righteousnes and the blessednesse arising therefrom as well as we and the mediation of our Saviour being of that present efficacie that it tooke away sinne and brought in righteousnesse from the very beginning of the world it had vertue sufficient to free men from the penaltie of losse as well as from the penalty of sense and to bring them unto him in whose presence is fulnesse of joy as to deliver them from the place of torment where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth The first that ever assigned a resting place in Hell to the Fathers of the old Testament was as farre as wee can finde Marcion the heretick who determined that both kinde of rewards whether of torment or of refreshing was appointed in Hell for them that did obey the Law and the Prophets Wherein he was gainsayd by such as wrote against him not only for making that the place of their eternal rest but also for lodging them there at all and imagining that Abrahams bosome was any part of Hell This appeareth plainly by the disputation set out among the workes of Origen betwixt Marcus the Marcionite Adamantius the defender of the Catholicke cause who touching the parabolicall historie of the rich man Lazarus in the sixteenth of S. Luke are brought in reasoning after this maner MARCUS He saith that Aâ—raham is in hell and not in the kingdome of heaven ADAMANTIUS Reade whether he saytâ— that Abraham was in Hell MARC In that the rich man and he talked one to the other it appeareth that they were together ADAMANT That they talked one with another thou hearest but the great gulfe spoken of that thou hearest not For the middle space betwixt heaven and earth he calleth a gulfe MARC Can a man therefore see from earth unto heaven it is impossible Can any man lifting up his eyes behold from the earth or from hell rather see into heaven If not it is plain that a vally only was set betwixt them ADAMANT Bodily eyes use to see those things only that are neere but spirituall eyes reach farre and it is manifest that they who have here put off their body doe see one another with the eyes of their soule For marke how the Gospell doth say that he lifted up his eyes toward heaven one useth to lift them up and not toward the earth In like maner doth Tertullian also retort the same place of Scripture against Marcion and prove that it maketh a plaine difference betweene Hell and the bosome of Abraham For it affirmeth saith he both that a great deepe is interposed betwixt those regions and that it suffereth no passage from eyther side Neyther could the rich man have lifted up his eyes and that afarre off unlesse it had beene unto places above him and very farre above him by reason of the mightie distance betwixt that height and that depth Thus farre Tertullian who though he come short of Adamantius in making Abrahams bosome not to be any part of Heaven although no member at all of Hell yet doth he concurre with him in this that it is a place of blisse and a common receptacle wherein the soules of all the faithfull as well of the new as of the old Testament doe still remaine in expectation of the generall resurrection which quite marteth the Limbus Patrum of our Romanists and the journey which they fancie our Saviour to have taken for the fetching of the Fathers from thence With these two doth S. Augustin also ioyne in his 99. epistle to Euodius concerning whose iudgement herein I will not say the deceitfull but the exceeding partiall dealing of Cardinall Bellarmine can verie hardly be excused Although Augustin saith he in his 99. epistle do seeme to doubt whether the bosome of Abraham where the soules of the Fathers were in times past should be in Hell or somewhere else yet in the 20. booke of the Citie of God the 15. chapter he affirmeth that it was in Hell as all the rest of the Fathers have alwayes taught If S. Augustin in that epistle were of the minde as hee was indeed that Abrahams bosome was no part of Hell he was not the first inventer of that doctrine others taught it before him and opposed Marcion for teaching otherwise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alone he went not two there were at least as we have seen that walked along with him in the same way But for that which he is said to have doubted off in one place and to have affirmed in another if the indifferent Reader will be pleased but to view both the places he shall easily discerne that the Cardinall looked not into these things with a single eye In his 99. epistle from that speech of Abraham Betweene you and us there is a great gulfe fixed he maketh this inference In these words it appeareth sufficiently as I thinke that the bosome of so great happinesse is not any part and member of Hell These seem unto the Cardinall to be the words of a doubtfull man with what words then when he is better resolved doth he affirme the matter With these forsooth If it do seem no absurditie to beleeve that the old Saincts which held the faith of Christ to come were in places most remote from the torments of the wicked but yet in Hell untill the blood of Christ and his descent into those places did deliver them truely from henceforth the good and faithfull who are redeemed with that price already shed know not Hell at all If satis ut opinor apparet it appeareth sufficiently as I thinke must import doubting and si non absurdé credi videtur if it doe seeme no absurditie to beleeve affirming I know not I must confesse what to make of mens speeches The truth is S. Augustin in handling this question discovereth himselfe to be neyther of the Iesuits temper nor beleefe He esteemed not this to be such an article of faith that they who agreed not therein must needs be held to be of different religions as he doth modestly propound the reasons which induced him to think that Abrahams bosome was no member of Hell so doth he not lightly reiect the opinion of those that thought otherwise but leaveth it still as a disputable point Whether that bosome of Abraham where the wicked rich man when he was in the torments of Hell did behold the poore man resting were eyther to be accounted by the name of Paradise or esteemed to appertaine unto Hell I cannot readily affirme saith he in one place and in another Whether Abraham were then at any certaine place in Hell we cannot certainly define and in his 12. book de Genesi ad literam I have not hitherto found and I doe yet inquire neyther doe I remember that the canonicall Scripture doth any where put Hell in the good part Now that the bosome of Abraham and that rest unto which the godly poore man was carried by the
hast delivered me from prison A debtor was in danger to be hanged the debt is payd for him he is said to be freed from hanging In all these things they were not but because such were their deserts that unlesse they had beene holpen there they would have beene they say rightly that they were freed thence vvhither by those that freed them they vvere not suffered to be brought That Christ destroyed the power of Hell spoyled principalities and powers and made a shew of them openly triumphing over them is acknowledged by all Christians Neyther is there anie who will refuse to subscribe unto that which Proclus delivered in his Sermon before Nestorius then Bishop of Constantinople inserted into the Acts of the Councell of Ephesus He was shut up in the grave who stretched out the heavens like a skinne he was reckoned among the dead and spoyled Hell and that which S. Cyrill and the Synod of Alexandria wrote unto the same Nestorius concerning the Confession of their faith approved not only by the third generall Councell held at Ephesus but also by the fourth at Chalcedon and the fifth at Constantinople To the end that by his unspeakable power treading down death in his own as the first and principall flesh he might become the first borne from the dead and the first fruits of those that slept and that he might make a way to mans nature for the turning back againe unto incorruption by the grace of God he tasted death for all men and revived the third day spoyling Hell All I say do agree that Christ spoyled or as they were wont to speake harrowed Hell whether you take Hell for that which keepeth the soule separated from the body or that which separateth soule and body bothe from the blessed presence of him who is our true life the one whereof our Saviour hath conquered by bringing in the Resurrection of the body the other he hath abolished by procuring for us Life everlasting Touching the maner and the meanes whereby Hell was thus spoyled is all the disagreement The maner whether our Lord did deliver his people from Hell by way of prevention in saving them from comming thither or by way of subvention in helping those out whom at the time of his death he found there The meanes whether this were done by his Divinity or his Humanitie or both whether by the vertue of his sufferings death buriall and resurrection or by the reall descending of his soule into the place wherein mens soules were kept imprisoned That hee descended not into the Hell of the damned by the essence of his soule or locally but virtually onely by extending the effect of his power thither is the common doctrine of Thomas Aquinas and the rest of the Schoole Cardinall Bellarmine at first held it to be probable that Christs soule did descend thither not only by his effects but by his reall presence also but afterwards having considered better of the matter he resolved that the opinion of Thomas and the other Schoolemen was to be followed The same is the judgement of Suarez who concerning this whole article of Christs descent into Hell doth thus deliver his minde If by an Article of faith we understand a truth which all the faithfull are bound explicitly to know and beleeve so I doe not thinke it necessarie to reckon this among the Articles of faith Because it is not a matter altogether so necessary for all men and because that for this reason peradventure it is omitted in the Nicene Creed the knowledge of which Creed seemeth to be sufficient for fulfilling the precept of faith Lastly for this cause peradventure Augustin and other of the Fathers expounding the Creed doe not unfold this mysterie unto the people And to speake the truth it is a matter above the reach of the common people to enter into the discussion of the full meaning of this point of the descension into Hell the determination whereof dependeth upon the knowledge of the learned tongues and other sciences that come not within the compasse of their understanding some experiment whereof they may finde in this that whereas in the other questions here handled they might finde themselves able in some reasonable forre to follow me here they leave me I doubt and let me walke without their company It having here likewise beene further manifested what different opinions have beene entertayned by the ancient Doctors of the Church concerning the determinate place wherein our Saviours soule did remaine during the time of the separation of it from his body I leave it to be considered by the learned whether any such controverted matter may fitly be brought in to expound the Rule of faith by which being common both to the great and the small ones in the Church must contayn such verities only as are generally agreed upon by the common consent of all true Christians and if the words of the article of Christs going to Hades or Hell may well beare such a generall meaning as this that he went to the dead and continued in the state of death untill the time of his Resurrection it would be thought upon whether such a truth as this which findeth universall acceptance among all Christians may not safely passe for an article of our Creed and the particular limitation of the place unto which our Saviours soule went whither to the place of blisse or to the place of torment or to both be left as a number of other Theologicall points are unto further disputation In the articles of our faith common agreement must bee required which wee are sure is more likely to be found in the generall than in the particular And this is the onely reason which moved me to enlarge my selfe so much in the declaration of the generall acceptions of the word Hades and the application of them to our Saviours descent spoken of in the Creed wherein if the zeale which I beare to the peace of the Church and the settlement of unitie among brethren hath carried me too farre as it hath made me indeede quite to forget my intended brevity I intreate the Reader to pardon me and ceasing to be further troublesome unto him in the prosecution of this intricate argument I passe to the next question OF PRAYER TO SAINTS THat one question of S. Paul Rom. 10.14 How shall they call upon him in whom they have not beleeved among such as lust not to be contentious will quickly put an end unto this question For if none can be invocated but such as must be beleeved in and none must be beleeved in but God alone everie one may easily discerne what conclusion will follow thereupon Againe all Christians have beene taught that no part of divine worship is to be communicated unto any creature for it is written Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onely shalt thou serve But prayer is such a principall part of
who succeeded him in his Bishopricke saith that the bread and wine sanctifieth them that feed upon that matter acknowledging thereby that the materiall part of those outward elements do still remaine In the Church saith Macarius is offered bread wine the type of his flesh and blood and they which are partakers of the visible bread doe spiritually eate the flesh of the Lord. Christ saith S. Hierome did not offer water but wine for the type of his blood S. Augustine bringeth in our Saviour thus speaking of this matter You shall not eate this bodie which you see nor drinke that blood which they shall shed that will crucifie mee I have commended a certaine Sacrament unto you that being spiritually understood vvill quicken you The same Father in another place writeth that Christ admitted Iudas to that banquet wherein he commended and delivered unto his Disciples the figure of his body and blood but as he elsewhere addeth they did eate that bread which was the Lord himselfe hee the bread of the Lord against the Lord. Lastly the Lord saith he did not doubt to say This is my body when he gave the signe of his body So the Author of the Homily upon the 22. Psalme among the workes of Chrysostome This table hee hath prepared for his servants and hand-maydes in their sight that he might every day for a similitude of the body and blood of Christ shew unto us in a sacrament bread and wine after the order of Melchisedec And S. Chrysostome himselfe in his Epistle written to Caesarius against the heresie of Apolinarius As before the bread be sanctified we call it bread but when Gods grace hath sanctified it by the meanes of the Priest it is delivered from the name of bread and is reputed worthy the name of the Lords body although the nature of the bread remain still in it and it is not called two bodies but one body of Gods sonne so likewise here the divine nature residing in the body of Christ these two make one sonne and one person In the selfe same maner also doe Theodoret Gelasius and Ephraemius proceed against the Eutychian heretickes Theodoret for his part layeth downe these grounds That our Saviour in the deliverie of the mysteries called bread his body and that which was mixt in the cupp his blood That hee changed the names and gave to the body the name of the symbol or signe and to the symbol the name of the body That hee honoured the visible symboles with the name of his bodie and blood not changing the nature but adding grace to nature And that this most holy food is a symbol type of those things whose names it beareth to wit of the body and blood of Christ. Gelasius writeth thus The sacraments which we receive of the body and blood of Christ are a divine thing by meanes whereof wee are made partakers of the divine nature and yet the substance or nature of bread and wine doth not cease to be And indeed the image and the similitude of the bodie and blood of Christ are celebrated in the action of the mysteries It appeareth therefore evidently enough unto us that wee are to hold the same opinion of the Lord Christ himselfe which we professe celebrate and are in his Image that as those Sacraments by the operation of the holy Spirit passe into this that is into the divine substance and yet remaine in the propriety of their owne nature so that principall mysterie it selfe whose force and vertue they truely represent should be conceived to be namely to consist of two natures divine and humane the one not abolishing the truth of the other Lastly Ephraemius the Patriarch of Antioch having spoken of the distinction of these two natures in Christ and said that no man having understanding could say that there was the same nature of that which could be handled and of that which could not be handled of that which was visible and of that which was invisible addeth And even thus the body of Christ which is received by the faithfull the Sacrament he meaneth doth neither depart from his sensible substance and yet remayneth undivided from intelligible grace and Baptisme being wholly made spirituall and remayning one doth both retaine the propertie of his sensible substance of water I meane and yet looseth not that which it is made Thus have wee produced evidences of all sorts for confirmation of the doctrine by us professed touching the blessed Sacrament which cannot but give sufficient satisfaction to all that with anie indifferencie will take the matter into their consideration But the men with whom wee have to deale are so farre fallen out with the truth that neither sense nor reason neither authoritie of Scriptures or of Fathers can perswade them to be friends againe with it unlesse we shew unto them in what Popes dayes the contrarie falshood was first devised If nothing else will give them content we must put them in minde that about the time wherein Soter was Bishop of Rome there lived a cousening companion called Marcus whose qualities are thus set out by an ancient Christian who was famous in those dayes though now his name be unknowne unto us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Where first hee chargeth him to have beene an Idolmakeâ— then hee objecteth unto him his skill in Astrologie and Magicke by meanes whereof and by the assistance of Satan hee laboured with a shewe of miracles to winne credite unto his false doctrines amongst his seduced disciples and lastly hee concludeth that his father the Divel had imployed him as a forerunner of his antithean craft or his antichristian deceiveablenesse of unrighteousnesse if you will have it in the Apostles language For he was indeed the Divels forerunner both for the idolatries and sorceries which afterward were brought into the East and for those Romish fornications and inchantments wherewith the whole West was corrupted by that man of sinne whose comming was foretold to be after the working of Satan with all power and signes and lying wonders And that we may keep our selves within the compasse of that particular which now wee have in hand wee finde in Irenaeus that this Arch-heretick made speciall use of his juggling feates to breed a perswasion in the mindes of those whom hee had perverted that in the cup of his pretended Eucharist he really delivered them blood to drinke For fayning himselfe to consecrate the cups filled with wine and extending the words of Invocation to a great length he made them to appeare of a purple and redd colour to the end it might be thought that the Grace which is above all things did distill the blood thereof into that cup by his Invoâ—ation And
But howsoever this wee are sure of that the Canonists afterward held no absolute necessitie of obedience to be required therein as unto a Sacramentall institution ordayned by Christ for obtayning remission of sinnes but a Canonicall obedience onely as unto an usefull constitution of the Church And therefore where Gratian in his first distinction de Poenitentiâ had in the 34. chapter and the three next following propounded the allegations which made for them who held that men might obtaine pardon for their sinnes without anie orall confession of them and then proceeded to the authorities which might seeme to make for the contrarie opinion Iohannes Semeca at the beginning of that part upon those words of Gratian Alij é contrario tesâ—antur putteth too this Glosse From this place untill the section His auctoritatib he alledgeth for the other part that sinne is not forgiven unto such as are of yeares without confession of the mouth which yet is false saith he But this free dealing of his did so displease Friar Manrique who by the command of Pius Quintus set out a censure upon the Glosses of the Canon law that hee gave direction these words which yet is false should be cleane blotted out which direction of his notwithstanding the Romane Correctors under Gregory the XIII did not follow but letting the words still stand give them a check only with this marginall annotation Nay it is most true that without confession in desire at least the sinne is not forgiven In like maner where the same Semeca holdeth it to be the better opinion that Confession was ordayned by a certaine tradition of the universall Church rather then by the authoritie of the new or old Testament and inferreth thereupon that it is necessarie among the Latins but not among the Greekes because that tradition did not spread to them Friar Manrique commandeth all that passage to be blotted out but the Romane Correctors clap this note upon the margent for an antidote Nay confession was ordayned by our Lord and by Gods Law is necessary to all that fall into mortall sinne after Baptisme as well Greekes as Latins and for this they quote onely the 14. Session of the Councell of Trent where that opinion is accursed in us which was held two or three hundred yeares ago by the men of their owne religion among whom Michael of Bononia who was Prior general of the order of the Carmelites in the dayes of Pope Vrban the sixth doth conclude strongly out of their owne received grounds that confession is not necessary for the obtayning of the pardon of our sinne and Panormitan the great Canonist professeth that the opinion of Semeca doth much please him which referreth the originall of Confession to a generall tradition of the Church because saith he there is not anie cleare authority which sheweth that God or Christ did clearely ordayne that Confession should be made unto a Priest Yea all the Canonists following their first Interpreter say that Confession was brought in onely by the law of the Church and not by anie divine precept if we will beleeve Maldonat who addeth notwithstanding that this opinion is eyther alreadie sufficiently declared by the Church to be heresie or that the Church should doe well if it did declare it to be heresie And we finde indeed that in the yeare of our Lord 1479. which was 34. yeares after the death of Panormitan by a speciall commission directed from Pope Sixtus the fourth unto Alfonsus Carillus Archbishop of Toledo one Petrus Oxomensis professor of Divinitie in the Vniversitie of Salamanca was driven to abjure this conclusion which hee had before delivered as agreeable to the common opinion of the Doctors that confession of sinnes in particular vvas grounded upon some statute of the universall Church and not upon divine right and when learned men for all this would not take warning but would needs be medling againe with that which the Popish Clergie could not indure should be touched as Iohannes de Selva among others in the end of his treatise de Iurejurando Erasmus in diverse of his workes and Beatus Rhenanus in his argument upon Tertullians booke de Poenitentiâ the fathers of Trent within 72. yeares after that conspired together to stop all mens mouthes with an anathema that should denie sacramentall confession to be of divine institution or to be necessarie unto salvation And so we are come to an end of that point OF THE PRIESTS POVVER TO FORGIVE SINNES FRom Confession we are now to proceed unto Absolution which it were pitie this man should receive before he made confession of the open wrong he hath here done in charging us to denie that Priests have power to forgive sinnes whereas the verie formall words which our Church requireth to be used in the ordination of a Minister are these Whose sinnes thou doest forgive they are forgiven and vvhose sinnes thou doest retaine they are retained And therefore if this be all the matter the Fathers and we shal agree well enough howsoever this make-bate would faine put friends together by the eares where there is no occasion at all of quarrell For wee acknowledge most willingly that the principall part of the Priests ministerie is exercised in the matter of forgivenesse of sinnes the question only is of the maner how this part of their function is executed by them and of the bounds and limits thereof which the Pope and his Clergie for their owne advantage have inlarged beyond all measure of truth and reason That wee may therefore give unto the Priest the things that are the Priests and to God the things that are Gods not coÌ„municate unto any creature the power that properly belongeth to the Creator who will not give his glory unto another we must in the first place lay this downe for a sure ground that to forgive sinnes properly directly and absolutely is a priviledge onely appertayning unto the most High I saith he of himselfe even I am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine owne sake and will not remember thy sinnes Esai 43.25 Who is a God like unto thee that pardoneth iniquitie saith the Prophet Micah 7.18 which in effect is the same with that of the Scribes Mark 2.7 and Luk. 5.21 Who can forgive sinnes but God alone And therefore when David saith unto God Thou forgavest the iniquitie of my sinne Psalm 32.5 Gregory surnamed the great the first Bishop of Rome of that name thought this to be a sound paraphrase of his words Thou vvho alone sparest who alone forgivest sinnes For who can forgive sinnes but God alone Hee did not imagine that he had committed anie great error in subscribing thus simply unto that sentence of the Scribes and little dreamed that anie petie Doctors afterwards would arise in Rome or Rhemes who would tell us a faire tale that the faithlesse Iewes thought as Hereticks now adayes that to forgive
Lord their God and the disobedient to the wisedome of the just by giving knowledge of salvation to Gods people unto the remission of their sins Not because he had properly anie power given him to turne mens hearts and to worke faith and repentance for forgivenesse of sinnes when and where he thought good but because he was trusted with the ministerie of the word of Gods grace which is able to convert and quicken mens soules and to give them an inheritance among all them which are sanctified by the powerfull application of which word he who converteth the sinner from the errour of his way is said to save a soule from death and to hide a multitude of sinnes For howsoever in true proprietie the covering of sinnes the saving from death and turning of men from their iniquities is a priviledge peculiar to the Lord our God unto whom alone it appertayneth to reconcile the world to himselfe by not imputing their sinnes unto them yet inasmuch as he hath committed unto his ambassadors the word of reconciliation they in performing that worke of their ministerie may be as rightly said to be imployed in reconciling men unto God and procuring remission of their sinnes as they are said to deliver a man from going downe into the pit when they declare unto him his righteousnesse and to save their hearers when they preach unto them the Gospel by which they are saved For as the word it selfe which they speake is said to be their word which yet is in truth the word of God so the worke which is effectually wrought by that word in them that beleeve is said to be their worke though in truth it be the proper worke of God And as they that beleeve by their word are said to be their Epistle 2. Cor. 3.2 that is to say the Epistle of Christ ministred by them as it is expounded in the verse following in like maner forgivenesse of sinnes and those other great graces that appertaine to the beleevers may be said to be their worke that is to say the worke of Christ ministred by them For in verie deed as Optatus speaketh in the matter of Baptisme not the minister but the faith of the beleever and the Trinitie doe bring these things unto every man And where the preaching of the Gospel doth prove the power of God unto salvation onely the weakenesse of the externall ministerie must be ascribed to men but the excellency of the power must ever be acknowledged to be of God and not of them neyther he that planteth being here any thing neyther he that watereth but God that giveth the increase For howsoever in respect of the former such as take paines in the Lords husbandry may be accounted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Apostle termeth them labourers together with God though that little peece of service it selfe also bee not performed by their owne strength but according to the grace of God which is given unto them yet that which followeth of giving the increase God effecteth not by them but by himselfe This saith S. Augustin exceedeth the lowlinesse of man this exceedeth the sublimitie of Angels neither appertayneth unto anie but unto the husbandman the Trinity Now as the Spirit of God doth not onely woâ—ke diversities of graces in us distributing to every man severally as he will but also maketh us to know the things that are freely given to us of God so the ministers of the New Testament being made able ministers of the same spirit are not onely ordayned to be Gods instruments to worke faith and repentance in men for the obtayning of remission of sinnes but also to declare Gods pleasure unto such as beleeve and repent and in his name to certifie them and give assurance to their consciences that their sinnes are forgiven they having received this ministerie of the Lord Iesus to testifie the Gospell of the grace of God and so by their function being appointed to be witnesses rather then conferrers of that grace For it is here with them in the loosing part as it is in the binding part of their ministerie where they are brought in like unto those seuen Angels in the book of the Revelation which powre out the vialls of the wrath of God upon the earth having vengeance ready against all disobedience and a charge from God to cast men out of his sigâ—t not because they are properly the avengers for that title God challengeth unto himselfe or that vengeance did anie way appertaine unto them for it is written Vengeance is mine I will repay saith the Lord but because they were the denouncers not the inflicters of this vengeance So though it be the Lord that speaketh concerning a nation to pluck up and to pull down and to destroy or on the other side to build and to plant it yet he in whose mouth God put those words of his is said to be set by him over the nations and over the kingdomes to roote out and to pull downe and to destroy and to throw downe to build and to plant as if he himselfe were a doer of those great matters who was onely ordeyned to be a Prophet unto the nations to speake the things unto them which God had commanded him Thus likewise in the thirteenth of Leviticus where the Lawes are set downe that concerne the leprosie which was a type of the pollution of sinne wee meet often with these speeches The Priest shall cleanse him and The Priest shall pollute him and in the 44. verse The Priest with pollution shall pollute him not saith S. Hierome that he is the author of the pollution but that he declareth him to be polluted who before did seeme unto many to have beene cleane Whereupon the Master of the Sentences following herein S. Hierome and being afterwards therein followed himselfe by manie others observeth that in remitting or retayning sinnes the Priests of the Gospell have that right and office which the legall Priests had of old under the Law in curing of the lepers These therefore saith hee forgive sinnes or retaine them whiles they shew and declare that they are forgiven or retayned by God For the Priests put the name of the Lord upon the children of Israel but it was he himselfe that blessed them as it is read in Numbers The place that he hath referrence unto is in the sixth chapter of that booke where the Priests are commanded to blesse the people by saying unto them The Lord blesse thee c. and then it followeth in the last verse of that chapter So they shall put my Name upon the children of Israel and I will blesse them Neyther doe we grant hereupon as the Adversarie falsely chargeth us that a lay-man yea or a woman or a childe or any infidell or the Divell the Father of all
and such as have beene overthrowne in the lists are cast out and all things are clearely finished after that we are once departed from hence We are to consider then that the prayers and oblations for reiecting whereof Aërius was reproved were not such as are used in the Church of Rome at this day but such as were used by the ancient Church at that time and therefore as we in condemning of the one have nothing to doe with Aërius or his cause so the Romanists who dislike the other as much as ever Aërius did must be content to let us alone and take the charge of Aërianisme home unto themselves Popish prayers and oblations for the dead we know do wholly depend upon the beleefe of Purgatorie if those of the ancient Church did so too how commeth it to passe that Epiphanius doth not directly answer Aërius as a Papist would doe now that they brought singular profite to the dead by delivering their tormented soules out of the flames of Purgatorie but forgetting as much as once to make mention of Purgatorie the sole foundation of these suffrages for the dead in our Adversaries iudgement doth trouble himselfe and his cause with bringing in such farr fett reasons as these that they who performed this dutie did intend to signifie thereby that their brethren departed were not perished but remained still alive with the Lord and to put a difference betwixt the high perfection of our Saviour Christ and the generall frailtie of the best of all his servants Take away Popish Purgatorie on the other side which in the dayes of Aërius and Epiphanius needed not to be taken away because it was not as yet hatched and all the reasons produced by Epiphanius will not withhold our Romanists from absolutely subscribing to the opinion of Aërius this being a case with them resolved that if Purgatory be not admitted after death prayer for the dead must be unprofitable But though Thomas Aquinas and his abettors determine so we must not therefore thinke that Epiphanius was of the same minde who lived in a time wherein prayers were usually made for them that never were dreamed to have beene in Purgatorie and yeeldeth those reasons of that usage which overthrow the former consequence of Thomas everie whit as much as the supposition of Aërius For Aërius and Thomas both agree in this that prayer for the dead would be altogether unprofitable if the dead themselves received no speciall benefite thereby This doth Epiphanius defending the ancient use of these prayers in the Church shew to be untrue by producing other profites that redounded from thence unto the living partly by the publick signification of their faith hope charitie toward the deceased partly by the honour that they did unto the Lord Iesus in exempting him from the common condition of the rest of mankinde And to make it appeare that these things were mainly intended by the Church in her Memorialls for the dead and not the cutting off of the sinnes which they carried with them out of this life or the releasing of them out of anie torment he alledgeth as wee have heard that not onely the meaner sort of Christians but also the best of them without exception even the Prophets and Apostles Martyrs themselves were comprehended therein from whence by our Adversaries good leave we wil make bold to frame this syllogisme They who reject that kind of praying and offering for the dead which was practised by the Church in the daies of Aërius are in that point flatt Aërians But the Romanists doe reject that kinde of praying and offering for the dead which was practised by the Church in the dayes of Aërius Therefore the Romanists are in this point flatt Aërians The assumption or second part of this argument for the first we thinke no body will denie is thus proved They who are of the judgement that prayers and oblations should not be made for such as are beleeved to be in blisse doe reiect that kinde of praying and offering for the dead which was practised by the ancient Church But the Romanists are of this iudgement Therefore they reiect that kinde of praying and offering for the dead which was practised by the ancient Church The truth of the first of these propositions doth appear by the testimonie of Epiphanius compared with those manie other evidences whereby we have formerly proved that it was the custome of the ancient Church to make prayers and oblations for them of whose resting in peace and blisse there was no doubt at all conceived The veritie of the second is manifested by the confession of the Romanists themselves who reckon this for one of their Catholicke verities that suffrages should not be offered for the dead that raigne with Christ. and therefore that ancient forme of praying for the Apostles Martyrs and the rest of the Saincts is by disuse deservedly abolished saith Alphonsus Mendoza Nay to offer sacrifices and prayers to God for those that are in blisse is plainly absurd and impious in the iudgement of the Iesuite Azorius who was not aware that thereby hee did outstrippe Aërius in condemning the practise of the ancient Church as farre as the censuring it only to be unprofitable for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what shall the dead be profited thereby was the furthest that Aërius durst to goe commeth short of reiecting it as absurd and impious And therefore our Adversaries may doe well to purge themselves first from the blott of Aërianisme which sticketh so fast unto them before they be so readie to cast the aspersion thereof upon others In the meane time the Reader who desireth to be rightly informed in the iudgement of Antiquitie touching this point is to remember that these two questions must necessarily be distinguished in this inquiry Whether prayers and oblations were to be made for the dead and Whether the dead did receive any peculiar profite thereby In the latter of these he shall finde great difference among the Doctors in the former verie little or none at all For howsoever all did not agree about the state of the soules saith Cassander an indifferent Papist vvhich might receive profite by these things yet all did judge this dutie as a testimonie of their love toward the dead and a profession of their faith touching the soules immortalitie and the future resurrection to be acceptable unto God and profitable to the Church Therefore for condemning the generall practise of the Church herein which aymed at those good ends before expressed Aëâ—ius was condemned but for denying that the dead received profite thereby eyther for the pardon of the sinnes which before were unremitted or for the cutting off or mitigation of anie torments that they did endure in the other world the Church did never condemne him For that was no new thing invented by him diverse worthy men before and after him declared themselves to be of the same minde and were never for all that charged with the
dead man in his sleepe he thinketh that he doth see his soule but when he dreameth in like maner of one that is alive he maketh no doubt that it is neyther his soule nor his body but a similitude of the man that did appeare unto him as if not the soulâ—s but the similitudes of dead men not knowing it might not also after the same sort appeare So he telleth of one Eulogius a rhetorician in Carthage who lighting upon a certaine obscure place in Ciceroes Rhetorickes which he was the next day to reade unto his schollers was so troubled therwith that at night he could scarce sleepe In which night saith S. Augustin I expounded unto him while he was in a dreame that which he did not understand nay not I but my image I not knowing and so farre beyond the sea eyther doing or dreaming some other thing and nothing at all caring for his cares The like he doth also note to happen unto those that are in raptures and extasies For unto these also doe appeare images as well of the living as of the dead but after they have been restored unto their senses as many of the dead as they say that they have seen with them they are truely beleeved to have beene neyther doe they marke who heare these things that the images of some living men that were absent and ignorant of these things were in like maner seene by them And for the confession of the Divels in parties possessed he bringeth in a memorable instance of that which fell out in Millaine at the place of the memoriall of the martyrs Protasius and Gervasius where the Divels did not only make mention of the Martyrs that were dead but also of Ambrose the Bishop then living and besought him that he would spare them he being otherwise employed and being utterly ignorant of the thing when it was a doing But as S. Augustin doth put us in minde in that discourse that men are sometimes ledd into great errors by deceitfull dreames or visions and that it is just that they should suffer such things so S. Chrysostom giveth a good admonition that little heed should be taken of the Divels sayings What is it then saith he that the Divels doe say I am the soule of such a Monke Surely for this I beleeve it not because the Divels say it for they deceive their hearers And therefore Paul Act. 16.18 silenced them although they spake truth least taking occasion from thence they might mingle false things againe with those truthes and get crediâ— to themselves and touching dreames and apparitions of the dead he addeth further If at this time the dreames that appeare oftentimes in the shapes of them that have departed this life have deceived and corrupted many much more if this were once setled in mens mindes that many of those that are departed did returne againe unto us that wicked Divel would plot a thousand guiles and bring in much deceit into our life And for this cause God hath shut up the doores and doth not suffer any of the deceased to returne back and tell the things that are there least he taking occasion from thence should bring in all his own devices It was the complaint of Synesius in his time that there were many both private men and Priests too who fayned certaine dreames which they called Revelations· and in ancient writings we meet with sundry visions which if they be truely related may more justly be suspected to have been illusions of deceitfull spirits than true apparitions of blessed eyther Soules or Angels He that will advisedly reade over Basilius Seleuciensis his narration of the miracles of S. Thecla for example must eyther reject the worke as strangely corrupted or easily be drawne to yeeld unto that which I have said For who can digest such relations and observations as these that they who watch the night that goeth before her festivitie doe at that time yearely see her driving a fiery chariot in the ayre and removing from Seleucia unto Dalisandus as a place which she did principally affect in regard of the commoditie and pleasantnesse of the situation that both shee and other of the Saints deceased do rejoyce much in solitary places and doe ordinarily dwell in them that after her death she should affect Oratory and Pâ—ëtry and be continually delighted with such as did more accurately set forth her prayses even as Homer bringeth in Apollo tickled at the heart with hearing the songs that were made unto him in the campe of the Greciaâ—s of which he produceth two speciall instances the one of Alypius the Grammarian unto whom being forsaken of the physicians Thecla he saith did appeare in the night and demanded of him what he ayled and what he would He to shew his art and to win the Virgins favour with the aptnesse of the verse returneth for an answer unto her that verse wherewith Homer maketh Achilles to answer his mother Thetis in the first of the Iliads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou knowest why should I tell it thee that knowest all Whereat the Martyr smiling and being delighted partly with the man partly with the verse and wondring that he had answered so aptly conveyed a certaine round stone unto him with the touch whereof he was presently set on foot from his long and perillous sicknesse For â—he other instance the writer reporteth that which happened unto himselfe For the Martyâ— saith he is such a lover of learning and taketh such a delight in these oratorious pâ—ayses that I will tell somewhat of those things that were done to my selfe and for my selfe vvhich the Martyr who did it doth know to have beene done and that I lye not Then he telleth how having preparâ—d an oration for her anniversarie festivitie the day before it should be pronounced he was taken with such an extreame paine in his eare that the auditorie was like to be quite disappointed but that the Martyr the same night appeared unto him and shaking him by the eare tooke all the paine away He addeth further that the same Martyr used often to appeare unto him in his studie at other times but once more specially while he was in hand with writing this selfe same book For having begunne to be weary of the labour the Martyr saith he seemed to sit by close in my sight where I used to be at my booke and to take the quaternion out of my hand in which I transcribed these things out of my table-booke Yea and she seemed unto me to read it and to rejoyce and to smile and to shew unto me by her looke that she was pleased with the things that were written and that it behoved me to finish this worke and not to leave it unperfect These things doe I here repeat not with any intention to disgrace antiquitie whereof I professe my selfe to be as great an admirer as any but to discover the first
answer of Ratrannus was directed had then in his Court a famous countrey-man of ours called Iohannes Scotus who wrote a booke of the same argument and to the same effect that the other had done This man for his extraordinarie learning was in England where hee lived in great account with King Alfred surnamed Iohn the wise and had verie lately a roome in the Martyrologe of the Church of Rome though now he be ejected thence Wee finde him indeed censured by the Church of Lyons and others in that time for certaine opinions which he delivered touching Gods foreknowledge and predestination before the beginning of the world Mans freewill and the concurrence thereof with Grace in this present world and the maner of the punishment of reprobate Men Angels in the world to come but we finde not anie where that his book of the Sacrament was condemned before the dayes of x Lanfranc who was the first that leavened that Church of England afterward with this corrupt doctrine of the carnall presence Till then this question of the reall presence continued still in debate and it was as free for anie man to follow the doctrine of Ratrannus or Iohannes Scotus therein as that of Paschasius Radbertus which since the time of Satans loosing obtayned the upper hand Men have often searched and doe yet often search how bread that is gathered of corne and through fires heate baked may be turned to Christs bodie or how wine that is pressed out of manie grapes is turned through one blessing to the Lords blood saith Aelfrick Abbat of Malmesburie in his Saxon Homily written about 650. yeares agoe His resolution is not onely the same with that of Ratrannus but also in manie places directly translated out of him as may appeare by these passages following compared with his Latin layd downe in the margent The bread and the wine which by the Priests ministery is hallowed shew one thing without to mens senses and another thing they call within to beleeving mindes Without they be seene bread wine both in figure and in taste and they be truely after their hallowing Christs body and his blood by spirituall mysterie So the holy font water that is called the well-spring of life is like in shape to other waters and is subject to corruption but the holy Ghosts might commeth to the corruptible water through the Priests blessing and it may after wash the body and soule from all sinne by spirituall vertue Behold now we see two things in this one creature in true nature that water is corruptible moisture and in spirituall mysterie hath healing vertue So also if we behold that holy housel after bodily sense then see wee that it is a creature corruptible and mutable If we acknowledge therein spirituall vertue then understand we that life is therein and that it giveth immortalitie to them that eate it with beleefe Much is betwixt the bodie Christ suffered in and the body that is hallowed to housel The body truely that Christ suffered in was borne of the flesh of Mary with blood and with bone with skin and with sinewes in humane limbs with a reasonable soule living and his spirituall body which we call the housel is gathered of many cornes without blood and bone without lim without soule and therefore nothing is to be understood therein bodily but spiriâ—ually Whatsoever is in that housel which giveth substance of life that is spirituall vertue and invisible doing Certainly Christs body which suffered death and rose from death shall never dye henceforth but is eternall and unpassible That housel is temporall not eternall corruptible dealed into sundry parts chewed betweene teeth and sent into the belly This mysterie is a pledge and a figure Christs bodie is truth it selfe This pledge wee doe keepe mystically untill that we be come to the truth it selfe and then is this pledge ended Christ hallowed bread and wine to housel before his suffering and said This is my body my blood Yet he had not then suffered but so notwithstanding hee turned through invisible vertue the bread to his owne body and that wine to his blood as he before did in the wildernesse before that he was borne to men when he turned that heavenly meate to his flesh and the flowing water from that stone to his owne blood Moses and Aaron and manie other of that people which pleased God did eate that heavenly bread and they died not the everlasting death though they dyed the common They saw that the heavenly meate was visible and corruptible and they spiritually understood by that visible thing and spiritually received it This Homily was appointed publikely to be read to the people in England on Easter day before they did receive the communion The like matter also was delivered to the Clergie by the Bishops at their Synods out of two other writings of the same Aelfrick in the one wherof directed to Wulfsine Bishop of Shyrburne we reade thus That housel is Christs bodie not bodily but spiritually Not the body which he suffered in but the bodie of which he spake when he blessed bread and wine to housel the night before his suffering and said by the blessed bread This is my body and againe by the holy wine This is my blood which is shed for many in forgivenesse of sinnes In the other written to Wulfstane Archbishop of Yorke thus The Lord which hallowed housel before his suffering and saith that the bread was his owne bodie and that the wine vvas truely his blood halloweth daily by the hands of the Priest bread to his body and wine to his blood in spirituall mysterie as wee reade in bookes And yet notwithstanding that lively bread is not bodily so nor the selfe same body that Christ suffered in nor that holy vvine is the Saviours blood which was shed for us in bodily thing but in spirituall understanding Both be truely that bread his body and that wine also his blood as was the heavenly bread which vve call Manna that fedde fortie yeares Gods people and the cleare water which did then runne from the stone in the vvildernesse vvas truely his blood as Paul wrote in one of his Epistles Thus was Priest and people taught to beleeve in the Church of England toward the end of the tenth and the beginning of the eleventh age after the Incarnation of our Saviour Christ. And therefore it is not to be wondered that when Berengarius shortly after stood to maintaine this doctrine manie both by word and writing disputed for him and not onely the English but also all the French almost the Italians as Matthew of Westminster reporteth were so readie to entertaine that which hee delivered Who though they were so borne downe by the power of the Pope who now was growne to his height that they durst not make open profession of that which they beleeved yet manie continued even
there where Satan had his throne who privately employed both their tongues and their penns in defence of the truth as out of Zacharias Chrysopolitanus Rupertus Tuitiensis and others I have elsewhere shewed Vntill at length in the yeare 1215. Pope Innocent the third in the Councell of Lateran published it to the Church for an oracle that the body and blood of Iesus Christ are truely contayned under the formes â—f bread and wine the bread being transsubstantiated into the bodie and the wine into the blood by the power of God And so are wee now come to the end of this controversie the originall and progresse whereof I have prosecuted the more at large because it is of greatest importance the verie life of the Masse and all massing Priests depending thereupon But this prolixitie shall be some wayes recompensed by the briefer handling of the points following the next whereof is that OF CONFESSION OVr Challenger here telleth us that the Doctors Pastors and Fathers of the primitive Church exhorted the people to confesse their sinnes unto their ghostly fathers And wee tell him againe that by the publike order prescribed in our Church before the administration of the holy Communion the Minister likewise doth exhort the people that if there be any of them which cannot quiet his owne conscience but requireth further comfort or counsell he should come to him or some other discreet and learned Minister of Gods word and open his griefe that he may receive such ghostly counsell advice and comfort as his conscience may be relieved and that by the ministery of Gods word hee may receive comfort and the benefite of absolution to the quieting of his conscience and avoyding of all scruple and doubtfulnesse Whereby it appeareth that the exhorting of the people to confesse their sinnes unto their ghostly fathers maketh no such wall of separation betwixt the ancient Doctors and us but we may well for all this be of the same religion that they were of and consequently that this doughtie Champion hath more will then skill to manage controversies who could make no wiser choyce of pointes of differences to bee insisted upon Be it therefore knowne unto him that no kinde of Confession either publick or private is disallowed by us that is anie way requisite for the due execution of that ancient power of the Keyes which Christ bestowed upon his Church the thing which wee reject is that new pick-lock of Sacramentall Confession obtruded upon mens consciences as a matter necessarie to salvation by the Canons of the late Conventicle of Trent where those good Fathers put their curse upon everie one that either shall deny that Sacramentall confession was ordayned by divine right and is by the same right necessary to salvation or shall affirme that in the Sacrament of Penance it is not by the ordinance of God necessarie for the obtayning of the remission of sinnes to confesse all and every one of those mortall sinnes the memory wherof by due and diligent premeditation may be had even such as are hidden and be against the two last Commandements of the Decalogue together with the circumstances which change the kinde of the sinne but that this confession is only profitable to instruct and comfort the penitent and was anciently observed onely for the imposing of Canonicall satisfaction This doctrine I say wee cannot but reject as being repugnant to that which wee have learned both from the Scriptures and from the Fathers For in the Scriptures wee finde that the confession which the penitent sinner maketh to God alone hath the promise of forgivenesse annexed unto it which no Priest upon earth hath power to make voyde upon pretence that himselfe or some of his fellowes were not first particularly acquainted with the businesse 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 iniquitie of my sinne And lest we should thinke that this was some peculiar priviledge vouchsafed to the man who was raised upon high the Anointed of the God of Iacob the same sweet Psalmist of Israel doth presently enlarge his note and inferreth this generall conclusion thereupon For this shall every one that is godly pray unto thee in a time when thou mayest be found King Salomon in his prayer for the people at the dedication of the Temple treadeth just in his Fathers stepps If they turne saith hee and pray unto thee in the land of their captivity saying Wee have sinned we have done amisse and have dealt wickedly if they returne to thee with all their heart and with all their soule c. forgive thy people which have sinned against thee all their transgressions wherein they have transgressed against thee And the poore Publican putting up his supplication in the Temple accordingly God bee mercifull to me a sinner went back to his house justified without making confession to anie other ghostly Father but onely the Father of Spirits of whom S. Iohn giveth us this assurance that if wee confesse our sinnes he is faithfull and just to forgive us our sinnes and to cleanse us from all unrighteousnesse Which promise that it appertained to such as did confesse their sinnes unto God the ancient Fathers were so well assured of that they cast in a maner all upon this Confession and left little or nothing to that which was made unto man Nay they doe not onely leave it free for men to confesse or not confesse their sinnes unto others which is the most that we would have but some of them also seeme in words at least to advise men not to doe it at all which is more then we seeke for S. Chrysostome of all others is most copious in this argument some of whose passages to this purpose I will here lay downe It is not necessary saith he that thou shouldest confesse in the presence of witnesses let the inquiry of thy offences bee made in thy thought let this judgement be without a witnesse let God onely see thee confessing Therefore I intreat and beseech and pray you that you would continually make your confession to God For I doe not bring thee into the theater of thy fellow servants neyther doe I constraine thee to discover thy sinnes unto men unclaspe thy conscience before God and shew thy wounds unto him and of him aske a medicine Shew them to him that will not reproach but heale thee For although thou hold thy peace he knoweth all Let us not call our selves sinners onely but let us recount our sinnes and repeate every one of them in speciall I doe not say unto thee Bring thy selfe upon the stage nor Accuse thy selfe unto others but I counsaile thee to obey the Prophet saying Reveale thy way unto the Lord. Confesse them before God confesse thy sinnes before the Iudge praying if not with thy tongue yet at least with thy memory and