thē but to the defect of the light of naturall reasō foūd in thē or the want of due consideratiō right proceeding in the searching out of such things as are so to be known so likewise it is not to be imputed to the want of evidence of the truth of the things or at least of Gods speaking in the word of Heauenly Truth that all men beleeue not all the bookes that are diuine canonical the things contained in thē but to thedefect of spirituall light in thē that should discerne such things or the want of due cōsideratiō right proceeding in the searching out of such things Secondly he laboureth to proue that none of the articles of faith or things beleeued by vs are evident vnto vs in the light offaith whereas yet notwithstanding Hugo de sancto Victore sayth expresly that in some the light of diuine reason causeth approbation of that they beleeue that in other the purity of the heart conscience causeth a fore-tasting of those things which hereafter more fully shall be enioyed And Alexander of Ales pronounceth that the things apprehended by vs in diuine knowledge are more certainly discerned by such as are spirituall in the certainty of experience in the certainty which is in respect of affection by way of spirituall taste feeling then any thing is discerned in the light of naturall vnderstanding according to that of the Prophet How sweet are thy wordes O Lord vnto my mouth they are sweeter then the hony and the hony combe Wherefore that wee may the more distinctly conceiue these things wee must obserue that there are some things which though without revelation we could not know yet after they are revealed are evident vnto vs in the light of grace As first that the defects euils that are found in the nature of man the blindnes of his vnderstanding the way wardnes of his affections and perverse inclination of his will were not from the beginning that hauing beene in all the sonnes of men the first parents of mankind fell from their originall primitiue estate and that seeing these euils are found in all euen in litle infants new borne the propagation of them is naturall and not by imitation Secondly that the very inclinations of our hearts beeing naturally euill in this corrupt state of nature nothing can change them to good but GOD by a speciall worke aboue and beyond the course of Nature which therefore may rightly be named grace Other thinges there are which are discerned by spirituall taste and feeling as the remission of sinnes the joy and exultation of heart that is there found where God is present in grace And a third sort of thinges there are which being not discerned to bee true eyther of these two wayes are beleeued notwithstanding because deliuered vnto vs by God whom wee discerne to speake in the word of heavenly trueth So that the two former sortes of thinges are euident in themselues to them that are spirituall the latter in respect of that Medium by force whereof they are beleeued which is Diuine authority deliuering them vnto vs which thing Hugo de Sancto Victore excellently expresseth Credit fides saith he quod non vidit non vidit quod credit vidit tamen aliquid per quod admonita est excitata credere quod non vidit Deus sic ab initio notitiam sui ab homine temperauit vt sicut nunquam quid esset totum poterat comprehendi sic quod esset nunquam prorsus posset ignorari Oportuit vt proderet se occultum Deus ne totus celaretur propsus nesciretur rursum ad aliquid proditum se agnitum occultaret ne totus manifestaretur vt aliquid esset quod cor hominis enutriret cognitum rursus aliquid quod absconditum prouocaret That is Faith beleeveth that it neuer saw and it neuer saw that which it doth beleeue yet it saw something by which it was admonished and stirred vppe to beleeue that which it saw not God from the beginning did so temper the revealing of himselfe to bee knowne of men that as it could never bee wholly comprehended what he was so it might neuer be altogether vnknowne that he was It was fitte therefore that God should manifest himselfe formerly hid that hee might not bee wholly hidden and no knowledge had of him and againe that having in some sort reuealed and made himselfe knowne hee should so hide himselfe as not wholly to bee manifested that there might bee something which being knowne might nourish the heart of man and againe something which being hid might prouoke and stirre men vp to a desire of attayning some farther thing These things it seemeth the Treatiser thought not of and therefore denyeth that there is any motiue sufficient to make a man beleeue the articles of the fayth setting aside the meane supernaturall by which they are propounded and therevpon asketh Mee what maketh Me beleeue the articles of the Trinity the two distinct natures in Christ in the Vnity of the same person and the resurrection of the dead Wherevnto I answere that the thing that moueth mee so to beleeue is the authority of the Scripture which is the Word of God and that I beleeue it to bee the Word of God because I doe most certainely discerne him to speake in the same and a certaine diuine force and Majesty to present it selfe vnto Mee though the prophane Treatiser professeth hee knoweth not what that authority and Majesty of God is which is discerned in the sacred Scriptures nor how wee discerne it which is not to bee marvayled at seeing blind men cannot discerne the difference of colours but that there is something more then humane discernable in the Scripture all deuout and religious men will acknowledge with vs. Beleeue Mee sayth Picus Mirandula there lyeth hidde in the Scripture a secret vertue strangely altering and changing them that in due sort are conversant in the same So that the reason that all doe not discerne the Majesty of God in all bookes that are diuine and that some doubt of such as other admitte is not because such a diuine power is not discernable in them but because there is some defect in the parties not discerning the same To the former most weake reasons brought to proue the insufficiency of those inducements or reasons by which wee thinke the Spirit of GOD setleth vs in a perswasion of the truth of thinges contayned in the Scripture First hee addeth an vntruth to witte that I deny those parts of Scripture which rehearse matters of fact to bee knowne to be divine by the authority of God himselfe discerned to speake in the Word of faith And secondly an objection that men cannot know the Scripture to be diuine by discerning the Majesty of God speaking in them vnlesse they reade or heare euery part of them read ouer which is very hard to bee
in that they offend him and this is proper to God in that he onely hath power not to punish that hath power to punish and the Ministers of the Church concurre hereunto no otherwise but onely by bringing men by force of the Word and Sacraments into such an estate wherein God finding them will not punish them The second kinde of absolution is the freeing of men from the censures of suspension excommunication penitentiall corrections and such punishments as the Church may inflict and in this kinde the Church may properly bee saide to absolue The third kinde of absolution is the comfortable assuring of men vpon the vnderstanding of their estate that they shall escape Gods fearefull punishments In these two later sorts the Ministers of the Church haue power to absolue and personall absolution in either of these senses is rightly said to be an Apostolicall and godly ordinance but it is a written ordinance and not an vnwritten tradition which is the thing that this man should proue There is another kinde of absolution imagined by the Papists which is a Sacramentall act giuing grace ex opere operato to the remission of sinnes which is not an Apostolicall ordinance but an invention of their owne whereof I haue spoken elsewhere Touching the ministration of baptisme by priuate persons in the time of necessity it is not said to bee an vnwritten tradition by the Bishoppe of Winchester and therefore it is not to this purpose no more then that Bishoppes are saide to bee Diuinae ordinationis seeing the distinct degrees of Bishops and Presbyters are proued out of the Scripture That confirmation is an Apostolicall tradition wee confesse but it is a written tradition both in respect of the first practise of it by the Apostles who laid their hands on such as were baptized by others from which authority the custome of imposing hands doth come as Hierome testifieth as also in respect of the necessity of the continuance of it in that the Apostle to the Hebrewes reckoneth the imposition of hands together with the doctrine of baptismes amongst the foundations of Christian religion We doubt not therefore but it is a fitting thing that the Bishop should confirme by imposition of hands those that are baptized by others but it is rather for the honour of Priest-hood then the necessity of any law as Hierome testifieth for that otherwise they were in a wofull case who in places farre remote die before the Bishop can come to them if none could receiue the spirit of God but by the imposition of his hands It is therefore a sacramentall complement not to be neglected but not a Sacrament But this good man will proue it to be a Sacrament First because as hee saith it is so ioyned by vs with baptisme And secondly because it hath both a visible signe and grace by the communion-booke reviued It seemeth hee was neuer any good disputer he bringeth so many weake silly arguments and yet vrgeth them as if they were vnanswerable Surely these reasons will be found too weake to proue confirmation a Sacrament if they fall into the hands of any one that will take the paines to examine them For first if hee meane that it is joyned by vs with baptisme as a Sacrament hee is greatly deceiued seeing wee joyne it only as a Sacramentall complement And secondly though it haue an outward signe and inuisible grace yet the signe is not so much a signe of that grace which the Bishop imposing hands by his prayer obtayneth for the confirmation of the parties he layeth his hands vpon as a signe of limitation or restraint specifying and setting out the partie on whom hee desireth God to powre his confirming grace and therefore it hath not the nature of a Sacrament wherein there must be a visible signe of that grace that is conferred Secondly because though the Bishop ouershadowing the party by the imposition of his hands doe in a sort expresse resemble the hand of God stretched forth for the protecting assisting and safe keeping of the party which is an inuisible grace yet it followeth not that it is a Sacrament for the fiery and clouen tongues were a visible signe of that gracious gift of the spirit which the Apostles receiued in the day of Pentecost enabling them with all fiery zeale to publish the mysteries of Gods kingdome in all the seuerall languages of the world yet were they no Sacraments as Bellarmine noteth because the grace whereof these fiery tongues were a signe was not giuen by force of this signe as a set meane appointed by almighty God So in like sort the imposition of hands is a signe of protecting assisting and safe keeping grace not giuen or obtayned by the due vse of this signe as in Sacraments but to be obtained by the prayers of the Bishop and Church of God That which he hath out of Basil is to little purpose for I hope he thinketh not the doctrine of the Trinity to be holden by bare and onely tradition without the warrant of the written word or God And if Saint Basil reckon the forme of wordes wherein we professe our faith in the blessed Trinity to bee a tradition it proueth nothing against vs seeing the thing so professed is contayned in Scripture That the ordaining of Bishops in Diocesses to rule their churches and Metropolitanes in prouinces to call and moderate Synodes was an Apostolicall tradition we make no question but we deny it to be an vnwritten tradition For whereas in the Acts Paul sendeth for the Presbyters of Ephesus to Miletum in the Reuelation it appeareth by the Epistles of the Spirit of God directed to the seauen churches of Asia that amongst many Presbyters feeding the flocke of Christ in Ephesus there was one chiefe who had a kinde of eminent power who is named the Angell of the Church and who is commended or reproued for all thinges done well or ill within the limits and bounds of the same That the Bishop of Winchester saith the Article of Christs descending into hell and the Creede wherein it is contayned is an Apostolicall tradition deliuered to the Church by the direction and agreement of the Apostles is nothing but that we all say Neither is the Popish conceit touching vnwritten Articles of religion thereby confirmed for howsoeuer the Creede of the Apostles may be said to be a tradition in respect of the orderly collection of the principall heades of Christian faith into a briefe summe and Epitome which are scattered here and there in Scripture yet no Article of this Creed is beleeued or receiued by bare and onely tradition but they are all proued out of Scripture as that worthy and learned Bishop doth most excellently confirme and proue the Article of Christs descending into hell out of the same After these particular instances this authour groweth to a generall conclusion and asketh why we may not say with the Councell of Florence cited by
for him before he came yet hee cast him into prison and would never release him though the Great Turke wrote vnto him on his behalfe Since this time the Moscovites seeke no confirmation of their metropolitan from the patriarch of Constantinople The Russians that are vnder the King of Polonia in the yeare 1595 finding they could not haue recourse to the Patriarch of Constantinople liuing vnder the tyranny of the Turke in such sort as was fitt fell from that jurisdiction and submitted themselues to the Roman Bishop yet not without reservation of the Greeke religion and sundry limitations in subjecting them selues to that goverment as wee may see at large in Thomas à Iesu. With these Christians that presently are or lately were subject to the Patriarch of Constantinople the Melchits of Syria and the Georgians hold communion and are of the same religion with them Touching the Melchites were must obserue that after the ending of the Counsell of Chalcedon there grew a very great distraction in the East part of the world for many disliked and questioned the proceedings in that Councell and would not consent to the decrees of it Amongst those that thus refused to admit the Councell some ranne into dangerous errours and heresies the Emperour Leo therefore for the remedying and preventing of evills of this kind required the Bishs of those parts by their subscription to confirme the faith established in that Councell and they that so did at the Emperours command were by the rest in scorne and contempt called Melchites as if you would say men of the Kings religion of Melchi which in the Syrian tongue signifieth a King but they were indeede and were reputed right beleivers by all the sounder parts of the Church throughout the world These fell from the Communion of the Roman Church when the Greekes did and are wholy of the same religion yet were they never subject to the Patriarch of Constantinople but of Antioch These for their number are reputed the greatest sort of Christians in the Orient Their Patriarch resideth at Damascus whither the patriarchall seate vvas traslated Antioch it selfe where they that belieued in Christ were first called Christians and which was therefore named Theopolis the Cittie of God lying in a manner wast or broken and dissevered into small villages of which onely one of about threescore houses with a small temple belongeth to Christians but in Damascus there are aboue a thousand houses of Christians The Maronites which inhabit mount Libanus haue a Patriarch of their owne whom they honour as Patriarch of Antioch as likewise the Iacobites of Syria haue a Patriarch of their owne residing in Mesopotamia whom they account patriarch of Antioch But the Melchites who retaine the auncient religion of Syria acknowledge none for Patriarch but their owne chiefe Bishop residing at Damascus and reject the other as hauing departed from the faith obedience and Communion of the true Patriarch The Georgians inhabit Iberia they are saith Volateran great warriers and cruell to their bordering neighbours They are named Georgians as some thinke from S. George whose banner they carry when goe to war against Infidels But he rather inclineth to thinke they were the same that were named Georgians by Pliny before Saint George was borne and that it is not a name of sect but of their Country named Georgia and Iberia They follow the opinions of the Grecians touching matters of Religion and in their divine seruice writings they partly vse the Greeke tongue and partly the Chaldee They haue an Archbishop residing in mount Sina in a Monasterie of S. Katherin whom they obey without any further relation or dependance Betweene these and the riuer Tanais along the coast of Meotis and the Euxine sea lye the Mengrellians and the Circassians who are not onely of the Greeke Religion but subject also to the Patriarch of Constantinople Thus hauing spoken of the Christians of the Greeke Religion it remaineth that wee come to the rest Amongst whom the first that offer themselues to our consideration are the Assyrians commonly named Nestorians What the Heresie of Nestorius was is knowne to all For hee professed to beleeue that the Sonne of Mary is a divine Man and that GOD is with him but would not acknowledge that he is GOD and therefore would not yeeld that it may bee truely said that Mary is the Mother of GOD. But they that are now named Nestorians acknowledge that Christ was perfect GOD and perfect Man from the first moment of his conception and that Mary may rightly bee saide to bee the Mother of the Sonne of GOD or of the Eternall Word but thinke it not fit to call her the Mother of GOD left they might bee thought to imagine that shee conceiued and bare the Divine Nature of the three Persons the Name of GOD containing Father Sonne and Holy Ghost This scruple might bee tolerated in them but they haue another leauen that sowreth the whole lumpe For they are said to affirme that the nature of man is imperfect without personalitie and therefore that the Sonne of God who assumed not an imperfect humane nature assumed the nature of man together with the personalitie of the same Whence it seemeth to follow that there are two persons in Christ. For the clearing of this point it is to bee noted that personalitie is nothing but the existence of nature in it selfe which is in two sorts potentally or actually The humane nature which the Sonne of GOD assumed potentially existeth in it selfe and would haue existed actually if it had beene left vnto it selfe And in this sense they say the Sonne of GOD assumed the nature of man together with the personalitie of the same that is with a potentiall aptnesse to exist in it selfe But it was not left but prevented before it might actually exist in it selfe and assumed into the Divine Person and so suspended from actuall existing in it selfe In which sense we rightly say the Sonne of God assumed the nature of man without the personalitie of the same and that it must not be granted that there are two persons in Christ as there are two natures Neither doe these Christians so say there are two persons in Christ as if the humane nature did actually exist in it selfe but onely to imply that there is a potentiall aptnesse in it so to exist if it were left vnto it selfe Yet the forme of words which they vse is not to be allowed for it savoureth of Heresie and tooke beginning from Heresie But that they haue no hereticall meaning it is more then probable because otherwise they should contrarie and ouerthrow their former true Confession that Christ was perfect GOD and perfect Man from the first moment of his conception And that Mary that conceiued and bare him may truely bee said to bee the Mother of the Sonne of GOD. And also because the Archbishop of the Indians was permitted to retaine his auncient Religion when first he submitted
merit in that it augmenteth devotion enlargeth the apprehension of faith and is a more compleat full receiuing And againe The receiuing vnder both kindes which manner of receiuing the Lord deliuered is of more efficacy and complement And hee that receiueth the sacrament vnder the forme of bread onely doth not perfectly receiue the same in respect of sacramentall receiuing With him agree Albertus magnus Petrus de Palude Bonaventura and sundry other By all which it is evident that though they gaue way to the custome that grew in and began to prevaile in their time yet they signified and sufficiently expressed that in their opinion the communicating in both kindes as Christ at first did institute and the Church for a long time observed is fitte convenient compleat perfect of more efficacie and more cleere representation than the other vnder one kind alone And therefore many still retained the auncient manner of communicating after other had admitted receiued the new Aquinas sayth of his time that the communicating vnder one kinde alone was receiued in many Churches not in all Alexander of Hales sayth that lay men almost euery where communicated in one kinde Petrus de Palude sayth it was the custome in some Churches to giue the communion to the people in both kinds Durandus reporteth that it was the custome of some Churches in his time that the priest should consecrate such a quantity of wine that after hee had drunke of the same there might still some of the sacrament of Christs blood remaine in the chalice into which more wine not consecrated might be powred that the other communicants might partake of the blood of Christ. And then they began to dispute the question whether the wine that was put into the cup by contact of Christs blood became consecrated sacramentall or not But whether it did or not they resolued that all by this meanes did partake and drinke of the blood of Christ which was mingled with euery part of the wine newly powred into it After this some proceeded farther left none of the sacramentall or consecrated wine in the cuppe or chalice but powred meere wine into it that the communicants might wash their mouthes with it after they had receiued the body of Christ teaching them that they had beene sufficiently partakers of the blood of Christ in that they had receiued his body from which his blood cannot bee separated But Willielmus de Lauduno sayth that he that receiueth the body of Christ vnder the forme of bread receiueth the whole verity but not the whole sacrament and that therefore in many places they communicated in both kindes And wee shall finde that where they admitted the communion vnder one kinde yet they put a difference betweene the communicants and permitted some to communicate in both kindes Linwood sayth that in the lesser Churches onely they that consecrate receiue the blood of Christ vnder the forme of consecrated wine insinuating thereby that in the greater it was otherwise and that within the compasse of the same nation and people the greater and more honourable Churches had the communion in both kindes when the meaner had it but in one Yea wee shall finde that in the same particular Church some communicated in both kindes when other communicated but in one For Richardus de mediâ villâ and Petrus de Tarantasia afterwards named Innocentius the 4 t report that in their time not onely the Ministers of the Altar but the more principall of the people communicated in both kindes Thomas Waldensis provinciall of the Carmelites here in England saith of his time We permit the Pastours of the Churches to giue the Sacrament in both kindes to svch persons as are strong in faith and discreet as the Bishop of Rome doth vse to giue the communion to the deacon and other Ministers of the Altar and other excelling in faith or of high place and dignity as Doctours and Kings Or as the Churches of religious men and of great places doe still continue to giue the Sacrament to their brethren and such persons as are worthie of so great a thing And in another place he hath these words Neither doe we deny vnto all Lay men generally to drinke of the blood of Christ vnder the forme of wine neither doe wee generally and without distinction or difference graunt and yeeld it vnto all for wee know that by the custome of the Church it is left to the discretion of the greater Prelates to admit certaine of the Ministers of the Altar or certaine other illustrious persons amongst the people that are faithfull reverent and devout to the solemne communicating in both kindes Thus did he write more then a thousand and foure hundred yeares after Christ in the time of Pope Martin who was elected in the Councell of Constance and who as B. Lindan telleth vs went home from the Councell of Constance and ministred the communion to sundry both of the Clergie and Laity vnder both kindes So that the communion vnder both kindes continued after the Councell of Constance which as the same Lindan saith did not simply forbid the ministring of the Sacrament in both kindes but the teaching of the people that of necessitie it must be so ministred To this purpose see the 13th session of the Councell The Councell of Basil permitted the Bohemians to continue the vse of the communion in both kinds Cassander telleth vs that good credible authors do testifie that in France the whole cōmunion was ministred though not euery-where in ordinary Churches yet in Chappels euen a little before the memory of our fathers as also it is ministred to the French Kings to this day Caietan saith of his time that the Church of Rome almost all the Churches of the west had the cōmunion in one kind He saith not all but almost all for as it appeareth by the same Caietan the Cistercian monks in some places did cōmunicate vnder both kinds euen in his time their order as it may be thought being instituted while the communion vnder both kindes continued in generall observation For otherwise it is not to be thought that any Monasterie would haue presumed to renew an abolished custome So that we see that the Churches of this part of the world were neuer wholly depriued of the necessarie and comfortable vse of the Sacrament vnder both kindes And for those that were wee see by what degrees and in what sort not without complaining of the wrong done vnto them they were forced to giue way to the innovation by a prevailing faction Yet did they not cease to bee members of the true and orthodoxe Church that were thus wronged The Armenian in the Dialogues of Armachanus objecting the saying of Christ except a man eate the flesh of the Sonne of man and drinke his blood hee can haue no life to prooue the necessitie of the Communion in both kindes
rightly noteth that there is no merit properly so named to bee attributed to mortall miserable men and that though the ecclesiasticall writers vse the word merit and when they speake of holy mens workes call them merits yet they thinke them not to bee properly so but doe so name the good actions of holy men that proceed from faith and the working of the holy Ghost because Almighty God though they bee his gifts and joyned in them by whom they are wrought with defect imperfection yet is so pleased to accept of them out of his goodnesse that he not onely rewardeth the doers of them with ample great rewards in their owne persons but so as to doe good to others for their sakes So God sayd to Abraham if there were but fifty righteous in the city hee would spare the whole city for their sakes Neither onely doth hee good for their sakes whose workes hee thus rewardeth while they liue but euen after they à re dead also And therefore God promiseth that hee will protect Hierusalem for his owne sake and for Dauid his seruant which he must be vnderstood to doe not onely in respect of the promise made vnto him but with respect had to his vertue according to the which we read 1 Reg. 15. 3. that God left a little light in Hierusalem to Abiam the sonne of Roboam King of Iudah for Dauids sake who did that which was right in the sight of the Lord. This Dauid saith Chrysostome did not only please God while he was in the body but he is found to haue yeelded great comfort after his death to such as he left behinde him aliue The Prophet Esay commeth to Hezekiah and saith vnto him I will defend this city for mine own sake and for Dauid my seruants sake David is dead but his vertues that pleased God do still liue O strange thing O ineffable clemencie a man long since dead patronizeth him that liueth In this sense then it is that the Church desireth God to be gratious vnto her in graunting her petitions for the merit of those his holiest Ones that she remembreth no way derogating from the merites of Christ but putting a great difference betweene them and those of the Saints for Christs merite is the onely price of our redemption by which onely we are redeemed from sinne eternall death and being reconciled to God are adopted to bee sonnes and heires of eternall life but the merites of the Saints here mentioned are nothing but those imperfect good workes which they did while they liued here which God was pleased so to accept that hee promised not onely to reward them with great and ample rewards in their owne persons but to doe good for their sakes that did them to others also Bucer speaking of the publique prayers of the Church which wee call Collects in which the intercession and merites of Saints are commemorated hath these words Seeing in these prayers whatsoeuer is attributed to the intercession and merites of Saints all that is asked not of the Saints but of our mercifull God through Iesus Christ they that so pray doe thereby professe and testifie that they acknowledge that those things which they aske of God by the intercession and for the merites of the Saints are the free gifts of God c And a little after Wee willingly acknowledge and publiquely professe that GOD doth reward the workes of his Saints not onely in their owne persons but in those also that pertaine vnto them and for whom they intercede for hee hath promised to doe good to a thousand generations to them that loue him and study to keepe his Commaundements hence it was that hee would not heale those of the house of Abimelech till Abraham interceded and intreated for them and hence it was that God graunted and gaue the deliuerance and saluation of all the people to Moses when he intreated for the same These are the wordes of Bucer which not being contradicted by any of our profession it is evident that no part of Romish Religion disliked by vs can bee prooued out of this part of the Canon of the Masse Thus hauing cleared that great objection of Mr Brerelie touching the publique Liturgie vsed in the Church in the dayes of our Fathers and made it appeare that the vsing thereof is no proofe that the Church that then was was not a Protestant Church and hauing made it cleare and evident that both the Liturgie it selfe and the profession of such as vsed it shew plainely that the Church that then was neuer allowed any Romish errour howsoeuer some did in the midst of her it remaineth that I now proceed to shew in the particulars that the outward face of Religion at and before Luthers appearing was not as M ◠Brerelie telleth vs the now professed Romane Religion and that whatsoeuer wee haue done in the reformation of the Church was long before wished for and desired by the best men amongst the guides of the Church CHAP. 1. Of the Canon of the Scriptures THat the Church did not admit the Canon of Scripture which the Romanists now doe nor euer accounted those bookes Canonicall which we thinke to be Apocryphall it will easily appeare in that all the most famous Divines from the beginning of the Christian World euen till the time of Luther did reject those bookes as Apocryphall that wee doe The Church of the Iewes to whom as S. Paul saith the oracles of God were committed admitted but onely 22 Bookes as deliuered to them from God to be the Canon of their faith as Iosephus witnesseth Neither did the Christian Church euer admit any more Melito Bishop of Sardis being desired by Onesimus to send him a catalogue of the bookes of the old and new Testament writeth thus vnto him Hauing diligently sought out the bookes of the old Testament and put them in order I haue sent them vnto you the names whereof are these the 5 bookes of Moses Genesis Exodus Leuiticus Numbers Deuteronomie then Iesus the sonne of Naue Iudges Ruth the 4 bookes of Kings two bookes of Chronicles the Psalmes of Dauid the Prouerbes which is also called the Wisdome of Salomon Ecclesiastes the Canticles Iob the Prophets Esay Hieremie one booke of the twelue Prophets Daniel Ezechiel Esdras Some soe translate the words of Melito as if hee reckoned the wisdome of Salomon as a seperate booke and so meant the booke that is commonly called the Wisdome of Salomon and is by vs accounted to be apocryphall but Ruffinus translateth as wee doe and that wee haue rightly expressed the meaning of this worthy Bishoppe and that hee onely added this as a glorious title to the booke of Salomons Prouerbs which as Eusebius saith the auncients vsually called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the reader will soone be satisfied if he peruse that which D. Raynolds hath touching this point in his prelections Eusebius she weth that Iosephus according to the auncient
and what hereticall after many convincing reasons hee addeth this in the conclusion The defining of things in this kinde pertayneth principally to the professors of that science to which nothing may bee added and from which nothing may bee detracted but of this sorte is the profession of diuines and therefore Moses sayth in the person of God Deuteronomie 4. Yee shall not adde vnto the word I speake vnto you neither shall yee take from it to which that of Solomon answereth Proverb 30. where speaking of the word of God hee sayth Adde nothing to his words least thou be reproved found a liar And hence it is that the holy Ghost doth terribly threaten by Iohn the Evangelist in the last of the Revelation all them that adde or take any thing from the holy Scripture saying If any man shall adde more then this God shall adde vnto him the plagues that are in this booke and if any man shall take any thing from the words of the Prophesie of this booke God shall take his part out of the booke of life and out of the holy city By all which it is euidently collected that nothing is to bee added to the holy Scripture nor nothing to be taken from it Cardinall Cameracensis agreeth fully with Ariminensis before cited for first hee distinguisheth principles and conclusions theologicall principles he maketh to be the verities of the sacred canon conclusions to bee those verities which are not sound formally and in expresse words or precise tearmes in Scripture but may necessarily be deduced from things so contayned whether they bee articles or not whether they bee determined by the Church or not determined and then pronounceth that that onely is a theologicall discourse which consisteth of sayings and propositions contayned in the sacred Scriptures or of such as may bee deduced from them and that then onely wee say a thing is theologically proued when it is concluded out of the words of holy Scripture To these wee may adde Waldensis his words are these That Wickliffe affirmeth that neither Friars nor Prelates may define any thing in matters of faith vnlesse they haue the authoritie of sacred Scripture or some speciall revelation I dislike not but I condemne his way wardnesse craft and thinke it necessary least we wrest the Scriptures erre in the interpretation of them to follow the tradition of the Church expounding them vnto vs and not to trust to our owne private singular conceipts â— Gerson acknowledgeth as much as the rest his wordes are these What evils what daungers what confusions haue followed the contempt ofsacred Scripture which is sufficient for the government of the Church or else Christ was an imperfect lawgiuer experience will teach vs. The authour of that most pious and worthy worke called Destructorium vitiorum hath sundry things for confirmation of this poynt As sayth hee corporall things here below may in some sorte bee known without the benefit of corporall light for one may know the length breadth and other dimensions of such a thing and may in the darke discerne whether it bee long or short but whether it bee faire or foule white or black wee cannot certainely know So it is in things that are to bee discerned intellectually for though Philosophers excelling in mundane wisedome lacking the light of faith had some kinde of knowledge of God as that hee is the beginning cause of all things yet could they not know how faire how good how mercifull and how glorious hee is neither did euer any man knowe it but either by diuine revelation or by the information of the holy Scripture so that the holy Scripture is that light by which in this state of wayfaring men wee may haue sufficient knowledge of all things necessary to saluation whence it is that the Psalmist sayth Thy word is a lanthorne to my feete a light to my steppes But as experience doth teach that hee that will bee lighted by the light of a candle must haue the candle before him and must follow it but that if hee shall cause it to bee brought after him in the darkenesse of the night it will not giue him light to any purpose so they that walke in the darkenes of this life if they desire to be lighted by the candle of Gods word and to direct their goings in the way of trueth without falling they must haue the light of Gods word before their eyes and must follow it by well doing But even as if a candle be carried out in the darkenesse of the night where bruite beasts as horses and the like are they will runne from it whereas birds will come towards it So bestiall men that are like horses mules flie from the light of the Scriptures according to that of Iohn 3. Every one that doth euill hateth the light neither doth hee come to the light least his workes should bee reproued For confirmation of that hee sayth hee alleadgeth a most excellent discourse of Bishop Grosthead who intreating of that history in the 1 Kings 19. where the Angell of the Lord sayd to Elias goe forth and stand in the mountaine before the Lord and hee stood and saw and behold a winde passed by him overthrowing the mountaines and tearing the rockes in sunder but the Lord was not in the winde and after the winde an earthquake but the Lord was not in the earthquake and after the earthquake fire but the Lord was not in the fire and after the fire a still small voyce and there was the Lord sheweth that God is not found in any other science but in the holy Scripture only which is giuen by diuine inspiration and for farther illustration hereof noteth that there were three wels digged by Isaak Genesis 26. For he digged the first and the Philistins stroue for it likewise the second and they claymed it also wherefore hee left them both and digged a third which hee peaceably enjoyed and called the name of it Robooth that is latitude because the waters of it were inlarged and to the first of these wells hee compareth naturall scâ—…ences to wit the seaven liberall arts as logicke in which there is much brawling contending to the second such science as wee learne for gaine sake and to get preferment as is the knowledge of humane lawes according to those verses Dat Galenus opes sanctio Iustiniana Ex aliis paleas existis collige grana To the third hee compareth diuine knowledge and sayth that that well was rightly named Robooth that is latitude because the waters of it were inlarged So the heavenly doctrine was published to all parts of the world by the Apostles and other faithfull preachers according to that of the Psalmist Their sound is gone forth into all the earth and the Lord inviteth his elect to come and drinke the waters of this well saying all yee that are thirsty come to these waters and the wordes of Christ moue all
earnestly to thirst after these waters when hee sayth Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousnes but the vngodly having tasted of the wine of mundane joy and temporall riches hate dislike and put from them this water and therefore the Lord sayth well of them by the Prophet Esay 8. Because this people haue refused the waters of Siloe that runne softly and without noyse and haue taken rather Rasin and the sonne of Romelia I will bring upon them the mighty waters of of the floud Siloe is interpreted sent and it signifieth the doctrine of the diuine Law sent vnto vs by Christ the Apostles and other faithfull ones which doctrine the Pastors of the Church are bound vnder the paine of damnation to know and teach whereupon Isidore saith de summo bono lib. 3. c. 46. The Priests shall bee damned for the iniquity of the people if either they neglect to teach them being ignorant or to reproue them when they offend the Lord hauing said by the Prophet I haue set thee as a watch-man ouer the house of Israel and if thou shalt not tell the wicked of his wickednes that hee forsake his euill way he shall dye in his iniquitie but I will require his bloud at thy hand Notwithstanding all this many of the moderne Priests cast from them this learning and say we will none of it because it is not de pane lucrando that is it serueth not to bring in gaine and profite and giue themselues to the study of humane lawes which are not so necessary for the sauing of soules as the law of God because as Odo saith here vpon the Gospell sermone 39. If Christ had knowne that we might more easily attaine saluation by the Lawes of Iustinian he would surely haue taught them vs with his own mouth and haue let that alone which he taught vs and deliuered vnto vs et in quâ continetur implicitè vel explicitè omnis scientia ad salutem necessario requisita and in which is contained expressely or implicitely all knowledge necessarily required to saluation according to that of S. Augustine 2. de doctrinâ Christianâ in fine Whatsoeuer a man learneth without and beside the holy Scripture if it be hurtfull it is there condemned if it bee profitable it may there be found But many Church-men leaue this learning and take vnto them Rasin and the sonne of Romelia Rasin signifieth a picture and Romelia high and mighty thunder so that by Rasin and the sonne of Romelia wee may vnderstand painted and glorious wordes and that wordy thunder of humane lawes which kindes of learning many Ecclesiastical persons assume that they may be by such profession exalted in the courts of great Lords and for this cause as the Prophet addeth the Lord shall bring vpon them the mighty and great waters of the floud that is infernall punishments so saith Odo Hitherto hee hath alleadged the words of Grosthead and Odo In another place he saith concerning them that so contemne the word of God that the Lord complaineth of such by the Prophet Ierem. 2. saying My people hath done two euils they haue forsaken me the fountaine of liuing water and haue digged to themselues broken cisterns to which as Gulielmus Parisiensis saith the decree or canon law may fitly be compared which is a broken cisterne that cannot hold water which though it haue water to day shall haue none to morrow because it shall bee abrogated whereas touching the Law of God it is otherwise and therefore the Psalmist saith thy righteousnesse O Lord is an euerlasting righteousnesse and thy law is trueth Yet is the holy Scripture much contemned by the profession of the Canonists so that the knowledge of holy Scripture and profession of Divinity may say to an ill Advocate or Lawyer as Sara said to Abraham in the 16 of Genesis Thou dealest ill with me I gaue thee my handmaid into thy bosome who seeing that she had conceiued despised me for as Gulielmus Parisiensis saith de vitiis part 4. cap. 6. The profession of Canonists contemneth the profession of Divines and science of holy Scripture because they are not so gainefull as it is When Ismael and Isaack played together Ismael mocked Isaack so that Sarâ—… was forced to intreate Abraham to cast out the bondwoman and her sonne So happily it were behoofefull and profitable for the Church that this Science in a great part should be cast out because it not only contemneth the diuine Science and Law of God but blasphemeth it and in so doing contemneth and blaspheameth God himselfe who is the lawgiuer Here wee haue the opinion of three worthy men touching the sufficiencie of the Scripture and the dangers confusions and horrible euils that followed vppon the multiplying of humane inuentions Many more might be alleadged to the same purpose but these may suffice to let us know what the doctrine of the Church was in the dayes of our Fathers for they deliuer not their priuate conceipts but tel vs what all good and iudicious men conceiued of these things in their times But some men will say wee find often mention of traditions in the writers of former ages soe that it seemeth they did not thinke the Scriptures to containe all things necessary to saluation For the clearing of this doubt wee must obserue that by the name of tradition sometimes all the doctrine of Christ and his blessed Apostles is meant that was first deliuered by liuely voice and afterwards written Sometimes the deliuering of the diuine and canonicall bookes from hand to hand as receiued from the Apostles is named a tradition Sometimes the summe of Christian religion contained in the Apostles creed which the Church receiueth as a rule of her faith is named a tradition but euery one of those articles is found in the Scripture as Waldensis rightly noteth though not together nor in the same forme so that this colection may rightly be named a tradition as hauing beene deliuered from hand to hand in this forme for the direction of the Churches children and yet the Scriptures be sufficient Sometimes by the name of traditions the Fathers vnderstand certaine rites and auncient obseruations And that the Apostles delivered some things in this kind by word and liuely voyce that they wrote not wee easily grant but which they were it can hardly now be knowne as Waldensis rightly noteth But this proueth not the insufficiencie of the Scripture for none of those Fathers speake of points of doctrine that are to be belieued without and besides the Scripture or that cannot be proued from thence though sometimes in a generall sort they name all those points of religion traditions that are not found expressely and in precise tearmes in Scripture and yet may necessarily be deduced from things there expressed Lastly by the name of tradition is vnderstood the sense and meaning of the Scripture receiued from the Apostles and deliuered from hand to hand together with the bookes There are
Church when it is confessed by the best learned of all sides that the Priests of the Law had no priuiledge of not erring in teaching the people of GOD after Christ appeared and began to teach in his owne person whatsoeuer they had before and that this was fore-told by Ieremy the Prophetwhen he said Peribit lex à Sacerdote verbū à Propheta consilium à Sapiente The Law shall perish frō the Priest the word frō the Prophet and counsell from the wise But such is the impudencie of some of the friends louers of the Church of Rome that they feare not to defend cleare the doctrine of the Scribes and Pharisees from errour wherewith Christ so often chargeth them to justifie the proceedings of the high Priest and the rest of the Priests and Rulers assembled in Councell against Christ himselfe affirming that the sentence pronounced against him was true and just for that he was truly guilty of death in that hee had taken vpon him our sinnes to purge them in himselfe and that it was indeede expedient that he should dye for the people according to the saying of Caiphas who in so saying is saide to haue prophesied as being the high Priest that yeare But Bellarmine ingenuously acknowledgeth the ouer-sight of his friends and companions and saith that howsoeuer those words of Caiphas admit a good sense though not intended by him for he meant it was better that Christ being but one should die then that the whole people whose destruction he thought vnavoidable if Christ were suffered to liue should perish come to nothing Yet there are other wordes of Caiphas that in no sense are justifiable as when he said He hath blasphemed what need we any more witnesses Touching his former speech it was the will of God for the honour of the Priesthood that he should vtter that he meant ill in such wordes as might haue a good sense though not meant nor intended by him whereupon he is said to haue prophesied but the latter words are words of cursed blasphemy without horrible impiety cannot be excused in any sense Therefore there are others who confesse that Caiphas and his assistants erred when they cōdemned Christ but that it was but a matter of fact wherein they erred in mistaking the quality of Christs Person in being mis-informed of him in which kinde of things Councels may erre This conceipt the Cardinall likewise rejecteth explodeth as absurd for that howsoeuer it was a question of fact concerning the Person of him that stood to be judged yet it inwrapped in it a most important question concerning the Faith to wit whether IESVS the Son of Mary vvere the true Messias Son of God therefore Caiphas with his whole Councell resoluing that he was not erred damnably in a matter of Faith pertinaciously in that they rejected him as a blasphemer of God whom the Angels from Heauen testified to be the Son of God the Starre designed to be that light that lightneth euery one that commeth into the World the Sages from a farre adored as being that King of the Iewes that is to sit vpon the Throne of Dauid for euer whose Dominion is from Sea to sea from the Riuer to the end of the Land whom the seas windes obeyed at whose rebuke the Diuels went out of those they had formerly possessed But if this defence of the hellish sentence of wicked Caiphas be too weake as indeed it is our adversaries last refuge is that this Councel erred because Caiphas his fellowes proceeded in it tumultuously not in due sort vvhich is a most silly shift For how are Councels priviledged from erring vvhich is the thing these men seek so carefully to defend though it be vvith excusing of the Fact of those men vvho shal be found vnexcusable in the day of Iudgment if Councels may proceed tumultuously so define against the truth Thus we see that the great Councell of state amongst the Iewes to vvhich all matters of difficultie vvere brought from vvhich there vvas no appeale might and did erre sometimes dangerously damnably This Councell continued in some sort as vvell after the captivity of Babylon the returne from the same as before though vvith this difference that vvheras before the king had a principal interest in the same aftervvards the High Priest alvvayes vvas chief there being no more Kings of Iudah but the kings of Persia Aegypt and Syria commaunding ouer the Iewes and making them tributaries vnto them In this sort were they gouerned till some differences growing amongst them for the place of the high Priest they were by Antiochus Epiphanes king of Syria depriued both of their liberty and exercise of religion and brought into miserable bondage the indignity whereof the Assamonaei of the tribe of Leui could not indure but by force and policie in a sort freed the state of the Iewes againe and tooke vnto themselues first the name of Princes and then of Kings In the booke of Maccabees we reade that Mattathias was constituted Priest Prince and Ruler and that many came downe to him to seeke judgement and iustice Iudas Maccabaeus succeeded Mattathias and joyned the dignity of the high Priest to the princely power Ionathas succeeded Macchabaeus of whom we reade Now this day doe we chuse thee to be vnto vs a Prince instead of Iudas and a captaine to fight our battels Simon succeeded Ionathas and in his time Demetrius king of Syria and Antiochus his son remitted all tributes so that then the Iewes recouered their ancient liberty in as ample manner as they had formerly enjoyed it vnder their kings Iohn succeeded Simon and Aristobulus Iohn who put vpon himselfe a Diademe and assumed the name of a King After Aristobulus succeeded Alexander his brother marrying Solina his wife Alexander being dead Alexandra obtayned the kingdome after her Hircanus whom Aristobulus his brother expulsed Pompey tooke this Aristobulus prisoner subdued Iudaea brought it into the forme of a prouince and appointed Antipater Ascalonita to be Procurator of it but not long after Antigonus the son of Aristobulus recouered the citie of Hierusalem inuaded the kingdome against whom the Romans set vp Herod the son of Antipater and gaue him the name of a King Thus the direction and gouernment of the Iewes rested principally in the Sanedrim as well before as after their returne from Babylon and the Sanedrim which was the highest Court and swayed all consisted for the most part of men taken out of the house of Dauid and therefore the Scepter did not depart from Iudah so long as that Court continued and retayned the authority belonging to it though there were no king of the posterity of Dauid and tribe of Iudah but the high Priests first and then other of the tribe of Leui assuming to themselues Priestly and Princely dignity had the chiefest place and highest roome in this court of
tree into which it is implanted and to beare fruite in and for it and not for it selfe soe the Person of Christ is sayd to bee compounded of the nature of God and Man not as if there were in him a mixt nature arising out of these but as hauing the one of these added vnto the other in the vnity of the same person And as this tree is one and yet hath two different natures in it and beareth two kinds of fruite soe Christ is one and yet hath two different natures and in them performeth the distinct actions pertaining to either of them Lastly as a man may truly say after such implanting this Vine is an Oliue tree and this Oliue tree is a Vine and consequently this Vine beareth Oliues and this Oliue tree beareth Grapes so a man may say this Sonne of Mary is the Sonne of God and on the other side this Sonne of God and first borne of euery creature is the Sonne of Mary borne in time the Sonne of God and Lord of life was crucified and the Sonne of Mary layd the foundations of the earth stretched out the Heauens like a curtaine CHAP. 13. Of the Communication of the properties of either nature in Christ consequent vppon the vnion of them in his Person and the two first kindes thereof HAuing spoken of the assuming of our nature by the Sonne of God into the vnity of his diuine Person it remaineth that we speake of the consequents of this vnion and the gifts and graces bestowed vpon the nature of Man when it was assumed The first and principall consequent of the personall vnion of the natures of God and Man in Christ is the Communication of their properties of which there are three kindes or degrees The first is when the properties of either nature considered singly and apart as the properties of this or that nature are attributed to the person from whichsoeuer of the natures it be denominated The second is when the different actions of two natures in Christ concurre in the same works and things done The third when the diuine attributes are cōmunicated vnto the humane nature and bestowed vpon it Vsually in the Schooles only the first degree or kinde of communication is named the communication of properties Which that wee may the better vnderstand we must obserue that there are abstractiue concretiue words the former whereof do precisely note the forme or nature of each thing the latter imply also the person that hath the same nature or forme as Humanitas and Homo Sanctitas and Sanctus Manhood and Man Holinesse Holy 2ly Wee must obserue that abstractiue words noting precisely the distinct natures cannot be affirmed one of the other nor the properties of one nature attributed to the other abstractiuely expressed For neither can we truly say that Deity is Humanity or Humanity Deity nor that the Deity suffered or the Humanity created the world but we may truly say God is Man and Man is God God died vpon the Crosse and Maries babe made the world Because the person which these concretiue words imply is one all actions passions and qualities agree really to the Person though in and in respect sometimes of one nature and sometimes of another When wee say God is Man and Man is God wee note the conjunction that is between the natures meeting in one person and therefore this mutuall conuersiue predication cannot properly be named communication of properties but the communication of properties is when the properties of one nature are attributed to the Person whether denominated from the other as some restraine it or from the same also as others enlarge it This communication of properties is of diuers sorts first when the properties of the diuine nature are attributed to the whole Person of Christ subsisting in two natures but denominated from the diuine nature as when it is sayd Those things which the Father doth the Sonne doth also Secondly when the properties of the humane nature are attributed to the person denominated from the diuine nature as when it is sayd They crucified the Lord of glory They killed the Lord of life Thirdly when the properties of the diuine nature are attributed to the person denominated from the nature of man as when it is sayd No man ascendeth into Heauen but the Son of man that came downe from Heauen euen that Son of man that is in Heauen 4ly When those things that agree to both natures are attributed to the person denominated from one of them as when the Apostle sayth There is one God one Mediatour betweene God man which is the man Christ Iesus Fiftly when the properties of one nature are attributed to the person neither denominated precisely from the one nature nor from the other but noted by a word indifferently expressing both as when we say Christ was borne of Mary If any man list to striue about words not admitting any communication of properties but when the properties of one nature are attributed to the person denominated from the other as when wee say the Son of God died on the Crosse the Son of Man made the world besides that he is contrary to the ordinary opinion he seemeth not to consider that it is a person consisting in two natures that is noted by what appellation soeuer we expresse the same and that therefore the attributing of the properties of any one of the natures unto it may rightly be named a communication of properties as being the attributing of the properties of this or that nature to a person subsisting in both though denominated from one For the better vnderstanding of that hath bin said touching this first kind of communication of properties the diuers sorts thereof there are certaine obseruations necessary which I will here adde The first is that the cōmunication of properties wherein the properties of the one nature are affirmed of the person denominated of the other is reall and not verball onely The second that the properties of the humane nature are not really communicated to the diuine nature The third is that the properties of the diuine nature are in a sort really communicated to the humane nature whereof wee shall see more in the third kind of communication of properties The fourth obseruation is that in the sacred and blessed Trinity there is Alius Alius but not Aliud Aliud diuersity of persons but not of being nature but that in Christ there is aliud aliud and not alius alius that is diuersity of natures but so that he that hath them is the same whence it cōmeth that the properties of either nature may be affirmed of the person from which soeuer of them it be denominated yet so that more fully to expresse our meaning it is necessary sometimes to adde for distinction sake that they are verified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secundum aliud that is according vnto the other nature and
not according vnto that whence the person is denominated This explication or limitatioÌ„ is theÌ„ specially to be added wheÌ„ such properties of one nature are attributed to the persoÌ„ denominated from the other as seeme to exclude the properties of the other so when we say Christ the Son of God is a creature we must adde that wee neither scandalize them that heare vs nor giue any occasion of errour that hee is a creature in that hee is man Now it followeth that wee speake of the second kinde or degree of communication of properties which is in that the actions of Christ are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Deiuiriles Divinely-humane Humanely-diuine each Nature so worketh it owne worke according to the naturall propertie thereof that it hath a kinde of communion with the other But lest we fall into errour touching this point we must obserue that the actions of Christ may bee said to bee Theandricall that is Diuinely-humane three wayes First so as if there were one action of both Natures and so we must not vnderstand the actions of Christ to be Diuinely-humane for this is to confound the Natures whereas we must vndoubtedly beleeue that Omnia in Christo sunt duplicia naturae proprietates voluntates operationes solâ exceptâ subsistentiâ quae est una that is that all things in Christ are twofold or double as his Natures properties wils actions his subsistence only or Person excepted which is but one Secondly the actions of Christ may be said to be Theandricall that is Diuinely-humane for that both the actions of Deitie Humanity though distinct yet concurre in one work to which purpose Sophronius in that notable Epistle of his which we read in the â—…6 t generall Councell doth distinguish 3 kinds of the works of Christ making the first meerely diuine as to create all things the second meerely humane as to eate drink sleep the third partly diuine partly humane as to walke vpoÌ„ the waters in which worke vvalking vvas so humane that the giuing of firmnes soliditie to the vvaters to beare the vveight of his Body vvas an action of Deitie Thirdly the actions of Christ may be said to be Theandrical that is Diuinely-humane in respect of the Person that produceth bringeth theÌ„ forth which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God-man In either of these two latter senses the actions of Christ may rightly be vnderstood to be Theandricall that of Leo is most true coÌ„cerning Christ. In Christo utraque forma operatur cum alterius coÌ„munione quod propriuÌ„ est that is in Christ both natures do work that which is proper vnto them with a kind of coÌ„munioÌ„ the one hath with the other for this saying is true first in respect of the Person the coÌ„munion which either nature hath with other therein Secondly in respect of the work effect wherunto by their seuerall proper actions they coÌ„curre though in different sort as in healing of the sick not only the force of Deity appeared shewed it self but the humane nature also did coÌ„curre in respect of the body in that he touched those that were to be healed laid his hands vpon theÌ„ spake vnto theÌ„ in respect of the soul in that he desired applauded rejoiced in that which by diuine power he brought to passe thirdly in that the actions of humane nature in Christ haue in them a greater perfection then can be found in the actions of any meere man from the assistance of the Deity that dwelleth bodily in him CHAP. 14. Of the third kind of communication of properties and the first degree thereof NOw let vs come to the third kind of coÌ„municatioÌ„ of properties which is that whereby diuine precious things are really bestowed on the nature of man The things which are thus coÌ„municated bestowed are of 2 sorts The first finite created as qualities or habites formally habitually subjectiuely inherent in the humane nature the 2â— the essentiall attributes of the diuinity it self coÌ„municated to the humane nature not formally by physicall effusion or essentiall confusioÌ„ but by dispensatioÌ„ of personal vnioÌ„ Touching the things of the first sort there is no questioÌ„ but that they vvere bestovved vpon the nature of man in all perfectioÌ„ vvhen it vvas vnited to the Person of the Sonne of God so that in it vvas found the fulnesse both of grace vertue according to that of S. Iohn The word was made flesh dwelt amoÌ„gst vs. we saw the glory of it as the glory of the only begotten Son of God full of grace truth The fulnes of grace as the Schoolemen excellently note is of tvvo sorts first in respect of grace it selfe and secondly in respect of him that hath it The fulnesse of grace in respect of grace it selfe is then vvhen one attaineth to the highest and vttermost of grace both quoad essentiam virtutem intensiuè extensiuè in the Essence and vertue of it intensiuely and extensiuely that is vvhen he hath it as farre forth as it may be had and vnto all effects and purposes wherevnto grace doth or can extend it selfe as he is said to haue life perfectly or the fulnesse of life that hath it not onely in the essence but according to all the operations and acts of life sensible rationall intellectuall spirituall and naturall in which sort man onely hath the perfection and fulnesse of life in him and no other thing of inferior condition This kinde of fulnesse of grace is proper to Christ onely Of whose fulnesse wee all receiue The fulnesse of grace in respect of the subiect or him that hath it is then when one hath grace fully and perfectly according to his estate and condition both intensiuely to the vttermost bound that God hath prefixed to them of such a condition and extensiuely in the vertue of it in that it extendeth to the doing and performing of all those things that may any way pertaine to the condition office or estate of such as are of his place and Ranke In this sort Stephen is said to haue beene full of the holy Ghost who is the fountaine of grace and Marie the blessed Virgine the mother of our Lord is by the Angell pronounced Blessed amongst women and full of grace for that shee had grace in respect of the Essence of it intensiuely in as perfect sort as any mortall creature might haue it and in respect of the vertue of it extending to all thinges that might any way pertaine to her that was chosen to bee the sacred vessell of the incarnation of the Sonne of God So that there was neuer any but Christ whose graces were no way stinted and to whom the spirit was not giuen in measure that was absolutely full of grace which fulnesse of grace in Christ the Diuines doe declare and cleare vnto vs wherein it consisted by distinguishing a double grace in Christ the one of
afterwards he knew it when he was risen and appointed of his Father King and Iudge which words of his admitte no such glosse Wherefore Iansenius saith there are two principall interpretations of those words of Christ when he saith Of that day and houre knoweth no man no not the Sonne the one that he sayd hee knew it not because he knew it not to reueale it and because his body the Church knew it not the other that he knew it not as man and this interpretation hee sheweth to bee likewise two-fold For saith he if we follow the common opinion that Christ had the perfect knowledge of all things in his humane soule at the first then we must vnderstand that Christ sayd hee knew not the day of judgement because hee knew it not by naturall and acquisite knowledge but by vertue of that knowledge that was infused into him but if wee follow the other opinion that Christ had not perfect knowledge of all things in his humane soule at the first but grew in it then as Origen among other senses deliuereth the meaning of the words is that hee knew it not till after his resurrection And surely Cyrill a worthy Bishop and one that had many conflicts with the Nestorian heretiques who diuided the person of Christ feareth not directly to say that Christ as man knew not the day appointed for the generall judgement when he vsed the words before mentioned Neither is this the heresie of the Agnoêtae as some ignorantly affirme for their errour was that the Deitie of Christ was ignorant of some thing or that Christ in his humane nature was properly ignorant that is knew not such things and at such time as he should haue knowen and that he is still ignorant of sundry things in the state of his glorification as it appeareth by that Epistle of Gregorie in which one of them alledgeth that as Christ tooke our nature so hee tooke our ignorance to free vs from the same and therefore Maldonatus vpon the 24. of Matthew saith that the Themistians called also Agnoetae were accounted heretiques not for saying Christ knew not the day of iudgement as Damascene de haeresibus testifieth but that as may be gathered out of the same Damascene they simply without all distinction of the diuine or humane nature said Christ was ignorant thereof because they thought the Diuinitie was turned into the Humanitie CHAP. 15. Of the third kind of Communication of properties and the second degree thereof THus hauing spoken of those finite and created things that were bestowed on the nature of man when it was assumed into the vnitie of the diuine person let vs come to those things that are infinite Where first we are certainely to resolue that as the nature of man was truely giuen and communicated to the Person of the Sonne of God so that he is indeede and really Man so the Persont of the Sonne of God was as truly communicated to the nature of man that it migh subsist in it and that that which was fashioned in the wombe of the blessed virgine borne of her might not onely be holy but the holiest of all euen the Sonne of God Secondly that in this sense the fulnesse of all perfection and all the properties of the diuine Essence are communicated to the nature of man in the Person of the Sonne For as the Father communicated his Essence to the Sonne by eternall generation who therefore is the second Person in Trinitie and God of God so in the Person of the Sonne hee really communicated the same to the nature of man formed in Maries wombe in such sort that that Man that was borne of her is truely God And in this sense the Germane Diuines affirme that there is a reall Communication of the diuine properties to the nature of man in the personall vnion of the natures of God and Man in Christ not by physicall communication or effusion as if the like equall properties to those that are in God were put inherently into the nature of man in such sort as the heate transfused from the fire into the water is inherent in it whence would follow a confusion conuersion and equalling of the natures and naturall properties but personall in the Person of the Son of God For as the Person of the Son of God in whom the nature and Essence of God is found is so communicated to the nature of Man that the Man Christ is not onely in phrase of speech named God but is indeede and really God so he is as really omnipotent hauing all power both in heauen in earth There is one Christ saith Luther who is both the Son of God and of the Virgine By the right of his first birth not in time but from all eternity he receiued all power that is the Deitie it selfe which the Father communicated to him eternally but touching the other nature of Christ which began in time euen so also the eternall power of God was giuen vnto him so that the Son of the Virgine is truely really eternall God hauing eternall power according to that in the last of Matthew All power is giuen vnto me both in heauen and in earth And of this power a litle after he bringeth in Christ speaking in this sorte Although this power was mine eternally before I assumed the nature of man notwithstanding after I began to be man euen according to the nature of man I receiued the same power in time though I shewed it not during the time of my infirmitie and crosse Bonauentura saith the very same in effect that Luther doth when it is sayd saith he speaking of the Man Christ This Man is euery where this may either note out the Person of Christ or the singular and indiuiduall nature of a man if the Person of Christ there is no doubt but the proposition is true if the indiuiduall nature of a Man yet still it is true not by proprietie of nature but by communication of properties because that which agreeth to the Sonne of God by nature agreeth vnto this Man by grace Cardinall Cameracensis agreeth with Bonauentura affirming that the diuine attributes and properties are more really communicated to the Man Christ then the humane are to the Sonne of God and that therefore a man may most truely and properly say speaking of the Man Christ This Man is immortall almighty and of infinite power and maiestie because he is properly the diuine Person so consequently truely really immortall and omnipotent Yea Bellarmine though he impugne the errours of the Lutherans as he calleth them with all bitternesse yet confesseth all that hitherto hath beene sayd to be most true I say saith he as before that the glorie of God the Father was giuen to the humanitie of Christ non in ipsa not to be formally or subiectiuely inherent in it but in the diuine Person that is that by grace of vnion the humane
preached to the spirits in prison sometimes disobedient in the dayes of Noe. But as Saint Augustine fitly noteth this preaching of Christ in spirit mentioned by the Apostle was not after his death in his humane Soule but in the dayes of Noe in his eternall Spirit Deity And as Andradius rightly obserueth they that he preached vnto are named spirits in prison because they were spirits in prison when Peter wrote of them not when Christ preached to them though if they should be vnderstood to be named Spirits in prison as being such when Christ preached vnto them yet we might rightly conceiue as Saint Augustine doth that he preached to the Soules and Spirits of Men shut vp in the prison house of their sinfull bodies and the darke dungeons of ignorance and sin and not in the prison of hell Thus then our Diuines deny the descending of Christ into Purgatory Limbus puerorum and Limbus patrum perswading themselues that there are no such places But his descending into the Hell of the damned they all acknowledge though not to deliuer men thence yet to fasten condemnation to them that are there to bind Sathan the Prince of darkenesse that hee may not prevaile against them that beleeue in Christ and to keepe them from sinking downe into that deuouring piâ—… into which he went and out of which hee soe triumphantly returned Onely this difference may seeme to be amongst them that some of them thinke he went personally and locally others onely vertually in power and operation Which diuersity of opinions is likewise amongst the Papists Bellarmine and some other in our time teaching that hee went locally into the lowest Hell and the Schoole-men that he went not locally into the lowest Hell but vertually onely in the manifestation of his vertue and power and into Limbus Patrum locally and personally soe that all the controuersie betweene them and vs standeth in two points The descending of Christ into Limbus Patrum and the suffering of Hellish paines For whereas Cardinall Bellarmine laboureth to proue a locall Hell he busieth himselfe in vaine no man denying it But sayth he Beza and others do say the words vsed in the Hebrew and Greeke Sheol and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe alwaies signifie the Graue in holy Scripture and not Hell whence it may seeme to follow that there is no other Hell then the Graue and soe consequently noe locall Hell for damned soules Surely this is a most vnjust and vntrue imputation For Beza and the other learned Diuines he speaketh of do not affirme that Sheol and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe precisely and alwayes in holy Scripture signifie the graue but as Arias Montanus Andradius and sundry other excellently learned amongst our aduersaries do that Sheol which the Septuagint translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not precisely and immediatly signifie the place of damned soules but in an indifferencie and generality of signification noteth out vnto vs the receptacles of the dead And that seeing there are two parts that are sundered one from another in them that are dead there are likewise two kinds of receptacles of death or dwelling places for them on whom death hath her full force the one prouided for their bodies putrifying and rotting and the other for their soules tormented euerlastingly Soe that when these words thus indifferently signifying either of these receptacles of death do note out vnto vs the one or the other of these two places either the graue for the body or hell for the soule cannot be gathered out of the words themselues but the circumstances of those places of Scripture where they are vsed In like sort they say that the word Nephesh translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and anima doth not alwaies signifie the spirituall substance of man that is immortall but the whole person the life yea and some times that which hath beene aliue though now dead euen a dead carcasse according as wee reade in Leuiticus where God pronounceth that whosoever toucheth Nephesh that is a deade corpes shall be vncleane And in this sense it is that Arias Montanus translateth not that place in the Psalme Non derelinques animam meam in inferno that is Thou shalt not leaue my soule in Hell but Non derelinques animam meam in sepulchro that is Thou shalt not leaue my Soule Life or Person or that Body that sometimes was aliue in the Graue For it it cannot be vnderstood that the reasonable soule or immortall Spirit of Christ was euer in the graue either to be deliuered thence or left there If it be sayd that the Greeke and Latine words vsed by the Translators signifie more precisely hell and the reasonable Soule or Spirit then those Hebrew words Sheol and Nephesh doe we answere that whatsoeuer their vse and signification be in prophane Authors yet they must be enlarged in the Scriptures to signifie all that which the Hebrew words doe that so the translation may be true and full Bellarmine to confute this explication and construction of the Hebrew words made by Beza and the rest vrgeth that the Septuagint neuer translateth Sheol by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifies the graue but by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that therefore Sheol doth not properly signifie the Graue Hereunto we answere that the word of it selfe being indifferent to signifie any receptacles of the dead whether of their bodies or soules must not be translated by a word precisely noting the graue as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth and that therefore it is not to be marvailed at that the Septuagint neuer translate the Hebrew word by this Greeke word of a narrower compasse straiter significatioÌ„ Secondly we say that seeing Sheol when by the circumstances of the places where it is vsed it is restrained to signifie onely the place of dead bodies yet doth not precisely note that fitting receptacle provided for them to be laide in as in their beds of rest by the liuing as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth but any other receptacle whatâ—…er euen of such as want that honourable kind of buriall whether they be devoured by wilde beasts swallowed vp of the Sea or receiued into any other place of stay and abode till the time of the generall resurrection the Translators vsed not the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of too narrow compasse straight signification but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 enlarged by them to expresse all that the Hebrew word importeth in this sense Iacob said he would go down mourning into Sheol or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to his son not into a place of soules sequestred from God or into hell sor he neuer thought his sonne to bee gone thither nor into the graue properly so named for he thought his son had bin devoured of a wilde beast but into the receptacles of the dead and into the chambers of death wherein there are many very different
might not nor did not iudge any B. of himselfe alone 2 That being B. of the first See he with his associates might iudge any other B. or Patriarch but no particular Patriarch with his Bishops might iudg him his because there is no particular person or company of men greater then he and his being chiefe Patriarch of the world but that both hee and his may bee iudged by a generall Councell it appeareth by the eight generall Councell wherein the words now vrged are recited For that Councell taketh order that all the Patriarches shall bee honoured and respected and especially the Bishop of Rome and forbiddeth any man to compose any billes or writings against him vnder pretence of some crimes wherewith they will charge him as Dioscorus did but that if there bee a generall Councell and any question bee moued touching the Romane Church they may in reuerent and due sort determine the same though they may not proceede contemptuously against the Romane Bishop And so first the Councell of Nice gaue lawes as to the other two Patriarches so likewise to the Bishoppe of Rome and included him within his owne bounds and limits Secondly the Councell of Chalcedon made the Bishoppe of Constantinople a Patriarch and the Bishoppe of Romes Peere notwithstanding the resistance of those that were there present on the behalfe of Leo then Bishop of Rome and the other Bishops of the West And this decree in the end preuailed so that after much contradiction and long continued opposition the Bishops of Rome were forced to yeeld vnto it Thirdly generall Councels reexamined and iudged againe thinges iudged by the Bishop of Rome and his Bishops as the Councell of Chalcedon reexamined the iudgement of Leo against Dioscorus and for Theodoret. And the sixth generall Councell the iudgement of Pope Martine with his Synodes against Pyrrhus and Sergius and the eighth the judgments of Nicholas and Adrian against Photius Augustine speaking of the sentence of the 70. Bishoppes against Caecilianus retracted and reuersed by Melchiades Bishop of Rome and his colleagues whom vpon the suites of the Donatists Constantine appointed to heare the matter sayth they therefore appealed to the judgements of the Bishops beyond the Seas that if by any falsehood and slaunders they could preuaile they might gaine the cause if not they might say as all men that haue ill causes are wont to do that they met with bad judges But sayth hee let vs grant that those Bishops that judged the matter at Rome were not good Iudges yet there remained a generall Councell of the whole Church for them to flye vnto where the matter might anew haue beene handled with the former Iudges that their sentences might be reuersed if they should haue beene conuinced to haue judged ill Which thing if they did let them make it appeare vnto vs. Wee proue they did not because all the world communicated with Caecilianus and not with Donatus and his adherents So that either they neuer brought the matter to be scanned in a generall Councell or else they were therein condemned also Here wee See hee clearely acknowledgeth the generall Councell to haue power to reexamine and reuerse the judgement of the Bishoppe of Rome and his colleagues Saint Gregory likewise acknowledgeth the vniuersall Church to be greater then hee and his For professing to follow the direction of Christ in the matter betweene him and the Bishop of Constantinople who willeth vs if our brother offend against vs to go and admonish him betweene him and vs if then he heare vs not to take two or three with vs that in the mouth of two or three witnesses euery word may stand and if he heare not them then to tell the Church he sayth that he had first sent to the Bishop of Constantinople and by his messengers admonished him in all gentle and louing sort and that now he writeth vnto him omitting nothing that in all humility he ought to doe but that seeing hee is thus despised there remaineth nothing but that he vse the helpe of the Church for the repressing of the insolencie of this man soe preiudiciall to the state of the whole Church Fourthly generall Councels haue by their decrees ordained many things concerning the See of Rome either enlarging or limitting the power of it and the exercise of the same as it seemed good vnto them as we see in the Councell of Sardica Hosius with the Bishops there assembled resolued in the honour of the memory of Peter to make a Decree that Bishoppes condemned by the Bishoppes of their owne Prouinces might appeale to the Bishop of Rome and that it might be lawfull for him vpon such appeale to write to the Bishops of the next Prouince to reexamine the matter againe And if hee pleased to send some from himselfe to sit with them in joynt commission Neither did the Bishoppes of Rome Zozimus Bonifacius and Caelestinus vrge the law of Christ or the right of Saint Peter to justifie their claime of receiuing appeales out of Africa but the Decrees of the Nicene Councell And this is farther confirmed in that the Bishops in the Councell of Chalcedon say the Fathers gaue the preheminence to the Bishop of Rome in ancient times because it was the seat of the Empire and that therefore now they would giue the like to Constantinople now become the seat of the Empire and named new Rome And as generall Councels gaue preheminences to the Romane Bishops so also they restrained and limited them in the vse of their jurisdiction when they saw them to incroch too much as the Councell of Sardica tooke order that they should not meddle with the causes of Presbyters and inferiour Clergy-men vpon any appeale but leaue them to to their owne Bishops and the Synodes of the Prouinces and in the case of Bishops appealing not to reuerse the acts of the Synode of any prouince without another Synode of the Bishops of the next Prouince And the Councels of Chalcedon and Constantinople the eighth decreed that the Bishop Rome and the other Patriarches shall confirme the Metropolitanes subject vnto them by sending the Pall or by imposition of handes but shall not intermeddle in the ordination of Bishoppes Fifthly it appeareth that the Romane Bishops are inferiour to the whole Church First in that their Legates rise vp when they speake in generall Councels And secondly in that in the councell of Ephesus when they with others were sent by the councell to the Emperour they were willed precisely to follow the directions and instructions giuen them For that if they did not all their proceedings should bee voided and they rejected from the communion of the rest Sixthly in that the sixth generall councell particularly giueth lawes to the Church of Rome For in the thirteenth canon it reprehendeth the Romane Church because it forbiddeth Presbyters Deacons and Subdeacons to liue in matrimoniall society with their wiues
a pilgrime and so going to Rome with this Hildebrand in his company by his aduice counsell found the meanes to get himselfe chosen Pope by the Clergy and people of Rome Leo dyed and Gebehardus afterwards named Victor succeeded him and Stephen him about whose time Henry the third dyed Henry the fourth his sonne succeeded him and after Stephen Benedict and Nicholas Alexander gate the papall See against whom great exception was taken for that contrary to the custome hee was chosen without the Emperours consent and with the liking of the yong Emperor and his mother as some report Another was set vp by the Bishops of Lombardy affirming that no man might be chosen or designed to the Popedome without the Emperours allowance And besides Anno Arch-bishop of Coleyn went to Rome to expostulate the matter with Alexander and the Cardinals adhering to him and to know of him how he durst contrary to custome and the law prescribed and imposed anciently vpon the Popes assume the Popedome without the consent of the Emperour alleaging many things to shew the vnlawfulnesse of this fact and beginning at Charles the great hee named many Emperours who had either chosen or confirmed Popes and made good their election But being ready to go forward and to adde more proofes vnto that which he had said Hildebrand the Arch-deacon the whole company of Cardinals beckening vnto him so to doe stood vp and answered in this sort Arch-bishop Anno the Kings and Emperours of Rome neuer had any authority right or commanding power in the choyce of the Pope and if at any time any thing were done violently or disorderly it was afterwards corrected and set right againe by the censure of the Fathers After the death of Alexander this Hildebrand who thus euer opposed himselfe against the Emperours claimes was by the Romanes chosen Pope without the Emperours consent Which the Bishops of France vnderstanding knowing well of how violent seuere and vntractable a disposition hee was vnwilling to haue him possesse so high a place in the Church told the Emperour that if hee did not in time preuent the matter and voyd his election greater euils and perils would beset him then he could at first thinke of Whereupon he sent Embassadours to Rome to know the cause why the Romanes contrary to the ancient custome had chosen a Pope without his consent And if they gaue not satisfaction to put Hildebrand from the Papal dignity which he had vniustly gotten The Embassadours comming to Rome were kindly and courteously entertained and when they had deliuered their message Hildebrand like a vile dissembling hypocrite contrary to his owne practise and that which he had perswaded other vnto answered that hee neuer sought this honor but that it was put vpon him and that yet hee would not accept of it till by a certaine Embassadour hee was assured that not onely the Emperour but the Princes of Germany consented to his election Which answer when the Emperour receiued hee was fully satisfied and with all readinesse by his royall consent confirmed his election and commanded that he should be ordained Thus wee see how to serue his owne turne he could now acknowledge the Emperours interest and refuse to be ordained before hee had obtained his confirmation which yet before in the case of Alexander he disclaimed though a some say hee neuer yeelded so much to the Emperour but euer held out against him disclaiming his intermedling and that a most horrible schisme ensued thereupon Howsoeuer he was no sooner Pope but he began to molest the Emperour challenging him for Symony in conferring Ecclesiasticall dignities and requiring him to come to some Synodall answer which when he refused to doe he excommunicated him depriued him of his Empire and absolued his subiects froÌ„ their Oath of obedience This was the first Pope that euer presumed to depose any Emperour Lego relego saith Otho Frisingensis Romanorum Regum Imperatorum gesta nusquam invenio quenquam eoâ—…um ante hunc à Romano Pontifice excommunicatum vel regno privatum nisi fortè quis pro anathemate habendum ducat quod Philippus ad breve tempus à Romano Pontifice inter poenitentes collocatus Theodosius à beato Ambrosio propter cruentam caedem à liminibus Ecclesiae sequestratus sit that is I reade and I reade ouer againe and againe the Acts of the Romane Kings and Emperours and I no where finde any of them before this excommunicated by the Romane Bishop or depriued of his kingdome unlesse haply any man doe thinke that is to be taken for an excoÌ„munication that Philip was for a short time put among the Penitents by the Bishop of Rome and Theodosius for his bloudy murther stopped by blessed Ambrose from entring into the Church And therefore whatsoeuer Gregory pretendeth to the contrary professing that hee treadeth in the steps of the Saints and his holy predecessours yet it is true that Sigebert saith which hee hopeth hee may say with the leaue of all good men that this novelty that hee say not heresie had not shewed it self in the world in their time that the Priests of that God which maketh hypocrites to reigne for the sins of his people should teach his people that they owe no subiectioÌ„ to wicked Kings and that they owe no feaulty vnto them though they haue taken the oath of feaulty that they are free froÌ„ periury that lift vp their hands against the king to whoÌ„ they haue sworne that they are to be taken for excoÌ„municate persons that do obey him What horrible confusioÌ„s followed vpon this censure of Gregory Otho Frisingensis reporteth in most tragicall manner His wordes are these How great euils how many warres and dangers of warres followed thence How often was miserable Rome besieged taken and sacked How one Pope was intruded vpon another as likewise one King set vp against another it is irksome to me to remember To conclude the whirle-winde of this tempest inwrapped in it so many euils so many schismes so many perils of the soules and bodies of men that it alone may suffise in respect of the cruelty of the persecutioÌ„ and the long continuance of the time thereof to set before our eyes the infelicity of mans miserable conditioÌ„ For first the Emperour offended with the Pope for molesting him about the Investitures of Bishoppes which his Predecessours anciently had and enjoyed and the Clergy discontented with him for his forbidding marriage hee was in an assembly of the States and Bishops of Germany holden at Wormes deposed a letter written to him requiring him no longer to meddle with the Episcopall Office But such was the resolutioÌ„ and stoutnesse of this turbulent vnquiet spirit that being encouraged by certain Bishops of Germany promised their aide helpe he depriued the Bishops that had giuen sentence against him and deposed Henry the Emperour absoluing his subiects froÌ„ their Oath of obedience Whereupon
be present in Generall Councels and who they are of whom generall Councels do consist HAuing spoken of the necessity profit and vse of Generall Councels it remaineth that wee proceede to see who they are that may bee present in such Councels and of whom they do consist The persons that may be present are of diuerse sorts For some are there with authority to teach define prescribe and to direct others are there to heare set forward and consent vnto that which is there to be done In the former sort none but only Ministers of the word and sacraments are present in Councels and they onely haue deciding and defining voyces but in the latter sort * Lay-men also may be present whereupon we shall find that Bishops and Presbyters subscribe in this sort Ego N. definiens subscrips◅ that is I as hauing power to define and decree haue subscribed But the Emperour or any other Lay-person Ego N. consentiens subscripsi that is I as one giuing consent to that which is agreed on by the spirituall Pastors haue subscribed That the Emperor and other Lay-men of place and sort may be present in Generall Councels no man maketh doubt For though Pope Nicholas seeme to deny that the Emperours may be presēt in other Councels where matters of faith are not handled yet he cōfesseth they may be presēt in general Conncels where the faith which is cōmon to all pertaineth not to Clergy-men alone but to Lay-men and all Christians generally is treated of it being a rule in nature reason Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus tractari debere that is that that which concerneth all may be handled and medled with by all so farre forth as conueniently it may and as there is no manifest reason in respect of the disturbance and hinderance of the deliberation to repell them from such intermedling for in such cases there may bee a repelling of men hauing interest in such businesses and affaires and therefore Pulcheria the Empresse Commanded the Captaine of Bythinia with violence to driue out of the Councell of Chalcedon such Monkes Clerkes and Lay-men as being of no vse did but pester the Councell and to leaue none there but such as the Bishops brought with them But our aduersaries say the Protestants affirme that Lay-men ought not only to be present in generall Councels but also to haue decisiue yoyces as well as they of the Cleargy and thereupon charge vs with great absurdity Wherefore for the answering of this obiection wee must obserue that there is a threefold decision of things doubtfull and questionable The one such as euery one vpon the knowledge of it must yeeld vnto vpon perill of damnation vpon the bare word of him that decideth The second to which euery one must yeeld vpon like perill not vpon the bare word of him that decideth but vpon the euidence of proofe he bringeth The third such as euery one must yeeld vnto not vpon perill of damnation but of excommunication and the like censure Ecclesiasticall In the first sort the Protestants say that onely Christ the sonne of God hath a decisiue voyce In the second sort that any Lay-men as well as Clergy-men for whosoeuer it is that bringeth conuincing proofes decideth a doubt in such sort as that no man ought to resist against it Whereupon Panormitan sayth that the iudgment of one priuate man is to be preferred before the sentence of the Pope if hee haue better authorities of the Old and New Testament to confirme his iudgment And Gerson saith that any learned man may and ought to resist against a whole Councell if hee discerne it to erre of malice or ignorance and whatsoeuer Bishops determine their determinations binde not the conscience further then they approue that they propose some other way then by their authoritie onely Soe that in this sence the Protestants truely say that Bishoppes must not proceede Praetor-like but that all that they doe must bee but in the nature of an inquiry and their Decrees no farther of force then reason doth warrant them For howsoeuer the Son of God hath promised to be with his Church to the end of the world which shall bee fulfilled in respect of his elect and chosen who cannot erre damnably and finally yet hath he not tyed himselfe to any one sort or company of men neither is it certainely knowne but that all they that meete in a Councell may erre notwithstanding Christes promise To which purpose it is that Brentius and other say We cannot be certaine of the determination of Councells because euery company of men professing CHRIST is not the true Church seeing all that so professe are not Elect neither doe they deny all authority and iurisdiction to such as are not knowne to be Elect nor giue it all to such as no man canne knowe who they be as Bellarmine vntruly saith they doe for in the third sort they willingly acknowledge that Bishops haue deciding voyces power so to iudge of things as to subiect all those that shall thinke and teach otherwise then they doe to excommunication and censures of like nature And that therefore they are properly Iudges that their course of proceeding is not a bare Inquiry and search but a binding determination and that they haue a Pretorlike power to binde men to stand to that they propose decree and in this sort we all teach that Lay-men haue no voyce decisiue but Bishops Pastors onely which may be confirmed by many reasons First because when the question is in what pastures it is fitte the sheepe of CHRIST should feede in what pastures they may feede without danger the duty of consulting is principally and the power of prescribing wholy in the Pastours though the sheepe of CHRIST being reasonable haue and must haue a kinde of discerning whether they bee directed into wholesome pleasant pastures or not Secondly none but they whom Paul saith CHRIST going vp into heauen gaue for the gathering together of the Saintes for the worke of the Ministery haue authority to teach and to prescribe vnto others what they shall professe beleeue of whom the LORD said by Ieremy the Prophet I will giue you Pastors that shall feede you with knowledge and doctrine Thirdly because in all Councels Bishops Pastors onely are found to haue subscribed to the decrees made in them as defining decreeing howsoeuer other men testified their consent by subscription and Princes and Emperours by their royall authority confirmed the same and subiected the contemners and violaters thereof to imprisonment banishment confiscation of goods and the like ciuill punishments as the Bishops did to excommunication and censures Spirituall So that it is agreed on that Bishoppes and Ministers onely haue decisiue voyces in Councels in sort before expressed but the question is onely whether all Ministers of the Word and Sacraments haue such decisiue voyces or none but Bishops The Papists
the Trueth whom hee giueth vp into a reprobate sence Secondly in opposition to that which I alleadge hee vndertaketh to proue there were no such differences betweene the Ancient as those betweene the followers of Luther and Zuinglius but demeaneth himselfe like a false gamester for whereas I place the differences and conflictes betweene Epiphanius and Chrysostome in the front as hottest and most violent the one of them refusing to pray with the other the one challenging the other for manifold breaches of Canons and the one professing he hoped the other should neuer die a Bishop the other that he should neuer returne to his country aliue both which things fell out according to their vncharitable wishes desires Epiphanius dying by the way as he was returning home and Chrysostome being cast out of his Bishopricke and dying in banishment he scarce taketh any notice hereof but saith only the differences betweene Luther and Zuinglius exceeded the conflicts betweene Chrysostome and Epiphanius which yet I thinke hee will hardly proue Touching Ruffinus and Hierome it is certaine the one of them charged the other with heresie and vsed most bitter speaches one against another to the great scandall of the world The differences betweene Augustine and Hierome were carried more temperately neither doe I say they exceeded in passion as Luther and Zuinglius did yet did Augustine charge Hierome with taking on him the Patronage of lying and affirming that the Authours of Canonicall Scriptures lyed in some passages of the same the consequence whereof he thinketh to bee most dangerous and damnable Besides this they differed about the ceasing of the legall obseruations so that their differences were greater then those of Luther and Zuinglius if they had rightly vnderstood one another Yet will Master Higgons shew a great difference betweene the differences of the Auncient and those of Luther and Zuinglius First because Chrysostome and Epiphanius Hierome and Ruffinus had an ordinary vocation whereas Luther and Zuinglius are supposed to haue beene raysed vppe extraordinarily Secondly for that they quarrelled onely about the bookes of Origen and the improbation thereof but the differences betweene Luther and Zuinglius were founded originally in matters of faith pertaining to the necssity of saluation Thirdly in respect of extent in that their differences were not the differences of whole Churches as these are and of duration in that their divisions were soone extinguished but these are propagated in succession and increased with continuall addition To euery of these pretended differences I will briefly answere first to the first that we neuer thought that Luther and Zuinglius had an extraordinary calling as the Apostles other sent immediatly of God had but that God stirred and moued them extraordinarily with Heroicall resolution to vse that ordinary ministeriall power which they had receiued in the corrupt state of the Church for the reprehending and reforming abuses in the same and therefore they might be subiect to errours and infirmity as Chrysostome and Epiphanius were notwithstanding any thing wee say or conceiue of them To the second wee say Master Higgons sheweth himselfe in it either faithlesse or ignorant For we know Epiphanius was an Anthropomorphite that hee was willing for that cause to condemne the bookes of Origen wherein this grosse errour is condemned besides took part with Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria who though hee were of another minde yet fained himselfe to be an Anthropomorphite to condemne the bookes of Origen as contrary to that conceipt deposed Chrysostome for which his temerity hee was anathematized by the Church of Rome if we may beleeue Nicephorus Neither were these the priuate differences of particular men but of the greatest Churches of the world as Chrysostome confesseth in his Epistle to the Bishop of Rome saying that all the Churches euery-where by reason heereof were brought vpon their knees Touching Ruffinus it is evident that he was challenged for fauouring the heresies of Origen whose workes he translated so that it was no matter of circumstance but of substance in highest degree about which Hierome he calumniated one the other for proof heereof Anastasius Bishop of Rome writing to the Bishop of Hierusalem touching Ruffinus saith he had so translated the books of Origen out of Greek into Latin as that he approued the errors contained in them was like a man that consenteth to the vices faults of other men Yea Hierome feared not directly to pronounce him to be an Hereticke and more blinde then a Mole We reade that in the time of the first Councell of Ephesus called for the suppressing of the heresie of Nestorius there grew most bitter contentions betweene Cyrill of Alexandria and Iohn of Antioch so that the Churches subiect to them were deuided one from another in such sort that they Anathematised one the other imputing heresie each to other yet were they in truth and indeede of the same judgment and in the end it was found that these contentions grew out of dislikes mistakings and mis-constructions of things well meant but not so taken The like may be sayd of Theodoret who notwithstanding all the conflicts betweene him and Cyrill and the condemnation passed vppon him as if hee had beene an Hereticke was in the end found to be an Orthodox by Leo and the Bishoppes of the West and vppon a full and cleare declaration and profession of his faith receiued as a Catholicke Bishoppe into the Councell of Chalcedon Gregory Nazianzen in his oration made in the praise of Athanasius sheweth that there was a maine diuision of the Christians of the East and the Romanes or those of the West the one part suspecting the other of heresie vpon a meere not vnderstanding one another the Romans professed to beleeue that there are three persons in the blessed Trinity but could not bee induced to acknowledge three Hypostases whence the Orientall Christians thought them to bee Sabellians who thought that there is but one person in the Godhead called by three names on the otherside the orientall Christians professed that they beleeued three Hypostases in the God-head but would not admitte three persons whence they of Rome thought them to bee Arrians who beleeued that there are three distinct substances in the God-heade the word Hypostasis in the Schooles of secular learning importing substance as Hierome noteth but Athanasius perceiuing that they differed not in iudgment and that the Greekes meant the same by their Hypostases that the Latines did by their name of Persons left them free for the manner and forme of speech and made a peace betweene them by letting them know they all meant one thing though they expressed the same differently whereas otherwise it was to bee feared they would haue beene diuided with endlesse diuisions about these fewe Syllables About this matter Hierome liuing in the East parts wrote to Damasus Bishoppe of Rome his wordes are these They vrge vs to acknowledge
three Hypostases wee aske them what they meane by the Hypostases they speake of and they tell vs three persons subsisting wee answere that wee beleeue so but the sense satisfieth them not they vrge vs to vse the word it selfe some poyson lying hid in the very syllables c. Let it bee sufficient for vs to say there is one substance in God and three subsisting Persons perfit equall and coeternall if it seeme good vnto you let vs speake no more of three Hypostases but let vs acknowledge one only there is some ill to be suspected whē in one sense diuersity of words is found let it suffice vs to beleeue as I haue sayd or if you thinke it right that wee admitte three Hypostases with their interpretation we will not refuse soe to doe but beleeue mee there lyeth some poyson hid vnder their wordes the Angell of Sathan hath transfigured himselfe into an Angell of light By this which hath been said it is euident that there haue bin as great and hot contentions in former times amongst right beleeuers as are now between the professors of the reformed religion and that those diuisions were not about matters of circumstance or personall onely as Higgons falsely pretendeth but of whole Churches disliking condemning and refusing to communicate one with another vppon supposed differences in mattersof faith and religion Wherefore to draw to a conclusion we deny not but that Luther and some other adhering to him vpon some misconstruction of the opinion of Zuinglius and the rest were carried too farre with the violence of their ill-guided zeale but we say also that there were as fiery conflicts in former times betweene Cyrill and Theodoret betweene Cyrill and Iohn of Antioch betweene Chrysostome and Epiphanius who yet were Catholicke Christians all of them as I take it notwithstanding the vnkindnesses that passed betweene them and as Iohn of Antioch and Theodoret were reconciled to Cyrill and those of that side vpon a more ful explication of their positiōs formerly disliked so it is reported by Melanchthon that Luther a litle before his death cōfessed vnto him that he had exceeded gone too far in the cōtrouersies between him his opposits about the Sacramēt that thereupon being wished to publish some qualification of his former writings that were too violēt and bitter he said hee had thought vpon that matter and would so doe but that hee feared the scandall that might grow vpon such his retractation and that therefore he was resolued to referre all to God and to leaue the matter to Melanchthon who might doe something in it after his death This conference betweene Luther and him Melanchthon made knowne to many and euer constantly shewed himselfe a most godly peaceable and religious man carefull to hold the vnity of the spirit in the bond of peace howsoeuer it pleaseth pratling Higgons to wrong him and to compare him to the Moone in mutability Wherefore leauing my first allegation let vs come to the second which is that there are more and more materiall differences amongst Papists then amongst vs which Higgons saith is a poore recrimination For that the eye being iudge there is a comfortable Harmony in the Roman Church the same Doctrine preached the same Sacraments ministered and the same Gouernment established whereas Protestants are diuided in iudgement touching matters of faith and haue a distinct gouernment in England Scotland Heluetia and Saxony This exception consisteth of two parts the first clearing the Papistes from the differences and diuisions they are charged with The second charging Protestants with diuisions and differences both in matters of faith and gouernment For answere to the former part of this exception first I say if there be no contradiction betweene these assertions the Pope is aboue Generall Councels the Pope is not aboue Generall Councels the Pope hath the vniuersality of all Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction in himselfe the Pope is but onely prime Bishoppe in order and honour before other equall in commission with him and at the most but as the Duke of Venice amongst the senators of that state the Pope may erre iudicially the Pope cannot erre iudicially the Pope is temporall Lord of all the world the Pope is not temporall Lord of all the world the Pope if not as temporall Lord of the world yet in ordine ad spiritualia may dispose the Kingdomes of the world the Pope may not meddle with Princes states in any case men are iustified by imputed righteousnesse men are not iustified by imputed righteousnesse men are iustified by speciall faith men are not iustified by speciall faith men may be certaine by the certainety of faith that they are in state of grace men cannot bee so certaine there is merit of condignity properly so named there is no merit of condignity the blessed Virgine was conceiued in sinne the blessed Virgine was not conceiued in sinne then doubtlesse all the Pastours and Bishoppes of the Roman Church preach the same Doctrine otherwise let the reader assure himselfe Master Higgons hath stretched his stile to vse his owne wordes till hee forced it to breake into a vast and notable vntrueth Secondly I say the forme of ministring the Sacraments hath not beene alwayes the same in the Romane Church For as Cassander noteth in his preface before the booke called Ordo Romanus published by him the auncient formes of diuine service were abolished new imposed and prescribed violently so that all that resisted were sent into banishment and since that first alteration as Platina noteth a number of Tautologies and Barbarismes are crept in making ingenuous men abhorre from the celebration of the holy mysteries Thirdly I thinke it will easily appeare there was no such sweet harmony in the Romane Church touching matters of gouernment as Master Higgons speaketh of when the Pope was not onely resisted but called Antichrist in respect of his infinite reseruations admittances of appeales his prouisions and graunting of expectatiue graces and the like vsurpations preiudiciall to the right of all other Bishoppes and the liberty of the Church For answere to the second part of his exception first I confidently affirme and the proudest Papist vnder heauen shall neuer proue the contrary that Protestants haue no reall and essentiall differences in matters of faith and doctrine Secondly I say that their differences in the forme of gouernment are not such as our Aduersaries pretend For they that admitte gouernment by Bishoppes make their authority to bee fatherly not princely directing the rest not excluding their aduise and assistance subordinate to Prouinciall Synodes wherein no one hath a negatiue voyce but the maior part of the voyces of the Bishoppes and Presbyters determineth all doubtes questions and controuersies and they that retaine not the name of Bishops yet haue a president in each company of Presbyters and thinke it a part of Gods ordinance that there should bee such a one to goe before the rest and to be