est vt ieiunium Sabbati horribilius haberetur By the which sayth he it came to passe that the fast of the Sabboth was more abhorred Augustin ibid. But this reason now bindeth not vs because the name and heresie of the Manichees is now worne out and therefore there is no feare of any scandale to arise that way Thirdly we grant that the Lords day is not the fittest time for publique fasts first because it is a day of reioycing so we reade that the people in Nehemiah his time were forbidden to mourne and weepe after the lawe was read vnto them by Ezra because it was a day of ioy and mirth Nehem. 8.11 Secondly the day of solemne and publique fasting ought to be set a part from other dayes and to be proclaimed solemnely and to be spent wholly in spirituall exercises euen as the Sabboth with vacation and rest from other bodily labours as we may reade 2. Chronicl 20.3 Nehem. 9.1 And therefore any day is more fit then the Sabboth because that is a holy day alreadie vnto the Lord but when we will humble our selues before the Lord by fasting and prayer some day would onely for that purpose bee consecrate vnto GOD that may be as a voluntarie sacrifice whereas wee are bound of necessitie to keepe the Lords day But concerning priuate and particular fasts when men by themselues haue occasion to giue themselues to prayer whereof S. Paul speaketh 1. Corinth 7.5 Such priuate exercises may be better performed vpon the Sabboth because of the ordinarie exercises of the word which are notable meanes to kindle and stirre vp true deuotion in him which at that time will humble himselfe yea and publike fasts though not ordinarily yet wheÌ„ there is iust occasion may be kept vpon the Sabboth as we reade Act. 20.7 how that Paul continued his preaching till midnight whereof Augustine writeth thus Necessarius sermo resiciendi corporis causa interrumpendus esse non visus est profecturo Apostolo The necessary preaching of the Apostle he thought not good for the refreshing of their bodies to breake off being readie to depart We conclude therefore that it is lawfull to fast vpon the Lords day though it be not alwaies expedient And Augustine very well determineth this matter Ego in Euangelicis Apostolicis literis video praeceptum esse ieiunium quibus autem diebuâ—â—non oporteat ieiunare quibus oporteat praecepto domini vel Apostolorum non inuenâ—o de finitum I finde both in the Euangelicall and Apostolicall writings that fasting is commanded but vpon what dayes we ought to fast vpon what we ought not I doe not finde it defined Epistol 86. Wherefore to fast or not to fast vpon the Lords day or vpon any other being not determined in scripture is left as a thing indifferent to the Church of God The Papists error 67 8. THe name Sunday is an heathenish calling as al other weeke-daies in our language some imposed after the names of Planets as in the Romanes time some by the name of certaine Idols which the Saxons did worship which names the Church vseth not but hath appoynted to call the first day the Dominike after the Apostle Apocal. 1.10 the other by the name Feries vntill the last of the weeke which she calleth by the old name Sabboth because that was of God not by imposition of the heathen Rhemist annot Apocal. 1. sect 6. The Protestants Ans. FIrst as the name of Sunday and the rest is of the heathenish beginning and therefore were better to be otherwise termed as the first second or third from the Lords day as the Iewes called their daies from the Sabboth so your terme of feries is no lesse heathenish deriued from the word feria or feriae which were so called a feriendis victimis of striking the heathenish sacrifices as Sextus Pompeius sayth Fulk ibid. 2. We haue other names also that might bee reformed as of our moneths as March is so called of Mars Iune of Iuno Ianuary of Ianus which were heathen goddes Iuly and August doe beare the names of men yea and if wee might bee inuentors of newe names the termes of Christmas Michaelmas Candlemas should not stand in force nor any more be vsed which are as offensiue as the rest for as for the names of heathen Idols the most part are ignorant of them but the vulgar terme of Masse is to too well known too much loued of many of our countrey men Now for the name Sunday which is so great a mote in your eye if there were no more but that Augustine sheweth how it might be fauourably expounded Dies magni solis celebramus illius solis de quo dicit scriptura orietur vobis sol iustitiae We doe keepe Sunday holy namely of that great Sunne whereof the scripture speaketh the Sunne of righteousnesse shall arise 3. We wish that all these termes might be layd downe as Augustine sayth Nolumus vt dicant vtinam corrigantur vt non dicant We would not haue men so to speake and I wish they were reformed But seeing by continuall custome mens tongues are inured to such termes let them knowe that they are vsed onely as ciuill names to call things by not for any religion or mysterie in them contained or signified THE THIRD PART OF THE FESTIVAL daies of Christ and the holy Ghost The Papists THE feasts of Easter and Whitsontide and other solemnities of Christ were error 68 prescribed they say by the Apostles Rhemist Matth. 15. sect 2. to be kept vpon certaine dayes and that Peter did appoint that Easter should not be kept the 14. day of the first Moone as the Iewes obserued it but the Lordes day after And of the feast of Pentecost mention is made 1. Corinth 16.8 Ergo these feasts were instituted of the Apostles Bellarm. cap. 12.13 The Protestants Ans. FIrst wee graunt that it is expedient for the Church to keepe the memoriall of the Natiuitie Passion Resurrection Ascension of Christ and of the comming of the holy Ghost and the dayes instituted for the remembrance thereof no doubt ought to be had in greater account then any other holy dayes instituted by the Church Secondly it cannot be proued that they were prescribed by the Apostles or if they were but as indifferent ceremonies which are subiect to alteration and in the which the religion or worship of God dooth not consist Certaine it is that before the time of Constantine the great there were not many festiuall dayes kept in so much that the feasts of the Natiuitie of Christ Easter Pentecost were not vniformally obserued for many yeares after as appeareth by diuerse Councels And before Constantines time there was great contention betweene the Bishop of Rome and the Bishops of the East about the celebration of Easter they alleadging the constitution of Saint Iohn the other of Saint Peter wherefore it is like that the Apostles appointed no such certaine dayes for then the Church would
God so the manner of celebrating and keeping it holy is to be learned out of the word and neither custome nor authority ought to giue liberty for such workes vpon the Lords day as are not warranted by the word First we graunt that we are not so necessarily tied to the rest of the Sabboth as the Iewes were for those things are abolished which appertained to the Iewish Sabboth First the prescript of the day Secondly the ceremonious exercises of the Sabboth in the sacrifices and other rites of the Law Thirdly the typicall shadowes and significations of their Sabboth as first it betokened their rest in Canaan then the rest and peace of the Church by Christ Hebre. 4.3 5. Fourthly the strickt and precise rest wherein Christians haue more liberty then the Iewes had and againe they obserued their rest as being properly and simply and in it selfe a sabboth daies duty but we doe consider it as being referred to a more principall end as making of vs more fit for spirituall exercises Secondly we allow these workes to be done First opera religiosa or pietatis the religious workes and conferring to piety as the Priestes did slaye the sacrifices vpon the Sabboth and yet brake not the rest of the Sabboth Math. 12.5 so the people may walke to their parish Church though somewhat farre off the Pastor Minister may goe forth to preach yea and preaching is of it selfe a labour of the body to study also and meditate of his Sermon to ring the bels to call the people to the Church all these are lawfull as being helpes for the exercises of religion Secondly opera charitatis the workes of mercy are permitted as to visite the sicke the Phisitian to resorte to his patient yea to shew compassion to brute beastes as to helpe the sheepe out of a pit Math. 12.11 Thirdly opera necessitatis the workes of necessitie as the dressing of meat and such like Math. 12.1.3 Our Sauiour excuseth his Apostles for plucking the eares of Corne when they were hungry As for opera voluntaria workes of pleasure and recreation we haue no other permission to vse them then as they shal be no le ts or impediments vnto spirituall exercises as the hearing of the word and meditating therein and such other Otherwise they are not to be vsed Augustine saith speaking of the Iewes who did greatly prophane their Sabboth in sporting and dalliance Melius toto die foderent quà m toto die saltarēt It were better for them to digge all day then to daunce all day euen so verily it were better for many poore ignorant people that vpon the Sabboth giue themselues to drinking and quaffing gaming if they should goe to plough or cart all the day But as for other seruile workes as to keepe Faires and Markets vpon the Lords day to trauell themselues their seruants and beastes vpon the Sabboth it is flat contrary to the commaundement of God and the practise of the Church Nehemiah 13.16 where there is no extream and vrgent necessitie so that it is not to be doubted but that as the keeping of the Lords day is a moral commaundement so also the manner of the obseruing thereof in sanctifying it and resting therein is morall the ceremonies of the rest being abolished that is the Iewish strictnes thereof and the opinion which they had of their rest as being simply a part of the sanctifying of the Sabboth But we doe consider it as referred vnto more principall duties and obserue it not as of it selfe pleasing God but as making vs more fit for spirituall exercises Contrary to these rules we acknowledge neither power in Ordinaries nor priuiledge in custome to dispence with the sanctification of the Sabboth The Papists THey affirme that the Apostles altered the sabboth day from the seaueth day to the eight counting from the creation and they did it without scripture error 62 or any commaundement of Christ such power say they hath God left to his Church This then they holde that the sabboth was changed by the ordinarie power and authoritie of the Church not by any especiall direction from Christ thereupon it followeth that the Church which they say cannot erre may also change the sabboth to any other day in the weeke Rhemist Apoca. 1. sect 6. The Protestants 1. THe Apostles did not abrogate the Iewish sabboth but Christ himselfe by his death as he did also other ceremonies of the Law and this the Apostles knew both by the scriptures the word of Christ his holy spirite 2. They did not appoint a new sabboth of their owne authoritie for first they knew by the scripture that one day of seauen was to be obserued for euer for the seruice of God and exercise of religion although the prescript day according to the Law were abrogate for the Lord before the morall law was written euen immediatly after the creation sanctified the seauenth day shewing thereby that one of the seauen must be obserued so long as the world endured Secōdly they knew there was the same reason of sanctifiyng the day of Christs resurrection and the restitution of the worlde thereby as of sanctifiyng the day of the Lords rest after the creation of the world Thirdly they did it by the direction of the spirite of God whereby they were so directed and gouerned that although they were fraile men by nature and subiect to error yet they could not decline in their writings and ordinances of the Church from the truth which assurance of Gods spirite in the like measure the Church hath not but so farre forth is promised to be led into all truth as she followeth the rule of truth expressed in the Scriptures Wherefore the Church hath no authority to change the Lords day and to keepe it vpon Munday or Tuesday or any other day seeing it is not a matter of indifferency but a necessary prescription of Christ himselfe deliuered by the Apostles for the Lords day began in the Apostles time and no doubt by their Apostolike authority directed by the spirite of Christ was instituted Act. 20.7 Apocal. 1. ver 10. Neither can there come so long as the world continueth so great a cause of changing the Sabboth as the Apostles had by the resurrection of Christ. Wherfore the law of the Sabboth as it is now kept and obserued is perpetuall The Papists errour 63 4. THey affirme that the keeping of the Lords day in stead of the Iewish Sabboth is a tradition of the Apostles and not warranted by Scripture Rhemist Math. 15. sect 3. The Protestants THe obseruation of the Lords day is not deliuered by blinde tradition but hath testimony of holy Scriptures 1. Corinth 16.2 Act. 20.7 Apocal. 1.10 and the obseruation thereof is according to Gods commaundement not after the doctrine of men Fulk ibid. The Papists errour 64 5. THey teach that the Lords day is commaunded and likewise kept for some mysticall signification not onely for the remembraunce of benefites already
not haue broken them Thirdly Pentecost whereof Saint Paul speaketh was the feast of the Iewes which with other solemnities of theirs the Apostles obserued not as a portion of Christian religion but taking occasion of the meeting of the Iewes in those festiuall dayes and so doe we obserue those holy dayes for order and edification of Gods people that vse to assemble at such times Fulk Matth. 15. sec. 3. Fourthly what cause is there why Easter and Whitsontide should be tied to the Lords daye and the Natiuitie of Christ which Bellarmine confesseth was vpon the Lords day should indifferently bee kept vpon any day but that hereby wee vnderstand that it is an indifferent matter whether they should bee kept vpon the Lords day or any other and whether vpon any certaine daye or to bee left to the discretion of the gouernors of the Church to be obserued as any other occasion shall be offered Fulk annot Apocalyps 1. sect 6. Lastly we shewed Augustines opinion in the first part of this question how hee vnderstandeth that saying Psalme 118. This is the day which the Lord hath made onely of the Sabboth thereby insinuating that other holy dayes either were not instituted of God at all or else not with the like necessitie THE FOVRTH PART OF THE solemnities of Saintes The Papists error 69 1. THey hold that holy dayes may be dedicated vnto Saints for their honor and worship as Christ promised that the charitable act of Marie Magdalene wrought vpon him should be recorded and remembred Matth. 26. vers 13. Hereby we learne that the good workes of Saintes may be recorded to the honor of Saints in the Church whereof arise their commemorations and holy dayes Rhemist annot Matth. 25. sect 1. The Protestants 1. THe good works of Saints may be remembred to the honor of God without their holy dayes and commemorations Christ instituted no holy day of Mary Magdalene nor commanded an image of her fact to be made but a memorie of her in preaching the Gospel Fulk ibid. Secondly we graunt that Christian solemnities may be kept as things indifferent which the Church may retaine or abrogate as it shall seeme best for edification not obserued of necessitie as a part of the worship of God nor consecrate to the honor of Saints seeing al diuine worship is wholly to be reserued to God not to be giuen to any other For times and seasons the scripture saith the Lord hath put onely in his owne power therefore he is onely to haue the honor of them Act. 1.7 Thirdly what honor is due vnto Saints Augustine sheweth Colimus martyres eo cultu dilectionis societatis quo in hac vita coluntur sancti homines Dei Wee doe honor Martyrs with the seruice of loue and fellowship as holy men are honored in this life But it is not lawful to consecrate times and dayes to holy men liuing therefore neither to Saints departed for one and the same kind of honor is due to them both The Papists error 70 2. THey maintaine that there may bee holy dayes and commemorations of all Saints as Christ promiseth there should bee of Mary Magdalene Rhemist Matth. 25. sect 1. The Protestants THis is another principal fault which we finde complaine of in their holy dayes that they haue pestred the Church with such a number of Saints and Saints dayes First as we haue partly shewed before they appointed a seuerall Saint almost for euery purpose as here we haue set it downe Saint Leonard for captiues Saint Rochus for the pestilence Saint George for warre Saint Anna giueth riches Saint Nicholas and Christopher for the sea Saint Apollonia for the toothake Saint Otilia for the eyes Saint Margaret for women in trauell Saint Laurence keepeth from the fire Saint Catherine giueth wit learning Saint Iohn against poyson Saint Quirine for the fistula Saint Protasius and Geruasius helpe to bewray theft And thus is it true of them as Ieremie complained of the Idolatrous Israelites that their gods were after the number of their cities Ierem. 2.28 In like manner also haue they multiplied their Saints dayes for beside the festiuals of Christ the holy Ghost and of the Apostles they haue added these besides Saint George his day Corpus Christi Assumption of Mary Natiuitie of Mary Conception of Mary The birth dayes of the Apostles Magdalenes Laurence The Dedication feast Martin their holy dayes Nicholas their holy dayes Catherine their holy dayes Anne their holy dayes Beside in the Dioces of Salisburge fifteene festiuals of Saint Rubert with many more whereof some of them are blasphemous as to keepe the Conception of Mary in remembrance that shee was conceiued without sinne some of them fabulous and forged as the Assumption of Mary in memorie of her Assumption in body to heauen which is a meere fable But all the rest are idolatrous and superstitious ordained for the honor and worship of creatures And thus haue they cumbred the people of God with their infinite obseruations So that the Lorde saith to them concerning their feastes as vnto the Israelites They are a burden vnto mee I am wearie to beare them Isai. 1.14 In Augustines time or who else it was that made those Sermons when there were nothing so many festiuals as now among Papists yet more then needed he writeth thus in a sermon vpon a festiuall Laetus sum hodierno die propter tantam festiuitatem sed aliquantulum tristis quia non video tantum populum congregatum quantus congregari debuit I am glad to daye because of this festiuall day and somewhat grieued withall that the people resorte not in such frequencie as they should We may see by this that euen then the people began to wax wearie of their many holy dayes The Papists THey enioyne sanctification and necessarie keeping of all their festiuities and holy dayes and so make no difference betweene the obseruation of error 71 holy dayes appointed of GOD and others ordained of men requiring the like strictnes in keeping of them all Rhemist Annot. Galat. 4. sect 5. The Protestants THere are no dayes necessarie to be kept but those that are of the Lords appointment the rest being voyde of superstition may be celebrated as indifferent and therefore not to be commaunded with the like strictnes as is the Lords daye There is greater libertie vpon holy dayes for bodilie labour then vppon the Sabboth for bodilie rest vppon the seauenth day is commaunded of GOD bodily labour vppon all other dayes permitted and may without offence of conscience bee vsed when it is not by the lawfull authoritie of the gouernors of the Church vppon iust occasion restrained as during the time of publike praiers and fastes hearing of the word and such like The rest of the Sabboth so far as it helpeth our preparation and fitnes to spirituall exercises and is a part of sanctifying the Lords day bindeth simplie in conscience because it is the commaundement of GOD but
was lawfull for them to read the scriptures much more for all Christians The Iesuite aunswereth that our knowledge is greater then theirs not in all scripture but in the misteries for our redemption onely We answere this is all we desire for if the misterie of saluation and redemption be plainly opened in the scripture why should not the people be admitted to the reading of the word to be confirmed in the knowledge of their redemption who seeth not what sillie aunsweres these be 4 Augustine thus writeth of this matter In ijs inquit quae aperte in Scripturis â—osita sunt inueniuntur ea omnia quae fidem continent moresque viuendi De doctrin Christia lib. 2. cap. 9. The plaine and easie places of scripture conteine all things necessarie vnto faith and good life Ergo the doctrine of saluation in the scriptures is not hard and difficult but easie of good Christians to be vnderstood THE SIXT QVESTION CONCERNING the interpretation of Scripture THis question doth diuide it selfe into three partes First concerning the diuerse senses of the scripture Secondly to whoÌ„ the chief authoritie to expound scripture is committed Thidly what meanes must be vsed in the interpretation of scripture THE FIRST PART OF THE SIXTH QVEstion of the diuerse senses of Scripture The Papistes error 7 THere are two straunge Assertions of our aduersaries coÌ„cerning this matter First they affirme that the scripture may haue diuerse senses and meanings in the same place The sense of the scripture is either literall say they historicall which is the first most proper sense or spirituall that is an higher sense deriued out of the other and it is of three kinds Allegoricall Tropologicall Anagogicall they shew by particular instance and induction that the scripture besides the literall sense may haue these also The Allegoricall sense is when besides the plaine historicall and literall meaning somewhat is signified which by an allegorie is referred vnto Christ or the Church as Gal. 4. beside the truth of the storie of the bond and free woman S. Paule applieth it vnto the two Testaments Ergo one place may haue more senses then one The Tropologicall sense is when as there is somewhat signified appertaining to manners as Deut. 25. Thou shalt not mussell the mouth of the oxe that treadeth out the corne this by S. Paule is applied to the Ministers of the Gospell 1. Cor. 9. Ergo the scripture hath diuerse senses The Anagogicall sense is wheÌ„ the place is applied to decipher set forth the kingdome of heauen and eternall things as Psal. 94. I sware vnto them if they should enter into my rest this is literally vnderstood of the rest in Canaan spiritually of life eternall Ergo many senses thus reasoneth Bellarmin lib. 3. de Scriptur cap. 3. The Protestantes WE affirme that of one place of scripture there can be but one sense which we call the literall sense when as the wordes are either taken properly or figuratiuely to expresse the thing which is meant as in this place the seede of the woman shall breake the Serpents head the literall sense is of Christ who should triumph ouer Sathan though it be spoken in a borowed and figuratiue speach There can be therefore but one sense which is the literall as for those three kinds they are not diuerse senses but diuerse applicatioÌ„s onely and collections out of one and the same sense 1 It shall appeare by a seuerall induction of all these kindes In the first example of the Allegoricall sense Galathes 4 the Apostle saith not that there is a double sense but that it may be allegorically applied which is historically set downe There is then but one sense of the place part whereof consisteth in the storie part in the allegorie so that the whole sense is conteined in them both Concerning the second exaÌ„ple of the Tropologicall there is not a twofold sense of that place but one whole generall sense that as the mouth of the oxe was not to be musled so the Minister of the Gospell must be prouided for Likewise of the Anagogicall kind it is not one sense to vnderstaÌ„d the rest of Canaan an other of the kingdome of God but there is one whole sense that as they for their Idolatrie were depriued of the land of promise so we should take heede lest by our disobedience we lose the hope of the kingdome of heaueÌ„ So we coÌ„clude that those are not diuerse senses but one sense diuersly applied 2 The literal sense is the onely sense of the place because out of that sense onely may an argument strongly be framed wherefore seeing allegories and tropes do not coÌ„clude they are not the senses of the place An allegorie or type may be part of the literall sense and then it concludeth but when an allegorie is framed beside the literall sense it concludeth not and therefore is no part of the sense as to reason thus the oxes mouth must not be musled Ergo the Minister must be maintained it foloweth well because it is part of the sense but allegories deuised beside the sense proue not though they may illustrate The Papistes THeir other assertion is this that it is lawfull to allegorise scripture both in the old and new Testament Bellarm. lib. 3. cap. 3. They reason thus Rhemens error 8 annot Heb. 4. ver 5. The Apostle applieth the rest of the Sabboth to the eternall rest Ergo the like applications of the fathers are lawfull See annot Heb. 7.2 the Apostle say they findeth great misteries euen in the very names Ergo it is lawfull to make allegories The Protestantes WE say it is daungerous to make allegories of Scripture without the warrant and direction of Gods spirite this was the occasion that diuerse of the auncient fathers greatly erred as the Iesuite him selfe repreheÌ„deth Papias Iustinus Lactantius for allegorising that place Reuel 20. which made them fall into the error of the Chiliastes by false interpreting of the thousand yeares there mentioned To their argumeÌ„ts our learned countryman D. Fulk answereth First it foloweth not because it was lawfull for the Apostles gouerned by the spirite to make allegories that it is therfore lawfull for others Secondly wheÌ„ the fathers or any other writers can be assured of the same spirite which the holy writers had and of the like dexteritie in vnderstanding and expounding Scripture they may likewise be bold to make allegories Let vs heare what Augustine saith of this matter Sicut mihi multum errare videntur qui nullas res gestas aliquid aliud praeter id quod eo modo gesta sunt significare arbitrantur ita multum audere qui prorsus ibi omnia significationib allegoricis inuoluta esse contendunt As they are much deceiued which thinke that the stories in the scripture do signifie no other thing but that which was done so they are to rash and bold that would draw all things to allegories which they read in scripture Ergo it is not
scripture 1. Deut. 17.12 He that harkeneth not vnto the priest that man shal die But mark I pray you what goeth before v. 11. according to the law which they shal teach thee according to the iudgement which they shall tell thee shalt thou do see then here is no absolute iudicial power giuen to the priest but according to the law of God 2. The example of the Apostles Act. 15. is as fōdly alleadged where it was decreed saith the Iesuite that the Gētiles shuld not be burthened with ceremonies which saith hee was not determined by the scriptures but by the absolute suffrages of the Apostles Again their decrees were absolutely imposed vpon the Churches without any further examination of the Disciples Ergo we are now also absolutely bound to obey all decrees of Councels Bellar. de concil 1.18 We answere first it is false that this matter was determined without scripture for Iames alleadgeth scripture Peter thus reasoneth we beleeue through the grace of God to be saued as wel as they v. 11. therfore what need this yoke of ceremonies 2. Though there had been no scripture who seeth not that the spirit of God so ruled the Apostles that their writings and holy actions should serue for scripture vnto the ages following Thirdly the Disciples needed not to examine their decrees knowing that they were gouerned by the spirit as they themselues write It seemed good to vs and the holy Ghost yet we see the brethren of Bereae searched the scripture for the trueth of those things which the Apostles preached Act. 17.11 When they can proue such a plenarie power fulnes of the spirit in their pastors and Councels as was in the Apostles we wil also beleeue them The Protestantes WE doe firmly beleeue that neither the Church nor Councels haue any such absolute power to determine without the holy scriptures either beside or agaynst them or to binde other men to obey such decrees Neither that the true Church of God dare or will arrogate such power vnto it self But that Councels are ordayned for the discussing deciding of doubtful matters according to the scriptures and word written 1. If the Apostles preachings might bee examined according to scripture much more the acts of all other Bishops and pastors But that was lawful in the Disciples of Berea Act. 17.11 which are commended for it therefore called noble couragious Christians because of this their promptnes diligence in searching out of the truth Ergo. 2. All things necessarie to saluation to be beleeued are articles of our fayth but al such articles must be grounded vpon the word of God therfore nothing can be imposed as necessary to saluation without the word of God Wherefore it is a blasphemous saying of the papists that the Church may make new articles of fayth Rhemens annot in 1. Tim. 3. sect 9. and Eckius maintained the same poynt agaynst Luther in the disputation at Lipsia and brought forth a new article of faith agreed of in the Councel of Constance that it is de necessitate salutis of the necessitie of saluation to beleeue that the Pope is the head of the Church The fathers of Basile more modest then so concluding that it was an article of fayth to beleeue that Councels were aboue the Pope doe vse this reason those things say they which we alleadge for the superioritie of general Councels are gathered out of the sayings of our Sauiour Christ. Ergo we are al bound to obey them Therefore we conclude that the word of God only written is the rule of fayth and al things necessary to be beleeued Rom. 10.10 Fayth commeth by hearing and hearing by the word Councels are to explane and declare articles of faith not to establish new 3 Lastly we will heare Augustine speake Nec tu debes Ariminense neque ego Nicaenū tanquā praeiudicaturus proferre concilium scripturarum authoritatibus c. Neither must I alleadge the Nicen Councel nor you the Arimine I am neither bound to the one nor you to the other let the matter be tried by Scripture cont Maximu Arrianum lib. 3. cap. 14. By this fathers sentence therefore no man is bound of necessitie to be tyed to Councels but the Scripture onely is absolutely to be beleeued THE SEAVENTH QVESTION WHETHER Councels be aboue the Pope or not The Papists THis is a matter yet not fully determined amongst the Papists Neither are error 35 they all of one opinion In the Councell of Constance and Basile it was fully concluded that the Councell is aboue the Pope Gerson of Paris that was also present in the Councell of Constance and a great dooer against Iohn Hus stifly maintaineth the authoritie of Councels aboue the Pope Other Papists more fauorable to their new God amight say that the Pope is by right aboue the Councell but he may if he wil submit himselfe to the Councell But now commeth in the stoute Iesuite and saith with the rest of the schoolemen that the Pope hath such a soueraigntie aboue the Councell that he cannot be subiect to their sentence though hee would Bellar. de concil lib. 2.14 Yet hee is in a mammering with himselfe for saith he in periculo schismatis when there is a schisme and it is not knowne who is the true Pope in such a case the Councell is aboue the Pope Let vs examine some of his best reasons 1 Now commeth in a great blasphemie All the names saith the Iesuite that are giuen to Christ in the Scriptures as head of the Church are ascribed to the Pope as he is called fidelis dispensator Luc. 12. a faithfull steward in the Lords house pastor gregis Iohn 10. the shepheard of the flocke Caput corporis ecclesiae Ephes. 4. the head of his bodie the Church vir seu sponsus Ephes. 5. the husband or spouse of the Church all these titles saith he are due to the Pope Ergo he is aboue the Church and so consequently aboue generall Councels Bellar. de concil lib. 2.17 O Lord what great blasphemie is here to appropriate the titles of Christ to a mortall man But goe to Bellarmine and the rest of that packe fil vp the measure of iniquitie of your forefathers say with Pope Athanasius that the people of the world are the partes of his bodie with Cornelius the Bishop in the Councell of Trent the Pope being the light came into the world and men loued darkenes rather then light with Pope Calixtus in the Councell of Rhemes who when hee saw the Councell would not consent to excommunicate the Emperour impiously cried out that they had forsaken him as Christ was left of his Disciples with Innocentius the third that all things in Heauen and earth and vnder the earth doe bowe the knee vnto him with Otho no Pope but a Cardinall that sitting amongst his Bishops blasphemously applied to himselfe the vision of Ezechiel cap. 1. resembling the Bishops to the sower faced beasts himselfe vnto God that approched to the
sometime in Rome also tribuni plebis the officers for the people had the chiefe authoritie Now of all these in common-wealth matters the first kinde is the best and safest the Monarchical or princely gouernement The question now is whether the same forme ought to bee reteyned in Church-gouernement and in this question certaine things are to bee obserued First that wee haue not to deale in this place with that part of Ecclesiasticall regiment wherein the prince hath interest as in ordayning Ecclesiasticall Lawes and seeing to the execution thereof but the question is onely of that regiment Ecclesiasticall which is proper to the gouernors of the Church which consisteth in the ministerie of the word and Sacraments in ordaining and electing of Church-ministers in the dispensing of the keyes of the Church in the Ecclesiasticall censures and discipline and such like whether in the Church there ought to bee one chiefe Bishop from whom all other receiue this power in the premisses Secondly the question is not of the spirituall gouernement of Christ who is the chiefe Monarch and King of his Church but of the outward and externall regiment vpon earth Thirdly wee speake not of the state of any particular Church either nationall prouinciall or oppidall but of the generall state of the Church whether ouer all Churches there ought to be one chiefe Bishop These things premised wee come now to the question The Papists THat there ought to bee one chiefe Monarch and high Bishop ouer all the Church in all Ecclesiasticall matters for the deciding of controuersies preseruing the vnitie of the Church from whom all other Ecclesiasticall Ministers doe receiue their power and authoritie they thus would proue 1 The militant Church is in all things answerable and correspondent to the triumphant companie in Heauen as Heb. 8.5 Moses was bid to make all things according to the paterne shewed in the Mount But in heauen there is beside God himselfe a Monarch and chiefe commaunder of the Angels euen Michael the Archangel Reuel 12.7 Michael and his Angels fought Ergo it ought to be so vpon earth We answer First the Church vpon earth neither is nor can be altogether like to the celestiall congregation for there is no temple Reuel 21.22 There shall enter no vncleane thing and many such like differences there are We are bid to follow them in holines and obedience so farre wee must imitate the Angels as in the Lords prayer 3. Petit. As for imitation and conformitie in other things we haue no such commaundement we are promised hereafter to be like them but that is not yet Neither doth that place proue any such thing Heb. 8. For how followeth it Moses was shewed a paterne to make the Tabernacle by Ergo the Church hath a paterne of her gouernement from Heauen When they can shew any such paterne reuealed in the word for their dreames and phantasies we wil not beleeue for the Church as Moses had for the Tabernacle then they shall say somewhat 2 It is a vaine controuersie so to descant of the Angels as to appoynt them a Captaine and commaunder and to make nine orders or bands of them as our Rhemist annot 1. Ephes. vers 21. These are but their dreames they haue not a worde in Scripture for it And concerning Michael they are much deceiued for in that place Apocal. 12.7 Christ is called Michael Michael and his Angels fought against the Dragon And who I pray you is the chiefe Captaine of the Church against the diuell and his hoast but Christ And so is it expounded verse 10. Now is saluation in Heauen and the strength and Kingdome of our God and the power of his Christ Here hee is called Christ who before is Michael In other places also Michael is vnderstood to be Christ as Dan. 10.21 there is none that holdeth with mee but Michael your Prince here Michael is the prince of the Church and not of the Angels And that Michael is not the prince of the Angels as our aduersaries meane taking Michael for an Angell it is proued out of the 13. verse Michael one of the chiefe princes the Angels are all called princes and not one to bee prince aboue them Likewise the nature and signification of the word Michael agreeth hereunto for it is compounded of three hebrue particles as much as to say one that is equall vnto GOD which name in that sense cannot bee giuen vnto any creature Further Epistle Iud. 9. there is mention made of Michael the Archangell who stroue against the diuell and saide the Lord rebuke thee Sathan where the Apostle alludeth to that place of Zacher 3.2 where the very same words are found but there the prophet calleth him Iehouah that spake those words and here the Apostle calleth him Michael so that in this place it must needes bee vnderstoode for Christ. But to conclude we denie not but that Michael may bee the name of some glorious Angell but out of these places it cannot bee proued And againe we will not stand with them but that there may be degrees of excellencie amongst the Angels as there shall be amongst the Saints but that any one hath any such soueraigne and commaunding authoritie ouer the rest it is a curious and presumptuous surmise 2 The Church of the olde Testament was a figure of the Church vnder the New but they had a high Priest aboue the rest Ergo there ought to be now We answere First we graunt the high Priest was a figure but neither of Peter nor Pope but onely of Christ for in two things did the high Priest resemble Christ in offering of sacrifice so hath Christ offered vp himselfe Heb. 7.27 and in entring into the sanctuarie to make attonement for the people so Christ is entred into the Heauens to appeare in sight for vs before God as the apostle saith Heb. 9.24 I trow in neither of these the high priest could be a type either of Peter or Pope 2 Neither doth it follow because there was an high priest in one countrey therefore there ought to bee one ouer the Churches in al countries as the Iesuite frameth an other argument by a comparison because a bishop is ouer his diocesse a Metropolitane ouer his prouince there may bee as well a Pope ouer the whole Church For by the same reason because a Lorde may bee the chiefe in his seignorie a Duke in his prouince a Prince in his Kingdome therefore there ought to bee an Emperour ouer all the world or as Master Caluine saith because one fielde is committed to one Husbandman to dresse and to till therefore the whole Worlde may which were a thing impossible The Protestants THat there ought not to be any one chiefe Bishop Pope or prelate to exercise iurisdiction ouer the whole Church wee doe thus make it good 1 We acknowledge no head of the Church but Christ neither doth the Scripture attribute this title of Maiestie ouer the whole Church but onely to Christ. If
shewe of reason can our aduersaries haue to make them proper to the Bishop of Rome 2 The second name is prince of Priests or high and chiefe Bishop which title if it be taken for a chiefe power dominion and soueraigntie is proper only to Christ the chiefe shepheard 1. Pet. 5.4 and cannot in that sense agree to any man If it bee vsed onely as a title of excellencie and commendation so was it in times past ascribed to other excellent and famous Bishops as Ruffinus lib. 2. cap. 26. calleth Athanasius Pontificem maximum chiefe Bishop yea it was in common giuen to all Bishops as Anacletus Bishop of Rome in his second Epistle writeth thus Summi sacerdotes id est Episcopi a deo iudicandi sunt The high Priests that is Bishops saith he are to bee iudged of God If it be taken further for the excellencie of the ministerie of the Gospell and the worthie calling of Christians in this sense the title of summum sacerdotium of the high Priesthood is attributed to all ministers Ecclesiasticall both Bishops and others so Fabianus Bishop of Rome vseth this name Yea the holy Apostle calleth all the people of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a princely royall or chiefe priesthood Ergo the Bishop of Rome hath no especiall or proper interest in this name 3 The third name is to bee called the Vicar of Christ vpon earth Where we are to vnderstand that in respect of the spirituall regiment and kingdome of Christ he needeth no Vicegerent vpon earth for I am with you saith he to the end of the world he himselfe is alway present in power and needeth not in that respect that any man should supplie his roume Petrus scriba martyr Fox pag. 906. If we doe take it for a word of office and publike administration so the Magistrate may bee called the Vicar of Christ in gouerning the people according to the word of God In which sense Eleutherius Bishop of Rome writing to Lucius King of the Britaines calleth him the Vicar of Christ and therfore in his owne kingdome had power out of the word of God to establish lawes for the gouernment of the people So all Bishops Pastors and Ministers in ancient time were called the Vicars of Christ in preaching praying binding and loosing in the name and power of Christ. So Augustine saith or whose worke els it is that Omnis antistes est Christi vicarius Euery pastor and prelate and not the Pope onely is the Vicar of Christ. And this is confessed by our Rhemists annot in 2. Cor. 5.18 that the Bishops and priests of the Church are for Christ and as his ministers that is his Vicars Nay Augustine maketh yet a more generall vse of this word he saith that Homo imperium Dei habens quasi vicarius eius est That man by creation being made Lord of the creatures doth therein represent God and is as his Vicar vpon earth So then all ministers are the Vicars of Christ the ciuill Magistrate likewise in some good sense may bee so called yea in respect of the creatures man generallie is vpon earth in Gods steade Ergo this name cannot be appropriate to the Pope of Rome 4 It is also too huge a name for the Pope or any mortall man to beare to be called the head of the vniuersall Church this is a name only due vnto Christ neither doe the scriptures acknowledge any other head but him Ephes. 1.22.4.15 But say they wee doe not make the Pope such an head as Christ is but only a ministeriall head ouer the militant Church vpon earth We answere First Ergo the Pope by your owne confession is not head of the vniuersall Church whereof the triumphant Church in heauen is a part Secondly the Rhemists confesse that the Church in no sense can bee called the bodie of the Pope Ergo the Pope cannot be any wayes the head of the vniuersall Church Annot. in 1. Ephes. 22. Thirdly the Fathers of Basile vsed this argument The head of the bodie being dead the whole bodie also dyeth but the whole Church doth not perish with the Pope Ergo he is not properly the head of the Church Fox pag. 675. If it shall bee further obiected that the Bishop of Rome hath been called in times past caput Episcoporum the head of all other Bishops we answere that it was but a title of excellencie and commendation not of dominion and power as London is called the head or chiefe citie of England yet are not other cities of the land subiect vnto it or vnder the iurisdiction thereof But we shall haue occasion more fully to discusse this matter afterward 5 They would haue the Pope called the Prelate of the Apostolike See the Rhemists say further that the Papall dignitie is a continuall Apostleship Annot. 4. Ephes. sect 4. We answere First if they call those Churches Apostolicall whose first founders were the Apostles then the See of Antioch Alexandria Constantinople are as well Apostolicall as Rome and this the Iesuite denyeth not Lib. 2. de pontific cap. 31. Secondly those Churches are Apostolicall which hold the Apostolike faith so is not the See of Rome Apostolicall being departed and gone backe from the ancient Catholike faith but those Churches where the Gospell of Iesus Christ is truely preached are indeede Apostolike Thirdly how can the Pope be an Apostle or haue Apostolike authoritie seeing hee preacheth not at all much lesse to the whole world wherein consisted the office of an Apostle Neither can he shewe his immediate calling from Christ as all the Apostles could for seeing he challengeth the Apostolike office by tradition from S. Peter and not by commandement from Christ he can in no wise be counted an Apostle or his office an Apostleship for the Apostles ordayned onely Euangelists and Pastors they had not authoritie to consecrate and constitute new Apostles Our aduersaries for this their Apostleship can finde nothing in scripture nor for a thousand yeeres after Christ in the ancient writers Fulk annot in Ephes. 4. sect 4. 6 Concerning the title of vniuersall Bishop it was thus decreed in the sixt Councel of Carthage as it is alleadged by Gratian Vniuersalis autem nec Romanus pontifex appelletur No not the Bishop of Rome is to be called vniuersall In Gregorie the first his time Iohn Patriarke of Constantinople obtayned of the Emperour Mauritius to be called vniuersall Patriarke but Gregorie would not agree thereunto calling him the forerunner of Antichrist that would challenge so proude a name Bellarmine and other of that sect doe answere that Gregorie found fault with this title because Iohn of Constantinople would haue been Bishop alone and none other to bee beside him but all other onely to bee his deputies and vicars To this wee replie First Iohn did onely challenge a superioritie ouer other Bishops not to be Bishop alone for this had been a thing impossible Secondly if Iohn had sought any such thing
world part 8. Which cannot agree to the Pope Ergo he is not Antichrist Answere To these eight arguments we haue before answered seuerally shewing how fabulous ridiculous and impossible our aduersaries assertions are without ground of scripture shewe of reason or colour of argument Wherefore we will not trouble the reader with needlesse repetitions desiring him to haue recourse to that which hath been alreadie sayd The Protestants THat the Pope of Rome is very Antichrist and that all the qualities and properties which the scripture describeth Antichrist by doe fitly agree vnto his person and that we are not therefore to expect or looke for any other Antichrist Thus by testimonie of scripture and sufficient reasons deduced out of the same we trust it shall appeare to all men 1 The first place of scripture is Daniel 11. where many notes and markes are declared proper to Antichrist yet especiallie set foorth to describe Antiochus Epiphanes who might be very well a type and figure of Antichrist who was then to come 1 vers 36. It is sayd He shall doe what him listeth This is most true of the Pope his will must stande for reason Distinct. 96. cap. satis If the Pope should drawe infinite soules to hell no man is to say vnto him Sir why doe you so Distinct. 40 Heere Bellarmine hath but this poore shift to say that it is meant onely of publike iudgement that no man is by authoritie to call the Pope to account but yet a brotherly admonition may bee vsed But who seeth not that the words are generall Nemo debet ei dicere No man ought to say vnto him neither Iudge nor other 2 Hee shall magnifie himselfe agaynst GOD and speake blasphemous things agaynst GOD hath not the Pope done so Of him it is sayd that GOD and the Pope haue but one Consistorie I am able to doe almost all that GOD can doe Fox pag. 785. articl 192. I am aboue all and in all Hostiens Nay that Dominion and Lordship which Christ had in earth but habitu in habite the Pope hath actu in act and in deede Agayne as we reade the earth is the Lordes and the fulnesse thereof and as Christ sayth all power is giuen mee in heauen and in earth so is it to bee affirmed that the Vicar of Christ hath power on things celestiall terrestriall infernall apud Fox pag. 791. col 1. Now let the discreet reader iudge whether this fellowe doe not magnifie himselfe and speake blasphemously agaynst God 3 Hee shall prosper till the wrath bee accomplished So hath the Pope had but too good successe hee hath subdued Emperours and made them his seruants trode vpon their neckes made them serue at his table crowned them with his feete made them hold his stirrup and leade his horse by the bridle But wee doe hope that his date is out and that hee shall prosper no longer 4 vers 37. He shall not care for the God of his fathers No more doth the Pope for he hath inuented and erected a newe breaden god which he worshippeth hangeth vp in Churches carrieth about in procession being but a peece of bread This breaden god a might his forefathers neuer knew 5 Hee shall not care for the desires of women So hee prohibiteth lawfull marriage permitteth adulteries and the vnnaturall lust of Sodomites Bellarmine first denyeth the text which is faithfully translated according to the Hebrew Secondly he sayth the place is meant literally and properly of Antiochus who was giuen to the pleasures of women Answere First if it be meant literallie of Antiochus then can it not be meant literallie of your Antichrist If Antiochus be but a type of Antichrist then can you not necessarilie conclude out of this place for types prooue not vnlesse they be diuine that is appoynted of God to be types which you can not shewe for this place see then the best arguments that you haue for your Antichrist out of the prophecies of Daniel and Ezechiel are proued nothing worth Secondly as Antiochus was giuen to vnlawfull desires of women so is the Pope yet might he be an enemie to chast and holy marriage and so is the Pope And by the way let it bee noted that the Iesuite picketh quarrels with scripture and maketh it false for the text sayth He that is Antiochus shall not care for the desires of women Yes sayth the Iesuite he shall be giuen to the pleasures of women cleane contrarie to the text Bellarm. cap. 21. 6 vers 38. He shall honor his god Mauzzim that is a god of power and riches with gold siluer precious stones Both of these are most true of the popish religion for their god hath brought them great riches lands treasure possession by their idolatrous Masses they haue greatly enriched themselues wherein their breaden god playeth the chiefe part and therefore they doe worship him agayne with gold siluer precious stones what rich Corporals and Altar-clothes Copes Vestiments of veluet silke wrought with gold are seene in their Churches what gilding of Roodes and Roodlofts garnishing of Idols what rich Crucifixes of siluer of gold beset with pearle and precious stones This description therefore of Daniel as you see doth in euery respect agree with the conditions and properties of Antichrist of Rome Argument Illyrici Secondly Saint Paules description in euery poynt also is verified in the Pope First He shall exalt himselfe aboue God and all that is called God 2. Thess. 2.4 So the Pope challengeth the full authoritie of Christ as wee haue shewed before and exalteth himselfe aboue Emperours which are called gods vpon earth yea they haue taken the iust proportion of inequalitie betweene the Pope and Emperour for the Pope is 47. degrees aboue the Emperour as the Sunne is 47. degrees bigger then the Moone Innocent 3. in decretalib 2 He shall sit in the temple that is in the Church so the Pope nameth himselfe head of the Church and hath the keyes as he braggeth both of heauen and hell Therefore the Turke cannot bee that Antichrist because he is out of the Church and so in truth is the Pope but yet he challengeth to him and his the name of the Church 3 The mysterie wrought in Paules time and afterward encreased so not long after the Apostles time the Bishops of Rome began to lift vp their heads aboue other Churches as Zozimus falsified the Councel of Nice and sent to the 6. Councel of Carthage to haue it there confirmed that it might be lawfull to send vp appeales to Rome 4 Antichrist shall come with lying signes So hath the Pope done as experience proueth and we haue shewed before 5 vers 11. God shall send strong delusions that they shall beleeue lyes And in time of Poperie men indeede were so strongly deluded that the father persecuted the sonne the sonnes set fire to their father yea the husband was made a witnesse agaynst the wife the wife agaynst her husband and seruants accused their masters These things are
Images which are stockes and stones 2 The Gospell teacheth that wee are freely saued by Iesus Christ without workes which neither merite remission of sinnes nor eternall life for eternall life is the free gift of God Rom. 6.23 And our sinnes are forgiuen vs freely because they are not imputed Rom. 4.6 They affirme cleane contrarie that by our merites we may deserue heauen and that vita aeterna is merces bonorum operum that eternall life is the reward of good workes But S. Paul sayth it is a free gift Bellarm. cap. 23. 3 The Gospell teacheth vs that we should growe vp to an assurance of our election 2. Pet. 1 10. and with boldnes to call vpon the name of God Heb. 4.10 The Papists say we should be kept alwaies in doubt and it is presumption to be assured of the fauour of God 4 The Gospell saith that not onely externall acts but euen secret thoughts are sinne yea the very cōcupiscence of the flesh to be sinne Genes 6.5 Rom. 7.7 They denie that concupiscence and euill thoughts are sinne vnlesse the be voluntarie and haue the consent of the will ibid. 5 The Gospell teacheth that it is impossible for any man to keepe and performe the lawe of God Rom. 8.7 Luk. 17.10 They doubt not to say that a man by grace may fulfill the lawe and by fulfilling of it deserue heauen 6 Christ instituted the Sacrament in both kinds and Paul 1. Cor. 11. giuing a direction concerning the Sacrament not onely to the Pastors and Ministers but to the whole Church of Corinth doth rehearse the institution in both kinds But the Papists doe minister but in one kind to the people 7 The Gospell saith that the Church is builded vpon Christ and he is the onely foundation thereof 1. Cor. 3.11 The Papists hold that Peter first and now the Pope whom they make his successor is the foundation of the Church Argument Chytraei And thus we see the Pope in his doctrine is a plaine aduersarie to Christ and therefore Antichrist The seuenth argument Apocalyps 17.1 Antichrist is called the great whore And here we are to note the singular prouidence of God who suffereth not one iot of his word to fall to the ground for euen soverily Anno 853. next after Leo the 4. there was a right whore elected Pope called Iohn or if you will Ioane the 8. who fate in the Papacie two yeeres sixe moneths and on a time being with child fell in labour in the midst of a solemne procession Whereupō there was a certayn Image of a woman with a child set vp in the same place where the Pope was deliuered And euer since the Popes when they goe to Laterane doe shun that streete being yet the neerer way abhorring that fact and the memorie therof There was also long after a chayre of Porphyrie stone kept in Laterane with an hole in the midst wherein the newe elected Pope was wont to sit to haue his humanitie tried Iuell pag. 428. Defens Apol. Obiect 1. Harding and since him Bellarmine obiect that there was neuer any such Pope because she is not registred in the Popes Calendar Ans. No they left her out for shame as Marianus Scotus writeth Agayne Bishops names haue vpon sundrie occasions been left out as Chrysostomes name was striken out vpon displeasure out of the table of the Bishops of Constantinople So Pope Cyriacus is not reckoned in the Calendar of the Popes and yet he was one of them Obiect 2. Whereas it is said that this Pope Ioane was first student at Athens and afterward professed at Rome Harding denieth that at Athens then there was any place for students but all was barbarous and so sayth Bellarm. neither that at Rome there was any open profession of letters at that time Ans. First anno 680. the Bishop of Athens was at a Councel at Constantinople called Synodus sexta anno 742. at the second Councel of Nice there were many Bishops of Greece present and Pope Ioane followed anno 853. and how should Athens afterward become barbarous being inhabited all this while by Christians for it was not taken of the Turkes before anno 1440. Secondly and me thinkes it is a discredite for Rome that there should be there vnder the Popes nose no profession of learning and that there should be there no Vniuersitie of Students where the vniuersall Bishop sate But Theodoricus Niemus sometime the Popes Secretarie sayth she read a Lecture two yeeres at Rome Obiect 3. It is not like that God would suffer S. Peters chayre to be polluted by a woman Harding Ans. You presume to much of Gods prouidence hauing no such promise Why might not a woman as well creepe into S. Peters chayre at Rome as one did into S. Andrewes of Constantinople as Bellarmine confesseth what priuiledge hath one more then the other Obiect 4. As for the chayre saith Harding it is a fable but Bellarmine more modestly graunteth there is a chayre of Porphyrie but to another purpose to shewe the Popes humilitie not to trie his humanitie Agayne Harding sayth it is a lye that the Popes refrayne to goe that way But Bellarmine that knoweth Rome better then he denieth not that the Pope so doth but not for any such heinous fact there committed but because it is a strait way and is not fit for his trayne And as for the Image Harding saith it representeth no such thing but is rather like one of the great ragged stones at Stonage Bellarmine denieth not but there is such an Image but it seemeth not to bee a picture of a woman but rather of some heathen priest going to sacrifice We see how handsomely they agree in their answers And no maruaile for if one lyer is many times contrary to himselfe how should two lyars agree But these men go only by coniectures we haue their owne writers against them for Theodoricus Niemus saith there is such an Image that resembleth such a thing and that the Popes will not goe that way in procession to this day vpon that occasion And as for the chayre of marble to that vse to search the Pope Sabellicus reporteth it Aenead 9. lib. 1. In this one example we may see the boldnes of our aduersaries which are not ashamed to denye so famous a storie being reported by Sabellicus Leonicus Chalcondyla Marianus Scotus that liued about the yeere 1028. Sigebertus Gimblacens anno 1100. beside thirteene Historiographers as they are quoted by Bishop Iewel and of them all not one a Lutherane It is almost as foule a shame for them to denye so manifest and playne a thing as it is a great blot to their succession that a whore sate sometimes in the Papall chayre Thus then by euident demonstration it appeareth that the Pope is the whore of Babylon and so consequently very Antichrist Lastly in the eight place their owne witnesses shall speake Bernard sayth Bestia de Apocalypsi cui datum est os loquens blasphemias Petri Cathedram occupat
The Beast in the Apocalypse to the which a mouth was giuen speaking blasphemies doth occupie Peters chayre Ioachim Abbas sayth Antichristus iam pridem natus est Romae Antichrist a good while since was borne at Rome The Bishops in the Councel at Reynspurge say thus Hildebrandus Papa sub specie religionis iecit fundamenta Antichristi Hildebrand vnder colour of holines hath layd a foundation for Antichrist Nay long before any of these Gregorie the 1. first of all the Gregories and the best of all the Popes that haue followed him thus prophecied of his successors Ego fidenter dico quòd quisquis se vniuersalem sacerdotem vocat vel vocari desiderat in elatione sua Antichristum praecurrit I speake it confidently that whosoeuer calleth himselfe vniuersall Priest or desireth so to bee called in the pride of his heart is the forerunner of Antichrist But the Popes of Rome are now called vniuersall Bishops or Priests Ergo they are either Antichrists or the forerunners of Antichrist But it is not like that Antichrist should haue so many forerunners and so many yeeres almost a thousand since Boniface the 3. was first called vniuersall Bishop Ergo Antichrist is alreadie come and hath been a good while and where els should he be but there where his forerunners were namely at Rome Now therefore seeing wee haue so many witnesses the scripture reason experience authorities to prooue the Pope Antichrist who will either bee so simple as seeing so good grounds not to beleeue it or so scrupulous hauing such certayne euidence to doubt thereof And thus at the length by Gods gracious assistance wee haue finished and brought this great question concerning Antichrist to an end as also the whole controuersie as touching the Bishop or Pope of Rome THE FIFT GENERAL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING SPIRITVAL PERSONS COMMONLY CALLED THE CLERGIE HAuing now sufficientlie handled the controuersie of the chiefe member of the militant Church which our aduersaries say is the Pope wee must come in the next place to speake of the middle parts which are those whom they call Clericos Clerkes and they are of two sorts Secular which haue any publique function in the Church or Regular which liue according to some rule and they are called Monachi Monkes First then of their secular Clerkes This controuersie conteyneth sixe questions 1 Of the name and title of Clerkes or Clergie men 2 Concerning the election of Bishops and Ministers first of all in generall secondly of the election of the Bishop of Rome 3 Concerning Ecclesiasticall orders First in generall secondly of the difference of Bishops and other Ministers Thirdly of Cardinals 4 Concerning the keyes of the Church and the power of binding and loosing the question deuided into foure parts 5 Concerning the marriage of Ministers three parts of the question 6 Of the maintenance of the Church by tythes in two parts THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING THE name of Clerkes or Clergie men The Papists error 66 THis name Clergie in Latine Clerus is a name made proper to the Spiritualtie by vse of antiquitie and agreeably to Scriptures they are so called because they are the Lords lot and consecrate to the diuine seruice the rest are called popular or lay men which meddle not with any function of the Church 1 This word say they hath been vsed by all antiquitie and thereby Church Ministers only signified Ergo it is a fit and decent name Bellar. lib. 1. de Clericis cap. 1. Rhemens 1. Pet. 2.3 Ans. First the Fathers vsed this name Clergie but not as it is now vsed of the Papists which doe hereby as it were exclude the people of God from the Lords inheritance counting them as Asses and Dogs in respect of the Clergie they vsed it as a ciuill indifferent name for an outward distinctiō of their callings not as a name of more holines and so we refuse it not 2 What though by custome continuance this name hath been somewhat abused we will learne herein to speake of the scriptures and not of men Secondly we mislike this name say our aduersaries because we would haue no difference betweene the people and Clergie Rhemist ibid. Ans. It is a great slander because we make no such difference as they doe as to make the Clergie onely Gods lot and portion and to count the people as vnholy and to preferre euery ignorant doltish Masse priest before the best and deuoutest of the people therefore they imagine we make no difference at all We doe distinguish the calling of the one and the other none of the lay sort to be so hardie as to meddle with the word or Sacraments which are committed to the Ministers which you notwithstanding permit them to doe and the people euery where to reuerence their Pastors and to yeeld due obedience vnto them But that the calling of the one before God in it selfe is more meritorious then the other that we doe not neither dare affirme 3 The Leuites in the time of the lawe were seuered out from the rest of the Lords people and he was their lot and inheritance and they the Lords lot Deut. 18.2 And as the Leuites were then so are the Ministers of the Gospell now Bellarm. Ans. First the Lord is rather sayd to be their lot because they had the Lords portion and liued of the Altar then they are sayd to be the Lords lot for the whole nation was holie vnto God and a kingdome of Priests Exod. 19.6 Secondly it followeth not that because there was a legall and ceremoniall difference then betweene the Priests and the people that therefore it ought to be so now Nay rather the contrarie followeth because there was such a difference then that therefore the Priesthood of the lawe being ceased there ought to bee none such now for Christ hath made vs all Kings and Priests to God his father Apocal. 1.6 And we are al a royall priesthood and holy nation 1. Pet. 2.9 Now though there be a difference of callings amongst men yet before God we are all Priests alike and there is but one Priest for vs all to Godward euen Christ Iesus our Lord. The Protestants THe name of Clerkes or Clergie men if it be not vsed as a name in it selfe of greater holines and merite and so is in effect a proude excluding of the rest of Christians from the Lords inheritance we refuse it not though there are better names and titles to call the Ministers of the Gospell by yet being taken as it is in Poperie we doe vtterly refuse and reiect it First 1. Pet. 5.3 The Apostle exhorteth the pastors and teachers to feede the flock of Christ non vt dominantes Cleris not as Lords ouer Gods Clergie inheritance Here S. Peter calleth the whole flocke the Clergie wherefore it appeareth that this difference was not knowne in the Apostles time of lay and Clergie men And it is agaynst all sense that Saint Peter should vnderstand here the inferiour Ministers and
but now they doe light them at noone day 3 These offices haue not been in vse these many yeares among the papists themselues for many times the Sexton or his boy doe execute the charge both of Acolites Ostiaries and Readers yea of Deacons and Subdeacons also when the Priest with his boy can dispatch a Masse Neither are these orders retayned amongst them for any especiall seruice or office but onely as praeparatories and steps and degrees to the priesthood Fulk annot 1. Timoth. 3. sect 7. THE SECOND PART OF THE DIFFErence of Bishops and other Ministers The Papists WE differ from them in two poynts First they say that Bishops are not onely in a higher degree of superioritie to other Ministers but they are as Princes of the Clergie and other Ministers as subiects and in all things to bee commaunded by them Secondly they affirme that Bishops are onely properly Pastors and that to them onely it doth appertaine to preach and that other Ministers haue no authoritie without their license or consent to preach at all and that not principally or chiefely but solie and wholie to them appertayneth the right of consecrating and giuing orders For the first for the princely authoritie of Bishops whom they would haue obeyed in all things they wrast these and such like places of scripture as 2. Cor. 1.9 I write vnto you to know whether you will be obedient in all things Ergo they must be absolutely obeyed Answere the Apostle challengeth only obedience in such things as he should commaund agreeable to Gods word for if I my selfe sayth he preach another Gospell holde me accursed Galat. 1. Fulk annot 1. Cor. 2. sect 3. 2 Against an Elder receiue no accusation vnder two or three witnesses 1. Tim. 5.19 Ergo the authority of Bishops is absolute and princelike Videmus Episcopum iudicem esse presbyterorum proinde verum principem wee see the Bishop is the iudge of the Elders Ergo a prince ouer them Bellarm cap. 14. Answere First it followeth not Bishops haue iurisdiction and authoritie ouer other Ministers Ergo they are princes ouer them Can there be no preeminence and superioritie in the Church but it must needes be princelike Is euery iudge a prince ouer those which are brought before him to be iudged 2. Timothie had no such princelike authority for here it is restrained limited a rule is set down by the Apostle which he must obserue Ergo his authoritie was not absolute Thirdly Saint Paul was so farre off from making Timothie a prince in the Church at Ephesus that he would rather haue him not to rebuke but to exhort the Elders as fathers the younger men as brethren cap. 5.1 Where now is his princely authoritie become whereas he maketh his subiects as our aduersaries call inferior Ministers his fathers and brethren For the second the Apostles properly had the preaching of the word committed vnto them Act. 6. For other were chosen to attend vpon tables the Apostles also onelie had the right of laying on of hands Act. 14.23 Ergo It is proper onely to Bishops to preach and to ordayne who are the Apostles successors Bellarmin Answere First Bellarmine denieth that Bishops doe properly succeed the Apostles de pontifice lib. 4.25 because he would magnifie the Pope his ghostly father aboue all Bishops but now forgetting himselfe hee sayth Episcopi propriè succedunt Apostolis Bishops doe properly succeede the Apostles cap. 14. so by this reason euery Bishop hath as ful authoritie as the Pope Secondly euery godly faithful Bishop is a successor to the Apostles we denie it not so are all faithfull and godly pastors Ministers for Christ prayeth for them all indifferently hauing first praied for his Apostles Iohn 17.20 I pray not for these alone sayth our Sauiour but for al them which shal beleeue in me through their word Thirdly at that time when the Deacons were elected the congregation was at Ierusalem neither were there as yet any other Pastors ordained therefore the Apostles only attēded vpon preaching of the word but afterward when they had ordayned Pastors in other Churches to them also fully was committed the word of reconciliation Ephes. 4.11 Christ hath giuen some to be Apostles some Prophets some Pastors and teachers So that Pastors teachers though ordained first by the Apostles yet had their calling of God and together in their calling authoritie and commission to preach neither being once ordayned needed they to expect anie further license from the Apostles And as for the right of ordayning and imposition of handes though it were chiefly in the Apostles yet the Pastors and Elders together with them layde on their handes Act. 13.4 Yea the Rhemists confesse as much that when a Priest is to be ordered the rest of the Priests together with the Bishop doe lay on their hands Annotat. 1. Timoth. 4.18 What doth this else signifie but that they haue some interest in ordayning together with the Bishop The law also must be changed Heb. 7.12 that is the manner and forme of the priesthood But we easily see your drift you would gladly haue vs like of this argument that in stead of a high Priest in the law you might bring a Pope into the Church The Protestantes FIrst though we doe admitte that for auoyding of schisme the Church hath thought it meete there should be difference in degree and a superioritie among Ministers yet your princely dominion which you doe vrge in no wise must be admitted 1 It is contrary to the rule of Christ. Luk. 22.25 the Kings of the nations are Lords ouer them and they that haue authoritie ouer them are called benefactors Here our Sauiour speaketh not of tyrannical dominion for how could tyrants be benefactors but forbiddeth that there should be any such princelike and pompous preeminence among ecclesiasticall persons as there is among secular and ciuill gouernours A superioritie may be graunted but not as the Prince is ouer his subiects it was so in time of popery that the people were halfe subiects to the Prince and halfe subiects to their spirituall gouernours But though we acknowledge other ecclesiasticall fathers and pastors yet we are subiects onely to our prince 2 Saint Peter also is flat against this princely rule and dominion Feede the flock sayth he not as Lords ouer Gods heritage but that you may bee ensamples 1. Pet. 5.3 But are not they I pray you Lords ouer the flock that challenge to be princes Secondly concerning the power of preaching we affirme that euery pastor once ordayned hath sufficient authoritie to preach in his owne flocke and charge as Iohn Husse notably prooued to their face out of a certayne glose in the fift booke of the decretals that when as the Bishop ordayneth anie Priest he giueth him also therewithall authoritie to preach Wee denie not but when there is iust occasion this authoritie maybe restrayned by the Church gouernours and so also may an euill Minister be suspended
saepe tam diu clamatur vt fiat in Psal. 63. What medicine or plaister wilt thou buie to heale thy sinne Behold euen now while I preach vnto thee change thy heart and it is already done which we so often call vpon you to be done See then by the preaching of the word our heart is chaunged our life amended and our sinne remitted THE SECOND PART TO WHOM THE authoritie of the keyes is committed The Papists error 74 THe authoritie and power of excommunication say they is not in the whole Church but onely in the Prelates neither was the power of binding and loosing giuen vnto the whole church but in their own name not in the name or right of the Church doe the pastors and Prelates exercise this power Remist 2. 1. Corinth 5. sect 3. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Clericis cap. 7. The Church is sayd to binde and loose because the Prelates doe binde loose as a man is said to speake and see though he onely speake with the tongue and see with the eyes 1 They seeme to proue it by S. Paules example 1. Corinth 5. I absent in bodie but present in spirit haue decreed S. Paul vseth here his Apostolike power in sending his letters and Mandatum to haue the incestuous person excommunicate Ergo the right was in him and not in the Church and so consequently in the Bishops his successors Ans. First S. Paul sendeth no Mandatum but sheweth his Apostolike power in decreeing the incestuous person worthy of excommunication and requiring the same to be executed by the Church Fulk 1. Corin. 5. sec. 2. Secondly though Paul gaue the sentence yet was it done both in the power of Christ and the name of the whole Church for he had decreed onely that he should be excommunicate it was not actually done but to the due performing thereof there is required the congregating of the Church in Christs name the presence of Paul in spirit by his apostolike power that it should be done in the name of Christ. Al this sheweth that Paul gaue sentence in the name of the whole Church 2 Paul they say by the preeminent power of his Ministerie pardoneth the incestuous person whom he had excommunicate Rhemist argument in 1. ad Corinth Ans. The text is plaine that he consenteth the Church should pardon him 2. Corinth 2.10 To whom you forgiue any thing I forgiue also Heere not Paul onely but the whole Church pardoneth Fulk ibid. 3 The Iesuites simile may bee returned vpon his owne head for as the eye and tongue in the bodie are but instruments of the life and power of the soule which quickneth the whole bodie so the gouernours of the Church do execute the discipline of the Church by the spirit of Christ which is giuen to the whole bodie The Protestants THe authoritie of excōmunication pertaineth to the whole Church although the execution and iudgement thereof to auoyd confusion be committed to the gouernours of the Church which exercise that authoritie as in the name of Christ so in the name of the whole Church Fulk totidem verbis annot 1. Cor. 5. sect 3. 1 Math. 18.17 If he wil not heare thee tell the Church this place proueth that although the exercising of the keyes be referred to the gouernours of the Church yet the authoritie and right is in the whole Church for the keyes were giuen to the whole Church The pastors and gouernours though they be excellent and principall members of the Church yet are they improperly called the Church Argument Illyrici 2 We conclude the same also out of S. Paules words 1. Cor. 2.21 All things are yours whether Paul Apollos or Cephas whether things present or things to come and ye are Christs and Christ Gods Ergo whatsoeuer power is in the Church it is the Churches not onely the common vse and the benefite thereof because it may be answered that although the keyes be onely granted to the Prelates yet they vse them to the good of the Church but the right also and possession thereof euen as the Church is the inheritance and proper possession of Christ. 3 Augustine consenteth Ecclesia quae fundatur in Christo claues ab eo regni coelorum accepit in Petro. Tract in Iohann 124. The Church which is founded vpon Christ receiued in Peter the keyes of the kingdome of heauen But the whole Church and not onely the Pastors is founded and builded vpon Christ Ergo. THE THIRD PART WHETHER THE PASTORS of the Church haue any absolute power to remit sinnes otherwise then as Ministers onely The Papistes error 75 THey spare not to say that Priests haue full right to remit sinnes and are not ministers onely thereof and dispensers but haue full power as Christ had and he that doubteth of their right herein may as well doubt whether Christ had authoritie as man to remit sinnes Rhemist annot Iohn 20. sect 3. And againe they call it an expresse power and commission yea a wonderfull power which is giuen vnto Priests to remit sinnes and therfore it followeth necessarily that men should submit themselues to their iudgement for release of their sinnes Annot. Iohn 20. sect 5. 1 They reason thus out of our Sauiours owne words Iohn 20.21 As my father hath sent me so I send you He sheweth his fathers commission giuen to himselfe and then in plaine termes most amply imparteth the same to his Apostles But Christ had full right to remit sinnes Ergo also the Apostles and their successors for they haue the same power that Christ had Rhemist annot Iohn 20. sect 3. Ans. First it is great presumption and spoken without any ground to say that Christ by sending his Apostles into the world gaue them as full large and ample commission as he himselfe had for neither the Pope in whom remaineth as they say the Apostolike authoritie by their owne confession can doe all that Christ did as to ordaine and institute Sacraments and Christ say they might forgiue sinnes without the Sacraments which the Pope cannot doe and so consequently neither the Apostles whose full iurisdiction he hath in this behalfe Bellarm. de pontif lib. 5. cap. 4. Secondly the power therefore here granted to the Apostles is in the name of Christ to declare and pronounce remission of sinnes according to the wil of God not properly in their owne power to release or absolue sinners 2 He breathed vpon them and gaue them the holy Ghost vers 22. Therefore he that denieth the Priests authoritie to forgiue sinnes he must denye the holy Ghost to be God and not to haue power to remit sinnes Rhem. ibid sect 4. Ans. What a blasphemous consequence is this The holy Ghost hath absolute power to forgiue sinnes Ergo the Apostles also and all other Priests haue the same power First by this meanes they make no difference betweene the fulnes of power in our Sauiour Christ and the communication of that power to other Ministers of Christ it is sayd that the
Spirit was not giuen him by measure Ioh. 3.34 and that the holy Ghost dwelleth in him bodily but it were great blasphemie so to say of any man Apostle or Minister beside which haue receiued of the same grace but not in the like measure that Christ hath but the spirit is giuen to euery one in measure as they haue neede in their seuerall places and callings Secondly though we should grant that the Apostles had the full authoritie of Christ actually to remit sinnes which they shall neuer proue yet it may be doubted whether al Ministers whom they call Priests which name we refuse not if it be taken according to the sense of the originall word Presbyter and not for a sacrificing priesthood haue as full power in this case as the Apostles had nay it is plaine they haue not for the Apostles and other in the Primitiue Church had power to discerne spirits 1. Cor. 12.10 and to giue actually the bodies of the excommunicate to bee vexed and possessed of the diuell 1. Cor. 5.5 and after a strange manner to exercise power ouer their bodily life as Peter did vpon Ananias and Sapphira Act. 5 Yet we rather stand vpon this poynt that neither the Apostles nor any other Ministers haue power actually to remit sinnes then onely as dispensers and stewards in the name of Christ. The Protestants AL the power of binding and loosing committed to the Apostles and to the Ministers of the word and Sacraments is by declaring the will and pleasure of God out of his word both to pronounce forgiuenes of sinnes to all that are truely penitent the reteining of them to the obstinate and impenitent Fulk annot Iohn 20. sect 3. So that Ministers are not made iudges in this case but only as the Lords ambassadors to declare the will of God out of his word 1 There is a notable place for this purpose 2. Corinth 5.18 God hath reconciled vs vnto himselfe through Iesus Christ and hath giuen vs the ministerie of reconciliation So then Christ is the onely author of reconciliation the Apostles are but ministers how then say the Rhemists that Christ himselfe is but a minister also of our reconciliation yet a chiefe minister whereas the Apostle maketh him the author God was in Christ reconciling the world to himselfe vers 19. Wee are but ambassadors for Christ and pray you in Christs stead to bee reconciled vnto God this then is the office of Ministers not to reconcile men vnto God but to pray them to bee reconciled through Christ Christ onely is the reconciler they but ministers of reconciliation They are but messengers and ambassadors onely to declare their Princes pleasure their commission is certaine beyond that they cannot goe Wherefore that is a blasphemous decretal and cleane contrarie to the scripture which is ascribed but falsely to Pontianus Bishop of Rome which sayth that God hath Priests so familiar that by them he forgiueth the sinnes of others and reconcileth them vnto him Fox pag. 59. But S. Paul sayth that God onely by Christ reconcileth vs vnto himselfe 2 Augustine doth very freely vtter his minde concerning this matter who putteth this obiection If men doe not forgiue sinnes then it should seeme to be false which Christ sayth Whatsoeuer you bind in earth is bound in heauen He answereth Daturus erat dominus hominibus spiritum sanctum c. God was to giue vnto men the holy Ghost by whom their sinnes should be forgiuen them Spiritus dimittit non vos spiritus autem Deus est Deus ergo dimittit non vos the spirit therefore remitteth sinne and not you the spirit is God God forgiueth sinnes and not you Here is one argument God onely forgiueth sinnes Ergo not man Againe Quides homo nisi aeger sanandus vis mihi esse medicus mecum quaere medicum O man what art thou that takest away my sinnes but a sicke man thy selfe wouldest thou be my phisition nay let vs both together goe seeke a phisition that may heale vs. Lo another argument He cannot be a phisition to others that needeth a phisition himselfe he cannot reconcile others to God who hath himselfe neede of a reconciler Further he sayth Qui dimittit per hominem potest dimittere praeter hominem non enim minus est idoneus per se dare qui potest per alium dare He that can forgiue sinnes by man can forgiue also without man for he may as well forgiue by himselfe as he can doe it by another Here is then the third argument If man doe actually forgiue sinnes then Christ should not forgiue sinnes without man for the whole power is committed to man Yea the Rhemists affirme the same that it is necessarie we should submit our selues to the iudgement of the Priest for release of our sinnes if it bee necessarie then sinnes cannot be remitted without the Priest then is Christs power limited he cannot forgiue without man which is contrarie to that Augustine affirmeth here THE FOVRTH PART WHETHER STRAIGHT waies whatsoeuer be loosed or bound by the ministerie of men vpon earth be so in heauen The Papists AN expresse power say they is giuen vnto Priests to remit and reteyne error 76 sinnes And Christ promiseth that whose sinnes soeuer they forgiue they are forgiuen of God and whose sinnes soeuer they retaine they are retained of God Rhemist annot Iohn 20. sect 5. Whereby it appeareth it is their opinion which is manifest also by the practise of their Church that at the will and pleasure of euerie priest exercising the keyes vpon earth men are bound and loosed in heauen They ground this their opinion vpon the generalitie of the wordes Whosoeuers sinnes you remit they are remitted Iohn 20.23 and Math. 18.18 Whatsoeuer you binde in earth shall be bound in heauen Answere These places are not so to be vnderstood as though God were bound to ratifie euery decree of men vpon earth for first this power is giuen to all lawfull pastors which doe holde the Apostolike fayth not to Idolatrous ignorant and blasphemous priests such as most if not all of the popish sorte are Secondly they must decree in the earth according to Gods wil Wherefore Iohn 20.22 first Christ breatheth his spirite vpon his Apostles and then giueth them their commission signifiyng hereby that they must execute this power as they shall be directed by Gods spirite and Matth. 18.20 it followeth that they must be assembled in the name of Christ that is according to Christs rule and the direction of his word they must binde and loose and not at their owne discretion The Protestants THat no sentence or decree of men bindeth or looseth before God in heauen but that which is pronounced according to the will and pleasure of GOD and by the warrant of his worde the scripture euery where teacheth vs. 1 Prouer. 26.2 As the sparrow by flying escapeth so the curse that is causelesse shall not come Isay 5.20 Woe vnto them that speake good
better argument can we haue against this Popish decree then the great vncleannes and foule enormities that haue been brought by the meanes thereof into the Church In the time of Gregorie the first who enioyned his Clergie to liue single commaunding on a time his seruants to catch him some fish out of his Motes and Ponds in stead of fish they brought vnto him sixe thousand heads of yong children whereupon he fetching a great sigh with himselfe commended then the saying of the Apostle It is better to marrie then to burne Bellarmine hath no better answere then to denie the storie which notwithstanding is found in the Epistle of Huldericus Bishop of Augusta which he sent to Pope Nicholas Fox pag. 1155. In Anselmes time after the restraint of Ministers marriage great rumors and complaint was brought to him of the execrable vice of Sodomitrie which began to raigne in the Clergie Pope Pius the second saide hee sawe manie waightie causes why wiues should bee taken away from Priests but he saw more why they should be restored to them againe Bishop Iewell Apol. cap. 8. diuis 3. Bernard saith Tolle de Ecclesia honorabile coniugium c. Take from the Church honorable Matrimonie shall you not replenish it with incestuous persons concubinaries Sodomiticall vices Hereupon the popish Catholikes seeing their owne infirmitie began thus to salue vp the matter Si non castè tamen cautè if thou deale not chastly yet deale charily Yea they are not ashamed thus to write If any of the Priests should bee found imbracing of a woman it must bee expounded and presupposed that hee doth it to blesse her I but saith Bellarmine these are the abuses of single life will you condemne a good thing because of the abuse by the same reason saith he coelum terra tollenda sunt Heauen and earth must be taken away because they were abused of the heathen and taken for Gods cap. 21. Answere First wee say not that these bee the fruites of single life which Saint Paul commendeth in all those that haue the gift but of this co-acted and constrained Popish Virginitie which is imposed indifferently vpon all and cannot haue any good vse secondlie when you can proue that restraining of Ministers marriage is of Gods ordinance as it is certaine Heauen and earth are of his making then wee will grant vnto you that it may haue a right vse and for the abuse ought not vtterly to be abolished 4 Lastly Augustine saith Quae nubere volunt ideo non nubunt quia impunè non possunt melius nuberent quà m vrerentur id est quà m occulta flamma concupiscentiae in ipsa conscientia vastarentur Those Virgins which would marrie but cannot because of restraint and reproch might better marrie then burne that is to say then with the secret flame of concupiscence to be wasted and consumed in their conscience Wherefore it followeth that all they both Ministers votaries Virgines that haue not power to absteine should doe better for all their profession and vow to marrie then to burne THE SECOND PART WHETHER any ought to bee admitted to the Ministerie after second marriage The Papists THey denie not but that Bishops and Ministers hauing been once married error 78 are rightly ordeyned so that afterward they doe not companie with their wiues but they which haue been either themselues twice married or haue married a widdow which had a husband before are vtterlie vncapable of holy orders Bellarmine cap. 23. Rhemist Timoth. 3. sect 4. and this they call Bigamie 1 They reason thus out of Saint Pauls words 1. Timoth. 4.2 A Bishop must be the husband of one wife that is say they that no kinde a way was Bigamus or had two wiues either at once or one after another And they proue their interpretation thus First as Saint Paul describeth a widow of the Church 1. Timoth. 5.9 that hath been the wife of one husband so here hee saith of a Bishop that he should be the husband of one wife but that is meant successiuè of one husband after another for it was neuer seene that one woman should haue more husbands then one at once nor neuer suffered either amongst the Iewes or Gentiles therefore it must be so taken here a husband of one wife that is who hath been but once married as it is taken there a wife of one husband that neuer had more not onely simul at once but not successiuè not successiuely one after another Bellarmine cap. 23. Ans. First there were many women both among the Iewes and Gentiles that had forsaken their first husbands and were vnlawfully coupled to others and so had moe husbands at once and likewise many men that had done the like to their wiues but afterward repented and were conuerted to the Christian faith but yet were not admitted to any publike office in the Church because of their former infamous life Of such the Apostle speaketh in both these places and not of those that married one wife or one husband after another It is therefore great boldnes and a greater vntruth to say that there were none such heard of in those dayes for although it were neither lawfull then nor now yet both many such were heard of in those dayes and it were no hard matter to finde out some now among the papists that haue had more then one wife at once Secondly he is not to be counted Bigamus or Digamus that is coupled and ioyned to one wife after another lawfullie but he that vnlawfully at once enioyeth more then one Fulk Annot. Timoth. 5. sect 6. cap. 3. sect 4. 2 Againe say they the high Priest in the lawe was not permitted to marrie a widow Leuit. 21.13 Which lawe being obserued in the high Priest ought much more to be kept now Rhemist Answere That lawe concerning the high Priest did onely appertaine to himselfe who was a figure of Christ neither can it be extended to the Ministers of the Gospell no more then any other partes of his office that were peculiar to that state and calling Fulk Annot. 1. Timoth. 3. sect 4. The Protestants THat it is not by the word of God forbidden that any man should marrie the second yea the third time after the decease of his wife neither that hee is to be counted vnchast or giuen to wantonnes in so doing much lesse hee that in his first marriage taketh a widow neither that to haue been twise married ought to be a barre or a stop from entring into the state and calling of the Ministerie if otherwise the man be qualified and furnished with sufficient graces for that calling thus it is proued 1 They that cut off such as haue been twise married from behauing any calling in the Church doe sauour of the heresie of Montanus into the which also Tertulliane fell who condemned second marriage for if once marriage be no impediment nor preiudice to him that is to bee ordained but
that tithes should be payd Praecidite deputate aliquid fixum ex annuis fructib vel quotidianis quaestibus defaulke sayth he and appoynt some certaine portion either of your yearely fruites or your ordinary and daylie gaines Decimas vis decimas exime Will you make choyce to pay tithes then let that be the portion And yet this is no great matter for the Pharisies whose righteousnesse you ought to exceede payed their tithes Tu vix millesimam das Thou scarce payest the thousand part Tamen non reprehendo vel hoc fac sic sitio vt ad istas micas gaudeam Yet I finde not fault doe so still for I so thirst after your well-doing that I refuse not your very crummes We see then that then the payment of tithes was voluntarie Augustine refuseth not the ten hundred that is millesimam partem the thousand part which he calleth their crummes THE SECOND PART BY WHAT RIGHT tithes are due to the Ministers of the Gospel The Papists COncerning tithes or their equiualent due to Christ the priesthood of the error 81 new Testament Rhemist annot Heb. 7.4 this then is their opinion that the priesthood of the Gospell being more excellent then the priesthood of the Law and their sacrifice which they offer vp in the Masse being of greater worthines they may with better right challenge tithes then the priests of the law did for their seruice at the altar So that tithes are due to the Church onely because of the priesthood not for any other duetie appertaining to that office as preaching the word ministring the sacraments or any such Abraham payd tithes they say to Melchisedech which was the priest of the most high God in offering the formes of bread wine wherein Melchisedech did sacrifice Ergo tithes are now due to the priests of the Gospel and new law which are all after the order of Melchisedech Rhemist Hebr. 7. sect 4. 8. Answere First Melchisedechs priesthood consisted not in offering bread and wine to God but brought them foorth to refresh Abraham neither were they formes of bread and wine onely as you imagine but very materiall bread and wine for if Melchisedechs priesthood had consisted therein the Apostle would not haue omitted the chiefe thing wherein Christs priesthood was shewed forth as he doth making no mention at all of it Heb. 7. Secondly againe it is great blasphemie to say that euery popish priest is after the order of Melchisedech nay that the proper act of Christs priesthood consisteth in the perpetuall offering of his bodie blood in the Church for by this reason euery impure priest doth more properly offer the body of Christ in the Masse then it was offered by himself vpon the cros thē the which what greater blasphemie can be vttered And yet they are not ashamed to speak it yea the sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse say they was after the order of Aaron and not after the order of Melchisdech and so they preferre euery popish priest offering in the Masse before Iesus Christ sacrificing himself vpon the Crosse contrary to the scripture which maketh this difference between the priesthood of Aaron and the priesthood of Melchisedech that the priests of the law were many because they were taken away by death But Christs priesthood is eternall because he dieth not Heb. 7.23 But if there should be many priestes after Melchisedechs order there should heerein bee no difference at all Wherefore seeing Melchisedechs priesthood onely resteth in Christ and is not translated to any other and that there is now no sacrifice left but spirituall of prayse and thanksgiuing Heb. 13.15 it followeth that by Melchisedechs right no tithes are now due vnto the Church neither in any such regard ought to be challenged The Protestantes TIthes or their equiualent are not due to the Church in respect of any sacrificing priesthood of which sorte there is none in the new testament ordayned to continue but for other pastorall dueties and principally the preaching and dispensing of the word and instructing of the people 1 If there were any such priesthood and tithes in that right did appertaine to the Church it is most like that our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles would haue challenged them But there is no one precept in the new testament concerning paying of tithes but onely for a sufficient maintenance for the ministers of the Gospel 1. Cor. 9.14 Gal. 6.6 Fulk Hebr. 7. sect 4. 2 Saint Paul euery where so oft as he sheweth the duetie of Christians in relieuing and mayntayning their pastors maketh onely mention of sowing of spirituall things 1. Cor. 9.11 and of teaching and instructing Gal. 6.6 Ergo tithes are due vnto Pastors and Ministers onely or especially for their feeding and instructing and sowing spirituall seede which is the word of God 3 There is no such sacrificing priesthood now in the Church as wee haue partly shewed before and shall of purpose more fully declare it afterward for euery where in the new testament spirituall sacrifices are commanded and all Christians are made Kings and Priests vnto God Apocal. 1.6 Other priesthood we read of none Wherefore in that respect tithes cannot be due Lastly Augustine sayth Si mendicum non contemnis quanto magis bonem per quem trituratur haec area If thou despisest not a beggar how much more oughtest thou to haue regard of the oxe that treadeth out the corne on the floore That is the Minister that preacheth the Gospel for so Saint Paul expoundeth it 1. Timoth. 5.17 The Elders sayth he that labour in the word and doctrine are worthie double honour and then it followeth vers 8. for the scripture sayth Thou shalt not muzle the mouth of the oxe that treadeth out the corne Sufficient maintenance therefore to the Ministers is due for their labour and trauaile in the word THE SIXT GENERAL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE SVPERSTITIOVS ORDERS AND SECTS OF MONKES AND FRIERS MOnkes in Latine called Monachi deriued of the Greeke word were such as liued solitarilie thereupon had they their name And they were at the beginning of three sortes some were called Eremites that liued in woods and desarts by themselues there were other which were mued vp and enclosed in cels and wals which had not so much libertie as Eremites had but kept alwayes in their cages and closets and soe in miserie spent their dayes and these were called Anchorites that is separated set apart from all men and liuing by themselues There was a third sorte called Coenobites which liued in companies as it were in Colledges by them selues had all things common And these properly were called Monks Bell. lib. 2. de monach cap. 3. This controuersie hath many questiōs 1 Concerning the beginning original of Monks of their diuers sects 2. partes 2 Concerning Counsels of perfection whether they differ from Euangelicall precepts 3 Concerning vowes in generall three partes First whether it be lawfull for Christians
to make vowes Secondly in what things lawful vowes consist Thirdly whether voluntary vowes are any part of the worship of God 4 Concerning Monasticall vowes in particular three partes First of the vow of voluntary pouertie Secondly the vow of obedience Thirdly the vow of continencie 5 Concerning Monasticall persons First whether the younger sorte ought to be admitted to professe Monkerie Secondly whether children can professe without consent of their parents Thirdly whether maried persons may with mutuall consent Fourthly whether either of the parties the mariage not consummate may enter into profession 6 Concerning the rules and discipline of Monasticall life First of their solitarie and seuere kinde of life Secondly of their canonical houres Thirdly their habite and apparell Fourthly of their maintenance whether they ought to liue by begging or labour of their handes of these in order THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE BEGINning and originall of Monkes and of their diuers sects THis question hath tow partes First of their originall Secondly of the diuersitie of their sects THE FIRST PART OF THE ORIGInall of Monkes The Papists error 82 THey make this profession to be as ancient as the time of our Sauiour Christ and prooue the beginning thereof both out of the newe and olde Testament 1 Helias and Helizaeus were Eremites and liued without wiues neither possessed any riches Ergo this profession of life is most ancient Bellarm. cap. 5. Rhemist annot in Mark 9.3 Answere First the argument followeth not they had no wiues nor riches Ergo were Eremites for euen amongst the papists themselues many were kept from wiues as their priests and yet were neither Monkes nor Eremites Secondly though we reade not that Helisaeus was married yet the sonnes of the prophets were that liued as it were in the same Colledge with him 2. King 4.1 which Bellarmine maketh a Colledge of Monkes and Eremites and sayth very vntruely that they all liued without wiues cap. 5. Thirdly though Elias and Elisaeus were sometime in the wildernes yet they alwayes remained not neither liued there Fulk annot Mark 9.3 2 Iohn Baptist a perfect patterne of Eremitical life for liuing in the desert and wildernes for his rough apparell for abstaining from all delicate meate Rhemist annot Math. 3.1 Answere First Iohn Baptists calling was singular and extraordinary and therefore cannot be made an author of any ordinary profession Secondly wee denie not but his life was austere and that he made his abode in a solitarie place yet there were houses and villages not farre off his apparell also was course cloth made of the hard haires of Camels his foode was of locusts and wilde honie the vsuall and common meate of that countrey he was an extraordinary preacher of repentance and shewed in him selfe an example of austere life as it became the forerunner of Christ But being no minister of the Gospel but the last prophet of the law he cannot be a patterne of an ordinary profession vnder the Gospel Fulk annot Matth. 3. sect 1. 3 Nay Bellarm. fetcheth his monkish order from a more ancient beginning thē from Elias Iohn Baptist yea from before the flood for Enos saith he seemeth to haue brought in some stricter kinde of life and peculiar maner of worshipping God whereas the text sayth that he began to call vpon the name of God that is after another manner for Adam Seth Abel before this time called vpon the name of God cap. 5. Answere First who would haue thought that there had been Monks and Eremites before the flood if the Iesuite had not sayd it or that this text which he alleadgeth could haue proued it The argument followeth not Enos brought in a peculiar worship of God therefore was founder of the Eremiticall life for he brought in the true worship of God but the other is superstitious and erronious Secondly Tremellius readeth more agreeably to the Hebrue Tum nomē Dei coeptum est inuocando profanari then the name of God began to be prophaned in calling vpon that is his worship began to be corrupted for the Hebrue word signifieth both to inuocate and call vpon God as also to corrupt pollute or prophane Thirdly if we read as they doe The name of God beganne to be called vpon it onely sheweth a restoring and renewing of the true worship of God which was polluted by the posteritie of Cain whose stocke and familie is set downe in that chapter Gen. 4. The Protestants WE see then that this Monasticall and solitarie kinde of life hath no proofe nor ground out of the scriptures either by precept or example Nay this kinde of profession was not knowen in the Church for diuers hundred yeeres after Christ how could then the Apostles be the founders of this order And though the name of Monks be of some antiquitie in the Church yet they were farre vnlike vnto Popish Monkes that for these many yeres haue pestered the Church 1 It is certaine as Hierome witnesseth that Antonius and his disciples Amathas and Macarius were the first beginners of Monkish profession three hundred yeere after Christ Centur. 4. cap. 6. Fulk annot Mark 9.3 2 The beginning of Monkes was not for the more merite and to doe penance for their owne sinnes and the sinnes of the worlde for Antonius the first Monk confessed that Christ onely suffered for the sinnes of the world but the first occasion was giuen in the time of persecution when as men were not suffered to worship God aright publikely and therefore they fled into the wildernes Rhemist Math. 3. sect 3. But now seeing the Christian fayth is openly professed they haue no such causes to seeke solitarie and secret places 3 The popish Monkes are altogether vnlike theirs First they liued in solitarie places farre from resorte of people but the popish Mock-monkes liue in Cities and the frequencie of the people Fulk annot Math. 3. sect 3. Secondly the Monkes in times past laboured with their hands but the popish fatbellies pampered themselues in idlenes Thirdly they are altogether vnlike in life and doctrine as wee shall see more at large afterward Fulk ibid. THE SECOND PART CONCERNING the diuers sects of Monkes and Friers The Papists error 83 THey say that imitation of diuers holy men as of Saint Francis Saint Benet Saint Dominick which hath brought in diuers sects and orders of Religious men doe tend all to the imitation of Christ Rhemist annot Philip. cap. 3. sect 2.1 Thess. 1.2 This their assertion they would ground vpon the Apostles wordes Philip. 3.17 Be ye followers of me brethren Rhemist Answere First Saint Paul would haue them no otherwise to follow him then he did Christ 1. Cor. 11.1 Neither gaue any other rules to his followers then he had learned of Christ as the patrons of the Monkish sects haue done Secondly Neither did Saint Paul erect a new order of Paulians as Franciscus did of Franciscanes Dominick of Dominicans Thirdly Saint Paul was a perswader of vnitie not a maker of
and gouernours the third is the vow of continencie of these three in order THE FIRST PART CONCERNING THE vow of voluntarie pouertie The Papists THey say it is an acceptable seruice vnto GOD for a man to giue all he hath error 87 to the poore and by vow to consecrate and addict himselfe to voluntarie pouertie 1 Math. 18.21 Christ faith If thou wilt be perfect goe and sell all thou hast and giue it to the poore and come and followe me This is properly to followe Christ to lacke proprietie and liue in common and thus the Apostles followed Christ Rhemist ibid. Ans. First This is a precept not generall to all but giuen to this one man to discouer his hypocrisie and vaine confidence that he had in himselfe as though he had kept the law which he came farre short of Secondly the Apostles themselues had proprietie Peter had a house Iohn had to prouide for the virgin Marie whom Christ commended vnto him Matthew made a feast of his owne goods Fulk ibid. 2 Act. 2.44 They had all things common and Act. 5. Ananias and Sapphira after their profession of commō life deteining some part proper to themselues were reproued and iudged of the Apostles Ergo it is acceptable to God to liue in common Rhemist ibid. Bellarm. cap. 20. Answere First that communitie vsed then amongst the brethren ought alwayes to be among Christians no man to count that his owne which the necessitie of his brother requireth to be bestowed vpon him euery man was not then bound to giue vp the proprietie of their goods for they distributed to euery man as they had need Act. 4.35 But if they had giuen vp all the proprietie of their goods then all should haue needed alike And Peter sayth not the contrary but that Ananias might haue kept the proprietie of his goods if he had not made publike profession to the contrarie Act. 5.4 2 Concerning Ananias we doe not read that he made any vowe to giue his goods to the Church nay the contrary appeareth in that Saint Peter saith While it remayned with thee appertained it not to thee But if his vowe were past before the goods though not yet solde could not appertaine vnto him Agayne the principall and chiefe cause why Peter proceeded agaynst him was his lying and hypocrisie not for breaking his vow for it cannot bee proued that he promised all but that he affirmed that hee brought all whereas hee withdrew part The Protestants VOluntarie or rather wilfull pouertie for a man hauing no vrgent cause to leaue all he hath and bequeath himselfe to a poore and needie life onely for opinion of greater merite and hope thereby better to please God is neither a thing acceptable nor commendable before God nor any where commanded in the scriptures 1 1. Timoth. 6.17 Saint Paul giuing Counsel to rich men biddeth them not to cast away their riches but Charge them sayth he that they be not high minded nor put their trust in vncertain riches Surely it had been a more compēdious way to wish them at once to leaue their riches so they should not be in danger either of pride or vaine confidence But the Apostle saith no such thing Againe God giueth vs abundantly al things to enioy riches are the gift of God we ought not to be weary of Gods blessing And as Iob sayth The Lord giueth the Lord taketh therefore a man ought not to make himselfe poore because he made not himselfe rich but to waite vpon God Further it followeth vers 18. that they do good and be rich in good works he that can vse riches well may bee rich in good workes but he that is poore wanteth occasion and meanes to doe good as the rich man indued with grace may Wherefore he is an enemie to the glorie of God that changeth his rich estate wherein he may more glorifie God for a poore Agayne if it were so acceptable a thing to God and so meritorious to liue in pouertie what made the Prophet to pray agaynst it Giue mee not pouertie nor riches but feede me with foode conuenient Prouer. 30. vers 8. 2 What better argument can we haue against them then their own practise for though in words they much commend voluntarie pouertie yet it is a rare thing to finde it amongst them for not one among a thousand of them if they haue landes doe giue them to the poore but to their owne kinsfolkes or else to the Abbeyes where they know they shal be wealthily maintained The Pope also is good to many and granteth them capacities to possesse temporall goods contrary to their former vowe Fulk annot Mark 10. sect 3. 3 Augustine sayth Diuitiae seculares si desint non per opera mala quarantur in mundo Si autem adsunt per opera bona seruentur in coelo Epist. 1. posteriorum If secular riches be wanting let not a man seeke to get them by euill doing in the world but if he haue them labour by well doing to store them vp in heauen He counselleth not men to cast away their riches It was the heresie of the Pelagians to perswade rich men to cast away their goods August epistol 106. and of the Manichees likewise August cont Faustum lib. 5. cap. 10. THE SECOND PART CONCERNING the vowe of obedience The Papists error 88 THey that doe enter into the monkish profession do vow in all things to become obedient to their gouernour to follow his rules iniunctions As the Franciscanes follow Saint Francis rule who in stead of a girdle put a corde about him went bare-foote in winter season couered his flesh with yce and snow It is acceptable and gratefull seruice say they vnto God to be thus obedient to their fathers and gouernours 1 Ierem. 35. The sonnes of Ionadab are commended for being obedient to their father who enioyned them to drink no wine nor to sow their fields nor builde houses but dwell in tents See they obeyed their father in thinges not commanded of God Ergo so ought religious Monkes to doe Bellarm. cap. 21. Answer First you cannot shew that your monkish Abbots haue such authoritie ouer their Monkes as the father hath ouer his children for Coloss. 3. and in many other places children are commanded to be obedient to their parents But they haue neither authoritie nor calling out of the word Secondly Ionadab inioyned nothing contrarie to the law of the Nazarites Numb 6. and if you say that it was not the custome of the Nazarites to dwell in tents you shall finde that the Rechabites did not so straightly obserue this as the other namely not to drinke wine for Ierem. 35.11 they came vp for feare of the Caldeans that were in the land and dwelt at Ierusalem they dispensed with the voluntarie iniunction of their father for dwelling in their tents but kept the other vow of abstaining from wine still because it was after the law Wherefore this example maketh not for monkish
sect 8. Ans. 1. In this place Christ reproueth the Pharisies for their swearing and condemneth it by this argument that howsoeuer they thought it a smal matter to sweare by the Temple yet in effect they did sweare by God himselfe See thē the boldnes of these men that dare iustifie swearing by creatures by the same reason that Christ condemneth it 2. Our Sauiour saith nothing but this that in euery othe there is an inuocation of the diuine power and therefore whosoeuer sweareth by a creature committeth idolatrie in making it his God The Protestants 1. THat it is great impietie to make vowes vnto Saints it is thus proued Isay 19.21 In that day the Egyptians shal know the Lord and shal do sacrifices and vow vowes vnto the Lord. But sacrifices are not due vnto saintes but onely to God therefore neither vowes Againe the vowes of Christians are not to binde them selues to go in pilgrimage or to offer vnto this Saint or that this Image or that as Augustine saith alius pallium alius oleum alius ceram one voweth a cloke another oyle a third a wax Candle God careth not for these vowes saith he Sed hoc quod hodie redemit ipsum offer hoc est animam tuam But offer and vow vnto God that which as this day hee hath redeemed that is thy soule The vowes therefore of obedience and repentance and all Christian dueties are the true vowes the vowing of body and soule to the seruice of God Rom. 12.1 But this can not bee vowed vnto any but to him that redeemed vs Ergo not to any Saint 2 That wee ought onely to sweare by the name of God the scripture is plaine Deuteron 6 13. Thou shalt feare the Lord thy God and serue him and shalt sweare by his name and by no other Exod. 23.13 But saintes are not to be feared nor serued for the Septuagint translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou shalt worship God which kinde of worship the Papists themselues dare not attribute to saintes Ergo neither are we to sweare by them Againe to sweare is to cal him to witnesse by whome we sweare and so to make him our God for whom we sweare by wee confesse to be a searcher and knower of our hearts and a reuenger of false swearers To sweare then is to call God to witnesse Quid tu facis cum iuras Deum testem adhibes Augustine What doest thou when thou swearest Thou callest God to wintesse But they that sweare by saints call them to witnesse and none els are called to witnesse but they by whom they sweare Ergo they make Saints their Gods seeing God is called vpon in euery oath THE SECOND PART OF THE distinction of the two kindes of worshippe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Papists error 26 THat kinde of worship which is proper to God they say is fitly expressed by the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither is this word vsed but for the worship of God the other word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for all kind of seruice both of God men so that the religious worshippe which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is onely to be giuen to God the other called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may bee attributed to Angelles and Saintes Bellarmine Cap. 12. The Protestants This distinction is but of late inuented and coyned of our aduersaries somewhat to countenance them out in their idolatrous and superstitious worship of saints We thus do refell it Argum. 1. This distinction helpeth them not for heere are onely two wordes which doo betoken two kinds of worship 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the religious honor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the ciuil dutie such as seruants performe to their masters They should haue found out three names for their three kindes of worshippe they haue gained nothing by this distinction but that ciuill adoration is due vnto Saints such as is giuen to men vpon earth As for their fayned word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which may be called a superseruice when they can find it in scripture they shal know more of our minde and yet receiuing this terme it signifieth but a more ciuill seruice it betokeneth not a new kinde of religious worship Argum. 2 Neither are the wordes so vsed as they make vs beleeue for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they make proper for the seruice of God is applyed to men as Leuit. 23. Opus seruile non facietis You shal do no seruil work the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lodouic Viues also sheweth out of prophane authors that somtime the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for the seruice of men or maids to their masters in 10. lib. Aug. de ciuit Dei cap. 1. So contrariwise the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken in scripture for the proper seruice of God as Gal. 4.8 Ye did seruice to them that by nature were no gods the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ergo religious seruice is only due vnto God not to Angelles or saints for they are not by nature gods Augustine saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 debetur Deo tanquam Domino 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verò nō nisi Deo tanquam Deo quaest in Exod. 94. Religious seruice is due vnto God as Lord religious worship is onely due vnto God as he is God THE THIRD PART CONCERNING the kissing of holy mens feete The Papists IT is a signe of reuerence done both to Christ and other sacred persons as Prophetes Apostles Popes or others representing his person heere vpon error 27 earth Rhemist act 4. sect 3. Argum. 1. The Shunamite fell downe and embraced Eliseus feete 2. King 4.27 Ergo the Popes feete ought to be kissed Ans. 1 Your popes must be first as holy men as this Prophet was who was thus reuerenced for his holynes before they can challenge the like honor 2 This reuerence to the prophet was voluntary in the woman not looked for or exacted by the prophet as the pope looketh for it of duty 3 Heere is no mention made of kissing of feete but onely that she caught him by the feete which was partly a signe of her ioy that she had met with the prophet partely by this sodain and disordered gesture the prophet perceyued that she was troubled in minde for Gehazi would haue thrust her away but he said Let her alone for her spirite is troubled within her 4 This is no warrant for the pope to offer his feete to be kissed of Kinges and Emperours because the woman fell downe at the prophetes feete think you that if the King of Israel had so done the prophet would haue suffered it Argum. 2. Marie kissed Christs feete Ergo the popes feete ought to be kissed Ans. What arrogancie is this that the pope a mortall and sinfull man should challenge that honor which was done to Christ being God in the flesh and void of sinne He might also
be lawfull to worship them Fourthly what manner of worship it should be THE FIRST ARTICLE OF THE DIFFErence betweene Idols and Images The Papists THere is great difference say they betweene an Image and an Idoll an Image called in Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the true similitude of a thing an Idoll 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 error 38 in Greeke translated simulachrum doth represent that which is not as were the Idols of Venus Minerua women Goddesses which was a meere deuised thing Images they confesse they haue but no Idols Bellarm. cap. 5. First S. Paul sayth 1. Corinth 10. That an Idoll is nothing that is doth represent a thing that is not as such were their heathenish Idols Bellarm. Ans. First the place is not so vnderstood for the Apostle sayth That things offered to Idols also are nothing which were not made to represent any thing But his meaning is this that of themselues they are nothing to breede offence neither were it needfull to shunne eating of Idoll sacrifices or to abhorre an Idoll but that they are abused and turned to the seruice of diuels as it followeth in the next verse Therefore an Idoll is not sayd to be nothing because it representeth a thing imagined but that of it selfe being but wood or stone or such like it were not offensiue if it were not abused to idolatrie Secondly all the portraictures of the Heathen were not Idols in this sense for Iupiter Mars Apollo Hercules whose images they had were men sometime liuing Thirdly you haue images representing nothing as the pictures of Angels of God the Father of the holy Ghost which haue no shape nor likenes Againe you haue also your imagined Saints as S. George S. Christopher for there were neuer any such and therefore you haue Idols as well as the Heathen The Protestants THough the name Idoll haue an odious signification in the English tongue yet neither the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor the Latine simulachrum doe sound so euill vnto the eares and in many places of the scripture we may in differently reade idoll or image for all worshipping of Images is idolatrie If we will distinguish them they are thus rather to be seuered An Idoll is that image which is set vp with an intent to be worshipped an Image is a generall name as well to vnlawfull pictures set vp for idolatrie as lawfull which haue but a ciuill vse But that the Papists Idols are images thus we proue it Argum. 1. The scripture calleth the Gentiles Idols images Rom. 1.23 there the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is vsed Ergo idoll and image are taken for one they haue images set vp for religious or rather irreligious vses Ergo Idols Arg. 2. Apocal. 9.20 There is mention made of Idols of gold siluer brasse which cannot be vnderstood of the Idols of the Gentiles which were abolished long agoe and that prophecie is to be vnderstood of men liuing after the opening of the seuenth seale which is toward the end of the world Wherefore it must needes be vnderstood of the Papists who are the onely knowne people in the world that worship images Ergo they haue Idols Augustine taketh imago and simulachrum which is the Latine for the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for all one for the loue of the dead sayth he images were first made whereof the vse of simulachers or Idols doe arise THE SECOND ARTICLE WHETHER IT BE lawfull to haue the images of the Trinitie of Christ or of the Angels The Papists error 39 THat Images may haue a good ciuill vse as for decencie or comelines of some worke or for vtilitie of storie it is of neither part denied but they further affirme that it is lawfull to expresse the Trinitie by pictures as God like an olde man and with the world in his hand Christ as he walked vpon the earth the holy Ghost in the likenes of a Doue the Angels with wings and these pictures they say are very meete and profitable to be set vp in Churches Rhemist Act. 17. sect 5. Arg. 1. To paint the Trinitie or any one of them as they appeared visiblie is no more inconuenient then it was vndecent for them so to appeare Rhem. ibid. Ans. You flatly controll the law of God which simply forbiddeth any similitude to be made of things in heauen or in earth to worship God by And Deut. 4.15 God expresly declareth that he would not appeare in any visible shape when he gaue the law lest the people should abuse that shape to make an image of God after it Lastly the argument followeth not for God sawe it was conuenient sometime by visible signes to appeare vnto men and yet seeth it to be inconuenient for pictures to be made to resemble him by for els he would neuer haue forbidden it Arg. 2. The angels were pictured in forme of Cherubims Ergo Spirits may be portraicted Ans. When you can shewe an expresse commandement for your images as the Israelites had for them we will yeeld that they are lawfully made Againe how followeth it God may command images to be made for the vse of religion Ergo men may for the law bindeth not the Lord who is the lawmaker But the law sayth thou shalt not make to thy selfe that is by thine owne authoritie any grauen image The Cherubims also were not made publikely to be seene and gazed vpon by the people but were set in the holy place so are not your pictures and images which are set vp openly in your Churches to entise people to idolatrie The Protestants TO set forth the Godhead and diuine nature by any picture or image is impossible and therefore both vnlawfull and inconuenient but to bring them into Churches and to make them for some vse of religion is a high steppe vnto grosse superstition 1. Such images of the Trinitie among the Papists are made to resemble the diuinitie and Godhead for to what purpose els should such images be made Fulk Act. 17. sect 5. They picture God the Father like an old man because in that forme he appeared to Daniel but how knowe they whether it were God the Father rather then God the Sonne who is as old as God the Father or then the whole Godhead They commend also the image of God the Father with the world in his hand which is a lying image and maketh simple people to beleeue that the world was made onely by God the Father which was the worke of the whole Trinitie Some of the Papists themselues as Abulensis Durandus Peresius doe hold that the image of God ought not to be made and that it is rather tolerated then allowed in the Church As for the images of Christ in the forme of a Lambe and the holy Ghost in shape of a Doue Bartholomaeus Caranza a papist sheweth that they were forbidden in the sixt generall Synode Canon 28. And this Bellarmine denyeth not Concerning the picture of Christ as he was man the Papists
not to enter into that holy place and thus according to the places they deuided the congregation as though one part were more holy then the other The people also were made to beleeue that to be buried in the Chauncell but especially vnder the Altar was more auailable for the dead then to be buried in the Church But where learne they that our Churches ought to haue a sanctuary as the Iewish Temple had that was an euident type and is now accomplished in our Sauiour Christ who is now entred into the heauens as the high Priest then entred into the holy place to make atonement for the people Heb. 9.24 This therefore is very grosse to reuiue and renew again Iewish types and figures And if herein they wil imitate the building of Salomons Temple to haue a Sanctuary why doe they not also build toward the West as the Temple was why bring they not their Altar downe into the body of the Church for in their holy place there was no Altar And indeed Altar we acknowledge none as afterward shal be proued But we see no reason why the communion Table may not be set in the body of the Church as well as in the Chauncell if the place be more conuenient and fit to receiue the Communicants But I pray you why is your Altar rather set in your Sanctuary then the Fonte or Baptistery they are both Sacraments as well Baptisme as the Lords Supper why should one be preferred as holier then the other Secondly all things in the Church ought to be done vnto edifiyng and therefore we allow no such partitions as doe hinder the edifiyng of the people and exclude them from hearing as in popish Churches the Priest is pued or mued vp by himselfe a great way off that his voice can hardly be perceiued of the people The Minister is so to stand and turne himselfe as he may be best heard and vnderstood of the people as Ezra had a pulpit of wood to stand in when he read the Law Nehemiah 8. 4. Augustine thus writeth Cum Episcopus solus intus est populus orat eum illo et quasi subscribens ad eius verba respondet Amen While the Bishop or Pastor praieth within the people both praieth together with him and subscribing to his words answereth Amen By this it appeareth that though in Augustines time the Minister had a place for him selfe as it is meete he should yet he so disposed himselfe that his praier was heard of all the people for otherwise how could they pray with him and subscribe or giue assent to his wordes THE SECOND PART OF THE END and vse of Churches THis part hath 3. seuerall pointes First whether the Churches of Christians are built to offer sacrifice in Secondly whether they be in themselues places more holy then others Thirdly whether they may be dedicate to Saintes THE FIRST POYNT OR ARTICLE whether our Churches are for sacrifice The Papists THe principall end of Churches is for the sacrifice of Christians and in that error 49 respect they are truely called Temples they are not onely for prayer the preaching of the word and administration of the Sacraments but chiefely for the externall sacrifice of the Masse Bellarm. cap. 4. Argu. 1. The Churches of Christians haue altars therefore sacrifices that they haue altars he thus proueth First 1. Corinth 10.21 You can not be partakers of the Lords table and the table of Deuils by the table here is meant the altar for the table of the heathen was their altar wherein they sacrificed to their Idols Ans. 1. A table is one thing an altar an other and very vnproperlye is an altar called a table this place in any wise mans iudgement maketh more against them then with them Secondly S. Paule speaketh not here of the sacrifices of the heathen nor of their altars but of the feastes which they made in their idolatrous temples which was done vpon tables of such sacrifices as had bene offered to idoles vnto the which feastes S. Paul forbiddeth Christians to come as it appeareth in the rest of the Chapter and more plainely cap. 8.10 Argu. 2. Heb. 13.10 Wee haue an altar of which they haue no power to eate that serue at the Tabernacle that is the altar whereon Christs body is offred Bellarm. Rhemist in hunc locum Ans. The Apostle speaketh expressely of participation of the sacrifice of Christs death as it is manifest in the 2. verses next following which is by a Christian faith and not in the Sacrament onely whereof none can be partakers that remayne in the ceremonial obseruations of the Leuitical sacrifices For the Apostle speaketh manifestly verse 12. of the suffering of Christ without the gate Christ therefore is the altar yea our Priest and sacrifice too You abuse this place to proue your materiall popish altars which are many but the Apostle saith we haue an altar speaking of one The Protestants THe Churches of Christians are the houses of praier made to that end that they should come together to heare the word of God read and preached receiue the sacraments and offer vp their spiritual sacrifices of praise and thanksgiuing other externall sacrifices or altars we acknowledge none Argu. 1. The temple of the Iewes was called an house of praier that is principally for praier Marke â—1 17 Moses was read and preached in their synagogues Act. 15.21 Much more are the Churches of Christians appointed for preaching and praier Act. 20.7 The first day of the weeke which is the Lords day they came together to breake bread and Paul preached vnto them Ergo the administration of the word and sacrameÌ„ts with praier is the chiefe and only cause of the holy assemblies of Christians Argu. 2. Altars we haue none in our Churches S. Paul calleth it the Lords table 1. Corinth 10.21 where wee receiue the sacrament of the bodye and bloud of Christ. And he calleth it bread which is broken 1. Corinthians 11.20 But bread is set vpon Tables not sacrificed vpon Altars Augustine also calleth it Mensam Domini the Lords table Epist. 59. epist. 50. He sheweth howe cruelly the Donatistes handled Maximian a catholik Bishop beating him with Clubbes euen in the church lignis altaris effractis immaniter ceciderunt and wounded him with the wood of the Altar which they had broken downe Where though he improperly call it an Altar yet was it a communion table framed of wood and made to bee remoued not fastened to the wall as their popish Altars were THE SECOND ARTICLE WHETHER Churches are more holy places in them selues The Papists GOd they say rather dwelleth and is present in Churches then els where error 50 and therefore it is more auailable for a man euen to make his priuate prayer in the Church Argum. 1. The Temple of Salomon was ordained euen for the prayers of priuate men and Salomon prayeth vnto God that they might be heard 1. King 8.38 So Anna prayed in the Tabernacle 1. Sam. 1.
by the example of our Sauiour Christ who was present at the feast of the dedication which was instituted by Iudas Macchabeus Iohn 10.22 and by his presence allowed it Rhemist in eum locuum The Protestants Ans. FIrst a thanksgiuing to God for the restitution of the temple after the horrible prophanation thereof is a thing approued by Gods lawe but it is not necessarie to keepe a yeerely memorie thereof for neither was there any such instituted by Ezechiah after the prophanation of the temple by Achaz and Vrias nor by Iosias after the same had been most horribly polluted by Manasses and Amon nor by Zorobabel Esdras or Nehemiah after it was reedified when it had been vtterly destroyed by the Chaldees Fulk ibid. Secondly your popish hallowing of Churches hath nothing like vnto it but the name for they vse a number of foolish ceremonies many of them grosse superstitions in the dedication of their Churches First there are twelue Crosses painted round about in the Church twelue burning Lamps set ouer against euery one of them one against one hereby say they the twelue Apostles are signified that by the preaching of the Crosse gaue light to the whole world Secondly they vse oyle in anoynting their Altar and other vessels shewing hereby that they are consecrate to holy vses Thirdly they sprinkle water burne incense set vp Taper light this sheweth sayth the Iesuite that the place is consecrate to prayer and other holy actions Fourthly they sprinkle ashes round about the Church and write in the floore the Greeke and Latine Alphabet from one side of the Church to the other This betokeneth say they the preaching of faith which is the foundation and ground of all righteousnesse which was first taught in the Greeke and Latine tongue Fiftly they beate vpon the Church doore and call vpon Saints and Angels that is say they to command Sathan to depart Bellarm. cap. 5. First they offend in the number of their foolish ceremonies exceeding herein the manner of the Iewish dedication so that vnto them it may bee sayd as Paul to the Galathians How turne you againe to impotent and beggerly rudiments 4.9 Secondly they haue no warrant for their friuolous shadowes and significations Coloss. 2.17 which are but shadowes of things to come but the bodie is in Christ we haue the bodie what need any more shadowes Christ wil not now be worshipped with Crosses ashes characters candle light such apish toyes Thirdly some of these ceremonies are impious and sacrilegious the inuocation of Angels and Saints is a robbing of God of his honour who onely is to be prayed vnto Augustine sayth of such inuentors of newe rites and ceremonies Ipsam religionem quam deus paucissimis sacramentis liberam esse voluit oneribus premunt They cumber religion with burdensome ceremonies which the Lord hath made free with a fewe sacraments THE FIFT PART OF THINGS HALLOWED and consecrate for Churches The Papists THey maintaine their superstitious popish blessing with the Crosse the hallowing of waxe fire palmes ashes holy bread holy water salt oyle such error 54 like which haue power as they would beare vs in hand to driue away diseases and euill spirits Rhemist annot 2. Timoth. 4. sect 12.13 Bellar. lib. 3. cap. 7. Arg. 1. First for the hallowing of these creatures to holy vses and making of them actually holy they alleadge that saying of S. Paul 1. Timoth. 4.5 Euery creature of God is good and is sanctified by the word of God and prayer Ergo these creatures may be sanctified to holy vses as the water also in baptisme and bread and wine in the Eucharist for the Apostle speaketh not here onely of the common benediction of meates but of a more high and exact applying of creatures to holy vses Rhemist Ans. 1. S. Paul here speaketh only of the common ordinarie vse of Gods creatures as of meates drinks for euery mans priuate vse he sheweth how they are sanctified by the word of God which permitteth vnto the faithfull the free vse of thē and by praier not that they are vnclean by nature but by pollutiō of sinne and by this meanes are made holy and cleane Secondly we confesse also that some things set apart for the seruice of God are more specially called holy as the Arke Altar Temple but it is not lawfull to seuer what creatures we will from the common vse and consecrate them to the seruice of God but such as are appoynted by his word as water in Baptisme and bread and wine in the Lords Supper haue the warrant of Gods word as none of your popish trumperie haue neither are these creatures so consecrate holy in themselues to conferre or impart their holines to other things but are so called in respect of the holy vse for the which out of the word of God they are appoynted Argum. 2. For the efficacie and power of these hallowed things they thus reason The bitter water giuen to the adulterous woman caused her thigh to rot if she were guiltie otherwise it made her fruitfull Numb 5. Elisaeus healed the bitter water with casting in salt the Apostles healed the sick with annoynting them with oyle Rhemist Bellarm. ibid. Ergo these sanctified creatures may doe the like Ans. First the bitter water of it selfe had not that power but by vertue of that oth with the which the woman was charged Againe it hath the warrant of the word as yours haue not Secondly Elisaeus and the Apostles had the spirit to worke miracles so haue not you and they might haue done that they did without any such meanes Againe it was common salt and ordinarie oyle which they vsed not blessed before after your popish manner The Protestants FIrst we hold that no such things ought to be separated for holy vses because they haue not the warrant of the word of God for all things that are sanctified are so sanctified by the word of God and praier 1. Timoth. 4.5 But they haue not the word of God for their warrant neither doe they vse any prayer of faith but a superstitious kind of crossing Nadab and Abihu were consumed with fire because they offered strange fire not taken from the Altar that is they presumed of their own authoritie without Gods commandemēt to consecrate a strange element to Gods seruice and were punished Leuit. 10. Ergo it is dangerous without Gods word to consecrate any such things Concerning the sprinkling and washing with holy water Augustine thus writeth of the same or like custome of washing Ne ad ipsum baptismi sacramentum videretur pertinere multi hoc in consuetudinem recipere noluerunt nonnulli de consuetudine auferre non dubitarunt Many would not receiue that custome lest it should seeme to be another baptisme and some haue not doubted cleane to take it away Secondly though such things were rightly halowed yet haue they no such power Christ sheweth the way wherby euill spirits are chased
wracke And as their cause was not good so neither were the meanes that they vsed for they brought S. George and S. Denys into the field against the Turkes and left Christ at home If the Israelites could not be deliuered from the Philistims by the presence of the Arke but thirtie thousand fell before them and all because of their sinnes let not men thinke that popish Saints can defend them while their liues remaine vnreformed at home 2. That the heathen are not to be prouoked to warre but vpon iust cause that is when they prouoke vs it appeareth by the example of the Israelites who as they came from Aegypt sent vnto the King of Edom and Moab that they might haue leaue to walke through their land but they not granting so much yet the people of God offered them no violence but went a longer iourney about Iudg. 11.17 Augustine sayth Sapiens gesturus est iusta bella sed multo magis dolebit iustorum necessitatem extitisse bellorum A wise man will take iust warre in hand but it more grieueth him that he hath iust cause to warre And what he meaneth by iust warre he further sheweth Iniquitas partis aduersae iusta bella ingerit gerenda sapienti The iniquitie or iniuries of the aduerse part doth giue vnto a wise man occasion of iust warre Iust warre therefore ariseth when men are prouoked by iniuries THE EIGHT QVESTION CONCERNING holy and festiuall dayes THis question hath diuers parts First of holy dayes in generall Secondly of the Lords day Thirdly of the Festiuall dayes of Christ and the holy Ghost Fourthly of Saints holy dayes Fiftly of the time of Lent THE FIRST PART OF HOLY DAIES in generall The Papists error 58 FIrst they hold that holy and festiual daies are in themselues and properly and truely more sacred and holy then other daies are Bellarm. cap. 10. proposit 2. Apocalyps 1.10 I was in the spirit saith the Apostle on the Lords day God reuealeth such great things to Prophets rather vpon holy daies then prophane daies Ergo some daies holier then other Rhemist Apocal. 1. sect 6. The Protestants Ans. FIrst God giueth not his graces in respect of times but according to his owne pleasure Times of praier he chooseth often and of other godly exercises not for the worthines or holines of the times but for the better disposition of his seruants in such exercises to receiue them yet this was not perpetually obserued for God appeared to Moses keeping of sheepe Exod. 3. to Amos following his herd Amos 7. Secondly wee grant that the Lords day being commanded of God and so discerned from other daies may be said to be holier then the rest in respect of the present vse but not in the nature of the day for then could it not haue been changed from the last day in the weeke to the first as water in Baptisme is holier then other waters because of the sacred vse not in it selfe as by a qualitie of holines inherent And as for other festiuall daies which haue not the like institution they are appoynted onely of the Church for Christian policie orders sake for the exercise of religion But this now popish before time Iewish distinction of daies as being by their nature hoâ—â—er then other is flatly against the Apostles rule Rom. 14.5 One putteth difference betweene day and day and Galath 4.10 You obserue daies and moneths times and yeeres Augustine saith Nos dominicum diem pascha celebramus sed quia intelligimus quo pertineant non tempora obseruamus sed quae illis significantur temporibus Cont. Adimant cap. 16. We keepe the Lords day and the feast of Easter not obseruing the times but remembring what is signified by those times that is for what cause they were ordained Ergo obseruers of times are reproued The Papists 2. THey affirme the keeping and sanctification of holy dayes to be necessary errour 59 Rhemist annot Galath 4. sect 5. and that we are bound in conscience to keepe the holy dayes appointed of the Church although no offence or scandale might follow and ensue vpon the neglecting of them Esther 9. Mardocheus and Esther appoint a new festiuall day not instituted of God and bind euery one to the obseruing therof that none should faile to obserue it ver 27. Ergo men bound in conscience to keep festiuall daies Bellarm. ca. 10. The Protestants Ans. FIrst though we refuse not some other festiuall daies yet we acknowledge none necessary more then are of the holy Ghosts appointing in the Scripture Secondly we deny that the constitutions of the Church for holy dayes do bind Christians in respect of the dayes them selues in conscience to keepe them otherwise then they may giue offence by their contempt and disobedience to the holesome decrees of the Church for it selfe in it owne nature is indifferent neither can the Church make a thing necessary in nature which God hath left indifferent nothing bindeth absolutely in conscience but that which is necessary by nature wherefore keeping of holy dayes being not enioyned but left indifferent in the word bindeth no otherwise then we haue said Thirdly the example of Esther sheweth that the Church hath authoritie to appoint for ciuill vses dayes of reioycing that festiuall day then begun did not binde the obseruers in conscience no otherwise then they were bound in all lawfull things to obey their gouernours for their consent was required and they promised both for themselues their seede to keepe that day Esther 9.27 Whereby it appeareth that they were not bound absolutely in conscience to obserue it Augustine speaking of the Sabboth saith thus haec est dies quam fecit Dominus exultemus laetemur in ea This is the day which the Lord hath made let vs reioyce and be glad therein Psal. 118.24 This onely holy day he saith is of the Lords making and therefore of all other necessary to be kept THE SECOND PART OF THE Lords day The Papists THe seuerall pointes wherein our aduersaries and we doe differ about the errour 60 Christian Sabboth are these First the principall exercise of the Sabboth say they is for the people to come to the Church and heare Masse which their abominable and idolatrous sacrifice they make the proper worke of the Sabboth Catechism Roman pag. 649. The Protestants THe Sabboth was ordayned for the people to assemble together to heare the word read Act. 15.21 preached and to receiue the Sacramets Act. 20.7 and to offer vp their praiers these were the proper exercises of the Sabboth as for the popish sacrifice of the Masse we finde no mention at all thereof in Scripture The Papists error 61 2. WE dissent about the rest of the Sabboth they allow such workes to be done vpon the Sabboth as shal be permitted by the Prelates and Ordinaries and such as by long custome haue bene vsed Bellarm. cap. 10. The Protestants WE holde that as the Lords day was instituted of
accomplished as of the resurrection of Christ and the Aduent or comming downe of the holy spirite but also to betoken vnto vs things to come as our rest and glory in the kingdome of God Bellarm. de cultu sanctor li. 3. ca. 11. The Protestants 1. WE graunt that the Sabboth may be so applied both to call to remembraunce things already as vpon that day done as the resurrection of Christ and the descending of the holy Ghost Some think also that Christ vpon that day was baptized vpon that day turned water into wine fed fiue thousand with a few loaues came vnto his Apostles after his resurrection the dores being shut and that as vpon this daye he shall appeare to iudgement but vpon what ground I know not Certaine it is that vpon this daye Christ rose againe and that the holy Ghost came downe then vpon his Apostles We denye not but that the keeping of the Lords day holy may fitly bring vnto our remembrance these things yea and that it may be a type and symbole vnto vs in some sort both of things spirituall as to betoken our ceasing and resting from the workes of sinne Hebr. 4.10 and 1. Pet. 4.1 as also of things to come as the kingdome of heauen is called a Sabboth Isai. 66.23 But we dare not neither will affirme that the Sabboth was ordained constituted for any such end for the commandement of the Sabboth now to vs is onely moral not typical or ceremonial as the Iewish Sabboth was but looke wherein the Sabboth was moral to the Iewes so it is kept still As in these two poynts it was morall to them first to be a signe betweene them and the Lord and to distinguish them from other people Exod. 31.17 And so also the right keeping of the Lords day is a notable outward marke of difference betweene the Church of God all others Secondly that vpon the Sabboth they should resort together and heare the lawe read and preached Act. 15.21 And for this cause namely the exercise of religion are Christians chiefly bound to the Sabboth It may I say fitly be drawne to resemble heauenly and spirituall things but that is not any end of the institution The Iewes had two kind of types typos factos and typos destinatos types made and applied and types appoynted and ordained of God to shadowe forth some notable thing as the Paschall Lambe was typus destinatus of our Sauiour Christ as they were not to breake a bone of the Lambe so was it accordingly performed in Christ. They had also many types beside that were not destined to signifie any certaine thing of such S. Paul speaketh 1. Corinth 10 6 11. So wee say of the Sabboth that it is not typus destinatus it is not instituted for any shadowe or signification though it may be fitly applied to such an vse The Papists 6. THey say that we are not bound vpon the Sabboth by any peculiar commandement to abstaine from sinne more then vpon any other day neither error 65 that the internall act of religion appertaineth to the keeping of the Sabboth but the external that any sinne committed vpon the Sabboth is not therby the greater neither that we are more bound vpon the Sabboth to seeke for internall grace then vpon any other day Bellarm. lib. 3. cap. 10. propos 4. The Protestants Ans. FIrst we grant that all sinne as of theft adulterie and the like are in their owne nature alike at what time soeuer they are committed yet they may be made more hainous by the circumstances as of the place as sacriledge is greater then common theft so why not of the time Secondly if that which is no sinne vpon the worke-day be a sinne vpon the Sabboth as to digge to plough to cart then that which is a sinne of it selfe as to steale to coÌ„mit adulterie must needs be greater more hainous being done vpon the Sabboth for beside the sinne he also prophaneth the Sabboth which is the breach of another commandement Thirdly the internall act of religion is properly commanded in the sanctifying of the Sabboth for it cannot be sanctified by the externall act of going to Church and hearing the word vnlesse a man be inwardly in the deuotion of his heart prepared for those holy exercises So inward grace is more sought for vpon the Sabboth not in respect of that inward desire which we haue vnto them which ought alwaies to be alike feruent in vs if it were possible but because of those outward meanes of hearing the word publique prayer receiuing the Sacraments which are vpon the Sabboth for the which we ought more especially to prepare examine our selues Ecclesiast 4.17 1. Corinth 11.28 Augustine sayth speaking of the Iewish women Quanto meliùs foeminae eâ—ruÌ„ lanam facerent quà m illo die in neomenijs saltarent spiritualiter obseruat Sabbatum Christianus abstinens se ab opere seruili id est à peccato Tractat. 3. in Iohan. Their women might be better occupied in spinning at home then in dauncing vpon this day for a Christian doth spiritually keepe the Sabboth in abstaining from al seruile worke that is from sinne They then that do obserue the Sabboth onely in externall acts doe but carnally keepe it The Papists error 66 7. THey hold it a thing vnlawfull for Christians to fast vpon the Lords day Bellarm. lib. 3. de cultu sanctor cap. 11. The Protestants Ans. FIrst we grant that this opinion is very ancient that in Tertullians time it was receiued in many Churches and they thought it as vnlawfull to bow the knee vpoÌ„ the Lords day Tertul. lib. de coron Militis Die dominico ieiunare nefas ducimus de geniculis adorare We count it vnlawfull to fast vpon the Lords day and to pray kneeling But the Papists obserue not the one why then should they binde themselues to the other Ignatius maketh fasting vpon the Sabboth as great an offence as the killing of Christ himselfe Epistol ad Philipp But I trust they will not say so Secondly the reasons why fasting is not to be vsed vpon the Lords day because the Iesuite setteth downe none I will supplie out of Augustine first Sentio saith he ad significandam requiem sempiternam vbi est verum Sabbatum relaxationem quà m constrictionem ieiunij aptius conuenire I thinke that to signifie the eternall rest which is the true Sabboth libertie rather then the vrging of fasting doth most fitly agree But to this we answere that this signification of eternall rest is no essentiall part of sanctifying the Sabboth nor no end of the institution as we haue shewed afore though it may haue such an application and therefore this reason proueth not such a necessitie of not fasting vpon the Sabboth Secondly Die dominico ieiunare magnum est scandalum It is a great offence to fast on the Lords day because the Manichees made choise of that day to fast in Per quod factum
QVESTION OF THE NATVRE and definition of a Sacrament WE thus define a Sacrament to be an outward sensible signe representing an holy inward and spirituall grace instituted of Christ to be vsed in that manner he hath appoynted to seale vnto vs the promises of God and to assure vs of the remission of sinnes by the righteousnes of faith in Christ Rom. 4.11 Some things there be in this definition that are agreed vpon betweene vs and our aduersaries as that the Sacraments are outward signes of spirituall and holy graces and that there must be a conueniencie and agreement betweene the signe and the thing signified that not euery thing may be represented by a Sacrament but an holy and spirituall grace that a Sacrament ought to be instituted by a diuine not an humane authoritie Bellar. de Sacram. in gener lib. 1. cap. 9 The seuerall poynts then wherein we dissent from them and which they mislike in this definition are these First concerning the authoritie of instiâ—uting a Sacrament which we affirme to be deriued onely from Christ and manifestly to be proued out of the scriptures Secondly of the forme and manner of celebrating the Sacraments Thirdly of the instrumental or ministerial cause which is the Minister Fourthly of the vse and end of a Sacrament whether it be a scale of the promises of God and instituted for that end THE FIRST PART OF THE EFFICIENT CAVSE that is the author or institutor of a Sacrament The Papists THey doe willingly grant that neither the Apostles then had nor the Church error 87 now hath authoritie to institute Sacraments but that this power is onely in Christ and that the Apostles did but declare and deliuer that which they receiued of Christ yet for the triall of this they refuse to be iudged by the expresse word of God but flie vnto their traditions which they call the word of God not written Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sacram. cap. 14. 23. Argum. The sacrament of Baptisme and of the Eucharist were instituted without expresse warrant of scripture for at that time the newe testament was not written when Christ ordained those mysteries Ergo for the other Sacraments we need not the expresse coÌ„mandement of scripture Bellar. lib. 1. cap. 14. Ans. First the traditions of our Sauiour giuen vnto the Apostles concerning those two Sacraments were afterward written by the Apostles and expressely set downe in scripture therefore we doubt not but that they were of Christs institution But your traditions being not committed to writing concerning your other forged sacraments are iustly suspected seeing the Apostles should haue as well been charged with all the sacraments if Christ had instituted theÌ„ as with only two Secondly how then followeth it the word of God was sometime vnwritten therefore it is so still or Christ who was the author of the word written might institute sacraments without expresse scripture Ergo the testimonie of scripture is not necessarie now The Protestants WE hold no sacraments to be of Christs institution but those onely which the scripture testifieth to haue been commanded by Christ as Baptisme Math. 28.19 the Lords Supper Luk. 23.19 The other which haue no testimonie of scripture were not appoynted by Christ. Argum. 1. S. Paul saith That the scriptures are able to make the man of God absolute and perfect to euery good worke 1. Timoth. 3.17 But how can the Minister of God be perfectly furnished and prepared for the worke of the ministerie if he haue not sufficient direction out of the scriptures concerning the sacraments of the Church for how can he absolutely execute euery part of his office if he faile in the right vse of the sacraments Ergo seeing the scriptures are able to make him perfect from thence he receiueth sufficient instruction for the sacraments Argum. 2. Augustine saith Christus sacramentis numero paucissimis obseruatione facilimis c. Christ hath ioyned his people together by the sacrameÌ„ts few in number easie in obseruation such are Baptisme and the partaking of his bodie and blood then it followeth Et si quid aliud in scripturis canonicis commendatur And if any other sacrament be commanded in the canonicall scripture Epistol 118. Ergo we must attend vpon the scripture and written word of God if we will be instructed aright concerning the Sacraments THE SECOND PART OF THE FORME OF A Sacrament and the manner of consecration The Papists THe Sacrament is not consecrated say they by al the words of the institution error 88 but by a certain forme of speech to be vsed ouer the elemeÌ„ts as these words to be said ouer the bread This is my body the like ouer the wine This cup is the new testament c. And in Baptisme these In the name of the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost These are the formes of the Sacrament and very words of consecration though spoken in a strange tongue without further inuocation of the name of God or giuing of thankes or without a Sermon which we require as they say as necessarie to the essence of a sacrament Rhemist 1. Corinth 11 sect 11.15 Bellarm. lib. 1. de Sacrament cap. 19. Argum. S. Paul sayth The cup of blessing which we blesse 1. Corinth 10.16 The Apostle referreth the benediction or blessing to the cup or Chalice which is nothing els but the consecration thereof Rhemist ibid. Ans. First wee denie not but that to blesse here doth signifie to sanctifie or consecrate but that is not done by a magicall murmuration of words ouer the Sacrament but by the whole action according to Christs institution in distributing receiuing giuing of thankes Secondly as for the words which Christ vttered in the institution we rehearse them not as a magicall charme to be sayd ouer the bread and wine to conuert their substance but to declare what they are made to vs by force of Christs institution namely his bodie and blood The Protestants WE doe not hold that it is an essentiall part of the Sacrament alwayes to haue a sermon before it as they vnderstand a sermon which notwithstanding were most conuenient and alwaies to bee wished but this wee affirme that the Sacrament cannot be rightly ministred vnlesse there be a declaration and shewing forth of the Lords death not only in the visible action of breaking distributing the elements but also in setting forth the end of the Lords death out of the word of God with an exhortation to thankfulnes which is alwaies obserued amongst vs in the dayly celebration and receiuing of the Sacrament Concerning the words of the institution we also grant that they are necessarily to be vsed in the celebration of the Sacrament but not as the Papists vse them For first they make them not all of one value but out of the whole institution picke out certaine consecratorie words as they call them as This is my bodie This is the cup whereas the other words Take ye eate ye drinke ye doe this in remembrance
doe as well belong to the institution as the other Secondly they say that the words of institution doe not serue any thing at all for the instruction of the people to shew them the right vse of the Sacrament but onely for benediction and consecration of the elements Bellarm. cap. 19. Thirdly they doe hold that only by the pronouncing of those words the elements are consecrated whereas by the whole action and cerebration of the Sacrament the giuing receiuing inuocation thankesgiuing according to Christs institution the consecration is performed vpon the elements Fulk 1. Corinth 10. sect 4. Arg. 1. That the words of institution rehearsed do helpe as well to admonish stirre vp the people to a thankful remēbrance of the death of Christ as to consecrate blesse the elemēts it is manifest whereas Christ saith as the words are vsually rehearsed Doe this in remembrance of me and S. Paul saith That by receiuing the sacrament we doe shew forth the Lords death 1. Corinth 11.26 Ergo the people are by the words pronounced instructed and admonished and taught the right vse of the sacrament Argum. 2. that the words of institution doe helpe toward the benediction or consecration of the Elements we deny not but not by them alone but praier also and thankesgiuing and the whole action beside of receiuing To the consecration or sanctifiyng of any creature two things are required the word of God and praier 1. Timoth. 4.5 Neither the word sanctifieth without praier nor praier without the word Ergo to the sanctifiyng cōsecrating of the sacrament the bare rehearsall of the institution sufficeth not without inuocation and praier Augustine saith Accedat verbum ad elementum et fiet Sacramentum Let the word be ioyned to the element and it is become a Sacrament And in an other place he sheweth what word he meaneth Faciente verbo non quia dicitur sed quia creditur hoc est verbum fidei quod praedicamus The word effecteth this not because it is spoken or vttered but because it is beleeued this is the word of faith saith the Apostle which we preach thus farre Augustine tract in Johan 80. Wherefore it is not the muttering of a few words in a strange toung after the manner of enchaunters that by any secret force giuen vnto them hath power to consecrate but the vnderstanding hearing and beleeuing the institution of Christ with calling vpon the name of God and thankesgiuing before him AN APPENDIX OF THIS PART WHETHER THE forme of wordes in the institution of the Sacraments may not be by some addition or other alteration changed The Papists THe words of institution may be changed two manner of wayes either substantially error 89 when the sence is also altered with the words or accidētally whē the elements or syllables are onely changed but the sence remaineth the same If there be a change in the substance of the words the sacrament is imperfect if the alteration be of the forme onely of words and not of the sence the sacramēt is not destroyed but he sinneth that doth so alter them Wherefore it is not lawfull any way at all to alter or change the forme of words Bellarmine cap. 21. li. 1. Argum. It is not lawfull to adde or take to or from the words of scripture much lesse to change the words appointed to be vsed in the Sacrament Bellarm ibid. Ans. To adde or detract to or from the word of God with a purpose and intent to wrest it to a contrary meaning and destroy the true sence thereof cannot be done without great impiety and such is the manner of all heretikes But to alleadge Scripture in keeping still the full sence though we misse of the wordes is not to be counted so heinous a sinne we see the holy Apostles in citing textes of Scripture doe not alwaies binde themselues to the very wordes as Act. 7.43 Heb. 10.5 The Apostle saith A body thou hast giuen me In the Psalme we read Mine eares hast thou opened diuerse wordes yet the same sense Augustine saith very well they that vnderstand the Scripture though they keepe not alwaies the wordes are better then they that read and vnderstand not Sed vtrisque ille melior qui et cum volet ea◠dicit et sicut oportet intelligit But he is better then both that both remembreth the wordes and keepeth the sense too yet he also deserueth praise that beareth the sense in minde though he cannot the words The Protestants NO substantiall change we confesse is to be admitted in the forme of Institution which may alter the sense neither is any particular man by himselfe to make any accidentall change and bring in a new forme of wordes but the publike and vniforme order of the church must be kept yea and the church likewise is bound both to reteyne the true sense and as neere as may be the very words but where occasion serueth to make some small accidentall change of the words the sence being nothing diminished it is not condemned as an vnlawfull and sinfull act Argum. 1. The Euangelists report not all the same forme of words which should be vttered by our Sauiour neither yet S. Paul fully accordeth with them in the precise and strict forme of institution as by comparing of them together it may be seene Mat. 26. ver 27. Take eat this is my body S. Luke cap. 22. This is my body which is giuen for you do this in remembrance of me ver 19. S. Paul Take eat this my body which is broken for you doe this in remēbrāce of me 1. Cor. 11.24 ver 28. This is my blood of the new testament that is shedde for many for the remission of sinnes This cup is the new testamēt in my blood which is shed for you This cup is the newe testament in my bloud this do as oft as you drink it in remēbrance of me If it had beene a sinne to haue missed in some termes and sillables no doubt the spirite of God would not haue suffered these holy writers to haue made the least scape Is it to be thought a sinne in the Church which in stead of Take ye eate ye in the plurall number hath appointed the Sacrament to be ministred particularly in the singular number to euery of the cōmunicants saying Take thou eat thou drinke thou Wherfore all accidentall change of words carieth not with it a guilt of sinne Augustine indeede saith Certa sunt verba euangelica c. The words of the gospell are certaine whereby Baptisme is consecrated But yet he saith else where In ipso verbo aliud est sonus transiens aliud virtus manēs In the word spoken the sound which passeth is one thing the vertue or sense of the words which abideth is an other It is then the sence of the words not the sound or sillables that is certaine and permanent THE THIRD PART OF THE INSTRVMENTALL cause of the Sacraments that is the lawfull
Minister SOme things are yeelded vnto of both sides First that no man ought to take vpon him to administer the Sacraments vnlesse he be thereunto lawfully called and ordeined by the Church sauing that they make exception of Baptisme which in case of necessity as they teach may be giuen by the hands of lay men or women but of this matter we shall haue fitter occasion afterward to consider Secondly it is agreed that the efficacy or vertue of the Sacrament dependeth not of the faith or honesty of the Minister but a faithfull man may receiue the sacrament worthily euen at the hands of an vnworthy Minister The Papists THe point of difference betweene vs is this They do teach that the efficacie error 90 perfection and being of the Sacrament doth necessarily depend of the intention of the Minister so that they holde it to be no sacrament if the Minister haue not Intentionem faciendi quod facit ecclesia A full purpose and intent in ministring the Sacrament to doe that which the Church doth that is to consecrate the elements and to make a Sacrament Trident. concil sess 7. canon 11. Bellarm. cap. 27. So that by this rule if the Ministers intention be not wholy vpō the busines he hath in hand it shall be no Sacrament Argum. If the Ministers intention were not necessary to make a sacrament when it chaunceth that the gospell is read at the table by a Minister there being both bread and wine set before them and he in reading saith This is my body and This is my blood straightwaies all that bread wine should be consecrate and become a sacrament but because his intention is wanting it is none Bellarm. ibid. Ans. 1. But what if the Minister should haue a fantastical conceite and intent as he readeth to consecrate all the bread wine vpon the table then it should seeme by your rule that it must needs be a sacrament which were euen as absurd a thing as the other 2. There are other lets impediments from hauing a sacrament at the table thē the intention of the minister being wanting or kept back for the elements are not consecrated nor the Sacrament made by the bare pronouncing of the words but the whole institutiō ought to be obserued there must be eating drinking taking and doing al in the remēbrāce of the death of Christ there must be distributing receiuing inuocatiō thākesgiuing the whole action in the sacramēt is the cōsecration therof these things thē being wāting there can be no Sacrament The Protestants IF the Sacrament be administred aright according to the institution of Christ whatsoeuer the Minister be howsoeuer affected be he neuer so prophane in his hart without any godly purpose or intention yet to the worthie receiuer it ceaseth not to be a Sacrament Caluin in antidot concil Tridentin sess 7. canon 11. Argum. 1. The word of God with what intention soeuer it be preached yet may haue his effect and worke faith in the hearer So Christ be preached saith S. Paul whether vnder pretence or sincerely I therein ioy Philip. 1.18 Ergo the Sacraments also may haue their efficacie without the intent of the Minister argum Lutheri Argu. 2. If the effect of the Sacrament consisteth vpon the intention of the Minister then should euery man be vncertaine whether any thing be wrought in him or he haue receiued any benefit by the Sacrament because he knoweth not the intent of another mans hart and so should he be depriued of the spirituall comfort which he might reape by the Sacrament Caluin Augustine saith Sacramentum Baptismi tam sacrum est vt nec homicida vel ebrioso ministrante polluatur The Sacrament of Baptisme is so holy that it cannot either by a murtherer or drunken person ministring it be defiled And I pray you is it not like to be a good intention that should enter into the harts of such lewd and wicked men Therfore without any good intention euen by the hands of such may the Sacraments be giuen THE FOVRTH PART WHETHER THE Sacraments be seales of the promises of God The Papistes error 91 THey vtterly deny that the Sacraments be pledges and seales vnto vs of the promises of God or that therby our faith is nourished and confirmed and we assured of free remission of sinnes by the death of Christ neither that the sacraments were ordeyned for any such end Bellarm. lib. 1. de sacram cap. 14. Argum. 1. If the sacraments confirme vnto vs the promises of God in his word then must they of necessitie be more euident and better known vnto vs then is the word of God for that which is lesse knowen and not so notorious cannot perswade vs of that which we haue better knowledge of But such are the Sacraments which are not so euident being called mysteries of religion as are the words of God Ergo Bellarm. ibid. Ans. 1. It is strange to see that you should now contend for the euidence and plainenes of Scripture which you haue locked vp from the people with no other pretence then because they are hard and obscure and dangerous ro be read of the simple Secondly you doe not well in comparing the word and the sacraments together for they cannot be diuorsed or separated for the word giueth life to the sacraments the sacraments againe giue liuely testimony and witnes to the truth of the word But let this be the question not whether the writing by it selfe and the seale by it selfe are of greatest force but whether an instrument with a seale be not of greater euidence and strength then without it So the word of God which doth but beate vpon the sence of hearing must of necessitie not in it self but in respect of vs worke more effectually being sealed by the sacraments where we receiue instruction by two other sences of ours the sight and the taste The Protestants THat the Sacraments are ordeined of God to be pledges and seales of his promises made vnto vs in Christ that as verily as the externall elements are applied to the outward man so our soules spiritually are refreshed with an assured hope of the remission of our sinnes in Christ and so the sacraments to be seales onely of the righteousnes of faith and not giuers or workers of grace in vs it is euident out of the Scripture Argum. 1. Abraham receiued the signe of circumcision as the seale of the righteousnes of faith Rom. 4.1 Circumcision then was to Abraham a seale of the righteousnes of faith that is that he was iustified by faith Ergo so are all other sacraments Rhemist Indeede circumcision was a seale to Abraham for he was iust before and receiued this sacrament as a seale thereof afterward But it foloweth not that it was so in all for in Isaac his sonne and so consequently in the rest the Sacrament went before and iustice followed annot Rom. 4. sect 8. Ans. 1. The Apostle setteth forth the example of Abraham to shew
how all men are iustified before God and what is the vse of the sacraments in all men and therefore it is no extraordinary or exempt case but the common case of all the faithfull that righteousnes saith the Apostle might be imputed to them also Rom. 4. 11. Secondly although Isaac with many other were first circumcised and after iustified yet this is perpetuall they were no more iustified by circumcision then Abraham who was iustified before he was circumcised but by faith onely and therefore the Sacraments are seales of the iustice of faith whether the iustice of faith goe before or follow after Argum. 2. Augustine saith In Isaac qui octauo die circumcisus fuit praecessit signaculū iustitiae fidei et quoniam patris fidem imitatus est secuta est in crescente ipsa iustitia cuius signaculum in infante praecesserat In Isaac who was circumcised the eight day the seale of the righteousnes of faith went before and because he did follow his fathers faith as he grew iustice it selfe followed the seale whereof went before in his infancy Ergo circumcision was a seale as well to Isaac as to Abraham and so consequently to all THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE efficacie and vertue of the Sacraments THis question also hath diuerse partes First whether the Sacraments do giue or conferre grace by the worke wrought Secondly of the difference of the Sacraments of the olde and new testament Thirdly whether the Sacraments of the new law doe imprint a signe or character in the soule that can neuer be put out Fourthly of the necessity of the Sacraments THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE SACRAMENTS of them selues doe giue or conferre grace The Papistes error 92 THe Sacraments giue grace ex opere operato by the worke wrought that is by force and vertue of the worke and word done and said in the sacrament Rhemist Act. 22. sect 1. So that not faith onely iustifieth but the Sacraments also and other workes of religion Rhemist Rom. 6. sect 5. The Sacraments then are immediate instruments and efficient causes of our iustification not mediately as they nourish and encrease our faith but properly and in themselues Faith in the receiuer giueth no efficacie to the Sacrament but onely taketh away the lets and impediments which might hinder the efficacie of the Sacrament as the drynes of the wood maketh it to burne the better yet is it no efficient cause of the burning which is the fire onely but onely a helpe Thus they compare the Sacrament working of it selfe to fire that burneth and faith is as the drying of the wood but a disposing and preparing of the hart Bellarm. lib. 2. de sacram cap. 1. Argum. 1. Be baptized and wash away thy sinnes Act. 22. ver 16. The Sacrament of Baptisme doth of it selfe wash away sinnes Rhemist And we see in S. Iames that remission of sinnes is annexed to the vnction with oyle Rhemist 1. Timoth. 4.14 Ergo the Sacraments giue and conferre grace Ans. 1. To the first we answer that the text ioyneth with the Sacrament the inuocation of the name of God to the which saluation is promised Rom. 10.13 to wash away sinnes wherefore that place maketh nothing for your purpose Secondly in the other place health of body is promised by the gift of miracles but remission of sinnes is said to be obtained by the praier of the Elders The praier of faith shall saue the sick Iam. 5.15 Argum. 2. S. Paul saith He hath cleansed his Church by the lauer of water in the word Ephes. 5.26 Ergo baptisme is an instrumental cause of our iustification Bellarm. Ans. 1. It is not vnusuall in the Scripture to call the signe or Sacrament by the thing signified as Exod. 12.11 the Paschall Lambe is called the Passeouer whereas it was but a signe and memoriall thereof So Baptisme is called The lauer of regeneration Tit. 3.5 because it is a sure signe of our regeneration by the holy Ghost Secondly the Apostle in this place expoundeth himselfe for he saith that We are washed by water in the word that is the outward element doth send and referre vs to the word and promise of God whereof it is a seale The Protestants THe sacraments haue no power to giue or conferre grace to the receiuer neither are they immediate instruments of our iustification instrumentall meanes they are to encrease and confirme our faith in the promises of God of themselues they haue no operation but as the spirit of God worketh by them our internall senses being moued and quickened by those externall obiects Neither doe we say that the sacraments are bare and naked signes of spirituall graces but they doe verily exhibite and represent Christ to as many as by faith are able and meete to apprehend him So to conclude looke how the word of God worketh being preached so doe the sacraments but the word doth no otherwise iustifie vs but by working faith at the hearing thereof So sacraments doe serue for the encrease of our faith faith is not a seruant and handmaide to the sacraments as the Iesuite declared by the homely similitude of the fire and drie wood but faith is the more principall and the sacraments haue no other vse or end then as they are helpes for the strengthening of our faith Grace of themselues they can giue or conferre none Argum. 1. Rom. 1.17 The iust shall liue by faith Ergo he liueth not that is he is not iustified by any worke wrought as by the sacraments but onely by faith faith therefore giueth life and efficacie to the sacramentes it is not contained absolutely in themselues Againe Saint Paul saith That faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnes before he was circumcised Rom. 4.10 Ergo he was not iustified by circumcision no more are we by the sacraments but both he and we are iustified onely by faith Argum. 2. Saint Peter sayth Baptisme saueth vs not the putting away of the filth of the flesh but in that a good conscience maketh request vnto God by the resurrection of Christ 1. Pet. 3.21 Ergo it is faith in the resurrection of Christ which worketh in vs peace of conscience and not the outward washing that saueth or iustifieth Kemnitij argum Augustine thus writeth Aliud est aqua sacramenti aliud aqua quae significat spiritum dei ista visibilis est abluit corpus significat quid fit in anima per illum spiritum anima mundatur saginatur The water of the Sacrament is one thing the water which signifieth the spirit is another the one is visible and washeth the flesh and signifieth what is done in the soule but by the spirit the soule is cleansed The Sacrament of Baptisme then by this fathers sentence and so all other sacraments doe not giue grace but signifie onely and represent grace THE SECOND PART OF THE difference of the olde and new Sacraments error 93 THe sacrifices and ceremonies of the olde law were so farre
the sacrament of the Lords bodie Baptisme is equiualent to the word of God by our aduersaries own confession Ergo also it is of equall value and dignitie with the other sacrament THE TWELFTH GENERALL CONTROVERSY OF THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISME THis controuersie standeth vpon diuers questions 1. Of the name and definition of Baptisme Secondly of the partes of Baptisme Thirdly of the necessitie of Baptisme Fourthly of the Minister of Baptisme Fiftly of the parties which are to be baptized Sixtly of the effects of Baptisme Seuenthly of the difference of Christs Baptisme and Iohns Eightly of the ceremonies of Baptisme THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE NAME and definition of Baptisme COncerning the name there is no question betweene vs for the name of Baptisme hath the originall and beginning from the scripture Saint Paul vseth this word Coloss. 2.12 We are buryed with him through Baptisme And againe Heb. 6.2 All the question is about the definition of Baptisme The Papists error 98 THey define Baptisme to bee a sacrament of regeneration by water in the worde that is not which signifieth and sealeth vnto vs our regeneration and assureth vs of remission of sinnes but actually iustifieth and regenerateth vs Bellarm. lib. 1. de Baptism cap. 1. The Protestants WE rather according to the scriptures define baptisme to be a signe or seale of our regeneration and new birth whereby wee are assured that as verily by fayth in the blood of Christ we are cleansed from our sinnes as our bodies are washed with water in the name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost So that Baptisme doth not actually bestow remission of sinnes by the work wrought but is a pledge and seale of the righteousnesse of fayth as Saint Paul sayth of Circumcision Rom. 4.11 for it is not the washing of the flesh by water but the establishing of the heart with fayth and grace that saueth vs 1. Pet. 3.21 See this poynt handled more at large Controuers 11. next before quest 2. part 1. Augustine saith Per fidem renascimur in baptismate by fayth wee are borne agayne in Baptisme De tempor serm 53. It is then the proper act of fayth to regenerate vs not of Baptisme the vse and end whereof is to strengthen and increase our fayth THE SECOND QVESTION OF THE PARTES which are the matter and forme of Baptisme AS touching the matter that is the externall element vsed in Baptisme there is no question betweene vs but that it ought to bee plaine and common water Act. 10.47 Saint Peter saith Can any man forbid water that these should not bee baptized Wherefore wee condemne the foolish and vngodly practises and inuentions of heretikes that either exclude water altogether as the Manichees with others or doe vse any other element as the Iacobites that in stead of water burned them that were to be baptized with a whot yron or as the Aethiopians which are called Abissines that vsed fire in stead of water misconstruing the words of the Gospell Matth. 2.11 That Christ should baptize with the holy Ghost and with fire which is not literally to bee vnderstoode but thereby is signified the internall and forceable working of the spirite which kindleth zeale and loue in our hearts as fire Concerning the forme of Baptisme we all agree that no other is to be vsed then that prescribed by our Sauiour Christ to baptize in the name of the Father the Sonne and holy Ghost that it is neither lawfull to change this forme in sense as many heretikes haue done nor yet in words as to leaue out any of the three persons in Trinitie and inclusiuely to vnderstand them by naming of one for whereas some alleadge that place Act. 2.38 Bee yee baptized in the name of Iesus Christ for remission of sinnes to proue that it is lawfull onely in the name of Christ to baptize wee are to vnderstand that the forme of Baptisme is not in that place expresly set downe but the scope onely and end of Baptisme which is to assure vs of remission of sinnes in the name of Christ as Beza very well noteth vpon that place The point of difference betweene vs concerning the forme of Baptisme is this The Papists THey are bold to affirme that this forme of Baptisme to baptize in the name error 99 of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost is not fully concluded out of Scripture but deliuered by tradition for say they the commandement of Christ to baptize in the name of the Trinitie Matth. 28. may bee vnderstoode thus to baptize them into the faith of the Trinitie or by the authoritie of the Trinitie And it were sufficient by those words to doe and performe it in act without saying the wordes were it not that wee haue otherwise learned by tradition that this very forme of wordes is to bee kept Bellarmine de baptism lib. 1. cap. 3. The Protestants WE neede no tradition for this matter the very forme which is to bee vsed in Baptisme is plainely proued out of the Scriptures for that commandement of Christ Goe and baptize c. doth necessarily imply a forme of speech to be vsed Wee grant that in the Scriptures this word name is taken for power vertue authoritie as Act. 3.6 In the name of Iesus arise and walke So also as there is a Baptisme with water there may be a baptizing with fire Matth. 3.11 Wherefore if part of the commandement bee to bee taken properlie and literally as this Goe and baptize why not the rest also In the name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost If then the whole commaundement bee properly and plainely vnderstoode how can they baptize in the name of the Trinitie vnlesse the Trinitie bee spoken and named Secondly it appeareth also out of other places of Scripture that this forme was vsed in the Apostles time As Act. 10.47 Can any man forbid water why these should not be baptized which haue receiued the holy Ghost as well as wee As if Saint Peter should haue reasoned thus these haue receiued the giftes of the holy Ghost Ergo they may be also baptized in the name of the holy Ghost Likewise Act. 19.2 When the brethren at Ephesus had answered Paul that they had not heard whether there were a holy Ghost he saith vnto them Vnto what then were you baptized By this interrogatorie it appeareth it was their manner to baptize in the name of the holy Ghost and so consequently of the whole Trinitie Wee haue no cause then to flie vnto tradition this matter being so plainely decided by the Scripture Augustin tract in Iohann 80. Vpon those wordes of our Sauiour Iohn 15.3 You are cleane thorough the word which I haue spoken vnto you Detrahe verbum quid est aqua nisi aqua Accedit verbum ad elementum fit sacramentum Take away the word and what remaineth in Baptisme but bare water let the word be ioyned to the element and it maketh a Sacrament The forme then of Baptisme is the word which Christ
Martyrs and so to bee saued for Macrobius writeth that one of Herods sonnes which was nursed in those parts was slaine among the rest the infants which were saued were within the promise and belonged to the couenant and so could not bee lost their saluation depended of their free election before God it was not purchased by the very act of their dying Secondly the theefe also vpon the Crosse was iustified by his faith and beleefe in Christ. And therefore Augustine doth chiefely commend his faith Tunc fides eius de ligno floruit quando discipulorum emarcuit Then his faith did as it were bud and flourish out of the tree of the crosse when the faith of the Disciples withered The Protestants NEither the outward worke of Martyrdome nor contrition doe iustifie or giue remission of sinnes but the faith onely of Martyrs and penitent persons whereby they apprehend Christ. Argum. 1. Saint Paul saith 1. Corinth 13.3 That if a man giue his bodie to be burned and haue no loue it profiteth not Ergo it is not the outward act of Martyrdome but an effectuall and liuely faith working by loue which pleaseth God Argum. 2. Neither is the bare worke of sorrowe and contrition in it selfe acceptable to God for there is a worldly repentance that causeth death there is a godly repentance not to be repented of which worketh in vs care zeale feare desire which are the fruites of faith 2. Corinth 7.10.11 Ergo it is faith onely that maketh all our workes to be accepted of before God for without faith it is vnpossible to please him Hebr. 11.6 The Papists 2. MArtyrdome and contrition or conuersion of the heart vnto GOD error 102 though they bee no Sacraments yet may supplie the lack of Baptisme Bellarm. ibid. Argum. Martyrdome in the scriptures is rightly called a Baptisme as Christ speaking of his death saith I must bee baptized with a Baptisme Luk. 12.50 And therefore it may fitly stand in stead of Baptisme Ans. If euery thing that hath the name of Baptisme may bee vsed in place thereof then adde vnto your number of such deuised supplies the Pharisaicall washing of cuppes for they are called baptismata calicum the Baptismes or clensings of cuppes Mark 7.4 The Protestants WE neede not any such supplies to make good the want of Baptisme neither is it safe so to doe 1. It is great presumption and boldnes without warrant of Gods word to giue the effect and blessing which God hath annexed to the Sacraments to any other externall worke for what is this else but to institute other Sacraments then Christ left And shall wee not thinke that God by his spirite can better supplie the losse and the want of the Sacraments then we by our owne inuentions can helpe our selues 2. Concerning contrition of the heart if you vnderstand by it true repentance and withall a vowe and true desire to receiue the Sacrament of Baptisme which cannot bee obtained because of some remedilesse necessitie that in such a case it standeth as auailable as if a man had been actually Baptized for thus the Rhemists expounde themselues annot Iohn 3.2 I pray you what greater necessitie is there now of Baptisme then of the other Sacrament For this is true and we willingly grant that euery man that shall be saued must either receiue the Sacraments or haue a desire vnto them for the neglect and contempt of the Sacraments without repentance is a sinne damnable And thus you ouerthrow your selues making Baptisme necessarie without necessitie 3. Augustine admitteth none of these supplies but onely Martyrdome Nemo fit membrum Christi nisi aut Baptismate Christi aut morte pro Christo No man is made the member of Christ but either by the Baptisme of Christ or in dying for Christ here Augustine maketh but one supplie of Baptisme they make two When men followe their owne inuentions there can be no agreement THE FOVRTH QVESTION WHETHER women and Lay-men ought to baptize The Papists error 103 THey hold that not onely Lay men but Pagans that are not baptized themselues yea and women also may be ministers of Baptisme in a case of necessitie eBllarm cap. 7. Argum. Exod. 4. Zipporah circumcised her sonne and the Lord was pleased therewith and went away from Moses whom hee came against to haue slaine him Ergo women may as well now minister Baptisme Ans. First there is not the like strict necessitie of Baptisme as there was then of Circumcision for if euery man childe were not circumcised the eight day the Lord threatned to cut him off from among the people Genes 17.14 But Baptisme is not tied or limited to any such time or number of dayes Secondly there was great necessitie which enforced Zipporah to circumcise her childe for they had neglected the time and passed the stint of dayes wherefore the Lord strooke Moses with sicknes and being not able himselfe to performe that duetie his wife in great haste taketh the childe and cutteth him to saue her husbands life but shee in great indignation cast away the fore-skin from her knowing that shee was constrained to commit an vnwomanly act There cannot bee any such necessitie of Baptisme as there was then of Circumcision which was to be done within a certaine compas of dayes Thirdly you may as well proue by this example that a woman may baptize the Bishop Priest or Deacon standing by which notwithstanding you hold vtterly vnlawfull as that it is lawfull for her to baptize For Zipporah did it in the presence of Moses The Protestants NEither lay men of what calling soeuer nor yet Midwiues or any other women ought to bee suffered in a wel reformed Church to baptize infants neither are they authorized so to doe amongst vs. Argum. 1. The commission and charge to baptize was giuen onely by our sauiour Christ to his Apostles and all lawfull Ministers their successors Matth. 28.19 Ergo Lay men and women in baptizing goe beyond the commission of Christ. Argum. 2. The preaching of the word and administration of the Sacraments are and ought alwaies to be ioyned together And the care and charge of both is committed to Pastors and Ministers lawfully ordained Goe saith our Sauiour and teach all nations baptizing them Matth. 28.19 But it is not lawfull for women to preach the word 1. Corinth 14. vers 35. Ergo not to baptize Argum. 3 If it be lawfull for such to baptize it is onely in the time of necessitie but there is no such necessitie as we haue shewed of Baptisme Ergo it is not at all lawfull for them Augustines iudgement is this if a Lay man doe giue Baptisme Nescio an piè quis dixerit esse repetendum I cannot tell whether it may well bee iterated or repeated Hee dooth not allowe Lay men to baptize but is of opinion that they are not to bee baptized againe that receiue Baptisme at their handes Yet hee speaketh vncertainelie I cannot tell saith he and so we will conclude with
chapter of Iohn cannot be so vnderstoode as they expound it First Christ speaketh not onely of the sacramentall eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood but generally of the spirituall participation by fayth whether in the sacrament or without which is wrought in vs by the holy Ghost 1. If it be vnderstoode of the sacrament then it will follow that no man can be saued vnlesse he doe receiue the sacrament for Christ saith vers 53. Except you eate my flesh and drink my blood you cannot haue life in you This I am sure they will hardly grant that the Eucharist also should bee necessarie as they make Baptisme to saluation 2. If Christ hath relation to the sacrament then must it of necessitie bee ministred in both kindes for in euery place he ioyneth both these together the eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood Augustine also thus writeth vpon these wordes Hoc est manducare illam escam illum bibere potum in Christo manere illum manentemin se habere This it is to eate that flesh and to drinke that drinke to abide in Christ and to haue him abiding in vs but this may be done without the sacrament Ergo it is not necessary to vnderstand it of the sacrament Secondly though we should graunt that this whole treatise Iohn 6. may fitlie be referred to the sacrament yet the wordes must be taken figuratiuelie for the spirituall eating and drinking of Christ in the sacrament and not otherwise 1 Vers. 35. Christ so expoundeth his owne words I am the bread of life he that commeth to me shall not hunger and he that beleeueth in me shall not thirst To eate then and to drinke Christ is to beleeue in him 2 Christ vnderstandeth another manner of eating of his flesh then the Capernaites did But they imagined that Christ would giue his very flesh and blood to bee eaten And therefore they went away offended and sayd This is an hard saying vers 60. Therefore Christ to correct their erronious conceit sayth vnto them that his words were spirite and life that is spiritually to be vnderstoode verse 63. So Augustine interpreteth those wordes of Christ as if he had sayd Spiritualiter intelligite quod locutus sum You must vnderstand spiritually that which I haue sayd You shall not eate this body which you see nor drinke that blood which shall be shed for you Sacramentum vobis aliquod commendaui spiritualiter intellectum viuisicabit vos I haue commended a certaine mystery and sacrament vnto you which being spiritually vnderstood shall quicken you The Papists ARgum. 3. Christ in the institution of this sacrament sayd vnto his Apostles after hee had giuen thanks and blessed Hoc est corpus meum This is my bodie that is that which is contayned in this bread or vnder the formes of this bread is my very body Bellarm. cap. 9. So that these wordes must needes be taken properly not to bee a trope or figure 1 It is not the manner of the scriptures to set down flatte precepts and commaundements and directorie rules in obscure termes or figuratiue speeches but plainely and euidently therefore it is not like that Christ being now to prescribe vnto his Apostles the perpetuall lawe and forme of this sacrament would speake obscurely 2 Though he spake by parables and signes to the Pharisies yet there was no cause why he should so doe none being present but his Apostles Bellarmin ibid. Ans. 1. It is very well that you will now though I thinke vnawares grant vnto vs that the precepts and rules in scripture are set downe simply and playnely wherefore the scriptures cannot bee so hard and obscure as you would beare vs in hand they are for if the precepts and rules of fayth be euidently in scripture expressed as you seeme to confesse what reason haue you to keepe back the people from the reading of scripture 2 It is false that the scriptures vse no figures nor tropes in the declaration of the lawes and sacraments of the Church for sayth not Saint Paul speaking of the sacraments of the Iewes Petra erat Christus the rock was Christ 1. Cor. 10.4 that is signified Christ Likewise in the 17. vers We that are many are one bread that is our spirituall vnitie and coniunction is represented in that we are partakers of one bread 3 Sometimes our Sauiour would speake darkely being alone with his Apostles thereby to stirre them vp more diligently to attend vnto his wordes as when he biddeth them beware of the leauen of the Pharisies Mark 8.15 Yet this speech of our Sauiour Christ vttered in the hearing of his Apostles This is my bodie was neither so darke nor obscure that the Apostles neede much bee troubled about the vnderstanding Nay many things being spoken in borrowed and metaphoricall wordes are vttered with greater grace and carrie a fuller sense When Christ sayd I am the doore Iohn 10.9 I am the vine Iohn 15.1 he spake by figure as he doth here for neither was he a vine or a doore as the bread was not his bodie Yet which of the Apostles was there that vnderstoode him not when he called himselfe a vine and a doore Neither could they doubt of our Sauiour Christs meaning here Contra. Now on the other side we will make it playne that these words of Christ are spoken tropically 1 Where Christ sayth according to Saint Luke This cuppe is the new Testament in my blood Luk. 22.23 we must needes admitte a double trope or figure for first the cuppe is taken for that which was contayned in the cuppe Secondly the wine in the cuppe was not the newe Testament but a signe of the new Testament If then in one parte of the sacrament hee spake by a figure why not also in the other when he sayth This is my bodie that is a liuely signe and seale thereof 2 It is no vnusuall phrase in the scripture to say this is that is signifieth as Genes 17.10 Circumcision is called the couenant it selfe where it was a signe onely of it And Exod. 12.11 the Lambe is called the Lords passeouer which it betokened onely In the same sense Christ sayth This is my bodie that is exhibiteth and representeth vnto you my bodie Augustine so expoundeth these wordes Non dubitauit Dominus dicere Hoc est corpus meum cum daret signum corpus sui Christ doubted not to say This is my bodie when hee gaue a signe and sacrament of his bodie The Protestants THat Christ is present with all his benefites in the sacrament wee doe willingly graunt neither doe we thinke that the elements of bread and wine are bare and naked signes of the bodie and blood of Christ but Christ is verily by them exhibited vnto vs and spiritually by fayth we are truely made partakers of his precious bodie blood not that Christ descendeth from heauen to vs but we ascend by faith and in spirit vnto him yea we confesse
Masse is not of that nature for it is made by the ministerie of man for euery one of their sacrificing Priests is able to make the bodie of Christ but this bodie which Christ had to offer was made onely by God without the helpe of man as the Apostle saith Againe say if you dare that the bodie which you offer is the true Tabernacle and temple of God for then it would followe that God dwelleth in temples made with hands that is by the ministerie of man contrarie to the Scriptures seeing you affirme that the bodie of Christ is no otherwise present but by the ministerie of the Priest And what a goodly Tabernacle is this for God thinke you which you shut vp in a pixe and hang vp in your Churches A mouse may eate it the fire may consume it corruption may take it would God suffer his Tabernacle thus to be defiled Wherefore vpon these premises we conclude that what you offer in your popish sacrifice cannot be the proper gift belonging to Christes Priesthoode Argum. 3. The Apostle saith Hebr. 13.10 Wee haue an altar whereof they haue no power to eate which serue in the Tabernacle Ergo we haue not onely a common table to eate meere bread vpon but a verie altar in the proper sense to sacrifice Christs bodie vpon Rhemist annot Hebr. 13. sect 6. Ans. First the Apostle speaketh of the sacrifice of Christs death whereof we are made partakers by faith which they can reape no benefite by which remaine in the ceremoniall obseruations of Leuiticall sacrifices Christ therefore is our Priest altar and sacrifice for verse 12. the Apostle maketh mention of the suffrings of Christ he meaneth not then the Communion table which is vnproperly called an altar or any materiall altar beside but the altar onely of Christs death Secondly if wheresoeuer in Scripture this worde altar is read it must be taken for a proper materiall altar we shall haue also a material altar in heauen Apoc. 8.3 which I am sure they wil not grant Thirdly the Apostle saith We haue an altar which is but one whereas popish altars are many it cannot therefore be vnderstoode of such altars The Protestants THat there are spirituall sacrifices remaining yet vnto Christians in the exercise of religion we doe verily beleeue being so taught by the Scriptures such are the sacrifices of praise and thankesgiuing Heb. 13.15 The sacrifice of almes and distribution verse 16. the mortifying also of the flesh is a kinde of crucifying and so a spirituall sacrifice Galat. 6.14 And in this sense wee denie not but that the Sacrament may be called a sacrifice that is a spirituall oblation of praise and thankesgiuing but that there is a proper and externall sacrifice as in the lawe of Goates and Bullocks vpon the crosse of the bodie of Christ so in the Eucharist of the same bodie and flesh of Christ we doe hold it for a great blasphemie and heresie Argum. 1. The very flesh and true naturall bodie of Christ is not as wee haue shewed before at large in such carnall and corporall manner present in the Sacrament therefore it cannot in the Sacrament be sacrificed and offered vp Argum. 2. This sacrificing of the bodie and blood of Christ is contrarie to Christs institution for he saith onely Take yee eate yee drinke yee he saith not Sacrifice yee or lift vp and make an oblation of my bodie Neither doe those wordes hoc facite doe this giue them any power to sacrifice for to whome he saith Eate yee drinke yee to the same also he saith Doe yee Wherefore if doe yee be as much as sacrifice yee all Christians for whome it is lawfull to eate and drinke the Sacrament by this rule haue authoritie to sacrifice Againe the words are Doe this in remembrance We remember things absent and which are alreadie done and past if then there be a present sacrifice in the Sacrament of the bodie of Christ it cannot properly be said to be a memorie of his sacrifice Argum. 3. The Apostle saith that Christ neede not to offer himselfe often but that he hath done once in the end of the world Heb. 9.26 And with one offering hath hee made perfite for euer them that are sanctified 10.14 Ergo Christ cannot be sacrificed againe for that were to make his sacrifice vpon the crosse imperfect Bellarmine answereth that the Apostle here speaketh of the bloodie and painefull sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse which was sufficient once to bee done but this taketh not away the vnbloodie sacrifice which is but an iteration of the former whereby the fruite and efficacie of that first oblation is applied vnto vs Bellarm. lib. 1. de miss cap. 25. Ans. First the Apostle excludeth all manner iterations of the sacrifice of Christ for otherwise if Christ should now bee often howsoeuer sacrificed the difference would not hold betweene the sacrifices of the lawe which were often done and the sacrifice of Christ which was once to be performed for their sacrifices were also in a manner iterations and commemorations of the sacrifice of Christ. The Apostle then thus reasoneth They had many iteratiue and commemoratiue sacrifices of Christs death Ergo we haue not now Secondly that is but a foolish and false distinction of the bloodie and vnbloodie sacrifice as they vnderstand it for there can be no proper vnbloodie sacrifice of Christ neither could he be offered vp otherwise then by dying Heb. 9.27.28 Therefore he is not offered vp in the Sacrament because now he dyeth not Thirdly neither neede wee inuent a new kinde of sacrifice for the application of Christs death for to that end Christ hath appointed the preaching of the word and instituted the Sacraments wherby the death of Christ with al the benefites thereof are most fruitefully applied vnto vs Galath 3.1 1. Corinth 11.26 Argum. 4. Augustine in a certaine place allegorizing the parable of the prodigall child thus writeth Vitulum occidit quando in sacramento altario memoriam passionis in mente renouauit He slew the fat calfe when hee renewed in the Sacrament of the altar the memorie of his passion in his minde Hee calleth it the Sacrament not the sacrifice of the altar and it onely bringeth to our minde the memorie of Christs passion and sacrifice there is then no oblation or sacrifice in the Sacrament but onely a commemoration of Christs sacrifice which we denie not AN APPENDIX OR THIRD PART OF the name and office of Priestes The Papists AS they doe falsely teach and perswade that there is yet remaining a proper error 129 externall sacrifice for Christians vnder the Gospell so also they maintaine a sacrificing Priesthoode And further they say that the Leuiticall Priesthoode was not translated into the sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse but is properly turned into the Priesthoode and sacrifice in the Church according to Melchisedechs rite in offering vp the bodie and blood of Christ in the formes of bread and wine Rhemist
annot Hebr. 7. sect 7. Wherefore they which minister vnder the Gospell are worthilie called Priests which word doth so certainely implie the authoritie of sacrificing that it is by vse made the onely English of Sacerdos Rhemist act 14. sect 3. The Protestants FIrst we hold it to be a great blasphemie to say that the Priesthood sacrifice of Christ vpō the Crosse is not that sacrifice or Priesthood into the which the old sacrifice Priesthood was translated changed The Apostle proueth the contrary for that sacrifice whereby the new Testament is established is that whereunto the old sacrifice and Priesthoode is translated but this is done by the singular sacrifice of Christ who is the suretie of a better testament Hebr. 7.23 Ergo his singular sacrifice vpon the crosse is that whereinto the old Leuiticall sacrifices are changed and no other Againe the Priesthoode after Melchisedechs order is that into the which the old Priesthoode is changed but the Priesthoode of Christ vpon the Crosse was after that order Ergo. But here they are not ashamed to denie that the sacrifice of Christ vpon the Crosse was after Melchisedechs order but doe most impudently and blasphemously affirme that it was after the order of Aaron Heskin lib. 1. cap. 13. And thus euery vile massemonger shall be more properly a Priest after Melchisedechs order then Christ himselfe Secondly none but Christ is a Priest after the order of Melchisedech for vnto whome the Lord saide Thou art a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech to him the Lord saith also in the same Psalme Sit thou at my right hand Psal. 110. But this cānot agree to any popish Priest therefore not the other Againe the Apostle maketh this difference betweene the Priesthoode of the lawe and the Gospell because then there were many Priests they being prohibited by death to continue but Christ is the onely Priest of the New Testament because he dieth not Heb. 7 23.24 If they answer as they doe that although there be many Priestes yet it is but one Priesthoode because Christ concurreth with them in the actes of the Priesthoode Rhemist We answer first Christ concurreth with his faithfull ministers in the actes of their Ministerie but no such Priesthoode doe wee acknowledge Secondly so Christ concurred in the actes of the Leuiticall Priesthoode and the sacrifices of the law that were rightly offered wherefore this concurrence of Christ dooth no more take away the multitude of Priests in the Gospell then it did in the lawe Thirdly concerning the name of Priests in their sense as it implieth an authoritie of sacrificing we vtterly abhor it secondly but as it is deriued of the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth an Elder we refuse it not but wish rather that it had not bin abused in cōmō speach to signifie popish sacrificers Thirdly as for the word sacerdos which may be englished a sacrificer we finde it no where in the New Testament giuen to the ministers of the Gospell and so much Bellarmine confesseth cap. 17. And therefore vnfitly and vnproperly agreeth vnto them If some of the fathers haue confounded the names of Sacerdos and Presbyter they are not to be commended The word Sacerdos a sacrificer being a proper name of the Leuitical Priests cannot properly be attributed to the Ministers of the Gospell To conclude this word Priest as it is the English of Sacerdos we doe not approue but as it giueth the sense of Presbyter from whence it is deriued we condemne it not for so it signifieth nothing else but an Elder If common vse of speech haue drawne it to a contrarie sense it would be amended Augustine saith Sacerdotiū Iudaeorum nemo dubitat c. No faithful mā doubteth but that the Priesthood of the law was a figure of the royall Priesthoode in the Church whereby all that pertaine to the bodie of Christ are consecrated He acknowledgeth no other Priesthood abiding in the Church then that whereby all Christians are made Priests to offer spirituall sacrifices vnto God through Christ. THE THIRD QVESTION OF THE VERTVE AND efficacie falsely ascribed to the sacrifice of the Masse The Papists 1. THey blasphemously affirme that it is a sacrifice propitiatorie that is auailable error 130 to obtaine ex opere operato by the very worke wrought remission and pardon of all their sinnes Trident. Concil sess 22. can 3. Argum. Christ himselfe sayth in the institution This is my blood shed for you for the remission of sinnes Ergo the sacrifice of the Masse is auaileable for remission of sinnes Bellarm. lib. 2. de miss cap. 2. The Protestants Ans. FIrst Christ instituted no sacrifice as we declared afore but onely a Sacrament in remembrance of his death and passion Secondly the Sacrament rightly administred serueth to assure our faith of remission of sinnes by the death of Christ but it doth not by it owne vertue conferre remission of sinnes neither profiteth by the worke wrought for the Apostle sayth That without faith it is impossible to please God Hebr. 11.6 wherefore no action is accepted of God not proceeding of faith Argum. The Apostle sayth Where there is remission of sinnes there is no more sacrifice for sinne Hebr. 10.18 Seeing then remission of sinnes is fully obtained by the death and sacrifice of Christ there can be no more sacrifice for sinne Ergo the Masse is no sacrifice for sinne The Papists 2. THe sacrifice of the Masse is not onely propitiatorie for sinnes but auaileable error 131 to obtaine all other benefites as peace tranquilitie health and such like Bellarm. cap. 3. Argum. S. Paul willeth That prayers and intercessions should be made for all men especially for Kings that we may leade a godly and a peaceable life 1. Timoth. 1.1 These are the prayers which are made in the celebration of the Masse Bellarm. The Protestants Ans. FIrst the Apostle speaketh generally of al prayers made by whomsoeuer as it appeareth vers 8. Therefore this place is vnfitly applied to the praiers of Priests in the Masse Secondly this place proueth that temporall benefites are obtained by faithfull prayers not by the sacrifice of the Masse which S. Paul neuer knewe Thirdly Augustine indeed expoundeth this place of the publike prayers of the Church vsed in the administration of the Sacrament for he calleth it Domini mensam the Lords table not the altar he meaneth nothing lesse then your popish Masse Argum. It is contrarie to the institution of Christ to applie the Sacrament for any such temporall or external vse It was ordained to be receiued in remembrance of Christs death to assure vs by faith of remission of sinnes and other spirituall blessings not to giue vs assurance of health peace life prosperitie for the obtaining of such blessings according to the will of God other meanes are appoynted The ministerie of the Sacraments no more serueth for such vses then the preaching of the word THE FOVRTH QVESTION FOR WHOM THE sacrifice of
Apostle calleth their feasts of loue which they were wont to make after the receiuing of the Sacrament the Lords Supper coenas dominicas because they were made in the Lords houses which were called Dominicae he meaneth not the Sacrament Ans. First there were then no such distinct places as Churches and Oratories for the seruice of God which began to be built many yeeres after but they assembled together in their owne houses Secondly if their loue-feasts were called the Lords Suppers it would followe that they neuer had them but at night and that then also the Sacrament was celebrated about the time of their feasts which must be at the eeuentide But this I think they dare not affirme that they celebrated the Sacrament at night wherefore the Apostle cannot meane any other Supper but that which was instituted by Christ as it followeth vers 23. Augustine calleth it the Lords Supper Coenam manibus suis consecratam discipulis suis dedit His Supper being consecrated he gaue with his owne hands to his Disciples And although we sate not downe at that feast Ipsam coenam tamē fide quotidie manducamus Yet we eate that Supper daily by faith 2. The name Communion the Apostle also himselfe vseth he calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The communion of the bodie of Christ 1. Corinth 10.16 so doth Augustine name it Communionem corporis Christi de ciuit Det. 20. cap. 9. 3. As for the names of Eucharist and Leiturgie we mislike them not being vnderstood in their own sense but because they are Greeke and not vnderstood of the people we vse them not The horrible sacrilege of the Masse is the cause also why we vse not that terme THE SIXT QVESTION OF THE MANNER OF saying and celebrating Masse The Papists IT is not necessiarie that the Masse or as we call it the Sacrament should be sayd or done in the vulgar and familiar speech but for the greater reuerence to be kept in the Latine tongue they say it is more conuenient and that the words of consecration should not be vttered in a loud and audible but in a soft and low voyce Bellarm. cap. 11.12 Argum. Christ for the space of three houres being so long vpon the Crosse vttered nothing in the hearing of the standers by but 7. short sentences Ergo in the sacrifice of the Masse it is not necessarie to vtter all in the hearing of the people Ibid. Ans. First they haue not proued by this example that the Priest should mutter and mumble to himselfe but the contrarie rather that either he must altogether hold his peace or els speake aloude vnlesse they can shew that Christ spake some words secretly to himselfe Secondly we must not fetch the right vse of the Sacrament of our owne heads from the example of Christs sacrifice vpon the Crosse but we are commanded to resort for direction to the institution in his last Supper 1. Corinth 11.23 The Protestants FIrst for the Sacrament or any other part of the seruice of God to be ministred in an vnknowne tongue is contrary to S. Pauls rule who would haue al things to be done in the Church to edifying and in such sort that the vnlearned might say Amen 1. Corinth 14.16 But the people cannot be edified by a language which they vnderstand not nor yet can say Amen vnto strange prayers But of this matter we haue alreadie elsewhere entreated more at large Secondly it is also contrarie to S. Pauls rule that the Priest should mutter to himselfe and not speake aloud in the hearing of the people for he saith Ye doe shew forth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 annuntiatis preach or declare the death of Christ so often as ye receiue it 1. Corinth 11.26 But they doe not annuntiare that is preach set forth and declare the death of Christ that speake onely to themselues Augustine sayth Populus cum episcopo orat quasi ad eius verba subscribens respondet Amen The people prayeth with their pastor and subscribing to his words say Amen But how can the people say Amen where nothing is heard or subscribe in their hearts vnto it THE SEVENTH QVESTION OF THE CEREMOnies which they vse in the idolatrous sacrifice of the Masse The Papists error 138 SOme ceremonies goe before the celebration of the Masse and they are of such things as they haue alwaies in a readines for that impious seruice such are the vestiments and apparel of the priest the Albe Chesil Stole Dalmatike with such other Altars Altarclothes Corporasses Pixes Paxes Dishes Candlestickes Platters Censers water-pots all these and the like trumperie ought of right to be vsed in the sacrifice of the Masse the better to discerne the bodie of Christ Rhemist 1. Corinth 11. sect 18. The Protestants FIrst for diuers causes we doe condemne and reiect these superstitious vsages of the Papists 1. Because of the superfluous vnnecessarie number of them fewer by a great deale may serue for the Communion to be kept after Christs institution neither doe we reade that Christ at his last Supper vsed any such who notwithstanding would not haue left out any thing requisite and needfull for the Sacrament 2. The superfluous and excessiue cost in making so many Church vessels of gold and siluer so many Masse garments of silke fine linnen embrodered with gold pearle precious stones was both an intolerable burthen to the Church at whose charge such things were prouided and a great deale more costly then became the simplicitie of the Gospell 3. Conuenient vessels and instruments which are necessarie for the administration of the Sacrament with other seemely ornaments as a decent couering for the Communion table a cleane and hansome vessell to keepe the wine a cup of siluer for the distribution cleane linnen napkins for the bread such instruments and ornaments of the Lords table we condemne not but vse them our selues yet none of them for such ends or purposes as they pretend to discerne the bodie of the Lord by them as though they were ordained to waite and attend vpon the bodily presence of Christ which they haue falsely imagined but we vse them for decencie and order sake and due reuerence which is to be yeelded to so great mysteries In the Apostles time they had no consecrated Altars but Communion tables 1. Cor. 10.21 neither is it like that they vsed vessels of gold or siluer in the Lords Supper when they had neither siluer nor gold in their purses Math. 10.9 Wherfore such things are not necessarie for the discerning of the Lords bodie The Papists 2. THere are other ceremonies which they obserue and vse in the very action it selfe and celebration of the Masse as the diuers gestures of the Priest to lift vp his eyes and cast them downe againe and to lift them vp the second the third time sometime to cast abroad his hands to close them againe to warble with his fingers to bow to bend to ducke to turne on
onely faith but loue or charitie obtaineth remission of sinnes Bellarm. ibid. Rhemist in hunc locum The Protestants Ans. THe argument is not from the cause to the effect but from the effect to the cause for Christ doth not reason thus she loued much therefore many sinnes are forgiuen her but contrariwise Many sinnes are forgiuen her therefore she loueth much As the next words declare to whom little is remitted he loueth little And our Sauiour sayth in plaine words in the last verse That her faith had saued her whereof her loue was an effect Argum. That the contrition of the heart is no meanes of our iustification nor a meriting cause or procuring of remission of sinnes Saint Paul sheweth Rom. 4.5 6. To him that beleeueth faith is counted for righteousnes And Dauid declareth the blessednesse of that man to whom God imputeth righteousnes without workes It is faith then onely that obtaineth remission of sinnes and a man is iustified without any respect had to his workes Therefore neither contrition nor any other worke inward or outward procureth remission of sinnes but faith onely is the meane So Augustine sayth Opera sequuntur iustificatum non praecedunt iustificandum Workes followe a man alreadie iustified they goe not before to iustification De fide operib cap. 14. Therefore the worke of contrition is not auaileable to iustification The Papists 5. COntrition they say is not necessarie for veniall or small offences neither error 11 is a man bound thereunto So. lib. 4. distinct 17. articul 3. The Protestants THis assertion is cleane contrarie to scripture for the Prophet Dauid praieth not onely to be kept from presumptuous sinnes Psalm 19.13 but euen to be cleansed from his secret faults vers 12. Augustine agreeth Non solum propter vitae huius ignorantiam sed etiam propter ipsum puluerem mundi huius qui pedibus adhaerescit quotidianam habere debemus poenitentiam Not only for the ignorances of this life but euen for that drosse and dust of the world which hangeth vpon our feete we ought daily to repent vs. He meaneth the lesser and smaller scapes of our life The Papists error 12 6. THere is a kind of cōtrition that proceedeth only from the feare of punishmēt when a man doth leaue sinning not for any loue or delight he hath in God but onely for feare of damnation Euen this contrition also is good and profitable yet this seruile feare is at length cleane driuen out by charitie But there remaineth still in the godly an awe and feare of God and his iudgements with mistrust and feare of hell and damnation as Math. 10. Feare him that can cast bodie and soule into hell Rhemist Iohn 4. sect 6. Bellarm. lib. 2.17 The Protestants FIrst we acknowledge that the feare of punishment is necessarie in the beginning to make a way for true loue to enter as the bristle or needle as Augustine sayth maketh roome for the thred to enter We also confesse that there is a continuall feare and reuerence of God in the godly such as children haue of their parents but as for any mistrust or feare of hell and damnation after loue be once entred and we made the children of God which breedeth terror and anxietie of conscience it is cleane expelled and thrust out of the doores by loue Argum. So saith the Apostle There is no feare in loue but perfect loue casteth out feare and maketh vs to haue confidence in the day of iudgement 1. Ioh. 4.17 18. But he that feareth damnation and is afraid of the day of iudgement cannot haue confidence in that day So Augustine Quid dicimus de illo qui caepit timere diem iudicij si perfecta in illo esset charitas non timeret What say we to him that feareth the day of iudgement if loue were perfect in him he would not feare it THE SIXT QVESTION OF AVRICVLAR Confession the second part of penance The Papists error 13 NOne can rightly seeke for absolution at the Priests hands vnlesse they confesse particularly at the least all their mortall sinnes whether they be committed in mind heart will and cogitation onely or in word and worke with all the necessarie circumstances and differences of the same Rhemist Ioh. 20. sect 5. And this sacramentall confession as they call it must be made secretly to the Priest Concil Trident. sess 14. can 6. Argum. 1. This wonderfull power of remitting and retaining of sinnes which was giuen to the Apostles and their successors Ioh. 20.22 were giuen them in vaine if no man were bound to seeke for absolution at their hands which can not be had of them without distinct vtterance to them of our sinnes for they cannot rule the cases of conscience vnlesse they haue exact knowledge and cogitation of their sinnes Rhemist ibid. Ans. 1. God hath not made his ministers in Christs stead iudges of cases of conscience as though there were in them an actual power to remit and absolue sinnes but their office is onely to declare and set forth vnto all penitent persons the promises of God for remission of sinnes the seueritie of Gods iudgement against impenitent persons which is especially performed in the preaching and applying of the word either publiquely or priuately as S. Paul calleth the Gospell committed vnto him The word of reconciliation 2. Cor. 5.16 2. A man therefore may by their ministerie which are the preachers of reconciliation finde remission of sinnes without a particular declaration thereof neither is it necessarie for them to haue so exact a knowledge of our sinnes seeing they are not absolute iudges of the conscience but the ministers and ambassadors of reconciliation 2. Corinth 5.20 3. And Ministers are not to stay while suite is made vnto them for their helpe but they ought to exhort and desire men to be reconciled to God by their ministerie Argum. 2. As the Priests in the law had onely authoritie to discerne the leprosie of the people and therefore Christ sendeth the lepers to the Priest Luk. 17.14 so men must reueale the spirituall leprosie of sinne to the Priest Rhemist ibid. Ans. First the leprosie was not healed by the Priest but onely declared to be healed so sinnes are declared to be forgiuen by the Priest not properly forgiuē Secondly the Priest receiued not knowledge of all diseases but of this that was contagious therefore it would not followe hereupon that all sinnes are to be confessed to the Priest but such as are notorious where publique confession is by Church discipline inioyned and such confession we denie not Thirdly the argument followeth not from the Priests of the law to the Ministers of the Gospell for the Priesthood of the law is translated wholly vnto Christ who hath all knowledge to discerne and power to heale our spirituall diseases The Protestants COnfession of sinnes such as the scripture alloweth we doe acknowledge as namely these foure kinds There are priuate confessions either to God alone as Daniel confesseth
ground an ordinarie and perpetuall sacrament vpon an extraordinary example and that they were such visible graces of the spirite it appeareth because Simon Magu◠saw that the holy Ghost was giuen them by laying on of hands Secondly the holy Ghost was obtained by their praiers ver 15. and not by the very laying on of hands Thirdly to make a Sacrament it is not enough to haue a visible signe and to shew some spirituall grace therewith to be bestowed for then the spittle and clay that Christ vsed the napkins also and partlets which were carried to the sicke from the Apostles and they were healed presently all these should be sacraments for here are outward signes and some effect followed yet because there was no institution of a sacrament by Christ nor any commandement to vse them neither these nor the imposition of hands can be a Sacrament The Protestants WE graunt a ceremonie of imposition of hands vsed in the Apostles time and after so long as the miraculous gifts of the holy Ghost continued in the Church there is also another kinde of imposition of hands such as the Apostle speaketh of Heb. 6.2 which may haue perpetuall vse in the Church which is nothing else but a kinde of praier to be strengthened by the holy Ghost and for the encrease of grace But neither this nor the other doe we holde to be a sacrament Argum. 1. Euery sacrament must haue his appointment from Christ consisting both of an outward element and the word of institution but the popish sacrament of confirmation hath none of these the element they vse is oyle the word of consecration I signe thee with the signe of the Crosse and annoint thee with the Chrisme of health in the name of the Father the Sonne and holy Ghost but none of these haue their institution by Christ or his Apostles any where in the new testament Ergo it is no sacrament Augustine saith Manus impositio quid aliud est quà m oratio super hominem The imposition of the hands what els is it but praier ouer a man He saith not it is a Sacrament THE SECOND PART OF THE MATter and forme of Confirmation The Papists THe matter of this popish Sacrament they say is oyle mixed and tempered error 44 with balme Rhemist Act. 8. sect 6. First halowed and consecrated by the Minister thereof and striked in manner of a crosse vpon the forehead of him that is to be confirmed Bellarm. cap. 8. Argum. 2. Corinth 1.21 It is God which establisheth vs or confirmeth vs with you in Christ and hath annointed vs. Here the Apostle speaketh of confirmation and of the materiall part thereof which is holy vnction or anointing Bellarm. ibid. The Protestants Ans. FIrst the Apostle saith not Which hath confirmed but Which doth confirme which if it were meant of that external ceremony of confirmation see what iniury you offer to the Apostle that being a confirmer of others he had neede now to be catechized and confirmed himselfe Againe he speaketh not of confirmation wrought by the ministerie of men but God saith he confirmeth vs that is establisheth vs by his spirite 2. It is to too grosse to vnderstand by this anointing your greazie besmearing mens faces with your Chrisme seeing the Apostle expoundeth himselfe in the next verse He hath sealed vs and giuen the earnest of his spirite in our harts ver 22. Of this holy anointing of our harts by the spirite S. Iohn also maketh mention saying This Anointing teacheth you all things 1. epist. 2.27 But doth the anointing of the face I pray you giue men instruction Let vs heare Augustines exposition Christus sit in corde vnctio ipsius sit in corde inspiratio eius docet vnctio eius docet Let Christ be in your harts let his anointing be in your harts his inspiration is his anointing you may be ashamed therefore so grossely to abuse Scripture 3. As for your oyle therefore mixed with balme First the true balme you know is not to be had and therefore you abuse the people Secondly make the best of it you can it is but a Iewish ceremonie Thirdly your benediction of it is but a kinde of magicall inchantment seeing you haue no word of God to consecrate creatures in that sort for all things are sanctified by the word of God and praier Ergo without the warrant of God there is no such sanctifying of creatures The Papists 2. THe forme of Confirmation is in the words which are pronounced I signe thee with the signe of the crosse and confirme thee with the Chrisme of error 45 saluation or health in the name of the Father the Sonne and holy Ghost Bellarm cap. 10. The Protestants 1. THey must shew the institution of Christ out of the word for the forme of euery sacrament which they can not doe for this vnlesse they runne to their beggerly traditions which they blasphemously call the word of God vnwritten 2. Where haue they learned that men are confirmed and established with the externall anointing of oyle so said some amongst the Colossians Touch not taste not handle not to whom the Apostle answereth Which things perish with the vsing and are after the commandements of men Coloss. 2.21.22 So is this anointing with oyle a meere inuention of men and hath no longer vertue or force then in the naturall vse thereof THE THIRD PART OF THE EFFIcacie and vertue of confirmation The Papists THe holy Ghost is giuen in confirmation for force strength and corroboration against all our spirituall enemies and to stand constantly in the confession error 46 of our faith euen to death with great increase of grace Rhemist Act. 8. sect 7. And in this respect it giueth more abundant grace in strengthening of vs against the deuil then Baptisme doth Bellarm. cap. 11. The Protestants FIrst they doe offer great iniurie to the spirite of God tying him as it were to their beggerly elements which haue power as they say to conferre grace The Scripture saith The spirite bloweth where it listeth Ioh. 3. The spirite of God is free and is giuen without Sacraments as well as with them but this tradition of yours is no Sacrament if it were yet could it not conferre grace as we haue proued before Secondly they doe greatly deface the Sacrament of Baptisme making it imperfect without confirmation saying that he which is baptized shall neuer be a perfect Christian vnlesse he be confirmed with Chrisme Gerson And that it is to be reuerenced with greater reuerence then Baptisme See Fulk Act. 8. sect 7. Yea they depriue Baptisme of the proper effect and vse thereof which is a signe vnto vs of the assistance of Gods spirite to fight manfully against the Deuill for by baptisme we are buried into the death of Christ Rom. 6.3 But Christ by his death triumphed ouer the Deuill Coloss. 2.15 Ergo Baptisme is a signe of our victorie against the Deuil yet they rob Baptisme of this honor and giue it to
Confirmation And thus they preferre their owne inuentions before the ordinance of God no Sacrament before a Sacrament Augustine sheweth what the Sacrament of Vnction is Vnctionis sacramentum est virtus ipsa inuisibilis vnctio inuisibilis spiritus sanctus The sacrament of vnction is the inuisible vertue the inuisible anointing the holy spirite What is become now of your sacrament of vnction THE FOVRTH PART OF THE RITES and ceremonies of Confirmation The Papistes THe ceremonies which they commonly vse in Confirmation are these First error 47 the Bishop must breathe vpon the pot or cruze of Chrisme Seōcdly he saluteth it in these words Aue sanctum Chrisma Haile holy Chrisme Thirdly he giueth a kisse Fourthly he striketh him that is cōfirmed with his hand to teach him patience Fiftly his forehead is bound about least the Chrisme should run downe which teacheth him not to lose the grace of God Sixtly seuen daies together he must neither wash his head nor face And these with such like ridiculous toyes are practised amongst them Bellarm. cap. 13. lib. de confirmat The Protestants 1. SOme of these ceremonies we condemne as ridiculous as the breathing vpon the oyle the striking of the party confirmed which light gestures become not the grauity of the Ministers of the Gospell all things should be done in the Church in decent and comely order 1. Cor. 14.40 Secondly one of them is meerely Idolatrous to salute the oyle as the Angel saluted Mary to say Aue All haile vnto it making an Idoll of it being a thing without sense or life Thirdly all of them are superstitious hauing mysticall and typicall significations and shadowes which agreeth not with the nature of the Gospel for all shadows are now past the body being come Col. 2.17 Lastly they are superfluous cumbersome and burdenous as Augustine saith Ipsam religionem quam Deus paucissimis sacramentis liberam esse voluit onerib premunt They oppresse religion with the burden of ceremonies which God hath left free in few sacramēts Againe who seeth not how thus by their own traditions they doe euacuate the ordinance of God for in stead of catechizing and instructing of the youth in the principles and foundation of religion as of repentance from dead workes faith toward God of the resurrection and eternall iudgement Hebre. 6.2.3 they haue brought in nothing else but oyling greazing annointing of them breathing vpon them crossing and such like and whereas S. Paul giueth Parents a charge to bring vp their Children in the instruction of God Ephes. 6.4 They bid them bring their Children to be anointed crossed chrismated as they call it and they haue done enough THE SECOND QVESTION of Orders THe seuerall partes of this question are these First whether it be a Sacramēt Secondly of the efficacie and vertue thereof Thirdly of the ceremonies THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE receiuing of orders be a Sacrament The Papists THat holy Orders are a sacrament rightly and properly so called it was decreed in the Tridentine Councell sess 23. canon 3. And that not onely the error 48 three higher degrees of Priesthood Deaconship subdeaconship but the foure inferiour orders of Exorcistae Acoluthi Lectores Ostiarij doe belong vnto the same sacrament of Orders and are sacraments as well as the other Bellarm cap. 8. lib. de sacram ordinis Argum. 1. Timoth. 4.14 Despise not that gift which was giuen thee through prophesie with the laying on of hands Holy orders giue grace by an externall ceremonie and worke Ergo it is a Sacrament Rhemist in hunc locum Ans. 1. It cannot be proued out of this place that imposition of hands giueth grace for this was an extraordinary gift which S. Paul speaketh of and doth not alwaies follow imposition of hands Secondly this gift was not giuen by the very ceremony of imposition of hands but through prophesie and reuelation of the holy Ghost for it was reuealed vnto the Church by the spirite of prophecie that Timothie was a chosen vessell of God therefore S. Paul saith That worthie thing which is committed vnto thee keepe through the holy Ghost 2. Tim. 1.14 The holy ghost was both the conferrer of that grace and the preseruer of it Imposition thē of hands was but an outward signe of the presence of Gods spirit vpon those that were lawfully ordeined for al vpon whom hands were laid receiued not the holy ghost but such only as were appointed of God And therefore the Apostle chargeth Timothie to lay hands sodenly on no man 1. Timoth. 5.22 which caueat was not needfull if vpon whomsoeuer he had laid his hands they should immediately receiue the holy Ghost The Protestants YOur seuen popish orders we do not at all receiue into the church much lesse can we abide that they should be sacraments The lawfull ordeining of Pastors teachers and Deacons we doe acknowledge but no sacrificing Priesthoode nor no ministring Deaconship at the Altar such orders as we haue notwithstanding we doe not take to be Sacraments much lesse yours that are vtterly to be abolished Argum. 1. Sacraments must haue their institution from Christ so haue not your orders for Christ instituted onely Apostles and Disciples Presbyters and Deacons were founded by the Apostles who notwithstāding had no commission to constitute new Sacraments As for the other fiue orders of Subdeacons Readers Acoluthi Exorcistes doore keepers they are neither read in Scripture nor ordeined of the Apostles nor heard of for many yeeres after Secondly your Sacrament hath neither outward element nor word of institution if you say laying on of hands is the externall signe we answere that the visible signe in a Sacrament must not onely be an externall action but a materiall element as water in Baptisme and bread and wine in the Lords Supper The forme you say is in these wordes pronounced by the Bishop Accipite potestatem offerendi sacrificium Receiue ye power to offer sacrifice Bellarm. ca. 9. We answere againe that this sacrificing office hath no foundation in Scripture the Ministers of the Gospell are called dispensers of Gods Mysteries namely of the word and Sacraments 1. Corinth 4.1 Ministers for Christ not sacrificers of Christ wherefore neither haue ye any word of institution and consequently no Sacrament And I pray you tell me if you will make euery one of your orders a Sacrament then must you needes haue as many Sacraments as there are orders and so shall you haue sixe Sacraments more then you thought for you doe distinguish all the orders in office and forme of consecration one from another and therefore they cannot all make one Sacrament Augustine saith Christus Sacramentis numer◠paucissimis societatem populi colligauit Christ hath ioyned together his people with most fewe Sacraments and then he nameth Baptisme and the Communion Et si quid aliud in Scripturis canonicis commendatur and if any other be commended in Scripture Ergo there is no Sacrament of orders because it is not found in
Scripture as we haue said OF THE EFFICACIE WHICH THEY ascribe to this sacrament The Papists THis sacrament of Orders as they cal it giueth a double grace First it giueth error 49 those that are ordayned abilitie and power to execute their office which is to consecrate and offer vp the body and blood of Christ wherein chiefly the priesthood consisteth and not in preaching the worde for they may be priests though they preach not Concil Trident. sess 23. can 1. By holy orders then the holy Ghost is actually bestowed when those wordes are pronounced Accipâ— spiritum sanctum receiue yee the holy Ghost Canon 4. The Protestants FIrst the Gospell alloweth no externall sacrificing priesthood but a spirituall onely whereby euery Christian is made a king and priest to offer spirituall sacrifices of prayse and thankesgiuing vnto God Apocal. 1.6 And the onely essentiall parte of the office of Ministers vnder the Gospell is to be able dispensers of the mysteries of the word and sacraments 1. Corint 4.1 2. Corinth 3.6 So Augustine also sayth Quicunque aut Episcopus aut presbyter frequenter de Deo loquitur quomodo ad vitam aeternam perueniatur annuntiat meritò Angelus Dei dicitur Whosoeuer Bishop or presbyter doth speake freely of God and preacheth the way to eternall life is an Angel of God This then is the onely principall office of true Pastors to teaâ—h the way to the kingdome of God Secondly it is also a great vntrueth that the holy Ghost is straightway giuen to all those vpon whomsoeuer hands are layd and they admitted to Orders For what neede then that triall and examination which ought to bee had of those which are to be ordayned whereof Saint Paul speaketh 1. Timoth. 5.22 if the only laying on of hands can make able Ministers Nostri sacerdotes sayth one super multos quotidie nomen Domini verba benedictionis imponunt sed in paucis effectus est Our priests doe lay the word of blessing vpon many calling vpoÌ„ the name of God but in few followeth any effect of that blessing And he giueth the reason in another place Dei est effectum tribuere benedictionis It belongeth vnto God to giue effect to Priestly blessing Ergo it is not by onely act and vsing of the ceremony bestowed The Papists AN other effect of their sacrament of orders they say is to imprint a certaine error 50 indeleble marke character in him that is ordayned which can neither by sinne Apostasie or heresie bee blotted out Rhemist 2. Corinth 1. sect 7. And therefore a priest once ordayned can neuer lose his orders or become a lay man agayne Concil Trident. sess 24. can 4. Bellarmin cap. 10. The Protestants FIrst the practise of the popish Church is contrary to their owne rules for I would haue them tell me whether they tooke not the priesthood and anoynting from Iohn Husse when with a payre of sheares they clipped off the skin of his head most cruelly as they were busie in disgrading of him in the Councel of Constance Or when they had grosly abused that reuerend father Bishop Cranmer and vnmanerly behaued themselues in his degradation and clapt him in a poore beggerly thread-bare Lay mans gowne did they not thinke that they had dispoyled him of his priesthood What is now become masters of your indeleble character Or is it your meaning that it may bee clipped or scraped off onely but not washt off or lightly rubbed away Your owne cruell deedes doe ouerthrow your popish principles Augustine is agaynst you Constitutum est in ecclesia ne quisquam post criminis alicuius poenitentiam clericatum accipiat ad clericatum redeat aut in clericatu maneat It is a constitution of the Church that no man after publike penance done for some notorious crime should be either made a clerke or returne to his clerkship or priesthood or bee suffered to continue therein If his priesthood were neither restored to him nor hee suffered to remaine therein then surely he had lost his priesthood THE THIRD PART OF THE ceremonies The Papists error 51 THey doe anoynt the handes of such as are ordayned with oyle and doe enioyne them to shaue their crownes And the higher degree of priesthoode they haue so much broader must their shauen crowne bee Tileman Heshus loc 14. Err. 5. Bellarm. cap. 12. The Protestants WE haue the same opinion of these ceremonies as we haue of the popish orders themselues counting them worthy of no place in the Church of God As for the superstitious custome of anoynting it is a Iewish rite better beseeming Aarons order then the Ministers of Iesus Christ Looke howe hee was anoynted so are wee of him it is sayde The spirite of the Lord is vpon mee because hee hath anoynted mee Luk. 4.18 So the inward working of the spirite is our anoynting 1. Iohn 2.27 Agayne in diuers places of the scripture wee reade of ordayning by imposition of handes Act. 13.3 1. Timoth. 4.14 5.22 2. Timoth. 1.6 But there is no mention at all made of anoynting with oyle And as for the shauing of the crowne it it is worse then a Iewish ceremonie for it seemeth to haue taken beginning from the heathen and the Iewes were forbidden to cutte or make balde their heads Deuteronom 14.1 Leuit. 19.28 In so much as it was a signe of more holines amongst them not to suffer the rasor to come vpon their heads as it is to bee seene in the lawe of the Nazarites Numbers 6. The rest of the questions that concerne the calling of ministers wee haue entreated of more at large Controuers 5. of Ecclesiasticall persons THE THIRD QVESTION OF EXTREME VNCtion First whether it bee a sacrament Secondly of the efficacie Thirdly of the ceremonies THE FIRST PART WHETHER EXtreme Vnction be a sacrament The Papists THat extreme Vnction is rightly and properly a sacrament which is error 52 say they the anoynting of those that are extreme sicke to assure them of remission of their sinnes it was concluded in the Chapter of Trent sess 14. can 1. and is generally maintained by the Church of Rome Bellarmin cap. 2. Argum. Iam. 5.14 The sacrament of extreme Vnction in this place is playnely promulgated by the Apostle being instituted before by our Sauiour Christ Mark 6.13 For here is remission of sinnes promised to the outward element that is the anoynting of the sicke with oyle Ergo a sacrament Rhemist Ans. 1. This anoynting of oyle was a signe onely of the miraculous gift of healing that was then in the Church and therefore was no longer to continue then the gift it self But it is not like will they say that euery one of the Elders had this miraculous gift of healing Answer Though euery particular Elder perhaps had it not yet the whole company of the Eldership might haue it as Saint Paul speaketh of the gift of prophesie giuen to the Eldership 1. Timoth. 4.14 And it is not like that the Apostle
godly men there remaineth doubt mistrust feare error 72 of hell and damnation and the feare of Gods iudgements causeth iust men to humble themselues least they should be damned And so S. Paul saith Worke out your saluation with feare and trembling Philipp 2. Rhemist 1. Iohn 4. sect â— The Protestants Ans. WE acknowledge a dutifull reuerence feare of God alwaies remaining in the godly but it is farre from that seruile and slauish feare which is caused onely by the remembrance of hell fire and eternall iudgement Augustine doth thus resemble the matter The chaste wife saith he and the adulterous doe both feare their husbands sed casta timet ne discedat vir adultera ne veniat But the chaste wife is afraid least her husband should depart the adulterous is afraid least he should come Such a feare as is in the chaste wife we graunt to be in the children of God but not the other 2. We also confesse that the horror of hell is profitable to make a way and entrance for the calling of worldly and hard harted men as the needle or bristle as Augustine saith maketh a way for the thread But in a man already called this feare is expelled by loue as the Apostle saith 1. Ioh. â— â—8 For we must be of those that loue the appearing of Christ 2. Tim. 4.8 Not of that number which feare it and wish it were prolonged August Si possumus efficere fratres vt dies iudicij non veniret puto quia nec sic erat male viuendum If we could bring it about that the day of iudgement should not come at all we ought not for all that to liue ill His meaning is that we ought not to liue well onely for feare of Gods iudgements THE FIFTH PART OF THE VSE of the Law The Papists error 73 THe law they say is by Christ Ministratio vitae effecta made the ministration of life Andr. lib. 5. in qua omnis nostra salus consistit wherein consisteth our saluation Catech. Colom ex Tileman de leg loc 3. err 14. they call it Verbum fidei and verbum Christi the word of Christ and the word of Faith to be obeyed and followed of all Christians that which Christ vttered to the yong man Math. 19.17 If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandements Concil Trident. sess 6. cap. 7. So their opinion is that the law is made vnto vs a meane and instrument of our saluation The Protestants Ans. FIrst our Sauiour vttered those words to the yong man onely to humble him thereby and to teach him to know him selfe for otherwise the Apostles should haue taught contrary doctrine to their master who exhort men onely to beleeue and they shal be saued Act. 16.31 Argum. The Law was not ordeined to saue men but it serueth onely as a Schoolemaster as S. Paul saith to bring vs to Christ Galath 3.24 It also reuealeth and discouereth sinne Rom. 7.7 The Apostle also calleth it the killing letter and ministery of condemnation 2. Cor. 3.6.9 How then can it procure our saluation therefore what can be more opposite and contrary to Scripture then this assertion of theirs Let Augustine speake Testimonium legis eis qui ea non legitimè vtuntur testimonium est quo conuincantur eis qui legitimè vtuntur testimonium est quo demonstratur quò liberandi confugere debeant peccatores The testimonie of the law to them which vse it not aright is a testimony to conuince them to them which doe a testimony to teach them to whom sinners ought to flie for their deliuerance Ergo the law doth not it selfe worke our deliuerance but sendeth vs to our deliuerer THE THIRD PART OF THIS controuersie of Iustification THe particular questions are these First of Free will and the power thereof Secondly of Faith Thirdly of good workes Fourthly of the manner of our iustification THE FIRST QVESTION of Free will THe parts of this question First whether free will in spirituall things were vtterly extinguished by the sinne of Adam Secondly of the power and strength of free will in vs. THE FIRST PART WHETHER FREE WILL be vtterly lost by the transgression of Adam The Papists FRee will is not vtterly extinguished but onely abated in strength and attenuated error 74 Concil Trid. sess 6. cap. 1. The Rhemists also gather by the parable of the man in the Gospell that lay for halfe dead Luk. 10. vers 30. that neither vnderstanding nor free will and other powers of the soule are vtterly extinguished and taken away but wounded onely by the sinne of Adam Rhemist ibid. The Protestants Ans. IT is but a feeble collection and of small force which they draw from this allegorie for allegories and similitudes as they know themselues right well doe not hold in all things but wherein onely they are compared neither doe they necessarily conclude Argum. But that we are altogether dead in sinne by the transgression of Adam the scripture speaketh plainly in many places without allegorie Ephes. 2.1 5. When we were dead in our sinnes he hath quickened vs in Christ. Likewise Coloss. 2.13 he sayth not as in the parable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they left him for halfe dead but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 plaine dead men indeed Augustine sayth Cum peccauit primus homo non in parte aliqua sed tota qua conditus est natura deliquit When the first man sinned he did not offend in any one part but wholly in that nature wherein he was created And in another place Natura tota fuit per liberum arbitrium in ipsa radice vitiata Our nature wholly was corrupted by free will in the very roote or originall that is in Adam Ergo all the powers both of bodie and soule wholly corrupt and decayed in spirituall things THE SECOND PART OF THE POWER AND strength of free will in man The Papists THey say not that a man by his free will only is able to liue well or to obtaine error 75 eternall life but yet by the power of free will stirred prepared and assisted by the grace of God he is able to doe it The first stirring then and motion of the heart they say is of God Then it is the part of free will to apprehend the grace offered and to giue consent vnto it and to worke together with it Trid. Concil sess 6. cap. 5. can 4. Eckius setteth downe foure steps or degrees to iustification The beginning of our calling is onely of God by inspiring of grace into vs this is the first degree The second is in our owne power to giue assent vnto grace once inspired Thirdly to obtaine that which by so assenting we doe desire is onely of Gods gift and this is the third degree gratiae gratum facientis of grace which maketh vs gracious or acceptable The fourth degree of perseuerance in the grace of saluation receiued is partly in our power and free will partly of the grace of God
hath receiued a true liuely faith and is thereby iustified before God can neuer fall away neither can that faith vtterlie perish or faile in him for He that beleeueth is alreadie passed from death to life Iohn 5.24 If then it be possible for a man to be brought from life to death from heauen back againe to hell then may a faithfull beleeuer become also a faithlesse infidell Augustine doth plainely set downe his sentence of this matter Horum fides quae per dilectionem operatur profectò aut omnino non deficit aut siqui sunt quorum deficit reparatur antequam vita ista finiatur Their faith which worketh by loue either neuer faileth at all or if it doe fayle in any it is repaired againe before their life be ended THE EIGHT PART WHETHER wicked men may haue a true faith The Papists THe certaintie of remission of sins with a sure confidence and trust in Christ error 85 may be found euen amongst schismatikes heretikes and wicked men Conc. Trident. sess 6. cap. 9. The Protestants IT is impossible that a true liuelie faith whereby wee are iustified before God which worketh in vs a sure confidence and trust in God should enter into the heart of a wicked man Argum. Christ saith Hee that beleeueth in mee shall neuer thirst Iohn 6.35 And verse 40. This is the will of God that hee that beleeueth in me should haue eternall life Ergo if wicked men and reprobates may haue this faith they also shall haue euerlasting life which is a thing impossible Augustine Nostra fides .i. catholica fides iustos ab iniustis non operum sed ipsa fidei lege discernit quia iustus ex fide viuet The Catholike faith discerneth iust men from vniust not by workes but by the lawe of faith for the iust shall liue by faith If then the difference betweene the godlie and wicked be onely faith if the one may haue faith as well as the other there should bee no difference betweene them THE THIRD QVESTION OF good workes THe parts of this question first what workes are to be counted good works secondly whether there are any good workes without faith thirdly of the vse and office of good workes whether they bee applicatorie expiatorie meritorious fourthly of the distinction of merites fiftly the manner of meriting THE FIRST PART WHICH BE the good workes of Christians The Papists THey doe not onely call them good workes which are commanded of God error 86 but which are also enioyned by the Church and the gouernours thereof and that euen by such workes men are iustified Concil Trident. sess 6. cap. 10. Tapper ex Tileman loc 11. Err. 1. The Protestants SAint Paul defineth good workes otherwise namely those which God hath ordeyned that we should walke in them Ephes. 2.10 They are not the precepts of men but the commandements of God in his word the doing whereof hath the name of good workes As for the traditions and iniunctions of men not warranted by Gods word they are so far from being commended or commanded that our Sauiour calleth the doing thereof but a Worshipping of God in vaine Mark 7.7 Augustine vpon those words in the 103. Psalme vers 18. The louing kindenes of the Lorde is vpon those that keepe his couenant and thinke vpon his commandements to doe them saith thus Vide vt praecepta teneas sed quomodo teneas non memoria sed vita Memoria retinentibus mandata eius non vt reddant ea sed vt faciant ea See that thou keepe Gods commandements but how not in thy memorie but in thy life not to say them by rote but to doe them Ergo they are Gods commandements which we must thinke of to doe them for vnto such the blessing is promised not to the obseruers of mens precepts or traditions THE SECOND PART WHEther there bee any good workes without faith The Papists THough they dare not altogether iustifie the workes of the heathen and infidels error 87 yet they doe excuse them and doe blame vs for saying that infidels doe sinne in honoring their parents in fighting for their Countrey and such like They therefore doe discharge the heathen of sinne in these workes of theirs Rhemist Rom. 14. sect 4. The Protestants THese workes are not sinne in themselues but in infidels they are because they proceede of infidelitie Argum. It is the rule of the Gospell that a corrupt tree cannot bring foorth good fruite Matth. 7.18 But all infidels are corrupt trees being without faith Ergo they can bring forth no good fruite The Pelagians thought to haue posed Augustine with the same question which the papists propound to vs. Was it sinne in the heathen say they to clothe the naked Augustine answereth Non per seipsum factum peccatum est sed de tali opere non in domino gloriari solus impius negat esse peccatum The fact of it selfe is not sin but in doing any such thing not to reioyce in the Lord none but wicked men will denie it to be sinne THE THIRD PART OF THE vse and office of good workes THey make a threefold vse of good workes as they call them first by them the merites of Christ they say are applied vnto vs secondly they doe purge our sinnes thirdly they are meritorious THE FIRST ARTICLE WHEther bona opera be applicatoria The Papists BY any worke proceeding of faith and charitie the merite of Christs passion error 88 is applied to vs Soto ex Tilemann loc 11. err 21. Men by their sufferings and other workes may applie to themselues the generall medicine of Christs merites and satisfaction Rhemist annot 1. Coloss. sect 4. The Protestants IT is the propertie of faith onely to apprehend and applie vnto vs the benefits of Christs passion and all other his merites Argum. Rom. 10.7.8 We neede not saith the Apostle to ascend to heauen or descend into the deepe to bring Christ from thence it is the word of faith which wee preach By faith then we doe scale the heauens and beholde Christ it is not the doctrine of works but the word of faith that performeth this And therefore the Apostle defineth faith to be the ground of things hoped for and the euidence of things not seene Heb. 11.1 This definition cānot agree vnto works or vnto any other thing but faith for then it were no good definition nor yet description Ergo faith onely is the euidence of things inuisible and therefore onely applieth Christs precious merites which are things beleeued and not seene Augustine thus also describeth faith Rerum absentium praesens est fides rerum quae foris sunt intus est fides rerum quae non videntur videtur fides Faith maketh things absent present things without vs to bee within vs things not seene to bee seene Ergo faith onely hath this applicatorie power to applie Christs merites not present nor seene and to make them as our owne THE SECOND ARTICLE WHEther bona
one place for it is as proper to the bodie of Christ to be seene and felt as to be in one place at once 4. Bellarmine granteth being vrged with that argument that Christs soule was in Paradise after his passion and therefore not in hell he confesseth that it was not impossible that Christs soule should be in two places at once Lib. 4. de Christi anima cap. 15. Yea he sayth that Christ may if he will turne al the world into bread and the bread so made conuert into his flesh and so his bodie may be as well in euery place of the world as now it is in the Eucharist Lib. 3. de incarnat cap. 11. What great oddes now I pray you is there between the opinion of the Vbiquitaries and of the Papists but that they say that the bodie of Christ is euery where ordinarily by the power of the Godhead the other say his flesh is in many places at once by a miracle The one sayth Christs bodie actually is in euery place the other that it may be if Christ will THE SECOND PART WHETHER OVR SAVIOVR Christ did verily encrease in knowledge and wisedome as he was man The Papists CHrist they say in the very first creation of his soule and from his conception error 98 was endued with the fulnes of al wisedome grace and knowledge neither can he be sayd properly to haue encreased in any of these gifts 1. Christ was anoynted from his mothers womb and then the spirit of God was vpon him for the Angels that appeared to the shepheards call him Christ Luk. 2.11 And Iohn sayth The word was made flesh full of grace and truth 1. vers 11. Therefore euen then he had receiued all abundance of grace and knowledge Bellarm. de Christi anima lib. 4.2 Ans. 1. We grant that our Sauiour was the Iesus the Christ euen from his natiuitie not that thē he actually straightwaies entred into those offices or receiued plenarie power of all the graces of the spirit but because he was euen from his mothers wombe consecrated and appoynted thereunto for it no more followeth because he is called Christ that he then had his actuall anoynting then that because he was called Iesus from his natiuitie that he had actually performed our redemption The full anoynting of the spirit was fulfilled in his baptisme when the holy Ghost came downe in the likenes of a Doue and then beginning to preach in his first sermon at Nazareth he sheweth the accomplishment of the prophecie of Esay The spirite of the Lord is vpon me c. Luk. 4.18 2. Neither doe the words of Iohn import so much as they gather The word was made flesh and dwelt amongst vs full of grace and truth which is not to be vnderstood of the very first assuming of the flesh but of the dwelling of the word in the flesh amongst vs and so appeared to be full of grace and truth Argum. 2. Christ was the Sonne of God in his very incarnation and euen then was the humanitie perfectly vnited to the Godhead therefore immediatly vpon this vnion and coniunction of both natures in one person must needes follow the fulnes of grace in the humane nature Againe Adam was created in perfect wisedome therefore much more the second Adam Bellar. cap. 4. Ans. 1. If presently vpon the vniting of the two natures together it had been necessarie that the humane nature of Christ should haue receiued whatsoeuer by the presence of the diuine nature was to be conferred vpon it then Christ straight waies must also both in bodie and soule haue been glorified for it can not be denied but that as the bodie of Christ after the resurrection receiued more glorie then before so also his soule being the other part of his humanitie was more glorified By this it is euident that the humanitie receiued not at once the fulnes of all grace and glorie in the first vniting of the Godhead 2. Adam was created perfect in bodie and soule and if Christ therefore ought to haue the fulnes of the gifts of the soule in his creation as Adam had why ought he not also to haue had a perfect bodie as Adam was created withall Wherefore as it was no dishonour to Christ to grow vp in stature of bodie so neither was it to encrease in the gifts of the mind The Protestants THat Christ was euen from his birth and first conception perfect God and perfect man we doe assuredly beleeue and that in the very incarnation the diuine and humane nature were vnited together Also we graunt that the Lord Christ might haue created to himselfe a soule full of all wisedome and knowledge as he might haue made himselfe a perfect bodie but seeing it pleased him to bee borne of a woman and first to dwell in the bodie of an infant wee doubt not to say as the scripture teacheth vs that he also Encreased in wisedome 1. He was in all things like to his brethren onely sinne excepted Heb. 2.17.4.15 Ergo he grew vp and encreased in knowledge according to the manner of men which may be done without sinne 2. The scripture sayth plainly which cannot lye that Iesus grew vp and encreased in wisedome and stature Luk. 2.52 And lest they should answere that this encreasing was onely in the opinion of men it followeth And in fauour with God and men he increased in wisedome stature and fauour not onely in shew before men but in truth before God and as verily and indeed he grew vp in stature so also in wisedome 3. Christ testifieth of himselfe That neither the Angels nor the Sonne of man as he is man knoweth of the day or houre of his comming to iudgement but the father onely Mark 13.31 Ergo Christ as hee was man had not at once all fulnes of knowledge Bellarmine thus expoundeth this place Filius dicitur nescire quia non sciebat ad dicendum alijs The Sonne is sayd not to knowe because he knewe it not to reueale it to others but to keepe it secret to himselfe Ans. First then by the same reason the Angels doe knowe it also but that they are charged not to declare it to men for the text sayth that neither the Angels nor the Sonne of man knoweth the time Secondly in this sense also the father might be sayd not to knowe it for neither hath he reuealed it to any Lastly although we doe affirme according to the scripture that the child Iesus did increase in the gifts of the mind as he did in the stature of his bodie yet we do put great difference between him and all other children that euer came into the world for as his conception birth were not after the cōmon manner for he was cōceiued by the holy Ghost brought forth without trauel and labour as August sayth Nec concipiendo libidinē nec pariendo perpessa est dolorē In conceauing she felt no carnal desire in bearing she suffered no payne So likewise
festiuities of her Conception and Assumption be not kept she should haue none at all and so be thought worthie of lesse remembrance then any other Saint Galat. 4. sect 5. Rhemist The Protestants 1. WE doe not celebrate any festiuall daies in the honour of creatures neither of the Virgine Mary nor any other Saint but only to the honor of God and therefore the feasts of the Annuntiation and Purification may much better be receiued because they belong and are referred vnto Christ then the other festiuities of the assumption and conception of Mary the institution whereof was most superstitious the one for the fayned assumption of her bodie which your owne writers are vncertaine of the other to maintaine the heresie of the Franciscanes that she was conceiued and borne without sinne As for the memorie of the Virgine Mary it may better be kept then by such festiuities as our Sauiour Christ taught to keepe the remēbrance of Mary Magdalene by preaching the Gospell Math. 26.13 Fulk annot Act. 1.7 And if they only are Catholike generations that call her blessed in keeping these festiuities in her memoriall then there were no Catholike generations for many hundred yeeres after and so do you condemne the age of the Apostles for neither then nor many yeres after were these superstitious festiuities heard of But Mary saith in her song From henceforth euen from this time forward shall all generations call me blessed so that if her blessednesse had consisted in the memorie of those daies they should immediatly haue been kept especially the day of her natiuitie Fulk Galath 4. sect 5. 2. We doe allow all praise giuen vnto the Virgine without the dishonour of God and her Sonne and Sauiour Christ we doe acknowledge the honour that God vouchsafed her not to be a meritorious or principall efficient cause of our redemption but onely an holy vessell and instrumentall cause of the conception and birth of Christ by whose only merite and worthines our redemption is perfited as by a proper and principall and onely meritorious efficient cause thereof And therefore those are blasphemous titles which are giuen vnto her to call her the ladder of Heauen and gate of Paradise and such like and so in a manner to make her our redeemer Augustine saith She was more happie in that she conceiued the faith of Christ then in conceiuing the flesh of Christ. If then these titles be vnmeet for her in respect that she receiued the faith of Christ which is common to al the children of God then are they more vnfit in that she conceiued the flesh of Christ. 3. It is great presumption to thinke that the Virgine Mary may command her sonne in heauen seeing she had no authoritie to command him vpon earth in any thing pertaining to his office Ioh. 2.4 And now likewise that carnall respect of children to their parents ceaseth in the kingdome of God As for that superioritie higher kind of honour which she hath aboue al the Saints beside we finde no warrant out of scripture She is respected now in heauen not as she bare the flesh of Christ but as she liued by faith in Christ she also reioyced in God her Sauiour The scripture therefore maketh one condition and estate of all that shall be saued and sayth generally of all of others as well as the Virgine Christs mother That they shall be as the angels in heauen Matth. 22.30 Yea our Sauiour sheweth that Whosoeuer doth the wil of God is his sister brother and mother Math. 12.50 By the which we learne that other the faithfull seruants of GOD may by their faith in Christ be as well accepted of God as if they had borne Christ in the flesh Where then is that high dignitie which she hath as the mother of Christ aboue all Saints Augustine saith Tu concinis sine fine choris coniuncta Angelis Archangelis sociata Thou O Virgine doest reioyce being ioyned vnto the heauenly quire being associated to Angels and Archangels He maketh her not Ladie or Queene of heauen but onely a fellow companion of the Saints and Angels AN APPENDIX OR FIFT PART OF THE MErites of the Virgine and of the Aue Maria. The Papists 1. THey doe teach and hold that she onely amongst all women deserued to error 84 beare the redeemer of the world and so by her merites obtained that fauour to be the mother of Christ. Argum. The Angel saluteth her calleth her Full of grace which sheweth the prerogatiue that she had aboue other women and the worthines that was in her Rhemist Luk. 1. sect 12.15 The Protestants Ans. 1. Wee acknowledge that herein she was blessed aboue all other women in that she was chosen to be the mother of our Sauiour and that she was endued fully with the graces of the holy Ghost but those graces she had not of her selfe but of the free gift of God without her merites 2. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth freely beloued not full of grace as it is likewise taken Ephes. 1.6 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He hath made vs accepted in his beloued Sonne 3. She her selfe confesseth her selfe in her song to bee of a lowe degree poore in spirit and hungrie whom God in mercie looked vpon Luk. 1.50 whereas God sent away the proud and rich as the proud Pharisie that thought himselfe rich of good workes obtained nothing of God Luk. 18. Wherefore if she had stood vpon her owne deserts she had made her selfe rich not poore neither should she haue magnified the mercie of God but his iustice for when a reward is giuen according to desert it is of his iustice and not mercie Augustine thus commenteth vpon the words of her song Magnificet animae mea Dominum recordetur quomodo nullis suis praecedentibus meritis sed sola dei bonitate sit ab iniquitate saluata Let my soule praise the Lord and remember how that not by any merites going before but through the only gracious goodnes of God it is deliuered from sinne Ergo Mary not saued by her merites nor consequently the mother of Christ by her merites but onely by the meere fauour of God The Papists 2. THey much commend the often vsing of the Aue Mary which is done say error 85 they to the honour of Christ and our Ladie Argum. They be the very summe and abridgement of the whole Gospell and therefore to be vsed Rhemist Luk. 1. sect 11. The Protestants 1. You do shamefully abuse those words in making a praier of them which was but a forme of salutation vsed by the Angel neither can you say them in that sense they were vttered in by the Angel Also you offend in the vaine repetition of them vpon your beades as the heathen did Math. 6.7 and in committing idolatrie in the inuocating of the Virgine and praying vnto her in these words who is a creature and not a God to be called vpon 2. What mysterie soeuer be contained
in these words yet the people vnderstand nothing at all And though we denie not but that the words are holy and mysticall yet it followeth not that they should be vsed for a prayer 3. What great account they make of the Aue Mary it may appeare by this that they thinke they may alter and change it and adde to it at their pleasure as by Pope Sixtus the 4. there was a clause more added vnto the common Aue Mary in this manner Haile Mary full of grace the Lord is with thee blessed art thou amongst women and blessed is the fruite of thy wombe Iesus Christ and blessed is Anna thy mother of whom thy virgines flesh hath proceeded without blot of originall sinne What a fearefull thing is this that they should thus dare to adde vnto the scriptures How can they now escape that iudgement that is threatned against all those that doe adde or take ought to or from the word of God Apocal. 22.18 Thus farre of such questions and controuersies as concerne the kingdome of Christ which is his Church of the which we haue now entreated at large first in generall of the whole and then of the seuerall parts and members thereof in order Now follow those controuersies which belong vnto the Priesthood of Christ the third excellent and glorious office of our Sauiour which his Priesthood is partly seene in his intercession and mediation for vs partly in his sacrifice where we are to handle the great and waightie controuersies of the Sacraments by the which the sacrifice of his death is applied vnto vs. THE TENTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE INTERCESSION AND MEDIAtion of Christ whether he be onely our Mediatour and Intercessor The Papists THey seeme in these very words to confesse that Christ is the onely singular error 86 aduocate and patrone of mankinde that by himselfe alone and by his owne merites procureth all grace and mercie none asking or obtaining either grace in this life or glorie in the next but by him But this letteth not but that there may be other inferiour mediatours though not in that singular sense Rhemist annot 1. Timoth. 2. sect 4. Argum. Christ is the only Sauiour and Redeemer of the world yet the name of Sauiour and Redeemer is giuen to men in the scriptures as Iud. 3.9 Othniel is called a Sauiour Act. 7.35 Moses a Deliuerer or Redeemer and all this without derogation to him that in more excellent manner is the onely Sauiour of the world Ergo there may be also many mediatours in an inferiour degree to that singular mediatour to offer vp our praiers Rhemist ibid. Ans. 1. If Christ be sufficient to procure all grace and mercie vnto vs what neede then the mediation or inuocation of Saints for wee must either doubt of his power in ioyning other helpers with him or make question of his good will and readines to helpe vs in making other mediatours vnto him 2. They make other mediatours and intercessors beside Christ euen in that high and singular degree for not onely Christ by their doctrine by his merites procureth grace but other Saints also by their merites are our mediatours as it is plaine to see in that popish praier Tu per Thomae sanguinem c. By the blood of Thomas which for thee he did spend make vs Christ to climbe whither Thomas did ascend In this blasphemous prayer and a thousand such they pray only to Christ as God not as mediatour men departed and many of them no Saints they make their onely mediatours by their owne proper merites See Fulk ibid. Againe their Saints are not onely intercessors for grace but conferrers of grace and helpe which is the highest degree of mediation They appoynt seuerall patrones amongst the Saints for all purposes S. Apollonia for the tooth-ach Saint Rooke for the pestilence Saint Petronill for the ague Saint Gregorie for Schollers Saint Morris for Souldiers Saint Luke for Painters Saint Crispin for Shoomakers Saint Nicholas for the sea Saint Iodocus for corne Saint Vrbane for wine And thus doe they not onely as they beare vs in hand pray for these graces and blessings but they haue power themselues to bestow them Ans. 3. Concerning the name and title of Sauiour and Redeemer we answere first men are called in the Scripture Deliuerers and Sauiours in respect of some temporal deliuerance not of the spiritual or eternal redemption which belongeth onely to Christ but you make your Saints mediators of eternall redemption Secondly they whom the Scripture calleth Redeemers and Sauiours were appoynted by God for such temporall deliuerance but you cannot shewe the like appoyntment for Saints to be mediators of eternall saluation though in an inferiour degree to Christ. Thirdly seeing the name of God and Christ is giuen to men in the scriptures as to Princes and Prophets why may you not as well say that there may be many Gods and Christs properly though in an inferiour degree to him which is only God and Christ as to appoynt other inferiour Redeemers Sauiours and Mediators The Protestants WE acknowledge but one onely Mediatour as well of intercession as redemption euen Iesus Christ our Lord to whom and through whom all our praiers supplications ought to be made to him we only pray as being one God with the Father and the holy Ghost by him and through him we only pray as being the only Mediatour betweene God and man Arg. 1. S. Paul saith There is one mediatour of God and men the man Iesus Christ 1. Tim. 2.5 Hence we doe frame this argument The mediator betweene God and men must himselfe be both God and man but so is none but Christ Ergo he is the onely Mediatour Arg. 2. He is onely the aduocate and mediatour for our sinnes that is the propitiation for our sinnes 1. Ioh. 2.1 Christ only is the propitiation for our sinnes Ergo the onely mediatour Augustine thus writeth vpon this place Si Apostolus ita diceret c. If the Apostle had sayd thus If any man sinne you haue me a mediatour with the father and I doe by my praier obtaine pardon for your sinnes as Parmenianus in a certaine place maketh the Bishop a mediatour betweene the people God Quis sicut Apostolum Christi non sicut Antichristum intueretur Who would behold him as an Apostle of Christ and not as Antichrist It is then Antichristian doctrine in Augustines iudgement to make any other mediators or intercessors beside Christ. HERE FOLLOW SVCH CONTROVERSIES as concerne the Sacraments of the Church OF the Sacraments then wee must first intreate in generall and afterward handle them in particular THE ELEVENTH GENERAL CONTROVERSIE OF THE SACRAMENTS IN GENERAL THis Controuersie containeth diuers questions first of the nature and definition of a Sacrament Secondly of the efficacie and vertue of the Sacraments Thirdly of the number and order of the Sacraments the difference and preeminence amongst them They thus follow in their order THE FIRST