the minde of the learned as in the auncient Fathers writings and therefore haue more credit than the Fathers writings Secondly they are commonly recorded of more than one of the Fathers and so haue firmer testimonie than any one of their writings Thirdly if there should be any Apostolical Tradition related but of one auncient Father yet it should be of more credit than any other thing of his owne inuention because that was registred by him as a thing of more estimation And againe some of the rest of those blessed and godly personages would haue reprooued it as they did all other false-hoods if it had not bene such indeed as it was tearmed Which when they did not they gaue a secrete approbation of it for such and so that hath the interpretatiue consent at least of the learned of that age and the following for Apostolicall Tradition But M. P. prooues the contrarie by S. PAVL who sayeth * Act. 26.22 That I continue to this daye witnessing both to small and great saying no other thing then that which the Prophets and MOSES did say should come Why make you here a full poynt let S. PAVL make an ende of his speech and tell vs for what poynts of doctrine hee alleageth MOSES and the Prophets Marrie to prooue that CHRIST should suffer death and rise againe and that hee should giue light to the Gentils For these and such like which were euidently fore-tolde in holy writ hee needed not to alleage any other proofe but when hee was to perswade them to abandon MOSES Lawe he then deliuered to them the decrees of the Apostles and taught them to keepe them * Act. 16. As also when hee instructed the Corinthians in the Sacrament of the Altar he beginneth with Tradition saying * 1. Cor. 12 I deliuer vnto you as I haue receiued from our Lord not in writing but by word of mouth And in the same Chapter putteth downe the contentious scripturist with the custome of the Church saying If any man lust to striue we haue no such custome so that out of S. PAVL wee learne to alleadge Scriptures when they be plaine for vs and when they beare not so cleare with vs to pleade Tradition and the custome of the Church Hitherto I haue confuted what M. P. brought against Traditions Nowe to that which he saith for them in our behalfe First saith he the Catholikes alleage * 2 Thes 2.15 Where the Apostle bids the Church to keepe the Ordinances which he taught them either by word of mouth or by Epistle Hence they gather that besides the written worde there bee vnwritten Traditions that are necessarie to be kept and obeyed M. Perkens ANSWERE It is likely that this Epistle to the Thessalonians was the first that euer PAVL wrote to anie Church and then some-things needefull to saluation might de deliuered by word of mouth but that was afterwardes written in some others of his Epistles REPLIE OBserue first that insteede of Traditions according to the Greeke and Latine word they translate * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ordinances euer flying the word Tradition where any thing is spoken in commendation of them But if any thing sound against them then thrust they in the word Tradition although the Greeke word beare it not See for this their corruption and many other a learned Treatise named The Discouerie of false translations penned by Maister GREGORIE MARTIN a man most singulerly conuersant in the Greeke and Hebrue tongues Secondlie is it not plaine dotage to auouch that this seconde Epistle to the Thessalonians was the first that euer hee wrote Surely if none of his other were written before it yet his firste to the same Church muste needes haue bene written before it But let vs giue the man leaue to dreame some-times To the poynt of the answere that all was written after in some other of his Epistles which before had bene deliuered by word of mouth How prooueth M. P. that the man hath such confidence in his owne worde that hee goeth not once about to prooue it Good Sir hold you not here that nothing is needefull to be beleeued which is not written in the word Shew vs then where it is written in the word that Saint PAVL wrote in his later Epistles that which he taught by word of mouth before or else by your owne rule it is not needefull to beleeue it But yet for a more full satisfaction of the indifferent reader I will set downe the opinions of some of the auncientest and best Interpreters of this place of the Apostle that we may see whether they thought that S. PAVL committed all to writing and left nothing by Tradition S. CHRYSOSTOME in his most learned and eloquent Comentaries vpon this text concludeth thus Hereupon it is manifest that the Apostles deliuered not all in their Epistles but many things also vnwritten and those things are aswell to be beleeued as the written OECVMENIVS and THEOPHILACTVS vpon that place teache the same S. BASIL * De spu cap. 27. speaketh thus I hold it Apostolicall to perseuer in Traditions not written for the Apostle sayeth I commend you that ye are mindfull of my precepts and do hold the Traditions euen as I deliuered them vnto you and then alleageth this text Hold the Traditions which you haue receiued of mee either by Word or Epistle S. IOHN DAMASCEN accordeth with the former saying * Lib. 4. De fide cap. 17 That the Apostles deliuered many things without writing S. PAVL doth testifie when he writeth Therefore brethren stand and hold the Traditions which haue bene taught you either by word of mouth or by Epistle These holy and judicious expositors of S. PAVL free from all partialitie gather out of this text of his that many things necessarie to be beleeued euen vntil their daies remained vnwritten and were religiouslie obserued by Tradition which throweth flat to the ground M. P. his false supposition fenced with neither reason nor authotie that S. PAVL put in writing afterward all that he had first taught by word of mouth Moreouer S. PAVL immediatly before his death in one of the last of his Epistles commandeth his deare disciple TIMOTHY * 2. Tim. 2. To commend vnto the faithfull that which he heard of him by many witnesses not that only which he should finde written in some of his Epistles or in the written Gospell The second Argument for Traditions is this to beleeue that there be so many bookes of holy Scripture and no more and that those be they which are commonly taken so to be is very necessarie to saluation now this is not to be found written in any place of holy Scripture but is receiued onely by Tradition wherefore it is necessarie to saluation to beleeue some Tradition M. P. answereth that the bookes of the Old and New Testament be Scripture is not beleeued on bare Tradition but by the bookes themselues on this maner Let the man who
giuen any credit vnto the Apostles doctrine vnlesse by S. PETER and the other Apostles it had bene first examined and approoued * Tertal li. 4. in M rc Hierom. ep 89. que est 11. inter ep Augustinâ— August lib 28. cont faâ—st c. 4 Againe when there arose a most dangerous question of Abrogating MOSES Lawe Was it left to euerie Christian to decide by the written Worde Or would many of the faithful beleeue S. PAVL that worthie Apostle in the matter Not so but vp they went to Ierusalem to heare what the Pillers of the Church would saye Where by the decree of the Apostles in counsell the controuersie was ended Which S. PAVL afterward deliuered in his Preaching commanding all to obserue and keepe the decree and ordinance of the Apostles * Act. 16. And if it would not be tedious I could in like maner shew how in like sort euery hundreth yeere after errors and heresies rising by misconstruction of the written Word they were confuted and rejected not by the written Worde onely but by the sentence and declaration of the Apostles Schollers and successors See Cardinall BELLARMINE * Tom. 1 lib 3. cap 6 I will onely recorde two noble examples of this recourse vnto Antiquitie for the true sense of Gods word The first out of the Ecclesiasticall Historie * Lib. 11. cap. 9 whereof Saint GREGORY NAZIANZEN and Saint BASIL two principall lights of the Greeke Church this is recorded They were both noble men brought vp together at Athens And afterwarde for thirteene yeeres space laying aside all profaine bookes imployed their studie wholie in the holy Scriptures The sense and true meaning whereof they sought not out of their owne Iudgement and presumption as the Protestants both doe and teach others to doe but out of their Predecessors writings and authoritie namelie of such as were knowen to haue receiued the rule of vnderstanding from the Tradition of the Apostles These be the verie wordes The other example shall be the principall pillar of the Latine Church S. AVGVSTINE who not only exhorteth aduiseth vs to follow the decree of the auncient Church if we will not be deceiued with the obscuritie of doubtful questions * Lib. cont Crescon cap. 33. but plainely affirmeth That he would not beleeue the Gospel if the authoritie of the Church did not mooue him vnto it * Cont. ep fund c. 5. Which words are not to be vnderstood as Caluin would haue them that S. AVGVSTINE had not bene at first a Christian if by the authoritie of the Church hee had not bene thereunto perswaded but that when he was a learned and Iudicious Doctor and did write against Heretikes euen then he would not beleeue these bookes of the Gospell to haue bene penned by diuine inspiration and no others and this to be the true sense of them vnlesse the Catholike Church famous then for antiquitie generallity and consent did tell him which and what they were So farre was he off from trusting to his owne skill and judgement in this matter which notwithstanding was most excellent This matter is so large that it requireth a whole question but being penned vp within the compasse of one objection I will not dwell any longer in it but here fold-vp this whole question of Traditions in the authorities of the auncient Fathers out of whom because I haue in answering M. P. and else-where as occasion serued cited alreadie many sentences I will here be briefe S. IGNATIVS the Apostles Scholler doth exhort all Christians * Euseb lib 30.36 To sticke fast vnto the Traditions of the Apostles some of which he committed to writing POLICARPVS by the authoritie of the Apostles words which he had receiued from their owne mouthes confirmed the faith full in trueth and ouerthrew the Heretikes * Ibid. lib 5 cap. 20. S. IRENEVS who imprinted in his heart Apostolicall Traditions receiued from POLICARP sayeth * If there should be a controuersie about any meane question ought wee not to runne vnto the most auncient Churches in the which the Apostles had conuersed and from them take that which is cleere and perspicuous to define the present question For what if the Apostles had not written any thing at all must we not haue followed the order of Traditions which they deliuered to them to whom they deliuered the Churches ORIGEN teacheth that the Church receiued from the Apostles by Tradition to baptize Infants * Rom. 6 ATHANASIVS sayeth e Lib. de decret Nâ—caeni conâ— We haue prooued this sentence to haue bene deliuered from hand to hand by Fathers to Fathers but ye O new Iewes and sonnes of Caiphas what Auncestors can ye shew of your opinion S. BASIL hath these words * De Spâ— Sanct. c. 2 We haue the doctrine that is kept and preached in the Church partly written and part we haue receiued by Tradition of the Apostles in mysterie both which be of the same force to godlinesse and no man opposeth against these who hath at the least but meane experience of the Lawes of the Church See GREGORY NAZIANZ Orat. 1. in Iulian. Because I haue cited alreadie some of the Latine Auncient Doctors Insteede of the rest I will recorde out of them in a worde or two how olde rotten Heretikes vsed alwaies to reject vnwritten Traditions and flie wholy vnto the written worde See the whole booke of TERTVLLIANS prescriptions against Heretikes which principally handleth this verie poynt The same doth IRENEVS witnesse of the Valentinians and Marcionis * Lib. 3. c. 2 The Arrians common song vnto the Catholikes was I will not admit to be read any words that are not written in the Scriptures as witnesseth S. HILARY in his booke against CONSTANTIVS the Emperour against whom he alleadgeth the preaching of the Apostles and the authoritie of the auncient Bishops expressed in his liuely colours S. AVGVSTINE some thousand two hundreth yeeres agoe recordeth the very forme of arguing which the Protestants vse now-a-daies in the person of Maximinus an Arrian in his first booke against him in the beginning If thou shalt saith this Heretike bring any thing out of the Scriptures which is common to all wee must needes heere thee but these wordes which are without the Scriptures are in no sorte to bee receiued of vs when as the Lorde himselfe hath admonished vs and said in vaine doe they worship me teaching commandements and precepts of men How S. AVGVSTINE opposed against them vnwritten Traditions hath ben afore declared The like doth S. BERNARD affirme of certaine Heretikes of his time called * Hom. 62 Cantica Apostolici So that most truely it may be concluded that euen as we Catholikes haue learned of the Apostles and auncient Fathers our noble progenitors to stand fast and hold the Traditions which we haue receiued by worde of mouth aswell as that which is written Euen so the Protestants haue receiued as it were from hand to hand of their
that you finde no reliefe at all in Saint Bernard touching the mayne point that either the Pope or Church of Rome is Antichrist And all the world might meruaile if out of so sweete a Doctor and so obedient vnto the Pope anie such poison might be sucked Lib. 2. de Cons ad Fugea specially weighing well what he hath written vnto one of them to whome he speaketh thus Goe to let vs yet enquire more diligently who thou art and what person thou bearest in the Church of God during the time Who art thou A great Priest the highest Bishoppe thou art the Prince of Bishops the heire of the Apostles and in dignity Aaron in authority Moyses in Power Peter thou art he to whome the Keyes were deliuered to whom the sheepe were committed There are indeede also other Porters of Heauen and Pastors of flockes but thou art so much the more glorious as thou hast inherited a more excellent name aboue them they haue their flocks allotted to them to each man one but to thee all were committed as one flocke to one man thou art not only Pastor of the sheepe but of all other Pastors thou alone art the Pastor And much more to this purpose which being his cleare opinion of the Pope how absurd is it out of certayne blinde places broken sentences of his to gather that he thought the Pope of Rome to bee neither sheepe nor Pastor of Christs Church but verie Antichrist himselfe There is a grosse fault also in the Canon of Pope Nicolas as he citeth it that the Popes was to be created by the Cardinals Bishops of Rome As though there were some 30. or 40. Bishops of Rome at once but of the matter of election else where M. PERKINS hauing lightly skirmished with a broken sentence or two out of one Catholike Authour flyeth to a late heretike called Ioachim and quoteth Iewell for relator of it A worshipfull testimonie of one heretike and that vpon the report of an other he the most lying Authour of these dayes As for the late Poet Petrarke his wordes might easely be answered but because he quoteth no place I will not stand to answere it But to close vp this first combat a sentence is set downe out of the famous Martir Ireneus that Antichrist should be Lateinos a Roman Here be as many faults as words That learned auncient Doctor discoursing of Antichrist his proper name Cap. 13. out of these wordes of the reuel the number of the beast is 666. And obseruing the letters of the greeke Alphabet by which they doe number as we doe by ciphers sayeth that among others the word Lateinos doth contayne those letters which amount just to the number of 666. and consequently that Antichrists proper name perhaps might bee Lateinos but more likely it is to be Teitan as he sayeth there and lastly that it is most vncertayne what his name shall be See the place gentle reader learne to beware of such deceiptfull merchants as make no conscience to corrupt the best Authours and being often warned of it will neuer learne to amēd Ireneus leaueth it most doubtfull what shall be Antichrists name And among diuerse wordes esteemeth Lateinos to be the vnlikeliest And yet M. PERKINS reporteth him to say resolutely that his name shall be Lateinos and then to make vp the matter turneth Lateinos a proper name with S. Ireneus into Roman an appellatiue which noteth only his country Fie vpon that cause which cannot be vpholden and maintayned but by a number of such paltry shiftes Thus come we at length to the end of M. PERKINS proofs reproofs in his prologue where we finding litle fidelity in his allegations of the fathers badde construction and foule ouersight in the text of holy Scripture briefly great malice but slender force against the Church of Rome we are to returne the words of his theame to all good Christians Goe out of her my people Forsake the enemies of the Roman Church And as our Ancestors did the Pagan Emperours who drewe out her most pure bloud so let vs flie in matters of faith Religion from all heretikes that of late also spared not to shedde abundance of the same most Innocent bloud vnlesse to your greater condemnation you had leifer be partakers of her sinnes and receiue of her plagues And because I purpose God willing not only to confute what M. PERKINS bringeth against the Catholike doctrine but some what also in euerie Chapter to fortifie and confirme it I will here deliuer what some of the most auncient most learned most holy Fathers doe teach concerning ioyning with the Church and Pope of Rome from whose society Protestants labour tooth and nayle to withdawe vs. And because of this we must treat more amply in the question of supreamacie I will vse here their authority onely whome M. PERKINS citeth against vs. S. Bernard is cited already S. Ireneus Scholler of S. Policarpe he of S. Iohn the Euangelist of the Church of Rome writeth thus To this Church Lib. 3. c. 3. by reason of her more mighty principality it is necessarie that euery Church that is the faithfull on all sides to condescend and agree in and by which alwayes the tradition of the Apostles hath beene preserued of them that be round about her Saint Ierome writing to Damasus Pope of Rome sayeth I following none as chiefest but Christ doe in participation ioyne with thy blessednesse that is with the chayre of Peter I knowe the Church to be builded vpon that Rocke Whosoeuer doth eate the Paschall Lambe out of this house is a profane fellowe he that is not found within the Arke of Noe shall when the floudes arise perish And a litle after I knowe not Vitalis I refuse Meletius I take no notice of Paulinus he that gathereth not with thee scattereth that is he that is not with Christ is with Antichrist Marke and embrace this most learned Doctors Iudgement of joyning with the See of Rome in all doubtfull questions he would not trust to his owne wit skill which were singuler nor thought it safe to rely vpon his learned wise neighbours he durst not set vp his rest with his owne Bishoppe Paulinus who was a man of no meane marke but the Patriarke of Antioch but made his assured stay vpon the see of Rome as vpon an vnmoueable Rocke with which sayeth he if we doe not communicate in faith and Sacraments we are but profane men voyde of all Religion In a word we belong not to Christ but be of Antichrists trayne See how flat contrary this most holy auncient Father is to M. PERKINS M. PERKINS would make vs of Antichrists bande because we cleaue vnto the Bishoppe of Rome Whereas S. Hierome holdeth all to appertayne to Antichrist who be not fast lincked in matters of Religion with the Pope and See of Rome And so to conclude with this point euery true Catholike must say with S. Ambrose Lib.
his will and ordinaunce God doth in baptisme for Christs sake pardon both all sinnes and taketh fully away all payne due to sinne so that he who dieth in that state goeth presently to heauen But if we doe afterward vngratefully forsake God and contrary to our promise transgresse against his commaundementes then loe the order of his diuine justice requires that we be not so easely receiued againe into his fauour But he vpon our repentance pardoning the sinne and the eternall punishment due vnto it through Christ doth exact of euery man a temporall satisfaction answerable vnto the fault committed not to supply Christs satisfaction which was of infinite value and might more easely haue taken away this temporall punishment then it doth the eternall But that by the smarte and griefe of this punishment the man may be feared from sinning and be made more carefull to auoyde sinne and also by this meanes be made members conformable to Christ our head that suffering with him we may raigne with him And therefore he hauing satisfied for the eternall punishment which wee are not able to doe doth lay the temporall payne vpon our shoulders Gal. 6. that according vnto the Apostle Euerie man doe beare his owne burden Nay saith M. PERKINS we must then be newe Christs and Redeemers and Priestes of the same order with himselfe Nothing so but hauing grace from him we may in vertue thereof satisfie not for the crime it selfe or euerlasting punishment which is lincked with it because that would require an infinite vertue But for the temporall payne of it one indued with grace may satisfie for the measure of stripes must not exceede the rate of the fault the punishment then resting vnsatisfied being limited a creature may pay it And that the Reader may better perceiue what we meane by the temporall payne Let him consider that in sinne are two thinges the one is the turning away from God whome we offend the other is the turning vnto the thing for the loue of which we offend as for glory lust lucre or such like the sinner transgresseth Now when he is by the grace of God conuerted his turning away from God both the sinne and the eternall payne due vnto it are freely through Christ pardoned but for the pleasure which he tooke in the sinne the man himselfe is to satisfie and so according vnto the greatnes of that his pleasure he is to doe penance But Christ saith Master PERKINS said On the Crosse it is finished Wherefore all satisfaction was at CHRISTS death ended as well temporall as eternall Answere That those wordes haue a farre different sence To wit that Christ had then ended his course and fulfilled all prophecies and endured all such tormentes as he pleased God to impose vpon him for the redemption of mankinde of satisfaction temporall there is no mention neither can any thing be drawne thence against it No more can bee out of this other Christ made sinne for vs That is 2. Cor. 5. the punishment of sinne as Master PERKINS gloseth it but the learned say an hoast or sacrifice for sinne But we graunt that he suffered the punishment for our sinne and say consequently that all sinne is pardoned freely for his sake and the payne of hell also which is punishment of sinne but not other temporall paynes such as it hath pleased the justice and wisedome of God to reserue vnto euery sinner to beare in his owne person And after this sorte and no other was God in Christ reconciling the world to him selfe And that Saint Paul vnderstood well that Christs sufferinges did not take away ours may be gathered by these his wordes I reioyce in suffering for you Collos 1. and doe accomplish those thinges that want of the Passions of Christ in my flesh for his body which is the Church But of this point more when we come vnto the Argumentes for the Catholike part Nowe to M. PERKINS second reason In sundry places saith he of Scripture we are said to be redeemed iustified and saued freely but this word freely importeth that we are saued without doeing any thing our selues in that matter of saluation Answere Not so good Sir for euen in your owne Doctrine it is necessary that yee beleeue and bringe forth the fruites of repentance and that nowe and then yee make some short prayers and receiue the communion and doe many other odde thinges in that matter of saluation Wherefore the word freely doth not exclude all our working and suffering in that matter M. PERKINS third reason We pray daily forgiue vs our sinnes Nowe to plead pardon and to satisfie for our sinnes are cleane contrary Answere If our sinnes be mortall we craue pardon both of the sinne and the eternall punishment annexed and doe willingly withall satisfie for the temporall payne as the man who is conuicted of high treason and hauing both his life honour landes and goodes pardoned and restored vnto him doth very joyfully endure three monethes imprisonment and any reasonable fine sette on his head If our sinnes be veniall then that prayer is a speciall meane both to obtayne pardon of the fault and release of all the payne as witnesseth S. Augustine saying In Enchirid c. 71. That for the daylie short and light offences without which this life is not ledde the daylie prayer of the faithfull doth satisfie And that is not true which Master PERKINS addes that wee are taught in that prayer wholy and only to vse the plea of Pardon For in the same petition wee are taught also to pardon others euen as we will looke to be pardoned Againe if there were only a plea of pardon it would not serue M. PERKINS purpose For who would say that within the compasse of the Pater noster all thinges necessary to saluation be conteyned besides prayer is one part of satisfaction as shall be proued hereafter and so by oft praying for pardon we may well satisfie for much temporall punnishment M. PERKINS fourth Argument is taken out of certaine odde fragments of auncient writers Turtul de Bapts Guiltines being taken away the punishment is also taken away True he that is guilty of nothing cannot justly be punished for guiltines is a binding vp to punishment as M. PERKINS defineth then if the band to punishment be cancelled Pag. 28. the party is freed but all this is nothing to the purpose for guiltines of temporall punishment doth remaine after the sin and guilt of eternall be released De verb. Apost ser 37. In Enchir. cap. 70. Augustine saith Christ by taking vpon him the punishment and not the fault hath done away both fault and punishment Iust the eternall punishment which was due to that fault not the temporall as S. Augustine himselfe declareth God of compassion doth blot out our sinnes committed if conuenient satisfaction be not on our parts neglected Tom. 10. Hom. 5. To that other sentence out of him When we are gonne out of this
hath then neede of much confession bitter teares a sharpe combat of watching Idem Am. ad virg lap cap. 8. Orat. in sanct lum and vncessant and continued fasting if the offence were light and more tollerahle yet let the penance be equall vnto it S. Gregory Nazianzen saith It is as great an euill to pardon without some punishment as to punish without all pittie For as that doth loose the bridle to all licentiousnes so this doth straine it too much Idem de paup amor By compassion on the poore and faith sinnes are purged therefore let vs be cleansed by this compassion let vs scoure out the spottes and filth of our soules with this egregious herbe that makes it white some as woole others as snowe according to the proportion of euery mans compassion and almes De helia â—â—eiun S. Ambrose saith We haue many helpes whereby we may redeeme our sinnes hast thou mony Redeeme thy sinne not that our Lord is to be bought and solde but thou thyselfe art solde by thy sinnes redeeme thy selfe with thy workes redeeme thee with thy mony Epist 82. And How could we be saued vnlesse we washed away our sinnes by fasting S. Hierome maketh Paula a blessed Matron say My face is to be disfigured which against the commandement of God I painted my body is to be afflicted that hath taken so great pleasure my often laughter is to be recompenced with continuall weeping Ad Eusioch de obitu Paule my silkes and soft cloathing is to be chaunged into rough haire Reade another Epistle of his to the same Eustochium about the preseruing of her virginity and see what penance himselfe did being a most vertuous young man Epist 54. S. Augustine saith He that is trulie penitent lookes to nothing else then that he leaues not vnpunished the sinne which he committed For by that meanes not sparing our selues he whose high and iust iudgement no contemptuous person can escape doth spare vs. Li 50. hom Hom. 50. cap. 11. Cap. 15. And he sheweth how that a penitent sinner doth come to the Priest and receiue of him the measure of his satisfaction And saith directly against our Protestants position That it is not sufficient to amend our manners and to depart from the euill which we haue committed vnlesse we doe also satisfie God for those thinges which we had donne Lib. 6. in 1. Reg. S. Gregory saith That sinnes are not only to be confessed but to be blotted out with the austerity of penance I will close vp these testimonies with this sentence of our learned countriman venerable Bede In Psal 1. Delight saith he or desire to sinne when we doe satisfaction is lightly purged by almesdeedes and such like but consent is not rubbed out without great penance now custome of sinning is not taken away but by a iust and heauie satisfaction And if you please in fewe wordes to heare the Protestants workes of penance and satisfaction In steede of our fasting and other corporall correction they fall to eating and that of the best flesh they can get and take in the Lord all such bodely pleasure as the company of a woman will afforde In lieu of giuing almes vnto the poore they pill them by fines and vnreasonable rents and by vsury and crafty bargaines are not ashamed to cousen their nearest kinne Finally in place of prayer and washing away their owne sinnes by many bitter teares they sing meerely a Geneua Psalme and raile or heare a rayling at our imagined sinnes or pretended errours And so leaue and lay all payne and sorrowe vpon Christs shoulders thinking themselues belike to be borne to pleasure and pastime and to make merry in this worlde FIRST OF TRADITIONS M. PARK pag. 134. Traditions are doctrines deliuered from hand to hand either by worde of mouth or writing besides the written word of God OVR CONSENT WE Hold that the very word of God was deliuered by Tradition from ADAM to MOSES who was the first Pen-man of holy Scripture Item that the Historie of the New Testament as some for eight not eightie or as other thinke for twentie yeares went from hand to hand by Tradition till penned by the Apostles or being penned by others was approoued by them Hitherto we agree but not in this which he interlaceth that in the state of Nature euery man was instructed of God immediatly in both matters of faith and religion For that God then as euer since vsed the ministerie aswel of good fathers as godly masters as ENOCH NOE ABRAHAM and such like to teach their children and seruants the true worship of God true faith in him otherwise how should the word of God passe by Tradition froÌ„ ADAM to MOSES as M. P. affirmeth If no childe learned anie such thing of his Father but was taught immediatly from God but M. P. seemeth to regard little such pettie contradictions His 2. concl We hold that the Prophets our Sauiour Christ his Apostles spake did many things good true which were not written in the Scriptures but came to vs by Tradition but these were not necessary to be beleeued For one example he puts that the B. Virgin MARY liued dyed a Virgin but it is necessarie to saluation to beleeue this for HELVIDIVS is esteemed by S. AVGVSTINE an Heretike for denying it * De haeres ad Quod. li. 84. His 3. Concl. We hold that the Church of God hath power to prescribe Ordinances Traditions touching time place of Gods worship And touching order comelinesse to be vsed in the same mary with these foure caueats First that it prescribe nothing childish or absurd See what a reuerent opinion this man carryeth of the Church of God gouerned by his holy spirit that it neuerthelesse may prescribe things both childish absurde But I must pardon him because he speaketh of his owne Synagogue which is no part of the true Church Secondly that it be not imposed as anie part of Gods worship This is contrarie to the conclusion for order and comelinesse to be vsed in Gods worship which the Church can prescribe is some part of the worship Thirdly that it be seuered from superstition c. This is needelesse for if it be not absurd which was the first prouiso it is alreadie seuered from superstition The fourth touching multitude may passe these be but meere trifles That is of more importance that he tearmeth the decree registred in the xv of the Actes of the Apostles a Tradition whereas before he desined Traditions to be all doctrine deliuered besides the written worde Now the Actes of the Apostles is a parcell of the written word as all the world knowes That then which is of record there cannot be tearmed a Tradition THE DIFFERENCE CAtholikes teach that besides the written Worde there be certaine vnwritten Traditions which must be beleeued practised as both profitable and necessarie to saluation We hold that the Scriptures
this wee must beleeue that there is nothing else which wee may beleeue ANSWERE By the Gospell there is vnderstood all our Christian doctrine written and vnwritten and not onelie the written worde of the foure Euangelists else wee should not beleeue the Actes of the Apostles or their Epistles no more than Traditions which Christian doctrine written and vnwritten we onely beleeue by diuine faith to all other Authors we giue such credit as their writings do deserue If anie man desire to see TERTVLLIANS judgement of Traditions let him read his booke of prescriptions against Heretikes where he auerreth that Traditions serue better than the Scriptures themselues to confute all Heresies Heretikes alwaies either not allowing all the bookes of Scripture or else peruerting the sense and meaning of the Scriptures And in his booke De Corona militis he formallie proposeth this question Whether Traditions vnwritten are to be admitted or no and answereth by manie instances that they must be receiued concluding thus For these and the like poynts if thou require law out of the Scriptures thou shalt finde none but Tradition is alleadged to be the Author of them Custome the confirmer and Faith the obseruer So that nothing is more certaine than that TERTVLLIAN thought vnwritten Traditions necessarie to be beleeued Come we now vnto his second testimonie out of S. IEROM * In cap. 23 Mat. who writing as he saith of an opinion that S. IOHN Baptist was killed because he foretold the comming of Christ the good-man would saye ZACHARIE S. IOHNS Father for the Scripture sheweth plainely why S. IOHN lost his head * Mat. 14 But S. IEROM there sayeth this Because it hath not authoritie from Scriptures may as easelie be contemned as approoued But of which particular M. P. shewing himselfe a doughtie Logician would inforce an vniuersall that sorsooth all may be contemned that is not proued by Scripture As if you would prooue no Protestant to bee skilfull in the art of true reasoning because M. P. behaues himselfe in it so vnskilfully But S. IEROM in the same place declareth why that might be as easely reprooued as allowed not hauing anie ground in the Scripture because saith he It is taken out of the dreames of some Apocryphall writings opposing Scripture to other improoued writings and not to approoued Traditions to which hee saith in his Dialogues against the Luciferians before the middle That the Church of God doth attribute the like authoritie as it doth vnto the written Law M. P. His third Author is S. AVGVSTINE * Lib. 2. de doct Chri. cap. 9. In those things which are plainely set downe in Scriptures are found all those poynts which containe faith and maners of liuing well ANSWERE All things necessarie to be beleeued of euerie simple Christian vnder paine of damnation that is the Articles of our Beleefe are contayned in the Scriptures but not the resolution of harder matters much lesse of all difficulties which the more learned must expressely beleeue if they will be saued which distinction S. AVGVSTINE else-where doth signifie * De peccatorū meritis cap. vlt. And is gathered out of manie other places of his workes as in that matter of rebaptizing them who became Catholikes after they had bene baptized by Heretikes He saith * Lib. 5. de bapt contra Donat. cap. 23. The Apostles truely haue commanded nothing hereof in their writings but that custome which was layed against S. CYPRIAN is to bee beleeued to haue flowed from an Apostolicall tradition as there be many things which the vniuersall Church holdeth and therefore are to be beleeued The same saith he of the custome of the Church in Baptizing infants * De genes ad litra lib. 10. cap. 23. And in his Epist 174. of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is not in the holy Scripture and yet neuerthelesse is defended to be vsed in the assertion of faith As also saieth he we neuer read in those bookes that the Father is vnbegotten and yet wee hold that he is so to be called * Lib. 3. cap 3. cont max Arianum And S. AVGVSTINE holdes that the holie Ghost is to be adored though it be not written in the word The like of the perpetuall Virginitie of our B. Ladie * Haeresi 4. out of which and many more such like we gather most manifestlie that S. AVGVSTINE thought many matters of faith not to be contayned in the written worde but to be taken out of the Churches treasurie of Traditions M. P. His last testimonie is taken out of Vincentius Lirinensis who sayth as he reporteth that the Canon of the Scripture is perfecte and fullie sufficient for all things ANSWERE I thinke that there is no such sentence to be found in him he saies by way of objection What neede we make recourse vnto the authoritie of the Ecclesiasticall vnderstanding if the Canon of the Scripture be perfect Hee affirmeth not that they be fullie sufficient to determine all controuersies in religion but throughout all his booke he prooues the cleane contrarie that no heresie can be certainelie confuted and suppressed by only Scriptures without we take with it the sense and interpretation of the Catholike Church Thus M. P. hauing ended with the Law Testimonie addeth in a postscript two other slender reasons vnto his former The first that Christ and his Apostles vsed alwaies to confirme their doctrine with the testimonies of Scriptures and not with Tradition ANSWERE Fist for our Sauiour CHRIST IESVS he out of his diuine wisdome deliuered his doctrine most commonly in his owne name But I saye vnto you And verie seldome confirmeth it with any testimonie out of the Law The Euangelists do often note how CHRIST fulfilled the old prophecies but neuer or very seldome seeke to confirme his doctrine by testimonies their owne they doe sometimes but to saye they neuer wrote any thinge out of Tradition proceedes of most grosse ignorance Where had Saint MATHEVV the adoring of the Sages S. IOHN Baptists preaching briefelie that was done before his owne conuersion but by Tradition S. MARK wrote the most part of his Gospell out of Tradition receiued from S. PETER as witnesseth EVSEBIVS * Lib. 2. hist cap. 14. S. LVLE testifyeth of himselfe that he wrote his whole Gospell * Cap. 1. as he had receiued it by Tradition from them who were eye-witnesses What desperate carelesnesse was it then to affirme that the Apostles neuer vsed Tradition to confirme any doctrine when some of them built not onely parcels but their whole Gospels vpon Traditions His other reason is that if we beleeue vnwritten Traditions were necessarie to saluation then we must aswell beleeue the writings of the auncient Fathers as the writings of the Apostles because Apostolicall Traditions are not else-where to be sound but in their bookes but that were absurde for they might erre ANSWERE That doth not follow for three causes First Apostolicall Traditions are aswel kept in
dutie I beseech our blessed Sauiour to endue you both with the true knowledge of his diuine veritie and with the spirit of Fortitude to imbrace and defend it constantly or that at the least gratiouslie to tolerate and permitte it Your most Excellent Maiesties most obedient and loyall subiect and seruant W.B. THE PREFACE TO THE READER GENTLE READER I meane not here to entertayne thee with many wordes the principall cause that moued me to write was the honour and glory of God in defence of his sacred verity then the imploying of his talent bestowed vpon me as well to fortifie the weaker sort of Catholikes in their faith as to call backe and leade others who wander vp and downe like to lost sheepe after their owne fancies into the right way I tooke in hand particularly the confutation of this booke not onely for that I was thereunto requested by a friend of good intelligence and iudgement who thought it very expedient but also because perusing of it I found it penned more Schollerlike then the Protestants vse to doe ordinarily For first the pointes in controuersie are set downe distinctly and for the most part truely Afterward in confirmation of their opinion the chiefe arguments are produced from both Scriptures Fathers and reason Which are not vulgar but culled out of their Rabbins Luther Peter Martir Caluin Kemnitius and such like though he name them not Lastly he placeth some obiections made in fauour of the Catholike Doctrine and answereth to them aswell as he could And which I speake to his commendation doth performe all this very briefly and clearly So that to speake my opinion freely I haue not seene any booke of like quantity published by a Protestant to contayne either more matter or deliuered in better method And consequently more apt to deceiue the simple especially considering that he withall counterfeiteth to come as neare vnto the Roman Church as his tender conscience will permitte him whereas in deede he walketh as wide from it as any other noueller of this age Wherefore I esteemed my spare time best imployed about the discouering of it being as it were an abridgement of the principall controuersies of these times and doe endeuour after the same Scholasticall manner without all superfluity of wordes no lesse to maintayne and defend the Catholike party then to confute all such reasons as are by M. PERKINS alleadged for the contrarie Read this short treatise good Christian diligently for thou shalt finde in it the marrowe and pith of many large volumes contracted and drawne into a narrowe rowme And read it ouer as it becommeth a good Christian with a desire to finde out and to followe the truth because it concerneth thy eternall saluation and then iudge without partiality whether Religion hath better groundes in Gods word more euident testimonie from the purest antiquity and is more conformable vnto all Godlines good life and vpright dealing the infallible markes of the best Religion and speedely imbrace that Before I end this short preface I must intreate thy patience to beare with the faultes in Printing which are too too many but not so much to be blamed if it be courteously considered that it was Printed farre from the Authour with a Dutch composer and ouerseene by an vnskilfull Corrector the greatest of them shall be amended in the end of the booke Before the Printing of this part was finished I heard that M. PERKINS was dead I am sorry that it commeth forth to late to doe him anie good Yet his worke liuing to poison others a preseruatiue against it is neuer the lesse necessary MASTER PERKINS IN THE EPISTLE DEDICATORIE It is a pollicie of the Diuell to thinke that our Religion and the Religion of the present Church of Rome are all one in substance or that they may be reunited BEFORE I am to deliuer my opinion concerning this poynt I had neede to be enformed what this Author meaneth by these wordes our Religion For there being great diuersities of pretended Religions currant in the world all contrary to the Church of Rome how can I certainlie knowe whether of them he professeth Wherefore good Sir may it please you to declare what Religion you vnderstand when you say our Religion Is it that which Martin Luther a licentious Fryer first preached in Germany or rather that which the martiall Minister Zwinglius contended with sword and shield to set vp in Zwitzerland or perhaps that which Iohn Caluin by sedition wrought into Geneua expelling the lawfull Magistrate thence and by the ayde of Beza a dissolute turne-coate spread into many corners of France Or if by your Religion you meane only to comprehend the Religion now practised in England yet are you farther to shewe whether you vnderstand that established by the State or the other more refined as it is thought by many and embraced by them who are called Puritans for of their leauen sauoureth that position of yours That the article of Christs descent into hell crept into the Creede by negligence and some other such like in this booke These principall diuisions of the newe Gospell to omitte sundry sub-diuisions being famous and receiued of diuerse in England according to each mans phantasie it is meete you expresse whether of them you speake of that it may be dulie considered how the Roman Religion and it agree and what vnion may be made betweene them Now if you meane the hotchpotch and confusion of all these newe Religions togither as by the opposition here vnto the Church of Rome and by the articles following may be gathered then I am cleare for you in this that there can be no more concord betweene these two Religions then there is betweene light and darknes faith and infidelity Christ and Beliall Notwithstanding I thinke that the reason by you produced to proue the impossibility of this vnion is of no value to wit that they of the Roman Church haue razed the foundation for though in wordes they honour Christ yet in deede they turne him into a Pseudochrist and an Idoll of their owne braine A very sufficient cause no doubt of eternal breach and diuision if it could be verified But how proue you that we Roman Catholikes who beleeue Iesus Christ to be perfect God perfect Man and the only Redeemer of Mankinde make him a false Christ and an Idoll or before you goe about to proue it tell me I pray you how this can well stand with your owne definition of a reformed Catholike in your preface There you affirme him to be a Catholike reformed to your liking that holdeth the same necessarie heades of Religion with the Roman Church Now can there be any more necessarie head of Religion then to haue a right faith in Christ can anie other foundation be layed besides IESVS Christ 1. Cor. 3. If then your reformed Catholike must agree with the Roman Church in necessarie heades of Religion as you hold he must either the Roman Church razeth not the
doctrine of the Roman Church nor said in all her seruice We say Shew thyselfe to be a mother but it is not added by commaunding thy Sonne that is your glosse which is accursed because it corrupteth the text for it followeth in that place Sumat per te preces c. Present our prayers to him that vouchsafed to be borne of thee for vs. If any priuat person by meditation pearcing more profoundly into the mutuall loue and affection of such a Sonne towardes so worthie a Mother doe deeme her prayers as forcible in kindnes as if they were commaundements and in that sence call them commaundements according to the French phrase Vos priers me sont des commandements that may be donne without derogation to Christs supreame dignity and with high commendation of his tender affection vnto his reuerent best beloued mother Wherefore to conclude this Epistle if there be no waightier cause then this by you here produced why you your adherents doe not reconcile your selues vnto the Church of Rome you may shortly by Gods grace become new men For we are so farre off from making our Sauiour Christ a Pseudochrist or from drawing one jote of excellency from his soueraigne power merits or dignity that we in the very points by you put downe doe much more magnifie him then you do For in maintayning the authority by him imparted vnto his deputies our spirituall Magistrates and of their merits and satisfaction We first say that these his seruants prerogatiues be his free gifts of more grace bestowed on whome he pleaseth which is no small prayse of his great liberality And withall affirme that there is an infinite difference betweene his owne power merits and satisfaction and ours Wherein his soueraigne honour is preserued entire to himselfe without any comparison Now you make Christs authority so base his merits and satisfaction so meane that if he impart any degree of them vnto his seruants he looseth the honour of all from himselfe Whereupon it followeth inuincibly if you vnfeignedly seeke CHRIST IESVS his true honour and will esteeme of his diuine giftes worthelie you must hold out no longer but vnite your selfe in these necessary heades of Religion vnto the Catholike Church of Rome which so highly exalteth him both in his owne excellency and in his singuler giftes to his subjects AN ANSWERE TO THE PREFACE VPON your preface to the reader I will not stand because it toucheth no point of controuersie let it be declared in your next what you meane when you desire your reformed Catholike to hold the same necessarie heades of Religion with the Roman Church for if the Roman Church doth erre in the matter of faith and iustification in the number and vertue of the Sacraments in the bookes and interpretation of the word of God if she raze the foundation and make Christ a Pseudochrist and an Idoll to omitte twenty other errors in substantiall points of faith as in this your small discourse you would perswade there will remayne verie fewe necessarie heades of Religion for them to agree in And be you wel assured that you are so wide from winning Catholikes by this your worke to a better liking of your Religion that you haue taken the high way to lead them to a farre greater dislike of it by teaching that in so many materiall points it differeth so farre from theirs For al Catholikes hold for most assured that which the most auncient learned holy Doctor Athanasius in his creede deliuereth in the 2. verse Which Catholike faith vnlesse euerie man obserue wholy and inuiolably not omitting or shrinking from any one article of it without doubt he shall perish euerlastingly If S. Basil that reuerent blessed Father of the Church doth hold it the duty of euery good Christian rather to loose his life then to condescend to the alteration of any one sillable in matter of faith Theod. 4. his cap. 17. you may be sure that we Catholikes cannot but carry a very base cōceipt of your doctrine who goe about vnder the ouerworne threedbare cloake of reformation to deface and corrupt the purer and greater part of Christian Religion specially when they shall perceiue the most points of your pretended reformation to be nothing else but old rotten condemned heresies newe scoured vp and furbushed so in shew made more saleable vnto the vnskilfull as in this treatise shall be proued in euery Chapter THE THEAME OF M. PERKINS PROLOGVE And I heard an other voice from heauen say goe out of her my people that you be not partakers of her sinnes and receiue not of her plagues Reuelat. 18.3 ANSWERE TO THE PROLOGVE Exordium Commune THE learned knowe it to be a fault to make that the entry vnto our discourse which may as properly fit him that pleadeth against vs but to vse that for our proeme which in true sence hath nothing for vs nay rather beareth stronglie for our aduersarie must needes argue great want of iudgement Such is the sentence aboue cited out of S. Iohn by M. PERKINS for it being trulie vnderstood is so farre off from terrifying anie one from the Catholike Roman Church as it doth vehemently exhort all to flie vnto it by forsaking their wicked company that are banded against it For by the purple Harlot in that place is signified as shall be proued presently the Roman Empire as then it was the slaue of Idols and with most bloudy slaughter persecuting Christs Saints Those of the Church of Rome being as nearest vnto it so most subject to that sacrilegious butcherie Wherefore that voice which S. Iohn heard say Goe out of her my people that you be not partakers of her sinnes c. can haue none other meaning then that all they who desire to be Gods people must separate themselues in faith and manners from them who hate persecute the Roman Church as did then the Heathen Emperours now doe all Heretikes Vnlesse they will be partakers of their sinnes consequently of their plagues This shall yet appeare more plainly in the examination of this Chapter Where I will deale friendly with my aduersary aduantage him all that I can that all being giuē him which is any way probable it may appeare more euidently how litle he hath to any purpose out of this place of the Apocalipse whereof all Protestants vaunt and bragge so much both in their bookes pulpits Well then I will admitte that in the 17. 18. Chapters of the reuel by the whoore of Babilon is vnderstood the Roman state and regiment which in lawfull disputations they are not able to proue the most juditious Doctor S. Augustine and diuerse others of the auncient Fathers with the learned troupe of later Interpreters expounding it of the whole corps and society of the wicked And as for the 7. hilles on the which they lay their foundation they are not to be taken literally The Angell of God in the very text it selfe interpreting
the 7. heades of the beast to be aswell 7. Kings as 7. hilles But this notwithstanding to helpe you foreward I will graunt it you because some good writers haue so taken it And therefore omit as impertinēt that which you say in proofe of it What can you inferre hereupon Mary that the Roman Church is that whoore of Babilon fayre soft good Sir how proue you that thus The whoore of Babilon is a state of the Roman regiment ergo the Roman Church is the whoore of Babilon What forme of arguing call you me this By the like sophistication you may proue that Romulus Remus were the purple Harlot which to affirme were ridiculous or which is impious that the most Christian Emperours Constantine and Theodosius were the whoore of Babilon because these held also the state of the Roman Empire and regiment to make short the feeble force of this reason lyeth in this that they who hold the state and gouerne in the same Kingdome must needes be of like affection in Religion which if it were necessarie then did Queene Mary of blessed memorie and her sister Elizabeth carrie the same mindes towards the true Catholike faith because they sate in the same chaire of estate ruled in the same Kingdome See I pray you what a shamefull cauill this is to raise such outcryes vpon A simple Logician would blush to argue in the paruies so loosely yet they that take vpon them to controule the learnedst in the world often fall into such open fallacies Well then admitting the purple Harlot to signifie the Roman state we doe say that the state of Rome must be taken as it was then when these wordes were spoken of it that is Pagan Idolatrous and a hot persecutor of Christians Such it had beene a litle before vnder that bloudy Tyrant Nero and then was vnder Domitian which we confirme by the authority of them who expounde this passage of the Roman state The commentary on the Apocalips vnder Saint Ambrose name sayeth the great whoore sometime doth signifie Rome specially which at that time when the Apostle wrote this did persecute the Church of GOD but otherwise In c. 178. doth signifie the whole Citie of the Diuell And Saint Ierome who applieth the place to Rome affirmeth Libr. 2 cont Iouin that she had before his dayes blotted out that blasphemie written in her forehead because then the state was Christian which before had beene Heathen so that vnto the partie Pagan and not vnto the Church of God he ascribeth these works of the wicked Harlot which also the very text it selfe doth conuince Vers 6. for it hath That she was drunke with the bloud of the Martyrs of Iesus Now the Church of Rome hath not then by the confession of all men drawne any bloud of Christs Saints but in testimony of his truth had powred out abundance of her best bloud Wherefore it is most manifest that the harlot could not signifie the Church of Rome so pure and free from slaughter but the Roman Empire which was then ful gorged with that most innocent and holy bloud Againe that whoore is expounded Vers 18. To be a Citie which had kingdome ouer the Kings of the earth But the Church of Rome had then no kingdome ouer the earth or any temporall dominion at all but the Roman Emperours had such soueraigne commaundement ouer many Kings wherefore it must be vnderstood of them and not of the Church Now to take Kingdome not properly for temporall soueraignty but for spirituall Iurisdiction as some shifters doe is to flie without any warrant from the natiue signification of the word vnto the phantasticall and voluntary imagination And whereas M. PERKINS saith pag. 5. that Ecclesiasticall Rome in respect of state princely dominion and cruelty against the Saints is all one with the heathenish Empire he both seeketh to deceiue and is greatly deceiued he would deceiue in that he doth apply wordes spoken of Rome aboue 1500. yeares agoe vnto Rome as it is at this day and yet if that were graunted him he erreth foulie in euery one of his particles For first touching princely dominion the Roman Empire held then all Italy all France all Spayne all England a great part of Germany of Asia and also of Afrike hauing their Proconsulles and other principall Officers in all those Countries drawing an hundred thousand millions in mony and many other commodities out of them Wherefore in princely dominion and magnificall state it surmounted Ecclesiasticall Rome which hath not temporall dominion ouer the one halfe of that one kingdome of Italy more then an hundred degrees And as for persecution the Empire slewe and caused to be slayne more Saints of God in one yeare then the Church of Rome hath donne of reprobates and obstinate heretikes in 1600. yeares Hauing thus proued that the whoore of Babilon signifieth the heathen state of Rome and not the Ecclesiasticall let vs now heare vvhat you ay against it Marry that the distinction of the Empire of Rome and Church of Rome is foolish and coyned of late to serue our turne which to be farre otherwise I proue out of those very Authors who doe interpret that harlot to signifie Rome who are neither foolish nor of late dayes you haue heard it before out of S. Ambrose cōmentaries And farther we gather it out of S. Hierome in the Epistle which you cite for he hauing resembled Rome vnto Babilon for the multitude of the wicked which yet remayned in it pointeth out a more pure part saying There is in deede the holy Church there are the triumphant monuments of the Apostles and Martirs there is the true confession of Christ there is the faith praysed by the Apostle c. Be not there expressed two distinct parts of Rome Againe Tertullian who liued in the second hundreth yeare vnder those persecuting Emperours saith in one place that Babilon is a figure of Rome Lib. cont Iud. De prescript c. 16 in respect of her proude Empire and persecution of the Saints And in an other that Rome was most happie for her holy Church vnto which the Apostles with their bloud had poured forth their whole doctrine see a playne distinction betweene the Heathen Empire and the holy Church of Rome Which finally may be gathered out of the expresse word of God Where the Church in Babilon coelect 1. Pet. 5. is distinguished from the rest of that city which was Pagan You say but without any authour that Babilon there doth not signifie Rome but either a city in Egipt or Assyria But Eusebius lib. 2. his c. 14. S. Ierom de Eccles script vers Marcus with other Authors more worthy of credit doe expounde it of Rome And you your selues take Babilon for Rome where you thinke that any hold may be taken against it as in the 17. of the reuel but in S. Peters Epistle they wil none of it because it would proue too playnlie that S.
3 de Sacra c. 1. I desire in all thinges to follow the Church of Rome And thus much of his prologue Afterward he taketh vpon him to prescribe shewe vs how farre foorth we may joyne with the Church of Rome by proposing many points in controuersie betweene vs and them in each shewing in what points we consent togither in what we differ I meane by Gods grace to followe him steppe by steppe although he hath made manie a disorderly one aswell to discouer his deceipts to disproue their errors as also to establish the Catholike Doctrine the which I will endeuour to performe by the helpe of God with all simplicity of language and with as much breuity as such a weighty matter will permitte Yet I hope with that perspicuity as the meaner learned may vnderstand it and with such substance of proofe both out of the holy Scriptures and auncient Fathers as the more iuditious to whose profite it is principally dedicated may not contemne it CHAPTER I. OF FREE WILL. OVR CONSENTS THAT I be not thought captious but willing to admit any thing that M. PERKINS hath said agreable to the truth I will let his whole text in places indifferēt passe paring of only superfluous wordes with adding some annotations where it shall be needfull and rest only vpon the points in controuersie First then concerning free will wherewith he beginneth thus he sayeth Free will both by them and vs is taken for a mixt power in the minde and will of man whereby discerning what is good and what is euill he doth accordingly choose or refuse the same ANNOT. If we would speak formally it is not a mixt power in the minde and will but is a free facultie of the minde and will only whereby we choose or refuse supposing in the vnderstanding a knowledge of the same before But let this definition passe as more populer M. PERKINS 1. Conclusion Man must be cōsidered in a fourefould estate as he was created as he was corrupted as he is renued as he shal be glorified in the first state we ascribe vnto mans will libertie of nature in which he could will or nill either good or euill note that this libertie proceeded not from his owne nature but of original Iustice in which he was created In the third libertie of grace in the last libertie of glorie ANNOT. Carry this in minde that here he graunteth man in the state of grace to haue free will M.P. 2. Conclusion The matters whereabout free will is occupied are principally the actions of men which be of three sortes Naturall Humane Spirituall Naturall actions are such as are common to men and beasts as to eate sleepe c. In all which we joyne with the Papists and hold that man hath free will euen since the fall of Adam M.P. 3. Conclusion Humane actions are such as are cōmon to al men good bad as to speake to practize any kinde of arte to performe any kinde of ciuill duty to preach to administer Sacraments c. And hither we may referre the outward actions of ciuill vertues as namely Iustice Temperance Gentlenes and Liberality and in these also we joyne with the Church of Rome and say as experience teacheth that men haue a naturall freedome of will to put them or not to put them in execution S. Paul saith The gentils that haue not the lawe doe the thinges of the lawe by nature Rom. 2.14 that is by naturall strength And he saith of himselfe that before his conuersion touching the righteousnes of the lawe he was vnblameable Phil. 3.6 Mat. 6.5 Ezech. 29.19 And for this externall obedience naturall men receiue reward in temporall thinges And yet here some caueats must be remembred First that in humane actions he should say morall mans will is weake and his vnderstanding dimme thereupon he often failes in them This caueat is no caueat of the Protestants but taken out of S. Thomas of Aquines Summe 1. 2. q. 109. art 4. 8. And in all such actions with S. Augustine you might haue quoted the place I vnderstand the will of man to be only wounded or half dead 2. That the will of man is vnder the will of God and therefore to be ordered by it Who knowes not this M.P. 4. Conclusion The third kinde of actions are spirituall more nearely these be two fold good or bad In sinnes we joyne with the Papist and teach that in sinnes man hath freedome of wil. Some perhaps will say that we sinne necessarily because he that sinneth cannot but sinne and that free will and necessity can not stand together In deede the necessity of compulsion and free will can not stand together but there is an other kinde of necessity or rather infallibility which may stand with free will for some thinges may be donne necessarylie and also freely ANNOT. The example of a close prisoner is not to the purpose for it puts necessitie in one thing and libertie in an other The solution is that necessary lie must be is taken for certaynlie not that a man is at any time compelled to sinne but his weaknes and the crafte of the Diuell are such that he is very often ouer reached by the Diuell and induced to sinne but with free consent of his owne will M.P. 5. Conclusion The second kinde of Spirituall actions be good as repentance Faith Obedience c. In vvhich we likewise in parte joyne with the Church of Rome and say that in the first conuersion of a sinner mans free wil cōcurreth with Gods grace as a fellow or co-worker in some sorte for in the conuersion of a sinner three thinges are required the word Gods spirit and Mans will for Mans will is not passiue in all euerie respect but hath an action in the first conuersion chaunge of the soule when any man is conuerted this worke of God is not donne by compulsion but he is conuerted willinglie at the verie time when he is conuerted by Gods grace Serm. 15. de verb. Apost he willeth his conuersion to this end saith S. Augustine He which made thee without thee will not saue thee without thee Againe that it is certaine that our will is required in this that we may doe any thing well it is not only then required in our first conuersion if it be required to all good thinges which we doe but we haue it not from our owne power but God workes to will in vs. For looke at what time God giues grace at the same time he giues a will to desire and wil the same As for example when God workes faith at the same time he workes also vpon the will causing it to desire faith and willingly to receiue the gift of beleeuing God makes of the vnwilling will a willing will because no man can receiue grace vtterly against his will considering will constrained is no will But here we must remember that howsoeuer in respect of time
the working of grace by Gods spirit and the willing of it in man goe togither Yet in regarde of order grace is first wrought and mans will must first of all be acted and moued by grace and then it also acteth willeth and moueth it selfe And this is the last point of consent betweene vs and the Roman Church touching free will neither may we proceede farther with them Hitherto M. PERKINS Now before I come to the supposed difference I gather first that he yeeldeth vnto the principall point in controuersie that is freedome of wil in ciuill and morall workes in the state of corruption and all good works in the state of grace for in his first conclusion distinguishing foure estates of man he affirmeth that in the third of man renued or as we speake justified there is libertie of grace that is grace enableth mans will to doe if it please such spirituall workes as God requireth at his handes Yet lest he be taken to yeeld in any thing Pag. 16. he doth in shewe of wordes contradict both these points in an other place For in setting downe the difference of our opinions he saith that mans will in his conuersion is not actiue but passiue which is flat opposite vnto that which himselfe said a litle before in his first conclusion that in the conuersion of a sinner mans will concurreth not passiuely but is co-worker with Gods grace The like contradiction may be obserued in the other part of libertie in morall actions for in his third conclusion he deliuereth playnlie man to haue a naturall freedome euen since the fall of Adam to doe or not to doe the acts of wisedome Iustice Temperance c. Pag. 19. and proues out of S. Paul that the Gentils so did Yet in his first reason he affirmeth as peremptorily out of the 8. of Genesis that the whole frame of mans hart is corrupted and all that he thinketh deuiseth or imagineth is wholy euill leauing him no naturall strength to performe any part of morall dutie See how vncertayne the steps be of men that walke in darknes or that would seeme to communicate with the workes of darknes For if I mistake him not he agreeth fully in this matter of free will with the Doctrine of the Catholike Church For he putting downe the point of difference Page 1 saith that it standeth in the cause of the freedome of mans will in spirituall matters allowing then freedome of will with vs in the state of grace whereof he there treateth for he seemeth to dissent from vs only in the cause of that freedome And as he differeth from Luther and Caluin with other sectaries in graunting this liberty of will so in the very cause also he accordeth with Catholikes as appeareth by his owne wordes For saieth he Papists say mans will concurreth with Gods grace by it selfe and by it owne naturall power we say that Mans will worketh with grace yet not of it selfe but by grace either he vnderstandeth not what Catholikes say or else accuseth them wrongfully For we say that Mans will then only concurreth with Gods grace when it is stirred and holpen first by Gods grace So that Mans wil by his owne naturall actions doth concurre in euery good worke otherwise it were no action of Man But we farther say that this action proceedeth principally of grace whereby the will was made able to produce such actions for of it selfe it was vtterly vnable to bring forth such spirituall fruite And this I take to be that which M. PERKINS doth meane by those his wordes that the will must bee first moued and acted by grace before it can acte or will Hee mistooke vs thinking that we required some outward helpe only to the will to joyne with it or rather that grace did but as it were vntie the chaynes of sinne wherein our will was fettered And then will could of it selfe turne to God Luc. 10. Not vnderstanding how Catholikes take that parable of the man wounded in the way betweene Ierusalem and Ierico who was not as the Papists only say but as the holy Ghost saieth lefte halfe and not starke dead Now the exposition of Catholikes is not that this wounded man which signifieth all Mankinde had halfe his spirituall strength left him but was robbed of al Supernaturall riches spoyled of all his originall Iustice and wounded in his naturall powers of both vnderstanding and will and therein lefte halfe dead not being able of his owne strength either to know all naturall truth or to performe all morall dutie Now touching supernaturall workes because he lost all power to performe them not being able so much as to prepare himselfe conueniently to them he in a good sence may be likened vnto a dead man not able to moue one singer that way of grace Luc. 15. and so in holy Scripture the Father said of his prodigall Son he was dead and is reuiued Yet as the same sonne liued a naturall life albeit in a deadly sinne so mans wil after the fal of Adam continued some what free in actions conformable to the nature of man though wounded also in them as not being able to acte many of them yet hauing still that naturall facultie of free will capable of grace also able being first both outwardly moued and fortified inwardly by the vertue of grace to effect and doe any worke appertayning to saluation which is asmuch as M. PERKINS affirmeth And this to be the verie Doctrine of the Church of Rome Cap. 1. is most manifestlie to be seene in the Councell of Trent where in the Session are first these wordes in effect concerning the vnablenesse of man to arise from sinne of himselfe Euerie man must acknowledge and confesse that by Adams fall we were made so vncleane sinnefull that neither the gentils by the force of nature nor the Iewes by the letter of Moyses lawe could arise out of that sinnefull state After it sheweth howe our deliuerance is wrought and howe freedome of will is recouered in speciall and wherein it consisteth saying The beginning of iustification in persons vsing reason is taken from the grace of God preuenting vs through IESVS CHRIST that is from his vocation whereby without any desert of ours we are called that we who were by our sinnes turned away from God may be prepared by his grace both raising vs vp and helping vs to returne to our owne Iustification freely yeelding our consent vnto the said grace and working with it So as God touching the hart of man by the light of the Holy Ghost neither doth man nothing at all receiuing that inspiration who might also refuse it neither yet can he without the grace of God by his free will moue himselfe to that which is iust in Gods sight And that you may be assured that this Doctrine of the Councell is no other then that which was taught three hundred yeares before in the very middest of darknes as heretikes deeme
so wicked a man should rule ouer so good Ouer what then but he shall rule ouer sinne See how manifestly that worthie Doctor hath preuented their cauill And if it were neede I might joyne with him that most skilfull Father in the Hebrue text S. Ierome In quest Hebraice who in the person of God expoundeth it thus Because thou hast free will I admonish and warne thee that thou suffer not sinne to ouercome thee but doe thou ouercome sinne The second is taken out of this text of Deut. Cap. 30.19 I call this day sayeth Moyses heauen and earth to witnes that I haue set before you life and death benediction malediction therefore choose life that thou maist liue and thy seede Which words were spoken in vayne if it had not beene in their power by the grace of God to haue made choise of life or if that grace would haue made them doe it infallibly without their consent Vnto these two places of the old Testament one vnder the law of Nature and the other vnder Moyses law let vs couple two more out of the newe Testament The first may be those kinde wordes of our Sauiour vnto the Iewes Math. 23. Ierusalem Ierusalem c. how often would I haue gathered together thy children as the hen doth her chickens vnder her winges thou wouldest not Which doe playnlie demonstrate that there was no want either of Gods help inwardly or of Christs perswasion outwardly for their conuersion and that the whole fault lay in their owne refusing and withstanding Gods grace as these wordes of Christ doe playnlie witnes and thou wouldest not The last testimony is in the Reuelat. where it is said in the person of God I stande at the dore and knocke Cap. 3. if any man shall heare my voyce and open the gates I will enter in to him and will suppe with him and he with me Marke well the wordes God by his grace knockes at the dore of our hartes he doth not breake it open or in any sort force it but attendeth that by our assenting to his call we open him the gates and then lo he with his heauenly giftes will enter in otherwise he leaues vs. What can be more euident in confirmation of the freedome of mans will in working with Gods grace To these expresse places taken out of Gods word let vs joyne the testimonie of those most auncient Fathers against whose workes the Protestants can take no exception The first shall be that excellent learned Martir Iustinus in his Apologie who vnto the Emperour Antonine speaketh thus Vnlesse man by free will could flie from foule dishonest deedes and follow those that be faire and good he were without fault as not being cause of such thinges as were done But we Christians teach that mainkinde by free choise and free will doth both doe well and sinne To him we will joyne that holy Bishoppe and valiant Martir Ireneus who of free will writeth thus not only in workes but in faith also Lib. 4. c. 72. our Lord reserued liberty and freedome of will vnto man saying be it done vnto thee according to thy faith I will adde to that worthy companie S. Cyprian who vpon those words of our Sauiour will you also depart discourseth thus Ioan. 6. Lib. 1. Ep. 3 Our Lord did not bitterly inueigh against them which forsooke him but rather vsed these gentle speeches to his Apostles will you also goe your way and why so Marry obseruing and keeping as this holy Father declareth that decree by which man left vnto his liberty and put vnto his free choise might deserue vnto himselfe either damnation or saluation These three most auncient and most skilfull in Christian Religion and so zealous of Christian truth that they spent their bloud in confirmation of it may suffice to certifie any indifferent reader what was the iudgement of the auncient and most pure Church concerning this article of free will specially when the learnedst of our Aduersaries confesse al Antiquity excepting only S. Augustine to haue beleeued taught free wil. Heare the wordes of one for all Mathias Illyricus in his large long lying historie hauing rehearsed touching free will the testimonies of Iustine Ireneus and others Cent. 2. c. 4. col 59. saith In like manner Clement Patriarch of Alexandria doth euery where teach free will that it may appeare say these Lutherans not only the Doctors of that age to haue beene in such darknes but also that it did much encrease in the ages following See the wilfull blindnes of heresie Illyricus confessing the best learned in the purest times of the Church to haue taught free will yet had rather beleeue them to haue beene blindly ledde by the Apostles and their best Schollers who were their Masters then to espy amend his owne error These principall pillers of Christs Church were in darknes belike as Protestants must needes say that proude Persian most wicked heretike Manes of whome the Manichees are named who first denyed free will beganne to broach the true light of the newe Gospell Here I would make an end of citing Authorities were it not that Caluin sayeth 2. Iust. ca. 2. q. 4. that albeit al other auncient writers be against him yet S. Augustine as he vaunteth is clearly for him in this point but the poore man is fouly deceiued aswell in this as in most other matters I will briefly proue and that out of those workes which S. Augustine wrote after the Pelagian heresie was a foote for in his others Caluin acknowledgeth him to haue taught free will Of our freedome in consenting to Gods grace he thus defineth De spirit lit 34. De gra Chri. 14. Ad simpli q. 2. Tract 72. in Ioan Ep 47. to consent to Gods calling or not to consent lyeth in a mans owne will Againe Who doth not see euery man to come or not to come by free will but this free will may be alone if he doe not come but it cannot be but holpen if he doe come In an other place that we will doe well God will haue it to be his and ours his in calling vs ours in following him Yea more To Christ working in him a man doth cooperate that is worketh with him both his owne iustification and life euerlasting will you here him speake yet more formally for vs. We haue dealt with your brethren and ours as much as we could that they would hold out and continue in the sound Catholike faith the which neither denieth free will to euill or good life nor doth attribute so much to it that it is worth any thing without grace So according to this most worthy Fathers iudgement the sound Catholike faith doth not deny free will as the old Manichees and our newe Gospellers doe nor esteeme it without grace able to doe any thing toward saluation as the Pelagians did And to conclude heare S. Augustines answere vnto them who say
of God whereby he accounteth and esteemeth that righteousnes which is in Christ as the righteousnes of that sinner which beleeueth in him By Christs righteousnes we are to vnderstand two thinges first his sufferings specially in his death and passion secondly his obedience in fulfilling the lawe both which goe together for Christ in suffering obeyed and obeying suffered And the very shedding of his bloud to which our saluation is ascribed must not onely be considered as it is passiue that is a suffering but also as it is actiue that is an obedience in which he shewed his exceeding loue both to his father and vs and thus fulfilled the lawe for vs. 3. Rule That iustification is from Gods mercies and grace procured onely by the merite of Christ 4. Rule That man is iustified by faith alone because faith is that alone instrument created in the hart by the Holy Ghost whereby a sinner laieth holde of Christs righteousnes and applies the same to him selfe There is neither hope nor loue nor any other grace of God within man that can doe this but faith alone now of the Doctrine of the Roman Church Because M. PERKINS settes not downe well the Catholikes opinion I will helpe him out both with the preparation and justification it selfe and that taken out of the Councel of Trent Where the very wordes concerning preparation are these Sess 6. c. 6. Men are prepared and disposed to this iustice when being stirred vp and helped by Gods grace they conceiuing faith by hearing are freely moued towardes God beleeuing those thinges to be true which God doth reueale and promise â—â—â—â—ely that he of his grace doth iustifie a sinner through the redemption that is in CHRIST IESVS And when knowledging them selues to be sinners through the feare of Gods iudgementes they turne them selues to consider the mercie of God are lifted vp into hope trusting that God will be mercifull vnto them for Christs sake and beginning to loue him as the fountayne of all iustice are there by moued with hatred and detestation of all sinnes Finally they determine to receiue baptisme to beginne a new life and to keepe all Christs commaundements After this disposition or preparation followeth Iustification and for that euery thing is best knowne by the causes of it all the causes of Iustification are deliuered by the Councell in the next Chapter which briefly are these The finall cause of the Iustification of a sinner is the glorie of God the glory of Christ and mans owne iustification the efficient is God the meritorious CHRIST IESVS Passions the instrumentall is the Sacrament of Baptisme the onlie formall cause is inherent iustice that is Faith Hope and Charity with the other giftes of the Holy Ghost powred into a mans soule at that instant of iustification Of the iustification by faith and the second iustification shall be spoken in their places So that we agree in this point that iustification commeth of the free grace of God through his infinite mercies and the merits of our Sauiours Passion and that all sinnes when a man is justified be pardoned him The point of difference is this that the Protestants hold that Christs Passion and obedience imputed vnto vs becommeth our righteousnes for the wordes of justice and justification they seldome vse and not any righteousnes which is in our selues The Catholikes affirme that those vertues powred into our soules speaking of the formall cause of iustification is our iustice and that through that a man is iustified in Gods sight and accepted to life euerlasting Although as you haue seene before we hold that God of his meere mercie through the merits of CHRIST IESVS our Sauiour hath freely bestowed that iustice on vs. Note that M. PERKINS comes to short in his second rule when he attributeth the merits of Christs suffringes to obedience whereas obedience if it had beene without charity would haue merited nothing at Gods handes And whereas M. PERKINS doth say that therein we raze the foundation that is as he interpreteth it in his preface we make Christ a Pseudochrist we auerre that herein we doe much more magnifie Christ then they doe for they take Christs merits to be so meane that they doe but euen serue the turne to deface sinne and make men worthie of the joyes of heauen Nay it doth not serue the turne but only that God doth not impute sinne vnto vs. We contrarywise doe so highly esteeme of our Sauiours inestimable merits that we hold them wel able to purchase at Gods handes a farre inferiour justice and such merits as mortall men are capable of and to them doe giue such force and value that they make a man just before God and worthy of the Kingdome of heauen as shall be proued Againe they doe great iniury to Gods goodnes wisedome and justice in their justification for they teach that inward justice or sanctification is not necessary to justification Yea their Ring-leader Luther saith That the iustified can by no sinnes whatsoeuer except he refuse to beleeue lose their saluation Wherein first they make their righteous man Like as our Sauiour speaketh to sepulchers whited on the out side with an imputed justice but within full of iniquity and disorder Then the wisdome of GOD must either not discouer this masse of iniquity or his goodnesse abide it or his justice either wipe it away or punish it But say they he seeth it well enough but couereth it with the mantle of Christs righteousnesse Why can any thing be hid from his sight it is madnesse to thinke it And why doth he not for Christes sake deface it and wipe it cleane away and adorne with his grace that soule whome he for his sonnes sake loueth and make it worthy of his loue and kingdome What is it because Christ hath not deserued it So to say were to derogate from the infinite value of his merits Or is it for that God cannot make such justice in a pure man as may be worthy of his loue and his kingdome And this were to deny Gods power in a matter that can be donne as we confesse that such vertue was in our first father Adam in state of innocencie And M. PERKINS seemes to graunt Pag. 77. That man in this life at his last gaspe may haue such righteousnesse If then we had no other reason for vs but that our justification doth more exalt the power and goodnes of God more magnifie the value of Christs merits and bringeth greater dignity vnto men our doctrine were much better to be liked then our aduersaries who cannot alleage one expresse sentence either out of holy Scriptures or auncient Fathers teaching the imputation of Christs righteousnesse vnto vs to be our justification as shall be seene in the reasons following and doe much abase both Christs merits and Gods power wisdome and goodnesse Now to their reasons M. PERKINS first reason is this That which must be our righteousnesse before God must satisfie the iustice of
neuer be graunted But a word with you by the way Your righteous man must ouer-skippe that petition of the Pater noster forgiue vs our debts for he is well assured that his debts be already pardoned For at the very first instant that he had faith he had Christs righteousnes applyed to him and thereby assurance both of the pardon of sinnes and of life euerlasting Wherefore he can not without infidelity distrust of his former justification or pray for remission of his debts but following the famous example of that formall Pharise in liew of demaunding pardon may wel say Luc. 18. O God I giue thee thankes that I am not as the rest of men extortioners vniust aduouterers as also these Papists Fearing the remission of my sinnes or the certayntie of my saluation but am well assured thereof and of Christs owne righteousnes too and so forth But to goe on with M. PERKINS discourse Here we must note that the Church of Rome cutteth off one principall dutie of faith for in faith saith M. PERKINS are two thinges first knowledge reuealed in the word touching the meanes of saluation Secondly an applying of thinges knowne vnto our selues which some call affiance the first they acknowledge So then by M. PERKINS owne confession Catholikes haue true knowledge of the meanes of saluation then he and his fellowes erre miserable The second which is the substance and principall they denie Answere Catholikes teach men also to haue a firme hope and a great confidence of obtayning saluation through the mercy of God and merits of Christs Passion So they performe their dutie towardes God and their neighbour or else die with true repentance But for a man at his first conuersion to assure himselfe by faith of Christs righteousnes and life euerlasting without condition of doing those thinges he ought to doe that we Catholikes affirme to be not any gift of faith but the haynous crime of presumption which is a sinne against the Holy Ghost not pardonable See S. Tho 22. q. 21. â—rt 1. neither in this life nor in the world to come M. PERKINS third reason is drawne from the consent of the auncient Church of which for fashion sake to make some shewe he often speaketh but can seldome finde any one sentence in them that fits his purpose as you may see in this sentence of Saint Augustine cited by him Augustine saith De verbis Domini â—erm 7. I demaund nowe doest thou beleeue in Christ O sinner thou saiest I beleeue what beleeuest thou that all thy sinnes may freely be pardoned by him thou hast that which thou beleeuest See here is neither applying of Christs righteousnes vnto vs by faith nor so much as beleeuing our sinnes to be pardoned through him but that they may be pardoned by him So there is not one word for M. PERKINS But S. Bernard saith playnlie That we must beleeue that our sinnes are pardoned vs. But he addeth not by the imputed righteousnes of Christ Againe he addeth conditions on our party which M. PERK craftely concealeth For S. Bernard graunteth that we may beleeue our sins to be forgiuen if the truth of our conuersion meete with the mercy of God preuenting vs for in the same place he hath these wordes So therefore shall his mercy dwell in our earth that is the grace of God in our soules if mercy and truth meete together if iustice and peace embrace and kisse each other Which is as S. Bernard there expoundeth it if we stirred vp by the grace of God doe truly bewaile our sinnes and confesse them and afterward follow holines of life and peace All which M. PERKINS did wisely cut off because it dashed cleane the vayne glosse of the former wordes His last authority is out of S. Cyprian who exhorteth men passing out of this life not to doubt of God promises but to beleeue that we shall come to Christ with joyfull security Answere S. Cyprian encouradgeth good Christians dying to haue a full confidence in the promises of Christ and so doe all Catholikes and bidde them be secure too on that side that Christ will neuer faile of his word and promise but say that the cause of feare lyes on our owne infirmities And yet biddes them not to doubt as though they were as likely to be condemned as saued but animates them and puts them in the good way of hope by twenty kindes of reason M. PERKINS hauing thus confirmed his owne partie why doth he not after his manner confute those reasons which the Catholikes alleadge in fauour of their assertion Was it because they are not wont to produce any in this matter Nothing lesse It was then belike because he knew not how to answere them I will out of their stoare take that one principall one of the testimony of holy Scripture And by that alone sufficiently proue that the faith required to justification is that Catholike faith whereby we beleeue all that to be true which by God is reuealed and not any other particular beleeuing Christs righteousnes to be ours How can this be better knowne then if we see weigh and consider well what kinde of faith that was which all they had who are said in Scriptures to be iustified by their faith S. Paul saith of Noe That he was instituted heire of the iustice which is by faith Heb. 11.7 What faith had he That by Christs righteousnes he was assured of saluation No such matter but beleeued that God according to his word and justice would drowne the world and made an Arke to saue himselfe and his familie as God commaunded him Abraham the Father of beleeuers and the Paterne and example of justice by faith as the Apostle disputeth to the Romans Rom. ca. 4. What faith he was iustified by Let S. Paul declare who of him and his faith hath these wordes He contrary to hope beleeued in hope that he might be made the Father of manie Nations according to that which was said vnto him So shall thy seede be as the starres of heauen and the sands of the Sea and he was not weakned in faith neither did he consider his owne body now quite dead whereas hee was almost an hundred yeares old nor the dead Matrice of Sara in the promise of God he staggered not by distrust but was strengthned in faith giuing glorie to God most fully knowing that whatsoeuer he promised he was able also to doe therefore was it reputed to him to iustice Loe because he glorified God in beleeuing that old and barren persons might haue children if God said the word and that whatsoeuer God promised he was able to performe he was justified The Centurions faith was very pleasing vnto our Sauiour who said in commendation of it That he had not found so great faith in Israell What faith was that Marry that he could with a word cure his seruant absent Math. 8. Say the word onely quoth he my seruant shall be healed S.
generall that hope applyeth vnto me in particular by faith I beleeue CHRIST to be the Sauiour of all mankind by hope I trust to be made partaker of that saluation in him But charity doth yet giue me a greater confidence of saluation for by the rule of true charity as I dedicate and imploy my life labours and all that I haue to the seruice of God so all that God hath is made mine so farre forth as it can be made mine according vnto that sacred lawe of friendshippe Amicorum omnia sunt communia And therefore in true reason neither by faith nor any other vertue we take such holde on Christs merittes nor haue such interest in his inestimable treasures as by charity which S. Augustine vnderstoode well when he made it the modell and measure of justification saying That Charity beginning De nat gra c. vlt. was Iustice beginning Charity encreased was Iustice encreased great Charity was great Iustice and perfect Charity was perfect Iustice M. PERKINS fourth Reason is taken from the iudgement of the auncient Church They are blessed to whome without any labour or worke donne Ambros in Rom. 4. iniquities are remitted So no workes or repentance is required of them but only that they beleeue To these and such like wordes I answere First that it is very vncertaine whether these Commentaries be Saint Ambroses Secondly that that Author excludeth not repentance but only the workes of Moyses lawe which the Iewes helde to be necessary as circumcision and such like see the place and conferre with it that which he hath written in the same worke vpon the fourth to the Hebrewes where hee hath these wordes Faith is a great thing and without it it is not possible to be saued but faith alone doth not suffice but it is necessary that faith vvorke by charity and conuerse worthy of God M. PERKINS next authority is gathered out of S. Augustine De verb. Ap. ser 40. There is one propitiation for all sinners to beleeue in Christ True but where is it that we neede nothing else but to beleeue Hesichius saith Grace which is of mercy is apprehended by faith alone Leuit. li. 1. cap. 2. and not of workes that is we doe not meritte by our workes done before grace anything at GODS hand but of his mercy receiue both faith and iustification 4. Bernard hath Whosoeuer thirsteth after righteousnes let him beleeue in thee Sup. cant serm 22. that being iustified by faith alone he way haue peace with God Answere By faith alone he excludeth all other meanes that either Iewe or Gentile required but not charity Which his very wordes include for howe can wee abhorre sinne and thirst after justice without charity and in the same worke Serm. 24. He declareth playnely that he comprehendeth alwayes charity when hee speakes of a justifying faith saying A right faith doth not make a man righteous if it worke not by Charity And againe Neither workes without faith nor faith without workes is sufficient to make the soule righteous Gal. 3. 5. Chrysostome they said he who rested on faith alone was accursed but Paul sheweth that he is blessed who rested on faith alone Answere He speakes of the Iewes who held Christians accursed because resting on the faith in Christ would not obserue withall Moyses law the Apostle contrary wise denounceth them accursed Gal. 5. who would joyne the ceremonies of Moyses lawe with Christian religion and so faith alone there excludeth onely the old lawe not the workes of charity so he mangleth pittifully a sentence of S. Basils saying De humil Let man acknowledge himselfe to want true iustice and that he is iustified onely by faith in Christ If a man knowe him selfe iustified by faith in Christ howe can he acknowledge that hee wants true justice His wordes truly repeted are these Let man acknowledge that hee is vnworthie of true iustice and that his iustification comes not of his desert but of the meere mercy of GOD through Christ. So that by faith alone S. Basill treating of humility excludes all merite of our owne but no necessary good disposition as you may see in his Sermon de fide where he proues by manie textes of Holy Scripture that charity is as necessary as faith Rom. 3. M. PERKINS last testimony is out of Origen Who proues as M. PER. said that onely beleeuing without workes iustifieth by the example of the Theefe on the Crosse of whose good workes there is no mention Answere Origen excludeth no good disposition in vs to justification but saith that a man may be saued without doing outwardly any good workes If he want time and place as the Theefe did who presently vpon his conuersion was put to death which is good Catholike Doctrine but that you may perceiue how necessary the good dispositions before mentioned be to justification you shall finde if you consider well all circumstances not one of them to haue beene wanting in that good Theefes conuersion First that he stood in feare of Gods just judgement appeares by these his wordes to his fellowe Doest thou not feare God c. He had hope to be saued by Christ out of which he said O Lord remember me when thou comest into thy Kingdome By both which speeches is shewed also his faith both in God that he is the gouuernour and just judge of the world and in Christ that he was the Redeemer of mankinde His repentance and confession of his fault is laid downe in this And we truly suffer worthely His charity towardes God and his neighbour in reprehending his fellowes blasphemie in defending Christs innocency and in the middest of his greatest disgraces and raging enemies to confesse him to be King of the world to come out of all which we may gather also that he had a full purpose to amend his life and to haue taken such order for his recouery as it should please Christ his Sauiour to appoint So that the lacked not any one of those dispositions which the Catholike Church requires to justification Now that that great Doctor Origen meant not to exclude any of these good qualities out of the companies of faith is apparant by that which he hath written on the next Chapter where he saith Rom. 4. That faith cannot be imputed to iustice to such as beleeue in Christ vnlesse they doe withall put of the old man and a little before more playnlie saying I thinke that faith is the first beginning of saluation hope is proceeding in the building but the toppe and perfection of the whole worke is charity THE THIRD DIFFERENCE ABOVT IVSTIFICATION howe farre forth good workes are required thereto MASTER PERKINS saith Pag. 91. That after the doctrine of the Church of Rome there be two kindes of iustification the first when of a sinner one is made iust the which is of the meere mercy of God through Christ without any merit of man onely some certayne
containe in them all doctrine needfull to saluation whether it concerne faith or maners and acknowledge no Traditions for such as hee who beleeueth them not cannot be saued Before wee come to the Protestants reasons against Traditions obserue that we deuide Traditions into three sorts The first we tearmed Diuine because they were deliuered by our blessed Sauiour who is God The second Apostolicall as deliuered by the holy Apostles The third Ecclesiasticall instituted and deliuered by the Gouernours of the Church after the Apostles daies And of these three kindes of Traditions we make the same account as of the writings of the same Authors to wit we esteeme no lesse of our Sauiours Traditions than of the soure Gospels or any thing immediatly dictated from the holy Ghost Likewise asmuch honor credit do we giue vnto the Apostles doctrine vnwritten as writtē For incke paper brought no new holines nor gaue any force and vertue vnto either Gods on the Apostles words but they were of the same value and credit vttered by word of mouth as if they had bene written Here the question is principally of diuine Traditions which we hold to be necessarie to saluation to resolue determine many matters of greater difficultie For we deny not but that some such principall poynts of our Faith which the simple are bounde to beleeue vnder paine of damnation may bee gathered out of the holie Scriptures as for example that God is the Creator of the world Christ the Redeemer of the world the Holy Ghost the Sanctifier and other such like Articles of the Creede M. P. goeth about to prooue by these reasons following that the Scriptures containes all matter of beleefe necessary to saluation Testimonie * Deut. 4.2 Thou shalt not adde to the words that I command thee nor take any thing there from Therefore the written worde is sufficient for all doctrine pertaining to saluation If it be saide that this is spoken as well of the vn-written as written worde for there is no mention in the texte of the written worde then M. P. addeth that it must bee vnderstood of the written worde onely because these wordes are as a certaine preface set before a long Comentarie made vpon the written Law ANSWERE Let the words be set where you will they must not bee wrested beyond their proper signifycation The words cited signifie no more then that wee must not either by addition or subtraction change or peruert Gods commandements whether they be written or vnwritten Now to infer that because they areas a preface vnto MOSES Law that therfore nothing must be added vnto the same Law is extreame dotage Why then were the bookes of the Old Testament written afterward if God had forbidden any more to be written or taught besides that one booke of Deuteronomy Shall we thinke that none of the Prophets that liued and wrote many volumes after this had not read these words or that they either vnderstood them not or that vnderstanding them well did wilfullie transgresse against them one of these the Protestants must needes defend or else for very shame surcease the alleadging of this text for the all-sufficiencie of the written word M. P. His testimonie * Esa 8.2 ◠To the Law and testimonie if they speake not according to this word it is because there is no light in them Here the Prophet teacheth saith M. P. What is to be done in cases of difficultly men must not runne to the Wizardes and Soothsayers but to the Lawe and to the Testimonie commending the written word as sufficient to resolue all doubts whatsoeuer ANSWERE By the Lawe and testimonie in that place the fiue bookes of MOSES are to bee vnderstood if that written Worde bee sufficient to resolue all doubts what-so-euer What neede wee then the Prophets what neede wee the Euangelists and the Epistles of the Apostles What Wizarde would haue reasoned in such sorte The Prophet willeth there that the Israelites who wanted wit to discerne whether it be better to flie vnto God for councell than vnto Wizardes and Sooth-sayers to see what is written in the Lawe of MOSES concerning that poynt of consulting-Wizards which is there plainely forbidden in diuerse places Now out of one particular case whereof there is expresse mention in the written worde to conclude that all doubts and scruples whatsoeuer are thereby to be decided is a most vnskilfull parte arguing as great want of light in him as was in those blinde Israelites 3. Testimonie * Iohn 20.31 These things were written that ye might beleue that IESVS is the CHRIST and in beleeuing might haue life euerlasting Here is set down the full end of the Gospell that is to bring men to faith and consequently to saluation to which the whole scripture alone is sufficient without Traditions ANSWERE Here are more faults than lines First the text is craftily mangled Things being put insteede of Miracles For S. IOHN sayeth Many other Miracles CHRIST did c. but these were written c. Secondly S. IOHN sayth not that for faith we shall be saued but beleeuing we should haue saluation in his name which hee clipped off thirdly remember to what faith S. IOHN ascribes the meanes of our saluation not to that whereby we applie vnto our selues Christs righteousnes but by which we beleeue IESVS to be CHRIST the MESSIAS of the Iewes and the Sonne of God which M. P. also concealed Now to the present matter S. IOHN saith that these miracles recorded in his Gospell were written that wee might beleeue IESVS to bee the Sonne of God and beleeuing haue saluation in his name c. Therefore the written word containes all doctrine necessarie to saluation ANSWERE S. IOHN speakes not a word of doctrine but of myracles and therefore to conclude sufficiencie of doctrine out of him is not to care what one sayeth But M. P. sore-seeing this sayeth it cannot be vnderstood of miracles onely for miracles without the doctrine of CHRIST can bring no man to life euerlasting True and therefore that texte speaking onely of myracles prooueth nothing for the sufficiencie of the written Worde CHRISTS miracles were sufficient to prooue him to bee the Sonne of GOD and their MESSIAS But that prooueth not Saincte IOHNS Gospel to containe al Doctrine needful to saluation For many other poynts of faith must be beleeued also And if it alone be sufficient what neede we the other three Gospelles the Actes of the Apostles or any of their Epistles or the same S. IOHNS Reuelations Finallie admit that S. IOHNS Gospell were all-sufficient yet should not Traditions be excluded for Christ sayeth in it in plaine tearmes * Ioh. 16. that he had much more to saye vnto his Apostles but they as then being not able to be are it he reserued that to be deliuered vnto them afterward of which high mysteries S. IOHN recordeth not much in his Gospell after Christs resurrection and so many of them must needes be deliuered by
bookes of holy Scripture put together do contayne all necessary instruction Now then the argument followeth but some of those bookes of holy Scripture haue bene lost therefore some poynts of necessarie doctrine contayned in them are not extant in the written worde and consequently to be learned by Tradition M. P. answereth First supposing some of the bookes to be lost that all needfull doctrine which was in them is in some of the others preserued But why did he not solue the Argument proposed were then those bookes supersluous Doth the Holie Ghost set men to pen needelesse discourses which this answere supposeth Therefore he giues a second more shamefull that none be perished which is most contrary vnto the plaine Scriptures * 1. Paral. vlt. 2. Paral 9. as S. IOHN CHRYSOSTOM prooueth * Hom. 9. in Mat. E◠Hom. 7. in priorem ad Corinth where he hath these expresse words That many of the Propheticall bookes are lost may be prooued out of the historie of Paralipomeneon which they translate Cronicles Now as for M. P. gesses that some of them are yet extant but otherwise called some were but little rolles of Paper some profane and of Philosophie I holde them not worth the discussing beeing not much pertinent and avowed one in word onely without either any reason or authoritie M. P. His fourth objection of the Jewish Cabala is a meere dreame of his owne our Argument is this MOSES who was the Pen-man of the Olde Law committed not all to writing but deliuered certaine poynts needefull to saluation by Tradition nor any Law-maker that euer was in any Countrey comprehended al in letters but established many things by customes therefore not likelie that our Christian law should be all written That MOSES did not pen all thus we prooue It was as necessarie for women to be deliuered from Originall sinne as men Circumcision the remedie for men could not possible be applyed to women as euery one who knoweth what circumcision is can tell neither is there any other remedie prouided in the written law to deliuer women from that sinne Therefore some other remedie for them was deliuered by Tradition Item if the Childe were likely to die before the eight daie there was remedie for them as the most learned doe hold yet no where written in the Law Also many Gentils during that state of the Old Testament were saued as IOB and many such like according to the opinion of all the auncient Fathers yet in the Law or any other part of the Old Testament it is not written what they had to beleeue or how they should liue wherefore many things needefull to saluation were then deliuered by Tradition To that reason of his that God in his prouidence should not permit such a losse of any parte of the Scripture I answere that God permitteth much euill Againe no great losse in that according to our opinion who hold that Tradition might preserue what was then lost Now insteede of M. P. his fift reason for vs of milke and stronge meate wishing him a Messe of Pappe for his childish proposing of it I will set downe some authorities out of the written word in proofe of Traditions Our Sauiour said being at the point of his passiō * Ioh. 16.12 that he had many things to say vnto his Apostles but they could not as then beare them * Act. 10. Our Sauiour after his resurrection appeared often vnto his Disciples speaking with them of the kingdome of God of which little is written in any of the Euangelists * 1. Cor. 11 I commende you brethren that you remember me in all things and keepe the Traditions euen as I haue deliuered them to you * 1 Tim. 6. O TIMOTHY keepe the dispositum that is true which I deliuered thee to keepe * 2. Tim. 1 Hold fast by the holy ghost the good things committed vnto thee to keepe which was as S. CHRISOSTOM and THEOPHILACT expounde the true doctrine of CHRIST the true sence of holy Scriptures the right administration of the Sacramentes and gouernment of the Church To which alludeth that auncient holy Martir S. IRENEVS * Lib. 3. c. 4 saying that the Apostles layd vp in the Catholike Church as in a rich treasurie all things that belong to the trueth S. IOHN who was the last of the Apostles left aliue said * Epi. 3.13 that hee had many other things to write not idle or superfluous but would not commit them to inke and pen but referred them to be deliuered by word of mouth And to specifie for example sake some two or three poynts of greatest importance where is it written that our Sauiour the Sonne of God is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is of the same substance with his father Where is it written that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Sonne aswell as from the Father Where is it written that there is a Trinitie that is three persons reallie distincte in one and the very same substance And that there is in our Sauiour CHRIST IESVS no person of man but the substance of God man subsisting in the second person of the Trinitie Be not all and euerie of these principall articles of the Christian faith and most necessarie to be beleeued of the learned and yet not one of them in expresse tearmes written in any parte of the holie Bible Wherefore wee must either admit Traditions or leaue the highest mysteries of our Christian faith vnto the discretion and courtesie of euerie wrangler as shal be more declared in the argument following The sixt and last reason for Traditions Sundrie places of holy Scriptures be hard to be vnderstood others doubtfull whether they must be taken liberally or figuratiuely If then it be put to euery Christian to take his owne exposition euery seueral sect will coyne interpretations in fauour of their own opinions so shal the word of God ordayned only to teach vs the trueth be abused and made an Instrument to confirme all errors To auoide which inconuenience considerate men haue recourse vnto the Traditions and auncient Records of the Primitiue Church receiued from the Apostles and deliuered to the posteritie as the true copies of Gods word see the true Exposition and sense of it and thereby confute and reject all priuate and new glosses which agree not with those auncient and holy Comentaries So that for the vnderstanding of both difficult and doubtfull texts of Scripture Traditions are most necessarie M. P. His answere is that there is no such neede of them but in doubtfull places the Scripture it selfe is the best glosse If there be obserued first the analogie of faith which is the summe of religion gathered out of the cleerest places Secondly the circumstance of the place and the nature and signifycation of the wordes Thirdly the conference of place with place and concludeth that the Scripture is falsely tearmed the matter of strife it being not so of it selfe but by the
so that God giueth it not vnto all yet doth he certainely giue it to some for otherwise they cannot keepe their Vowes but to the dishonour of God and to their owne damnation should breake them And wee onely teach that some such who haue Vowed chastitie could keepe it so that the argument is verie childish and too too weake to lead any wise man away from the holy and auncient Doctrine of the Church But to the further confirmation of this poynt let vs heare what the holy Fathers teach touching the possibilitie of this Vowe TERTVLLIAN neere the ende expounding these wordes * Lib. de monog Hee that can take let him take * Mat 19. Choose sayeth hee that which is good if thou saye thou canst not it is because thou wilt not for that thou mightest if thou wouldest he doth declare who hath left both to thy choyse ORIGEN vpon the same place * Mat 19. Hee that will take this worde that is set downe of chastitie let him praye for it beleeuing him that saide aske and it shall bee giuen you and hee shall receiue it which doeth plainelie confute Maist Perk. Who sayeth that although wee aske neuer so much wee can not obtayne this gift with ORIGEN agreeth Sainct IEROM vpon the same place who sayeth It is giuen vnto them vvho haue requested it who haue desired it and trauayled that they might receiue it The same Song chanteth GREGORIE NAZIANZ which is of three kindes of Eunuchs * Orat. 3 1. Saint CHRYSOSTOME sayeth it is possible to all them who make choyse of it and further addeth that our Sauiour CHRIST himselfe doeth prooue it there after this sorte Thinke with thy selfe if thou haddest bene by nature an Eunuch or by the malice of men made one what wouldest thou then haue done when thou shouldest both haue bene depriued of that pleasure and yet not haue had any recompence for thy paine Therefore thanke GOD because thou shalt haue a great rewarde and a glyttering Crowne if thou liue so as they must doe vvithout any revvarde yet sayeth hee thou mayest doe it more easelie safelie and pleasantlie both because thou art fortifyed with hope of recompence and also comforted with a vertuous conscience Wee will wrappe vp this poynte with Saint AVGVSTINE who directlie confuteth M. Perk. by many reasons and examples Lib. 2. De adulterinis coniug cap. 12. Et de bono viduit cap. 20. And vpon the Psalme an hundreth thirtie seauen he yeeldeth an other reason why God will more reallie assist them saying Hee that exhorteth thee to Vowe vvill helpe thee to fulfill it All which heauenly Doctrine because it is spirituallie judged as the Apostle speaketh the Carnall man cannot vnderstande And therefore M. P. being perswaded that few can liue chastly except they marrie avoucheth that this Vowe doeth bring foorth innumerable abhominations in the Worlde Not the hundreth parte so manie as the fleshlie Heretikes imagine and out of flying and lying tales reporte and bruite abroade Naie I dare affirme that let the authenticall Recordes of our Realme bee well perused and you shall finde more lewde filthie Lecherie to haue bene practised by Ministers and their Wiues this last age than was in a thousand yeare before by all the Catholike Priestes and Religious persons of the Land This may serue for a reproofe of al that M. P. objecteth against the Vowe of chastity afterward the man would somwhat reason the matter by shewing howe hee condemneth not chastitie yet sayeth that Marriage is better than it in two respects If IOVINIAN was reputed by the learnedst an holiest Fathers a Christian Epicure and a Monster because he durst make marriage equall with Virginitie What shall this man be who sayeth it is better His reasons are so childish that by the like you may prooue durt to be better then gold wherefore I will not stand vpon them He neuerthelesse afterwarde concludeth that one may purpose constantly with himselfe to leade a single life but so as he may change vpon occasion and this to be a councell of expedience but not of perfection Lastly that if any hauing the gifte of continencie doe Vowe and afterwarde Marrie the gift remayning they haue sinned which is flat against his owne second rule which prohibites vs to leese our libertie and to make any thing vnlawfull in conscience which Christian religion leaueth at libertie Now libertie supposeth M. P. his default who was accustomed to rehearse although many times vntowardly yet lightly alwaies some reasons for the Catholike partie which in this question he hath whollie omitted I wil briefely prooue by an argument or two that it is both lawful verie commendable for men and women of ripe yeeres and consideration hauing wel tryed their own aptnesse to Vow virginitie if by good inspirations they be thereunto inwardly called My first reason is this that which is more pleasant and grateful vnto God may verie well be Vowed to him but Virginitie is more acceptable to God than Marriage The first proposition is manifest and hath no other exception against it but that which before is confuted to wit if we be able to performe it The second is denyed by them which we prooue in expresse tearmes out of S. PAVL * 1. Cor. 7. He that ioyneth his Virgin doth well but he that ioyneth her not doth better and againe of Widdowes * Esa 56. They shall be more happie by S. PAVLS iudgement if they remaine vnmarried This may be confirmed out of ESAY Where God promiseth the Eunuch that holdeth greatly of the thing that pleaseth him that he will giue him in his houshold and within his walles a better heritage and name than if they had bene called sonnes and daughters I will saith God giue them an euerlasting name And also out of the booke of Wisdome * Cap. 3. Blessed is the Eunuch which hath wrought no vnrighteosnesse c. For vnto him shall be giuen the speciall gift of faith and the most acceptable portion in our Lords Temple for glorious is the fruit of God Which is also plainely taught in the Reuelations * Reuelat. 14. Where it is said that no man could sing that song but 14400 and the cause is set downe These be they which haue not bene defiled with women for they are Virgins To these latter places M. P. answereth pag. 241. that to the Eunuch is promised a greater rewarde but not because of his chastitie but because he keepeth the Lords Saboth and couenant But this is saide vnaduisedlie for to all others that keepe Gods commandements shall be giuen a heauenly reward but why shall they haue a better heritage and more acceptable portion than others but because of their speciall prerogatiue of chastitie M. P. then answereth otherwise here that the single life is better and more happie because it is freer from common cares of this life and yeeldeth vs more bodelie ease and libertie to serue God But 1200. yeares agoe
Buls Cherubs and such like Secondly they serue for distinction of coynes Thirdly Images serue to keepe in memorie friends departed whom wee reuerence and therefore in the dayes after the Apostles Christians vsed priuatelie to keepe the Pictures of their friendes departed which afterwarde sayeth he by abuse came to be set in Churches and worshipped of which hereafter Second conclusion We hold the Historicall vse of Images to bee good and lawfull that is to represent to the eye the actes of Histories whether they be humaine or diuine and thus wee thinke that the histories of the Bible may be paynted in priuate places Third conclusion In one case it is lawfull to make an Image to testifie the presence or effects of the majestie of God namely when God himselfe commandes it so was the brazen Serpent made to represent Christ crucifyed * Ioh. 3. and the Cherubs ouer the Mercie seate to represent the Majestie of God when the Angels adore And therefore it is saide Thou shalt not make to thy selfe that is vpon thine owne head any grauen Image This by the way is a verie wilfull peruerting of those wordes to thy selfe which cannot signifie but to thine owne vse that is to adore them as is plainely declared in the text following The fourth conclusion The right Images of the New Testament are the doctrine and Preaching of the Gospell wherein Christ and his benefites are liuely represented vnto vs but these be metaphoricall Pictures not belonging to this purpose for it is one thing to describe in words an other to expresse in liuely colours and liueaments These conclusions conteyne as M P. affirmeth the doctrine of the Church of England which I would beleeue if I did not see the Magistrates publikelie to take away Pictures from Catholikes to teare and burne them which were kept but in priuate places yea their more feruent disciples cannot abide a Crosse standing by the High-waie-side or in any neuer so profaine a place but either they beate and hale them downe or most despitefullie deface them bewraying indeed vnto all moderate men their cankered stomaks against him that dyed on the Crosse who will one daye when he pleaseth confounde them But to couer this their malice they caste ouer it the mantle of zeale saying that the Papistes make them their Gods and that therefore they are to be abolished O men blinded with spite against true deuotion We Catholikes are a thousand times more zealous of the true honour of the liuing God than any Protestants euer were or will be And that small reuerence which we yeelde vnto Images is more different from the honour and obedience due vnto Almightie God than the cope of heauen is distant from the center of the earth And that these hotter brethren may see what reason M. P. had to allowe of the ciuill and historicall vse of Images I thinke it expediente to note here howe in the purest antiquitie Images were made and respected That famous Image of our blessed Sauiour which the woman cured of the bloudie flxe * Mat. 9. set vp in Brasse at Caesarea Philippi vpon a Piller of stone is not vnknowen vnto any that haue read the Ecclesiasticall Historie of EVSEBIVS Lib. 7. cap. 14. And howe God did approoue it by giuing vertue vnto an herbe when it did growe to touch the hemme of that Picture to cure all maner of diseases Which Image EVSEBIVS himselfe did see standing vntill his dayes which was 1300. yeares agoe as he there testfyeth as also that he sawe diuers others namely of Saint PETER and PAVL This goodly stature being most memorable both for antiquitie of it being made our Sauiour yet liuing and for the myracles wrought by that herbe growing at the foote of it IVLIAN the Apostata for malice against our Sauiour caused to bee broken downe and set vppe his owne Image in the place of it but his was presently with lightning and thunder from heauen consumed into ashes and our Souiours by the Christians carryed into their Church as witnesseth ZOZOMENIVS * Lib. 5. hist c. 20. An other Picture of our Sauiours visage hee himselfe is reported to haue sente vnto ABGARVS Prince of Edessa as witnesseth METAPHASTES In vita Constantini DAMASEN * Lib. 10. de imagi and EVAGRIVS * Lib. 4. hist cap. 28. who doeth in the same chapter rehearse a notable myracle wrought by the same Image to deliuer the Towne from the sacking of the Persians And in his fift booke and eighteenth chapter recordeth an other myracle done by the image of the blessed Virgin MARY in a Prison at Antioch The third Image representing our blessed Sauiour is saide to haue bene made by NICODEMVS his secreet Disciple which afterward was taken by the Iewes and in despight of Christ was crucifyed and to their confusion much blood issued out of it This historie is in the worke of S. ATHANASIVS that sound piller of the Church intituled De passione imaginis and is either his or some other very auncient and graue writer For it is related in the seauenth generall counsell act 4. That Saint LVKE the Euangell drewe the Picture of our blessed Ladie is registred by Theodorus Lector 100. yeares agoe * Lib. 1. collectam and Metaphrastes In vita Lucae and Nicephorus * Li. 14. hist 1. 2 TERTVLLIAN an author of the second hundreth yeare after Christ hath left written * Lib. 2. de pudicitia that the Image of Christ in shape of a shephearde carrying a sheepe on his shoulders was engrauen vpon the holy Chalices vsed in the Church In the time of S. CHRYSOSTOME they were so common that they were carryed in rings drawen on cuppes paynted in Chambers See THEODORET In histor relig in vita Simeonis Stelitae Aug. lib. 2. de cons Euang. c. 10. And the 7. Synod Act. 4. This briefely of Images in generall now a word or two of the signe of the Crosse which our Protestants haue banished from all their followers Neuerthelesse it can not be denyed to haue bene in most frequent vse among the best Chiistians of the Primitiue Church TERTVLLIAN hath these words * De corono militis At euerie going forward and returne when wee dresse vs and pull on our shoes when wee wash and sit downe at the lighting of Candels and entring into our Chambers finallie when wee set our selues to any thing wee make the signe of the Crosse one our fore-heads S. AMBROSE * Serm. 84 exhorts vs to begin all our works with the signe of the Crosse S. AVGVSTINE * 118. in Ioan. What is that ensigne of Christ which all men know but the Crosse of CHRIST the which signe vnlesse it bee made on the fore-heads of the faithfull yea on the water by which they are regenerate and on the Oyle and Chrisme wherewith they are annoynted and on the sacrifice wherewith they are nourished not one of them are orderlie and dulie administred Our Protestants then
represented and so in the seauenth generall Councell the drawing of the Holie Ghost in forme of a Doue as he appeared Mat. 3. is approoued The first poynt then being obtayned that such Images of God may be made I come to the seconde That all holie Pictures may bee placed in Churches which I prooue by the argument that M. P. made for our first objection In SALOMONS Temple were erected Cherubins which were Images of Angels on the Mercie seate where God was worshipped and vppon the walles and verie doores of the same pictured To this M. P. answereth that they were erected by speciall commandement from God who prescribeth the verie forme of them and the place where they should be set and thereby MOSES had a warrant to make them let them shewe the like warrant for their Images if they can Secondly sayth he the Cherubs were placed in the most inward place of the Temple so were remooued from the sight of the people and the Cherubs without the vaile though they were seene yet were they not worshipped REPLY This mans wits were gone a wool-gathering when proposing to himselfe the Cherubs erected in SALOMONS Temple he answereth of the Cherubs made by MOSES 350. yeares before a most grosse ouer-sight and a shameful shift but such as men desperatly defending vntruths must needes vse For if he had answered directly he had not had a word to saye for neither did God prescribe the forme of them nor giue any speciall commandement to SALOMON to make and erect any such Cherubs as he that pleaseth to read the Chapter may see there they were placed not onely in the inwarde but also in the outward parts of the Temple vpon the walles and very doores that they might be seene of all the people which M. P. finding flitted from thence and did flie vnto an other which because it spake of Cherubs he thought would serue to blinde his simple followers MOSES indeed had an expresse precept for the making of them as he had for the Curteines and Curteine-rods and euery particular belonging to the Tabernacle But SALOMON without any speciall commandement out of his high and holy wisedome vnderstood that he might most lawfully and lawdably imitate that heauenly patterne of MOSES And as the building was far more sumptuous and stately so in the number and quantie of pictures exceeded which is a sufficient instruction warrant for all men after his daies to make and set Images in the Church And this finallie M. P. seemes to graunt when he sayeth that these Cherubs without the veyle were there to be seene but not to be worshipped so that wee haue gotten one step further that Images may not onely be made but also be set vp in the Churches which is fortifyed by the testimonie of TERTVLLIAN in the place cited before where he sayeth that our Sauiour was pictured vpon holy Chalices which were vsed at the Altars and of SOZOMENVS who witnesseth that our Sauiours Picture was taken into the Church S. GREGORY NAZ * Epist 49. maketh mention of Images in the Church of Diocesaraea trimmed vp by himselfe Saint BASIL * Orat. in Barlaam poynteth to that holy mans Picture standing in the Church DAMASVS * In vita Siluest shewes how CONSTANTINE in the Church of S. IOHN LATERAN erected a siluer Image vnto our Sauiour S. CHRYSOSTOME In demonst quod Christ sit Deus And S. AVG. * Serm. 19 de sanc do teach that the Crosse was on the holie Tables and vsed at all holy functions And the reason why Images should principallie be set in Churches is verie pregnant For where should holy pictures of holy men be more properlie bestowed than in holie places And the Church being a resemblance of heauen as S. PAVL teacheth * Heb. 9 is most conueniently decked vp with Images the representations of heauenlie creatures that men entring into that holie place may by the viewe and consideration of such a heauenly shewe retire their mindes from worldly businesse and lift them vp vnto the soueraigne monarch of both heauen and earth Now let vs come to those two objections of M. P. which seemes to bee against the erection of Images in Churches The first is out of the Councell of ELIBERIS cap. 36. which commaundeth that nothing should bee paynted on the walles of the Church that was adored of the people ANSWERE That if the Councel speake of the Image of God in which sense M. P. cyteth it and the word adored doeth insinuate then it may bee saide that the Councell inhibiteth that sort of Gods Images which are made to expresse the diuine nature If it be extended vnto all sorts of Images I answere that they were then forbidden to be drawen vpon the Church walles but not to be set in Tables vpon the Altar or in any other place The reason is because that Councell was holden in time of persecution as appeareth by the twentie fiue Canon of it and then if the persecutors had found out the place of their assembly as they often did those pictures must needes either haue bene defaced by themselues or left vnto the derision and despight of the Heathens And pictures also paynted vpon such poore walles as they had then to their Churches would either by the moysture of the walles or other incommoditie haue bene quick y disfigured wherefore to the greater honour of such sacred things those graue Fathers thought it not meete to haue them drawen vpon the Church walles there being manie more meete places for them in the Churches The second objection is out of a post-script of EPIPHANIVS letter vnto IOHN PATRIARKE of Ierusalem in which is written as M. P. falsely reporteth that it is against the authoritie of Scripture to see the Pictures of Christ or of any Saint to hang in the Church ANSWERE It is there only to see the picture of a man Now that he should meane of Christ or of some Saint is onely gathered yet M. P. makes no bones to thrust them both into the Texte euen so doe wee thinke that some olde enemie of Images added that postscript vnto EPIPHANIVS letter Our reasons are because it hath no coherence with the former letter or stile Againe in the seauenth Councell when all that could be found out of antiquitie was cited against Images no tidings there of this place which if it had bene true might haue bene one of the principall Thirdly in the same Councell * Act. 6. other two places brought as it were out of EPIPHANIVS workes were found to be none of his And for Images was alleadged that EPIPHANIVS owne disciples erected an Image to their maister and set it in the Church which they would neuer haue done if he had taught them to be against the Scripture so to doe M. P. obserues a speciall reason in EPIPHANIVS other counterfeit testimonie That Images must not be suffered in the common house because wee must carrie God in our mindes To which
we answere that Images must be suffred in all places that we may the better carrie God in our harts being by the sight of them both often put in minde of him and much mooued to honour and loue him Now I come vnto a third poynt which M. P. maketh the second of our difference That Images may be not only made and set in Churches but also worshipped M. P. holds the contrarie and his principall ground is the second commandement which containes saith he two parts The first forbids the making of Images to resemble God the second the worshipping of them or God in them in these words Thou shalt not bow downe to them ANSWERE If it bee onely forbidden to make the Image of God and to adore it then the making and worshipping of the Image of Christ or of any other creature is not there prohibited And so this second commandement more than thrise alleadged will not serue the turne against any other Image but God onely And in plaine reason according also to M. P. his owne confession the Commandements of the first Table touch only our duety towardes God that wee giue him all his due honour and doe not giue any parte thereof vnto any thing else whatsoeuer Wherefore diuine and godlie worship is onely there spoken of and not such worship as wee giue vnto any creature or to the picture of it And consequently there is nothing there against the worshipping of our holy Images Obserue that there is a soueraigne worship due to God as to the Creator and gouernor of all the world and to giue this to any creature is Idolatrie An other honour by infinite degrees inferiour yet absolute in it self is ascribed vnto Angels and men as creatures endued with reason and made after the likenesse of God and to exhibite this to whom it is due is ciuilite and not Idolatrie This honour may be deuided into two parts because these creatures are like to God aswell in their naturall powers and qualities as in their supernatural And that honour which is giuen to man or angel in respect of any natural qualitie may be called moral or ciuile But that which is attributed vnto thē in regard of their supernatural gifts may well be called religious and spirituall because it is due vnto them onely for their spiritual and religious qualities There is a third kind of worship yet meaner then the other which is a kinde of dependant and respectiue worship as when a seruant is honoured or cheerished not for his owne but for his maisters sake And this is that worship which wee allow vnto Images which for the Saints sake whom it doeth represent we doe either reuerently regard or take off our hat or bow our knee vnto it This third kinde of worshippe being all wee allowe vnto Pictures were he not that vnderstands it more than halfe franticke that should thinke it a great desparagement vnto the incomprehensible worship of God that to one of his seruants pictures I should yeeld some such pettie reuerence or that God should forbid this in the fore-front of his ten Commandements nothing lesse But let vs go on with M. P. his argument His second is the brasen Serpent was an Image of Christ crucifyed appoynted by God yet when the children of Israel burned incence vnto it EZECHIAS brake it in peeces * 4. Reg. 18 ANSWERE So when Christians generally giue godly honour to Images as those Israelites did to the Serpent let them also be broken by their lawful superiour if no better remedie may be founde But as that very brasen Serpent duelie worshipped many hundreth yeares by the same people before they sell to Idolatrie as witnesseth S. AVGVSTINE * Lib. 3. de trinit c. 10. where hee reckoneth the brazen Serpents among those signes which are worthie of religious worship so good Christians may worship all sorts of holy Pictures so they thinke no God to dwell in them nor put any trust in the Pictures but vse them onely to sturre vp deuotion to keepe their mindes from wandering after their domesticall affaires and to conserue the memorie of Gods happie seruants Now to the third argument which is iollie and worthie the wilde-witte of a madde-minister CHRIST would not so much as bow his knee vnto the deuill although he would haue giuen him the whole world for doing of it Therefore we must not odore Images true if the Image were M. Bezas ensigne or of their maister the deuill or of any of his hel-houndes M. P. His fourth reason A man sayeth he may be worshipped with ciuill honour not with religions which is whollie prescribed in the first Table and yet the meanest man is a more excellent Image of God than any paynted one ANSWER A man may be worshipped with religious honour in respect of his supernatural gifts aswell as with ciuill honour of his naturall properties as hath bene before declared and no other religious honor is either precribed or proscribed in the first Table then such only as is proper to God But saith he THOMAS of Watering * 3 Part. qu. 25. act 3 holdes that the Crucifixe is to be adored with the same honor that Christ is Leauing THOMAS of Watering and of Wapping to them that deserue it I answere to the place of Saint THOMAS of Aquine that he speaketh like a most learned Philosopher and diuine very profoundly that the Image may be considered in it self and so he sayth it is not to be worshipped at all or as it doth conuey our mind vnto that which it doth represent and so because there is but one the same motion of our vnderstanding wil towards Christ and the crucifixe we do adore them both at once with the same act of adoration but in a far different degree for Christ we adore properly as the true God but the crucifixe accidentally as a thing joyned with Christ Euen as saith he expounding himselfe art 4. when one doth his homage vnto the king he worshippeth with all his purple garment not that any worship is due to the robe but the whole is giuen vnto the person which cannot be seated from that which is so closely joyned to the person Euen so the diuine person of Christ is properly adored but improperly al things conceiued together with it are said also by that deep doctor to be adored he that hath eare of hearing let him heare for our purpose it sufficeth to know that hee assignes very small worship to themselues Lastly M P. sayeth without quoting any place that Augustine Gregorie in plaine tearms deny Images to be odored and so do we too taking adoring as they do for the worship that is proper to God Hauing now answered to all that M. P. objecteth against the worshipping of Images let vs now examine the reasons which he maketh in defence of it The first by him proposed is this Psalme 98. Cast downe your selues before his footestoole which was the Arke now if the