certaine external meanes and helpes are required yet those moue vs nothing without the working of Gods holy spirit And he much misliketh of them that teach that our faith must rest vpon that point That we beleue that the church is true or cannot erre For therevpon he gathereth this absurditie that our faith should be grounded vpon the truth not of God but of man He also plainly affirmeth that if a man should aske how the faithfull do know that God hath reuealed that which they beleeue they cannot answere by the authoritie of the Church but it is by the inward light of Gods spirit that they know the same If now thou aske me how I know the Scriptures to be the Scriptures I answere out of Canus not by the authority of the Church but by the motion of Gods spirit and witnesse thereof If thou vrge that place of Augustine Canus telleth thee that they who are become Christians are not so brought to beleeue the Scriptures but onely Infidels and Nouices in religion So that this place serueth nothing to obiect against vs who professe Christianitie alreadie and beleeue the worde which the Manichies did not of whom and to whom Saint Augustine there writeth But we had neede out of that place to admonish you that in respect of that reuerence which with one consent al that professe Christianitie doe yeeld vnto the scriptures you would be ashamed so to depraue and despise them so to abuse and reiect them at your owne pleasure as you alwayes haue done You make vnlawfull that which God hath mad lawfull as for example It was lawfull in the Apostles time for euerie Priest Dion Carth. 1. Tim. 3. Bishop and Deacon to haue one wife but now by the appointment of the Pope they may not haue a wife sayth a friend of your owne a bird of your owne nest So that not the scripture or the will of God but the worde of the Pope must be the rule of our life so that whereas Augustine for the Church beleeued the scriptures you for your Churches sake controll the scriptures and disobey them And for the establishing of that vndue honour which they would bestow vpon the most happie mother of Christ the virgin Mary Marke the boldnesse of Durand a great piller in the Popish Church Rathon◠di◠li. 4. rub 6. who writeth thus Although it is said in the Scriptures that Christ rising did first appeare to Marie Magdalen yet it is more truly beleeued that first of all he appeared to his mother Is it not plaine how that to establish their foolish toyes he giueth the lie to that word that is onely true O grosse boldnesse Seeing therefore this worde hath not onely testimonie within vs which is the strongest witnesse but also with so great consent is knowne to be Gods worde be ashamed now to call it into question or to put it to the triall of the Church by which the Papists alwaies vnderstand the Romish Church whether it shal be allowed for currant or not For in deede this blasphemous sense which as I haue shewed euen their owne friends can in no wise like of is now the cōmon exposition of those words of S. Aug. I will not beleeue the scriptures vnlesse the Church of Rome do allow the Bookes for Canonicall and expound them as she shall thinke good And thus much to answer this their common obiection What the Catholike Church is that is mentioned in the Creede CHAP. 6 THE PROTESTANTS VVE say with the Apostle Saint Paul that the catholike church which is spoken of in the Creede s. Tim. 3. Is the house of God the pillar and ground of truth And with the fathers that it is the companie of all the faithfull of all times and of all places And with Saint Iohn The Bride of the Lambe Apoc. 21 9. and the bodie of Christ And therefore that the wicked and faithlesse are not of this Church nor can be counted of this companie THE PAPISTS BVt the Church of Rome to get a Catholike Church admit good and bad to be of their Church namely reprobates wicked Bellar. de Eccle. li. 3. cap. 2. and vngodly ones Neither do thinke that they neede any inward vertue to bee of their Church but onely that they professe religion and be vnder the Pope Well may they in some sort seeme to haue a Catholike Church because all is fish that comes into their net but holy apostolike it shal not be nor Catholike as in the Creed is meant Wherein this is worthie to be reproued in them that whereas they crie out in worde and writing The Catholike church of Rome and vnlesse you beleeue the Catholike Church you cannot be saued And for proofe hereof they alledge this article I beleeue the Catholike church yet when they should tell vs what this Catholike church is wherevnto we must so necessarily be subiect they onely paint vnto vs I know not what Romish Church The catholike church in the Creed and the Romish contrary which is no more like the true Catholike church than that church of Israel when it was started aside from the true worship of God was like to the true church of God that remained amongest the people of the Iewes as by these few reasons may appeare The catholike church is One One that is to say one companie and vnited and knit togither by one spirite and the selfe same graces but the reprobate and vngodly who fill vp a place in the Romish catholike church neither are one company with the Saints nor vnited to them by the same spirit and graces to be partakers of the communion of Saints Therefore that catholike and the Romish catholike Church are not all one Secondly that Church is Holy Holy and that not in part but perfectly euen without spot or wrinckle Ephe. 5.26.27 For in our Creed we doe not speake of the church that is but that shal be not that which we see with our eye but by faith not that which is perfected but hoped for which we shall not in deede behold with our eyes Reuel 21 vntill it come downe from heauen as saint Iohn speaketh of the heauenly Ierusalem Apoc. 11 which as witnesseth saint Ambrose doth represent the Church that shall bee after the ende of the world Apoc. 21 Of which minde is also saint Augustine But the Romish catholike church is of omnigatheroms as people goe to faires or markets of all sorts and qualities And although a man haue not one good thing in him not one crum of honestie hee is good enough to make vp a number in the Church of Rome but such a church is not holy and therefore not that that is mentioned in the Creede Thirdly that church is catholike Catholike that is as all the godly haue acknoledged it the mother of all Christians the companie of all the saints both in heauen and vpon earth But the Romish catholike church
remained of the sacramēt Origen also reporteth the same Which they would not haue don if they had thought as do the papists that it had beene transubstantiated into Christs body or else that it had beene as heere they affirme a sacrament although it be not receiued as Christ commaunded it should be Seeing therefore these men that would seeme pillars in the church of Christ doe picke quarrelles at his ordinance and make exception to his commaundement and all to writhe their neckes out of his yoke and to free themselues from his lawes like lewd seruauntes which will not frame themselues to doe that which woulde best please their maisters but that onely which they must bee forced to doe whether they will or not let vs nowe see how in the second point they do seeke to peruert the verie decree it selfe that Christ set down concerning this matter to make men beleeue that hee meant no such thing as in trueth he did The second part of his assertion is that it is not ordered by the word of God what shall be done in that point This is an intollerable boldenesse Doth not our sauiour Christ take order as well for the cup as for the bread Doth not he that saieth Take eate say also Drinke ye all of this If any man will answere as Bellarmine doth in one place De Euchar. lib. 4. cap. 27. that they were not both giuen at one time and therefore that properly to speake the Supper of the Lord consisteth but of one kind he should plainly declare that he hath rather a desire to contend than to knowe the trueth For what is it to vs how long time was betweene the one commaundement and the other so that we know that both the one and the other is instituted of Christ Yea the Apostle saint Paul very plainely telleth vs 1. Cor. 11. that the order both for the cup and the bread is deliuered to him of the Lord That which I receiued of the Lord I deliuered vnto you And then hee sheweth Christs institution for the bread and also the cup. But with full mouth and one consent they tell vs that that commaundement belongeth to the Apostles onely and not to all the disciples And yet saint Mathew saith Math. 26.26 he gaue it to his disciples Yea and Christ commaundeth Drinke yee all of this And hath not saide concerning the bread eate ye all of this although wee deny not that euery one hauing prooued themselues should eate of it But seeing God hath giuen a more expresse commaundement vnto all for the cup than for the bread why should they rather restraine lay men from receiuing the cup than from the bread Againe doeth he not say to all them Drinke yee all of this to whome before hee saide Take eate Yes verily for the text is plaine both in the Euangelists and saint Paule But the bread must be giuen to al they confesse therefore why not the cup also And that which saint Paule wrote concerning the vse of the Sacrament it is plaine he wrote vnto all the church of Corinth not onely by that place which Kemnitius alleadgeth 1. Cor. 1.2 To all that call vppon the name of the Lorde and that hee writeth vnto the church of Corinth De Euchar. lib. 4. cap. 25. which Bellarmine doeth seeke to answere rather least he should seeme to say nothing than that in truth he saith anie thing worth the setting downe but also by the punishment that followed the abuse of the sacrament For this cause many are weake and feeble amongst you and many sleepe Which came vpon them not that did eate of that bread onely but also that drunke of that cup vnworthily And it cannot be imagined that either the ministers were so bad at that time so generally that so many of them would haue offended therein or if the fault had beene in them the Apostle would more particularly haue reprooued them neither were they then so many in one place that it could haue beene truely saide of them that many are weake and many sleepe or are dead Therefore whereas many were punished amongst the Corinthians for vnworthily receiuing both the bread and the cup and this word Many cannot as I haue prooued be there referred to their Teachers onely it followeth that this punishment was amongest the lay men as well at the last as amongst their ministers and therefore that the lay men in the church of Corinth receiued the cup. And thus much of that wicked assertion wherein they doe affirme that it is lawfull for the church to alter this part of Christes institution and also to take away the cup. Nowe to a second and as wicked a proposition as the other Wherein they teach that it is needelesse to be receiued in both kindes And to prooue this Bellarmine taketh some paines in three whole chapters De Euch. lib. 4. cap. 21 22 23 In the first two he sheweth that the whole sacrament may be receiued vnder one kinde and therefore in the last hee teacheth that no more good is to be gotten of the sacrament vnder both kindes than vnder one And although we can not allowe of that concomitance as it is termed that is that inseparable coniunction of the body and blood vnder either of the signes which especially hee prooueth in the first chapter of those three namely the one and twentieth that the whole substance of a sacrament is found in either kinde as hee teacheth in the two and twentieth chapter yet if we should grant those two points that which master Bellarmine would conclude in the three and twentieth chapter can not follow For what if Christ may bee wholy receiued vnder one kinde Yet it should not follow that vnder one as effectually he may be receiued as vnder both For as before I shewed his death is more liuely represented by the bread and his bloudsheding by the wine And that which more effectually representeth it is more profitable than that which lesse representeth the same And it is too much sawcinesse so to controll the wisedome of God that when hee saith Drinke yee all of this which is a plaine commandement any foolish man dare say It is to no profite it can do you no good As for the causes that are alleaged by Gerson and other why the popish church thought good to take away the cup from the lay people they are so foolish and friuolous that a man would think rather that they iested than spake in earnest But what cause soeuer man can pretend to alter that which Christ hath ordained it doth but testifie that he thought not Christ wise enough to preuent such inconueniences as hee by his wisedome hath prouided for Seeing therfore the church cannot forbid that that God commaundeth whatsoeuer causes they will pretend and if they might yet the causes set downe by the Romish church either are blasphemous or at the least friuolous it is a sure way for vs rather to regard
also is a sufficient answere to his thirde argument that hee wringeth out of these wordes Whereby he will force Saint Paule whether hee will or not to finde out an offering in the Eucharist because he saith they that eate the offrings are partakers of the altar Out of which place as hee cannot probably conclude any thing to proue a sacrifice in the eucharist so hee plainely proclaimeth that if it should be proued that their masse were a sacrifice yet the priest only is the better for it because the priest onlie eateth vp all For They that eate the offrings are partakers of the Altar The second sort of proofes which Bellarmine promised is gathered out of the fathers Lib. 1. de missa cap. 6. And the first argument of that sort is drawen from the wordes of sacrifice sacrificing offering oblation and such like Chap. 15. Why the fathers vse thus to speake of the Eucharist I haue shewed a little before in the answere to his sixte argument But nowe maister Bellarmine proueth that a sacrifice may be both commemoratiue and represent an other thing as did the sacrifices in the Leuiticall law and also be a true sacrifice indeede which is most true and thereupon concludeth that this sacrifice representatiue in the eucharist is also a true sacrifice But this his argument hath no necessarie consequence for the Leuiticall sacrifice must needes be a sacrifice truely so called that by the death of the beast offered vp and by the shedding of that blood the death blodshedding of Christ might be the more liuely represented to the faithfull and more constantly beleeued of them which thing being in trueth perfourmed and Christ Iesus the true facrifice indeede being offered Heb. 10.26 There remaineth no more sacrifice for sinne Moreouer in those sacrifices that they might bee knowen to be sacrifices instituted and appointed of God we see how the thing sacrificed the manner of sacrificing and all the circumstances are plainely set downe and commaunded by God And on the contrary in this sacrifice which they seeke to maintaine all things are obscure not so much as a probable shew of any commaundement or of any institution of a sacrifice Therefore the Iewish sacrifice can be no proofe for the sacrifice of the masse Secondly he will prooue that in the eucharist is not only a representatiue sacrifice because the fathers speake sometimes of oblations and sacrifices in the plural number and therefore there are more sacrifices than that one representatiue but he taketh more paines then he needeth for we teach that besides the representation of Christs sacrifice we offer in the Eucharist the sacrifices of prayers prayses and such like spirituall oblations Thirdly baptisme saith hee is a sacrament representing Christes death but is not called of any of the fathers a sacrifice offered to God therefore the only representation of Christs death and bloudshedding cannot make the Eucharist be called a sacrifice For baptisme it representeth vnto vs the efficacy and vertue of Christes death rather than the death it selfe So that there is great difference betweene these two sacraments For the sacrament of the Lords supper representeth the sacrifice it selfe which he vpon the crosse did offer euen the tormenting and mangling of his body the shedding of his bloud So that there is much more cause why the Eucharist should be called a sacrifice than baptisme Fourthly M. Bellarmine imagineth that if it were not indeed a very proper sacrifice we might in the Eucharist say to God truely I offer to thee this gift accept Lord this sacrifice And moreouer he chargeth vs that we doe wholy abstaine from such wordes and greatly reproue them for vsing of them And yet in one short praier vsed after the receiuing of the communion with vs we pray thus Accept this our sacrifice of praise thankesgiuing And after We offer and present vnto thee o Lord our selues our soules bodies to be a reasonable holy liuely sacrifice to thee Which wordes doe not only answere the slaunder wherewith he vniustlie chargeth our churches but also sheweth that well we maie vse those words I offer to thee this gift accept Lord this sacrifice although we take not vpon vs to offer Christ really in the Eucharist As for the hyperbolicall speeches which the fathers vse sometimes which is his first reason we learne thereby rather with howe reuerent an affection we shoulde come to these sacramentes than what wee shoulde thinke the thinges themselues to be For howe can it els bee true that Bellarmine himselfe out of the Greeke fathers alleadgeth that they call it a sacrifice terrible and full of horrour which cannot be properly verified of the sacrifice propitiatorie which they woulde haue it to bee for that must needes bee sweete and comfortable vnto vs in it is only grace and mercy no horrour no terrour Lastly because the fathers acknowledge in this sacrifice of the Eucharist that there is that honor performed which is due to God only therefore woulde master Bellarmine conclude that it must needs be more than a sacrifice of representation And we doe easily yeeld vnto him that it is also called a sacrifice of the fathers yea of vs also in respect of the spirituall sacrifices therein offered And this yet must be noted that properly to speake of the Eucharist it is but a sacrament But in the respectes aforesaide De missa li. 1. cap. 16. it is sometime called yet vnproperly a sacrifice But saith master Bellarmine the fathers make mention of an altar therefore they also proue thereby that the Eucharist is a sacrifice for there is no Altar but in respect of a reall sacrifice But the first altars were but tables of wood not altars of stone such as are now for the popish sacrifice in these daies commaunded and these altars of worde they caried about from place to place as occasion serued and therfore although the names of altars be found in the most ancient fathers almost that are yet popish altars are not thereby proued neither were there any altars of stone before the time of Siluester who liued more than three hundred yeares after Christ For hee first commaunded that stone altars should be made as their freind Gerson writeth And therefore as they call it sometime an altar so sometime they call it a Table Lib. 4. cont Floratum De consecrat dist 1. cap. Nemo as doeth Clement who they say was one of the first bishops of Rome he twice within few wordes mentioneth the Lords Table If therefore it be a good argument thus to reason The fathers do sometime mention an altare for the eucharist therefore they thought it was a sacrifice for there needeth no altar but for a sacrifice I am sure this is as good an argument Somtime they speake of a table for the eucharist as out of Athanasius Theodoret Augustine this Clement and others is most plaine and therefore they thought it not to be a sacrifice for
of them O blasphemie intollerable if this their argument might bee allowed then the church of Rome which falsely challengeth to bee the church Caus 15. Quaest 6. ca. Autoritatem Dâ— st 34. c. sector dist 82. presbyt would soone prooue their abhominable Idolatries and heresies to be true religion And therefore doe they challenge this authoritie and striue for it And the Pope sometimes dispenseth against the Apostle as their Canonists doe note and sometimes a Councell dispenseth against the apostle and all this is to challenge vnto their church this prerogatiue that it may deale with Gods word as it will When Gregorie the thirteenth pope of that name confirmed the order of the fellowship of the blessed virgine Marie a new deuised order and come vp since the order of Iesuites in his Bull hee confirmeth and ratifieth all such priuileges as they haue or shall haue Notwithstanding anie Constitutions or Ordinances Apostolike or whatsoeuer may be against it Did you euer reade or heare any speake more like the beast mentioned in the Apocalips Apoc. 13.5 6 who had a mouth giuen vnto him that spake blasphemies But to be short I will against their argument oppose this Whatsoeuer scriptures are not giuen by inspiration of God spirit and by the godly receiued into the canon of the scripturs those are not the word of God though they haue the approbation of the latter churches but such are the Bookes which wee call Apocrypha which the councell of Trent would make of like authoritie with the canonicall Scriptures therefore those Bookes are not the vndoubted word of God And howe can any body imagine that that which once hath beene not canonicall can by continuaunce of time and confirmation of men become canonicall or that which God hath not vouched woorthy to bee his word in times past that nowe at the last he should acknowledge the same as though hee were nowe chaunged or had repented him of his former opinion Admit once this doctrine of theirs and farewell all certaintie in religion For men will wander from one thing to an other as wee see in the kingdome of darkenesse and Poperie where there is no ende of deuotions deuised and inuentions of men So that that which was good christianitie in the dayes of Christ and of his Apostles is nowe holden to be farre from the perfection of a godly life vnlesse wee doe helpe it with our will-worshippings and by the obeying the preceptes of the church Nay graunt them this and then that worde written that wee haue it shall speake nothing but Romish so that whatsoeuer is the meaning and true sense of the scriptures yet God must be taught to speake as the church of Rome will haue him De verbo dei lib. 4. cap. 11. To this ende tendeth that common axiome receiued of them all and vsed by Bellarmine The true sense of the Scripture hangeth of vnwritten traditions So that beleeue them and they will easily confute any aduersaries For first they alow for scripture what they will Secondly that which they must needes confesse to bee Scripture must bee expounded by their vnwritten Traditions That I say that is written by that which is vnwritten the certaine by the vncertaine Like to Procustes his bed which who so lay in it if he were too long he was cut shorter if he were too short he was stretched out longer So must all be made fit to their traditions Seeing therefore the Canonical Bookes haue so manifest a testimonie not onely of the godly but euen of the aduersaries themselues and the credite of the Apocrypha by so great authorities is suspect I will conclude with belâ— armines words That he is not well in his wit that not regardâ— ng â—â— e Scripture the surest and safest rule wâ— ll refeâ— re hâ— mself to the iudgement of the inward spirâ— t which is often deceitfull and alwayes vncertaine as in truth the Papists do For they will make you beleeue that because they are guided by the holy Ghost they cannot erre in their traditions This rule then of Gods written word in the Canonicall bookes of the old and new Testament being set downe as a rule most sure to trâ— e all doctrines with let vs now proceed to examine other matters in controuersy among vs when I shal first haue answered a common obiection wherein all the most ignorant sort especially of Papists doe maruellously trust and triumph and doe therewith deceiue others such as them selues are How shal I know the scriptures say they to be the scriptures but by the authoritie of the Church I will not answer although I might very well that absurdly they call that in question whereof there is no doubt among vs. For neither we nor they denie Gods word It is knowne of all it is receiued of vs all Therfore they put case of that there is not neither is likely to be amongs vs. But for their sakes that are ignorant I answer plainely and shortly out of Saint Augustine Coâ— feâ— li. 6. cap. 5. Thou Lord hast perswaded me that they are blame worthie not who haue beleeued thy bookes which thou hast so setled almost in all nations but they that haue not beleeued them And that I should not heare them if perchance any would say to me How knowest thou that those bookes the scripture are giuen to mankinde by the spirite of one very and most true God Yea Saint Augustine there confesseth that when he was but a nouice in religion yet was he perswaded that God would neuer haue made the whole world so to reuerence the Scriptures but that he meant to be beleeued in them and to be sought out by them We see then by saint Augustine that not onely that common account that the whole world not the Church onely maketh of the Scriptures should be sufficient to stop our mouths for asking that question but also that he flatly telleth vs that God would not haue vs to heare such faithles and fruitles obiections But I know they will by and by come vpon me with that place of Augustine Cont. epist 〈◊〉 c. 5. I would not beleeue the Gospel vnlesse the authoritie of the Church should moue me thereto Out of which they will perchance conclude as grosly as you heard Eckius hath done That the Scripture it selfe hath no credite but as the Church will bestow it vpon the same But Melchior Canus a learned Papist doth gather otherwise out of that place and doth in deed truely answere this common obiection for vs out of the said words of S. Augustine concluding thus Therefore it teacheth not Locor Theo lib. 1. cap. â— that beleeuing the Gospel is grounded vpon the authoritie of the Church but onely that there is no sure way whereby either Infidels or Nouices in faith may come to the holy Scriptures but the consent of the Catholike Church Yea he hath taught a little before in that Chapter that although to haue faith