vnderstanding and turning the will from affecting that which before peruersly it did desire to seeke that which it should and in such sort as it should And so in that hee doth desire and pursue that which he thinketh to be good out of the naturall inclination of his will but that which indeede is and he should thinke to be good out of the motions of the spirit there is a kinde of Synergy or co-operation of the naturall powers of man
haue all been heretickes and schismatickes and that they haue liued and died in state of damnation that haue liued died in those churches euer since their separation that therfore a generall Councel of the Christians of the West adhering to the Pope is absolutely general and Oecumenicall representing the whole vniuersall Church wee detest so vnchristian and diuellish a censure and therefore wee willingly confesse that the Protestants being but a part of the Christian church cannot haue any Councell absolutely generall but in a sort onely in respect of those of their owne profession Such a generall Councell of Protestants to settle and compose their differences the Protestant Relator of religion wisheth for neither doth he euer deny the possibility thereof as this Pamphleter mis-reporteth him but saith only that as things now stand there being no better correspondence among Christian Princes nor greater desire of making vp the breaches of the Christian Church there is little hope of any such generall meeting of those of the reformed religion Out of the two next allegations nothing can be concluded for the errours of the present Romane Church are fundamentall neither doth it preach the pure word of God duely administer the Sacraments according to Christs institutioÌ„ in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same But he saith he hopeth no man wil deny the Church of Rome to be the same now it was when Luther began long before and that I confesse the Latin Church continued the true Church of God euen till our times Because some man perhaps will thinke that we yeeld more vnto our Aduersaries now then formerly we did in that we acknowledge the Latine or Western Churches subiect to Romish tyranny before God raised vp Luther to haue bin the true Churches of God in which a sauing profession of the truth in Christ was found wherein Luther himself receiued his christianity ordination power of ministery I will first shew that all our best most renowned Diuines did euer acknowledge as much as I haue written 2ly That the Romane church is not the same now it was when Luther began And 3l l that we haue not departed from the church wherein our Fathers liued died but only from the faction that was in it Touching the first M. Luther confesseth that much good nay that all good and the very marrow kernell of faith piety and christian beliefe was by the happy prouidence of God preserued euen in the middest of all the confusions of the Papacy M. Caluine in like sort sheweth that the true Church remained vnder the Papacie Cum Dominus foedus suum saith he in Gallia Italiâ Germaniâ Hispania Angliâ deposuerit vbi illae prouinciae Antichristi tyrannide oppressae sunt quò tamen foedus suum inuiolabile maneret Baptismum primò illic conseruauit qui eius ore consecratus inuita humana impietate vim suaÌ„retinet deinde suâ prouidentiâ effecit vt aliae quoque reliquiae extarent ne Ecclesia prorsus interiret ac quemadmodâ—… ita saepe diruuntur aedificia vt fundameÌ„ta ruinae maneant ita non passus est EcclesiaÌ„ suam ab Antichristo vel á fundameÌ„to subuerti vel solo aequari vtcunque ad puniendaÌ„ hominuÌ„ ingratitudinem horribileÌ„ quassationem ac disjectioneÌ„ fieri permiserit sed ab ipsa quoque vastatione semirutum aedificiuÌ„ superesse voluit That is the Lord hauing made his couenaÌ„t with the people of France Italy Germany Spaine EnglaÌ„d wheÌ„ these prouinces were oppressed by the tyraÌ„ny of Antichrist that yet still his couenant might remaine muiolable first he preserued the Sacrament of Baptisme amongst theÌ„ which being consecrated by his own mouth retaineth his force in despight of mans impiety besides carefully prouided that there should be found some other remainders also that the Church might not altogether perish And euen as oftentimes buildings are so thrown down that the foundations some ruines do remaine so God suffered not his church to be subuerted ouerthrown by Antichrist froÌ„ the very foundation or be laid euen with the ground but howsoeuer to punish the ingratitude of men he suffered it to be horribly shaken torne and rent yet his pleasure was that the building should remaine after all this waste and decay though halfe throwne downe Of the same opinion is Bucer Melancthon and Beza who saith The Church was vnder the Papacy but the Papacy was not the Church We say saith Philip Mornay that among that poore people that was so long time deceiued vnder the darknesse of Antichrist there was a part of the body of the visible Church but that the Pope and his maintayners were the bane of it who stifled and choaked this poore people as much as lay in them Wee say that this was the Church of Christ but that Antichrist held it by the throat to the end that the saluation and life that floweth from Christ might not passe vnto it To be short saith he we say that the people were of the Christian commoÌ„-wealth but the Pope with his faction was a proud seditious Catiline seeking to destroy it set all on fire so euer he most aptly putteth a difference between theÌ„ that were vnder the Papacie and the vpholders of the Papacie the Christian Church and the faction that was in it M. Deering in his Lectures speaking of the orders of the Popish Church hath these words If any man will heere obiect that notwithstanding all the abuses yet the Priest had that which was principall libertie to preach and minister Sacraments and that therefore their ministery ought not to be neglected I answer In this was the great goodnesse of God that in time to come his children might assuredly know he reserued to himselfe a Church euen in the midst of all desolation and that he called them by his word and confirmed them by his Sacraments euen as at this day For seeing there can be no sin so great but faith in Iesus Christ scattereth it all away it was impossible that the man of sinne should so much adulterate either the Word of God but that it should be to the faithfull a Gospell of saluation or the Sacraments of God but that they should bee pledges of eternall life to those that did beleeue and he addeth that notwithstanding all the prophanations in those times in respect whereof we haue iustly separated our selues from the pertinacious maintainers of such confusions yet God of his infinite goodnesse who calleth things that are not as though they were euen in that ministery gaue grace vnto his Saints Thus doe these Worthies write touching the state of the Christian Church in former times tyrannically oppressed by Antichrist neither is there any of our Diuines of worth and learning for ought I know that dissenteth from them Wherefore I will now proceede to shew that the Romane Church is not the same now that it was when Luther
view or handled with the handes of men and that the burying of them and hiding them from the sight of men is a duty wee owe vnto them wee haue caused Reliques which were wont superstitiously to bee adored and offered to be seene and handled of men to bee honourably buryed If any thing haue beene disorderly done in the confusions of warre and popular tumults they know our aunswere wee cannot excuse it nor could not remedie it Touching the fourth wee say that Bishoppes neither are bound to marry nor abstaine from marriage Touching the last wee say that Christian perfection standeth in this that wee set not our hearts vpon riches that wee bee not proude of them nor trust in them that we be ready if it be for Gods glory or our own soules good to leaue all But for giuing away all at once or retaining to our selues a sufficiency neither the one nor the other is absolutely a matter of more perfection For sometimes and for some men it is better to keepe and retaine a sufficiencie and to giue according to the proportion of their abilitie then to giue away all at once and sometimes for some men vpon some occasion and in some state of things it argueth more perfection to giue away relinquish and forsake all at once Perfection therefore essentially consisteth not in riches or pouerty nor in the refusing to haue any property in any thing as thereby expressing the state of things in the time of mans innocency but in the affection of the minde alwayes ready to forsake all for the glory of God the profession of the faith of Christ and the attaining of eternall saluation See to this purpose Gerson in his booke de consilijs evangelicis wherein hee excellently handleth and cleareth this matter of Christian perfection CHAP. 32. Of the heresies of Pelagius touching originall sinne and the difference of veniall and mortall sinnes THe fourteenth heresie wee are charged with is Pelagianisme which Bellarmine endeuoureth to fasten vpon vs three wayes First because Zuinglius did sometimes seeme to deny originall sinne as did the Pelagians Secondly because Calvine and others teach that the children of the faithfull are holy by the right of their birth Thirdly because wee say that all sinnes are by nature mortall To the first of these obiections wee say there is no more reason to charge vs with the priuate opinion of Zuinglius which himselfe afterwards corrected and none of his followers euer in the Heluetian Church defended then for vs to charge them with the errour of Pighius and Catharinus who taught more peremptorily the same errour that Zuinglius did if not a worse more dangerous For whereas he acknowledged most greeuous euils to be found in the nature of man since Adams fall which no way could haue beene in the integrity of nature though hee will not call them by the name of sinne They hold that originall sinne is not subiectiuely inherent in euery of vs but that Adams sinne is imputed to vs and wee punished for his offence that all the euils the sonnes of Adam are subiect to are the conditions of nature consequently not newly brought in by Adams sinne with sundry other erroneous conceits of the like nature Touching the second obiection that Bucer and Calvine deny originall sinne though not generally as did Zuinglius yet at least in the children of the faithfull If hee had said that these men affirme the earth doth moue and the heauens stand still he might haue as soone iustified it against them as this he now saith For they most constantly defend the contrary of that he imputeth to them But sayth hee they teach that the children of the faithfull are borne holy or are holy by the right of their birth O inconsiderate Iesuite is this the ground of that vile and vniust imputation Doth not Paul say so in expresse words and wilt thou make him a Pelagian like wise But sayth hee Calvin and Bucer teach that the children of Christians by the right of their birth are comprehended in the couenants of grace and so vnderstand the holinesse attributed to them whence it will follow that they are borne without originall sinne To this wee answere that the children of beleeuing parents may bee vnderstood to bee comprehended in the couenants of mercy and grace by the right of their birth either as beeing already in the couenants by actuall admission in that they are borne of such parents or for that in the couenant betweene God and their parents their parents offering them vnto God and his admission of them and taking them to bee his children vpon such offer made are couenanted and agreed vpon If Caluin and Bucer did teach that the children of beleeuing parents are already in the couenant by actuall admission in that they are borne of such parents it would follow that they were the children of grace by nature and not of wrath and consequently not borne in sinne But they teach no such thing but vnderstand the comprehension in the couenants in the other sense namely that the offering of them vnto God by their parents and his acceptation of them vpon such offer made are couenanted and agreed vpon in the couenants betweene God and their parents Now then as beleeuing parents haue good assurance that God will receiue their children as his owne children by adoption and forgiue them the sinne they are borne in if they present and offer them to Baptisme as they are bound by couenant to doe as much as in them lyeth So if by ineuitable impossibility they be hindred and cannot they hope of Gods goodnes in this behalfe are moued so to hope by sundry Rules of equity whereof Gerson and diuerse others do speake whom I hope Bellarmine will not pronounce to bee Pelagian heretickes The second thing wherin Bellarmine supposeth wee agree with the Pelagians is the deniall of the difference or distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes That the Pelagians did expressely and directly deny this distinction of sinnes there is no auncient writer that reporteth Bellarmine therefore prooueth it to bee consequent vpon that which they taught concerning the perfection of righteousnes supposed by them to be so full absolute as not to admit any imperfectiō or any the lightest sins to be where it remaineth How good this consequence is how well he proueth that he intendeth I referre to the iudgmēt of the Reader will not now examine But whether the Pelagians were in an error touching the difference of sins or no I will make it cleare euident that wee are not For wee do not deny the distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes but do thinke that some sinnes are rightly said to bee mortall and some veniall not for that some are worthy of eternall punishment therefore named mortall others of temporall only and therefore iudged veniall as the Papists imagine but for that some exclude grace out of that man in
not onely a condition but a cause of that perswasion of fayth which they haue yea the authority of the Church is the formall cause of all that faith seduced Papists haue And therefore the distinction of a cause and condition helpeth them not It is true indeed that the Ministerie of the Church proposing to men thinges to bee beleeued is onely a condition requisite to the producing of a supernaturall act of fayth in respect of them that haue some other thing to perswade them that that is true which the Church proposeth besides the authority of the Church but in respect of such as haue no other proofe of the trueth thereof it is a formall cause Now this is the condition of all Papists For let them tell Mee whether they beleeue the Scripture to be the Word of God without any motiue at all or not and if they doe not as it is most certaine they doe not whether besides such as are humane they haue any other then the authority of the Church if they haue not as doubtlesse they haue not they make the authority of the Church the formall cause of their faith and fall into that sophisticall circulation they are charged with For they beleeue the articles of religion because reuealed and that they were reuealed because it is so contayned in the Scripture and the Scripture because it is the Word of God that it is the Word of God because the Church telleth them it is and the Church because it is guided by the spirit and that it is so guided because it is so contayned in the Scripture this is such a maze as no wise man will willingly enter into and yet the Treatiser commendeth the treading of these intricate pathes and telleth vs that two causes may bee causes one of another That the cause may bee proued by the effect and the effect by the cause and that such a kinde of argumentation is not a circulation but a demonstratiue regresse that two causes may be causes either of other in diuerse respects we make no question For the end of each thing as it is desired setteth the efficient cause a worke and the efficient causeth the same to bee actually enjoyed Likewise we doubt not but that the cause may be proued by the effect and the effect by the cause in a demonstratiue regresse For the effect as better known vnto vs then the cause may make vs know the cause and the cause being found out by vs may make vs more perfitly and in a better sort to knowe the effect then before not onely that and what it is but why it is also So the death of little infants proueth them sinners and their being sinners proueth them mortall The bignesse of the footstep in the dust or sand sheweth the bignesse of his foote that made that impression And the bignesse of his foote will shew how bigge the impression is that he maketh but this maketh nothing for the justifying of the Romish circulations For heere the effect being knowne in a sort in itselfe maketh vs know the cause and the cause being found out and knowne maketh vs more perfectly to knowe the effect then at first wee did but the case is otherwise with the Papists for with them the Scripture which in it selfe hath no credit with them but such onely as it is to receiue from the Church giueth the Church credit and the Church which hath no credit but such as it is to receiue from the Scripture giueth the Scripture credit by her testimony And they endeauour to proue the infallibility of the Churches judgment out of the Scripture and the trueth of the Scripture out of the determination and judgement of the Church Much like as if when question is made touching the quality condition of two men vtterly vnknowne a man to commend them to such as doubt of them should bring no other testimony of their good and honest disposition but the testimony of each of them of the other It is true then which I haue said that to a man admitting the Old Testament and doubting of the New a man may vrge the authority of the Old and to a man doubting of the Old and admitting the New the authority of the New but to him that doubteth of both a man must alledge neither of them but must bring some other authority or proofe so likewise to him that admitteth the Scripture and doubteth of the Church a man may vrge the authority of the Scripture but to him that doubteth of both as all doe when they begin to beleeue a man must alledge some other proofe or else hee shall cause him to runne round in a Circle for euer and neuer to finde any way out Wherefore to conclude this poynt let our Aduersaries know that wee admitte and require humane motiues and inducements and amongst them a good opinion of them that teach vs as preparing fitting vs to fayth Secondly that wee require a supernaturall ayde light and habit for the producing of an act of faith Thirdly that we require some diuine motiue inducement Fourthly that this cannot be the authority of the Church seeing the authority of the Church is one of the things wee are to bee induced to beleeue Fiftly that wee require the ministery of the Church as a propounder of all heauenly trueth though her authority can be no proofe in generall of all such truth Sixtly that the Church though not as it includeth onely the beleeuers that are in the world at one time yet as it comprehendeth all that are or haue beene is an infallible propounder of heauenly truth and so acknowledged to bee by such as are assured of the trueth of the doctrine of Christianity in generall Seauenthly that the authority of this Church is a sufficient proofe of the trueth of particular things proposed by her to such as already are by other diuine motiues assured of her infallibility §. 7. FRom the authority of the Scripture which he would faine make to bee wholy dependant on the Church the Treatiser passeth to the fulnesse and sufficiency of it seeking amongst other his discourses to weaken those proofes which are brought by Mee for confirmation thereof Affirming that though I make shew as if it were a plaine matter that the Euangelists in their Gospels Saint Luke in the Actes of the Apostles and Saint Iohn in the Apocalyps meant to deliuer a perfect summe of Christian doctrine and direction of faith yet I bring no reason of any moment to proue it Whereas yet in the place cited by him I haue these wordes contayning in them as I suppose a strong proofe of the thing questioned Who seeth not that the Evangelists writing the history of CHRISTS life and death St Luke in the booke of the Acts of the Apostles describing the comming of the Holy Ghost the admirable gifts and graces powred vpon the Apostles and the churches founded and ordered by them and Saint Iohn writing the Revelations
which he had concerning the future state of things to the end of the world meant to deliuer a perfect summe of Christian doctrine if the proof contained in these words be not sufficiēt for my part I know not what may be for what can be necessary to bee knowne of Christians ouer and aboue that which is found in the olde Testament besides the Incarnation of Christ his words actions sufferings the manner of the establishment of churches in the faith of Christ and the ordaining and appointing of fit guides to take care of the government of the same and the future state of things to the end of the world But he saith no one of the Evangelists intended to set downe all that Christ did and suffered as it appeareth in that no one of them hath so done that it cannot be said that all jointly haue so done seeing that could not proceed but from some common deliberation or the disposition and inspiration of the holy Ghost mouing them to write neither of which can be said For that there was no such deliberation he saith it is evident in that no man mentioneth any such thing in that it is knowne they wrote in diuers countries at diuers times vpon diuers occasions that the inspiration of the holy spirit did not direct them to the writing of all things necessary hee saith it is likewise most cleare in that I confesse there are some things wanting in their bookes which the church beleeueth which could not be if the spirit had moued them to write all This obiection will soone be answered For first it is certain that some one of the Evangelists intended to write all things which Christ did and spake S. Luke professing that he had so done Which yet is not to be vnderstood of all things simply but such onely as he did spake in that time within the compasse whereof he confined his narration Neither doth this prejudice the fulnesse of the Evangelicall history For as Baronius noteth the later Evangelists taking a view of that the former had written for the most part added what things they found omitted by them So Marke Luke write of the ascension of Christ not mentioned by S. Mathew because he ended his story before he came to it And Iohn finding as Hierome saith that the other three had written onely the history of one yeare after Iohn the Baptist was cast into prison wherein Christ suffered approued that which they had written as true omitting that yeare because the things that fell out in it were reported by thē recorded such things as fell out before the imprisonment of the Baptist which they had not written as not fetching the beginning of their narration so farre off If it be said by this Treatiser that many things that Christ did are so omitted that they are found in none of the Evangelists for that Iohn who wrote last of all knew well what the rest had written hath these words Many other signes also Iesus wrought in the sight of his Disciples which are not written in this booke but these things are written that you may beleeue that Iesus is the Christ the son of God and that beleeuing you may haue euerlasting life through his Name And againe there are also many other things which Iesus did which if they should be written euery one I suppose the world would not be able to containe the Bookes which should be written Baronius will tell him that the Evangelists when they tooke in hand the writing of the sacred stories intended not to write all the things generally that Christ did but such so many only as might serue to confirme the Faith and to demonstrate that IESVS is the Son of GOD that the things which they haue written are sufficient to saluation that men beleeuing may haue eternall life So that though there were no commō deliberation or consultation amongst the Evangelists though they wrote at diuers times in diuers places yet by the sweet disposition of the holy Spirit that moued them to write it might and did so fall out in that one saw what another had written that the later added such things as they foūd omitted by the former so left vnto vs a perfect full narration concerning Christ his incarnation life death resurrectiō ascension as also the things he did and spake during the time of his conversing amōgst men So that the Treatiser is not able to proue that the Evangelicall historie is imperfect but there is one thing wherein hee gloryeth as if hee had gotten some great aduantage which is that I confesse that there are somethings found in the Epistles of the Apostles occasionally writtē beleeued by the Church that are not found in the history of the Euangelists the book of all the Acts of the Apostles nor the Reuelation of Saint Iohn whence hee thinketh hee may inferre that eyther the Authors of th◅se books meant not to deliuer a perfect summe directiō of Christian faith as I affirme or that they missed of their purpose which may not bee graunted But lette him know that there is no consequence of any such absurdity as hee imagineth from any thing I haue written For the things beleeued by the Church and not found in the former bookes but in the Epistles of the Apostles are nothing else but distinct and cleare determinations of doubts arising touching matters of faith or manners out of and according to the summe of Christian Doctrine found in the former bookes or historicall narrations of such thinges as passed betweene the Apostles themselues or between them and the Churches founded by them or some particular persons in them not mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles or lastly Apostolicall prescriptions of things pertaining to decencie order and comelinesse in the performance of the acts of Gods worship and seruice Now I thinke it will not follow that if there be found in the Apostolicall Epistles some more distinct cleere resolutiōs determinations of doubtes out of the forme and direction of Christian Doctrine found in the former bookes then are there found or a prescription of some outward obseruations that the former bookes containe not a perfect summe and direction of Christian faith much lesse will it be consequent that these bookes containe not a perfect direction of Christian faith because some historicall narrations not found in them are beleeued in the Church as that Paul left his cloake at Troas that hee mediated for Onesimus and sought to reconcile him to his Maister and the like The Treatiser therefore passeth from this exception and asketh how I will proue that all thinges beleeued by the Church not contained in the former books are found in the Epistles of the Apostles to whom I answere that when hee shall giue any instance of things beleeued by the Church not foūd in the former books either it shal be proued