Succession In the Cities of Judah and Jerusalem There is Universalitie so Demetrius urged Antiquity and Universality for his godde 〈…〉 viz. That her Temple should not be despised 〈…〉 Magnificence destroyed whom all Asia and the world worshipped So Symachus that wise Senator though a bitter enemie to the Christians Servanda est inquit tot seculis fides sequendi sunt nobis parentes qui feliciter sequuti sunt suos we must defend that Religion which hath worne out so many ages and follow our Fathers steps who have so happily followed theirs So Prudentius would have put back Christianity it selfe viz. Nunc dogma nobis Christianum nascitur post evolutos mille demum Consules Now the Christian Doctrine begins to spring up after the revolution of a thousand Consul-ships But Ezekiel reads us another lecture Ne obdurate cervices vestras ut patres vestri cedite manum Iehovae ingredimini sanctuarium ejus quod sanctificavit in seculum colite Iehovam Deum vestrum Be not stiff-necked as your fore fathers were resist not the mighty God enter into his Sactuary which he hath consecrated for ever and worship ye the Lord your God Radbodus King of Phrygia being about to be baptized asked the Bishop what was become of all his ancestors who were dead without being baptized The Bishop answered that they were all in hell whereupon the King suddenly withdrew himselfe from the font saying Ibi profecto me illis Comitem adjungam Thither will I go unto them no lesse wise are they who had rather erre with fathers and Councels then rectifie their understanding by the word of God and square their faith according to its rules Our Saviour Christ saith we must not so much hearken to what has been said by them of old time Mat. 21. 12. as to that which he shall tell you where Auditis dictum esse antiquis is exploded and Ego dico vobis is come in its place which of them all can attribute that credit to be given unto him as is to be given to Saint Paul Yet he would not have us to be followers of him more then he is a follower of Christ 1 Cor. 11. 1. Wherefore if you cry never so loud Sancta mater Ecclesia sancta mater Ecclesia the holy mother Church holy mother Church as of old they had nothing to say for themselves but Templum Domini Templum Domini the Temple of the Lord the Temple of the Lord we will cry as loud againe with the Prophet Quomodo facta est meretrix Urbs fidelis how is the faith full City become a harlot if you vaunt never so much of your Roman Catholick Church we can tell you out of Saint John that she is become the Synagogue of Sathan neither is it impossible but that the house of prayers may be made a Den of theeves you call us hereticks we answer you with Saint Paul Act. 24. 14. After the way which you call heresie so worship we the God of our fathers believing all things which were written in the Law and the Prophets I will grant you that all those marks which you have set downe are marks of the true Church and I will grant you more that they were belonging to the Church of Rome but then you must grant me thus much that they are as well belonging to any other Chucch who hold and maintaine that Doctrine which the Church of Rome then maintained when she wrought those conversions and not at all to her if she have changed her first love and fallen from her old principles for it will do her no good to keep possession of the keyes when the lock is changed now to try whether she hath done so or no there can be no better way then by searching the Scriptures for though I grant you that the Catholick Church is the White in that Butt of earth at which we all must aime yet the Scripture is the heart centre or peg in the midst of that white that holds it up from whence we must measure especially when we are all in the white We are all of us in gremio Ecclesiae so that controversies cannot be decided by the Catholick Church but by the Scriptures which is the thing by which the nearenesse unto truth must be decided for that which must determine truth must not be fallible but whether you mean the consent of Fathers or the decrees of generall Counsels they both have erred I discover no Fathers nakednesse but deplore their infirmities that we should not trust in armes of flesh Tertullian was a montanist Cyprian a rebaptist Origen an Anthropomorphist Heirom a Monoganist Nazianzen an Angelist Eusebius an Arrian Saint Augustine had written so many errors as occasioned the writing of a whole booke of retractations they have often times contradicted one another and sometimes themselves Now for generall Counsels Did not that Concilium Ariminense conclude for the Arrian heresie Did not that Concilium Ephesinum conclude for the Eutichian heresie Did not that Concilium Carthaginense conclude it not lawfull for Priests to marry Was not Athanasius condemned In concilio Tyrioi Was not Eiconolatria established In concilio Nicaeno secundo What should I say more when the Apostles themselves lesse obnoxious to error either in life or doctrine more to be preferred then any or all the world besides one of them betraies his Saviour another denies him all forsake him They thought Christs Kingdome to have been of this world and a promise onely unto the Jewes and not unto the Gentiles and this after the resurrection They wondered that the holy Ghost should fall upon the Gentiles Saint John twice worshipped the Angel and was rebuked for it Apoc. 22. 8. Saint Paul saw how Peter walked not uprightly according to the truth of the Gospel Gal. 2. 14. Not onely Peter but other of the Apostles were ignorant how the word of God was to be preached unto the Gentiles But who then shall rowl away the stone from the mouth of the monument Who shall expound the Scriptures to us one puls one way and another another by whom shall we be directed Scinditur incertum studia in contraria vulgus You that cry up the Fathers the Fathers so much shall hear how the Fathers doe tell us that the Scriptures are their owne interpreters Irenaeus who was scholler to Policarpus that was schollar to Saint Iohn lib. 3. cap. 12. thus saith Ostentiones quae sunt in Scriptur is non possunt ostendi nisi ex ipsis Scriptur is the evidences which are in Scripture cannot be manifested but out of the same Scripture Clemens Alexandrinus Nos ex ipsis de ipsis Scriptur is perfectè demonstrantes ex fide persuademus demonstrative Strom. li. 7. Out of the Scriptures themselves from the same Scriptures perfectly demonstrating doe we draw demonstrative perswasions from faith Crysost Sacra Scriptura seipsam exponit auditorem errare non sinit Basilius Magnus Quae ambiguè quae obscurè videntur
take away the meanes of reconciliation For I must confesse ingenuously yet under the highest correction that there is not a thing that I ever understood lesse then that assertion of the Scriptures being judge of Controversies though in some sence I must and will acknowledge it but not as it is a book consisting of papers words and letters for as we commonly say in matters of civill differences the Law shall be the judge between us we do not meane that every man shall run unto the Law books or that any Lawyer himselfe shall search his Law-cases and thereupon possesse himselfe of any thing that is in question between him and another without a legall tryall and determination by lawfull Judges constituted to that same purpose In like manner saving knowledge and Divine Truths are the portion that all Gods children lay fast claime unto yet they must not be their own carvers though it is their own meat that is before them whilst they have a mother at the table They must not slight all Orders Constitutions Appeales and Rules of Faith saving knowledge and Divine Truths are not to be wrested from the Scripture by private hands for then the Scripture were of private interpretation which is against the Apostles Rule Neither are those undefiled incorruptible and immaculate inheritances which are reserved for us in heaven to be conveighed unto us by any Privy-seales For there is nothing more absurd to my understanding then to say that the thing contested which is the true meaning of the Scriptures shall be Judge of the Contestation no way inferiour to that absurditie which would follow which would be this if we should leave the deciding of the sence of the words of the Law to the preoccupated understanding of one of the Advocates neither is this all the absurditie that doth arise upon this supposition for if you grant this to one you must grant it to any one and to every one if there were but two how will you reconcile them both If you grant that this judicature must be in many there are many manyes which of the manyes will you have decide but that and you satisfie all For if you make the Scripture the Judge of Controversie you make the reader Judge of the Scripture as a man consists of a soule and body so the Scripture consists of the letter and the sence if I make the dead letter my Judge I am the greatest and simplest idolater in the world it will tell me no more then it told the Indian Emperour Powhaton who asking the Jesuite how he knew all that to be true which he had told him and the Jesuite answering him that Gods word did tell him so The Emperour asked him where it was he shewed him his Bible The Emperour after that he had held it in his hands a pretty while answered It tells me nothing But you will say you can read and so you will find the meaning out of the significant Character and when you have done as you apprehend it so it must be and so the Scripture is nothing else but your meaning wherefore necessitie requires an externall Judge for determination of differences besides the Scriptures And we can have no better recourses to any then to such as the Scripture it selfe calls upon us to heare which is the Church which Church would be found out King Doctor Saint John in his first Epistle tells us that the holy Scripture is that to whose truth the Spirit beareth witnesse And John the Evangelist tells us that the Scripture is that which gives a greater Testimonie of Christ then John the Baptist Saint Luke tells us that if we believe not the Scripture we would not believe though one were risen from the dead and Christ himselfe who raised men from death to life tells us they cannot believe his words if they believe not in Moses writings Saint Peter tells us that the holy Scripture is surer then a voice from heaven Saint Paul tells us that it is lively in operation and whereby the Spirits demonstrates his power and that it is able to make a man wise to salvation able to save our soules and that it is sufficient too to make us believe in Christ to life everlasting John 20. As in every seed there is a Spirit which meeting with earth heat and moisture grows to perfection so the seed of the word wherin Gods holy Spirit being sowen in the heart inlivened by the heart of faith and watered with the teares of repentance soon fructifies without any further Circumstance Doctor It doth so but Your Majestie presupposes all this while husband-men and husbandry barnes and threshing floors winnowing and uniting these several grains into one loafe before it can become childrens bread All that Your Majestie hath said concerning the Scriptures sufficiencie is true provided that those Scriptures be duly handled for as the Law is sufficient to determine right and keep all in peace and quietnesse yet the execution of that sufficiencie cannot he performed without Courts and Judges so when we have granted the Scriptures to be all that the most reverend estimation can attribute unto them yet Religion cannot be exercised nor differences in Religion reconciled without a Judge For as Saint Ierom tells us who was no great friend to Popes or Bishops Si non una exors quaedam imminens detur potestas tot efficerentur in Ecclesia schismata quot Sacerdotes Wherefore I would faine find out that which the Scripture bids me heare Audi Ecclesiam I would faine referre my selfe to that to which the Scripture commands me to appeale and tells me that if I do not I shall be a Heathen and a Publican Dic Ecclesiae which Church Saint Paul in his first Epistle calls the pillar and foundation of Truth of which the Prophet Ezekiel saith I will place my Sanctification in the midst of her for ever and the Prophet Esay that the Lord would never forsake her in whose light the people should walke and Kings in the brightnesse of her Orient Against which our Saviour saith The gates of Hell shall not prevaile with whom our Saviour saith He would be alwayes unto the end of the world And from whom the Spirit of Truth should never depart For although the Psalmist tells us that the word of the Lord is clear inlightning the eyes yet the same Prophet said to God Enlighten mine eyes that I may see the marvels of thy Law And Saint Iohn tells us that the booke of God hath seven Seals and it was not every one that was thought worthy to open it onely the lambe The Disciples had been ignorant if Iesus had not opened the Scriptures unto them The Eunuch could not understand them without an Interpreter and Saint Peter tells us that the Scripture is not of private Interpretation and that in his brother Pauls Epistles there are many things hard to be understood which ignorant and light-headed-men wrest to their owne perdition Wherefore though as
their owne severall Dominions practising disobedience to their Superiours they teach it to their Inferiours The greatest Unitie the Protestants have is not in believing but in not believing in knowing rather what they are against then what they are for not so much in knowing what they would have as in knowing what they would not have But let these negative Religions take heed they meet not with a negative Salvation Neither can the Conversion of Nations be attributed to any other Church then to the Roman which is another mark of the true Church according to the Prophesies of Esay cap. 49. 23. Kings shall be thy nursing fathers and Queens thy nursing mothers And Esay 60. 16. Thou shalt suck the milk of the Gentiles and the breasts of Kings shall minister unto thee And Esay 60. 10. And thy Gates shall be continually open that men may bring to thee the riches of the Gentiles and that their Kings may be brought And the Iles shall doe thee service And the Prophet David I will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession c. Now no Protestant Church ever converted any one Nation Kingdome or People Many Protestant people have fallen away from the Church of Rome but this cannot be called conversion but rather perversion for the Romane Church may justly say of such these have not converted Nations from paganisme to Christianity which is the mark of the true Church These are they which went forth from us 1 Joh. 2. 19. Certaine that went forth from us Act. 15. 14. These are certaine men who rise out of our selves speaking perverse things Act. 20. 30. These were they who separated themselves Iude 19. which are marks of false and hereticall Churches But the Romane Church I find stretching forth her armes from East to West receiving and imbracing all within her Communion For the first three hundred years the Church grew down-ward like a strong building whose foundations are first laid in the earth whose stones are knit together in Unity by the morter that was tempered with the blood of her ten Persecutions Afterwards this building hasting upwards Constantine the great Emperour submitting his neek unto the yoke of Christ subdued all Christian Churches to Pope Sylvester then Pope of Rome from which time to these our dayes the Pope and his Clergy hath possessed the outward and visible Church as is confessed by Napier a learned Protestant in his treatise upon the Revelation pag. 145. and all along hath added Kingdomes upon Kingdoms to her Communion untill she had incorporated into her selfe not onely Europe but Asia Africa and America as Simon Lythus a Protestant writer affirmeth viz. The Jesuits have filled Asia Africa and America with their Idols as he calls them for the late Conversions of the East and West-Indies by the Romans if you read Joan. Petrus Maffeus Hist Indicarum Jos Acosta de natur novi orbis You shall find that no Church in the world hath ever spread so farre and wide as the Church of Rome Wherefore I hope in this respect also I may safely conclude that the Church of Rome most justly deserves to be called the Catholick Church Neither is it a vainer thing to say that the Pope of Rome cannot be head of the Church because Christ himselfe is head thereof then it is for a man to say that the King of England cannot be King of England because God is King of all the earth Psal 46. 8. As if the King could not be Gods Vice-gerent and the peoples visible God so the Pope Christs Vicar or Deputy and the Churches visible head And let Kings beware how they give way to such Arguments as these lest at the last such inferences be made upon themselves As strange an inference is that how that the Church was not built upon Peter because it was built upon his Confession as if it might not be built casually upon the one and formally upon the other as if both these could not stand together As if the Confession of Peters Faith might not be the cause why Christ built his Church upon his Person as if Christ did not as well personally tell him Tu es Petrus as significantly super hanc Petram id est super istam Confessionem aedificabo Ecclesiam No lesse invalid is that Objection of Protestants against the oeconomacy of the Bishop of Rome viz. that saying of Greg. sometimes Bishop of that sea viz. He that intituled himself universall Bishop exalted himself like Lucifer above his brethren and was a fore-runner of Antichrist As if there were no more meanings in the word Universality than one as if there were not a Metaphoricall as well as a Literall and Grammaticall sense as if Saint Gregory might not censure this title of Universality in the Grammaticall and exclusive meaning which being so taken would have excluded all other Bishops from their Offices Essences and Proprieties which they held under Christ thereby depriving them of the Key of orders and yet still keep the Superiority viz. of one Bishop over another and himself over all in a Metaphoricall and transferent sense thereby still keeping the Key of Jurisdiction in his own hands and this not onely is but must be the meaning of Saint Gregory for he thus explicates the matter himself lib. 4. ind 13. cp 32. viz. The care of the Church hath been committed to the Prince of all the Apostles Saint Peter and yet had Saint Peter called himselfe the Universall Apostle in the first sence seeing that Christ Jesus made other Apostles as well as him he had been no Apostle himself but Antichrist and yet this hindred not but that the care and principality was committed unto Peter Whereby you may plainly see how he ascribes a head-ship over the Church whilst he denies the Universality of Episcopacy Wherefore having shewed Your Majesty my Church I humble beg that You will be pleased either to give me a few lines in answer hereunto or else to shew me Yours The KINGS Paper in Answer to the Marquesse MY Lord I have perused your Paper whereby I find that it is no strange thing to see Errour tryumph in Antiquity and flourish all those Ensignes of Universality Succession Unity Conversion of Nations c. in the face of Truth and nothing was so familiar either with the Iews or Gentiles as to besmear the face of Truth with spots of novelty For this was Ieremiahs case Ier. 44. 16. viz. As for the word which thou hast spoken unto us in the Name of the Lord we will not hearken unto thee but we will certainly doe whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our owne mouths to burn incense unto the Queen of heaven and to powre out drink-offerings unto her as we have done we and our fathers our Kings and our Princes in the Cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem as we have done there is Antiquity we and our Fathers there is
ascribing so much to the Church when as 't is well known contrary to what the Bishop of Rome and the Church generally did hold he held the re-baptizing of such as had been baptized by Heretikes Though Cyprian in this did erre yet his very erring in this shewes that hee thought the Church the generality of the visible Church not onely subject to error but indeed to have erred The last Father whom the Marquesse here mentioneth for though hee say cum multis aliis yet hee nameth no more is Irenaeus l. 3. c. 4. where he saith It is not meet to seeke the truth among others which it is easie to take of the Church seeing the Apostles did lay in it as in a rich depository all things that concerne truth that every one that will may out of it receive the drinke of life This indeed is gloriously spoken of the Church and not Hyperbolically neither yet doth it not amount to this that the Church cannot erre The holy Scriptures wherein all saving truth is contained are committed to the Church and the Doctine of salvation is ordinarily held forth in and by the Church but hence it doth not follow that the Church that is such as beare sway in it is not subject to error All that Irenaeus saith of the Church is no more if so much as that of the Apostle 1 Tim. 3. 15. that the Church is the pillar and ground of truth which place it may seeme strange that the Marquesse pretermitteth Bellarmine disputing this point brings in those words in the very first place to prove that the Church cannot erre And whereas Calvin answers that the Church is so styled by the Apostle because in it the Scriptures are preserved and preached he replies that thus the Church should rather be compared to a Chest then to a Pillar But this is a frivolous objection for the Church doth not keepe the truth close and secret as a thing is kept in a chest but so as to professe and publish it and therefore is compared to a Pillar to which a thing is fastned and so hangeth that all may see it But that those words of the Apostle do not infer an infallibility of the Church and an exemption from errour is cleare by this that he speakes of a particular visible Church namely the Church of Ephesus now that a particular visible Church may erre our Adversaries will not deny and that very Church of Ephesus there spoken of doth sufficiently demonstrate The Apostle therefore in those words doth rather shew the duty of the Church then the dignity of it rather what it should be then what it alwayes is As when it is said Mal. 2. 7. Labia sacerdotis custodient scientiam The Priests lips shall keep knowledge that is as our translations rightly render it should keepe So the Jesuite Ribera doth expound it shall keepe that is saith he ought to keep The Marquesse here comes againe to the visibility of the Church and some other particulars before handled That the Church is alwayes visible he proves by Mat. 5. 14 15. The light of the World a City upon a Hill cannot be hid But I have shewed before these words Yee are the light of the world to be meant of the Apostles who as their own Iansenius expounds it were a light unto the World by their preaching So also Theophylact They did not enlighten saith hee one Nation but the whole world And the words following A City set upon a Hill cannot be hid he shewes to have been spoken by way of instruction Christ saith hee doth instruct them to be carefull and accurate in the ordering of their life as being to be seene of all As if hee should say Doe not thinke that you shall lie hid in a corner no you shall be conspicuous And therefore see that yee live unblameably that so you may not give offence to others This exposition sutes well with the admonition given vers 16. Let your light so shine forth before men that they seeing your good workes may glorifie your Father which is in Heaven The Marquesse here further addes 2 Cor. 4. 3. Isai 22. I suppose it should be Isai 2. 2. Now the former of these two places is not to the purpose viz. to prove a perpetuall visibility of the Church For how can that be inferred from those words of the Apostle If our Gospell be hid it is hid to them that are lost The Apostle having said vers 2. by manifestation of the truth commending our selves to every mans conscience in the sight of God because as Oecumenius notes it might be objected that the truth was not made manifest unto all for that all did not believe to prevent this Objection the Apostle addes If our Gospell be hid c. As if hee should say It is not our fault as if the Gospell were not plainly enough preached by us but it is their own fault who perish through their owne blindnesse That Isai 2. 2. is more to the purpose though not enough neither It is said that in the last dayes the Mountaine of the Lords House shall be established in the top of the Mountaines and shall be exalted above the Hills and all Nations shall flow unto it The Prophet there sheweth by metaphoricall expressions taken from Mount Sion where the Temple stood that by the preaching of the Gospell the Church should be increased and exalted farre above what it was before This prophesie was fulfilled by the bringing in of the Gentiles but the Prophet doth not say that in the times of the Gospell the Church should alwayes be so conspicuous and visible Neither doe the Fathers here alledged by the Marquesse viz. Origen Chrysostome Austine and Cyprian speake of the perpetuall condition of the Church but onely as it was in their time I have proved before by Scriptures and Fathers and even by the acknowledgement of our Adversaries that the Church is not perpetually visible After the Visibility of the Church the Marquesse speaketh of the Universality of it saying that the universality of the Church is perpetuall and that the Church of Rome is such a Church For proofe hereof hee citeth Psal 2. 8. Rom. 1. 8. Now the former place shewes that Christ should have the heathen for his inheritance and the ends of the Earth for his possession and consequently that the Church should not be confined as it was in the time of the Law to one Country but should be extended farre and wide throughout the World This also hath been fulfilled and yet shall be but hence it doth not follow that the Church is alwayes so universally extended throughout the World but that sometimes errors and heresies doe so prevaile and overspread all that the truth in comparison can finde no roome See before page 2. The other place viz. Rom. 1. 8. testifies indeed that the Church of Rome was a true Church and famous throughout the World but neither doth
he did declare who he was For if none can forgive sinnes but onely God and the Lord Christ did forgive them then it is manifest that he was the Word of God made the Son of Man c. and that as God he hath mercy on us and doth forgive us our debts which we owe unto God our Maker Accordingly also Ambrose another of those Fathers whom the Marquesse maketh to be of their opinion Whereas saith he Iewes say that onely God can forgive sinnes they doe indeed confesse Christ to be God and by their judgement bewray their perfidiousnesse c. They have a testimony for Christs Divinity they have no Faith for their owne Salvation Therefore great is the madnesse of the unbelieving people that when as they confesse that it belongs onely unto God to forgive sinnes yet they doe not beleeve God when he forgiveth sins So by this Argument the same Father proves the Holy Ghost to be God because he forgiveth Sins For that none can forgive sinnes but onely God as it is written Who can forgive sinnes but only God Thus Ambrose cites that saying of the Scribes as a most undoubted truth How then have Ministers power to forgive Sins In that the word of reconciliation is committed unto them 2 Cor. 5. 19. in that they are to preach remission of sinnes in Christs name Luk. 24. 47. Be it known unto you that through this man viz. Christ is preached unto you forgivenesse of sinnes said Paul Act. 13. 38. Ambrose observes that Christ first said to his Apostles Receive ye the holy Ghost and then Whose sins ye remit they are remitted Whence he gathers that it is the holy Ghost that doth indeed forgive Sins Men saith he doe onely afford their Ministery for the forgivenesse of sinnes they doe not exercise the authority of any power Neither doe they forgive sins in their Name but in the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the Holy Ghost Lombard called the Master of the Sentences and of School-divinity disputing this Question and shewing diverse Opinions about it determines thus That God only doth remit and retain sins and that yet God hath given power to the Church to bind and loose But that God himself doth bind and loose one way and the Church another way That God by himself alone doth forgive sinne so as to clense the soul from staine and to free it from the guilt of eternall death That he hath not given this power to Priests to whom yet he hath given power to loose and bind that is to declare men to be loosed or bound Whence our Lord first by himselfe made the Leper sound and then sent him to the Priests that they might declare him to be clean And hence he inferres that a Minister of the Gospell hath such power in remitting or retaining sins as the Priest in the Law had in clensing a Leper The Priest was said to make the Leper clean or unclean so the words are in the Originall Levit. 13. when he did pronounce and declare him to be clean or unclean So Ministers remit or retain sinnes when they pronounce and declare that sins are remitted or retained of God And in this Lombard followed Hierome who as his words cited by Lombard doe shew by this very similitude of the Leviticall Priest dealing with a Leper illustrates and sets forth the manner how a Minister doth now remit or retain sins Thus then I hope it may sufficiently appear that in this point both Scriptures and Fathers are for us and not against us as the Marquesse would have it We hold that we ought to confesse our sins unto our ghostly Father this ye deny saying that ye ought not to confesse your sins but unto God alone This we prove by Scripture Mat. 3. 5 6. Then went out Jerusalem and all Judea and were baptized of him in Jordan confessing their sinnes This confession was no generall confession but in particular as appeares Acts 19. 18 19. And many that beleeved came and confessed and shewed their deeds The Fathers affirme the same c. For Confession of Sinnes Protestants doe not say that they ought not to confesse to any but God onely though they hold that ordinarily it sufficeth to confesse onely unto God and that there is no necessity of confessing to any other whereas they of the Church of Rome will have it necessary for every one man to confesse unto a Priest all his deadly sinnes and such indeed are all sinnes whatsoever without the mercy of God in Christ Rom. 6. 23. Gal. 3. 10. which by diligent examination he can find out together with all the severall circumstances whereby they are aggravated Thus hath the Councell of Trent decreed it And nothing will suffice to procure one that is Baptized remission of Sins without this Confession either in Re actually performed or in Voto in desire as Bellarmine doth expound it Who also stickes not to say that in all the Scripture there seems not to be any promise of for givenesse of sinnes made to those that confesse their sins unto God Which is a most impudent Assertion For David having said I acknowledged my sinne unto thee and mine iniquity have I not hid I said I will confesse my transgressions unto the Lord and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sinne he addes immediately for this shall every one that is godly make his prayer unto thee c. Psal 32. 5 6. Besides Aquinas and Bonaventure two prime Schoolemen hold that under the Law it was not ordinarily required of people to confesse in particular unto a Priest Bonaventure also cites Austine saying Oblatio sacrificiorum fuit confessio peccatorum The offering of sacrifices was the confession of sinnes whence hee inferreth that therefore it seemes there was no other confessing of sinnes but the offering of Sacrifices For those two places of Scripture cited by the Marquesse neither they nor any other doe speake of such a confession as they of the Church of Rome doe contend for Bellarmine holds that their Sacramentall confession as they call it viz. that confession which they make a part of the Sacrament of penance was not instituted till after Christs Resurrection and therefore he sayes it is no marvell if as Ambrose observes we reade of Peters teares but not of his confession That the Jewes therefore when they were baptized of Iohn confessed their sinnes Mat. 3. 5 6. is not enough to prove that confession which we now dispute of although it did appeare that the confession there spoken of was a particular confession which yet appeares not Cardinall Cajetane saith it was but a generall confession Neither indeed in probability could it be any more for how should Iohn have been able to heare such multitudes as came unto him to be baptized Ierusalem and all Iudea and all the region round about Iordan Mat. 3. 5. confesse all their sinnes in
There to justifie and to condemne are opposed-one to the other and to justifie is to repute just not to make just for so it should be no abomination to justifie the wicked but a very good worke For hee which converteth a sinner from the errour of his way shall save a soule from death c. Iames 5. 20. So Isai 5. 23. They are taxed who justifie the wicked for a reward Thus also God is said to justifie Isai 50. 8. Hee is neare that iustifieth mee who will contend with me And Rom. 8. 33 34. who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods elect it is God that justifieth Who is he that condemneth it is Christ that died c. But saith Bellarmine when God doth justifie the wicked by declaring him just he doth also make him just because the judgement of God is according to truth I answer true it is whom God doth justifie them also hee doth sanctifie yet it doth not follow that these two viz. to justifie and to sanctifie are one and the same David was a man truly sanctified yet hee knew and acknowledged that his righteousnesse whereby hee was sanctified was not such as that he could be justified by it and therefore cried Enter not into judgement with thy servant c. Psal 143. 2. And Blessed is the man whose iniquity is forgiven c. Psal 32. 1 2. yet is Gods judgement neverthelesse according to truth when hee accounteth those righteous and imputeth no sinne unto them who still have sinne in them and so cannot be justified by their owne righteousnesse because they whom God justifieth by faith are united unto Christ as members of his Body and so Christs righteousnesse is their righteousnesse and though not in themselves yet in Christ they are compleatly righteous He is called The Lord our righteousnesse Ier. 23. 6. And sayes the Apostle In him yee are complete Col. 2. 10. wherefore hee desired to be found in him not having his own righteousnesse which is of the Law but that which is through the faith of Christ the righteousnesse which is of God by faith Phil. 3. 9. And thus we hold that faith doth justifie not formally but instrumentally not because of it selfe but because of its object viz. Christ and his righteousnesse which faith apprehendeth and applieth For by faith wee receive Christ Ioh. 1. 12. And Christ doth dwell in our hearts by faith Ephes 3. 17. Diverse of the Church of Rome since the beginning of Reformation in this great point touching justification have inclined to us Ferus I cited before saying that Believers have yet much sinne but no condemnation because thorough faith in Christ they are reputed cleane Cardinall Contarenus his workes I have not neither can I alledge him of mine own knowledge but his words as I finde them cited by another are very full for our purpose Because saith hee wee come unto a twofold righteousnesse by faith a righteousnesse inherent in us c. and the righteousnesse of Christ given and imputed to us in that wee are ingraffed into Christ and put on Christ it remaines to inquire whether of these we must rely upon that wee may be justified before God that is accounted holy and just I doe altogether hold that it is piously and Christianly said that wee ought to reply as on a thing that is stable and doth surely support us on the righteousnesse of Christ given unto us and not on that holinesse and grace which is inherent in us For this righteousnesse of ours is but inchoated and imperfect which cannot preserve us so but that in many things we offend and sinne continually Therefore for this righteousnesse of ours wee cannot be accounted righteous and good in the sight of God so as it should become the sonnes of God to be good and holy But the righteousness of Christ given unto us is true and perfect righteousnesse which doth altogether please the eyes of God in which there is nothing that may offend God nothing which cannot fully please him On this therefore alone as sure and stable must we rely and for it alone must wee believe that wee are justified before God that is accounted and called iust I see not why we should desire more in point of justification then this amounts to Pighius also a stout Champion of the Church of Rome is as full and expresse for that which wee make the formall cause of justification as any can be It is cleare saith hee what sentence we should all have if God would have dealt with us in strict judgement if hee had not most mercifully succoured us in his Son and had not involved and wrapped us in his righteousnesse wee having none of our own that will serve our turne And againe In him therefore are wee justified not in our selves not with our own but with his righteousnesse which by reason of our communion with Him is imputed unto us Being empty of our owne righteousnesse wee are taught to seeke righteousnesse out of our selves in him And againe That our righteousnesse is placed in Christs obedience it is from hence that wee being incorporated into Him it is reckoned as if it were ours so that because of it we are accounted righteous And immediately he adds that as Iacob being cloathed with the robes of his elder brother obtained the blessing of his Father so we must be clothed with the righteousnesse of Christ our elder brother that God may bestow the blessing of justification upon us And againe God doth justifie us saith he of his free-goodnes whereby he doth embrace us in Christ whiles that he clothes us being ingraffed into him with Christs innocency and righteousnesse which as it is alone true and perfect able to indure the sight of God so it alone must be presented for us at the tribunall of Gods Iudgement This and much more to this purpose hath Pighius and hee saith that hee could not dissemble that this prime part of Christian Doctrine was rather obscured then illustrated by the Schoolemen with thorny questions and definitions and therefore he was the more diligent in the handling of this point shewing that none of the sons of Adam can be justified before God by their own righteousnesse and their own workes but that all must rely onely on the righteousnesse of God in Christ and that by it alone they being destitute of a righteousnesse of their owne are righteous before God Pighius is so plaine and home in this point that Bellarmine doth censure him as erroneous in it And yet so powerfull and prevalent it truth that it extorted even from Bellarmine himselfe this confession That because of the uncertainty of a mans owne righteousnesse and the danger of vaine glory it is most safe to repose all confidence only in Gods Mercy and Goodnesse By his own confession then it is most safe in matter of justification to renounce Workes and to flie onely to Faith in
the Lord Jesus The ancient Fathers also give testimony to this truth Hilarie hath these very words Fides sola iustificat i. e. Faith alone doth iustifie Austine in effect sayes the same when hee saith Our righteousnesse in this life is so great that it consists rather in forgivenesse of sinnes then in perfection of vertues And so when hee saith Woe even to the landable life of men if thou O Lord laying aside mercy shall enter into the examination of it To this purpose also is that which hee saith upon those words of David Enter not into judgement with thy servant O Lord c. How right soever saith hee I thinke my selfe thou bringest forth a rule out of thy treasure and triest me by it and I am found crooked Thus also Bernard Lord saith he I will make mention of thy righteousnesse onely for it also is mine seeing that thou of God art made unto me righteousnesse Must I feare lest this one righteousnesse will not suffice us both No it is not a short cloake that cannot cover two And againe It is sufficient for mee unto all righteousnesse to have him onely propitious against whom onely I have sinned Not to sinne is Gods righteousnesse mans righteousnesse is Gods indulgence Thus then in the point of justification wee have both Scriptures and Fathers yea and divers Papists also concurring with us As for the two places of Scripture alledged by the Marquesse the former viz. that 1 Corin. 13. 2. speaketh not of justifying Faith but of a Faith of working miracles as is cleare by the words themselves being fully cited which run thus Though I have all faith so that I could remove mountaines and have not charity I am nothing Oecumenius upon the place notes that by Faith there is not meant that Faith which is common to all Believers but a Faith peculiar to such as had the gift of working miracles And though Estius a learned Romanist in his Commentary upon the place seeke to draw it another way yet commenting upon 1 Cor. 12. 9. hee saith that the Greeke Expositors doe rightly understand it of that Faith which is spoken of Chap. 13. If I have all Faith c. that is of the Faith of signes and miracles as they call it which Faith hee saith is not properly a sanctifying grace but onely such a grace as is given for the benefit of others The other place viz. Jam. 2. 24. doth seeme to make against us but indeed it doth not For S. Iames saying that a man is justified by Workes and not by Faith onely meanes onely thus as Cajetan himselfe doth expound it that we are not justified by a barren Faith but by a Faith which is fruitfull in good Workes This appeares to be his meaning by his whole discourse from vers 14. to the end of the Chapter wherein hee bends himselfe against those who presume of such a faith as is without workes and more specially it may appeare by the verses immediately preceding wherein hee saith that Abraham was justified by workes when hee offered up Isaac and that Faith wrought with his workes and by workes was Faith made perfect and the Scripture was fulfilled which saith Abraham believed God and it was accounted unto him for righteousnesse Now this clearly shewes that Abraham was justified by Faith and not by workes onely his workes did shew that his Faith was a true justifying Faith indeed and not as it is in many that pretend and professe Faith a vaine shew of Faith and a meere shadow of it For that which S. Iames citeth Abraham believed God and it was accounted unto him for righteousnesse was as appeares by the story in the booke of Genesis long before that Abraham offered up Isaac and by those very words Saint Paul proveth Rom. 4. that wee are justified by Faith and not by Workes Therefore when S. Iames saith that by Abrahams offering up of Isaac that Scripture was fulfilled the meaning is that thereby it did appeare that it was truly said of Abraham that hee believed God and it was counted unto him For righteousnesse his readinesse in that worke to obey God did demonstrate that hee believed God indeed and that his faith was of a right stampe Thus also is it said that by workes faith was made perfect viz. even as the Lord said unto Paul My strength is made perfect in weakenesse 2 Cor. 12. 9. that is Gods strength doth exercise it selfe and shew how great it is in mans weaknesse So Abrahams workes did shew how great his faith was in this sense his workes did make his faith perfect not that they did adde any thing unto it no more then mans weaknesse doth adde unto Gods strength This opinion of yours saith the Marquesse S. Aug. de fide oper cap. 14. saith was an old heresie in the Apostles time and in the Preface of his comment upon the 32. Psal he calles it the right way to hell and damnation See Origan 5. to the Rom. S. Hilar. chap. 7. in Mat. S. Ambr. 4. ad Heb. Answ Austine de fid oper c. 14. speakes nothing against our Opinion but something for it That which hee speaketh by way of reproofe is against those who so thinke that Faith alone will suffice as that they heede not to doe good workes nor to order their life and conversation aright But this is nothing to us who are farre from holding such a Faith as that sufficient But in the same place Austine hath this for our purpose that when the Apostle saith that a Man is justified by Faith without the Workes of the Law hee did not intend that the Workes of Righteousnesse should be contemned but that every one should know that hee may be justified by faith though the workes of the Law did not goe before For saith hee they follow a man being justified they doe not goe before a man being to be justified If as this Father affirmeth a man must first be justified before hee can doe good workes then good workes are no cause of justification but an effect of it For the other place of Austine which the Marquesse alledgeth there is none such that I can finde viz. no preface of his comment upon Psal 32. but in the comment it selfe I finde this which makes for us Doest thou not heare the Apostle The just shall live by Faith Thy faith is thy righteousnesse What Origen saith on Rom. 5. having not his workes now at hand I cannot tell but I see what Bellarmine cites out of him on Rom. 4. and perhaps so it should have been in the Marquesse his writing However there is no doubt but Bellarmine would have made use of it if there had been any thing more for his purpose on Rom. 5. Now on Rom. 4. Origen saith that whose believe Christ but doe not put off the old man with his deeds their faith cannot be imputed unto them for righteousnesse This wee doe
and who hath been his Counsellour Rom. 11. 34. The last place of Scripture which the Marquesse objecteth is Ezech. 33. 11. As I live saith the Lord I delight not in the death of a sinner Now to this also we have Alvarez to answer for us viz. first that it is meant of spirituall death which is by sinne Which God doth only permit but doth not delight in it And this Explication hee saith is confirmed by the words following but rather that he be converted and live And if it be expounded of the second death which is eternall damnation the meaning hee saith is that God will not inflict this upon any but for sinne But though God will not inflict damnation upon the Reprobate but for sinne yet this same Alvarez as I have shewed abundantly before and so other Writers of the Church of Rome doe tell us that God by his eternall Decree of Reprobation of his meere Will and Pleasure doth determine to suffer the Reprobate to sinne and so to damne them for it And thus now I have made it appeare I hope sufficiently that by the consent of the Romanists themselves the Scriptures alledged are not repugnant to the Doctrine of Protestants concerning Reprobation neither I thinke will the Fathers whom the Marquesse citeth be against it The first of them is Austine who as hath before been shewed is as much for us as we neede desire He is here produced against us but so as that I know not easily how to finde what he saith For onely li. 1. de Civit. Dei. is cited but no Chapter whereas there are no lesse then 36. in that booke this is a strange kinde of citing Authors but the fault may be in the Printer or in some other and not in the Marquesse As for Cyprian who is next cited I see not any thing in the place pointed at which is to this purpose except this Seeing it is written God made not death nor doth he rejoyce in the destruction of the living surely he that would not have any to perish desires that sinners may come to Repentance and that by Repentance they may returne unto life againe Now that which Cyprian here alledgeth viz. God made not death c. I have shewed before by the testimony of Hierome to be no Canonicall Scripture nor of sufficient force to decide any point of controversie as also that if it were yet by the acknowledgement of Alvarez it makes not against Gods Decree of Reprobation which wee maintaine It hath also beene shewed before in what sense God would have none to perish viz. by his Antecedent Will with which yet will stand the Decree of Reprobation as we hold it which likewise hath been shewed and that from both Bellarmine and from Alvarez also And that God desires sinners may come to Repentance and so to life Protestants that I know doe not deny though they hold that God doth give and so from all eternity did purpose to give Repentance unto some and not to others as hee pleaseth which I have also shewed to be acknowledged by Bellarmine Alvarez Estius and others of the Church of Rome And it is most cleare by that of the Apostle If God peradventure will give them Repentance 2 Tim. 2. 25. and that He hath mercy on whom he will have mercy and whom he will he hardneth Rom. 9. 18. The third and last Father who is here alledged is Ambrose de Cain Abel lib. 2. but what Chapter whereas there are ten in that Booke is not mentioned Now I finde that Chap. 3. hath something which probably was aimed at by the Marquesse viz. this Christ therefore offered the helpe of healing unto all that whosoever perisheth may ascribe the cause of his death to himselfe who when he had a remedy whereby he might escape would not be cured And that Christs mercy towards all might be made manifest in that they that perish doe perish by their own negligence but they that are saved are freed according to Christs sentence who will have all men to be saved and to come to the acknowledgement of the truth Now I know no Protestant but hee will assent unto this that whosoever perish must ascribe the cause to themselves and that they perish through their own default I have before cited Calvin asserting thus much That none doe perish without their desert But this assertion of his is very well consistent with his Doctrine about Reprobation as I have shewed by the testimonies of diverse famous Writers of the Church of Rome And whereas Ambrose saith that such as perish had a remedy whereby they might escape and that they therefore perish because they would not be cured No Protestants I suppose will deny but that such as perish through unbeliefe if they did believe should be saved but yet neverthelesse not Protestants onely but Papists also as I have shewed doe hold that God from all eternity did decree and purpose to give faith unto some and not unto others and that meerely of his own will and pleasure And that therefore according to Austine whose words are cited before the prime and supreme cause why some are not saved is not because they will not but because God will not For that which Ambrose hath in the last place who will have all men to be saved c. enough hath beene said before to shew that in the judgement of Austine and diverse Romanists it is nothing against the absolute decree of Reprobation and so I have done with this point In the next place the Marquesse speakes of a mans assurance of his salvation saying that Protestants hold that a man ought to assure himselfe of it and to prove the contrary which they of the Roman Church doe hold he alledgeth 1 Cor. 9. 27. saying S. Paul was not assured but that whilest he Preached to others he himselfe might become a cast-away And Rom. 11. 20. Thou standest in the Faith be not high minded but feare c. lest thou also mayest be cut off And Phil. 2. 12. Worke out your own salvation with fear and termbling Answ Concerning this point Protestants hold 1. That a Christian may be assured of his salvation 2. That a Christian ought to labour for this assurance For the former of these positions wee have diverse places of Scriptures As first that Famous place Rom. 8. 35 36 37 38 39. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ shall Tribulation or Distresse or Persecution c. Nay in all these things we are more then conquerours through Him that loved us For I am perswaded that neither Death nor Life nor Angels nor principalities nor powers nor things present nor things to come nor height nor depth nor any other Creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. So also that 2 Cor. 5. 1. We know then if our earthly house of this Tabernacle were dissolved we have a building
of God an house not made with hands eternall in the Heavens And v. 6 7 8. Therefore we are alwayes confident knowing that whiles we are here in the body we are absent from the Lord. For we walke by faith and not by sight We are confident I say and willing rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord. And that Phil. 1. 21. To me to live is Christ and to die is gaine And that 2 Tim. 4. 18. The Lord shall deliver me from every evill work and will preserve me to his Heavenly Kingdom And in the same Chapter v. 6 7 8. I am now ready to be offered and my departure is at hand I have fought a good fight I have finished my course I have kept the faith henceforth is laid up for me the crown of righteousnesse c. So also S. Peter Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Iesus Christ who according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us againe unto a lively hope through the Resurrection of Iesus Christ from the dead unto an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that fadeth not away reserved in Heaven for us 1 Pet. 1. 3 4. This hope which believers have or may have of salvation is a lively hope it is a hope that maketh not ashamed Rom. 5. 5. because they are sure to obtaine that which they hope for and shall not be disappointed of it Hence it is also that believers rejoyce with joy unspeakable and full of glory 1 Pet. 1. 8. because they know they shall receive the end of their faith even the salvation of their soules v. 9. Wee have also Fathers to testifie this truth There flourisheth with us saith Cyprian the strength of hope and the firmness of faith and amongst the very ruines of the decaying world the minde is raised up and virtue is unmoveable and patience is ever joyfull and the soule is alwayes secure and confident of her God And immediatly hee confirmes this by that of the Prophet Habakkuk Although the fig-three shall not blossome c. yet I will rejoyce in the Lord I will joy in the God of my salvation Hab. 3. 17 18. So againe the same Father what place is there here for anxiety and carefulnesse who in the midst of these things can be fearfull and sad except he want hope and faith It is for him to fear death that would not go unto Christ it is for him to be unwilling to go to Christ that doth not believe that he doth begin to reigne with Christ For it is written The just shall live by faith If thou beest just and doest live by faith if thou doest truly believe in God seeing thou shalt be with Christ and art sure of Gods promise why doest thou not embrace this that thou art called unto Christ and art glad that thou art freed from the Devill God doth promise immortality and eternity to those that depart out of this life and thou doubtest this is not at all to know God this is to offend Christ the Lord and Master of Believers with the sinne of unbeliefe this is to be in the Church the house of faith and yet to have no faith Here we see how earnest Cyprian is to prove that Christians may yea ought to be confident against the feare of death and that because they may and ought to be assured of the life to come Thus also Austine I believe saith hee him that promiseth The Saviour speaketh the truth promiseth he hath said unto me He that heareth my words and believeth him that sent me hath eternall life and is passed from death to life and shall not come into condemnation I have heard the words of my Lord I have believed Now whereas I was an unbeliever I am made a Believer as he hath said I am passed from death to life I come not into condemnation not by my presumption but by his promise To this purposes also Bernard The Sun of Righteousnesse arising saith hee the mystery concerning the predestinate and those that shall be made blessed which was so long hid beginnes after a sort to come up out of the depth of eternity whiles every one being called by feare and justified by love that is by Faith working through love as hee said a little before doth assure himselfe that he is of the number of the blessed Knowing that whom he hath justified them he hath also glorified For why Hee heares that he is called when he is moved with feare he perceives that he is justified when he is filled with love and shall he doubt of his being glorified And againe Thou hast O man saith hee the justifying spirit a revealer of this secret and so testifying unto thy spirit that thou also art the Son of God Acknowledge the counsell of God in thy justification For thy present justification is both a revelation of Gods Counsell and also a certaine preparation unto future glory Or truly predestination it selfe is rather a preparation and justification is rather an appropinquation unto it And againe Who is righteous but he that doth requite Gods love with love againe which is not done but when the spirit by Faith doth reveale unto a man Gods eternall purpose concerning his future salvation Which revelation surely is no other thing but the infusion of spirituall grace by which the deeds of the flesh are mortified and so a man is prepared for that Kingdome which flesh and blood do not possesse receiving together by one spirit both this that he is assured that he is loved and also this that hee doth love againe that so he may not be ungratefull to him of whom he is loved Thus both Scriptures and Fathers testifie that Christians may be assured of their salvation And that this assurance may be had may be proved also by all that hath beene said before concerning the stability of Faith once had and the certainty of persevering in the estate of grace if a man be once in it For hence it followeth that if a man can be assured that hee is in the estate of Grace hee may also be assured of his salvation Now that he may be assured of his being in the state of grace some of the Romish Church and that since Luthers time have maintained as namely Catharinus and the Author of the Booke called Enchiridium Coloniense both which are mentioned in this respect by Bellarmine And because the Councell of Trent Sess 6. c. 9. doth seeme to determine the contrary therefore Eisingrenius hath written a whole booke to shew that the determination of the Councell is not indeed against this that a man may be assured that he hath true grace in him The booke I have seene and read many yeeres agoe though now I have it not And I remember he holds that a man may be as sure that hee hath true grace and that his sinnes are forgiven as hee is sure that twice two make
was the custome then to call upon the holy Angels for their patronage But to say as the Marquesse doth that it appears by these words that they used then to call upon the Saints departed is contrary to the tenet of the Romanists who hold that during the time of the old Testament praying unto the deceased Saints was not in use because then the Saints that departed out of this life as they hold did not goe to Heaven nor enjoy happinesse But the truth is those words Iob 5. 1. Call now c. and to which of the Saints wilt thou turne make neither for the invocation of Saints nor of Angels the meaning of Eliphaz being onely to convince Iob that none is punished as he was except he were wicked and therefore he bids him shew any of the Saints if hee could that was so punished as hee was For this was the error of Eliphaz and the other two friends of Iob that they thought Iob could not be a godly man because God did so afflict him Therefore God said his Anger was kindled against them because they had not spoken of him the thing that was right Iob. 42. 7. For the Fathers which are here objected the first viz. Dionys is cited cap. 7 but of what For hee wrote diverse Bookes But his testimony is of little worth it being uncertaine who hee was and when hee lived and this being evident to all that have any the least taste of him that hee was not as is pretended that Dionysius that is mentioned Acts 17. 34. which his fustian and bombast-stile doth sufficiently declare The next is Athanasius but I finde no such peece as Ser. de Annunt either in his workes as they are extant both in Greeke and Latine nor in Bellarmines Index or Catalogue of them which he hath in his Booke of Ecclesiasticall writers If perhaps the Marquesse meant Ser de Sanctissimâ Deiparâ Bellarmine in that same booke censures it as not belonging to Athanasius but to some other long after his time and in some thing as it seemes not very sound Basil I have not to peruse nor Maximus Chrysostome in the place quoted viz. Hom. 66. de Pop. Antioch doth indeed seeme to speake for praying unto Saints to pray for us But wee must remember how hee is reckoned among them who held that the Saints departed are not yet in glory and therefore if the Romanists will have him speake agreably to this position they must not have him for a patron in this cause touching the invocation of Saints And upon the same ground must they also let goe Bernard who is likewise noted for the same opinion though the truth is hee lived in very corrupt times and therefore it is no marvell if hee did draw some dreggs it is indeed a marvell that hee was not more corrupted and infected then he was There remaines onely Hierome who in the end of his Epitaph or Funerall Oration concerning Paula addresseth his speech unto her bidding her farwell and helpe him with her prayers But 1. I have shewed before that Bellarmine doth overthrow the foundation that Hierome buildes upon viz. that the Saints departed are every where and so can heare and understand whatsoever any stand in need of and desire of them which Bellarmine confesseth to be incompetible to any meere creature as indeed it is this being a property that belongs unto God only 2. When the Fathers sometimes speak in that manner to the Saints deceased their speeches proceeded rather from affection then from judgement and are Rhetoricall rather then Theologicall expressions As appeares by that of Gregory Nazianzen who in his first Oration against Iulian speakes thus unto Constantine who was then dead And heare O thou soule of the great Constantine if thou hast any sense or understanding of these things Where the Greeke Scholiast notes that Nazianzen did imitate Isocrates a Heathen Oratour This is spoken saith hee in imitation of Isocrates as if he should say If thou hast any power to heare the things that are here spoken And observe how Nazianzen whom Hierome calleth his Master spake doubtfully making it a question whether the Saints departed doe understand things here upon Earth 3. Austine who lived in the same time with Hierome in his booke of true Religion speaking of the Saints deparred saith plainly They are to be honoured for imitation but not to be worshipped for Religion And in the last booke of that famous worke intituled Of the City of God in the tenth Chapter of it speaking of the Martyrs hee saith that in the celebration of the Eucharist they were mentioned in their place and order viz. to praise God for them and to stir up others to the imitation of them but yet that they were not invocated and that no prayers were put up unto them This may suffice to shew how farre in this point they of the Roman Church are departed both from the Rule of Gods Word and also from the judgement and practice of the ancient Fathers We hold saith the Marquesse Confirmation necessary you not We have Scripture for it Acts 8. 14. Peter and Iohn prayed for them that they might receive the holy Ghost for as yet he was falne upon none of them onely they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Iesus then laid they their hands on them and they received the holy Ghost Where we see the holy Ghost was given in Confirmation which was not given in Baptisme Also Heb. 6. 1. Therefore leaving the principles of the Doctrine of Christ let us goe on unto perfection not laying against the foundation of Repentance from dead workes and of Faith toward God of Baptisme and of laying on of hands The Fathers affirme the same Tertul. de Resur S. Pacian de Bapt. S. Amb. de sacr S. Hierome contra Lucif S Cypr. l. 2. Ep. 1. speaking both of Baptisme and Confirmation saith Then they may be sanctified and be the sons of God if they be borne in both Sacraments Answ Concerning Confirmation the Romanists make it a Sacrament properly so called of the same nature with Baptisme and the Lords Supper The matter of this Sacrament they make to be a certaine Ointment compounded after a speciall manner and consecrated by a Bishop wherewith the person to be confirmed is anointed in the forehead in the forme of a crosse The forme of the Sacrament they make to consist in these words I signe thee with the signe of the Crosse and confirme thee with the Chrisme or ointment of salvation in the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost The effect of this Sacrament they say is to confer true sanctifying grace and that more abundantly then Baptisme doth in respect of the strengthening of the soule against the assaults of Satan Now this Confirmation Protestants deny to be a Sacrament as having no institution nor any ground for it in the Scripture The
as that whatsoever was contained in them should be sacred he thought that if the Apostle had done so it had been too much arrogancy in him wherein I am far from being of his minde There is nothing material which the Marquesse here doth further alleadge against Luther onely he citeth two or three passages wherein Luther doth vaunt of himself which though it may perhaps argue some vanity of the man yet doth it not argue any falsity of his doctrine I never required saith Luther that any should account me modest or holy but that all should embrace the Gospel Yet might he without any vain boasting say as the Marquesse objecteth Page 170. that he would not have his doctrine to be judged either by Men or Angels that is he being assured of its truth and agreeablenesse to Gods word he would not refer it to the censure either of Men or Angels so as to submit unto them if they should condemn it In this he had respect it seems to that of the Apostle Though we or an Angel from heaven preach any other Gospel unto you then that which we have preached unto you let him be accursed Gal. 1. 8. And thus much for answer to those things which are alleadged against Luther In the next place the Marquesse fals upon Calvin and brings many charges against him but by the examination of the matter it will appear that Calvin is altogether as injuriously dealt with as Luther if not more 1. He maintains its said that three Essences do arise out of the holy Trinity I wish the Marquesse had either cited Calvins words or at least the place so as that I might have found what he saith But he onely citeth Tract Theol. p. 793. Where in the Edition which I have viz. Genev. an 1576. is no such thing to be found Neither need I to search into Calvins Works for the answering of this charge Bellarmine himself who would have been ready enough to find out any such grosse stuffe in him doth justifie him in this point confessing that Calvin doth acknowledge onely one nature in three distinct persons And that he doth plainly say that the Essence is communicated to the Son by the Father which also doth take away the next charge viz. That the Son hath his substance distinct from the Father and that he is a distinct God from the Father By Bellarmines own confession Calvins doctrine is directly contrary 2. He teacheth saith the Marquesse That the Father can neither wholly nor by parts communicate his nature to Christ but must withall be deprived thereof himself This is clearly confuted by Calvins words which Bellarmine alleadgeth If there be any differe we in the Essence viz. of the Father and the Son let them answer whether the Father did communicate it to the Son or no Now this could not be in part for it is not lawfull to make half a God Besides by this means they should foully tear in peeces Gods Essence It remains that the whole and intire Essence is common to the Father and the Son 3. Calvin is said to deny that the Son is begotten of the Fathers substance and to affirm that he is God of himself not God of God Divers Romanists besides and before the Marquesse would make Calvin guilty of some grosse herefie in saying that the Son is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God of himself But Bellarmine hath a whole Chapter about this very point and doth clear Calvin from that aspersion which others cast upon him shewing that he spake of the Son not in respect of his Person but in respect of his Essence and that his meaning is that the Person of the Son is begotten of the Father but that the Essence of the Son is not begotten nor produced but is of it self So another learned Jesuite viz. Gregorius de Valentia as I finde him cited doth ingenuously confesse that Calvins doctrine in this point being rightly understood is sound and true viz. That the Son as he is essentially God is of himself and only is from the Father as he is a Person When the Fathers and Councels affirm the Son to be God of God he saith they take the word God personally viz. as it signifieth both the Person Father and of the Son yet saith he the Son as he is essentially God so he is not from another And in this sense he saith Epiphanius seemeth to have called the Son 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is God of himself 4. He taxeth Calvin for saying That dream of the absolute power of God which the Schoolmen have brought in is execrable blasphemy Calvin in one of the places alleadged for the other I cannot consult saith thus Neither do we bring in the device of absolute power which as it is profane so we have just cause to detest it But Calvin was far from denying that absolute power of God whereby he is able to do whatsoever he pleaseth Only he seems to deny God to have such an absolute power as to be able to do any thing whether it be right or wrong For he addes immediately We do not fein God to be without law who is a law unto himself 5. It is objected against Calvin that those words The Father is greater then I Joh. 14. 28. he will not have restrained to the humane nature but will extend them to Christ as God and man Many places are cited for proof of this some whereof for want of the same Edition though I have the book I cannot examine viz. Tract Theol. p. 794. 792. my book in those pages hath nothing to the purpose And so also it is in all other places where the Marquesse doth cite those Theological Tractates Another place here also the Marquesse citeth which is as if it were not cited viz. Calvin on Mat. 22. the verse being not mentioned the quotation is to no purpose Two other places he cites also viz. Calvin Instit l. 2. c. 14. § 3. and on Joh. 17. 12. but in neither of these places doth Calvin speak any thing about those words My Father is greater then I. It may seem strange that the Marquess should here cite so many places out of Calvins Works and yet pretermit his Commentary upon those very words about which he taxeth him Now Calvin commenting upon those words saith That the Arians did wickedly abuse this testimony to prove that Christ is but a secondary God and not equal with the Father and that yet on the other side the Orthodox Fathers did not rightly interpret the words of Christs humane nature For that here neither Christs humane nature nor his eternal divinity he saith is spoken of but Christ according to the weaknesse of our capacity doth set himselfe in the midst betwixt God and us He explains it further thus Christ saith he doth not compare his Fathera Divinity with his own nor doth he compare his
he was above two hundred years after Minutius and Gregory who was about as much after Paulinus was against the worshipping of any thing made with hands as appears by the words before cited Finally saith the Marquesse the Church then held that to the Catholick Church only belongs the keeping of the Apostolical tradition the authority of interpretation of Scripture and the decision of controversies of faith and that out of the succession of her communion of her doctrine and her ministery there neither was Church nor salvation 1. For Apostolical traditions enough hath been said before 2. And so also of interpretation of Scripture and decision of controversies of faith 3. I understand not what is meant by objecting against us that out of the Catholick Church there is no Church For the Catholick Church being the Church universal and so comprehending all particular Churches as parts and members of it who can doubt that there is no Church out of the Church Catholick But what is this to the Church of Rome which once indeed was a sound part of the Catholick Church but the Catholick Church it never was nor could be except a part could be the whole In that which follows page 101. c. there is nothing but the same matter as before only the form is somewhat altered and therefore there is no need that I should trouble either my self or the Reader any further about it only I shall adde one or two Animadversions 1. Whereas it is objected page 105. c. that Luther after his deserting the communion of the Church of Rome did yet hold some points of Popery and so also Husse and Wickliffe and others that otherwise opposed themselves against the errors and corruptions of that Church I answer That as Rome was not built at once so neither was it demolished at once but by degrees it is no marvel therefore if those worthy men did at least for a while retain some Romish opinions and practices after that in many things they had discovered the truth and stood up in defence of it 2. Whereas it is pretended page 106. that before Berengarius who was above 1000. years after Christ none did oppose that reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament which the Romanists maintain besides that I have sufficiently confuted this before the Marquesse might have seen from Bellarmine himself that there were some who above 200. years before Berengarius did oppose that doctrine which in this particular the Church of Rome now doth hold namely Bertram a Presbyter who was about 800. years after Christ and saith Bellarmine was one of the first that did call in question that doctrine But Bellarmine doth too much mince the matter for Bertram did more then call in question that reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament which the Romanists do hold he did plainly assert that which Protestants maintain viz. that the substance of bread and wine doth still remain after consecration as is to be seen in Hospinians first part of the Sacramentary history and so in others that cite that Author for the book it self I confesse I have not seen that I do remember But that is here worthy to be observed which the Romish censurers of Books say speaking of this book of Bertrams about the Sacrament Although say they we do not much value this book nor should greatly eare if it were no where to be found yet seeing it hath been often printed and read of very many c. and we sufer very many errours in other ancient Catholicks we extenuate them we excuse them and finding out some device we often deny them and fain some good sense of them when they are opposed in disputations or conflicts with the adversaries we see not why Bertram may not deserve the same favour and diligent recognition lest Hereticks prate against us and say that we burn antiquity and prohibit it when it makes for them Some things therefore in Bertrams book they will have to be quite left out and some things to be quite altered as namely for visibly to be read invisibly Such devices have they of the Church of Rome to corrupt ancient Writers when they make against them and then they pretend that all are for them Thus the Marquesse in the conclusion of his Reply page 230. pretends that they have the prescription of 1600. years possession and continuance of their Churches Doctrine and evidence out of the word of God and the Fathers witnessing to that evidence and the decrees of Councels and Protestants own acknowlegdements But what ground there is for this pretence let the Reader judge by comparing and considering what is said on both sides And so I also shall leave the successe of my labour unto God in whose hand are the hearts of all An Addition of some few things omitted in the fore-going REJOINDER THe Marquesse pag. 69. citeth Basil orat in 40 it is misprinted 44 Mart. as affirming that we may pray unto the Saints departed But in that Oration Basil affirms no such thing He shews indeed his approbation of praying not unto the Martyrs but which is quite another thing to God at the monuments of the Martyrs The most learned B. Usher observes That the memory of the Martyrs indeed was from the very beginning had in great reverence and at their Memorials and Martyria that is to say at the places wherein their bodies were laid which were the Churches whereunto the Christians did in those times usually resort prayers were ordinarily offered up unto God for whose cause they laid down their lives But this is no argument that they then prayed to the Martyrs though that errour might take occasion afterwards to creep in by this meanes The Marquesse taxeth Calvin for holding that Christs soule was subject to ignorance To what I have already said in answer to this charge I adde that in this particular Fulgentius was of the same minde with Calvin For confuting those that held Christ to have no humane soul he saith thus If we must believe that the humane nature in Christ wanted a soul what is it that in Christ being an Infant is said not to have known good and evil Then he cites Isa 7. 16. expounding it of Christ and addes Therefore the humane soule which is naturally made capable of reason in Christ being an Infant is said not to have known good and evil which according to the truth of the Gospel in Christ being a child is related to have increased in wisdome c. To that also that hath been said before concerning Calvins death let this be added How far Calvin was from despairing at his death as the Marquesse doth object may appear by what he wrote to his dear friend Farel when he looked for death every moment I hardly breath saith he and expect continually that breath should fail me It is enough that I live and dye to Christ who to those that are his is both